• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Stimulants If not isopropylbenzylamine, then what?

Status
Not open for further replies.
tung

tung

Greenlighter
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Messages
17
We know that the majority of meth coming out of Mexico is produced via p2p and is racemic if and when no steps were taken to resolve for the D isomer. Yet, all of the meth comes in the form of these big pretty shards which should be impossible to grow without the inclusion of a chemical that can form co-crystals with both isomers. So, if it's not n-iso being used to make the shards, what is being used exactly?
 
The meth coming up is almost always racemic meth that’s undergone optical resolution to d-meth with residual amounts of l-meth. The idea that the product coming across the border is still racemic is a myth. Another thread on here recently where the OP swore the same thing has great graphs that show the optical purity of meth year to year. On average it’s 85-95% d-meth with rest being l-meth that they couldn’t separate out.

-GC
 
G_Chem said:
The meth coming up is almost always racemic meth that’s undergone optical resolution to d-meth with residual amounts of l-meth. The idea that the product coming across the border is still racemic is a myth. Another thread on here recently where the OP swore the same thing has great graphs that show the optical purity of meth year to year. On average it’s 85-95% d-meth with rest being l-meth that they couldn’t separate out.

-GC
Click to expand...
ok, thanks!
 
So… I just found this particular test result on drugsdata.org in which the user suspects n-iso; the sample is tested and the lab cautions the following:

Note:
Regarding stereoisomers: Sample contains only methamphetamine. The lab's analytical method cannot determine which stereoisomer of methamphetamine, so this could be d-methamphetamine, l-methamphetamine, a racemic mix, or a complex mix.

Here is the specific sample submitted:
www.drugsdata.org

DrugsData.org (was EcstasyData): Test Details : Result #11554 - Meth, 11554

DrugsData (EcstasyData) lab testing result
www.drugsdata.org www.drugsdata.org

Clearly the user suspected an adulterated substance, N-ISO was not found, but it becomes obvious that any any amount/combo of l or d meth is going to show a “meth positive” marquis result and if their results this entire time where they report methamphetamine as a active substance but that this could be entirely or partially l-meth, then I have to question any test results and assume what is coming in is indeed racemic, or worse, and end users are unable to get an accurate picture of the make up of their substance.
 
The testing lab Energy Control can test a substance for % meth purity but as yet cannot determine the relative proportion of the d-meth and l-meth isomers. They plan to introduce the ability to do this with new equipment when funds allow.

However, they can and do test meth samples for the presence of n-iso. They’ve never found n-iso when asked to search for it in a meth sample.
 
Jabberwocky said:
The testing lab Energy Control can test a substance for % meth purity but as yet cannot determine the relative proportion of the d-meth and l-meth isomers. They plan to introduce the ability to do this with new equipment when funds allow.

However, they can and do test meth samples for the presence of n-iso. They’ve never found n-iso when asked to search for it in a meth sample.
Click to expand...
The Canadian site getyourdrugstested.com seems to have the same testing parameters, however they have found isopropylbenzylamine eleven times since February 2021, all around the Vancouver area. They completed around five hundred methamphetamine sample tests in that same period, so I think the only conclusion we can accurately come to is that n-iso is rare ( ~ 2% ) amongst Vancouverites who lab-test their twack.

This could be a representative sample of the whole tweaker community, or it's possible that those who have their gear tested are a self-selecting group due to bulk buys, greater health concerns, a higher sensitivity to cutting compounds, etc., but we can't determine any of that.

The only thing we can know for certain is that n-iso is out there and generally at 100% of the tested sample. I encourage everyone in Canada to test their suspected n-iso cut gear at this lab. It's free, and donations of any amount are accepted and would probably make them very happy.
 
Last edited:
RainbowVasoconstrictor said:
The Canadian site getyourdrugstested.com seems to have the same testing parameters, however they have found isopropylbenzylamine eleven times since February 2021, all around the Vancouver area. They completed around five hundred methamphetamine sample tests in that same period, so I think the only conclusion we can accurately come to is that n-iso is rare ( ~ 2% ) amongst people who lab-test their twack.

This could be a representative sample of the whole tweaker community, or it's possible that those who have their gear tested are a self-censoring group due to bulk buys, greater health concerns, a higher sensitivity to cutting compounds, etc., but we can't determine any of that.

