• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: andyturbo | BlueBull | simstim

What is wrong with the MDMA available today? - v2

unodelacosa

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
1,032
You don't need a capillary tube... The material to be tested is sprinkled on the top of the block.


material to be tested is sprinkled on the top of the block, a thermometer is inserted in the slanted hole, and the block is heated from below by a Bunsen burner or other heat source. As soon as the material starts to melt, read the thermometer for the melting point.


I've seen others sell the block for $80 just the block so I think all considered not bad. https://www.wardsci.com/store/product/8887436/simple-melting-point-apparatus ... https://us.vwr.com/store/product/8887436/simple-melting-point-apparatus . a 3 inch block on ebay is about that much anyways and I don't wanna hassle drilling a hole.

Yes I can use an old tin can and thermometer but I imagine the flame being to close to such thin aluminum be a pain to keep the surface temp slow/ accurate. All together it really isnt that much. If I wanted to go cheap I would use a plat on top with a pot and cooking oil with an electric thermometer for $10 but I'm not gonna go that cheap
Lol, no I know how it works. Remember though: melting point is a range, but I guess it depends on how accurate and traditional you want to be about your lab notes & such.

Also, a capillary packs the sample down into one cohesive mass, and this makes observing its phase-change-start and -end temps less ambiguous, don't you think? Or is that not a problem with these heavy-ass bean cans?

A $1 capillary in a $6 test tube + oil bath on your stove = low profile. Get an infrared thermometer for ~$15 on Amazon. So what's that like $22? It's basically the same price.

Of for ~$10 you can get a Thiele-type, triangle-shaped, melting-point tube. There are no wrong answers here, of course, and I'm not knocking the bean cans – indeed it's a pretty cool, simple rig. I'm just wondering how accurate do you think they are? Probably pretty close, right? Thermodynamics is … tricky, to say the least.
 

vash445

Bluelighter
Joined
May 3, 2015
Messages
316
Lol, no I know how it works. Remember though: melting point is a range, but I guess it depends on how accurate and traditional you want to be about your lab notes & such.

Also, a capillary packs the sample down into one cohesive mass, and this makes observing its phase-change-start and -end temps less ambiguous, don't you think? Or is that not a problem with these heavy-ass bean cans?

A $1 capillary in a $6 test tube + oil bath on your stove = low profile. Get an infrared thermometer for ~$15 on Amazon. So what's that like $22? It's basically the same price.

Of for ~$10 you can get a Thiele-type, triangle-shaped, melting-point tube. There are no wrong answers here, of course, and I'm not knocking the bean cans – indeed it's a pretty cool, simple rig. I'm just wondering how accurate do you think they are? Probably pretty close, right? Thermodynamics is … tricky, to say the least.
No wrong way
 

Delmonte421

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 16, 2022
Messages
402
Location
USA
Lol, no I know how it works. Remember though: melting point is a range, but I guess it depends on how accurate and traditional you want to be about your lab notes & such.

Also, a capillary packs the sample down into one cohesive mass, and this makes observing its phase-change-start and -end temps less ambiguous, don't you think? Or is that not a problem with these heavy-ass bean cans?

A $1 capillary in a $6 test tube + oil bath on your stove = low profile. Get an infrared thermometer for ~$15 on Amazon. So what's that like $22? It's basically the same price.

Of for ~$10 you can get a Thiele-type, triangle-shaped, melting-point tube. There are no wrong answers here, of course, and I'm not knocking the bean cans – indeed it's a pretty cool, simple rig. I'm just wondering how accurate do you think they are? Probably pretty close, right? Thermodynamics is … tricky, to say the least.
you would be better off buying an old one off a local university or eBay. That way you can see it tube and watch it melt instead of jimmy rigging something. Sorry, I just don't see the point of it. here
I remember teaching this in grad school and EVERY FUCKING UNDERGRAD STUNDENT would rush to see it melt instead of taking some damn patients and waiting for the correct melting temp instead of adjusting it to increase 10C every 5 seconds, stupid inpatient students. Sorry for my rant.....
 

