What is wrong with the MDMA available today?

[mooka]

there is no 2,3-mdp2p around. Any PMK been made in china is coming from safrole anyway for legitimate uses

I have to disagree on that, PMK coming from China is fully synthetic, otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation. Everything changed when the camphor oil with high safrole content coming from far east was banned in early 2000's

But recrystallization is not an ideal process.
Neither is trituration ...especially when solubilities are very similar.

Also, there are substances which crystallize together very well despite being composed of different molecules.
For example, just look at the common cut of Methamphetamine which is known as Isopropylbenzylamine. It forms LARGER crystals with Methamphetamine than Methamphetamine alone !

BTW: The equivalent MD compound would be the N-(1,3-Benzodioxol-5-ylmethyl)-2-propanamine.

Ok.. let's play logic:

IF a contaminant is present in big quantities (mg) THEN it'll be detected by standard analysis methods
IF a contaminant is present in minute quantities (ug) THEN it'll stay in the mother liquor

so even if re-x isn't the best available process still will tell us if there's a a cut or not, in your example the meth cut Isopropylbenzylamine gets detected by standard analysis methods.
in meh no one detects anything, hence the highly active contaminant with sedating effect theory become just a myth without any real ground

There are contributors here who have access to magic, and I have meh. The problem is that we have nowhere to send the samples. Drugs Data was, at first, indicating they would assist me and provide more detailed information on my samples, but they have been largely non-communicative for a long time now.

what about a private lab? is that a possibility or is not because of legal implications?

 

[PsychedelicSummer]

I’ve always thought that a regioisomer was the culprit, though I lack sufficient knowledge in chemistry to have any foundation to base that on. Anyhow, I'd to share some thoughts.

If we imagine that after safrole became very hard to come by, an evil chemist got the idea to start producing a regioisomer of MDMA from a precursor which wasn’t controlled. Which regioisomer would he choose? Can someone with chemistry knowledge figure that out?

From what I’ve read, normal GC-MS isn’t enough to easily differentiate MDMA from its regioisomers (there are some papers available on the subject, like this recent one: https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Drug_Isomers_Using_Infrared_Ion_Spectroscopy)

So the question I think we should focus on is how can we get researchers with access to the right equipment interested in investigating our hypothesis? There must be plenty of labs around the world which could do it. Reading some papers regarding regioisomer of MDMA gives us names of researchers already knowledgeable in the subject. Can we/someone write a letter we can send to some of them? Maybe formulate it as a public health issue?

Thoughts?

 

[Negi]

Yeah I thought about that, and I do know that they're generally more apt to do what they can with regard to publicizing any info about novel substances, or oddities in widely distributed commercial psychoactives which weighs in against this theory significantly. I'm sure that the material I'm talking about is the same, cheap bulk substance coming from dutch labs. It's all I've seen here in the region of the US I'm in for years now.

If you look at the published research of the forensic chemist I emailed, he has four papers about detecting drug isomers using different methods (he even uses 2,3-MDMA and 3,4-MDMA as a specific test case in two of them). I'm pretty sure he's doing a PhD thesis on the topic. If he is saying that the Dutch police lab has never seen it, I'm willing to take that at face value.

So the question I think we should focus on is how can we get researchers with access to the right equipment interested in investigating our hypothesis? There must be plenty of labs around the world which could do it. Reading some papers regarding regioisomer of MDMA gives us names of researchers already knowledgeable in the subject. Can we/someone write a letter we can send to some of them? Maybe formulate it as a public health issue?

I literally just did this on the last page. The researcher replied that they are aware of the possibility of MDMA isomers, have processes in place to detect them and have never seen any of them.

 

[G_Chem]

Indeed someone in this tread had detected the glycidate of 2,3-MDP2P before, but I just searched all the posts here and the 2,3-MDMA has never been seen.

The member who analyzed those samples eventually deleted all his posts for reasons I’d rather not say on here.

Unfortunately we lost a lot of good info in the process if his analysis were actually legit, but his story seems peculiar to me as well so I don’t know...

It appears even his account is now deleted so maybe there was something to his story after all?

