What is wrong with the MDMA available today? - v2

[Jmoda]

For really? Maybe you’re right. Well certainly there’s validity to your claim from a descriptivist view and considering the Latin root means “to carry” (gerere), perhaps this is really the case. Dictionaries seem to generally say “especially by mouth” though, and can we agree that “digest” and “ingest” both contain this root? So also we agree then that “digestion”, when not used metaphorically, refers to what happens post-oral-consumption? Idk, to me, you can inject, insufflate, inhale, or ingest. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Anyone else care to chime in here?

Regarding drug dependency and compulsive behavior pattern disorder, we’re not gonna see eye-to-eye because you already believe in the made-up theory of what’s called “addiction”. Did you know the World Health Organization created that term in, I think it was 1958? They were attempting to categorize drugs according to their potential for causing harm from dependency. The word itself is sort of asinine in that it literally means “spoken for”, sharing etymology with words like “dictionary” and “dictate”. It’s an absurd metaphor that smacks of ignorance and a lack of scientific understanding and sophistication. Within five years, they attempted to remove the term from the surrounding lexicon but it was too late and too powerfully sensationalist to stop by then.

So here we are in 2021 with people using the term addiction with grave tones, and simultaneously people flippantly saying shit like, “omg, these potato chips are addicting”, or like, “I’m so totally addicted to this YouTube channel!” The term is rendered impotent to me by these facts, and I can’t help but think it contributes to the problem more than it helps people who would be better off using the medical terms “[drug] dependency”, “tolerance”, and then in the behavioral sciences sense: “compulsive behavior pattern disorder”. In my humble opinion, these things should be addressed separately, and conflating the issues with an outdated term from the 1950s is, honestly? Dangerously irresponsible. But so few people I talk to who have drug abuse problems seem to know anything about this, so it’s just unfortunate and no one’s real fault.

Oh and don’t worry, I’m not upset or anything to hear your predictable opinion of me, and I’m not saying that to be rude or offensive; but I was absolutely expecting this response. You’re not the first person “in recovery” with whom I’ve conversed. I’m quite sure you’re intelligent, well spoken and well read, someone people admire for their worldly experiences, even as much to call you “Drug Jesus”, and all this even though you’re still fairly young, I suspect.

These are all good things, and I’m sure there are ppl in your life who are proud of you for getting a grip on your drug abuse problems before you did something severely catastrophic. That kind of “close call” with oblivion, as it were, is a powerful experience and a potent source for a certain self-righteous attitude that is very tempting to assume when confronted and confused by reality. By definition, not all drug use = drug abuse. Rehabilitation lingo won’t tell you this though. It’s a lot easier if you simply believe the problem lies in the drugs themselves instead of in the user. For example, the belief that no one can use crystal meth without becoming a strung out mess who ruins everything in their life is based on the premise that there is a quality imbued to the drug magically rendering it this way. Logically though this is blaming an inanimate object.

It’s very easy to project your issues onto others, but I acknowledge this cuts both ways. Have you ever heard the expression: when you have a hammer every problem looks like a nail?

From your perspective it’s a lot easier to run with the “addiction recovery” view of the world, applying it willy nilly to everyone you see using drugs you failed to use correctly. I mean it’s fine; I’m not trying to call you out or shame you for it. I’ve got my own shortcomings. For example: I’m fucking terrible at being drunk, so I generally nurse one beer or something if I’m in a social situation requiring a bit of drinking. Otherwise my drinking “snowballs” into massive, idiotic, angry, drunken intoxication, and well to be quite honest it’s embarrassing and not a good look. I’ve learned this and I avoid it now. However, it doesn’t mean I simply assume no one else is capable of responsible alcohol intake. I just know the limits of my own relative parameters, and I acknowledge what my drug skills are and aren’t. I leave the heavy drinking to others.

Opioids cause me to have stomach problems, massive nausea and a constant feeling of motion sickness. I find more euphoria from benzos than painkillers anyway, and I’ve tried plenty of various opioid drugs. I think it’s personal enzymology and individual variances in neurotransmitter saturation profiles that owe to these differences such as e.g.: why opioids don’t do much for some ppl like yours truly, but others barely catch a whiff of opium and they turn into an extra from the movie Trainspotting.

