• 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

Shulgin never made a Dihkal for dissociatives. What has been done about this?

2c-t-4 is more disassociative than dxm Ime... I never got any disassociative effects from 2c-t-21, but I only had a small amount to work with, so I never took the dose above 10mg.
 
thenightwatch said:
I think you all will be pretty happy when you see this thread. :) http://bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=504286



I believe it's 2C-T-4 that you're thinking of. however, 2C-T-21 was dissociative in me at higher doses, and i've heard wind that 2C-T-8 (the 4-cyclopropylthio, i believe) is pretty dissociative too.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Thank you, I had no idea we had that many active analogues of PCP.

I got what I asked for, but I wonder why we don't have as many ketamine analogues? I've never tried PCP, but I want to. I want clean PCP though. Nothing cut or made of formaldehyde (so many stupid people out there 8) ).
 
I don't understand how synthing RC dissociatives is any more risky than synthing number of tryptamines (well, not as many, but look at 5-meo-amt) and phenethylamines. If a substance isn't researched, it isn't researched, so precaution needs to be taken no matter what. Its already been seen that a few dissociative RCs have hit the market haven't caused any tragic events, or any reason to be concerned other than the fact that they are RC's.

DXM, ketamine, and nitrous all don't how have any cases of reported neurotoxcity in humans, and only show evidence of neurotoxicity at extremely high doses in animal studies (non-human).

Also, the dosage responsive curves are always a concern, and many different RC psychedelics have very step responsive curves which can result in a psychosis situation as easy if not easier than what we've seen with the RC dissociatives (though, my only report is 3-meo-pcp w/ F&B). Think about how many times we've seen a thread on someone taking a ridiculous dose of a DOx, whether it be by accident or not.

As with any drug over use can always be a problem. If you are using RC's you should have a mg scale as well as have done the proper research, whether or not it is a dissociative.

I also don't think there will be as big of a market for dissociatives, as there are with worse classifications of chemicals, such as the beta-ketones. Dissociatives aren't as attractive to the public as your more traditional psychedelics are. I mean, even among drug users, PCP has a ridiculous name for itself.
 
egor said:
2c-t-4 is more disassociative than dxm Ime... I never got any disassociative effects from 2c-t-21, but I only had a small amount to work with, so I never took the dose above 10mg.
Click to expand...

yeah t-21 didn't start getting dissociative to me until around 16mg. doses 16mg and over pretty much feel like a totally different drug. i suspect that there is some sort of plateau effect...
 
Yeah it was T-4 I was thinking of, thanks.

And DXMKid, if you were to try every disassociative in front of you, I have no doubt you would get your disassociatives AND death.
 
There is a lot in this thread that doesn't sit very well with me...

a. I think that shulgin and a handful of "celebrity" internet personalities have used the word "dissociative" to describe 2C-T-21 and 2C-T-4. They are certainly free to use it as an adjective, but poetic license is about as valid as this claim gets. It is my opinion that there is clearly a very, very different mode of action behind dissociatives (particularly dissociative anaesthetics) and psychedelics, and that this difference correlates with the fact that both drug groups have rather different pharmacological profiles.

b. With the Meph-mania, it is easy to see why anyone who knows what they're doing isn't going to release dissociatives en masse - as psoodonym offered above, these drugs require a lot of responsibility and maturity to handle, and even those most responsible can still find themselves going kookoo while experimenting with these drugs. It is my opinion that dissociatives present the two extremes of psychedelics: they are far riskier as far as mania/psychosis goes, but they are also far more effective as entheogens when used properly.

c. While Shulgin may not have been a fan of dissociatives, this doesn't mean that the world is devoid of other brilliant people who DO invest a lot of science and art into investigating this mysterious class of drugs. I know of at least a couple of people whom I hold with as much high regard and respect as Shulgin.
 
there are drugs that produce a dissociative effect without being NMDA receptor antagonists just as there are drugs that produce a "psychedelic" effect without being 5ht2a agonists. typically psychedelics make me feel more connected/aware of my senses, but high dose t-21 made me feel very disconnected and dissociated. i'm fairly certain i would have drawn the connection between the way t-21 made me feel and the way dissociatives make me feel even if i had not heard anyone else refer to certain 2c-t compounds as dissociative.

