• BASIC DRUG
    DISCUSSION
    Welcome to Bluelight!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Benzo Chart Opioids Chart
    Drug Terms Need Help??
    Drugs 101 Brain & Addiction
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums
  • BDD Moderators: Keif’ Richards

non (or less) neurotoxic stimulant research chemicals

Research chemicals is a misnomer - essentially these are, for the most part, new and pretty unresearched drugs. The clever people in ADD can predict toxicity sometimes from their molecular structure or similarity to better-known chemicals, and of course anecdotal evidence is emerging, but who really knows what the long term effects might be?

There might be some research papers on some of the chemicals you are asking about - try searching PubMed otr Google Scholar, or having a browse in ADD. Other than that, it is all speculation really...
 
^ great post.

Some of the 'research chemicals' were actually developed decades ago and investigated for therapeutic use so there is a body of scientific literature on them that you can find if you know where to look while others (e.g. mxe) didn't exist a couple years ago so our knowledge about many facets of their use is extremely limited. There is a predictive value in looking at closely related compounds but for a good example of the limitations on such, look into MPPP and MPTP... in trying to produce a synthetic opioid with effects mimicking meperidine, a simple mistake could result in a substance that produces permanent symptoms near identical to Parkinson's.

Well, at least for me, I've noticed a trend with the more neurotoxic substances and residual mood/thought patterns. For example, MDPV- which is crystalline hell in my opinion- completely screws up my memory (regardless of how much sleep I'm able to get) and during my last (and final) experience with it it triggered a flashback and I had three back to back anxiety attacks.
Looking back, you're right it doesn't really show neurotoxicity, but I've observed substances that are supposed to be more neurotoxic- pardon my language- usually cause some serious skullfuckery.

I don't mean to be adversarial here but there is nothing remotely scientific about your subjective experiences with a handful of substances coincidentally producing certain acute effects and potentially or actually producing more or less neurotoxicity. In fact, since it seems based on the handful of posts you've made that you either have preexisting anxiety or are predisposed to those side effects, your knowledge of potential neurotoxicity of those substances can directly cause those side effects.
 
ok, i could find a study saying 5-iai is non neurotoxic, but is this a nice drug ?
 
Well here is the reason for its decreased neurotoxicity.

The reason 5-IAI is less neurotoxic than amphetamines is likely due to it lacking the toxic metabolites of the class (like nasty alpha-methyldopamine) which normally severely aggravate the damage. This is because it's an aminoindane instead of phenethylamine and is therefore markedly different on a structural level -- it either does not reduce to the corresponding damaging metabolites or it still does but they are no longer active. You can see the same thing going on with 4-methylaminorex here, potent releaser but little to no neurotoxicity.

I have no experience with it and unfortunately can't offer you anything further.
 
define "nice drug".

cannabis ! provided it is grown by only sunlight and without horrendous amounts of fertilisers that cause the deformed shapes fruit you see in the supermarket, within these conditions i would safely predict it to be highly non-neurotoxic, most probably even neuroprotective

MDMA definitely feels refined, and street-drug quality chemistry / the popular tendency to dose too high and repeatedly by recreational users, is undoubtably toxic. but you only live once right ...
 
i love cannabis, too bad it´s not good for partying. also this also shouldn´t be done TOO often
 
just to let you know: ethylphenidate seems like a winner to me, maybe also in combination with mdai, what do you think ?
 
synthetic cannibinoids are probably the least toxic. (actually i have no clue, i am speaking out of my ass lol)
 
yes but they make me horrible addictive. me and my girlfriend did 20g am-2201 in 3 month :o so i quited smoking them and also mary jane.
but i think i´m doing well with ibuprofen, vitamin c, coenzym Q10, ala, fishoil before, while and after the roll
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16736241
it´s about methylphenidate, but i think this can be said about ethylphenidate,too. so this is a winner !

Wow, I'm amazed. Very promising report.

If the neuro-protective qualities of methylphenidate do indeed transfer over to ethylphenidate, then this particular RC just got a whole lot more brilliant.

This report about methylphenidate's ability to enhance dopamine neurotransmission in brains damaged by physical trauma makes it almost appear a wonder-drug.

I really, really hope the same applies for ethylphenidate.
 
Out of curiosity, what would make the ethyl- version more desirable than the methyl- version? Not so much what are the differences, but why are the differences what they are?
 
^ I may have missed something but I don't think anyone said the ethyl- is more desirable than the methyl- , just that hopefully the desirable effects from methylphenidate will transfer to ethylphenidate. I don't know about elsewhere, but in the UK methylphenidate is prescription-only (and only prescribed to kids with ADHD) where as ethylphenidate is not (and is not a banned substance) so therefore could be purchased legally alongside other "RCs" - so I guess you could say it is more desirable for that reason ;)

(note - no discussion of vendors please, am just making a general point about the status of both the drugs here in the UK)
 
Wrong strain for the time then, some herbs knock me out, some have me zipping around the house cleaning.

Fair way off the course of topic, however.
 
Top