• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest Posting RulesBluelight Rules
  • PD Moderators: Cream Gravy? | Transform | Vastness | Xorkoth
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

The safety (or lack therof) of DOX chemicals discussion thread

SteamboatBillJr

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
552
Location
Retired
Xorkoth's empirical observation about the track-record of DOxs stands.

Most important this isn't an attack on Xorkoth. I respect Xorkoth and have benefited from his contributions. I simply disagree with the claim DOX chemicals are safer than NBOMe chemicals. Xorkoth's observation of DOX's history misinterprets the data. We aren't looking at how long the chemical was available we are looking at the number of people using the chemical vs fatalities. Luckily DOX chemicals never gained popularity outside of our esoteric hobby. NBOMe chemicals achieved much wider distribution through the web.

The popularity of NBOMe chemicals is decreasing. Despite this if you look on the darknet hundreds of listings offering NBOMe chemicals remain. DOX chemicals are much less available on the same sites. This suggests in NBOMe chemicals short existence far more people were exposed and risked the associated dangers.

Now lets look at search data from Google and compare how much the average person researched DOX and NBOMe.





Those examples demonstrate few people were researching DOX in comparison with NBOMe. This further supports my claim NBOMe chemicals experienced much wider distribution. Now consider the fatalities associated with DOX over the same time.



DOB:*
Nonfatal and fatal DOB (2,5-dimethoxy-4-bromoamphetamine) overdose.

Bromo-DragonFLY:*
A fatal poisoning involving Bromo-Dragonfly.

Second Victim Dies After Taking Designer Drug In Konawa

DOC:*
A Fatal Intoxication of 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-Chloroamphetamine: A Case Report

“Moment of madness”: rare drug implicated in student death


Now infer the number of fatalities we could expect if DOX chemicals were distributed as much as NBOMe chemicals were distributed.


*This data excludes older reports of fatalities and reports of near-fatal adverse reactions.
 
Last edited:

sean107

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
1,325
Location
Where gnomes reside.
I've seen people have full blown seizures and freak the fuck out on less than 1mg of NBOMe, DOX chemicals don't ever usually do that as far as I know. I'm gonna have to agree that NBOMe's is much more dangerous than any DOX substance, despite that DOX is much less available.
 

SteamboatBillJr

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
552
Location
Retired
I've seen people have full blown seizures and freak the fuck out on less than 1mg of NBOMe, DOX chemicals don't ever usually do that as far as I know.

The fact you haven't observed seizures from DOX use doesn't prove they never occur. These are the reports of seizures from DOX I found in my research. Other reports probably exist.


Nonfatal and fatal DOB (2,5-dimethoxy-4-bromoamphetamine) overdose.

Delayed onset of seizures and toxicity associated with recreational use of Bromo-dragonFLY

Hallucinogens Causing Seizures? A Case Report of the Synthetic Amphetamine 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-Chloroamphetamine (DOC)

Seizures and rhabdomyolysis with a novel phenethylamine: 2, 5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC)
 

lamanogaucha

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
584
Your arguments regarding DOx are becoming more compelling, but the idea that these chemicals are as risky as NBOMe's is still a very hard pill for me to swallow. I'm not convinced, Steamboat, but my mind is open. Keep working on it. Maybe you'll eventually find something truly solid.
 

BlacklightHorizon

Greenlighter
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
37
Just a quick question, what is the point in stating seizures as a danger of DOX drugs, I'm pretty sure I have read of actual lsd and dmt and the other classical psychedelics causing seizures as well, I kind of feel like that is just a danger that comes with the territory of taking drugs that make the world break apart and reform into new and unexplainable things, who would be surprised? I think I too thought psychedelics were extremely safe, but I am coming to terms with the fact that they are not, but we can make them as safe as possible with harm reduction. I don't have the time to research, I have a newborn, but anyone else could feel free to prove me wrong or right :)
 

sean107

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
1,325
Location
Where gnomes reside.
I'm just saying that seizures are WAY more common with NBOMe's. Almost everybody I know that's tried NBOMe's over a dozen times has had a seizure from it and freaked out. Never met anybody that said DOX did that, although I'm sure it's happened I doubt it's as common. And yeah, like blacklighthorizon said, most all psychedelics can cause seizures, it's just really rare. Except in the case of NBOMe. I even had 3 seizures from NBOMe myself and multiple bad trips, also my feet swelled up, turned purple and eventually my skin fell off of them from vasoconstriction due to use of NBOMe.
 

