MDMA Chemistry/Pharmacology Thread

[Brenner]

I've got said 99% stuff made from PMK here. I'll post a pic, looks like glass. Do I think it is 99%? No. And will it be as good as the safrole stuff? I doubt it.

I'll be sending for lab tests. and I'll post the results here.

Don't forget to picture the Marquis result

 

[SmokingAces]

Yes mate correct! I'm going to be ordering some more MDMA for a test off, and will post pics of a few batches at once. One from PMK, one from safrole and one that is the glycidate shite. For people to see for themselves

 

[Small_town_casual]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/425201/Largest-drugs-factory-in-Europe-raided-in-Mafia-bust

Does anyone remember this bust? If I'm not mistaken it was a q-dance crews lab (always did like their pills, defqons, androids, partyflocks, bitcoins etc)

But notice how it says safrole oil was also seized and quite a sizeable amount of it, so safrole was still being used on 2013, but as you can imagine that would be a big loss all that product and safrole so maybe after that they resorted to glycidate.

 

[Small_town_casual]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/425201/Largest-drugs-factory-in-Europe-raided-in-Mafia-bust

Does anyone remember this bust? If I'm not mistaken it was a q-dance crews lab (always did like their pills, defqons, androids, partyflocks, bitcoins etc)

But notice how it says safrole oil was also seized and quite a sizeable amount of it, so safrole was still being used on 2013, but as you can imagine that would be a big loss all that product and safrole so maybe after that they resorted to glycidate.

 

[Biscuit]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

 

[Biscuit]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

 

[Small_town_casual]

I read somewhere that glycidate is actually 2 steps ahead of using safrole... I simply posted that link for those that say it is since the drought the pills have been mongy

 

[Small_town_casual]

I read somewhere that glycidate is actually 2 steps ahead of using safrole... I simply posted that link for those that say it is since the drought the pills have been mongy

 

[mister]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

I think you nailed it, Biscuit

 

[mister]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

I think you nailed it, Biscuit

 

[Brenner]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

Very interesting post indeed, and based on research I've been doing in the background recently I'd have to agree. What appears to be happening is the few big producers out there (which appear to supply a lot if not all of the pill pressers with MDMA) are using the method which produces the inferior MDMA. There does seem to be a hint that one or two very small labs (we're talking almost home labs) still use the method which produces similar stuff to what was around in the 90s but we don't hear about it because they are such small scale they don't pump a lot of product out and none of it is darknet based so unless you know a guy who knows a guy kind of thing....

Guess we will just have to keep hunting around

 

[Brenner]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

Very interesting post indeed, and based on research I've been doing in the background recently I'd have to agree. What appears to be happening is the few big producers out there (which appear to supply a lot if not all of the pill pressers with MDMA) are using the method which produces the inferior MDMA. There does seem to be a hint that one or two very small labs (we're talking almost home labs) still use the method which produces similar stuff to what was around in the 90s but we don't hear about it because they are such small scale they don't pump a lot of product out and none of it is darknet based so unless you know a guy who knows a guy kind of thing....

Guess we will just have to keep hunting around

 

[Acid4Blood]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

Great point, well presented.
Makes alot of sense.

 

[Acid4Blood]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.

Great point, well presented.
Makes alot of sense.

 

[bogman]

I do wish people would stop blaming the glycidate and assuming that the only good MDMA has to be made from safrole. Good MDMA is produced from a standard reductive amination of MD-P2P or PMK oil. This latter chemical has no stereoisomers and therefore will always produce, if standard reductive amination techniques are employed, racemic MDMA.

Safrole isn't the only chemical which produces perfectly good MD-P2P. Piperonal can be converted into MD-P2P just as well. And yes, so can PMK-glycidate.

What seems to be happening, if this theory is even correct, is that manufacturers have found a way to convert PMK-glycidate (which does come in different stereoisomers) straight to MDMA, either by bypassing the manufacture of MD-P2P completely or the MD-P2P being generated so briefly before it is then converted into MDMA (kind of like a "one-pot" type synthesis) that one isomer of the MDMA is favoured because the glycidate precursor used was of a particular isomer to begin with.