We may have to agree to disagree, but I want people to know: you can use drugs responsibly through dedication to harm reduction techniques and a reasonable amount of self-discipline. “Addiction” is made-up monkey garbage, and it is definitely not a disease. That’s just a sad cop-out. The aspects to consider are tolerance and dependency, which have a direct 1:1 link. Practice tolerance control and you have dependency control as well. It’s fairly easy, unless you’re compulsive. I want to expound on that but first let me just point out that I’m not directing this broader stuff about my thoughts on dependency vs addiction at you @Zuda as much as I am in general putting this alternate theory of addressing drug abuse issues out there, though I also recognize how off topic this is. So to pull it all together, here we go...

So if you’re compulsive, first piece of advice for you is: fucking stop it. You’re not a child, and if you are still a child, you have no business complaining about drugs you’re too young to use in the first place. If you’re an adult, you have no business being so impulsive, but if you’re between 18-25, this is understandably more difficult due to physical limitations in your brain’s anatomy. We’re not done developing our brains until about 25 years of age. The centers of the frontal lobe responsible for impulsiveness, procrastination, time management, and other mature/responsible aspects of our personality continue developing a full seven years after we legally hit adulthood. And I honestly think we continue evolving beyond that, maybe less in a physical sense and more in a dataset kind of way.

But I’ve read our brains gradually produce more MAOs as we get older. And so I think it’s entirely possible that the reason so many people consider MDMA from their past to be better than MDMA from their present is because: when you’re younger and still fairly fresh to rolling and tripping, MDMA really kicks you in the fucking face. There’s probably a certain window for most people when it will really be the best feeling in the world and after that it’s still pretty good provided you manage your expectations and you learn to enjoy being exactly where you are instead of obsessing over where you aren’t. I hope that makes sense to someone else.

Maybe I’m addicted to writing longAF diatribe responses on drug discussion forums. </ramble>

The very first post is by an older gentleman that has both og cook product and has also tried the mehmdma that is so prevalent today... there is a difference every time.

 

[Jmoda]

I initially started with moderate doses of the crystal, and while it was enjoyable, it was never full-on rolling. I experimented with larger doses, but could never really reach that old school magic of days before. The redbulls I had last year tested out good with reagents, but it was definitely the mehdma. I took 4 of those over a 12 hr period and my brain was completely fried the next day, with a massive headache to boot.

The supreme pill was absolutely delicious, so much I made an account to share my experience on the topic. Ive been coming to this forum for years and never posted.. When I started enjoying mdma again after all those years of abstinence, I was convinced I had abused it too much when I was younger because that magic was gone. Even crystal that tested out amazing didn't provide it, nor did good pills. 1 supreme had me rolling so hard I chewed my lips up pretty bad, and I've never done that. I wanted to dance, hug and share my soul. It was a divine experience, especially since it caught us all off guard. There was 6 of us and we all agreed it was the best pill we've ever had. Ever. And coming from me, thats a lot to say. There was even a sweet, beautiful after glow several days later that kinda just lingered. 1 pill did that, and I'm used to consuming several a night. Im intentionally going to wait a few months before I do them again, just to relish the anticipation of knowing the magic isn't lost and the keys to heaven are still floating around.

Its been hypothesized that a perfect dosage of speed in a pill could be the magic factor. With the uncontrollable lip chewing....i do wonder...

 

[indigoaura]

Its been hypothesized that a perfect dosage of speed in a pill could be the magic factor. With the uncontrollable lip chewing....i do wonder...

Then why wouldn't the speed show up in lab testing when they are specifically looking for it? Labs definitely own the standard.

 

[indigoaura]

I need some official user reports from some of the long time contributors here who have experienced this phenomenon.

I have continued to talk to researcher, Walter Sandtner. He feels that the research concept is interesting and has merit. However, collecting user reports is not his area of expertise. I am hoping he may be able to refer me to someone that would be more appropriate to work with. He has asked to review some of the user reports.

If people are willing to email more official reports, that would be helpful. PM me if you are willing to participate.

 

[Jmoda]

Then why wouldn't the speed show up in lab testing when they are specifically looking for it? Labs definitely own the standard.

I guess my implication was more along the lines of potentially multiple routes to the promised land. For instance, is it possible that amphetamines help to reduce the secondary effects of mddma. I guess ive just become so skeptical through this thread about pressed pills, my mind automatically wanders elsewhere with respects to it.

 

[diaphon]

@diaphon @indigoaura I wonder if there are any corollaries between MDMA/MDDMA/MDTMA & methamphetamine/dimethylamphetamine/trimethylamp...

@unodelacosa this is an excellent question, I have also wondered if there are parallel experiences with "meh" drugs where the mechanism is established. But in terms of the chemistry you are streets ahead of me, so I will follow your lead on that question!