vash445

Bluelighter
Joined
May 3, 2015
Messages
316
you would be better off buying an old one off a local university or eBay. That way you can see it tube and watch it melt instead of jimmy rigging something. Sorry, I just don't see the point of it. here
I remember teaching this in grad school and EVERY FUCKING UNDERGRAD STUNDENT would rush to see it melt instead of taking some damn patients and waiting for the correct melting temp instead of adjusting it to increase 10C every 5 seconds, stupid inpatient students. Sorry for my rant.....
Yeah I know it's $80 but International shipment of items may be subject to customs processing and additional charges. means $0 in USA except a month+ wait from china/india XD

our Canada/UK friends might not be so lucky with tariffs...
It's more a waiting thing for me then anything else...
I mean thats why I feel a thick block of metal vs thin is needed for such a thing. I'm patient many people not so much XD

But also weird i'm not getting the eye wiggles or intense euphoria like before. maybe it's because I did it recently, maybe because I grabbed a different recrystallized portion all I know is multiple different samples will be going out of it of the cops
 
Last edited:

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
Yeah I know it's $80 but International shipment of items may be subject to customs processing and additional charges. means $0 in USA except a month+ wait from china/india XD

our Canada/UK friends might not be so lucky with tariffs...
It's more a waiting thing for me then anything else...
I mean thats why I feel a thick block of metal vs thin is needed for such a thing. I'm patient many people not so much XD

But also weird i'm not getting the eye wiggles or intense euphoria like before. maybe it's because I did it recently, maybe because I grabbed a different recrystallized portion all I know is multiple different samples will be going out of it of the cops
It could be pure R enantiomer, made from (R)-MDA. You did actually post that cook regarding enantiomerically pure (R)R-MDA.

According to Shulgin, enantiomerically pure MDMA, regardless of which stereoisomer, does not give the lovey-dovey, euphoric, eye wiggling +++ experience you get from racemic MDMA.
 

G_Chem

Moderator: OD
Staff member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
6,619
It could be pure R enantiomer, made from (R)-MDA. You did actually post that cook regarding enantiomerically pure (R)R-MDA.

According to Shulgin, enantiomerically pure MDMA, regardless of which stereoisomer, does not give the lovey-dovey, euphoric, eye wiggling +++ experience you get from racemic MDMA.

I know you been gone but we’ve had a few research articles come out recently which looked for enatiomeric excess. Out of the 2 articles, only 1 batch was found among many with enatiomeric excess. It wasn’t a pure isomer, just R isomer heavy. I’ll hunt down the articles later if you’d like.

-GC
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
I know you been gone but we’ve had a few research articles come out recently which looked for enatiomeric excess. Out of the 2 articles, only 1 batch was found among many with enatiomeric excess. It wasn’t a pure isomer, just R isomer heavy. I’ll hunt down the articles later if you’d like.

-GC
No, this was in response to vash's post regarding how to cook R pure MDA. I was being funny.
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
And that leads right into my most recent encounter with stuff. I came across what was stated to be MDMA, but as the substance was in nice little smooth tiny pieces, and tasted like milder MDMA but with a minty weird taste. I knew it was probably a substituted Methcathinone. (STILL WAITING ON THE REAGENTS)

Boy was I right, there was a little bit of what was likely actually MDA or MDMA. It was jaggedy but not like meth shard.

I may have had a total of 120 mg with initial dosing insufflated at 30 mg, an hour later an insufflated dose of 40 mg, and a final dose of about 50 mg oral.

The subjective effects mimicked MDMA to a high degree. The reaction to insufflated dosing occurred in about 25 to 30 minutes, increase in subjective response from the oral dose occurred approximately 1 hour after dosing.

No Sweating, increased heart rate but not crazy, could tell there was a little bit increased Blood pressure, no Vasoconstriction, slightly dilated pupils at + 4 hours, mile to moderate bruxism (gurning) at t +10,

insane euphoria and body involvement, No Hyperthermia, almost a complete lack of heart palpitations, only mild anorexia.

It lasted for approximately 9 hours with most of it being the peak, the come down lasted three, after effects another 24 but extremely mild. It was a good ++, almost approaching +++.