Xorkoth

🎨 ARTministrator 🎨
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
54,286
Location
In the mountains
I appreciate your words steamboat, thanks for that. I also respect your intentions. I don't really agree but I appreciate that you're coming from a good place.
 

kidklmx

Bluelighter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,311

Mushrooms and LSD are known to cause seizures as well, though. All psychedelics lower the seizure threshold, though some more than others probably. Fact of the matter is, were crystal LSD as readily available as these chems you'd see a lot more problems there as well. People seem to dose a lot higher with these chems. I think people should take more care with psychedelics, I know a guy who wants to dose his soon-to-arrive 2C-E by licking his finger and sticking it in the baggy. If you use these chemicals like that you will at some point get some issues, and some chemicals just have a much lower ceiling. DOx chemicals sure fall within that category, obviously you should titrate your doses if you want to go higher to reduce the risks. Even still, their safety profile is much better than the newer stimulants as far as I'm concerned.
 
Last edited:

SteamboatBillJr

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
552
Location
Retired
People occasionally experience mild shaking or dystonia on other psychedelics. This is different with DOX and NBOMe. With DOX and NBOMe people experience legitimate seizures comorbid with death.
 

InterestingFACT

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
512
Most important this isn't an attack on Xorkoth. I respect Xorkoth and have benefited from his contributions. I simply disagree with the claim DOX chemicals are safer than NBOMe chemicals. Xorkoth's observation of DOX's history misinterprets the data. We aren't looking at how long the chemical was available we are looking at the number of people using the chemical vs fatalities. Luckily DOX chemicals never gained popularity outside of our esoteric hobby. NBOMe chemicals achieved much wider distribution through the web.

The popularity of NBOMe chemicals is decreasing. Despite this if you look on the darknet hundreds of listings offering NBOMe chemicals remain. DOX chemicals are much less available on the same sites. This suggests in NBOMe chemicals short existence far more people were exposed and risked the associated dangers.

Now lets look at search data from Google and compare how much the average person researched DOX and NBOMe.





Those examples demonstrate few people were researching DOX in comparison with NBOMe. This further supports my claim NBOMe chemicals experienced much wider distribution. Now consider the fatalities associated with DOX over the same time.



DOB:*
Nonfatal and fatal DOB (2,5-dimethoxy-4-bromoamphetamine) overdose.

Bromo-DragonFLY:*
A fatal poisoning involving Bromo-Dragonfly.

Second Victim Dies After Taking Designer Drug In Konawa

DOC:*
A Fatal Intoxication of 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-Chloroamphetamine: A Case Report

“Moment of madness”: rare drug implicated in student death


Now infer the number of fatalities we could expect if DOX chemicals were distributed as much as NBOMe chemicals were distributed.


*This data excludes older reports of fatalities and reports of near-fatal adverse reactions.

This is an excellent point to bring up, and one that deserves discussion. However, it's ironic that you do so in a thread discussing DOM: This chemical long predates the NBOMES or even the 2C-X series and saw extensive use alongside LSD under the names "STP" and "Tranquility," in addition to being frequently misrepresented as LSD. There were in fact a significant number of documented cases of adverse reactions, generally related to excessive dosing/redosing by people who thought they had LSD, but these were generally just psychotic breaks rather than physical emergencies.

The fact of the matter is that DOM once had a level of exposure and of misrepresentation comparable to what the NBOMES have achieved today, yet without the associated numbers of fatalities. The reason it no longer holds that status is because it's been illegal for decades now, was less potent than LSD and less desirable, and because MDA and MDMA partially supplanted it's role (doing the same to LSD) and were considered both an easier synth and a better use of precursor materials.


