4DQSAR
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2025
- Messages
- 5,614
From time to time we are sent samples, usually when things go wrong.
In this case I was interested to look at how the dose unit had been produced.
Until now I hadn't encountered a product with a debossed logo a fine (0.4mm) wide embossed 'ring' on the obverse, bevelled edges, an embossed break-line and a little embossed ™ symbol inside a little embossed circle (again 0.4mm) on the reverse. The colour was uniform forest green colour. It seems that polishing or at least gentle de-dusting was employed because if nothing else, dust would get trapped in that fine detail.
It IS intersting that forest green was chosen as usually this colour is a bit harder to produce. Either a mixture of a yellow die, a blue dye and use of titanium dioxide as an excipient are all required (although at a pinch tiny amounts of iron oxide can be added to reduce the vivid colour thus replacing the need for titanium dioxide). But however you look at it, it certainly isn't the cheapest or easiest colour to produce.
Now my limited knowledge suggests to me that the makers are purposefully including these details to deter counterfeiting. I have noted what appears to be counterfeits and typically they are speckled, come in multiple and often vivid colours and the overall design has been simplifed with debossing replaced by embossing the crude outline and fine features removed.
But that doesn't mean it's impossible to produce a visually identical counterfeit.
I am reminded that the original Doves (also known as Sitting Ducks) which in 1988 were a consistant* briliant white with bevelled edges and an embossed logo. The mythology is that the makers used polished stainless-steel punches and dies, in high-pressure presses and after pressing the tablets went through a tablet polisher (de-duster). Obviously with high pressures and clearn uniform embossing, dies are more costly and need be replaced more frequently. In that case titanium dioxide was the excipient used to produce the 'brilliant white'.
But ultimately, MDMA salts are white. I understand the arguments about 'brand recognition' but dyes can hide a multitude of sins.
From a HR perspective you cannot tell how much of what is in a tablet just by looking at it. But at a rave or free party or wherever young people use such things, taking the time to look closely may offer clues.
There is a bit of a myth that dyes and chemically unreleated compounds are added to fool preuptive tests. The truth is actually worse. When misrepresention occurs, the products are far more likley to contain an active which is structurally siimilar so will fool some presumptive tests.
Even if someone else tried one before you did, all they know if the one they took was subjectively 'as expected'.
I only had 10 minutes to examine the sample but it's always better to be skeptical.
*Consistant for several years.
In this case I was interested to look at how the dose unit had been produced.
Until now I hadn't encountered a product with a debossed logo a fine (0.4mm) wide embossed 'ring' on the obverse, bevelled edges, an embossed break-line and a little embossed ™ symbol inside a little embossed circle (again 0.4mm) on the reverse. The colour was uniform forest green colour. It seems that polishing or at least gentle de-dusting was employed because if nothing else, dust would get trapped in that fine detail.
It IS intersting that forest green was chosen as usually this colour is a bit harder to produce. Either a mixture of a yellow die, a blue dye and use of titanium dioxide as an excipient are all required (although at a pinch tiny amounts of iron oxide can be added to reduce the vivid colour thus replacing the need for titanium dioxide). But however you look at it, it certainly isn't the cheapest or easiest colour to produce.
Now my limited knowledge suggests to me that the makers are purposefully including these details to deter counterfeiting. I have noted what appears to be counterfeits and typically they are speckled, come in multiple and often vivid colours and the overall design has been simplifed with debossing replaced by embossing the crude outline and fine features removed.
But that doesn't mean it's impossible to produce a visually identical counterfeit.
I am reminded that the original Doves (also known as Sitting Ducks) which in 1988 were a consistant* briliant white with bevelled edges and an embossed logo. The mythology is that the makers used polished stainless-steel punches and dies, in high-pressure presses and after pressing the tablets went through a tablet polisher (de-duster). Obviously with high pressures and clearn uniform embossing, dies are more costly and need be replaced more frequently. In that case titanium dioxide was the excipient used to produce the 'brilliant white'.
But ultimately, MDMA salts are white. I understand the arguments about 'brand recognition' but dyes can hide a multitude of sins.
From a HR perspective you cannot tell how much of what is in a tablet just by looking at it. But at a rave or free party or wherever young people use such things, taking the time to look closely may offer clues.
There is a bit of a myth that dyes and chemically unreleated compounds are added to fool preuptive tests. The truth is actually worse. When misrepresention occurs, the products are far more likley to contain an active which is structurally siimilar so will fool some presumptive tests.
Even if someone else tried one before you did, all they know if the one they took was subjectively 'as expected'.
I only had 10 minutes to examine the sample but it's always better to be skeptical.
*Consistant for several years.