 

[Jmoda]

@indigoaura I think you've hit upon a really interesting mechanism here. The paper you cited (Sandtner et al 2016) implies that there are 2 binding sites on the serotonin transporter - one is a high affinity agonist site, and the other is a low affinity inhibitory site. MDMA only binds to the high affinity site, but MDDMA can bind to either.

If the kinetics work in the normal way, then when MDMA and MDDMA are both present the MDMA will preferentially bind the high affinity site forcing MDDMA to bind to the low affinity site. So it's not only the amount of MDDMA that determines the inhibitory effect - it's also how much MDMA is occupying the preferred binding sites.

In other words, a little MDDMA on its own will not have an inhibitory effect, but that same little bit of MDDMA in the presence of a lot of MDMA will. Since MDDMA has this weird dual-mode binding pattern, the two molecule soup will behave in more complex ways than you'd predict based only on independent concentrations.

Anyway, that's how I read the paper. It's a good one, thank you for sharing it!

Any drugs we know that can prohibit the low inhibiting site? Heh

 

[psy997]

I need some official user reports from some of the long time contributors here who have experienced this phenomenon.

I have continued to talk to researcher, Walter Sandtner. He feels that the research concept is interesting and has merit. However, collecting user reports is not his area of expertise. I am hoping he may be able to refer me to someone that would be more appropriate to work with. He has asked to review some of the user reports.

If people are willing to email more official reports, that would be helpful. PM me if you are willing to participate.

Its been too long since I've taken MehDMA to write a new report, but you're free to anything I've posted before. And, if you can't collect enough reports, I'm willing to take some of the poor product I still have specifically to report on it.

 

[Jmoda]

Has this been discussed before? Seems this lab was able to mddma...perhaps because there eas such a significant amount?

 

[unodelacosa]

The very first post is by an older gentleman that has both og cook product and has also tried the mehmdma that is so prevalent today... there is a difference every time.

Oh wow, how very objective that sounds. Nothing anecdotal about that dataset at all. Why didn’t someone just say so?

Sorry, it’s dickhead-ish to use sarcasm like that but I’m coming down from an excellent DMT blast-off into hyperspace and I’m hoping you take it as friendly ribbing, or taking the piss or whatever. Meant with love. I do the same thing at times bc it’s hard to argue against one’s own personal experiences. I’m just pointing out that we need more conclusive data before we declare this question solved. Anecdotes are not enough, and confirmation bias does exist and should at least be considered.

Thanks for hearing me out

 

[Zephyn]

Without reading the new posts, I've thought a lot about this, and while I think isomers play a big role in (m)any drug(s) i think the majority of this thread just did brain damage and is burned out of mdma (like me)

 

[indigoaura]

Has this been discussed before? Seems this lab was able to mddma...perhaps because there eas such a significant amount?

I have not seen that one before, but in our old thread there is a report from someone who took a sample to two labs and one lab saw the MDDMA and one lab did not.

I also have a sample that went to Drugs Data and they identified MDMA + MBDB + MDA

DrugsData.org (was EcstasyData): Test Details : Result #8547 - MDMA, 8547

DrugsData (EcstasyData) lab testing result

www.drugsdata.org

I read before that MDDMA can be misidentified as MBDB very easily.

So, I am quite curious as to what IEC would see in that same sample.

 

[G_Chem]

Has this been discussed before? Seems this lab was able to mddma...perhaps because there eas such a significant amount?

Yea I actually talked to that guy personally. He reported positive effects, but then again pretty sure he got it tested with another lab which showed different results.

I should have a post or two about it in the other thread

-GC

 

[ThreePointCircle]

Just to recap (amazing progress btw), we've seen three compounds in the literature which have been shown to interfere with MDMA, and that have been found in drug seizures? Plus, MDTMA but has that been reported found anywhere?

I made a list for myself, but I'm struggling to check the drug aliases. Hopefully I've got them right:

Compound 1 [1,2]:

3,4-Methylenedioxy-N,N-dimethylamphetamine: MDDMA, MDDM
1-(2H-1,3-Benzodioxol-5-yl)-N,N-dimethylpropan-2-amine
3,4-Methylenedioxy-(α,N,N-trimethyl)-1-ethane


Compound 2 [3,4]:

1,3-bis (3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-propanamine
α-(3, 4-methylenedioxy) benzyl-(3, 4-methylenedioxy)-phenethylamine ???


Compound 3 [3,4]:

N-formyl-1,3-bis (3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-prop-2-yl-amine
α- (3, 4-methylenedioxy) benzyl-N-formyl- (3, 4-methylenedioxy) phenethylamine ???