While psychedelic drugs do lower the seizure threshold (and the DOX series can be expected to do so more significantly than weak partial agonists like psilocin... Though LSD's dopamine affinity means all bets are off in that regard)... These case files in which seizures are reported should be taken with a grain of salt. 5ht2a agonists cause muscle spasm which can present indistinguishably from seizure, but which have a different neuro chemical cause AND different consequences. Even in NBOME overdose reports, I suspect the vast majority of reported "seizures" are merely a symptom of the 5ht2a full agonism (also possibly the root cause of their toxicity, through over activation-induced rhabdomyolysis and associated organ toxicity)

Mushrooms and LSD are known to cause seizures as well, though. All psychedelics lower the seizure threshold, though some more than others probably. Fact of the matter is, were crystal LSD as readily available as these chems you'd see a lot more problems there as well. People seem to dose a lot higher with these chems. I think people should take more care with psychedelics, I know a guy who wants to dose his soon-to-arrive 2C-E by licking his finger and sticking it in the baggy. If you use these chemicals like that you will at some point get some issues, and some chemicals just have a much lower ceiling. DOx chemicals sure fall within that category, obviously you should titrate your doses if you want to go higher to reduce the risks. Even still, their safety profile is much better than the newer stimulants as far as I'm concerned.

While your point is valid, let's be careful not to paint DOX with the same brush as classical psychedelics. Even as we claim it's inaccurate and unfair to consider DOX as dangerous as NBOME, it's an equal if not greater injustice to categorize them with LSD or psilocin. Remember that, whether or not we believe they can be used safely, they are categorically more dangerous than classical psychedelics.
 

SteamboatBillJr

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
552
Location
Retired
While your point is valid, let's be careful not to paint DOX with the same brush as classical psychedelics. Even as we claim it's inaccurate and unfair to consider DOX as dangerous as NBOME, it's an equal if not greater injustice to categorize them with LSD or psilocin. Remember that, whether or not we believe they can be used safely, they are categorically more dangerous than classical psychedelics.

Thus far NONE of the people claiming the DOX group of drugs is safer than NBOMe drugs provided any objective evidence supporting those claims. I have compiled statistical data and toxicological data supporting my claim DOX and NBOMe drugs cause harmful physical reactions at similar frequencies. Both groups of drugs also produce the similar pathological findings in fatal overdoses.

Multiple accounts make claims without providing accessible evidence. Credible people provide evidence supporting the claims they make with simple explanations. Could you provide verifiable objective evidence with short and simple explanations supporting your claim the DOX group of drugs is safer than NBOMes?
 

MrHH

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
241
Location
Infinite conscious
DOx substances are tested and rarely available on the black market from more than 40 years ago. There is a huge amount of historic data about dosages, pharmacokinetics, eventual deaths (most caused by overdoses), etc.

Some of the compounds of the DOX family are not longer considered a Research Chemical and that it's a good indication on how much do we know about its mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, toxicity, LD50, overdoses, short-term side effects, long-term side effects, interactions, metabolism, etc. That will happen with NBOMEs as well, but some years from now :)

I've never heard about any DOx death at standard dosages, but I've heard about deaths using supposedly "common" doses of NBOMEs. Even more intriguing: two persons consuming the same amount of substance, one dies, the other one perfectly survives.

It looks like some people had very rare idiosyncratic reactions that resulted in different deaths using NBO*s. Or maybe, the dose/effect curve is not safe enough resulting on a very small difference in weight between the standard active dosage and the fatal overdose.

I think it should be definitively decisive to have in mind the high number of deaths in a very small period of time. Even if you can compare both terms using something like Google Trends, you must be aware about the history of the psychedelic amphetamines.

I also think it's a bit useless to compare the safety between two substance families because every substance within each family has its own properties as well. Also, we are trying to compare two families having a somewhat distinct pharmacokinetic profile. Nevertheless, generally speaking and based on the number of unexplainable deaths on NBOMEs, most DOx compounds (maybe except for DOB and its vasoconstriction effects?) are relatively safer at suggested dosages in comparison with most NBOMEs at suggested dosages.

I still don't understand what's the point about the comparison, since they both families are completely different in terms of chemistry, pharmacology and effects. I just don't remember any other compounds -except for NBOMEs- generating a so high number of *unexplainable* deaths in a so very limited timespan.
 
