• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators:

What is wrong with the MDMA available today? - v2

I was getting kinda heavy into oxy back around 2004 when I took Toronto Green Smilies and I remember the green smilies made me nod some. And some idiot was saying that it's because of the heroin in that ecstasy but I kinda think the culprit was MDE eve. So what do I like about MDE? The fact that I could nod on it
 
@AutoTripper
A few years back some friends had a batch of mdma that was supposedly “lighter” in effect(/side effects) and comedown, so “just dose a little higher”. These guys are usually honest so I grabbed a dose to give it a whirl, as unfortunately, my reagents were years old and I only had 3/5 left (not enough for any conclusive results).

At 150 mg it was euphoric, but nothing otherworldly, somewhat empathetic, produced some mild nystagmus and was notably shorter by a good hour or more. The comedown was gentle and In the following days I noted no midweek blues.

Naturally I grabbed a small stash. When I tested it with fresh reagents later that year results pointed to mde.

Now I’ve only mixed it with product that’s tested as mdma...using reagents again, and is ok on its own for me, though friends who’ve tried the same batch claim it’s the best they’ve had in years... a couple times. And I’m not convinced mde is what contributed to the amazing rolls I’ve had in the past. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a decent combo but I don’t think the answer is that simple (And I think lab results from that era are indicative that not all good pills contained such a combo). I don’t believe playing with doses and ratios will make that great of a difference... but rest assured I’ll give it a whirl (when I get to it, usually only about once a year these days).
 
@AutoTripper
A few years back some friends had a batch of mdma that was supposedly “lighter” in effect(/side effects) and comedown, so “just dose a little higher”. These guys are usually honest so I grabbed a dose to give it a whirl, as unfortunately, my reagents were years old and I only had 3/5 left (not enough for any conclusive results).

At 150 mg it was euphoric, but nothing otherworldly, somewhat empathetic, produced some mild nystagmus and was notably shorter by a good hour or more. The comedown was gentle and In the following days I noted no midweek blues.

Naturally I grabbed a small stash. When I tested it with fresh reagents later that year results pointed to mde.

Now I’ve only mixed it with product that’s tested as mdma...using reagents again, and is ok on its own for me, though friends who’ve tried the same batch claim it’s the best they’ve had in years... a couple times. And I’m not convinced mde is what contributed to the amazing rolls I’ve had in the past. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a decent combo but I don’t think the answer is that simple (And I think lab results from that era are indicative that not all good pills contained such a combo). I don’t believe playing with doses and ratios will make that great of a difference... but rest assured I’ll give it a whirl (when I get to it, usually only about once a year these days).
Hi, that’s interesting, thanks for sharing.

To make my position clearer possibly, I’m not actually trying to argue the MDE+ MDMA combo has anything to do with the reported/claimed absence of magic, or the better experiences. I don’t think MDE nor MDA need ever have existed for ecstasy to be the legend it became. Just proper MDMA in abundance and everything still would have gone down as it did.

My nose just suddenly smelled a rat. Having good experience with MDE, it struck me how little it’s mentioned, even known almost nowadays.

So my suspicion was that it may have stopped appearing the same time many claim MDMA turned sour, 2005, and was interested to see the small few reports since then.

So my suggestion is- why did MDE prevalence, availability and use in pills suddenly dry up?

I felt the answer to that may be related to the answer this thread seeks.
 
AutoTripper THANK YOU for posting those. https://www.drugsdata.org/view.php?id=1332 .

I am 100 percent certain that the green smilies I had were these. And I remembered wrong they had speed or sass mixed in. They had EVE!!! MDE!!

I am convinced now that EVE is a major factor in what makes up good ecstasy. Eve might even be a better mixer than sass. If just for the hangover effect .

MDMA and MDE heavy in the MDMA makes/made epic rolls.
Now as I suggested above, I don’t see it that way- MDE with MDMA is necessary, the recipe, for true, proper ecstasy.

I would gladly set sail for my desert island with a tonne of the highest grade pure MDMA.

I’ve had the equally amazing experiences on pure MDMA in pill, crystal and powder, to any MD variation and combo.

