• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

Ecstacy as speed?

LockedNLoaded

LockedNLoaded

Greenlighter
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
28
OK, this is just my opinion of course, but here goes. I recently got myself a dexedrine prescription (Holy hell, I could write volumes about that shit, amphetamines are the true wonder drug), which is really my first experience with straight speed of any kind, so I've been having fun observing and picking apart the different effects. It's been interesting, especially after doing straight molly two weekends ago for the first time in a while. The point I'm making here is that I feel like ALOT of what people do E for is the stimulant effects. The superhuman endurance, wakefulness, self-confidence, being able to out-talk any reasonable human being, even music appreciation and tactile sensations to a lesser degree, are all stimulant effects, and are really the most useful for partying. I'm not saying people don't take E for the empathogenic qualities, and have a damn good time as a result, but after going raving on pure MDMA, I realized it's way less of a party drug on it's own. I guess I'm just bring this up because it's SO much worse for you to abuse ecstacy than speed (I'm talking good ol' amphetamines here, meth has it's own little bag of tricks for brainmelting), I wish more people would just do some goddamn amps than trainwrecking their personalities and all the other fun bonuses that come with MDMA abuse.

Edit: this also goes a long way to explaining the advent of PILLS. And the subsequent slow death of ecstacy culture.
 
Idk, I'm no great neuro-chemical expert, just the basic research I've done on dopaminergic vs. serotonergic neurotoxicity. I mean, not very experienced, but it seems like doing a solid dose of amphetamines every weekend will result in alot less damage than a solid dose of MDMA every weekend. Maybe someone more well-versed can verify or not?
 
I agree that speed is more conducive for dancing and partying at a rave. This doesn't mean that it is "better" than MDMA or should replace it. Nor does it mean that it is safer. Amphetamines have much more abuse potential; I don't touch speed any more because of heavy use in the past.

MDMA in a relaxed environment with some good friends or even alone is a completely different experience, and IMO takes advantage of its unique effects.

Speed blows up the ego like a balloon, MDMA softens it. Both are euphoric and stimulating but they are not interchangeable.
 
Oh no, experientially MDMA is way superior, all those lovely psychedelic qualities. I think of speed as +++, hallucinogens as !@#$%^&*(), and MDMA something like @+#+$<3$+#+@.

It's just a shame to me that people ruin such a multifaceted and potentially beneficial experience by doing it like speed, when they could just be do amps and having a similarly FUN, if shallower, experience.
 
Also, I don't have a very addictive personality, and addictive potential definitely needs to be considered in any comparison. I totally see how someone could develop a major fucking problem with amps. Still, the number of people who develop major fucking problems with E is not insignificant. I guess it's kind of a question of harm reduction. Does anybody have any firsthand thoughts on the effects of heavy amp use vs heavy MDMA use? Or any relevant information on neurotoxicity?
 
LockedNLoaded said:
OK, this is just my opinion of course, but here goes. I recently got myself a dexedrine prescription (Holy hell, I could write volumes about that shit, amphetamines are the true wonder drug), which is really my first experience with straight speed of any kind, so I've been having fun observing and picking apart the different effects. It's been interesting, especially after doing straight molly two weekends ago for the first time in a while. The point I'm making here is that I feel like ALOT of what people do E for is the stimulant effects. The superhuman endurance, wakefulness, self-confidence, being able to out-talk any reasonable human being, even music appreciation and tactile sensations to a lesser degree, are all stimulant effects, and are really the most useful for partying. I'm not saying people don't take E for the empathogenic qualities, and have a damn good time as a result, but after going raving on pure MDMA, I realized it's way less of a party drug on it's own. I guess I'm just bring this up because it's SO much worse for you to abuse ecstacy than speed (I'm talking good ol' amphetamines here, meth has it's own little bag of tricks for brainmelting), I wish more people would just do some goddamn amps than trainwrecking their personalities and all the other fun bonuses that come with MDMA abuse.

