• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

Exotic drug encyclopaedia

Solipsis

Solipsis

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Mar 12, 2007
Messages
15,503
Location
NL
We have PIHKAL, we have TIHKAL, who knows what Shulgins next release will pertain... but are there any handy handbooks out there that cover the most exotic drugs that are on the market today (one might say - how obscure may it be?), well let's say things like the NBOMe's are a recent and good enough example of an exotic drug.
Arylcyclohexylamines and such exotic dissociatives are discussed, some GABAergics, synthetic cannabinoids get a part, huge parts for PEAs from somewhat common to the most exotic (as illustration example) and also a big one for tryptamines and designer stimulants.

A couple of questions for this thread:

- Is there a book about exotic drugs out there already that tries to go after them all, explain a bit about analogues and tries its best to have something in it for laymen and connoisseurs alike? I would hate to redo something entirely the same (+ copyright? accidental infringement lol).
- What are topics you would feel that are great to discuss? Please fantasize with me because I intend to make a good one out of it and am already pretty far ahead.

Note that it's in my native language first, I will not release it for free and I have good hopes of getting picked up by a drug information / prevention monitoring institute. Therefore it is meant very much for professionals to broaden their horizon, not for the irrelevant idiot who(m?) I would notify of the existence of very potent new drugs.
 
It would be good to include reports similar to pihkal, and pharmacological information...not nesescarily synthesis info. All I can think of right now, maybe Ill add later.

Theres also rare benzos like etizolam.
 
You are right about etizolam being rare, there is also brotizolam and I would include phenazepam since it is so abundant on the market these days. Perhaps I would devote a small section to this but I just don't want to get into pharmaceutical abuse too deeply, opiates is the same thing: hard to find analgesics does not equal novelty to me but perhaps that is my biased view?

I include gabapentin and pregabalin though for example, because I consider it an interesting read that you can get high off neuropathic painkillers very well and they are an atypical class of drugs.

Thanks for the input, there will not be any synthesis info because I don't want to make a cookbook for chemists but a good read to find out about less common drugs.
 
The problem I see is that by including a number of the more obscure drugs, you are in effect giving RC companies ideas, which is something that we've tried to avoid lately, what with the massive amount of fake drugs on the market. I'm going to PM you a list of things I think are worth including, and if you have trouble digging up trip reports on anything I can probably help you out.

On the other hand I'm generally in favor of synthesis info being included.
 
"Professionals to broaden their horizons"? I do appreciate the good will, Sol, but these professionals wouldn't really want a catalogue - they already know all that is available and more.

I find myself wondering how such a project would ever NOT end up doing the very thing we don't want it to do...

Btw, Etizolam is not that rare - it is prescribed in a number of countries and that was in fact how I tried it. It just happened to appear on the grey market.
 
^^^
Agreed, the information is already widely available online for those who wish to dig it up (and the digging is really quite easy) making it any easier will only attract moronic journalists, legislators, and other outsiders who would abuse the info.

I'm not against discussion of obscure potentially abusable novel drugs (as some are) but I think presenting the information for the world to see with a bow tied around it can only lead to problems.

EDIT: I have seen a draft of the Shulgin Index (they put a copy out for people to flip through at a recent MAPS conference) and although and I'm not positive, I'm 90% certain the N-benzylated PEAs were included.
 
Last edited:
How come when Shulgin publishes it for the world to read it's heralded with delight, but when it's done cross-drugclass primarily for professionals it's only bad news? And when I say professional I mean people who pretty much care about getting people with problems help and watching drug trends (manufacture, use, rise of fakes, etc - all relevant in the Netherlands, where there are a lot of pills and they are getting tested a lot),
yes there was a study done lately that showed there is an unprecedented number of 'designer drugs', or analogues or whatever but it doesn't mean that each and every social worker knows about this stuff! Not at all, most know about the major ones because those are the ones causing trouble with addiction, crime, etc. But at the same time it doesn't mean those people wouldn't be interested in reading it and getting a sophisticated picture...
Anyway I know plenty of people who are generally curious who I think would consider this a fine read but wouldn't abuse it. I would be amazed if they would venture some trials with basic 2C-Xes.

I agree that one should not approach this too liberal - for example I once thought it would be great to just legalize everything but many people are just too retarded to expose them too things too easily - my better shaded stance right now is that this should be a gradual process taking years and years of informing right and possibly deregulating accordingly. At least take down the huge punishments for things like DMT, etc. in countries like the US.
Which is why I would discuss all of this with the people I am connected with and try to come up with ways to protect against abuse, they would not agree with a general release of too much info into the public either.
Ways to deal with this are for instance - off the top of my head - different versions of the writing, leaving some out for protection... also leaving some out to prevent against 5-IAI or 6-APB -like fiasco's. Thanks atara for some good insight.
Another thing is that it takes advertisement to distribute such a thing well so I would be selective with the audiences I would promote this to.

