• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!

84% mdma?

^ So how does one separate the HCl from MDMA, yiellding pure MDMA? You can mix it in water but the water and H+ Cl- ions floating around the water still make the solution not pure MDMA.

In other words MDMA's purest form is MDMA HCl, and it's rather silly to call it "only 84% MDMA".
 
One would add a base to the mixture, thus deprotonating the conjugate acid of MDMA and forming the freebase. You would then add some sort of organic solvent to the mixture, and separate that, leaving you with MDMA in solution.
In other words MDMA's purest form is MDMA HCl, and it's rather silly to call it "only 84% MDMA"
Click to expand...
It's not silly at all. One could have MDMA hydrofluoride, or MDMA sulfate. Even if all of them were pure, they would still contain differing amounts of MDMA. How do you suggest the figures should be stated?
no i understand exactly what a chemical bond is... and yes it forms ONE molecule. MDMA HCl s a chemically bonded molecule. Whats your point?
Click to expand...
You were the one with a question, I was just trying to help you understand. There's absolutely no call for rudeness, and you could possibly be a little more humble, you evidently do not really understand what a chemical bond is.
 
The vast majority of people who try to state that "MDMA can only be 84% pure" are being pedantic and don't REALLY know what they are talking about. For all practical purposes, when it comes to actually using the drug and applying the available information about dosages, etc, 100% MDMA.HCl can be considered to be 100% pure. So if you're on a forum to discuss drug use or harm reduction and someone makes the 84% claim, they are either misinformed, confused, or being a pedantic asshole.

If you're talking about chemistry, synthesis, etc, then yes, it might be relevant that MDMA.HCl is only 84% MDMA by mass.

Also, make some MDMA.HF and tell me how that goes. :P
 
Also, make some MDMA.HF and tell me how that goes.
Click to expand...
See, I have a feeling (just a funny feeling, mind), that you already know I can't do that, so rather than giving me the coy tongue-sticking-out smiley, could you please explain why that won't work and leave everyone a little richer for the experience? ;)
 
Vader said:
One would add a base to the mixture, thus deprotonating the conjugate acid of MDMA and forming the freebase. You would then add some sort of organic solvent to the mixture, and separate that, leaving you with MDMA in solution.

It's not silly at all. One could have MDMA hydrofluoride, or MDMA sulfate. Even if all of them were pure, they would still contain differing amounts of MDMA. How do you suggest the figures should be stated?

You were the one with a question, I was just trying to help you understand. There's absolutely no call for rudeness, and you could possibly be a little more humble, you evidently do not really understand what a chemical bond is.
Click to expand...
lol... I'm not trying to be rude but I understand exactly what a chemical bond is.

My point is that nobody is going to make MDMA HF or MDMA sulfate "molly", and that it's rather trivial to bring the 84% number into the discussion of "molly" purity.

The form of MDMA has more to do with potency than purity. 99% MDMA HCl is still 99% MDMA HCl.

If you take it I'm being rude, perhaps it is because you are being condescending by assuming I have no clue what I am talking about?
 
Buddy, I don't pretend to know exactly what a chemical bond is and I study chemistry. I didn't assume that you have no clue what you're talking about, you made it obvious when didn't understand the difference between a covalently bound molecule and an ionic crystal. Anyway, I'm not trying to get into a flamewar here, I just think you're being a little bit arrogant. Anyway, my understanding is that the discussion of this issue becomes necessary when people are trying to understand the results of laboratory testing of a sample. When they get their results, and see that 84% of that sample is MDMA, they might think that they have an impure sample. In this instance, it makes every bit of sense to tell them that the greatest proportion of the mass of their sample of MDMA HCl that could possibly be constituted by MDMA molecules is 84%. I'm not disputing that people misuse and misunderstand this information, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it.
 
severely etarded said:
The form of MDMA has more to do with potency than purity. 99% MDMA HCl is still 99% MDMA HCl.
Click to expand...

I think for the original question of this thread, this is probably the most relevant comment of the entire discussion. The confusion in the distinction between the terms potency and purity is probably the source of all of people's confusion. People who are concerned with this for the sake of harm reduction and proper dosing should be most concerned with potency rather than purity. 99%/100% pure MDMA.HCL is the most potent orally/rectally/injectably/nasally commonly available form of the drug. It may be only 84% MDMA by mass, but that is totally irrelevant in terms of dosing.