Last edited:

Xorkoth

🎨 ARTministrator 🎨
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
54,286
Location
In the mountains
Thus far NONE of the people claiming the DOX group of drugs is safer than NBOMe drugs provided any objective evidence supporting those claims. I have compiled statistical data and toxicological data supporting my claim DOX and NBOMe drugs cause harmful physical reactions at similar frequencies. Both groups of drugs also produce the similar pathological findings in fatal overdoses.

Multiple accounts make claims without providing accessible evidence. Credible people provide evidence supporting the claims they make with simple explanations. Could you provide verifiable objective evidence with short and simple explanations supporting your claim the DOX group of drugs is safer than NBOMes?

My main claim is supported by evidence. It's a fact that the NBOMes have existed and been around for far less time than the DOXs. Although your post about Google search frequency for DOXs vs NBOMes is a valid point, it's only true for right now and recent times. DOC, DOB and DOI made the rounds years ago as the main "fake LSD" on blotters, and it was quite widespread, with many people taking them. People in general knew less about research chemicals then, the culture has expanded and changed so much recently with the RC stimulant epidemic that began with mephedrone. A lot more people are aware that such things exist now and thus more people are googling it. Thus, even though people are certainly taking way more NBOMes now than DOXs, and probably in greater volume now than they ever were with DOXs, you can't make a straight comparison like that. DOXs have been around for 40 years, and began with DOM in large (obscene) dosages. If you look up "STP fatalities" (which was what they called it then), it's hard to find information because of other things that STP stands for, but although there were a variety of hospitalizations due to people freaking out on a massive dose that lasted 36 hours, I do not recall hearing of deaths. I don't have time to keep looking right now so if someone has that information that would help clsrify further one way or the other.

After that period of time, they were rare until more recent times, pre-NBOMes, when they were around and popular for a longer period of time than NBOMes have existed thus far. If you look up DOC death, DOB deaths, etc, you don't get much in the entire span of their use.
https://www.erowid.org/chemicals/doc/doc_death.shtml
https://www.erowid.org/references/refs_view.php?ID=6864
(Nothing I could anywhere on DOI)
(Nothing I could anywhere on DOM)

Contrast this with 25i-NBOMe (which seems the most dangerous and popular, but there are also others of course), where reports of deaths are numerous and easily found:
https://www.erowid.org/chemicals/2ci_nbome/2ci_nbome_death.shtml
http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/690574-List-of-Nbome-deaths

This, to me, clearly demonstrates that NBOMes are more dangerous than DOXs, given the much larger volume of deaths in a much shorter timeframe. And I only looked up deaths, not hospitalizations. I'm sure the counts are higher in both groups, but, I bet, proportional. Again if someone wants to do that research it would help clarify. I just don't have time to keep doing this at the moment. I'd be curious as to a count of hospitalizations and their nature. It seems one should leave hospitalizations due to freaking out out of the equation as weed and LSD and mushrooms probably have more of those than any RC, it's different from an actual health complication.

Adverse events can happen with any drug or psychedelic. People have had seizures from mushrooms and from LSD, plenty of people due, to their widespread use. I classify DOXs as more dangerous than the "standard" psychedelics for a couple of reasons (pharmacology and potency/importance of responsible dosing practices), and NBOMes much more dangerous for both of those same reasons. Nothing presented so far indicates otherwise to me.
 

Xorkoth

🎨 ARTministrator 🎨
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
54,286
Location
In the mountains
I mvoed the relevant posts from the DOM thread into here that pertain to this discussion because people felt it was cluttering up the thread. I'm going to go to the DOC thread to try to find any more. Please discuss this in here from now on... it's a focused discussion that doesn't really contribute to the Big and Dandies, but is worth discussing for sure.
 

Tranced

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Messages
9,720
Location
Newcastle, UK
We aren't looking at how long the chemical was available we are looking at the number of people using the chemical vs fatalities. Luckily DOX chemicals never gained popularity outside of our esoteric hobby. NBOMe chemicals achieved much wider distribution through the web.

There is a major fallacy in your proposal here; the fallacy being that Google search data is a reliable way of measuring DOx vs. NBOMe consumption.

Whilst many people may have Googled NBOMe substances, many others have consumed DOx thinking it was LSD, without ever having known the name to be able to Google it.

The only LSD in my city for about three years was DOx, and it was never, ever (to my knowledge) sold as that. DOx chemicals have been widely and unknowingly consumed in the UK, and from what I understand, worldwide, for years.

