The thing is, I have a special ability called insight and awareness. Something we should all have, a gift from god...but the devil's army has stolen this from most of us. This is why I spend pointless hours arguing with demons, to no avail. Basically you need a third eye. You need to see the things that are really there right in front of your face, or else your entire life will be just an illusion. What are hallucinations? Are they real? Of course they are. So what they tell us are hallucinations is what is really there...and what you see that is "Really" there, is just an illusion. Try some mushrooms today...before it's too late. Then come back and tell me 5-IT is not a good drug.
You wrote all that just to make a point that you do not trust me? WoW! lol I think it's obvious to most people, not to trust anyone on the internet. I don't expect anyone to trust me. And even if they had trusted me, it doesn't mean the drug is going to work wonders for them, as it has for me. Bottom line is, the legal drugs are the drugs you need to worry about. They have been programmed to destroy your brain and body. The illegal drugs and nutrients are mostly good for you...that is WHY they are illegal. Mushrooms and Pot are the safest substances known to man, both are illegal. Why? Because Pot is a medicinal herb, and both make you think for yourself. This would be deadly to them. So, basically you cannot overdose on either one, I've taken both in extreme quantities.
So, you've made your points, of course you have an afterglow and feel good the next day. I've been doing 5-IT long enough to know what the 3rd and 4th days feel like. They are fine. I've taken MDMA and 6-apb before and all 5-IT is, is like 6-apb with a less trippy side and more of an MDA feel. All are closely related. However I can strongly say (Even with no proof) that MDMA is much worse for your brain than 5-IT. And worse for your liver as well. There are too many factors involved with illegal drugs to put the blame on any certain thing. Besides, Why would I worry about the future, when we are not even guaranteed to survive the next trip we take down the street? Worry about some "illegal" drug, just because it is a painkiller? Of course MDMA kills pain, I love getting punched/slapped in the face when I'm rolling. Pain is pleasure if you're on that level. I remember my "friend" put a cigarette out on my arm while I was driving. It didn't even hurt, it felt good like a sensation. But if I was sober it would of hurt like a bitch cuz I did that once to myself when I was a kid.
OK Peace and be safe, if you're afraid of 5-IT and you're afraid to live...then limit yourself and don't try it. Also I would recommend against leaving your house as well. Lots of dangerous things out there in the world...and the big 5-IT monster may just eat you alive. Lmao...
Ok, Ok, in all seriousness...Even if I do grow tentacles out of my ears in the future, I'll just try to look on the bright side...and 5-IT is so good, it would be worth it anyway.
Yeah, I did. For a good reason, to show why your personal experience isn't a credible source of information regarding the safety and possible toxicity of 5-IT on a general level and why your claim that this is a perfectly safe drug in itself is pretty much worthless to the rest of us.
As you can see I put some effort into explaining my perspective on autoreports in general with specific regard to euphoric drugs, which clearly has nothing to do with you as a person or the content of statements your making. This obviously needs to be pointed out to you, since your response delves in large part on you yourself as an issue of the discussion.
You've made some claims, among which are that this drug is perfectly safe because you happen to be an outspoken drug abuser not dead yet and that some conspiracy in Sweden faked these deaths or the autopsy results for some reason you're either ignorant of or failed to share in context. Instead you went on blabbering about how the victims if there really was any had it coming due to ignorance/stupidity and stating that everyone's stupid but you. Stating that just about everyone but you are ignorants. This is how you argue. With either reference to your own anecdotes or your values, or simplistic explanations based on everyones inferiority to you or some capacity of yours.
Compare that to my kind of argument, where the reasoning is based on well known facts about some things in general. Do you see the difference? Can you comprehend the idea of common ground as a solid base for an argument and why this is way superior to the I'm-all-that-matters-approach you've been practicing with? Are you able to follow how the connection between well known and undisputed facts and the effect on credibility of what's stated next if it complies with said facts?
I'll just ignore my personal views and assume you do. As you may or may not have noticed I put my self as an example of someone lacking credibility given a few conditions. Plenty of room in my post shows me off as an example of what you as an autoreporter appeared to be. Plain. No ridiculing. I didn't even touch on the subject that your posts somehow are meticulously stripped of anything resembling confident, classic step-by-step reasoning, the 101 of convincing thought patterns and kindergarten rhetoric.
Showing myself to be at least as faulty an autoreporter as I claimed everyone else to be and pointing out that basic stuff all of us druggies know very well concludes that your assessment of a drug apparent to be the force behind not only your assessed experiences but the importance ascribed to your interpretation as well. Arguing in this way is clearly invalid. The drug can't both be reason for your experience and the basis for credibility of your report at the same time. Bias is at the heart of this, 'the drug experience' resulting in assessment 'the drug is safe' which you are telling us to believe in because the drug experience to you implies what the assessment states and again 'the drug experience' surfaces as your preferred reliance.
Not only is your assessment a reworking of a drug dependent experience, you have been shown why that experience needs to be doubted as a source of general knowledge about the drug itself which you blatantly refuted with reference to the drug dependent experience which still cannot be trusted because of it's drug dependent status. This shows your relation to this drug, your minds dependence on it even when that same drug is clearly shown to have been depleted as a relevant source of assessment support at the very moment your interpretation and safety assessment was made, it is the effect of the drug that you believe is real and quote for truth.
Thats about how empty your contribution to the common routine for mapping new drugs really is. Thank you for the time and effort spent on my shot at explaining why there's such a lack of supporters for your case as an amateur safety assessment reporter.
I've tried to boggle my grey over the molecule and have contented with ungrounded guesses about possible enzyme targets in it. Meager result indeed. Anyone else feeling courageous enough to just make something up to continue with?
There are some aspects of the drug experience which I find a bit disturbing. First, how does it accomplish this series of effects: threshhold->serotonin buffing up->gliding over to dopaminergic activity as well->still rising even though past more than half the duration->plateau with a dissociation getting hinted at by mister unsuitable for reporting->weird start of the first fading phase, everything at once->perceptual subjective baseline->and then there's more going on at a slow fading pace->end. It's one substance. Either it becomes several or it operates many different levers and locks. In any case, why does euphoria kick in at a random point in the build up of the serotonin curtain just like that with no change in other processes. Is it the same kind of phenomenon operating when it goes plateu with a wisp?
If it cleaves early, where would you like to split it (stomach, liver, are there more) and what in vivo synthesis may new drugs appear as by products? Is this proposal even sane given for example a freshman year of biology?
It might grow in the body, fetching a more versatile range of elements or chemical molecylar components. Seems unlikely, right?
If it cleaves or just breaks down to another monoamine later on in process, would this feel like a grave concern regarding safety and the progress, yeah.
We have somewhat related drugs, the APB:s. One is skimmed by bya science team which leaves us at square one. Those to work in slightly different directions Why is one trippy and not the other? Receptor affinity or bonking with neurotransmitter streams.
Are these three substances susceptible to MAO? What do you think?
for example for me 6-APB is a nice party drug while 5-APB is more a relaxed at home empathic experience, with less of a euphoric push.