My suggestion is, if you come across MDE, whether in combo with MDMA or not, you may have ecstasy that is made somewhere, by somebody, superior to the bulk on the market from elsewhere testing as MDMA.

I know it sounds dumb. I’m stupidly stoned lol just about to shower. So wanna drop a load of acid but really really shouldn’t.
 
MDE with MDMA is necessary, the recipe, for true, proper ecstasy
Bollocks. MDE is not a part of “ecstasy” (which is pure, racemic n-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine hydrochloride, aka MDMA, either in crystal/powder form or pressed into tablets). MDE is “Eve”, MDA is “Sassy”, and MDMA is “Molly/Mandy” aka ecstasy, empathy, Adam… In the U.S. it's called “Molly” (short for "[Grateful Dead] Family Jewel molecule") and the high is called “rolling” whilst in the U.K. it's called “Mandy” and the high is sometimes referred to as “monging”. This is common street slang for the compound, n-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine. Anything else is an adulterant, and related 3,4-methylenedioxy-substituted phenethylamines and alpha-methylated phenethylamines are analogs and homologs with somewhat similar effect profiles, but they are not “proper ecstasy”. They all refer to one drug. In practice it's of course an unregulated free-for-all, but ignoring that for a moment, I think it's helpful to keep the definitions simple and consistent.

I was getting kinda heavy into oxy back around 2004 when I took Toronto Green Smilies and I remember the green smilies made me nod some.
MDMA kinda does this to me on a high enough dose. It's strange, but also euphoric and I usually don't mind and find that it passes before the high is over. What's more, different producers frequently have the same tablet dies and coloring. Poor-quality knock-offs are definitely a thing in that market.
And some idiot was saying that it's because of the heroin in that ecstasy
Good instinct. It almost certainly was not Heroin – it's just too expensive to have people wasting doses of good H in an e-pill when diacetylmorphine has such a low oral bioavailability – I think it's something like 40% through first-pass metabolism? Many users say if you're not shooting it, you're wasting it. So then consider how much H would need to go into each pill to achieve any kind of appreciable high from it… Your instincts there were right, and whoever was saying the pills were cut with Heroin was just regurgitating bullshit they heard some other asswipe proclaim. Bertrand Russell said it best with: “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.

On the other hand, and especially in 2021, fentanyl is a very real possibility for inclusion in a pressed pill. It's why I bought bulk fentanyl tests and suggest others do the same to test your drugs.
but I kinda think the culprit was MDE eve. So what do I like about MDE? The fact that I could nod on it
Careful with that line of thought – cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Or in other words: correlation does not imply causation. Just because you took some pills and nodded, and you think they have MDE because of something you saw on drugsdata.org (nevermind if that's actually the same pill), it does not imply MDE typically causes somnolence. In fact it usually does the opposite. This is true in the literature, true for me personally, and what I've witnessed firsthand with very high confidence I had near-pharmaceutical-grade compounds (if not actual-grade stuff). I happen to have synthesized MDE twenty-something years ago in a clandestine lab (this is well beyond the statute of limitations so I have no qualms mentioning it now and I no longer synthesize contraband drugs). I was using a route whereby I vacuum distilled safrole from sassafras oil, converted it to a ketone intermediate and then I would usually reduce the ketone to MDMA or MDA, but I realized I could produce MDE just by substituting ethylamine for methylamine, or nitroethane for nitromethane, whatever donates and attaches the respective nitrogen moiety for the desired target compound.

So I made ~18 grams of it with which to experiment and give away to certain psychonaut friends and close associates (underground chemistry has perks). The consensus then was that it was a lighter roll with a duration of about 1.5 - 2.0 hours. Just as it starts to peak and I'd get that synapse flooding feeling of serotonin that rattles my brain and my eyes start getting nystagmus… just as that begins to hit its peak, like it does with MDMA, I start coming down instead of continuing to blow up. Chasing the high doesn't do a whole lot of good, but the high can be kicked up a little bit more with effort. Arguably it's a “weekday evening after work” kinda drug, although I imagine it carries some neurotoxicity all the same. However, it didn't leave me feeling off-balance from a serotonin dump like MDMA does, but then… you get what you pay for, so to speak.

