• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Why you need to be careful naming "legal" highs

uk_pman

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
70
Wandered into a shop in the suburbs of Melbourne today looking for an item which was named in the legal high's thread.

When I mentioned it, the shopkeeper explained the police had raided the shop and taken the item "for testing". They don't expect it to make a re-appearance in the shop anytime soon.

I know it's useful to name particular brands of "legal highs" - but in this case I'm lead to believe it's appearance in bluelight - and subsequent discussion about good effects led it to be confiscated.

So in future - remember this forum is open, it's used not just by harm minimisation people, but others. We probably need a bit more care about what we write.
 
We don't mention brands, and we don't mention specific stores where people can get these products. If people do post that information, it gets edited.

How long ago did this raid take place?
 
Mr Blonde said:
We don't mention brands, and we don't mention specific stores where people can get these products. If people do post that information, it gets edited.

How long ago did this raid take place?

I didn't ask when the raid took place. It was relatively recent, as the shop had it within the last month.

I have gone back in the legal highs thread and verified the brand is mentioned.
 
Yeah, it would be a good idea for all posters from now on to be a little more discrete as this thing is liable to happen. In cases where the ingredients are known, it would be best to discuss those directly rather then mention specific brands, but it could be hard to refer to a product who's ingredients are unknown.
 
Im guessing it was some sort of DMT blend, and this was bound to happen anyway. These shops have gone from "helping friends out" to anyone who asks, just diving under the counter, its careless.

I may be wrong, but the same would apply.
 
The products in question are actually a pair of drinks that give you a rush when you drink them.
 
Well then lets completely disregard what i said!

Drinks that give you a rush? Aren't they already marketed under the names of Red Bull and V?

What are the ingredients (anyone know)?
 
No, these were different. I remember hearing nitric oxide said in connection with them, not sure if that's possible or not.
 
Uh, my memory of it may not be the best. It was in the big legal highs thread, I think.

Yeah maybe it wasn't that. But you can get it as a supplement apparently.

ETA: These drinks were supposed to give you a pretty good rush if I remember right, like you chugged 1/4-1/2 the bottle and then BANG!
 
^Synephrine is present in a lot of the [product range] products. Its an adrenal antagonist I think, bitter orange or someshit.

As there isn't really many headshops in melbourne besides what I just said, I have to say I used to agree that brands shouldn't be mentioned. But these guys are really ripping people off as well as being unethical; the DMT blend is massively overpriced and weak, and it is sold to anyobe who wants it. I doubt Bluelight has gotten them raided; its more likely themselves. Anyway, certain extracts aren't illegal if they aren't marketed that way, so the stroe could easily protect themselves if needed. DMT is a natural product, how can anyone be held accountable for whwre that alkaloid shows up?

Incidentally, [company] people ALWAYS say they have just been raided. I have heard it so many times from them; I take it as stupid-lingo for "sorry I'm not going to seel you illegal drugs today". *


*assuming you are talking about [store]'s.

[EDIT: Remove product & shop name. hoptis]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This would seem a good place to post a Question.

Im in SE QLD and would like to know if anyone has been buying that "weak overpriced DMT blend" mentioned earlier that i will not name, from sources i will not name.

I bought it twice last year and upon my third try was rejected.

I havent been back since.

Is it still available to randoms ?

cheers.
 
That question would be better answered in the actual legal highs thread. This one is for discussing the repurcussions of discussing said legal highs. =D
 
swilow said:
Incidentally, [company] people ALWAYS say they have just been raided. I have heard it so many times from them; I take it as stupid-lingo for "sorry I'm not going to seel you illegal drugs today". *


*assuming you are talking about [store]'s.

[EDIT: Remove product & shop name. hoptis]

Err no - it wasn't that store(s)! Just a little quiet shop with lots of mushrooms.
 
Agnu said:
As far as I know, that "weak overpriced DMT blend" is set to be criminalized, or has already been criminalized. This knowledge is based upon many extensive conversations that i've had with owners of various head shops that I know well enough not to be lied too (i've been a known customer for over 5 years), and I don't think they'd bullshit me on that one. The owner of one shop told me that her shop will no longer stock any psychedelic products full stop because of information being spread on here. And yes, she mentioned Bluelight in particular.

Pretty much, i'd say that we all need to really chill out and keep any talk on these semi-legal substances on the down-low. Hopefully the head shops are just experiencing a period of adjustment (out with the old, in with the new products), but we really can't be doing them any favours. Rip-off bastards or not, I still like being able to buy recreational/spiritual entertainment at a corner store, and plan to keep it that way.