He was a chemist who analyzed batches of MDMA for friends, he found some weird ones but also found slight isomer variation with legit MDMA as well. (Supposedly..)

-GC

 

[PsychedelicSummer]

I literally just did this on the last page. The researcher replied that they are aware of the possibility of MDMA isomers, have processes in place to detect them and have never seen any of them.

Yes, I saw that. Great job! Through not clear to me if they've screened for all regioisomers, and it's only for the Netherlands - where I've gotten the impression legit product is common domestically. Anyhow, plenty of other researcher around the world to write to. The more awareness, the better. And surely some people know the anser to our question - but so far they keep quiet. But nothing lasts forever.

 

[G_Chem]

I don’t trust the labs for shit when we are finding two samples from the same batch test different with different labs... This has consistently happened the few occasions people have “tested” this.

Either they are sloppy at what they do, or GC/MS ain’t foolproof.

-GC

 

[Negi]

Through not clear to me if they've screened for all regioisomers

If you have a specific regioisomer in mind I can email them again and ask if it would show up.

it's only for the Netherlands - where I've gotten the impression legit product is common domestically.

The Netherlands is the largest producer of MDMA in the world. Most of Europe's MDMA is produced there (large amounts of it also goes to the US via DNM orders). The researcher worked for the National Police Lab. So unless the groups producing the "mehDMA" for export have never had a lab busted, or even an outgoing shipment intercepted they would have been able to see it.

 

[indigoaura]

@Negi I would be very interested in knowing if your contact has any comment on synthesis byproducts present in samples. Are there always synthesis byproducts present? Why are those byproducts usually not reported by labs?

I would be curious to know what he thinks of this research: https://sci-hub.st/http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/314/1/346.short

Is it plausible that synthesis byproducts could be present at levels that alter the effect of the substance due to transporter blocking or another mechanism?

After reading this article: https://sci-hub.st/https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0036476, I really feel that something is blocking the transporters. The graphs and illustrations here describe the Meh experience perfectly.

So, either the MDMA is not actually MDMA but a regioisomer that appears to be MDMA, or there is something present in the sample that is interfering with the process.

As for private labs...I am not very comfortable with the legal implications. Now, it may be that Oregon will become an option now that drugs are decriminalized there. Maybe a lab will pop up there where I could send samples without fear of them pursuing any legal action. I will have to keep an eye on that as things develop. If you have any recommendations for private labs, I am all ears.

 

[PsychedelicSummer]

If you have a specific regioisomer in mind I can email them again and ask if it would show up.

All of these 10:

 

[Observer01]

A 3rd party onlookers opinion....

This latest discussion from Negi sealed my opinion. I do not believe there is a material difference in the MDMA being mass produced today as compared to 20 years ago. When a product is scaled up in production to the size we see now due to increased popularity, I do agree that there will be a higher chance of receiving "poor" or not as "clean" product. When it was being produced for a smaller niche crowd I'm sure the chemists were taking more precautions and on the whole, producing better MDMA. However, on a mass scale, I believe it to be much the same product.

After years discussing this subject, and arriving at no conclusive solution, it appears to my eyes there are a small number of folks on here grasping at straws.

You have essentially eliminated both the isomer argument as well as the contaminant argument.

While there are plenty of trip reports out there describing sub par "meh" effects on Reddit etc, they are heavily and completely outnumbered by those describing the traditional MDMA experience.

There is no judgement on my end for any of you who continue this work, and if something is found that contradicts my opinion, I will fully admit I was wrong and be glad that you discovered what that was. However, perhaps it is worth analyzing whether or not you are searching endlessly for something that does not exist. Perhaps MDMA has taught you all that you need to learn from it, and the experience will never be fully the same. This is not to say you can't enjoy it and benefit from it, but that endless sense of "magic" may be gone. Ann Shulgin confirmed this happened to her in her own speeches and writing. And that is truly OK. There are other substances, experiences, and adventures to have and grow from.

 

[indigoaura]

A 3rd party onlookers opinion....