jamshyd, you obviously strive for clarity of language, so perhaps you should use the term "NMDA antagonists" instead of using the term "dissociatives" for that class of drugs.

i do hope you realize that using the term "dissociative" to describe the effects of those particular 2c-t compounds is FAR more valid than mere "poetic license."

and another thing... for all we know, 2C-T-4 and 2C-T-21 might even BE NMDA receptor antagonists. there has never, to my knowledge, been rigorous studies into the mechanism of action of either of those two chemicals.

"if one thinks one knows everything, one can learn nothing."
 
Jamshyd said:
There is a lot in this thread that doesn't sit very well with me...

a. I think that shulgin and a handful of "celebrity" internet personalities have used the word "dissociative" to describe 2C-T-21 and 2C-T-4. They are certainly free to use it as an adjective, but poetic license is about as valid as this claim gets. It is my opinion that there is clearly a very, very different mode of action behind dissociatives (particularly dissociative anaesthetics) and psychedelics, and that this difference correlates with the fact that both drug groups have rather different pharmacological profiles.

b. With the Meph-mania, it is easy to see why anyone who knows what they're doing isn't going to release dissociatives en masse - as psoodonym offered above, these drugs require a lot of responsibility and maturity to handle, and even those most responsible can still find themselves going kookoo while experimenting with these drugs. It is my opinion that dissociatives present the two extremes of psychedelics: they are far riskier as far as mania/psychosis goes, but they are also far more effective as entheogens when used properly.

c. While Shulgin may not have been a fan of dissociatives, this doesn't mean that the world is devoid of other brilliant people who DO invest a lot of science and art into investigating this mysterious class of drugs. I know of at least a couple of people whom I hold with as much high regard and respect as Shulgin.
Click to expand...

thenightwatch said:
there are drugs that produce a dissociative effect without being NMDA receptor antagonists just as there are drugs that produce a "psychedelic" effect without being 5ht2a agonists. typically psychedelics make me feel more connected/aware of my senses, but high dose t-21 made me feel very disconnected and dissociated. i'm fairly certain i would have drawn the connection between the way t-21 made me feel and the way dissociatives make me feel even if i had not heard anyone else refer to certain 2c-t compounds as dissociative.

jamshyd, you obviously strive for clarity of language, so perhaps you should use the term "NMDA antagonists" instead of using the term "dissociatives" for that class of drugs.

i do hope you realize that using the term "dissociative" to describe the effects of those particular 2c-t compounds is FAR more valid than mere "poetic license."

and another thing... for all we know, 2C-T-4 and 2C-T-21 might even BE NMDA receptor antagonists. there has never, to my knowledge, been rigorous studies into the mechanism of action of either of those two chemicals.

"if one thinks one knows everything, one can learn nothing."
Click to expand...



I thank both of you for these post. I welcome all clarifications and points of view, I'm no expert (yet), just an interested amateur.
 
thenightwatch said:
there are drugs that produce a dissociative effect without being NMDA receptor antagonists just as there are drugs that produce a "psychedelic" effect without being 5ht2a agonists. typically psychedelics make me feel more connected/aware of my senses, but high dose t-21 made me feel very disconnected and dissociated. i'm fairly certain i would have drawn the connection between the way t-21 made me feel and the way dissociatives make me feel even if i had not heard anyone else refer to certain 2c-t compounds as dissociative.
Click to expand...
There are opioids that give me visuals (eg. Pentazocine) and there are stimulants that dull pain (eg. 4-AI) and there are hypnotics that cause dissociative-like effects (eg. Zolpidem). Where, exactly, do you draw the line? Why don't we just go back to using "narcotic" to describe all drugs and save paper and ink?

jamshyd, you obviously strive for clarity of language, so perhaps you should use the term "NMDA antagonists" instead of using the term "dissociatives" for that class of drugs.
Click to expand...
Sure, but dissociatives - particularly dissociative anaesthetics work in a manner opposite to that of psychedelics. At least in my experience.

i do hope you realize that using the term "dissociative" to describe the effects of those particular 2c-t compounds is FAR more valid than mere "poetic license."
Click to expand...
I don't realize. Sorry to disappoint.

and another thing... for all we know, 2C-T-4 and 2C-T-21 might even BE NMDA receptor antagonists. there has never, to my knowledge, been rigorous studies into the mechanism of action of either of those two chemicals.
Click to expand...
Which goes so far as to say that "dissociatives and psychedelics" is a far more apt dichotomy than "NMDA Antagonists and 5-HT agonists".