Now infer the number of fatalities we could expect if DOX chemicals were distributed as much as NBOMe chemicals were drequireded.

There is no way to know that they weren't. Your graphs can only display interest. They do not show consumption.

From what I've witnessed there had been widespread, high level distribution of DOx on blotters.
 
Last edited:

Talos

Greenlighter
Joined
Oct 7, 2014
Messages
20
IMHO, generalising when it comes to drugs is risky, as small structural changes can make a difference (see last study).

To get a clearer picture of safety of DO* compounds, I suggest looking at the research literature to try to understand the toxicology and pharmacology of each.


Metabolism studies in rats:

Metabolism and toxicological detection of the designer drug 4-chloro-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine in rat urine using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Abstract

Studies are described on the metabolism and the toxicological analysis of the amphetamine-derived designer drug 4-chloro-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine (DOC) in rat urine using gas chromatographic-mass spectrometric techniques. The metabolites identified indicated that DOC was metabolized by O-demethylation at position 2 or 5 of the phenyl ring partly followed by glucuronidation and/or sulfation. The authors’ systematic toxicological analysis procedure using full-scan gas chromatography-mass spectrometry after acid hydrolysis, liquid-liquid extraction and microwave-assisted acetylation allowed the detection of an intake of a dose of DOC in rat urine that corresponds to a common drug user’s dose. Assuming similar metabolism, the STA procedure described should be suitable as proof of an intake of DOC in human urine.


Metabolism and toxicological detection of the designer drug 4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamine (DOI) in rat urine using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Abstract

The amphetamine-derived designer drug 4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamine (DOI) is an upcoming substance on the illicit drug market. In the current study, the identification of its metabolites in rat urine and their toxicological detection in the authors’ systematic toxicological analysis (STA) procedure were examined. DOI is extensively metabolized by O-demethylation and beside small amounts of parent compound it was found to be excreted mainly in form of metabolites. The STA procedure using full-scan GC–MS allowed proving an intake of a common drug users’ dose of DOI by detection of the two O-demethyl metabolite isomers in rat urine. Assuming similar metabolism, the described STA procedure should be suitable for proof of an intake of DOI in human urine.


MAO inhibition:

Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitory Properties of Some Methoxylated and Alkylthio Amphetamine Derivatives: Structure–Activity Relationships

Abstract

The monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitory properties of a series of amphetamine derivatives with different substituents at or around the para position of the aromatic ring were evaluated. In in vitro studies in which a crude rat brain mitochondrial suspension was used as the source of MAO, several compounds showed a strong (ic50 in the submicromolar range), selective, reversible, time-independent, and concentration-related inhibition of MAO-A. After i.p. injection, the compounds induced an increase of serotonin and a decrease of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid in the raphe nuclei and hippocampus, confirming the in vitro results. The analysis of structure–activity relationships indicates that: molecules with amphetamine-like structure and different substitutions on the aromatic ring are potentially MAO-A inhibitors; substituents at different positions of the aromatic ring modify the potency but have little influence on the selectivity; substituents at the para position such as amino, alkoxyl, halogens, or alkylthio produce a significant increase in the activity; the para-substituent must be an electron donor; bulky groups next to the para substituent lead to a decrease in the activity; substituents located at positions more distant on the aromatic ring have less influence and, even when the substituent is a halogen (Cl, Br), an increase in the activity of the compound is obtained. Finally, the MAO-A inhibitory properties of some of the compounds evaluated are discussed in relation to: (a) potential antidepressant activity, and (b) their reported hallucinogenic, neurotoxic, or anxiolytic effects.


TL;DR: These studies suggest that:

  • DOC and DOI both are metabolised by O-demethylation
  • DO* s have varying activity as MAO-A inhibitors.

So DOC is a MAO inhibiter.If i eat cheese and then take lets say 1mg of DOC blotter, could this make my heart rate and blood pressure go up?Im asking because this happened to me ,after eating cheese and taking DOC.
After 3 hours from taking it of course which freaked me out.
 
