How we rolled in the 90s when the pills were super strong

[georgewc2001]

^this is true...don't need any science to know it either. years of ecstasy use will demonstrate it clearly to any user.

on the piperanol thing...it makes sense. more mda and amp combined with mdma will make for a MUCH stronger roll.

also, the hardpress point is very important...its related to concentration issue I mentioned. the less filler, the harder the roll. back in the 90s, some of the strongest pills were the little hard ones. you'd never guess it until you took one of those little suckers, then BAM and "where the hell did that come from?!" again...the higher the concentration, the more mdma will hit your brain at once, which should give a much stronger roll.

there were these white dolphins in '99 (nyc area) that were very small, but they still tie a couple of my other favorites as the strongest pills I ever took...one or two would have you soaring like a bird in the sky for hours...it felt like the seratonin couldn't flood my brain fast enough...like it was being pumped through a fire hose.

 

[Folley]

I don't think that's true. If it were, how would people ever recover from opioid or benzo addictions? Downregulation is a transient phenomenon, receptor density returns to normal in the absence of exogenous agonists.

Serotonin down regulation is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more damaging than opiate or benzo caused down regulation. Opiates and benzos bind to the receptors in the brain, like psychedelics. This causes little physical damage because the drugs you are taking simply mimic the neurotransmitters... while MDMA actually causes a direct release of Serotonin and other chemicals in massive amounts, which will over flood the synapse and destroy the axons...



Opiate caused down regulation is much different, it actually causes new opiate receptors to sprout up.. to get "high" you need all those opiate receptors activated, so you have to take more drugs to get the same kind of high because there are more receptors your brain needs to fill.. and if you don't fill the receptors, you go into withdrawals




See MDMA is MUCH different there, because it certainly isn't going to cause any new receptors to come about. Don't get me wrong, it's not like you can't recover at all from MDMA abuse... no, you will get used to it eventually and you won't even notice the fact that you're very low on serotonin after a while. If you're a heavy abuser though, then your guaranteed to be doing some major damage to Serotonin receptors that is not going to just go away.

Animal studies show that there is recovery of serotonergic markers. However, if axons are actually regrowing, there is no assurance that they will reform their original connections. While rats show extensive recovery that sometimes appears complete,[44][45] some primate studies show evidence of lasting alterations in serotonergic measures. Human studies, discussed below, show recovery, but these studies use indirect measures that may lack sensitivity for detecting subtle changes.

There is some recovery, of course. Your brain is very adaptive, it's going to do what it needs to do to be able to continue to function... however... "if axons are actually regrowing, there is no assurance that they will reform their original connections"


Once those connections are broken, they most likely are never going to be able to fix themselves. Your brain will rewire itself so that it's able to continue to function ("brain zaps" may be a direct manifestation of this rewiring process), but it won't be able to get back to the level of functionality that it had before.

^this is true...don't need any science to know it either.

lol

 

[futura2012]

also, the hardpress point is very important...its related to concentration issue I mentioned. the less filler, the harder the roll. back in the 90s, some of the strongest pills were the little hard ones. you'd never guess it until you took one of those little suckers, then BAM and "where the hell did that come from?!" again...the higher the concentration, the more mdma will hit your brain at once, which should give a much stronger roll.

Cant see how this would be possible. The filler would only be about 150mG or so very often its manitol. I cant see how this would have any effect on a roll.

The hardness of press could possibley have some effect if its really hard the pill breakdown could become gradual. I beleive there are specific binders for specific absorption speeds but these are usually associated with pharmacutical drugs not clandestine pills.

the hard press could potentially slow things but I cant see the link to speeding it up.

I cant see how loosley pressed pills would have much effect either as it would be the same as taking MDMA powder and that doesnt seem to have any more intense a come up.

The intense come ups seem to come from the pills I still think its something chemically specific about the MDMA or adulterant.

I wonder if you can get a filler that speeds up the come up? This might be possible

Re the dolphin George I reckon it might be this one. This looks like a 90s special.

Sourced in NY. Equal MDA / MDEA/ MDMA with a third dose METH

Size is standard at 8mm x 5mm

This would make you fly 90s style LOL

http://www.ecstasydata.org/view.php?id=1276

 

[Folley]

^ I don't know if it would really...

amphetamine is pretty different from meth. Whenever I've had meth with a roll it takes away a lot of the love and empathy for others and just replaces with with a hedonistic pleasure... I feel like amphetamine wouldn't do that as much, but still give you some energy.



What about this one?

http://www.ecstasydata.org/view.php?id=1355


Psuedoephedrine would be the binder used, and would give you a small amount of energy and cause an additional norepinephrine release which could make the roll more "magical"..


