• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

Phenethylamines Methyl-Mescaline?

Sentience

Sentience

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
2,203
I have had a hard time finding out much that is specific about this...Is it stronger than mescaline by weight? Is the character of the trip different?

I guess it occurs naturally in some cacti along with mescaline.
 
i would think it would be weaker by weight, i am pretty sure, at least with amphetamines, and theyre pretty close chemically, thats how it is..eg. MDA doses are lower than MDMA doses, Amphetamine doses are lower than meth doses (in a non tolerant user, i am pretty sure, Strike says that in Total Synthesis 2)
 
What position is that methyl at? The nitrogen? If so, I expect it would probably be less potent by weight than mescaline. It may be barely active at all by itself. If it's the alpha position, then it's TMA and about twice as potent iirc.
 
i've also heard 2c-d referred to as methyl mescaline before. not that its correct or anything, but such things do occur
 
LSDMDMA&8337105 said:
i would think it would be weaker by weight, i am pretty sure, at least with amphetamines, and theyre pretty close chemically, thats how it is..eg. MDA doses are lower than MDMA doses, Amphetamine doses are lower than meth doses (in a non tolerant user, i am pretty sure, Strike says that in Total Synthesis 2)
Click to expand...

My research tells me that Methamphetamine is more stimulating than amphetamine. I was not aware of it being less potent by weight though.

I am curious about the differences in quality as much as I am other differences.
 
i would agree that methamphetamine is more stimulating than amphetamine, and more potent by weight
 
any major dude said:
i would agree that methamphetamine is more stimulating than amphetamine, and more potent by weight
Click to expand...

That contradicts what LSDMDMA&AMP was saying, but its also what I thought as well.

Hmmm. I really have no idea about the position. I know it is naturally occurring in some cacti along with regular mescaline.



Does anyone know for sure if Methylmescaline is less potent?


Are there any analogs that are more potent and based on mescaline that are known?
 
if i remember correctly from pihkal, proscaline & escaline were the only ones that showed much promise.
 
escaline has a cool name....like escalating the situation....like mescalating the situation.
 
Sentience said:
My research tells me that Methamphetamine is more stimulating than amphetamine. I was not aware of it being less potent by weight though.
Click to expand...

sure methamphtamine is stronger and more potent than amphetamine, but these are stimulants while mescaline is a psychedelic. the SAR is different. when talking about phenethylamine psychedelics n-methyl gives greatly reduced effects while longer alkyl-chains completely abolish psychedelic activity in most cases.

Sentience said:
Maybe this should be merged with this thread.

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=392371
Click to expand...
why? that thread's topic is a completely different analogue of mescaline.
 
I learn a lot about chemistry when I come here :)


So if methyl analogs are weaker for psychedelic phenethylalamines then which analogs tend to be stronger?
 
alpha-methyl for instance. it all depends on the position. also moving the positions of the methoxy groups around should increase potency iirc.
or replacing methoxy by ethoxy giving way to escaline. just have a look at some entries in pihkal...
 
I should really read that. I am looking for a cheap used copy...all the cheap copies on Amazon are gone.
 
^beat me to the punch, i was about to post that same link.. there are a couple of html versions of the 2nd half of both pihkal & tihkal, but i think erowid's is the best.
 
This is in the pihkal mescaline entry:

If free base mescaline is brought into reaction with ethyl formate (to produce the amide, N-formylmescaline) and subsequently reduced (with lithium aluminum hydride) it is converted to the N-methyl homologue. This base has also been found as a trace component in the Peyote cactus. And the effects of N-methylation of other psychedelic drugs have been commented upon elsewhere in these recipes, all with consistently negative results (with the noteworthy exception of the conversion of MDA to MDMA). Here, too, there is no obvious activity in man, although the levels assayed were only up to 25 milligrams.
Click to expand...

So it's not all that certain but is considered unpromising / inactive.
 
Thats a low dose. It might be weaker, but that doesnt tell us much about the effects at a threshold dose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top