Intramuscular vs subcutaneous injection

[babooon87]

Hi everyone, I have read on many occasions on this forum of people taking psychedelics by intramuscular injection.

Personally when I inject I use subcutaneous injections which I find works well and seems much safer than I.M. I mean I would much rather get an abces just beneath the skin that I can take notice of immediately than one that festers deep in my muscle tissue that would surely warrant an E.R. visit if it gets ugly.

So my question to the people who have experience with both : is I.M. that much better, more potent, faster to justifie the added risks ? Or am I missing something else ? Thank you .

 

[JTemperance]

I don't know about psychedelics specifically, but AFAIK the rationale for IM injections concerning abscesses is that the much superior exposure to blood vessels in a major muscle will allow the drug/impurities to be absorbed faster and more fully than under the skin, hence reducing the risk of abscess overall.

But as you say, the trade-off is a more problematic location if an abscess does form. So I'm not sure which direction is the one of "added risk" overall, and I'm not optimistic about finding any studies comparing IM vs SC that would suggest an answer, at least not for street drugs.

 

[Pt4hh0t3p]

I agree with the above.
I might add that I've done some sloppy IM's that ended up being virtual subcutaneous, i.e. bubble under the skin injections. The psychoactivity wasn't in any way different. Even the "come up" is similar.

 

[Meth novice 79]

It’s probab different for everyone and depending on what you prefer, but I found subcutaneous injections bring the buzz on slower and I got loads more bumps and lumps that a nice clean vein shot that left nothing. I only go muscular when I’m having vascular constriction and I’m ALWAYS bruised to high heaven the next day for duck all cos the rush was too slow

Personally I always thought subcutaneous injections were just for roids. Learn something every day

 

[babooon87]

Afaik most roids are taken intramuscular. Subcutaneous is generally used for type 1 diabetics to administer their insulin.

 

[babooon87]

I don't know about psychedelics specifically, but AFAIK the rationale for IM injections concerning abscesses is that the much superior exposure to blood vessels in a major muscle will allow the drug/impurities to be absorbed faster and more fully than under the skin, hence reducing the risk of abscess overall.

But as you say, the trade-off is a more problematic location if an abscess does form. So I'm not sure which direction is the one of "added risk" overall, and I'm not optimistic about finding any studies comparing IM vs SC that would suggest an answer, at least not for street drugs.

That makes sense thanks. And I was not reffering to street drugs. I do it only with mostly pure compounds. Did it a handful of times with street drugs and it made me paranoid each time which kind of ruined the high.