• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | someguyontheinternet

Vendors, suppliers and Bluelight

Close ADD down, or limit to certain people. Ridiculous.

There is already other sites that are far more open about chemical research than bluelight, and those sites already have secret areas for chemists and vendors.

The main thing about bluelight, is that there seems to be some really switched on people who are open minded to new drugs but are not scared to lay down the fact that these things maybe highly dangerous and provoke discussion about potential dangers.

Bluelight, and ADD, are on the right track with forceful harm reduction views, it doesn't matter that chemicals are talked about here, because the same chemicals are talked about elsewhere and in alot more depth (synth).

I have lurked around these other forums, and they are far more reckless, atleast Bluelight and the ADD section, you generally find the warnings, dangers and the bad outcomes of drugs stuck right in your face.

Personally i have stayed away from sourcing just about any of the RCs due to this site, while they are very interesting and i enjoy researching them, they are mostly way to risky, i don't want to be that one in a 1000 thats allergic to the latest RC and die, or end up with some strange form of cancer years down the track.

Any talk of vendors fast tracking chemicals because of this site to avoid legals is a moot point, they will find these chemicals and sell them till someone dies, or they become illegal.. If its the latter, and the drug is actually "good", it will surface on the black market anyway, there is no stopping it. Its a sad thing it will probably be the former, at this rate, all these new chemicals, and there has almost been nothing that can compete with the current illegals, even meph, while ok, still doesnt compete with MDMA and has far more dangers... Its sad.
 
the problem as i see it is not "has ADD caused harm or reduced it". The problem is the same problem that effects nearly everything that humans touch - human greed coupled with human stupidity. I think webtryp proves that from the "middle days" (cuz it certainly wasn't the earliest RC busts...) many of those in the business are in it for money (RAC research, anyone?)

I'm sorry, but no amount of information is going to stop a greedy human from trying to make money. The cat is out of the money bag, there's no stuffing it back in now. However it might stop a person from making a stupid mistake, which is all you can really hope for I think.
 
Its all about to come crashing down anyway when a certain supplier puts RTI-126 up for sale. 5x more potent than cocaine, the closest pharmacological profile to cocaine that has yet been found, AND an MAO reuptake inhibitor. The bodies are going to be lining up in the morgue.

Seriously, there is no reason to change ADD. If ADD goes away, the vendors and suppliers are just going to start making their own guesses as to what is going to be active. A perfect example is 2C-iP. Luckily that one didn't prove to be terribly toxic but there is already talk of some pretty serious and potent compounds coming out that didn't start here.
 
Phener said:
I can't quite forsee or imagine at this point the kind of explosion that will happen if/when shulgins new book is released.

If I was him (some have suggested he has backed out of releasing such a book) - i would release it when I am gone. (one final note etc)
Click to expand...

Well the first, the Phen series, is up for pre-order right now. Its coming... and there are some very clever ways of getting around the analog laws contained within its pages.
 
MagickalKat777 said:
Its all about to come crashing down anyway when a certain supplier puts RTI-126 up for sale. 5x more potent than cocaine, the closest pharmacological profile to cocaine that has yet been found, AND an MAO reuptake inhibitor. The bodies are going to be lining up in the morgue.

Seriously, there is no reason to change ADD. If ADD goes away, the vendors and suppliers are just going to start making their own guesses as to what is going to be active. A perfect example is 2C-iP. Luckily that one didn't prove to be terribly toxic but there is already talk of some pretty serious and potent compounds coming out that didn't start here.
Click to expand...

wtf is a MAO reuptake inhibitor, MAO is not transported.

I cannot see RTI-126 making any significant impact because it is simply going to be too expensive or it is going to be an isomeric mess. there are several other phenyltropanes with a better profile than RTI-126 but this is not the time and certainly not the place to discuss them.
 
Last edited:
MagickalKat777 said:
Its all about to come crashing down anyway when a certain supplier puts RTI-126 up for sale. 5x more potent than cocaine, the closest pharmacological profile to cocaine that has yet been found, AND an MAO reuptake inhibitor. The bodies are going to be lining up in the morgue.
Click to expand...

Cocaine is highly cardiotoxic because it's a local anaesthetic. If this new shit lacks local anaesthetic activity it'll be far safer than coke.

I'm with vecktor.
 
i think it should ultimately be up to the individual posters, not the board, to censor knowledge in this area. i feel this board should not have moral rules of this sort. free speech!
 
As I see it, the members arguing against discussing new drugs are simply against discussing novel drugs; ones that haven't made it to market yet. I don't think they have anything against discussing dangers/toxcitiy of such compounds once they make it to market, but that they don't want any discussion here to lead to new drugs being made.