You can even tell the amounts of the contents with that pill.. It contains ~90mg of MDMA plus ~46mg of both MDA and MDE as well and ~46mg of pseudoephedrine unless my math is wrong..


That's a fucking strong pill!

 

[blah blah]

I cant see how loosley pressed pills would have much effect either as it would be the same as taking MDMA powder and that doesnt seem to have any more intense a come up.

The intense come ups seem to come from the pills I still think its something chemically specific about the MDMA or adulterant.

I wonder if you can get a filler that speeds up the come up?

Mints are a perfect case in point here Futura. Those things are usually between 130-180mg total pill weight and are accepted in the community at containing around 90mg of MDMA. They hit you with a great smack in the face right at the 20 min mark and you're full blown in 30-40 max. Every other pill and capsuled molly I've taken is just barely starting its creep when mints have you laying on the ground. I still don't feel quite as intense of a rush from the straight capped Molly as I do with the Mints. That was quite a surprise the first time I took them to start breathing so heavy at 20 minutes I had to brace myself on the kitchen counter haha.

They're pretty much a straight shot of MDMA right to the brain because of how little binder is used.

 

[Folley]

If that was true wouldn't crystal MDMA hit you the quickest? A capsule takes like 10 seconds to dissolve, and pure crystal dissolves instantly in water


Also, you are right that mints have very little binder, but they are also notorious for falling apart. That's probably why you don't really see large amounts of them traveling very far.. the bags would be littered with broken pills and powder

 

[blah blah]

It's just another one of those things folley that you're just going to have to take my word on till you can try them yourself haha. Caps of shards haven't ever gotten to doin their dirt on me as fast as mints, also confirmed by people close to me as well.

My guess is they don't travel too far because they're bad ass little pills that get scooped up quick like before they can make it too far in large amounts. They're sturdy enough little bastards to make a trek when well treated though

 

[Hapomen22]

Crystal MDMA hits the peak for me within 20 minutes on an empty stomach, I always comeup with a grin on my face within 10 mins, when it hits you it's like BAM instant feeling of emphaty and all the good things. In my experience, hard pressed tabs take much longer to hit you even (40-60mins) if you chew them before swallowing. So yes the binder definitely plays a role in the equation.

 

[futura2012]

Mints are a perfect case in point here Futura. Those things are usually between 130-180mg total pill weight and are accepted in the community at containing around 90mg of MDMA. They hit you with a great smack in the face right at the 20 min mark and you're full blown in 30-40 max. Every other pill and capsuled molly I've taken is just barely starting its creep when mints have you laying on the ground. I still don't feel quite as intense of a rush from the straight capped Molly as I do with the Mints. That was quite a surprise the first time I took them to start breathing so heavy at 20 minutes I had to brace myself on the kitchen counter haha.

They're pretty much a straight shot of MDMA right to the brain because of how little binder is used.

I still dont get this. Surely the cap of molly is the ultimate form of loose binder and you confirm it has a less of a come up.

Surely the "smack in the face" is something in the chemistry? I cant see how either the filler or binder would have such a dramatic effect.

Even if you crush up a pill it might make a slim difference on come up speed but not a "smack in the face" difference.

Unless a pill is extremely hard pressed I cant see this being much of an influence effect on the intensity of come up. It could likely make more of a difference on the time of come up. This would make more sense.

I would be very sure the "smack in the face" comes from all the chemistry points made from everyones previous posts.

As to the exact cause its difficult to say but if you know of a lab analysis that would make interesting conversation.

^ I don't know if it would really...

amphetamine is pretty different from meth. Whenever I've had meth with a roll it takes away a lot of the love and empathy for others and just replaces with with a hedonistic pleasure... I feel like amphetamine wouldn't do that as much, but still give you some energy.

What about this one?

http://www.ecstasydata.org/view.php?id=1355

Psuedoephedrine would be the binder used, and would give you a small amount of energy and cause an additional norepinephrine release which could make the roll more "magical"..

You can even tell the amounts of the contents with that pill.. It contains ~90mg of MDMA plus ~46mg of both MDA and MDE as well and ~46mg of pseudoephedrine unless my math is wrong..

That's a fucking strong pill!

amphetamine is pretty different from meth.?

Chemically similiar. Theres also the issue of D Meth or Race Meth. Both give quite a different buzz. (sound familiar LOL). (the lab reports dont pick this up)

I would assume if your adulterating pills you would add race meth as users report it as a "smoother" feeling.

Just to confuse things you can have different amphetamine salts also (sound familiar?)

I cant see Meth Amphetamine or Straight Amphetamine having too much of a different effect in this particular context of pill. The METH is a third the dose of the MDMA/MDA/MDEA ingredients. Thus Meth or Amphet I cant see being too much of an influence particularly if its RACE meth vs Sulfate.