The only thing we can know for certain is that n-iso is out there and generally at 100% of the tested sample. I encourage everyone in Canada to test their suspected n-iso cut gear at this lab. It's free, and donations of any amount are accepted and would probably make them very happy.
Click to expand...

Welcome man and good post!

2% sounds realistic to me. I believe it’s out there but nowhere as prevalent as has been stated by some users.

-GC
 
Racemic compounds can be crystallized. Or is it just that methamphetamine is an exception? Enantiomers are mirror images so why wouldn't they stack together in crystal formation?
 
G_Chem said:
The meth coming up is almost always racemic meth that’s undergone optical resolution to d-meth with residual amounts of l-meth. The idea that the product coming across the border is still racemic is a myth. Another thread on here recently where the OP swore the same thing has great graphs that show the optical purity of meth year to year. On average it’s 85-95% d-meth with rest being l-meth that they couldn’t separate out.

-GC
Click to expand...
Bullshit the meth coming from Mexico is crap and it is d and l meth with n-iso. Or whatever else the wonderful people that live in Mexico put in it there not gonna take the extra steps to make it mostly d-meth. There is no way that the crap that is called meth sold on the street is even close to being 40 to 50 percent d-meth. If u Think it is then u never had old school anny dope that shit was upwards of 90 percent that shit was where its at
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe msm or something can be used in combination with meth ànd liquid nitrogen is used to freeze the crystals together????

I've never had good meth either. Piss poor but I'm from a country with little to no meth scene.
 
tung said:
We know that the majority of meth coming out of Mexico is produced via p2p and is racemic if and when no steps were taken to resolve for the D isomer. Yet, all of the meth comes in the form of these big pretty shards which should be impossible to grow without the inclusion of a chemical that can form co-crystals with both isomers. So, if it's not n-iso being used to make the shards, what is being used exactly?
Click to expand...
That is what it is and I have proof
 
TheAddicted said:
Not only do I have proof but I can show you step-by-step. Seven different sources and none of them run in the same circles but they’re all the same thing…
Click to expand...
Awesome! Let's see what you got.
 
The n-iso thing seems to be very overblown. See below for a brief explanation from @SchoolofShardKnocks:
SchoolofShardKnocks said:
N- Iso is such a myth it's not even funny.

It has zero psychotropic effects whatsoever. That means that there is no rush, no high, nothing. It's also incredibly easy to identify. You'd get some tachycardia and probably very sick to your stomach if you actually did get it (you probably didn't))
Click to expand...

RainbowVasoconstrictor said:
This could be a representative sample of the whole tweaker community, or it's possible that those who have their gear tested are a self-selecting group due to bulk buys, greater health concerns, a higher sensitivity to cutting compounds, etc., but we can't determine any of that.
Click to expand...
The lab seems to be relatively well known amongst drug users in downtown Vancouver and apparently has plenty of average Joe drug users testing their shit. I'd take it as a relatively representative sample of what is in drugs in the Vancouver area.
 
N-isopropylbenzylamine, a substance related to meth that has been found sometimes as an adulterant in meth. It has been found, and continues to be, but if you look at results for samples sent in for lab testing, it only accounts for up to 2% of samples, and in those cases, it appeared to be 100% n-iso. From what wiki says, it actually isn't a stimulant, or even active as a recreational drug, but can produce side effects like headaches and confusion.

The idea that it is present in nearly all street meth from Mexico, and that is the reason why quality is so bad, really caught on, despite strong evidence to the contrary. My guess for quality level of meth decreasing is due to something else, different precursors or synthesis routes leading to different isomer ratios perhaps, or who knows, I am not fully convinced that there are not other differences between two seemingly identical molecules that we just don't know about yet due to an incomplete understanding of chemistry and pharmacology, which could explain why different batches of a drug that both test as pure and are the same isomer can still produce different effects that a great many people will attest to.

Could also be that although the meth crossing the border in quantity is 80-90% pure as claimed by the DEA, that it has become common practice for lower level dealers to step on it egregiously.

What I'd like, to help shine light on this debate, is for someone to find someone cooking meth so they can know it's the real deal, and get a bag of cartel meth, and see what the differences are. Because another factor in everyone longing for the meth from a decade or more ago, is that a decade or so of meth use makes meth much less good for you, because the longer you use it, the less you're able to get high from it. That's true of any drug where you use it regularly, you change your brain in the sense that your receptor systems become downregulated so much that you can't get high as well anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top