Refs:
[1] Optimization of HS-SPME/GC–MS analysis and its use in the profiling of illicit ecstasy tablets (Part 1) Forensic Science International 187 (2009) 73–80
[2] Binding Mode Selection Determines the Action of Ecstasy Homologs at Monoamine Transporters Mol Pharmacol. 2016 Jan; 89(1): 165–175
[3] Pharmacological Characterization of Ecstasy Synthesis Byproducts with Recombinant Human Monoamine Transporters JPET 314:346–354, 2005
[4] Synthesis markers in illegally manufactured 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine Int J Leg Med (1993) 106: 19-23

 

[Jmoda]

Oh wow, how very objective that sounds. Nothing anecdotal about that dataset at all. Why didn’t someone just say so?

Sorry, it’s dickhead-ish to use sarcasm like that but I’m coming down from an excellent DMT blast-off into hyperspace and I’m hoping you take it as friendly ribbing, or taking the piss or whatever. Meant with love. I do the same thing at times bc it’s hard to argue against one’s own personal experiences. I’m just pointing out that we need more conclusive data before we declare this question solved. Anecdotes are not enough, and confirmation bias does exist and should at least be considered.

Thanks for hearing me out

Im admittedly biased because i also have two samples that give very very noticeably different results, not just for me but for others as well. One sample hits us with a wall of pleasure, but then drops off super significantly at exactly the two hour mark (or whenever the two hour mark is with a redose bump) and another that is just a constant but smooth rolling/pulsing of pleasure waves without a noticeable drop off.

By noticeable i dont mean that it feels like you are still peaking the whole time, but with the magical stuff it feels like a smooth wavey chart downwards after peak that is satisfactory and doesnt necessarily leave you wanting more, you are content because even at the smaller waves it just feels so good. With the medium product its like a sharp step jump down and u just want to get back up, much more....everytime.

There is a clear difference in mechanism happening. Yes call it anecdotal, it is. But, its pretty clear something is up.

 

[unodelacosa]

there is a report from someone who took a sample to two labs and one lab saw the MDDMA and one lab did not.

It's tricky to identify compounds with identical molecular weight and empirical formula…

C₁₂H₁₇NO₂ → 12 carbons, 17 hydrogens, 1 nitrogen, and 2 oxygen atoms. When they're closely arranged (as they are here), it can be difficult to suss out every side-product and accurately label it.

I also have a sample that went to Drugs Data and they identified MDMA + MBDB + MDA
I read before that MDDMA can be misidentified as MBDB very easily.

Yes, and MDE (3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine) can also be thrown into the confusion. All three of these compounds—MDDMA, MBDB, MDE—have the exact same empirical formula and molecular weight: C₁₂H₁₇NO₂

As to the MDA, those effects certainly won't hold the effects of the MDMA back… the body naturally demethylates as much as ~15% of MDMA into MDA (as well as ~15% methamphetamine is demethylated into amphetamine).

 

[Tramalala]

Without reading the new posts, I've thought a lot about this, and while I think isomers play a big role in (m)any drug(s) i think the majority of this thread just did brain damage and is burned out of mdma (like me)

Can we remove posts like this? Some amazing progress is being made here by people and then clowns come in who don't even read the comments and just say "meh, u guyz probably hef brain demege liek me".

 

[Zephyn]

Can we remove posts like this? Some amazing progress is being made here by people and then clowns come in who don't even read the comments and just say "meh, u guyz probably hef brain demege liek me".

Its not spam. I first used mdma about ten years ago, before the "mehdma". Used to roll hard. Now the "mehdma" doesn't work for me anymore. It's not an isomers issue.

 

[Jmoda]

Its not spam. I first used mdma about ten years ago, before the "mehdma". Used to roll hard. Now the "mehdma" doesn't work for me anymore. It's not an isomers issue.

I think this is a brain damage issue

 

[unodelacosa]

but with the magical stuff it feels like a smooth wavey chart downwards after peak…

Come on, man.

the magical stuff … like a smooth wavey chart

Smooth wavy chart? Does anyone else consider placebos at all, and the reason why such things as "double-blind studies" specifically "double-blind", exist?
I'm just urging you toward skepticism. You're claiming your body is sensitive enough to detect all these little nuances of detail, right down to the comparison between analog and digital and your inclination to re-dose?
Hold on. Help me stay grounded in science. Which compound were we discussing again?

the magical stuff

Right, so… this is not what convinces me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm a man of science.