Either way, it was speedy AF and felt good; it just didn't last long enough which is irksome. I don't recall anyone nodding off on it, but that was just my experience. I can easily see nodding happening in the right individual, probably such as yourself. Still, I would not classify nodding as a standard qualitative effect. But you know, it doesn't mean anything necessarily either way. I've taken acid and mushrooms together before and wound up falling asleep in the middle of the peak…On many occasions I've seen people do a gangster rail of cocaine and then fall asleep within 5 minutes on the couch. Seen people do giant hot rails of good meth and then be yawning shortly afterward. Etcetera. You get the picture. Also, I get amped from benzos and opiates a little bit, especially at first, and the shit makes me oddly productive at times… The point is: MDE is a bit of a lame fuckaround compared to the real deal Holyfield MDMA though it's not without its own charms.

I don't understand the point you are trying to make with your response.
Ok check it out. You said: "I am even more firmly of the belief that MehDMA is 100% real." This statement confused me. Why that proclamation? You took some authentic, nearly pure MDMA and had a wonderful experience and your takeaway was that MehDMA exists? What did that experience rule out for you? Prior to this, were you questioning if the lackluster experiences on other so-called “MDMA” was the result of personal bias / loss of magic, or what? You say you don't believe in those as possibilities, and that's fine, but either way, I think it's well known that some MDMA is widely agreed to be really good shit, while other stuff purported to be MDMA is, at times, awful. Concurrent to that, it's also possible for a person to use MDMA too frequently without giving their neurochemistry a break and a chance to recuperate fully, and this will keep them from having mind-blowing MDMA experiences. Both scenarios are real, possible, and common, in my opinion. Does this make sense?

So you found some good MDMA. I have a personal stash of some really bomb shit at the moment as well as a few pressed pills that I would classify as being “meh”. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ They can't all be zingers, I suppose. But all this proves to me is that the market is muddled with impure and/or imposter MDMA (responsible for at least some of the “meh” experiences, in my opinion), and really good, pure, blissful MDMA that we all seek to find. There is no easy way for the layperson to remove certain impurities from dirty MDMA, and there are other things that can actually be removed fairly easily with an ice-cold anhydrous acetone rinse, and/or a recrystallization from boiling isopropyl alcohol followed by another acetone rinse. Fractional, vacuum distillation would be the next technique up the ladder, as it were, followed by lithographic chromatography but this is well outside the scope of most individual's personal comfort level let alone ability and knowledge.
I don't believe intentionally cut or impure MDMA is the source of Meh experiences,
What? Why not? That has to be at least some of the cases. Seems perfectly reasonable, understandable and likely to me. This doesn't rule out other causes of the phenomenon and various other factors affecting it. Why is everyone trying to find just one culprit for this phenomenon?
and I don't understand why your first statement is relevant.
Mostly I'm saying I agree with you, and while we all have our own pet theories, sometimes with overlapping philosophies, I just want to remind people to be careful they're not inadvertently sharing poor intel, erroneous info, propaganda, dangerous myths, superstition, and/or FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt).

