• 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

The Big & Dandy N-Ethyl-Norketamine Thread

Thanks Hammilton, I get you now. It was just very confusing, as all the vendors are stating that its Nor-Ethyl-Ketamine. If the substance in question is N-Ethyl-norketamine, doesn't that give more cause for concern, as the metabolite of regular ketamine is norketamine, which is thought to be the cause of many of K's bladder issues.

As for naming, I somehow feel that branding would be an unwise move. I can already see the daily mail jumping all over this one, and I forsee a ban on this in a few months. The name itself screams "BAN ME!!!". Unfortunately, I can foree some meph head idiot getting hold of this, drinking 10 pints of 'Stella Act a Twat', and railing half a g. What follows will be mass media hysteria, and a Daily Mail headline of: "Legal High 3x stronger than the Class C drug Ketamine kills 18 year old from Scunthorpe"
 
Last edited:
SilentRoller said:
Thanks Hammilton, I get you now. It was just very confusing, as all the vendors are stating that its Nor-Ethyl-Ketamine. If the substance in question is N-Ethyl-norketamine, doesn't that give more cause for concern, as the metabolite of regular ketamine is norketamine, which is thought to be the cause of many of K's bladder issues.
Click to expand...
I have never seen the compound in question called "Nor-Ethyl-Ketamine" by anyone - this is just false nomenclature.

the substance in question is not closer related to norketamine than regular ketamine is. all what the cumbersome nomenclature is trying to say is that ethylketamine has an ethyl group where regular ketamine has an methyl group.
 
I wonder if part of the disappointment of this chemical is that everyone was expecting it to be the new MXE, I'd be interested to know what the effects are like at the 200-300mg range?
 
In terms of false nomenclature, I have seen many vendors advertising said compound as N-Methyl-ketamine (hence where my confusion came from). I don't really understand why most use MXE as the gold standard. IMO, MXE was a dirty form of ketamine that was far too messy, hence why Im looking forward N-Ethyl-Norketamine. Roll on tomorrow morning I say :D
 
NO. WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT N-ETHYL-KETAMINE.

Man, people are so slow. Keep up.

N-ethyl-Ketamine would mean that the N would be disubstituted. There would be TWO alkyl residues, an N-ethyl and an N-methyl. Nor-ketamine is ketamine minus the N-methyl substitution. N-ethyl-norketamine is ketamine with the N-methyl removed and an N-ethyl added.

This isn't a grey area at all. This compound is not N-ethyl-ketamine. That would be a tertiary amine. This compound is absolutely, decidedly, N-ethyl-norketamine.


There is absolutely no question that this is the case. Any arguing of this point will make anyone doing so look retarded. Sekio's point about it being accepted as N-ethylketamine is fine, but it's wrong. N-ethylketamine may make a fine enough substance (it won't be very potent) but N-ethyl-norketamine- the substance we're actually discussing- is more potent than ketamine proper. So why make the issue more confused than it is, why not stick to a long understood and useful nomenclature? Why diverge because it's easier for retarded people to write?
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm not upto scratch on the chemistry side of things, but I was very much under the impression N-ethyl-norketamine and N-ethyl-ketamine were two different drugs. I'm not too sure where your based and sourcing discussion is a no no, but what's being sold by the reputable vendors here in the UK is definately N-ethyl-ketamine (NEK they're calling it).

I enjoyed it anyway, nice clean euphoria. I'm just wondering will it provide more of a ketamine esq wonk/psychadelic effect at higher doses? I've ordered another 500mg which I should have tomorrow hopefully. I tried high ish doses with my first 250mg sample, upto 170mg but no hole. I found 60mg was enough to feel quite nice off it but i'd be interested to see if there is a hole. Didn't seem like i got much more off 170mg than I did off smaller lines. Might just be that NEK isn't a particularly psychadelic dissociative...

Will report back when i have another bash at it.
 
rockstar 69 said:
Sorry I'm not upto scratch on the chemistry side of things, but I was very much under the impression N-ethyl-norketamine and N-ethyl-ketamine were two different drugs. I'm not too sure where your based and sourcing discussion is a no no, but what's being sold by the reputable vendors here in the UK is definately N-ethyl-ketamine (NEK they're calling it).