This latest discussion from Negi sealed my opinion. I do not believe there is a material difference in the MDMA being mass produced today as compared to 20 years ago. When a product is scaled up in production to the size we see now due to increased popularity, I do agree that there will be a higher chance of receiving "poor" or not as "clean" product. When it was being produced for a smaller niche crowd I'm sure the chemists were taking more precautions and on the whole, producing better MDMA. However, on a mass scale, I believe it to be much the same product.

After years discussing this subject, and arriving at no conclusive solution, it appears to my eyes there are a small number of folks on here grasping at straws.

You have essentially eliminated both the isomer argument as well as the contaminant argument.

While there are plenty of trip reports out there describing sub par "meh" effects on Reddit etc, they are heavily and completely outnumbered by those describing the traditional MDMA experience.

There is no judgement on my end for any of you who continue this work, and if something is found that contradicts my opinion, I will fully admit I was wrong and be glad that you discovered what that was. However, perhaps it is worth analyzing whether or not you are searching endlessly for something that does not exist. Perhaps MDMA has taught you all that you need to learn from it, and the experience will never be fully the same. This is not to say you can't enjoy it and benefit from it, but that endless sense of "magic" may be gone. Ann Shulgin confirmed this happened to her in her own speeches and writing. And that is truly OK. There are other substances, experiences, and adventures to have and grow from.

"You have essentially eliminated both the isomer argument as well as the contaminant argument."

How?

From the articles I have saved, it is repeatedly demonstrated that there are different byproduct profiles depending on synthesis route.

We also know that synthesis byproducts have activity on transporters.

I also know, due to direct correspondence with labs, that they do not report synthesis byproducts in their test results.

So, how is this theory disproven?

 

[indigoaura]

As I have said repeatedly, I am open to the problem being with me as an individual, and I am open to the problem being with the product.

In order for me to believe the problem is ME, I need to see SOMEONE actually rolling on the product. If I never see anyone getting the typical effects, then I have no evidence that the problem is me.

 

[mind-body-soul]

As I have said repeatedly, I am open to the problem being with me as an individual, and I am open to the problem being with the product.

In order for me to believe the problem is ME, I need to see SOMEONE actually rolling on the product. If I never see anyone getting the typical effects, then I have no evidence that the problem is me.

The problem is def not you. It is def the drug. I abstained for many years after getting married. My last roll before i quit was probably 2004 and it was great as per norm. Fast forward to 2017 and i tried it again. Got fried but no soul searching thoughts, no internal peace, no ecstasy...asked a few of my friends (who has been using all along my period of abstinence) about this and i got a 'thats what its like these days'

 

[Le Junk]

A 3rd party onlookers opinion....

This latest discussion from Negi sealed my opinion. I do not believe there is a material difference in the MDMA being mass produced today as compared to 20 years ago. When a product is scaled up in production to the size we see now due to increased popularity, I do agree that there will be a higher chance of receiving "poor" or not as "clean" product. When it was being produced for a smaller niche crowd I'm sure the chemists were taking more precautions and on the whole, producing better MDMA. However, on a mass scale, I believe it to be much the same product.

After years discussing this subject, and arriving at no conclusive solution, it appears to my eyes there are a small number of folks on here grasping at straws.

You have essentially eliminated both the isomer argument as well as the contaminant argument.

While there are plenty of trip reports out there describing sub par "meh" effects on Reddit etc, they are heavily and completely outnumbered by those describing the traditional MDMA experience.

There is no judgement on my end for any of you who continue this work, and if something is found that contradicts my opinion, I will fully admit I was wrong and be glad that you discovered what that was. However, perhaps it is worth analyzing whether or not you are searching endlessly for something that does not exist. Perhaps MDMA has taught you all that you need to learn from it, and the experience will never be fully the same. This is not to say you can't enjoy it and benefit from it, but that endless sense of "magic" may be gone. Ann Shulgin confirmed this happened to her in her own speeches and writing. And that is truly OK. There are other substances, experiences, and adventures to have and grow from.