Ok let's break this next one down:
My experience is an important data point
Is it though?
in my scientific-speculative journey
And what does this mean exactly? What journey are you talking about? Just to be clear, are you doing real, funded research with the goal of publishing the results in a journal somewhere, or is this more of an informal, personal thing you're doing, possibly with friends and community and such? That's not a slight or a knock, I just want to be clear what you're talking about when you speak so authoritatively about “data points”.
in that it disproves myself and other friends having "lost the magic",
Ok so to you, you were just proven wrong about a previous assumption that your own “mehDMA” experiences were the result of some personal, biochemical process leading you to a damaged state of having “lost the magic”, is that correct? Well it's good to know you're willing to change your opinion on a matter in light of new facts you discover. But as I've said: it helps support the claim that one possible cause for underwhelming MDMA experiences is: different batches of blackmarket MDMA have varying purities that probably impact the qualitative effects quite a good bit. Technically speaking though, it does not irrefutably “prove” anything, not in any objective sense anyway. I mean, the term “losing the magic” is kind of vague enough to begin with. It's nothing we can quantify or measure. And what feels like “magic” to one person might not feel like “magic” to another. Maybe some people in your group needed a nice, long break from serotonergic drugs, or maybe someone didn't realize they were previously taking a medication that interfered with MDMA's action and they had no idea that [XYZ pharmaceutical].hydrochloride was a 5-HT reuptake inhibitor, or myriad other examples and factors that cannot be ruled out any longer and with an experiment that is assumably so informal.
shows a huge difference in potential MDMA experiences as experienced by a wide range of individuals with mostly different MDMA usage patterns, and more.
Right. Many things can affect the outcome of an individual's experience upon consuming varying quantities and purity/impurity matrices of MDMA and/or its analogs. I think we all agree on this point. The thing is: why are we trying to pinpoint some phantom cause-of-all-MDMA-woes substance we're calling “MehDMA”?

My original point was that not ALL the MDMA on the blackmarket is shit right now. There is good MDMA on the market still. Your recent experience bolsters my point that it's not all crap out there. Everyone agrees that crappy MDMA is present, call it “MehDMA” or whatever you want, no one denies it exists. I'm saying it doesn't exist in only one form we could easily pinpoint and remove with some quick, clever kitchen chemistry. It's a much more varied and complex problem than that. The real solution is to figure a way to get underground producers of MDMA to avoid impurities and cuts altogether, but this is not an easy task to accomplish for reasons which should be obvious to anyone reading this.

Having said this, I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong in the above and that we can pinpoint a loss of MDMA-experience quality down to one or two particular impurities formed during specific phases in a common production process. Is this necessary and, if so, cui bono? Sure, the user benefits, but who calls the shots? It's hard to picture academic interest, and pharmaceutical companies are equipped with all the analytical tools they need to perfect and optimize the synthesis of whatever they mass produce, so I suspect that point might be rendered a bit moot. (←Note: I mean “moot” in the American sense of “irrelevant”, not the British sense of “arguable”).
This product was tested with a wide variety of reagents, and showed results only for MDMA (though the MDMA vs MDA differentiation test showed a little violet, like MDA would), which was similar to most batches that this group has procured in the past few years, which is also an important data point.
More “data points”. And let's talk about that fancy-sounding “wide variety of reagents”. You're talking about presumptive testing which is used to analyze a sample and can only establish one of the following: 1. the sample is definitely not a certain substance, or 2. the sample probably contains the substance. It takes confirmatory testing to know for sure. (For anyone unfamiliar and interested in this). This is the only court-admissible standard because it's based on solid science and the chance of false positives can be reasonably reduced beyond the shadow of a doubt. The FDA recommends that such tests should bear a label that says:

“This assay provides only a preliminary result. Clinical consideration and professional judgment should be applied to any drug of abuse test result, in evaluating a preliminary positive result. To obtain a confirmed analytical result, a more specific alternate chemical method is needed. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) is the recommended confirmatory method.”​

Also, as has been discussed in this thread, the presumptive tests would probably not be able to distinguish MDE from MDMA from MDDMA, and even if it could, the difference between MDE and MDDMA would be unclear given that they share the same empirical formula and molecular weight, plus they have the same basic shape and they largely react to most things the same way. There are methods to tell them apart, but it's outside the scope of presumptive testing for sure. I mean take a look at the standard presumptive test for ecstasy, The Marquis Reagent Test and just look at how many substances turn purple to black… Reagent testing is useful for quick field testing scenarios and for harm reduction purposes mostly. True analysis requires a deeper dive than this.
 
ecstasy is ecstasy its not pure mdma. Pure mdma is pure mdma. ecstasy is a fucking pressed pill that could contain anything but usually a good ecstasy recipe will be mdma + numerous other drugs to make the best fucking pill. the best pills are the ones who have perfected the other drugs added to it to make it the best roll ever.
 
ecstasy is ecstasy its not pure mdma. Pure mdma is pure mdma. ecstasy is a fucking pressed pill that could contain anything but usually a good ecstasy recipe will be mdma + numerous other drugs to make the best fucking pill. the best pills are the ones who have perfected the other drugs added to it to make it the best roll ever.
Say what you want, but a U.S. prosecuting attorney will charge someone—with the help of the DEA—with “manufacturing MDMA, commonly known as ecstasy”. That is their wording, not mine. It's the name of the “immediate offense” they will charge you with, and I'm 100% certain of this fact.