Now 40 hours from initial dose, I am the most relaxed in body and mind that I have been in the last decade. I feel absolutely amazing. It's almost like the afterglow from MDMA even though I know it wasn't MDMA.

I'm extremely curious as to what this substance could be, and am interested in investigating a bigger dose once I can determine what it is.

I am certain it is a substituted methcathinone, probably a methylenedioxy variant.

Anyway, the magic was strong in me the other night.
 
Last edited:

unodelacosa

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
1,032
I knew it was probably a substituted Methcathinone. (STILL WAITING ON THE REAGENTS)
Ok so you say "probably" here. Have you reagent-tested it yet?

there was a little bit of what was likely actually MDA or MDMA. It was jaggedy but not like meth shard.
So you think it’s “probably” a substituted methcathinone analogue with some “MDA or MDMA” mixed in?

I may have had a total of 120 mg with initial dosing insufflated at 30 mg, an hour later an insufflated dose of 40 mg, and a final dose of about 50 mg oral.
That's an odd way to dose, considering the tachyphylaxis. I think it’s better to take the dose all at once and just dive in.

The subjective effects mimicked MDMA to a high degree.
And you can discern the difference between a drug that “mimics MDMA to a high degree” and actual MDMA?

insane euphoria and body involvement, No Hyperthermia, almost a complete lack of heart palpitations, only mild anorexia.
That sounds delightful. “Insane euphoria”? Hot damn.
It lasted for approximately 9 hours with most of it being the peak, the come down lasted three, after effects another 24 but extremely mild. It was a good ++, almost approaching +++.
Nine hours of ”insane euphoria” only registers as a “++” for you? Goddamn, what does it take to impress you?

Now 40 hours from initial dose, I am the most relaxed in body and mind that I have been in the last decade. I feel absolutely amazing.
Really? That good? Jesus H. Tittyfucking Christ, man.

It's almost like the afterglow from MDMA even though I know it wasn't MDMA.
Ok wait a minute, now you know it wasn’t MDMA? Bc earlier you were waiting on reagents and said “probably”…

I'm extremely curious as to what this substance could be, and am interested in investigating a bigger dose once I can determine what it is.
I am certain it is a substituted methcathinone, probably a methylenedioxy variant.
Certain, hiuh?
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
Ok so you say "probably" here. Have you reagent-tested it yet?


So you think it’s “probably” a substituted methcathinone analogue with some “MDA or MDMA” mixed in?


That's an odd way to dose, considering the tachyphylaxis. I think it’s better to take the dose all at once and just dive in.


And you can discern the difference between a drug that “mimics MDMA to a high degree” and actual MDMA?


That sounds delightful. “Insane euphoria”? Hot damn.

Nine hours of ”insane euphoria” only registers as a “++” for you? Goddamn, what does it take to impress you?


Really? That good? Jesus H. Tittyfucking Christ, man.


Ok wait a minute, now you know it wasn’t MDMA? Bc earlier you were waiting on reagents and said “probably”…


Certain, hiuh?
Yes, I can. Discriminate between probably MDMA and real MDMA considering of taking over 400 pills and used a dozen RCs and many substituted Methcathinones.

The taste is pretty unique. And it's not MDMA which actually tastes like the devil is pissing on your tongue.

If you noticed I said I was still waiting on my reagent testing kit.

However, the subjective effects all point to some sort of substituted methcathinone, mixed with possibly MDA, MDMA, or methamphetamine.

Considering that the subjective effects were not like methamphetamine, especially considering the absence of vasoconstriction and sympathetic nervous system overload due to the norepinephrine.

The onset of action, the duration of action, the duration of come down, and the duration of after effects, all point to a mixture of what I stated.

As far as jumping in all at once, once I tasted one of the smooth pieces I knew it was probably one of the milder substituted methcathinones, because I've tasted it before.

However, I wasn't certain which it would be so I erred on the side of caution and titrated small doses.

Of interest is that insufflation did not produce immediate or within minutes effect, which kind of rolls out a lot but not all of the substituted methcathinones.