I enjoyed it anyway, nice clean euphoria. I'm just wondering will it provide more of a ketamine esq wonk/psychadelic effect at higher doses? I've ordered another 500mg which I should have tomorrow hopefully. I tried high ish doses with my first 250mg sample, upto 170mg but no hole. I found 60mg was enough to feel quite nice off it but i'd be interested to see if there is a hole. Didn't seem like i got much more off 170mg than I did off smaller lines. Might just be that NEK isn't a particularly psychadelic dissociative...

Will report back when i have another bash at it.
Click to expand...

seems unusual that a dose as high as 170mg didn't give you much effect, then again when My MXE tolerance was at its highest 120mg was pretty weak.
 
I should have virtually no tollerance. I didn't enjoy MXE so hardly ever did that. Used to do a fair bit of ketamine but I've only done 2g of that in the last 2 weeks. NEK became active at about 60mg. This is snorted doses. I might try 100mg orally next time then have a few lines.
 
For those of you wondering about bladder problems with ketamine abuse, google LUTS (Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms).
The problems have only generally occurred when it is abused significantly over months or years, of course that is not to say the effect is not potentially cumulative.
It seems to me, i suppose for obvious reasons, there is a lack of people willing to admit to bladder issues, however small, which makes it hard to gain an idea of the extent of the problem. It only usually comes to light at the end of a long addiction, when serious surgery may be required.
From personal experience, I know that daily use of ketamine for longer than a few weeks and I start to feel very minor bladder issues. This is worse with certain s-isomers than racemic in my experience.Blood in the urine is enough to stop my daily use!

I think it's fairly safe to assume that the effects profile of n-ethyl Ketamine are very similar and will probably carry the same long term risks, but we dont know at this stage, it will definitely be seriously habit forming so please tread carefully, anybody who decides to use this stuff daily before at least a few months of feedback only has themselves to blame. You have to weigh up the risks and buy your ticket.
I personally have a gram hopefully arriving tomorrow but my k tolerance may prove an issue...
 
rockstar 69 said:
I should have virtually no tollerance. I didn't enjoy MXE so hardly ever did that. Used to do a fair bit of ketamine but I've only done 2g of that in the last 2 weeks. NEK became active at about 60mg. This is snorted doses. I might try 100mg orally next time then have a few lines.
Click to expand...

I do hope the oral route is more effective than ketamine :)
 
Got two grams yesterday: Tested insufflated and IM. Seems the dosages are about equal to ketamine: 80 mg insufflated as a start was comfortable, but irritates the nose more. My nose is still clogged. IM seems to be the way to go though, like ketamine (at least for me). 200 mg created a nice hole, identical to ketamine. Nice to be able to hole again, sick of methoxetamine mania. All in all: A great ketamine, all though noticed more muscular soreness than regular ketamine. All gone now though.
 
Rather disappointing substance. Dosage required is the same if not higher than ketamine, duration is much shorter and the effects aren't nearly as deep. It is however somehow more euphoric in a weird way, but definately less psychedelic and very, very moreish. Im guessing there's some impurities with the first batch(es) as well, snorting one sizeable line clogs up your nose with bleeding and everything next morning, there were also very slight allergic symptoms, so do your tests proper. IM makes your muscles very sore, IV seems safer than with ket or mxe as it doesn't seem to knock you totally unconscious at comparable doses, but you'll still have holes in your memory afterwards. Hell I was literally walking after IVing a decent amount with very low tolerance, trying to clean up after injecting but it was kind of confusing.

It would be interesting to see how well this combines with mxe or ketamine taken simultaneously, perhaps resulting in a more euphoric, happy type of a hole. Note that it's extremely hard to 'hole' with ethyl-ketamine, it just doesn't feel visual enough. Also, perhaps the metabolites are even less psychedelic/psychoactive resulting in much faster sobering up after dosing. Ethyl-ketamine has potential, but it's still disappointing, definately doesn't live up to ketamine or even mxe for that matter IMO, though they all are three distinctively different substances. I'm sure it has it's own niche, but I don't know...

All dosing was eyeballed so I'd rather not even start guessing what the doses are, but there were all the allergy test doses, tiny doses, medium doses and big doses in the testing. Ended up consuming much more of it than ketamine or mxe in one session, probably because the sought after effect were less intense, duration was quite short and the nature of the drug was just moreish and euphoric in an odd way.