You can use whatever Urban Dictionary definition you want, and maybe things are different where you live, but I'll stick to sources that are relevant and actually matter.

Regardless, it's a slang colloquialism and I don't really feel like arguing semantics. Gleefully shovel handfuls of impurity-riddled, cut-to-shit garbage drugs down your gullet if you want. I'll hold out for a higher standard and encourage people never to cut a drug for profit or accept the practice of others doing so.
 
Bollocks. MDE is not a part of “ecstasy” (which is pure, racemic n-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine hydrochloride, aka MDMA, either in crystal/powder form or pressed into tablets). MDE is “Eve”, MDA is “Sassy”, and MDMA is “Molly/Mandy” aka ecstasy, empathy, Adam… In the U.S. it's called “Molly” (short for "[Grateful Dead] Family Jewel molecule") and the high is called “rolling” whilst in the U.K. it's called “Mandy” and the high is sometimes referred to as “monging”. This is common street slang for the compound, n-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine. Anything else is an adulterant, and related 3,4-methylenedioxy-substituted phenethylamines and alpha-methylated phenethylamines are analogs and homologs with somewhat similar effect profiles, but they are not “proper ecstasy”. They all refer to one drug. In practice it's of course an unregulated free-for-all, but ignoring that for a moment, I think it's helpful to keep the definitions simple and consistent.
There must be at least some wires crossed here because I don’t think you have taken my meaning right at all. I’m not suggesting at all that MDE, Eve, needs to be present. Pure clean proper MDMA is all that’s needed.

I’d still settle for pure clean MDA as an equal top pick, with MDE a decent consolation failing that.

All 3 class as ecstasy in my view, as does any percentage combination of any together.

MDE doesn’t need to be involved or present. I just found it interesting to see it virtually fall off the map at the same time many consider ecstasy to have gone downhill, changed, Meh emerging more widely, in 2005.

It is simply the case that MDE was phenomenally prevalent in the early to late 90’s pills. It surprised me to see how many of the legendary White Doves were largely, mostly, or wholly MDE. It was commonplace,

Late 2004, it practically vanishes. 2005 on is where most people would agree things took a big downward spiral.

All I was saying is maybe there is a link between MDE suddenly dropping off the scene, and the arrival of proclaimed Meh.

I’m sorry for the misunderstanding. I should have spelled it out and made my exact meaning clearer.
 
Now as I suggested above, I don’t see it that way- MDE with MDMA is necessary, the recipe, for true, proper ecstasy.
@unodelacosa my bad. What I typed above to my mind is correct as per my meaning, just too open to misinterpretation, which I know I was conscious of when I typed it as it came it and hoped my meaning would be obvious enough without me really spelling it out, asI was satisfied with the language correctness.

I’m saying, I don’t see it that way- (that) MDE needs to be present or exist at all. I could have included the word “that” or phrased it differently but again it’s correct to me just needs interpreting.
 
In simple terms to my simple mind, we ran through this case of semantics 2 years ago somewhere-
“ECSTASY” = MDMA, or MDA or MDE, or MDMA + MDA, or MDMA + MDE, or MDMA + MDA + MDE, or MDA + MDE.

It doesn’t need to be in a pill. As long as those are the constituents. Any other additive or drug is ecstasy plus that other compound.


In a definitionary nutshell. I welcome dispute but I don’t feel you can dispute that, fingers not pointed at anyone ftr.
 
@unodelacosa

I would appreciate it if you would respond in a more concise manner. I don't have the time nor desire to engage in reciprocated essays here, and in my personal life, as well as online, value conveyed in as short of a time as possible.