I really don't know why you're trying to pick apart my post because I was very up front saying this is what I thought it was.

At the end, I actually said I would like to find out what it was and I was waiting on my reagent testing kit which is moot at this point because there's nothing to test.

If you had read a little bit more closely, you would have seen that I addressed testing it.
 

Didgital

Moderator: PD
Staff member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
222
Location
USA
@shugenja (and others) you need to stop discussing synthesis, there is a very good reason it's not allowed on bluelight. This is a harm reduction forum. If you want to talk synthesis or even hypothetical synthesis there's other forums for that. Please stop.

Editing your post. This isn't my forum to mod, but I feel like I need to read through this entire stupid thread now.
 

unodelacosa

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
1,032
Yes, I can. Discriminate between probably MDMA and real MDMA considering of taking over 400 pills and used a dozen RCs and many substituted Methcathinones.
Yeah a lot of us here are on the same experience level. This does not make one immune to the placebo effect.

The taste is pretty unique. And it's not MDMA which actually tastes like the devil is pissing on your tongue.
We'll have to agree to disagree. MDMA hydrochloride tastes terrible.

If you noticed I said I was still waiting on my reagent testing kit.
Yes you said that on Tue. I thought perhaps the tests had arrived by now.

However, the subjective effects all point to some sort of substituted methcathinone, mixed with possibly MDA, MDMA, or methamphetamine. The onset of action, the duration of action, the duration of come down, and the duration of after effects, all point to a mixture of what I stated.
Okay… if you're already certain it isn't MDMA, then is it still relevant to the thread?

However, I wasn't certain which it would be so I erred on the side of caution and titrated small doses.
Right and I'm just asking for comparative purposes: do you consume it in that manner every time?

I really don't know why you're trying to pick apart my post because I was very up front saying this is what I thought it was.
Not trying to pick it apart; there were several points in your post to converse upon. I'm just looking for clarity on a few points of what you said while offering my opinion that perhaps you're experiencing some placebo + confirmation bias. That's all.

At the end, I actually said I would like to find out what it was and I was waiting on my reagent testing kit which is moot at this point because there's nothing to test.
Presumptive tests have limited utility anyway

If you had read a little bit more closely, you would have seen that I addressed testing it.
Oh I read it plenty closely. The problem was the author, not the reader :ROFLMAO:

Btw, don't get your panties in a wad. I'm only giving you a hard time. It's fine. I'm just dubious of your claimed abilities, and I know that's not popular and doesn't make friends, but it's in my nature to be skeptical. Most people are not skeptical. They are trained to grant others the benefit of the doubt. I really don't mean to come across as argumentative or abrasive. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
Yeah a lot of us here are on the same experience level. This does not make one immune to the placebo effect.


We'll have to agree to disagree. MDMA hydrochloride tastes terrible.


Yes you said that on Tue. I thought perhaps the tests had arrived by now.


Okay… if you're already certain it isn't MDMA, then is it still relevant to the thread?


Right and I'm just asking for comparative purposes: do you consume it in that manner every time?


Not trying to pick it apart; there were several points in your post to converse upon. I'm just looking for clarity on a few points of what you said while offering my opinion that perhaps you're experiencing some placebo + confirmation bias. That's all.


Presumptive tests have limited utility anyway


Oh I read it plenty closely. The problem was the author, not the reader :ROFLMAO:

Btw, don't get your panties in a wad. I'm only giving you a hard time. It's fine. I'm just dubious of your claimed abilities, and I know that's not popular and doesn't make friends, but it's in my nature to be skeptical. Most people are not skeptical. They are trained to grant others the benefit of the doubt. I really don't mean to come across as argumentative or abrasive. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I said MDMA hydrochloride tastes horrible. It tastes like the devil is pissing on your tongue.

Probably not. But possibly still relevant to some people.

If I know what it is with a reasonable certainty I usually dose at least a full dose.

It's not that my panties are in a wad, it's that the thong keeps riding up my ass crack.
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
Besides the common answer of " It doesn't make sense" or " It's more expensive", can anybody give me another reason why chemists don't use tartaric acid to separate out the (S) enantiomer of MDMA from the racemic mix?
 