"if one thinks one knows everything, one can learn nothing."
Click to expand...
Thanks for putting me on a pedestal and then mocking my being on it, but I never claimed or even implied any special knowledge.
 
Perhaps it's best to be consistent and call drugs that fall into the dissociative class: dissociative whether or not they have dissociative effects. And we can leave all other drugs in their respective classes and if they have dissociative effects, we'll note that. But we won't say that they're dissociatives.

I hope I make sense here.

There's the dissociative class, which is chemical. Then there's dissociative effects, which are psychological and independent of the chemical makeup of the psychoactive, but far more usual with those that fall into dissociative class of drugs.
 
^ Actually it has little to do with chemistry.

Dissociatives belong to a very wide variety of chemicals, such as the Morphinans (DXM), the Heterocyclics (Dizocilipine), or the Arylcyclohexamines (Ketamine, PCP, etc), amongst others.

That said, it does seem that the Arylcyclohexamines are the most promising and most encompassing of the dissociative experience.

The distinction is actually quite clear: the word can either refers to a state of mind where one is dissociated from reality (what you count as "psychological", and what I counted as "poetic license").

Then there are those which dissociate one from sensory stimulus and/or cognitive feedback. It is this category that I personally consider to be the polar opposite of psychedelics - the latter operate by enhancing sensory stimulus and cognitive feedback.
 
Then there are those which dissociate one from sensory stimulus and/or cognitive feedback. It is this category that I personally consider to be the polar opposite of psychedelics - the latter operate by enhancing sensory stimulus and cognitive feedback.
Click to expand...
I think you're right on the money here. I've always felt that psychedelics and dissociatives get one to the same place in radically different ways, like heading East or West around the globe-if you go far enough you end up at the antipodes.

You take the high road, and I'll take the low road...
 
going back to calling everything "narcotics?" i was describing the effects of one drug by comparing its action to another class of drug. you`re implying that i was oversimplifying things, when in fact what i was doing was attempting to desribe part of the complex pharmocological action of 2C-T-21.

i agree that typical dissociative drugs act in a manner largely opposite of typical psychedelics. what i`m saying is that 2C-T-21 at high dosages produces very atypical effects, at least in me. i`m no expert on pharmacology, but i will say that it would not surprise me if somewhere in the cascade of effects 2C-T-21 produces that there is a very unusual effect on NMDA channels.

i think you don`t realize that it is more than just "poetic license," because (i assume) you have not actually experienced 2C-T-21 or any of the other 2C-Ts that produce dissociative-like effects.

i assure you that i do not put you on a pedastal jamshyd. i implied with that anecdote that YOU are claiming to know more about this subject than anyone else in this thread, closing you off from learning anything more on the subject. those words were not meant to mock you..

also, you most definitely are claiming special knowledge. otherwise how could you so confidently contradict things that others have said here?

2C-T-21, in me, is purely an empathogen up to around 12mg. a bit higher than that and it became psychedelic, with beautiful flowing visuals. however, around 18mg the visuals disappeared and the experience became, i shit you not, more similar to the standard dissociative experience than psychedelic. it wasn`t just psychologically dissociative. i think that at high enough dosages it produces different pharmocological effects rather than just producing a more intense version of the low-dose effects.
the highest i ever took 2C-T-21 is about 22mg, by the way. perhaps a couple mg more, its been several years so the details of dosage are a bit fuzzy. that is nearly double the dosage from pihkal, which in part explains why the effects i`m desribing are much different than the effects described in 2C-T-21`s pihkal entry.