Furthermore, I don't have a desire to discuss a large amount of what you did share.

The point of my sharing is this: Loss of magic is the most commonly touted response to our inquiry here. My experience is a nice little piece of evidence against that theory. And, I really enjoyed the experience I had. I am making no absolute claims re: MDA vs MDMA and reagent testing, that good or bad MDMA exists or does not exist throughout the world, or a number of other statements you explored in your post. I have generally made my perspectives on some of these and related matters throughout this thread and the previous iterations.

I do feel I am being unnecessarily short and potentially bellicose, however, I do feel the need to share that I am not interested in engaging with you when you respond to my posts in this way. It doesn't make it wrong, but I don't want to engage.
 
Now I am NOT concise lol. So I can’t object to that. But we can choose to be less abrasive, calmer and discuss things more pleasantly, because we are not adversaries here.
 
I'd say that it is mainly cut with all sorts now, like 5 years ago it was less contaminated
This thread is specifically talking about lab tested samples, where any active cuts would be detected and identified. I'm curious about your five years comment, have you noticed a change in MDMA during that time frame?
 
Yes, I have sent samples they have identified stuff like Pseudoephedrine and PMA/2C-B added into the pills. When I 1st sent a sample around 2015/16 the only cuts that I got where Speed.
Neither of those is relevant to the thread:
  • We are specifically discussing MDMA that has been sent to a lab (such as Energy Control or Drugs Data), tested with some form of GCMS or other lab testing, found to be MDMA, but presents with a different effects profile than typical MDMA. We are not discussing un-tested product that could be anything or contain any adulterant.
I'm curious what region those pills were obtained in though. I checked drugsdata.org and 2-FMA and MDMA has never shown up at either their US lab or any of the European partners they report results from.
 
I spend my time in Europe and Asia. I have consumed MDMA in pills and powder around 30 times from around 20 different batches during the last 5 years. Not a single source was cut with another substance. In general, the sources that are available to me (darknet, offline) have quite high purity powder (85-95% MDMA*Hcl) or the dutch pills which have between 150mg and 200mg of MDMA*Hcl in them. Yes, it was all tested.

Quality varies but is usually decent. I can see some correlation between purity and initial dosage. I always dose between 120 and 180mg with half that dose as a booster. I can observe that the batches with lesser purity need higher doses to bring about the same effects. I have been following this thread since it came to light and have been asking myself: Was this all "MehDMA" or all "MagicDMA", as I can't draw a clear line between "good" and "shitty" product. It's not black and white, but grey. In general, other factors do heavily influence my rolls: Alcohol, sleep, environment, whether I have eaten or not, etc. But overall, it was all the same experience, except one from blue punishers which I found distinctively lacking in quality.

I also have observed some tolerance: I have less jaw grinding with the same doses now. This kind of headspace is very familiar to me now, and the whole experience is less surprising overall, yet still very enjoyable. I would say it's "at 75%" of the original roll.

I somehow feel that this is more an American than a European discussion. Maybe the product is generally higher quality overall over here.
 
Paper 1: A study of impurities in intermediates and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) samples produced via reductive amination routes
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.11.013

MDDMA (14meth by their labelling) came from reductive amination of PMK with N,N-dimethylamine. As far as I can tell, the dimethylamine was an impurity of the methylamine (with the quoted purchased source being 98% pure). If that's correct then it would be relatively easy for the MDDMA to creep into production?

Note typo: In the figure Scheme 1, the labels Route Ia and Ib should be swapped. For Scheme 2, the labels Route IIa and IIb should be swapped. Might be other errors I'm not sure.


Paper 2: 1H quantitative NMR and UHPLC-MS analysis of seized MDMA/NPS mixtures and tablets from night-club venues
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2019/ay/c9ay01403a

Looked at seized samples from the UK in 2019. Presented an NMR plot of one sample with quantified 10% MDDMA present. Not sure if that was the only one, or representative of more (they did say samples in the accompanying text). If only 1 (or a few) it is obviously not a full explanation of the situation, but they did say seeing the MDDMA is tricky because of overlapping peaks.
 