Please note I am saying in the context of this pill. i realise there is a difference between amphet and meth amphet.


"Psuedoephedrine would be the binder used, and would give you a small amount of energy and cause an additional norepinephrine release which could make the roll more "magical".."

It wont be used as binder. The actual role of the Pseudo in this pill is a tricky one to pin point?

Pseudo is a precursor for METH. Why its in this pill im unsure. Up against doses of MDA, MDEA and MDMA I cant see how you would feel it.

It would be like taking a coctail E Pill and taking a Sudafed. I very much doubt you would feel the Sudafed.

I also cant see why a manufacturer would use it as a filler because its a precursor and would be a waste.

It could be as you suggest perhaps it enhances the MDA/MDEA/MDMA combo in some way. How I am unsure I think this is unlikely however as the combo will over ride it.

The other thought is it could be a detection error in the GCMS and the pill infact contains METH and the pseudo is picked up as an impurity in the spike.

Unsure? interesting discussion.


"You can even tell the amounts of the contents with that pill.. It contains ~90mg of MDMA plus ~46mg of both MDA and MDE as well and ~46mg of pseudoephedrine unless my math is wrong.."

maths correct as long as you know the full content of the pill. Unfortunately because of this silly ban from the DEA where by they cant show the mG contents and only as ratios you are left guessing slightly.

There might be filler, binder, undetected in there that might mess up this prediction.

This is the negative of American lab pill analysis...

 

[blah blah]

Futura I have made the comments on the synth in Mints being such a high grade quality that everyone who is really contributing to this discussion already has heard my take on that. I simply wanted to include that detail of how fast and hard they hit since it pertained to the recent discussion on binders. There is, without a doubt, a difference in the synth in Mints.

 

[Folley]

It would be like taking a coctail E Pill and taking a Sudafed. I very much doubt you would feel the Sudafed.

That's why it's used as binder... caffeine is often used as a filler in pills too, take the copycat pokes that were going around. A light stimulant would be better than speed in my opinion... but then again I think speed with MDMA is a waste of a roll and kills the love



and meth is something like 50 times more dopaminergic than amphetamine... so I do think there is going to be a difference in the "magic" from one to another





Oh, and as for d-Meth/racemix meth, the L-methamphetamine isomer is non-psychoactive... in fact it's in vicks cold medicine. Both of MDMA's isomers are active though

 

[Vader]

That's why it's used as binder... caffeine is often used as a filler in pills too

Are you sure about that? Most pharmaceuticals use (relatively) inert binders and fillers, not active drugs.

 

[Folley]

^ Well yeah, but then again these guys aren't pressing medicine lol. Pharm pills are meant to only contain one or a combo of ingredients, nothing else... ecstasy certainly isn't as reliable as that


I'm pretty damn sure in that sample the psuedoephedrine is the binder, I mean the dosages would all match up if it was... 200mg of MDxx, yeah, I bet you could have a good night on half of that. The recreational dose of PE is like 3-4 times what would be in the pill... it would give very light stimulating effects and NE release at that dosage, and clear out your nose pretty good too.



Apparently psuedoephedrine used to be a very popular binder too...

http://www.ecstasydata.org/search.p...city=&source=&m1=&y1=&m2=&y2=&state=&country=

 

[futura2012]

blah
"I simply wanted to include that detail of how fast and hard they hit since it pertained to the recent discussion on binders. There is, without a doubt, a difference in the synth in Mints. "

So if the synth is different hence the hit. What is the relevance of the binder to the mints?

folley
"and meth is something like 50 times more dopaminergic than amphetamine... so I do think there is going to be a difference in the "magic" from one to another"

The point was in the context of the pill. Three equal doses of MDA/MDE/MDMA 1/3 the dose of this in amphetamine. If its race meth or amphetamine do you think the difference would be so relevant then? In my opinion I dont think there would be much of a difference. Its only an opinion not an absolute statement of fact.


"That's why it's used as binder... caffeine is often used as a filler in pills too, take the copycat pokes that were going around. A light stimulant would be better than speed in my opinion... but then again I think speed with MDMA is a waste of a roll and kills the love"

I didnt think pseudo was a binder? Its a precursor for METH but never heard of it as a binder.
I agree with your opinion about the speed. I would also prefer no adulterant at all.