EDIT: Also worth mentioning, the headspace on ethyl-ketamine was rather odd, the substance isn't nearly as anxiolytic as mxe or ketamine, when playing with those two dissociatives I've never really experienced anxiety or paranoia relating to my thought or experiences, but on the highest IM dose of kethyl, I actually had minor anxiety and paranoia, leading to me taking roughly 0,125mg clonazepam. Otherwise I experienced a little bit more lucid headspace compared mxe/ket like others, but I actually considered it negative when it came to the dissociative experience. I'd say this downplays kethyls medical potential when it comes to depression etc, atleast when compared to the alternatives.
 
Last edited:
FnX said:
Rather disappointing substance. Dosage required is the same if not higher than ketamine, duration is much shorter and the effects aren't nearly as deep. It is however somehow more euphoric in a weird way, but definately less psychedelic and very, very moreish. Im guessing there's some impurities with the first batch(es) as well, snorting one sizeable line clogs up your nose with bleeding and everything next morning, there were also very slight allergic symptoms, so do your tests proper. IM makes your muscles very sore, IV seems safer than with ket or mxe as it doesn't seem to knock you totally unconscious at comparable doses, but you'll still have holes in your memory afterwards. Hell I was literally walking after IVing a decent amount with very low tolerance, trying to clean up after injecting but it was kind of confusing.

It would be interesting to see how well this combines with mxe or ketamine taken simultaneously, perhaps resulting in a more euphoric, happy type of a hole. Note that it's extremely hard to 'hole' with ethyl-ketamine, it just doesn't feel visual enough. Also, perhaps the metabolites are even less psychedelic/psychoactive resulting in much faster sobering up after dosing. Ethyl-ketamine has potential, but it's still disappointing, definately doesn't live up to ketamine or even mxe for that matter IMO, though they all are three distinctively different substances. I'm sure it has it's own niche, but I don't know...

All dosing was eyeballed so I'd rather not even start guessing what the doses are, but there were all the allergy test doses, tiny doses, medium doses and big doses in the testing. Ended up consuming much more of it than ketamine or mxe in one session, probably because the sought after effect were less intense, duration was quite short and the nature of the drug was just moreish and euphoric in an odd way.

EDIT: Also worth mentioning, the headspace on ethyl-ketamine was rather odd, the substance isn't nearly as anxiolytic as mxe or ketamine, when playing with those two dissociatives I've never really experienced anxiety or paranoia relating to my thought or experiences, but on the highest IM dose of kethyl, I actually had minor anxiety and paranoia, leading to me taking roughly 0,125mg clonazepam. Otherwise I experienced a little bit more lucid headspace compared mxe/ket like others, but I actually considered it negative when it came to the dissociative experience. I'd say this downplays kethyls medical potential when it comes to depression etc, atleast when compared to the alternatives.
Click to expand...

Makes me wish I never bought a gram=D

However, I'm still Gunna give it a go
 
Got two grams yesterday: Tested insufflated and IM. Seems the dosages are about equal to ketamine: 80 mg insufflated as a start was comfortable, but irritates the nose more. My nose is still clogged. IM seems to be the way to go though, like ketamine (at least for me). 200 mg created a nice hole, identical to ketamine. Nice to be able to hole again, sick of methoxetamine mania. All in all: A great ketamine, all though noticed more muscular soreness than regular ketamine. All gone now though.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. I have 500mg coming today, I have pins too but no micron filter, might have to keep back some for an IM.

I'll probably just do a few 100mg lines then a 200mg to round it off. Was the hole a proper out of body experiance or just confusing? Even a lot of ketamine isn't capable of the out of body type hole, it depends what isomer/if it's leaning towards the S-isomer a bit it's usually possible. The likes of ketamax and ketaset never provide any real interesting adventure holes.

As for potency sounds like NEK is about the same as K maybe a fraction more like 1/5th or something. I definately found it far more enjoyable than I ever did MXE.
 
rockstar 69 said:
Sorry I'm not upto scratch on the chemistry side of things, but I was very much under the impression N-ethyl-norketamine and N-ethyl-ketamine were two different drugs. I'm not too sure where your based and sourcing discussion is a no no, but what's being sold by the reputable vendors here in the UK is definately N-ethyl-ketamine (NEK they're calling it).
Click to expand...

I don't care if they're calling it pineapple. They are selling N-ethyl-norketamine. There's no debate. Or rather, there should be no debate. if this were a different subforum this nonsense wouldn't have continued nearly so long.

