illuminati boy
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2005
- Messages
- 319
Attached should be a zipped file with 5 files in it that contain the data on 2C-T-2 gathered from the recent survey project on largely unresearched compounds.
General information about the survey project on largely unresearched compounds.
This project consisted of posting 28 surveys for about 60 days at 6 different internet discussion boards. 25 of the surveys received at least one response in that time. There were a total of 701 responses to all of the surveys with 5-MeO-DPT receiving the fewest responses (2) and 2C-I receiving the most (123). 11 surveys received 25 or more responses and probably give a somewhat reliable overview of the compounds in question.
There are 3 different types of surveys. The Phenethylamines, the Tryptamines, and the DOB-DFLY survey. The phenethylamine and tryptamine surveys are almost identically with 2 exceptions; the tryptamine surveys have an additional item labeled x01 and a freeform response at the end. The DOB-DFLY survey has numerous additional sections etc. due to it being a later addition. Despite these differences, each subsection should allow for apples to apples comparisons. The only real difference in the data might be a slightly higher skip rate on section 5 with regard to the phenethylamines, though looking at the actual data the difference appears to be minimal if any.
What was looked at across all surveys was 1. What people thought of the compound overall, 2. What people thought about the general pleasurableness of the compound, 3. What people thought about the general stimulant/sedative tendencies of the compound, 4. What people reported in the way of ‘primary effects,’ 5. What people reported in the way of ‘side effects,’ and 6. The number of times people reported taking a given compound.
For items 1, 2, & 3 a ‘score’ can be worked out.
For the overall rating one can either calculate the % of persons that consider the compound ‘worthwhile’ by adding the number of persons reporting ‘B,’ ‘A,’ and ‘A+’ and dividing by the total number of persons answering that item; or one can calculate an ‘average rating’ by giving a score of 6 to every ‘A+,’ 5 to every ‘A,’ 4 to every ‘B,’ 3 to every ‘C,’ 2 to every ‘D,’ 1 to every ‘E,’ and 0 to every ‘F’ (the results then divided by the number of total respondents).
For the overall pleasure direction one simply assigns a weighted score to the responses according to the value to the left (i.e. +3, +2, +1, 0, -1, -2, -3) and divides by the total number of responses. A net positive score indicates a compound that is reportedly more positive and a net negative score indicates a compound that is reportedly more negative. A score close to or at 0 indicates a compound that is not very particularly prone one way or another with regard to pleasurable experiences (it could have no discernable ‘push’ or it could be equally prone toward pleasurable or disconcerting experiences).
The overall energy direction is calculated much the same as the overall pleasure direction, with the difference being that the results will show the overall tendency of the compound toward stimulation or sedation. If the net score is positive it indicates a trend toward stimulation, if the net score is negative it indicates a trend toward sedation. If the score is close to or at 0 it indicates that a compound is not particularly prone toward one direction or the other (this could mean neither stimulation nor sedation or it could indicate that people are more or less equally prone to the experience of either).
Compound specific discussion.
2C-T-2 is a compound in the 2C class that appears to have been more common than many of the other compounds surveyed. While this survey received a moderate number of responses (32), there are additional sources of pretty reliable data on this compound already extant. Stolaroff & Wells published a study of 40 individuals using 2C-T-2 in a supportive therapeutic setting in Yearbook for Ethnomedicine, 1993. Murple’s study entitled “Sulfurous Samadhi” collected data from 43 valid responses on the compound. Both of these resources are available in their entirety at Erowid. Per available information, it appears that hundreds of thousands of doses of 2C-T-2 may have been sold through smart shops in the Netherlands.
Looking at the data here, 68.8% of respondents considered the material ‘worthwhile.’
The overall average pleasure score is +1.13 or ‘Pleasant’ to ‘Very Upbeat.’
The respondents generally reported that this is a noticeably stimulating compound with a stimulation score of +1.42 or midway between ‘Slightly’ and ‘Moderately’ stimulating.
2C-T-2 appears to be a notably psychedelic compound. While a single individual reported “No Psychedelic Effects Noticed,” 25.8% reported “Extreme Closed Eye Visuals.”
The most commonly reported side-effect for this compound is nausea / upset stomach, with 84.6% of those responding noting it. 46.2% of respondents reported vomiting.