"Oh, and as for d-Meth/racemix meth, the L-methamphetamine isomer is non-psychoactive... in fact it's in vicks cold medicine. Both of MDMA's isomers are active though "

Yes very true. I said D Meth and Race. Both have different qualities. The race would be better for a pill adulterant as its a smoother hit. The synth chemists discuss this quite a lot race is preferred in many cases. Not all.


vader
"Are you sure about that? Most pharmaceuticals use (relatively) inert binders and fillers, not active drugs. "

That is infact correct the caffeine and pseudo would be an adulterant rather than filler. Nice observation.


folly
"^ Well yeah, but then again these guys aren't pressing medicine lol. Pharm pills are meant to only contain one or a combo of ingredients, nothing else... ecstasy certainly isn't as reliable as that"

Dont agree the entire weight of the pill is very rarely made up of entire active ingredients. ironically a pharm pill often contains a lot less inert filler than an E pill.


"I'm pretty damn sure in that sample the psuedoephedrine is the binder, I mean the dosages would all match up if it was... 200mg of MDxx, yeah, I bet you could have a good night on half of that. The recreational dose of PE is like 3-4 times what would be in the pill... it would give very light stimulating effects and NE release at that dosage, and clear out your nose pretty good too."

Arent you confusing filler or adulterant with binder here?
Its possible in this particular pill its all active ingredient + binder. Due to the policies of ecstasydata we will never know its a speculative argument.
It is unusual for a pill to be crammed with active ingredient it usually has an inert filler such as manitol.
I still cant see the role of the pseudo in this pill? If you removed it I dont think it would make any difference.

http://www.ecstasydata.org/view.php?id=1355


"Apparently psuedoephedrine used to be a very popular binder too..."

I dont think its a binder.

Cant be a misread on the spike as so many reports

Must have some kind of CNS effect with everything else.

Seems a strange choice of adulterant as its a precursor but clearly something that is done.

Also a surprise where you have a pill with meth and pseudo it doesnt make sense to me.

 

[blah blah]

blah
"I simply wanted to include that detail of how fast and hard they hit since it pertained to the recent discussion on binders. There is, without a doubt, a difference in the synth in Mints. "

So if the synth is different hence the hit. What is the relevance of the binder to the mints?

George commented on the binder in pills affecting the hit, so i gave my take on the speed and punch of Mints because of the little amount of filler in them vs the tightly packed majority of pills. Just simply giving an example befitting his comment on fillers.

 

[futura2012]

Ok see what you mean blah.

No offense intended by the way I just like debating things.

I suppose when you think about this a small pill with little filler is effectively avoiding all the 'hype' of a 350mG sized pill and just keeping the raw essentials in there.

 

[georgewc2001]

@futura...if those are the dolphins from nyc area around '99, then yes those would be them because they did have a touch of meth...and i mean JUST the right touch. The comedown was no problem. Sometimes, a touch of meth is what gives that soaring bird rush as I call it. The dolphins had that but also had such a long lasting hard roll...one word...amazing. And, this just supports my argument that the mixing of ingredients in pills in the 90s is a large factor in the strength they had.

and again, on the concentration/filler issue, it's similar to oxys. snort three 30mg pills and you won't get half as high as if you snort a half an 80mg pill. to take an extreme example, which i do not have personal experience with so this is just based on other peoples general experiences, look at heroin. if you snort it vs shooting....BIG difference. again, the speed with which the mdma hits the brain makes a big difference...i'd say especially with ecstasy since you can't just constantly up the dose and still get high like with drugs like cocaine or opiates.

 

[Folley]

The difference between a 30mg roxycodone pill and an 80mg Oxycontin is that one is time released and the other is instant release. But they use special polymers and gels to achieve that time release, that's not going to happen in an E pill obviously.

Besides, I usually bite my pills as I take them, I never have to worry about the pill dissolving slowly

Arent you confusing filler or adulterant with binder here?

Nope... just because a chemical is slightly active doesn't mean it can't be used as a binder, like I said caffeine is pften used as a binder as well. We both agree that meth in a pill is undesirable, maybe those pressers agree. That's why they don't put it in the pill... but psuedoephedrine was pretty damn easy to get in large quantities before the government crackdown on meth precursors...

So I guess we can agree to disagree about it being used as a binder.



BUT, if it was, then that pill would contain almost 100mg of MDMA, 50mg MDE, 50mg MDA and 50mg of a lightly stimulating chemical that also causes a NE release which is directly attributed to a more "magical" experience...

That's a pretty DAMN good pill IMO...200mg of MDxx is almost too much to take at once, but MDE is weaker and those doses are rounded so it's probably equal to like 160-170... still a SOLID dose that would have you gone for hours.. half would have you rolling hard too.

 

[georgewc2001]

folley...i'm talking about the 30mg instant release vs the old 80mg witht the time coating that washed off so they were instant release...perhaps you weren't around when these still existed

 

[mark881]

I like the idea of MDMA and MDA mix. Duration is a real issue. The pills just crash very very suddenly once they burn out, there's no slow sobering up...it's like OK I'm on drugs..bam now I'm not.