Last edited:

Kl519

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
2,139
Location
CA
One of these days, I'll contribute a lot more to this topic with my bio hat on. Since there's an overwhelming amount of negatives about the dangers of DOXs (for whatever reason), I'll create an outline of how most of them can be used as safely as possible with risks at near zero. Probably on one of my breaks on either Labor Day or Thanksgiving (ugh). Although what one could do to eradicate most dangers is to just take an allergy dose and increase the dose slowly while having a sitter nearby for every trip. As it was said already, none of the psychedelic amphetamines have caused deaths at normal doses, maybe besides special, idiosyncratic cases, if that.

For certain the DOXs [psychedelic amphetamines] are not all the same. The same goes for all classes of substances, and their mechanism of action. Each one is different, even within the same class as MrHH pointed out. I'm going to apply simple logic to make a point by stressing that DOB is DOB and not DOC, DOM, DOI, DON or DOPr (there are more too). They are affecting receptors differently and at different strengths for that reason. That is why they have different dosages recommended for them. So the fact that they vary in how much they affect the whole class of 5ht receptors is pretty much a given, which is why it would be old news to anyone well versed in chemistry. They are different substances.

Concerning DOPr, I find it notable that despite a small number of reports, no one complained of vasoconstriction at any dose. Of course, it would be better if we used a blood pressure monitor during our trials, but since I can only speak for myself, I know how it feels after trialing 5 mapb. I'll do this next time, btw. As we all probably know, what makes vasoconstriction dangerous is how it can lead to tissue necrosis, heart attacks, strokes and various other cns related deficiencies. Blood flow is super important, of course. But that is the most significant factor (along with other cns functions) concerning risks with psychedelic amphetamines, because that is one of the functions that most of the 5ht1 and 2 subset of receptors controls. Obviously, the effect it has on something like mood and appetite isn't an immediate danger.

However I think it's worth saying that I don't think combinations should be used with these DOXs, whether they are psychs, stims or even otc/prescribed medications. If enough preparation is taken (important) while confirming no danger at sub-threshold doses, I don't see how it isn't safe to take DOXs at normal doses.

The sad thing is that there can be a comparable argument written about the dangers of processed foods, hydrogenated oils and high fructose corn syrup, but I digress (not really). I might do that though just to provide some perspective.
 

AA357

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
830
I have told you before: stop demonizing this class of drugs. I know they have a lower OD threshold than LSD and psilocin but so do all phens. Should mescaline and 2C-x be consigned to the rubbish bin as well?

I am all for harm reduction and this is why I believe NBOMes should be shunned. They have been known to kill people at normal doses and are simply not fit for human consumption. DOx on the other hand are actually quite safe... everybody who ever ODed on them took a ridiculously high dose.
 

wayab

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
830
ive taken from 0.5 to 8 mg of doc alone and in combination with 2cp, 2cc and dissociatives(on separate occasions). it seems like one of the safest(obviously if not in overdose) psychedelics.
don't know about the other DOx.
 

SteamboatBillJr

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
552
Location
Retired
As it was said already, none of the psychedelic amphetamines have caused deaths at normal doses, maybe besides special, idiosyncratic cases, if that.

None of the medical journal article I found mentioned dose. You make misleading assumptions. Please provide objective verifiable evidence supporting your claims.

I'm going to apply simple logic to make a point by stressing that DOB is DOB and not DOC, DOM, DOI, DON or DOPr (there are more too). They are affecting receptors differently and at different strengths for that reason.

This isn't simple logic this is another misleading assumption. Are these differences relevant regarding toxicity? Is the main difference potency, mechanism of action, or bioavailability? Please provide objective verifiable evidence with relevant binding data on the list of chemicals you gave making those claims.


DOx on the other hand are actually quite safe... everybody who ever ODed on them took a ridiculously high dose.

This isn't true because other users make this misleading claim. Please provide evidence supporting your claims.


DOx chemicals have been widely and unknowingly consumed in the UK, and from what I understand, worldwide, for years.

Your experience in your town isn't inherently representative of the entire world. Please provide evidence supporting your claims.

Your graphs can only display interest. They do not show consumption.

In this instance interest and consumption are related. The strength of this correlation is supported with the availability of drugs on the darknet market I mentioned earlier (If the mods allow I could provide screen-shots verifying this). NBOMe drug listings appear ~10X the amount of DOX listings.
 
Last edited:
Top