All the MDMA manufacturers using glycidate need to do is convert it to MD-P2P/PMK first and then extract and purify it for later use; which is precisely what should happen if MDMA is being made properly from safrole as well. The safrole isn't meant to be in the product. It is just via safrole, good quality MD-P2P/PMK (which is the true immediate precursor for MDMA) can be made.

So in summary, the glycidate isn't the problem; but rather it is the lazy and greedy people using the glycidate to make MDMA in the most low cost and expeditious way possible, at great expense to the quality/desirability of the product.


would love to get this printed onto a t-shirt, nice for wandering around a little festival and folk trying to make sense of it while off there heads

 

[Biscuit]

mister, Acid4Blood and bogman - thanks for the comments!

I should have qualified what I said in one respect. Whilst the glycidate situation does appear to be the issue, one other possibility is that new catalysts are being utilised in the reductive amination phase of the production which are stereoselective or favour the production of one isomer over the other. Perhaps the use of these catalysts was coincidental to the rise of the glycidate (with catalysts being far more likely to be used by very large laboratories of the kind which seem to be using the new precursor) and the glycidate isn't the problem.

I think the above is less likely but still feasible. Which is why I referred to using "standard" (i.e. the well publicised ones) reductive amination techniques in the post above. Regardless, the use of a new stereoselective catalyst is once again a business decision driven largely by commercial considerations. It still is something which the manufacturers could change if they wanted to.

Frankly, I don't think they are treating the glycidate precursor as the precious commodity that it is, likely due to there being limited restrictions on its availability currently. We know this because they are prepared to pump 200-250mg of MDMA into the pills, which would require twice as much glycidate as a 100-125mg pill containing racemic MDMA powder. See, whilst the glycidate remains readily available and likely quite cheap, it is likely more profitable to use twice as much of this precursor than it is to spend time extracting and purifying the MD-P2P easily made from the glycidate; if this situation changed and suddenly the cost parameters of these two variables were essentially reversed, then perhaps we would see a rapid return to MDMA that seems to be of better quality and where mega dosed pills are few and far between.

Brenner:
That purple in the marquis reaction is unmistakeable. It is certainly how I remembered it to be from most of the pills I tested from 1999 to 2005. The question is what causes this colour change and does it definitely relate to the actual MDMA contained in the pills and not due to some other factor which may have nothing to do with the MDMA at all (e.g. a particular binder which was used in the old days; or the purity of MDMA commonly found in older pills etc).

I have tested sassafras oil with marquis reagent a long, long time ago and it went the characteristic purple colour, albeit very dark, but never becoming black. The link below is to a PDF of a rather dated but still entirely valid manual produced by the UN.

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/st-nar-13-rev1.pdf.

This document confirms that:
(i) MD-P2P turns marquis orange/brown (see page 80), so it cannot account for the purple;
(ii) MDMA turns marquis black (page 45), although this doesn't mean that it wasn't dark purple at first before becoming black; and
(iii) safrole/isosafrole turns marquis deep purple (p89/p78 ), the colour never progressing to black at all.

The question is whether the purple colour is from the marquis reacting to left over safrole/isosafrole or whether (for whatever reason) racemic MDMA goes dark purple first but MDMA that is mainly the R isomer, goes straight to black:
- if it is the former then the "dark purple first" marquis reaction is actually only useful as evidence supporting but not proving that safrole/isosafrole has been used as a precursor; which as I stated in the earlier post is not a pre-condition for the MDMA to be racemic (although in the present climate this may well be the case).
- if it is the latter then marquis reagent may well be able to distinguish between racemic MDMA and R-MDMA, regardless of the way in which it was manufactured.

Unfortunately, I do not know the answer to this one and I am not sure that anyone necessarily does - unless Shulgin (or someone similar) recorded the results of a marquis test on the various racemic and isometrically pure samples of MDMA that we know he produced a long time ago.

 

[Biscuit]

mister, Acid4Blood and bogman - thanks for the comments!

