• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

Is all MDMA the same?

L

Limey

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
281
Location
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Ok, so I've heard MDMA is essentially MDMA regardless of the synth.
However, I hear people these days suggest that a 50-60mg dose of MDMA would have very little if any effect at all.
Rewind to 1991. Just half a dove ecstasy pill (50-60mg) would definitely be enough for a lot of people and some of my girlfriends would never do more than half and felt one was too much.

NYE 2012/2013 I bomb 250mg MDMA (tested legit) nothing much happened.
Wonder what's going on? Am I immune to it? Was 80's/90's MDMA synthesized differently? Or are people not getting much off 50-60mg MDMA because the MDMA is only 50% pure.
 
Just because it tested legit doesn't tell u how pure it was. It could have had 10mg of legit MDMA in it and the rest fillers or other shit. But yea 50mg of pure MDMA wouldn't do jack for me either so idk. I have nothing to compare it to from the 90s because I just found out bout this rolling phenomenon bout 3 yrs ago.
 
Pressed pills which contain a low dose of MDMA usually test weaker with the kit ie the black Colour is very diluted, I would assume because of this that a 10% pure batch of MDMA would produce similar results?
This stuff went dark black immediately when tested.
 
scureto1 said:
One of these threads has to pop up every month or two...
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I didn't want to spend a lot of time searching for and regurgitating old posts. No offense to anyone on here, but I've seen much worse threads.
Also this isn't one of these pills/MDMA were so much better back in the day (Although I think they were I could be proved wrong )
 
This is a baffeling thing to me too. I know that pills in my day were 100-120 mg most of the time unless they were cut with meth. 120mg was a sloppy night of you laying on the floor of a rave with everyone that passes asking if you were OK.

half a common pill was enough for a noob. now people are askin if taking half a gram is too much for a first timer 8o.

its either all the gear is so cut that the are getting next to nothing MDMA content or people want to be way more fucked than we did back then...I don't get it.
 
Exactly Matt. What prompted me to start this thread was hearing about people getting nothing off 50-60mg and asking if 0.5g was a good starter dose. This isn't a moaning/pills were better back in the day thread, it's kind of harm reduction and this is why- if people are bombing doses of 50% pure of less MDMA then it's very likely they could be in for a nasty surprise if they actually took the same amount of something much purer. I would suspect if 50mg of MDMA does nothing at all then it's probably heavily cut.
 
60mg is a very small dose...it really wouldn't have much of an effect on me, and I know for a fact that the MDMA I get is some of the best available in the world.

I don't really know what else to say except that you're mistaken.
 
You know this how? Have you had it lab tested? Also the best MDMA in the world now probably isn't a patch on 90s MDMA .

Also if you've never taken a 1991 dove your argument is invalid.
 
Last edited:
Limey said:
Exactly Matt. What prompted me to start this thread was hearing about people getting nothing off 50-60mg and asking if 0.5g was a good starter dose. This isn't a moaning/pills were better back in the day thread, it's kind of harm reduction and this is why- if people are bombing doses of 50% pure of less MDMA then it's very likely they could be in for a nasty surprise if they actually took the same amount of something much purer. I would suspect if 50mg of MDMA does nothing at all then it's probably heavily cut.
Click to expand...

I give adives here as if people are getting pure MDMA for harm reduction reasons. I know that is not the case for most but I would rather say take 100mg than assume they are getting cut shit and tell them to give 250mg a try and end up in the hospital something.

weirdfish said:
60mg is a very small dose...it really wouldn't have much of an effect on me, and I know for a fact that the MDMA I get is some of the best available in the world.

I don't really know what else to say except that you're mistaken.
Click to expand...

we are not mistaken...this is the way it was 12 years ago. a new user would have a great time on 60-70mg as long as they weren't 6'6" and 280lbs. 100mg was a good night for even a seasoned user. Now people scoff at giving a noob 100mg? something isn't right.
 
Last edited:
Limey said:
Sorry about that, I didn't want to spend a lot of time searching for and regurgitating old posts. No offense to anyone on here, but I've seen much worse threads.
Also this isn't one of these pills/MDMA were so much better back in the day (Although I think they were I could be proved wrong )
Click to expand...