I would appreciate it if you would respond in a more concise manner. I don't have the time nor desire to engage in reciprocated essays here, and in my personal life, as well as online, value conveyed in as short of a time as possible.
Ok I'll be concise: don't make so many assumptions.
Also that's just being rude saying all this. I'm sorry it takes you so long to read and write a dozen sentences.
Furthermore, I don't have a desire to discuss a large amount of what you did share.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ … Respond to whatever you like. I don't care. Again: don't make so many assumptions.
The point of my sharing is this: Loss of magic is the most commonly touted response to our inquiry here.
You've counted these responses? Do you have statistical data to back this up, or are you guessing? Are you making more assumptions here?
My experience is a nice little piece of evidence against that theory.
It's just one person's anecdotal evidence, not conclusive evidence. All it suggests is: for you, MDMA experiences have varied from meh to magic in a pattern inconsistent with the lifetime "loss of magic" theory regarding MDMA tolerance. I've been saying this the whole time: no conclusions can be drawn from the data this post has presented yet. There hasn't been sufficient conclusive evidence.
And, I really enjoyed the experience I had.
Stellar. And I'm not being sarcastic or anything asshole-ish when I say this. I genuinely mean it when I say I'm happy for you that you also found good MDMA, because a lot of people on here seem to think it doesn't exist anymore anywhere for some odd reason…
I am making no absolute claims re: MDA vs MDMA and reagent testing, that good or bad MDMA exists or does not exist throughout the world, or a number of other statements you explored in your post.
Oh no? What about:
“I am even more firmly of the belief that MehDMA is 100% real.”
and:
“Finally, they are believing me that Meh is a real phenomenon.”
🤔
“I am making no absolute claims […] that good or bad MDMA exists”
Only you did and you qualified it, claiming you were “more firmly” of that belief now.
I have generally made my perspectives on some of these and related matters throughout this thread and the previous iterations.
Cool. Me, too. We've usually agreed.
I do feel I am being unnecessarily short and potentially bellicose,
Yep.
however, I do feel the need to share that I am not interested in engaging with you when you respond to my posts in this way. It doesn't make it wrong, but I don't want to engage.
Don't “engage” then. You don't need to explain yourself. If what I'm saying is wrong or doesn't apply, just ignore me. It's easy.
And you don't need to be so defensive. We're on the same side; I just don't agree with your conclusions from the limited data you have.
But that's okay. We don't have to agree.
Concise enough?
 
Last edited:
In simple terms to my simple mind,
No, simple would be simply referring to MDMA only as ecstasy, not having some weird, arbitrary umbrella term catch-all bullshit.
we ran through this case of semantics 2 years ago somewhere-
(y)
“ECSTASY” = MDMA, or MDA or MDE, or MDMA + MDA, or MDMA + MDE, or MDMA + MDA + MDE, or MDA + MDE.
No, only MDMA should be referred to as ecstasy. It's deceitful to sell something as “ecstasy” that does not at least contain MDMA, because only MDMA = ecstasy.
This is common knowledge. For example, look at the wikipedia entry for Ecstasy_(drug). Notice how it says, “Not to be confused with MDA, EDMA or 2,3-MDMA.” (note: EDMA is another way of saying “MDE”)
It doesn’t need to be in a pill. As long as those are the constituents. Any other additive or drug is ecstasy plus that other compound.
I've heard others express similar opinions, and I reject them all. Ecstasy is uniquely MDMA in my book, and the scene would benefit to keep this term precise. More than a few times in the last couple decades, some asswipe sold pills containing PMA as “ecstasy” so people would buy them and unwitting users wind up overdosing. This is the kind of shit misrepresenting drugs leads to. Don't do it, please.
In a definitionary nutshell.
Sounds reductionist.
I welcome dispute but I don’t feel you can dispute that
Don't be too open-minded, now.
 
Ok I'll be concise: don't make so many assumptions.
Also that's just being rude saying all this. I'm sorry it takes you so long to read and write a dozen sentences.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ … Respond to whatever you like. I don't care. Again: don't make so many assumptions.