The "nor" prefix properly refers to the removal of an alkyl group from a nitrogen. I'm not entirely sure if this can refer to amides or only amines. I believe it can properly refer to either but someone else would have to comment on that. Norketamine is ketamine without the N-methyl group. It is a primary amine. N-ethyl-norketamine is absolutely, unequivocally the compound that has been described here. Insisting on it being N-ethyl-ketamine is like saying that heroin is diacetylcodeine.

I was expecting my comment to be met with "we know it's N-ethyl-norketamine, but we prefer to call it n-ethylketamine because it's easier" or something similar, not actual opposition to the truth of the matter. Calling this N-ethyl-ketamine (which is isn't) only confuses what we should be calling the REAL n-ethylketamine which is a real compound and may be active enough to be used.

kneknenk.jpg



Eventually people need to start getting away from abbreviating everything and actually name compounds. Generally whole classes of compounds are given a single ending (the 'pams, the 'zolams, the 'orphans and 'odones, the 'barbitals, the 'caines and 'qualones etc etc) and new compounds are just given new starts to that ending. Unfortunately ending in amine is overly common. Perhaps something based on phenylcyclidine. Ethylcyclodone perhaps. I don't know, I don't really care, but a systematized naming system instead of what has become and endless run of acronyms. This worked good for the drones, actually, with the obvious exception of methedrone, which was a terrible, moronic decision.

This isn't the right place for THAT conversation, but it's unfortunately relevant.
 
Jesus christ dude I didn't ask for a lecture. I already said I'm useless with chemistry, my bad, forget it.

I've done a lot of dissociatives and this one is interesting. What I find weird is it's not that psychadelic (which is why I love Ketamine), this is more a smooth happy euphoria. I recieved 500mg today, I've done 90mgs up the hooter and I can feel my vision has become slightly more crisp, my thoughts more concise. It's like very clean ketamine.

I'm hoping I'll be able to report back on some sort of hole experiance tonight if it's possible to hole on, there are a few reviews suggesting it is.
 
@Rockstar: What is this like on the cardiovascular side compared to real ketamine? I have a low resting Heart rate and low blood pressure, so I'm curious to know before I get my wonk on!

EDIT: Quick question. My SO has just started a course of Citalopram (SSRI's), and as far a I know, there are interactions between Ketamine and anti-depressants, but obviously since this isn't ketamine, I don't want to let her near it. Wise move?
 
Last edited:
Hammilton said:
I don't care if they're calling it pineapple. They are selling N-ethyl-norketamine. There's no debate. Or rather, there should be no debate. if this were a different subforum this nonsense wouldn't have continued nearly so long.

The "nor" prefix properly refers to the removal of an alkyl group from a nitrogen. I'm not entirely sure if this can refer to amides or only amines. I believe it can properly refer to either but someone else would have to comment on that. Norketamine is ketamine without the N-methyl group. It is a primary amine. N-ethyl-norketamine is absolutely, unequivocally the compound that has been described here. Insisting on it being N-ethyl-ketamine is like saying that heroin is diacetylcodeine.

I was expecting my comment to be met with "we know it's N-ethyl-norketamine, but we prefer to call it n-ethylketamine because it's easier" or something similar, not actual opposition to the truth of the matter. Calling this N-ethyl-ketamine (which is isn't) only confuses what we should be calling the REAL n-ethylketamine which is a real compound and may be active enough to be used.

kneknenk.jpg



Eventually people need to start getting away from abbreviating everything and actually name compounds. Generally whole classes of compounds are given a single ending (the 'pams, the 'zolams, the 'orphans and 'odones, the 'barbitals, the 'caines and 'qualones etc etc) and new compounds are just given new starts to that ending. Unfortunately ending in amine is overly common. Perhaps something based on phenylcyclidine. Ethylcyclodone perhaps. I don't know, I don't really care, but a systematized naming system instead of what has become and endless run of acronyms. This worked good for the drones, actually, with the obvious exception of methedrone, which was a terrible, moronic decision.

This isn't the right place for THAT conversation, but it's unfortunately relevant.
Click to expand...
everything can be exaggerated, including precision. why not insist on calling it (RS)-2-(2-Chlorophenyl)-2-(ethylamino)cyclohexanone when we're already at it? everybody knows what is meant, you are just confusing people by insisting on your point that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top