• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ
  • PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

NBOMe oral activity experiment.

Anon0631

Anon0631

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
711
Location
London, UK
I'm a massive fan of the scientific method. One important reason that we know things are true is because researchers repeat each others experiments and reproduce the expected results. Sometimes in the psychedelic community though, we just hear things that other people tell us and assume them to be true. The more people repeat a "fact" the truer we consider it to be.

It's assumed knowledge that NBOMe's are not orally active (active via ingestion through the mouth and into the stomach without being given a chance to absorb through the oral membranes) but I can't find any primary research on the subject, just a repeated assumption. Therefore I am going to conduct the following experiment:

A blotter laid with 375μg of 25c-NBOMe is placed in a gelatine capsule to avoid contact with mucus membranes in the mouth or oesophagus and ingested on an empty stomach with a small quantity of water. Activity will be noted after 2 hours and reported on.

If NBOMe's are indeed not orally active, there will be no subjective effects experienced.

This experiment will be repeated with 25d, 25b, 25i and 25n at 2-4 week intervals to prevent the phenomenon of tolerance from interfering with experimental findings.

EDIT: I just realised, that if I was to find oral activity in any of the NBOMe's that I try, unscrupulous dealers would be able to use this information to more effectively pass of the substance as LSD. On the other hand, any experimentally derived information on NBOMe's in the public domain takes the substances further from 'unknown' territory and enables people to make a more informed decision about safety profiles, etc.

Any comments on this on this interesting ethical conundrum? If oral activity was found, should the information be suppressed?
 
Last edited:
i think it's a good idea. NBOMe chems are already being passed off as L, so i can't imagine your findings making that a whole lot worse.

i've thought about swallowing a 25i+25c blotter immediately to see if it works.
 
Results of the first experiment:

Approximately 560μg (1.5x 375μg blotters) were placed in a capsule and swallowed with on an empty stomach. The blotters were known to be active from a previous experiment with 750μg (2x blotters) taken buccaly producing a ++/+++ experience. This was as expected from the dose.

No results that cannot be put down to placebo can be felt 1.5 hours after ingestion.
 
I recall some early "pioneers" of the NBOMe series tested doses up to several milligrams (2-3 mg) orally with nothing ever more than a +1.

EDIT: I just realised, that if I was to find oral activity in any of the NBOMe's that I try, unscrupulous dealers would be able to use this information to more effectively pass of the substance as LSD.
Click to expand...

So it goes. There would be no real point in lying to people and saying it "clearly had no activity orally". Sooner or later someone would do what you're doing...
 
Maybe there was some activity this afternoon. It's hard to tell. Certainly not into plus one territory but maybe a movement from baseline. Stupidly I had a small alcoholic drink at the beginning of the experiment so I was slightly altered from that. Not very scientific of me!

I need to continue experimentation to be sure. Next will probably be 1.6mg of 25d consumed in the same way.
 
Hasn't this been explored quite extensively already? I remember the same thing as Seiko (though there was some activity at 10mgs or so), but also people suggesting MAOI (bad idea) and some additive that would make it active orally. Either way, all of that ended up not working at all..

I can also recall some people looking in to transdermal administration as well, I wonder how that one turned out
 
It's kind of the point, to confirm other people's findings.

This is at the heart of the scientific method. Right?
 
Yeah it pretty much is. Would like to point out that if you're going to explore this by taking "MOAR*", then keep an eye out on blood-pressure for vasoconstriction, you know with seizures and all.. (More of a just-in-case, I know the vasoconstriction comes from the Serotonin receptor agonism)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh. I'm not really interested in that. Just confirming that NBOMe's aren't oraly active at reasonable doses.

Well. I didn't wait a week and I didn't try with 25D. I took 1mg 25N two hours ago (1 day after the first test) using the same method. The only differences were that I had a relatively full stomach and I avoided alcohol this time. There might have been activity somewhere between threshold and +1. It's harder than I thought to discount placebo effects.