I should have qualified what I said in one respect. Whilst the glycidate situation does appear to be the issue, one other possibility is that new catalysts are being utilised in the reductive amination phase of the production which are stereoselective or favour the production of one isomer over the other. Perhaps the use of these catalysts was coincidental to the rise of the glycidate (with catalysts being far more likely to be used by very large laboratories of the kind which seem to be using the new precursor) and the glycidate isn't the problem.

I think the above is less likely but still feasible. Which is why I referred to using "standard" (i.e. the well publicised ones) reductive amination techniques in the post above. Regardless, the use of a new stereoselective catalyst is once again a business decision driven largely by commercial considerations. It still is something which the manufacturers could change if they wanted to.

Frankly, I don't think they are treating the glycidate precursor as the precious commodity that it is, likely due to there being limited restrictions on its availability currently. We know this because they are prepared to pump 200-250mg of MDMA into the pills, which would require twice as much glycidate as a 100-125mg pill containing racemic MDMA powder. See, whilst the glycidate remains readily available and likely quite cheap, it is likely more profitable to use twice as much of this precursor than it is to spend time extracting and purifying the MD-P2P easily made from the glycidate; if this situation changed and suddenly the cost parameters of these two variables were essentially reversed, then perhaps we would see a rapid return to MDMA that seems to be of better quality and where mega dosed pills are few and far between.

Brenner:
That purple in the marquis reaction is unmistakeable. It is certainly how I remembered it to be from most of the pills I tested from 1999 to 2005. The question is what causes this colour change and does it definitely relate to the actual MDMA contained in the pills and not due to some other factor which may have nothing to do with the MDMA at all (e.g. a particular binder which was used in the old days; or the purity of MDMA commonly found in older pills etc).

I have tested sassafras oil with marquis reagent a long, long time ago and it went the characteristic purple colour, albeit very dark, but never becoming black. The link below is to a PDF of a rather dated but still entirely valid manual produced by the UN.

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/st-nar-13-rev1.pdf.

This document confirms that:
(i) MD-P2P turns marquis orange/brown (see page 80), so it cannot account for the purple;
(ii) MDMA turns marquis black (page 45), although this doesn't mean that it wasn't dark purple at first before becoming black; and
(iii) safrole/isosafrole turns marquis deep purple (p89/p78 ), the colour never progressing to black at all.

The question is whether the purple colour is from the marquis reacting to left over safrole/isosafrole or whether (for whatever reason) racemic MDMA goes dark purple first but MDMA that is mainly the R isomer, goes straight to black:
- if it is the former then the "dark purple first" marquis reaction is actually only useful as evidence supporting but not proving that safrole/isosafrole has been used as a precursor; which as I stated in the earlier post is not a pre-condition for the MDMA to be racemic (although in the present climate this may well be the case).
- if it is the latter then marquis reagent may well be able to distinguish between racemic MDMA and R-MDMA, regardless of the way in which it was manufactured.

Unfortunately, I do not know the answer to this one and I am not sure that anyone necessarily does - unless Shulgin (or someone similar) recorded the results of a marquis test on the various racemic and isometrically pure samples of MDMA that we know he produced a long time ago.

 

[Brenner]

mister, Acid4Blood and bogman - thanks for the comments!

I should have qualified what I said in one respect. Whilst the glycidate situation does appear to be the issue, one other possibility is that new catalysts are being utilised in the reductive amination phase of the production which are stereoselective or favour the production of one isomer over the other. Perhaps the use of these catalysts was coincidental to the rise of the glycidate (with catalysts being far more likely to be used by very large laboratories of the kind which seem to be using the new precursor) and the glycidate isn't the problem.

I think the above is less likely but still feasible. Which is why I referred to using "standard" (i.e. the well publicised ones) reductive amination techniques in the post above. Regardless, the use of a new stereoselective catalyst is once again a business decision driven largely by commercial considerations. It still is something which the manufacturers could change if they wanted to.