Edit: this also goes a long way to explaining the advent of PILLS. And the subsequent slow death of ecstacy culture.
Click to expand...

You're just starting your prescription to Amps. You have not reached the dark side yet. You think amps are not neurotoxic or personality altering? Think again.. Also, they are HIGHLY physically addicting, and getting off them once dependent is just as hard as recovering from heavy MDMA abuse, if not even harder.
 
LockedNLoaded said:
Also, I don't have a very addictive personality, and addictive potential definitely needs to be considered in any comparison. I totally see how someone could develop a major fucking problem with amps. Still, the number of people who develop major fucking problems with E is not insignificant. I guess it's kind of a question of harm reduction. Does anybody have any firsthand thoughts on the effects of heavy amp use vs heavy MDMA use? Or any relevant information on neurotoxicity?
Click to expand...

So what have you heard of ruining more lives? Meth & adderall or MDMA. I personally have heard many more horror stories about meth, and I read this ED forum, and pillreports, almost everyday.

MDMA doesn't make people binge for days getting meth psychosis from lack of sleep, resulting in all kinds of bizarre behavior that can result in life-changing effects. Just because you don't have "an addictive personality" doesn't mean anything for us... That's all you..

Meth in general is just a "get high" feeling, and is much more subject to frequent abuse. Ya you mentioned doing it only on the weekends... My friend, that is how full-blown addictions start ;) A few years, on the weekends turn to every other day, etc. You may go through a rough patch and lose self-control. Nobody can predict the future, but if you play with a physically addictive drug, there's a good chance after awhile you will get hooked.
 
Last edited:
severely etarded said:
So what have you heard of ruining more lives? Meth & adderall or MDMA. I personally have heard many more horror stories about meth, and I read this ED forum, and pillreports, almost everyday.
Click to expand...

Im pretty sure he's talking about speed (amp) not meth. There is a difference.
 
No Consequence said:
Sarcasm?
There is a big difference saying i got a prescription for dexedrine then saying I went and picked up some crystal.
Click to expand...

Sorry dude, in other countries methamphetamine is Rx like dextroamphetamine. It's brand name is called Desoxyn, but I don't think it's approved by the US FDA. They do prescribe it in Europe, though. So there's not much difference, besides being more effective at a lower dose.
 
I would imagine that bingeing/heavy use of either oral amp or oral methamp will have pretty similar results in the end. Many of the problems with stimulant use come from lack of sleep and not eating.
 
I find Amps and molly completly different.
Like who wants to tweaked out all night with no lovey dovey feelings.
Amps by themselves remind me of a mdma comdown.
Or like once all the happy feelings are gone and you try redose.
That's what amps remind me of,
And thats not good
 
I ruuuuuv me some amphet
Molly is better but in a different way....speed is moar like %GET HIGH NOW or something...like speed you do whenever...rolling you kinda have to have the right environment?
 
Yeah, speed and molly are totally different, but the vast majority of people do pills, which are usually both, and the feeling I get, though obviously I don't know for sure, is that the stimulant side of things are what alot of people do them for, especially once you overdo it and the lovey-dovey magic's gone. Also because meth acts on serotonin MUCH more than straight amphetamines, it's quite a bit more toxic (to my understanding). I don't fuck with meth and I'm not suggesting anyone does. I guess there isn't really a huge amount of straight amps floating around on the market except Rx.
 
Amphetamine is annoying... it's like super focused and I feel irritated if i'm not doing something massive delusional ego, somewhat aggressive but not in an enjoyable right way at all more of a start tense arguments aggressive. Still very euphoric in the right moments though, for some reason peeing on amphetamine cannot be topped.

Meth is different, more enjoyable less aggressive more sketchy.

MDMA is very unfocused hard to see hard to speak intelligently just wanna move, feel extremely compelled to touch other humans or interact with something. very easy going hard to upset and you pursue connection and crave it.
 
Molly is an appreciable stimulant if you have enough tolerance for it serotogenic effects... Other then that both have their place (but I prefer racemic, dex or meth)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top