I feel the same, but they don't really give out information on their products, so where else are people meant to get it? If they don't want people discussing their stuff, they shouldn't sell it ;) Natural psychedelics are abundant; why pay for them really?
 
Yeah i can definitely see how problems could arise from "secret ingredients"

Whether or not its for spiritual use, anyone taking drugs should know what and exactly what is in there stuff. This things with all these products haviing secret ingredients is bullshit, I mean if its illegal to sell then dont sell it, but a customer has every right to know whats in the stuff. I wish that I couldve tried this stuff because I have an idea of what everyone is talking about, but the simple fact is that its illegal so while it is such a huge shame we cant enjoy this blend, its reality that we cant do it and if you want it yourself it isnt really hard to find how to make something similar but purer. Anyway, if someone is going to do shrooms or DMT, the test is to find info about it all and do it yourself, IMO its cheating going to a shop and buying something you know nothing about to get "fucked up" The people who deserve this stuff are the people who know how to find it and how to get it without drug dealers or shops that priobably dont know anything about this stuff themselves. Sorry for the rant and I hope it makes sense because I cant figure out a way to get my point across without contradicting myself or sounding uninformed.

When I eventually do DMT im going to extract it myself for spiritual reasons and do it the proper way, same with mushies although ive already tried them, I was unsatisfied with the experience so it'll be head in the books and ill be picking them myself because for me, its the way it should be with natural highs. Weed dealers have fucked the culture, theyve made it closer to the hard drug culture than the sharing, caring happyness of weed culture. Very sad IMHO.
 
As far as I know, that "weak overpriced DMT blend" is set to be criminalized, or has already been criminalized.

That would be an already has been; DMT is illegal, after all. It's illegal to own DMT containing plants for anything other then decorative purposes and I'm sure that piece of legislation somehow extends to bits of bark that have been cut off and sold as incense, so it's probably covered by a couple of angles. We have that extremely vague analogue act after all, I wouldn't be surprised.
 
"Shoppers are like mushrooms...

...keep them in the dark and feed them bullshit"

This seems to be how some retailers/ drug dealers see their customers.


Whether it's illegal or not, users need to know what they're taking. FFS, how is HR supposed to work if someone doesn't know what the product is, how it may affect a pre-existing condition or if there's a danger of interaction with other medications?


This is a Harm Reduction board. It helps to facilitate safer drug use through informing users. First and foremost to that requires identifying the substance/s.

This site is not about helping users score drugs or protecting the business workings of their retailers/ dealers. As someone who works in front line HR, I can assure all doubters that adverse reactions to "legit" or herbal products do occur.


Incorrectly informing or deliberately misleading customers is a highly unsafe and irresponsible practice, and those doing it should not be in business IMO. And concern on whether a product could banned or not because of public notification should always take second place to practicing effective HR. If you think any differently, then why are you even a member of a HR community?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either support informed choice and the potential for improving safety, or you don't.


How many people know that a previously mentioned retail outlet was buying, repackaging and selling "herbal" products from a certain Israeli company? The customers certainly didn't know what they were taking, and neither, it seems did the salespeople. That sort of hush hush cover deserves to be peeled wide open.


We have that extremely vague analogue act after all, I wouldn't be surprised.

From a scientific perspective, the analogue act relating to chemical structure is very specific IMO. The legal interpretation of it is the problem. However, even so, it's normally pretty easy to see whether a compound would violate this law. It's the "pharmaceutically similar" clause in Qld that's vague, and as yet no precedents have been established to know just how far this law can be applied.

However, DMT, as has been said, is illegal in any preparations intended for consumption. I'd doubt very much incense can get around this. Intended inhalation would surely be regarded as human consumption IMO.
 
It's the "pharmaceutically similar" clause in Qld that's vague, and as yet no precedents have been established to know just how far this law can be applied.

Is it the federal or QLD analogue law that also has the similar effects part, or is that what you're referring to?

You could interpret that part to mean that alcohol is an 'analogue' of barbiturates for example; they have similar effects. Which would be interesting to see enforced. =D
 
Is it the federal or QLD analogue law that also has the similar effects part, or is that what you're referring to?

You could interpret that part to mean that alcohol is an 'analogue' of barbiturates for example; they have similar effects. Which would be interesting to see enforced.


afaik Qld is the only state at present that has this pharmacological, or similar action legislation. In effect it could be said broadly speaking alcohol is pharmacologically similar to barbituates as they both act on GABA a receptors, but then again, if metabolism as part of a pharmacological similarity is to be included, then the scope of this law is massive :\
 
Top