You've counted these responses? Do you have statistical data to back this up, or are you guessing? Are you making more assumptions here?

It's just one person's anecdotal evidence, not conclusive evidence. All it suggests is: for you, MDMA experiences have varied from meh to magic in a pattern inconsistent with the lifetime "loss of magic" theory regarding MDMA tolerance. I've been saying this the whole time: no conclusions can be drawn from the data this post has presented yet. There hasn't been sufficient conclusive evidence.

Stellar. And I'm not being sarcastic or anything asshole-ish when I say this. I genuinely mean it when I say I'm happy for you that you also found good MDMA, because a lot of people on here seem to think it doesn't exist anymore anywhere for some odd reason…

Oh no? What about:

and:

🤔

Only you did and you qualified it, claiming you were “more firmly” of that belief now.

Cool. Me, too. We've usually agreed.

Yep.

Don't “engage” then. You don't need to explain yourself. If what I'm saying is wrong or doesn't apply, just ignore me. It's easy.
And you don't need to be so defensive. We're on the same side; I just don't agree with your conclusions from the limited data you have.
But that's okay. We don't have to agree.
Concise enough?

1) You misquoted me. "that good or bad MDMA exists or does not exist throughout the world" The statement is about making claims as to the state of MDMA throughout the world.

2) It seems the assumptions you're referencing are the assumptions I'm making about the overall MehDMA situation? I am generally clear, in almost every post, that I am aware I am speculating and operating on incomplete data sets. It's not fair to wield that against me considering I am open and explicit about it being the case.

3) I do appreciate the conciseness, yes.
 
No, simple would be simply referring to MDMA only as ecstasy, not having some weird, arbitrary umbrella term catch-all bullshit.

(y)

No, only MDMA should be referred to as ecstasy. It's deceitful to sell something as “ecstasy” that does not at least contain MDMA, because only MDMA = ecstasy.
This is common knowledge. For example, look at the wikipedia entry for Ecstasy_(drug). Notice how it says, “Not to be confused with MDA, EDMA or 2,3-MDMA.” (note: EDMA is another way of saying “MDE”)

I've heard others express similar opinions, and I reject them all. Ecstasy is uniquely MDMA in my book, and the scene would benefit to keep this term precise. More than a few times in the last couple decades, some asswipe sold pills containing PMA as “ecstasy” so people would buy them and unwitting users wind up overdosing. This is the kind of shit misrepresenting drugs leads to. Don't do it, please.

Sounds reductionist.

Don't be too open-minded, now.
Well, respectfully I disagree.

Just because, and I’m not suggesting you based it on that solely, just a reference to the DEA’s legal description of ecstasy as only MDMA, doesn’t make those dicks a competent authority.

Now in thought, semantic again- those early 90’s warehouse raves and acid parties.

Everyone was on “E”.

As evidenced, it was a random and almost even mixture of MDMA, MDA and MDE almost as common as as MDMA, MDA rarer.

Now, all those ravers were “Eeing”, on “E”. Rushing, dancing, loved up, feeling the magic.

Half on say MDMA doves, half on MDE doves and other great pills. But they were not on “Ecstasy” therefore at all.

Try telling them that.

I’m very open in fact and always willing to change my mind completely, but I stick to my deep beliefs. Just like Bluedream and Cinderella Jack two different weed strains we grew. Both cannabis, but with distinctions.

OG scene. Ecstasy emerged as an almost cultural definition, not tightly and officially tied to MDMA.

It was used to cover what for most purposes and in effects worked as a virtual identical.

The proper original MDE I took myself was superb. Magic. Heavenly. So smooth and no comedown either. NOT short lasting either,

Just, like I said before, just slightly mongey with a tendancy to dreaminess.

But not short lasting like your friends reported. Full length roll, no ups, downs or jitters, exactly as proper ecstasy.

Yes MDA is a different compound too.

We can say….I’m taking ecstasy, in the form of…

But I just understand it that way, with context and appreciation for the distinctions.

I personally still reject that ONLY MDMA classes as ecstasy.

And yes, I like reductionism! 🙂
 
Last edited:
Top