As with almost all other compounds surveyed, the most frequently reported number of uses is 2-5 (45.2%).
I B
General information about the survey project on largely unresearched compounds.
This project consisted of posting 28 surveys for about 60 days at 6 different internet discussion boards. 25 of the surveys received at least one response in that time. There were a total of 701 responses to all of the surveys with 5-MeO-DPT receiving the fewest responses (2) and 2C-I receiving the most (123). 11 surveys received 25 or more responses and probably give a somewhat reliable overview of the compounds in question.
There are 3 different types of surveys. The Phenethylamines, the Tryptamines, and the DOB-DFLY survey. The phenethylamine and tryptamine surveys are almost identically with 2 exceptions; the tryptamine surveys have an additional item labeled x01 and a freeform response at the end. The DOB-DFLY survey has numerous additional sections etc. due to it being a later addition. Despite these differences, each subsection should allow for apples to apples comparisons. The only real difference in the data might be a slightly higher skip rate on section 5 with regard to the phenethylamines, though looking at the actual data the difference appears to be minimal if any.
What was looked at across all surveys was 1. What people thought of the compound overall, 2. What people thought about the general pleasurableness of the compound, 3. What people thought about the general stimulant/sedative tendencies of the compound, 4. What people reported in the way of ‘primary effects,’ 5. What people reported in the way of ‘side effects,’ and 6. The number of times people reported taking a given compound.
For items 1, 2, & 3 a ‘score’ can be worked out.
For the overall rating one can either calculate the % of persons that consider the compound ‘worthwhile’ by adding the number of persons reporting ‘B,’ ‘A,’ and ‘A+’ and dividing by the total number of persons answering that item; or one can calculate an ‘average rating’ by giving a score of 6 to every ‘A+,’ 5 to every ‘A,’ 4 to every ‘B,’ 3 to every ‘C,’ 2 to every ‘D,’ 1 to every ‘E,’ and 0 to every ‘F’ (the results then divided by the number of total respondents).
For the overall pleasure direction one simply assigns a weighted score to the responses according to the value to the left (i.e. +3, +2, +1, 0, -1, -2, -3) and divides by the total number of responses. A net positive score indicates a compound that is reportedly more positive and a net negative score indicates a compound that is reportedly more negative. A score close to or at 0 indicates a compound that is not very particularly prone one way or another with regard to pleasurable experiences (it could have no discernable ‘push’ or it could be equally prone toward pleasurable or disconcerting experiences).
The overall energy direction is calculated much the same as the overall pleasure direction, with the difference being that the results will show the overall tendency of the compound toward stimulation or sedation. If the net score is positive it indicates a trend toward stimulation, if the net score is negative it indicates a trend toward sedation. If the score is close to or at 0 it indicates that a compound is not particularly prone toward one direction or the other (this could mean neither stimulation nor sedation or it could indicate that people are more or less equally prone to the experience of either).
Compound specific discussion.
2C-T-2 is a compound in the 2C class that appears to have been more common than many of the other compounds surveyed. While this survey received a moderate number of responses (32), there are additional sources of pretty reliable data on this compound already extant. Stolaroff & Wells published a study of 40 individuals using 2C-T-2 in a supportive therapeutic setting in Yearbook for Ethnomedicine, 1993. Murple’s study entitled “Sulfurous Samadhi” collected data from 43 valid responses on the compound. Both of these resources are available in their entirety at Erowid. Per available information, it appears that hundreds of thousands of doses of 2C-T-2 may have been sold through smart shops in the Netherlands.
Looking at the data here, 68.8% of respondents considered the material ‘worthwhile.’
The overall average pleasure score is +1.13 or ‘Pleasant’ to ‘Very Upbeat.’
The respondents generally reported that this is a noticeably stimulating compound with a stimulation score of +1.42 or midway between ‘Slightly’ and ‘Moderately’ stimulating.
2C-T-2 appears to be a notably psychedelic compound. While a single individual reported “No Psychedelic Effects Noticed,” 25.8% reported “Extreme Closed Eye Visuals.”
The most commonly reported side-effect for this compound is nausea / upset stomach, with 84.6% of those responding noting it. 46.2% of respondents reported vomiting.
As with almost all other compounds surveyed, the most frequently reported number of uses is 2-5 (45.2%).
I B