I hardly think I would give vendors wrong ideas, they are generally thinking a step ahead and picking up on what is happening. The only thing I will be doing is bundling information that is already out there and making a sensible story and add interesting facts if I can. If people with a healthy interest have to grind BL, erowid and the xIHKALs to get a coherent picture of whats floating around it can take up much time and energy to locate information. People still need to do deeper research before doing anything but
- some research is better than none, and
- getting a general picture first can support a learning curve to get an understanding of the classes of compounds and lets you focus on what you want while grasping where you are in the complex world of psychoactive chemicals.
There is a great opportunity here to include appropriate warnings wherever needed. Things important to know first-off!

Trying to convey things from Nichols et al. articles to laymen and suggesting semi-new compounds is something I would limit to the version not released to the general public of course! I also wouldn't blow the whistle on gems that should be kept secret.

Can we assume that I will not do something rash? I do like to adopt the sceptic view myself guys, some of you are better at it than others I guess - Jam, for instance, I have to say it often does a heck of a job as a reality check for people with too floaty disconnected ideas, chapeau, but on the other hand it can sometimes... constrict a constructive flow?

I hope you guys want to think with me and not against me, this sort of project is what makes me pretty happy to work on. So how about that Shulgin argument I started with?
It sure is something I like to discuss, because like I said I agree this sort of thing needs to be handled carefully, hopefully it is transparent why I might have come off pretty defensive - sorry if abrasive - I welcome a mature and healthy multilogue :)
 
Last edited:
Shulgin is heralded as a hero because he discovers and synthesizes the compounds himself. If the guy who discovered 4C-B wants to publish it for the world to see, that's cool, but if he'd rather the synthesis stay within the confines of whatever forum he posted it on, we'd like to see his wishes respected.

In the particular case of 4C-B, it was published in The Entheogen Review, so I figure it's public enough to mention.
 
Fair enough but how does that fit into the story of what I am writing up, it's not about who invented them but that they exist and about the coherence of SAR. Neither am I talking about the syntheses. Your point is about protection of some gems which I already said I am considering, but objections above were about safety of the public.
 
What do you mean by that sekio? What would you have to search to find the sort of chemicals that are exotic and active like 4-CB? People on this forum will at least tell you if its active or not?
 
I've been thinking about a book like this for years, even wrote some drafts when I was locked up. An encyclopedia of substances, a history of clandestine chemistry, a book on the rise of the research chemical market. Lots of great book ideas. But my enthusiasm waned for the reasons HH and Sekio listed. . .most of this info is available on the Internet. And a book would be outdated in weeks at the rate things are going. . . ..

Bless and curse the Internet!
 
amanitadine said:
I've been thinking about a book like this for years, even wrote some drafts when I was locked up. An encyclopedia of substances, a history of clandestine chemistry, a book on the rise of the research chemical market. Lots of great book ideas. But my enthusiasm waned for the reasons HH and Sekio listed. . .most of this info is available on the Internet. And a book would be outdated in weeks at the rate things are going. . . ..

Bless and curse the Internet!
Click to expand...

Books are outdated period. You could make a website or a blog though (and if your goal is to make money, charge people for access).
 
I still think it's ridiculous that the 3C's are not the homologues... Meaning it's 2C-E, DOET, 4C-E while 3C-E is the escaline amphetamine. Why on earth make everyone dizzy like that?

So what else then? dimethoxyamphetamine-E ? Probably not, DMAE is already taken =D

I guess you guys are right about the internet being leading now... although I wonder if this must also be the case for reference works.
The book was pretty tough to market at the drug-related knowledge institute I was solliciting for a job a while back. Shit happened and I stuck it in the freezer. Oh well the advantage is that I can always still update it as long as it is not finished. :p Priorities though...
 
Books are not outdated at all. If you can write a good and informative story, as long as it's mostly accurate it will probably sell just fine. Think of the crowd that watches Breaking Bad obsessively.
The best of both world is to publish an eBook :P
 
Effuzion said:
Books are outdated period. You could make a website or a blog though (and if your goal is to make money, charge people for access).
Click to expand...

I refuse your statement that books are outdated, period. I am a serious reader, like several a week. I use the internet for browsing, or mining for data. I use books for reading. Many a serious reader wants that physical object in their hands. A drug encyclopedia might be superseded by the internet but not a narrative or story.. . and there are stories a plenty on this realm!
 
Just because people still read books (me included) doesn't mean they're not outdated. Drake sold almost a million physical copies of his last album but I wouldn't try to argue that CDs aren't outdated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top