G_Chem

Moderator: OD
Staff member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
6,619
Besides the common answer of " It doesn't make sense" or " It's more expensive", can anybody give me another reason why chemists don't use tartaric acid to separate out the (S) enantiomer of MDMA from the racemic mix?

The racemic mixture gives better effects than S-isomer, supposedly.. I’d like to try personally to see.

-GC
 

shugenja

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
The racemic mixture gives better effects than S-isomer, supposedly.. I’d like to try personally to see.

-GC
I understand that. Shulgin identified that 40 years ago.

However, I'm interested in people's opinion on why such an isomeric extraction would not necessarily be done.

Ostensibly people could use the r isomer to tone down MDA or even meth and sell it as Molly.

Chemists like to experiment. It's in their nature, or they wouldn't be chemists.
 

unodelacosa

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
1,032
I understand that. Shulgin identified that 40 years ago.
Well, that the two optical isomers potentiate each other and have a synergistic effect on the user’s qualitative experience is a pretty compelling reason established 40 years ago by probably the most iconic figure in the underground drug manufacturing scene.

However, I'm interested in people's opinion on why such an isomeric extraction would not necessarily be done.
I’m guessing from the perspective of a clandestine chemist running a large scale operation, seeking isomeric purity probably represents an overall loss of yield and thus profits for what they consider not substantial enough returns on the investment to separate and resolve stereoisomers. Obviously, this is different for methamphetamine where the L-isomer is not psychoactive and is only active in the peripheral nervous system, same with the primary amine, amphetamine…

Ostensibly people could use the r isomer to tone down MDA or even meth and sell it as Molly.
Yeah this is of questionable ethics practices. Obviously. Also, if this is their ostensible action, what is the real action?

Chemists like to experiment. It's in their nature, or they wouldn't be chemists.
Yeah I mean it’s also baked into the scientific method of identifying a problem, researching it to form a hypothesis, then testing that hypothesis in a repeatable manner for peer review and confirmation. That’s science. And but I think while most chemists in general enjoy running experiments, depending on their role in a company and where they work, this might not be the case. There are a-type personalities in these roles sometimes for sure. Now add to this the illicit element and severe legal liability exposure, and considering the stakes and the nature of clandestine chemistry, it would follow that many, perhaps most, underground drug manufacturers have zero interest in chemistry experiments. They’d probably like to oversee consistent, profitable, and predictable results instead.
 

Delmonte421

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 16, 2022
Messages
402
Location
USA
Well, that the two optical isomers potentiate each other and have a synergistic effect on the user’s qualitative experience is a pretty compelling reason established 40 years ago by probably the most iconic figure in the underground drug manufacturing scene.
Who is this? Id love to read more about that.
Now add to this the illicit element and severe legal liability exposure, and considering the stakes and the nature of clandestine chemistry, it would follow that many, perhaps most, underground drug manufacturers have zero interest in chemistry experiments. They’d probably like to oversee consistent, profitable, a
As you said earlier, a underground chemist isn't going to go through steriospecfic reactions because it'll make his ending product 15% stronger unless that 15% would correlate to X% more in profit. You have to realize any chemist that makes the choice to go the clandestine route in life not only has to, hopefully, have a PhD in orgo or Med chem but the knowledge of how to sell it. You can make all the illegal drugs in the world but without a crew so to say a "chemist" would not make a great business man. There are so many factors that go into this that is why @unodelacosa says what he says. I am a Legit chemist and I would NEVER make or extract anything illegal. For the simple fact I love working own cancer drugs, but if someone said ill give you a billion dollars to do X, then you gotta start thinking how much your willing to get paid to go to jail lol what's the salary ghat you think you should earn if you had to go to jail cause thats what it breaks down to. As @unodelacosa has said to me before, no none goes to undergrad then graduate school to become a clandestine chemist, they probably went pre-med and maybe couldn't get into medical school or life just happens... all Im saying is, for the most part, clandestine chemist are only doing it for the money probably could care less about the end user or the organization they are working for doesn't.
 
Top