Unfortunately, my very first post and starting of this thread contradicts your post. I still have old school MDMA and I’ve tried at least 10 different batches of new school lab tested MDMA and they’re all the same. Junk. Again, the pupils do not lie. From 1985-2010, complete pupil dilation was a given. And by dilation I mean as if you got them dilated at the eye doctor. All the way to the edge. This visual marker is non-negotiable and was taken as a given up until 2010. New school MDMA does not do this. So it doesn’t come down to an issue of he said she said, there is an actual visual marker that can tell the difference between old school lab tested MDMA and new school lab tested MDMA. If your pupils do not dilate all the way to the edge, you are fantasizing about how good you actually do feel versus how good you actually should feel. Never in my 35 years of doing ecstasy have I had an old school experience with my pupils not completely dilated to the edge. Because it will never happen. Other red flags are the amount of milligrams used in today’s pills versus what they used to be with old-school MDMA. They’re trying to make up for something. I can assure you the increase in milligrams is not the manufacturers doing you any favors. They know there’s a problem and they’re trying to make up for it. My theory, and keep in mind that I’m not a chemist when I say this, is the lack of safrole. Sometimes the most obvious answer has the easiest explanation. Safrole is no longer being used in production and thus the quality of the pills has changed. It seems to be the most logical answer to the equation but again I’m not a chemist. Back to the discussion....

 

[Negi]

I know there's a lot of discussion of pill dosage, but has anyone noticed a change in how capsules are dosed? From what I've seen 100mg (aka "one point") still seems to be the standard. Any theories why this hasn't changed if higher dosages are required to mask different effects?

 

[G_Chem]

I know there's a lot of discussion of pill dosage, but has anyone noticed a change in how capsules are dosed? From what I've seen 100mg (aka "one point") still seems to be the standard. Any theories why this hasn't changed if higher dosages are required to mask different effects?

In the U.K. MDMA is sold by the gram not point, they laugh about Americans selling points.

In the US, some areas still sell points cuz it’s good product, in other areas simply cuz it’s the standard elsewhere..

-GC

 

[Negi]

In the UK you can buy that gram for close to the price of the US point, which I think has a strong impact on the usage patterns. The change in UK prices and availability is been pretty incredible within the past 10 years, I've talked about it before:

The price of alcohol hasn't dropped to nearly a 1/4 of what it once was at the same time that the bottles doubled in size (pill dosages going to over 200mg) and 1L jugs of pure alcohol became available (the ability to buy grams of powder MDMA).

 

[FuckinAcidMan]

In the UK you can buy that gram for close to the price of the US point, which I think has a strong impact on the usage patterns. The change in UK prices and availability is been pretty incredible within the past 10 years, I've talked about it before:

That is fucked up from an anthropological and social engineering stand point. No wonder the UK folkz are mashing themselves up so bad. Its cheap as shit.

 

[LandsUnknown]

What's wrong with it these days? A lot, and every single problem with it is the direct result of criminalization. Pure MDMA is actually very safe. However, most of what's sold as MDMA these days is actually research chemicals, a mix of meth and MDMA, meth without MDMA, or even acid. Research chemicals come in many shapes and sizes, and the effects can be anything really. Some of them are likely also relatively safe, but others are very dangerous. It's completely random really, and there's new ones being created every day. So, the list of things that the "MDMA" could be gets longer every day.

Meth obviously is completely different, and it also causes more side effects. Then, obviously acid is completely different obviously, and few if any people would want to take it unexpectedly for obvious reasons. So, really the "best" form of it that's available is in the form of pills and powders that have a lot of filler substances and a little bit of MDMA. Back in the 80s, MDMA was actually given during therapy sessions for people suffering from PTSD and other mental health issues. It was actually used as a legitimate medication, and it worked very well. Then, it got banned.

 

[Negi]

However, most of what's sold as MDMA these days is actually research chemicals, a mix of meth and MDMA, meth without MDMA, or even acid.

This isn't true at all, except maybe for certain parts of the US. If you look at the results from scholarly research, harm reduction organizations and even law enforcement, most substances sold as MDMA are only MDMA. A key point of this thread is that the "mehDMA" people have shows as only MDMA when tested by reagents and laboratories.