in my opinion "psychedelic" and "dissociative" are also not as useful to use as terms that do actually desribe the pharmocological action of a compound. unfortunately, there have not been any serious scientific inquiries into the mechanisms behind 2C-T-21`s effects. 2C-T-21 may be a 2,5-dimethoxy-4-substitutedphenethylamine, but that does not necessarily mean that it`s effects are solely due to 5ht agonism. you appear to be labelling this drug as a psychedelic based purely on structure. i contend that its action is much more complex than that. until you have solid proof that this drug is not in fact dissociative i will continue to trust my experience over your presumptions.
 
Last edited:
thenightwatch said:
going back to calling everything "narcotics?" i was describing the effects of one drug by comparing its action to another class of drug. you`re implying that i was oversimplifying things, when in fact what i was doing was attempting to desribe part of the complex pharmocological action of 2C-T-21.
Click to expand...
And I was criticizing a common practice in the psychedelic community for what I call "macrotyping" - everything is psychedelic, everything is dissociative, everything is... like, everything!

i agree that typical dissociative drugs act in a manner largely opposite of typical psychedelics. what i`m saying is that 2C-T-21 at high dosages produces very atypical effects, at least in me. i`m no expert on pharmacology, but i will say that it would not surprise me if somewhere in the cascade of effects 2C-T-21 produces that there is a very unusual effect on NMDA channels.
Click to expand...
It is possible, but quite unlikely given its very close conformation to the phenethylamine moiety. Besides, affinity for NMDA channels is not what makes or breaks dissociatives - Amanitidine is a potent NMDA-antagonist yet is not much more than a mild stimulant.

i think you don`t realize that it is more than just "poetic license," because (i assume) you have not actually experienced 2C-T-21 or any of the other 2C-Ts that produce dissociative-like effects.
Click to expand...
Well as a matter of fact, I do have a lot of experiences with T-21, and some at higher doses. And yes I never disagreed that it is a very odd psychedelic (with dissociating effects at higher doses) - but it is still a psychedelic.

i assure you that i do not put you on a pedastal jamshyd. i implied with that anecdote that YOU are claiming to know more about this subject than anyone else in this thread, closing you off from learning anything more on the subject. those words were not meant to mock you..

also, you most definitely are claiming special knowledge. otherwise how could you so confidently contradict things that others have said here?
Click to expand...
It's called having an opinion.

And in case you haven't noticed, some people actually agree with it.

2C-T-21, in me, is purely an empathogen up to around 12mg. a bit higher than that and it became psychedelic, with beautiful flowing visuals. however, around 18mg the visuals disappeared and the experience became, i shit you not, more similar to the standard dissociative experience than psychedelic. it wasn`t just psychologically dissociative. i think that at high enough dosages it produces different pharmocological effects rather than just producing a more intense version of the low-dose effects.
the highest i ever took 2C-T-21 is about 22mg, by the way. perhaps a couple mg more, its been several years so the details of dosage are a bit fuzzy. that is nearly double the dosage from pihkal, which in part explains why the effects i`m desribing are much different than the effects described in 2C-T-21`s pihkal entry.

in my opinion "psychedelic" and "dissociative" are also not as useful to use as terms that do actually desribe the pharmocological action of a compound. unfortunately, there have not been any serious scientific inquiries into the mechanisms behind 2C-T-21`s effects. 2C-T-21 may be a 2,5-dimethoxy-4-substitutedphenethylamine, but that does not necessarily mean that it`s effects are solely due to 5ht agonism. you appear to be labelling this drug as a psychedelic based purely on structure. i contend that its action is much more complex than that. until you have solid proof that this drug is not in fact dissociative i will continue to trust my experience over your presumptions.
Click to expand...
Well I disagree, because science itself actually doesn't know enough to be able to attribute exact pharmacology to exact effects. We only have correlations. See my amanitidine example above. Also, going by this, LSD is simultaneously a psychedelic, stimulant, opioid, and depressant because of its insanely varried receptor affinity - in my mind, LSD remains simply psychedelic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top