Update: although I didn't experience peak effects which could reliably be differentiated from placebo, I have been experiencing the kind of residual stimulation which I would have expected post-experience with 1mg 25n-NBOMe. Very odd.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you should try 2 (or more) solutions with one having a dose of NBOMe in it. Try them 2 days in a row without knowing who is who and see if you can discern any differences between the 2.
 
I thought about going double blind. I have some plain white blotters of 25d which is next on the list anyway so il put them in one capsule, blank blotters in another and get someone else to label them so I don't know which is which.

Update 2: it's now 8 hours since administration and I'm still too stimulated to sleep. This is odd as I didn't really feel any mental effects, only some slight body/tactile stuff. Is it possible that NBOMe's might be more stimulant than psychedelic when taken orally? I wasn't really looking for those type of effects. Or is this the nature of the 25n threshold? It's a substance I have only tried once before at a ++ dose.

I feel at the moment that the results of this experiment are very much inconclusive. I'm hoping that many of my questions will be answered during the next trial which will be with a substance I am more familiar with and will include a placebo control. First though, a tolerance break.
 
Last edited:
As far as I heard they get broken down into the non-NBOME versions in your stomach. So it's like take 1-2mg 2C-I or something.
 
^ I had also understood that the methoxybenzyl group got cleaved off in the GI, but I can't find any solid data though.
 
There is no pharamcological data on the NBOMes outside of their binding profiles because they were never intended to be used in this way.

The speculation about conversion to 2C-X is just extrapolation from the knowledge that N-dealkylation is a common metabolic pathway and the NBOMes are indeed active at high doses orally.
 
Interestingly though, it appears that at least some NBOMe's might have mild stimulant effects at doses far below the oral activity of the related 2c. I wasn't able to sleep until more than 12 hours after oral administration of 1mg 25n, and then only for 4 or 5 hours. Whether that's a threshold effect caused by partial absorption or the onset of a so far unknown metabolite isn't certain yet.
 
This is a very interesting thread to me. When I was first handed an NBOMe, it was 25i and was given by a trusted friend before I began doing my own pre-first-time-experience research. (meaning i didn't know much about it at that time, but trusted his directions. This is about a year and a half ago) The thing I realize now was strange was the he said to take it orally. They were very large homemade blotters laid on approximately 2cm X 2cm white tabs. Unfortunately I do not know the exact dosage, although in my later experience with 25i, which has been extensive, I can say they felt nearly identical to a 1mg 25i NBOMe dose. TBO they were unlike anything I'd seen before, but the directions were to simply swallow it like a pill which I did and they absolutely produced full-on effects lasting just as long as my other 25i experiences, however the come on took noticeably longer (about 2 hours). Today I know that its generally assumed NBOMe's aren't orally active, however when I first heard this I was confused as you may imagine. I've wondered to this day whether it was:

A: a different drug with freakishly similar effects
or
B: a longer onset due to a successful oral administration

I've confronted him about this, but he stands by that it was defiantly 25i NBOMe and honestly, hes not the guy to fuck me over. I suppose he could have been tricked, but he knows his shit too. Quite confused on this matter, but thought this would be an interesting contribution

BTW: Hello there again Anon =) haha
 
Congratulations on throwing away some NBOME. I guess you figured everybody else who ever tried NBOMEs orally with zero effects were just mistaken. Nope, they weren't. That's why it's well known that they aren't orally active. Now, it MAY be possible that they are metabolized down to the regular 2CX compounds that they started as, but you'd have to take at least 10 mg or so even for that to be effective, which would be rather expensive. I even tried NBOMEs with enteric coating to bypass the stomach. Still didn't feel a thing.
 
Jason, if people didn't confirm others research, the scientific method wouldn't work. I heard lots of people saying that NBOMe's were not orally active but I couldn't find a primary source. So I created my own.

If you read down the thread, you will see that 25n-NBOMe seems to be active as a mild stimulant at levels which cannot be accounted for by metabolic conversion to 2c-n.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top