Here's the most applicable thread. 29 pages of discussion on this exact topic. There's also a lot of pretty detailed chemistry talk in there if you're interested in it.

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/631070-How-we-rolled-in-the-90s-when-the-pills-were-super-strong
 
Limey said:
You know this how? Have you had it lab tested? Also the best MDMA in the world now probably isn't a patch on 90s MDMA .

Also if you've never taken a 1991 dove your argument is invalid.
Click to expand...

Please stop. MDMA has not changed, it's a chemical. Your argument is ridiculous.

I obviously can't give out details but I know for sure how good my MDMA is and everyone who's tried it has said it's the best they've ever had.

I am straight up telling you that it is almost impossible to roll hard on 60mg of MDMA. Erowid lists a decent dose for most people at 75 - 125 mg, and I count that as a trustworthy source of information. I don't know where your misinformation has come from, but it is misinformation. Never have I seen anyone try and claim that you can roll hard on such a small amount of MD. Perhaps it's different for you, but you're certainly in the minority.
 
I call bullshit, purely for the fact that lab tests done in that Channel 4 thing (Medical grade MDMA) gave doses of 83mg to the participants, and they weren't all over the shop on it.
 
Mdma in years past was more pure than what is generally available today. That doesn't mean that you can't find high purity product now. There is just a lot of really inconsistent stuff going around.

There is really no way to determine the true purity of your mdma without proper laboratory equipment. Marquis/Mandelin/Mecke reagents only tell you what you have, not how pure it is. The appearance of the powder/crystal is also a poor indicator of purity.

Of course, some people will react more strongly than others. With the best stuff I have come across, 75-80mg was a proper dose for me and 95mg was close to being too much. Some of my friends reacted to that batch slightly less intensely as me though. But when you here of people taking 400+ mg and getting normal effects, you know that they had impure drugs.
 
MDMA is MDMA regardless of how you look at it.

There are other variables to consider such as impurities and contamination.

People taking MDMA for experimental PTSD therapy are probably getting the highest quality and cleanest product, I would imagine.

Edit: also how do you know the strength of a pill circa 1991 unless it is documented information?
 
I would be a doofus to say that MDMA is different. MDMA has been the same since the begining of time and it will comtinue to be the same. so that leaves 2 possibilities...

1. everything everywhere is cut to shit

2. people's preception of the typical MDMA experience has changed.

I am thinking that it is the latter. I don't think the users today would be satisfied with what I thought was a good roll 12-13 years ago. while I would be utterly wrecked on 200mg, today's users are getting the same effect but their preception is that its a good start but they want more. I am leaning toward the side of people today just like to go harder than we did.
 
alasdairm said:
an mdma molecule from 1990 and an mdma molecule from today are exactly the same.

there are so many variables at play here...

alasdair
Click to expand...


Emphasis added.


MDMA = MDMA. If your "MDMA" is different from MDMA, there is something else causing that.



Limey said:
You know this how? Have you had it lab tested? Also the best MDMA in the world now probably isn't a patch on 90s MDMA .

Also if you've never taken a 1991 dove your argument is invalid.
Click to expand...

Right.

and actually, I've taken pills that WERE lab tested at ~70mg... it was an awfully weak roll. One just had me pissed off that I didn't take more.
 
Last edited:
It could be that your mdma crystal was recrystalized. I`ve been wondering this exact same thing. The only thing that makes since is that the crystal has been altered to weaken the dose.
 
I don't think it was the OP's intention to suguest that MDMA, the chemical, is diffrent. but there has to be something going on...

I have not rolled in a very long time so I can't say for sure but I just find it unthinkable that people would need 150mg or 200mg or more to have a good roll. back in the day, the only way you needed that much is if your tolerance was extremely high. I am guessing that at my peak usage/tolerance level I was starting off with 150-200mg with another 100mg an hour in. I thought that was insane amounts to be taking and new I needed a break.

now it seems that this is what they are giving to first timers. knowing what I know now...and if I had a time machine...I would punch you in the face for giving me that much for my first time. I fear this is a quiestion that has no answer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top