Maybe I'm totally interpreting it wrong, but that's how I see this discussion. In which case, I don't think that the two opinions conflict. We still have our HR when idiots decide to make mephedrone v5.0, but we don't contribute to the development of said compound.
 
Sturnam said:
As I see it, the members arguing against discussing new drugs are simply against discussing novel drugs; ones that haven't made it to market yet. I don't think they have anything against discussing dangers/toxcitiy of such compounds once they make it to market, but that they don't want any discussion here to lead to new drugs being made.
Click to expand...
Exactly! But I would change the red-marked part into "...new drugs being marketed". And I agree, too, that harm reduction and refusal to provide inspiration to vendors are not necessarily conflicting concepts.

- Murphy
 
thenightwatch said:
i think it should ultimately be up to the individual posters, not the board, to censor knowledge in this area. i feel this board should not have moral rules of this sort. free speech!
Click to expand...

finally a view I can 100% agree with. :)

I too think if individuals want to refrain from talking about compounds that is their choice but I would hate to see bluelight ADD (+mods) turn in to a **new drug** discussion hater board - everyone will abandom ship.
 
I see the same thing happening over the years: very enthusiastic discussion about novel non-existing drugs takes place on BL. Vendors see this and take this as a sign of demand, because the same people end up being the customers. They create whatever has been discussed here. Then release it. Bluelighters buy the stuff. Post their experiences here. Add some shilling to the mix. All that promotion causes more popularity. Things start spinning out of control.
Then bluelighters who are debating the harmfulness and rightly discussing the unethical behaviour of the vendors.

Can you see the irony here? How is this harm reduction? Time and time again BL is creating the monster. I think its time for some introspection. The RC scene is out of control and things will only get worse. Much worse. Bluelight plays an important role in it in both positive and negative sense.

Its not without reason that the head of the AMCD criticizes online forums:
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1922452?UserKey=
Sooner or later they will go further than criticizing.
 
Last edited:
Mander said:
Its not without reason that the head of the AMCD criticizes online forums:
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1922452?UserKey=
Sooner or later they will go further than criticizing.
Click to expand...

and so the music industry criticised napster, then suprnova, then mininova/piratebay now a plethora of other torrent sites.

In fact I remember I was actually a keen read of the hive and only came to bluelight afterwards - when surprise surprise its momentum picked up.

Any kind of top down moderator enforcement is PRECISELY the SAME analogy as our current drug laws - the result is supply/discussion is swept underground to less well controlled and regulated systems. Discussion will take place on boards with less knowledgable people.
 
There already are many rules here that are enforced, by top down moderator enforcement.

Please explain to me what purpose threads like 'The stimulants of the future' serve.
You can be assured that they serve great purpose for vendors, wholesalers and producers and that they have lead to the production of RCs. Some of which caused hospitalizations. So if thats the price to pay for such threads, then what is the benefit that justifies such toll?
 
^as has already been pointed out F&B was able to prewarn the side effects of mephedrone - it was going to hit the market regardless (lets not get a god complex and believe bluelight is the sole source of RCs)

ban these kind of threads and they will go to another discussion board, i'd personally say it's more relevant to keep a heads up with whats going on rather than let it go underground on another forum
 
Exploring psychoactives was never without controversy. Whats your contribution to live optimally with it?
 
Prohibition was/is a bad idea in all cases. If these "vendors" want to cook up drugs they can't be arrested for then so be it. ADD might serve as some knowledge database but isn't that pretty much what's its about anyway.
 
^out of interest are we saying MEPHEDRONE was bluelights fault? To me that would be the kicker and the REAL problem to which every rediculous fake/crap legal "research chemical" can be linked. (of recent times)

Let's be realistic that was THE research chemical that recently got anyone and everyone (vendors included) poaching info of bluelight for new highs (or simply selling crap labelled as drug names poached from bluelight)

I just ask because from memory it was first sold as a legal high from israel, I'm guessing (people might have more definite facts on this, correct me if you feel I am wrong) THAT particular case there certainly wouldn't have been any inspiration from bluelight discussions? I.e from reading posts choosing the para-methyl would potentially cause a horrible neurotoxin akin to para-methyl-amphetamine. It was shear serendipity I asume on the part of the neo-organics people. Methylone and butylone existed in the background but it was mephedrone which caused the public to have a complete gaggin response for RC's.
 
Last edited:
Phener said:
^out of interest are we saying MEPHEDRONE was bluelights fault? To me that would be the kicker and the REAL problem to which every rediculous fake/crap legal "research chemical" can be linked.
Click to expand...
Mephedrone from bluelight? Absolutely not. Mephedrone was discovered and reported by some chemists on the Hive. The Hive is gone now; no other forum has risen to such prominence, because none of them want to, for obvious reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top