Frankly, I don't think they are treating the glycidate precursor as the precious commodity that it is, likely due to there being limited restrictions on its availability currently. We know this because they are prepared to pump 200-250mg of MDMA into the pills, which would require twice as much glycidate as a 100-125mg pill containing racemic MDMA powder. See, whilst the glycidate remains readily available and likely quite cheap, it is likely more profitable to use twice as much of this precursor than it is to spend time extracting and purifying the MD-P2P easily made from the glycidate; if this situation changed and suddenly the cost parameters of these two variables were essentially reversed, then perhaps we would see a rapid return to MDMA that seems to be of better quality and where mega dosed pills are few and far between.

Brenner:
That purple in the marquis reaction is unmistakeable. It is certainly how I remembered it to be from most of the pills I tested from 1999 to 2005. The question is what causes this colour change and does it definitely relate to the actual MDMA contained in the pills and not due to some other factor which may have nothing to do with the MDMA at all (e.g. a particular binder which was used in the old days; or the purity of MDMA commonly found in older pills etc).

I have tested sassafras oil with marquis reagent a long, long time ago and it went the characteristic purple colour, albeit very dark, but never becoming black. The link below is to a PDF of a rather dated but still entirely valid manual produced by the UN.

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/st-nar-13-rev1.pdf.

This document confirms that:
(i) MD-P2P turns marquis orange/brown (see page 80), so it cannot account for the purple;
(ii) MDMA turns marquis black (page 45), although this doesn't mean that it wasn't dark purple at first before becoming black; and
(iii) safrole/isosafrole turns marquis deep purple (p89/p78 ), the colour never progressing to black at all.

The question is whether the purple colour is from the marquis reacting to left over safrole/isosafrole or whether (for whatever reason) racemic MDMA goes dark purple first but MDMA that is mainly the R isomer, goes straight to black:
- if it is the former then the "dark purple first" marquis reaction is actually only useful as evidence supporting but not proving that safrole/isosafrole has been used as a precursor; which as I stated in the earlier post is not a pre-condition for the MDMA to be racemic (although in the present climate this may well be the case).
- if it is the latter then marquis reagent may well be able to distinguish between racemic MDMA and R-MDMA, regardless of the way in which it was manufactured.

Unfortunately, I do not know the answer to this one and I am not sure that anyone necessarily does - unless Shulgin (or someone similar) recorded the results of a marquis test on the various racemic and isometrically pure samples of MDMA that we know he produced a long time ago.

Completely agree, and to further the marquis potential issue, it might possibly just indicate the presence of MDA - since as far as I'm aware MDA turns marquis purple. Just an FYI, the same debate about isomers is also going on regarding MDA. To be honest I don't think we will really get an answer until we find someone with access to a lab and Chiral Column - Neither of which I have!!

The more I read into Shulgins reports about the effects of the different isomers, the more it tallys up with my experiences and hence the more convinced I am that we've found the difference with todays mass produced MDMA. I doubt the mass producers will change anything unless forced to by controlled pre-cursors etc. They'll probably just be in it for the money and as long as people are buying.....

 

[Jabberwocky]

Personally if it wanst for the dodgy rating of the orange tesla vendor i would well take a punt on them. dose means fuck all ive had some bangers that were dutch. some that were uk. it matters not.

i've got a gram of clear PMK oil made mdma 100% crystals ordered. hopefully that wil hit the spot. god bless t'internet

You do realize the MDP2P is MDP2P regardless of if it comes via piperonal --> PMK-gly or via sassafras oil --> safrole --> isosafrole

don't you?

The catalyst for PMK-gly to PMK is well known and not chiral

after MDP2P is reached, no different process is needed, so there should be no chiral catalyst used

 

[Jabberwocky]

The theory is that there is some other process that is in use going from PMK-G to MDMA without an intervening step, which leads to the suspected isomer imbalance that produces the subjective differences. It's mostly conjecture, but that's the best explanation we can come up with.

Why on earth would there be?

You have to convert the PMK-gly to PMK to do the synthesis to MDMA, it is quite easy, and has been known in the literature for a while.

Getting PMK from PMK-gly is actually easier than using sassafras oil