Also, to Vader, I re-read my last post and I think it gave the insinuation that I was referring to you as one of those pedantic assholes. That wasn't my intention and I apologize if it came across that way. I more meant the people who read that 84% figure somewhere online and figured that it "sorta, kinda" made sense to them, so now they repeat it anywhere that people will listen.
 
I didn't interpret your post in that way, I understood it as you say you intended it. Anyhow, would you care to explain why the hydrofluoride salt would be difficult to form please?
 
Vader said:
Anyway, my understanding is that the discussion of this issue becomes necessary when people are trying to understand the results of laboratory testing of a sample. When they get their results, and see that 84% of that sample is MDMA, they might think that they have an impure sample. In this instance, it makes every bit of sense to tell them that the greatest proportion of the mass of their sample of MDMA HCl that could possibly be constituted by MDMA molecules is 84%. I'm not disputing that people misuse and misunderstand this information, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it.
Click to expand...


The way I understand it, it would just come up as 100% pure MDMA HCL, which lab would actually make the distinction?
 
I don't know about the difficulty in the formation of the hydrofluoride salt, inorganic is not my thing. I could make a few speculations, but it would be pretty obvious that that's what they were.

I was referring more to the challenge of the process that would be required to form it if it would, indeed, form. The hazards of HF gas vs. HCl gas, or even hydrofluoric acid vs. hydrochloric acid, would be orders of magnitude in difference, especially for the home chemist.

Have I ended up in a pissing contest, somehow?
 
No, I was genuinely interested, inorganic isn't my thing either, I thought you might know a reason that would mean that the hydrofluoride salt couldn't be formed, and I wanted to know. Although, I can totally piss further than you :P Yeah, I have no intention of going anywhere near HF in my kitchen, that's not a smart move.
The way I understand it, it would just come up as 100% pure MDMA HCL, which lab would actually make the distinction?
Click to expand...
I've never had MDMA analysed, but my understanding is that they will just tell you how much MDMA is in your sample.
 
labs in the Netherlands usually say 84% MDMA rather than 100% MDMA HCL i think.

Edit: don't really have a 'source', but there are certain places on the internet where people can sell drugs. people selling MDMA from the netherlands that has been lab tested is usually 84% maximum. not that i'd ever browse such websites.
 
The sort of logic that produces these theories are internet chemists... they read a few synthesis recipies and suddenly think theyre a chemist or pharmacologist... the ingredient we look for is mdma(HCl)... the (HCl) is not an impurity. Without it you dont have usable mdma... and its not like "oops i added too much (HCl) i guess this batch will be weak" lmao...
 
The reason for it is more relivent to drugs with active at under 30mg for example when you need to exactly how mutch you have to the miligram
 
severely etarded said:
The form of MDMA has more to do with potency than purity. 99% MDMA HCl is still 99% MDMA HCl.
Click to expand...

^ - This.

100mg of MDMA HCl is as potent as 84mg MDMA freebase (assuming accuracy on that 84% of weight fact).

However I'm willing to bet that the majority of people who have access to pure MDMA, are basing their dosage reports on the HCl form and measurements. That's speculation though, but one I'd bet money on.
 
Chemically Insane said:
The sort of logic that produces these theories are internet chemists... they read a few synthesis recipies and suddenly think theyre a chemist or pharmacologist... the ingredient we look for is mdma(HCl)... the (HCl) is not an impurity. Without it you dont have usable mdma... and its not like "oops i added too much (HCl) i guess this batch will be weak" lmao...
Click to expand...
A)is freebase mdma inactive
B)adding more hcl wouldnt lower porancy because it wouldn't bond with anything as its one hcl per mdma
 
You would think that pure freebase MDMA would be ignored because it's an oil that I think it pretty agressive and you don't see it anywhere for ingestion. Yet at the testing center here they tell you how many mg of actual MDMA is in a pill instead of the mg of MDMA HCl. I suppose they do that to nullify what kind of salt it is (even if the far far majority is the HCl salt), apparently a matter of principle.

The terms relative purity and absolute purity could be used: pure MDMA HCl that has an absolute purity of 84% has a relative purity of 100%.
 
All this MDMA HgCl2 mentioning reminds me of something. A few years ago this lady was telling me about when she was in high school, they got this "molly" that was an oil that they all loved. Is it likely MDMA HgCl2? I know mercury is really bad for you, but I don't know if pure Hg and MDMA HgCl2 would somehow differ in the negative Hg effects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top