Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1    3  4
Author: Subject: What is wrong with MDMA production nowdays?
pastor
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 12-12-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 08:10
What is wrong with MDMA production nowdays?


Hello Science Madness,

I have been in discussion with an international collaboration of individuals in a drug harm reduction forum, who have noticed significant variation between MDMA batches that have all tested as MDMA through GCMS lab analysis. These variations have been confirmed by multiple people and under a wide variety of circumstances. Variation includes lack of traditionally observable physical phenomena such as mydriasis and profuse sweating, as well as a lack of traditional sensory enhancement and euphoria. Before you assume the answer is user tolerance, please note that the variation has also been noted in "virgin" users of MDMA. To simplify our discussion of this phenomena we have been calling traditional product with typical results "magic" and non-traditional product with muted results "meh."

Our own research has revealed a few possibilities for what may be occurring, but we would like to get some more scientific feedback.

Here are some of the research articles that we read while considering this issue:

This research article seems to indicate that there are structurally similar compounds that could masquerade as MDMA to GCMS testing: http://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/1304/AWAD_TAMER...

This article shows that some synthesis byproducts could have an impact on transporters and also on the effect of MDMA: https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.105.084426

These articles discuss variations in synthesis methods, and how those variations produce different byproducts:

1. Sci-Hub | A review of impurity profiling and synthetic route of manufacture of methylamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethylamphetamine, amphetamine, dimethylamphetamine and p-methoxyamphetamine. Forensic Science International, 224(1-3), 8–26 | 10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.10.040

2. Sci-Hub | Determination of synthesis method of ecstasy based on the basic impurities. Forensic Science International, 152(2-3), 175–184 | 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.08.003

3. Basic and neutral route specific impurities in MDMA prepared by different synthesis methods Comparison of impurity profiles

Currently, it seems to us that variations in MDMA synthesis methods result in variations of product due to either a) presence of active impurities or b) substitution of structurally similar compounds. Is this probable? Would synthesis techniques result in enough product variation to alter the end user experience in a significant way? If so, since GCMS testing does not appear to be detecting what is occurring, any ideas for how to identify these impurities? Also, any theories on what these impurities could be (specifically)?

The original thread is located at https://www.bluelight.org/xf/threads/what-is-wrong-with-the-...

I would like to emphasize that the main focus of the above discussion is not having better highs or which synth works best, but rather aiming to find what's happening and which substances and procedures are responsible, so to possibly formulate and make available a test like the various Marquis, Mandelin etc.

Thanks for your help!

[Edited on 12-1-2020 by pastor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
dextro88
Harmless
*




Posts: 35
Registered: 20-10-2018
Member Is Online


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 09:47


i dont know if its the right place to ask this question, since chemist here dont produce MDMA or altest the major of them, i think the problem is with your MDMA, maybe its purity is lower than previsous batches you had and with the growing of the tolerance you think you have lost the magic, one of the good thinks abaut mdma is the tolerance developed dont kill the magic so try with a higher dosage or try another stuff from enterly different places, the availability of precursors to MDMA now are very hot and usualy the stuff comersialy available is the cleanest from decades.

[Edited on 12-1-2020 by dextro88]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
S.C. Wack
bibliomaster
*****




Posts: 2108
Registered: 7-5-2004
Location: Cornworld, Central USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Enhanced

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 10:53


No mention of optical rotation eh. Throw some MDA, MDPV, etc. at the lab and see if they say it's MDMA.



"You're going to be all right, kid...Everything's under control." Yossarian, to Snowden
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 12-12-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 11:41


Sorry just to be crystal clear, not asking about any input related to MDMA production as no one is producing illegal substances here.
Please have a look in the thread posted above if you have some spare time.
Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
No mention of optical rotation eh. Throw some MDA, MDPV, etc. at the lab and see if they say it's MDMA.

tests show that meh product is racemic as it should be, not an optical isomer issue

the "meh" product seems to produce sickness later on, and it may be dangerous and with unknown long term effects. Users are seeing the MDMA result from testing companies and assuming everything is ok, but something is not normal. Also some testing companies provide percentages of strength and that even 85% MDMA with no other detected compounds is producing the meh results, and that taking more to compensate does not seem to make a difference.




[Edited on 12-1-2020 by pastor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Corrosive Joeseph
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 735
Registered: 17-5-2015
Location: The References Forum
Member Is Offline

Mood: Cyclic

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 11:48


This sounds like the classic safrole vs PMK Glycidate debate..... I have no experience with this, but many people seem to think that ever since safrole was replaced by Chinese Glycidate as the main ecstacy precursor, about, hmmm, maybe 10 or more years ago now, well apparently ever since then it just has not been the same.

I'm too busy to post links now but there are surely some threads about this on Bluelight.


/CJ




MSDS Addict and OTC Slut
View user's profile View All Posts By User
sodium_stearate
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 216
Registered: 22-4-2011
Location: guard duty at the checkpoint
Member Is Offline

Mood: "may we see your papers, please?"

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 12:27
what is wrong with it?


Maybe it's because it's being cooked
somewhere in a garage, in a garbage can lid.




"Opportunity is missed by most people
because it is dressed in overalls and it
looks like work" T.A. Edison
View user's profile View All Posts By User
dextro88
Harmless
*




Posts: 35
Registered: 20-10-2018
Member Is Online


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 12:35


they both produce MDP2P from both safrole or PMK glycidate and use the old fucking leuckard to produce the same reacemic MDMA, but in the Safrole days they were aminating iodosafrole too, but iodo/bromo safrole or even safrole contamination cant provide any benefits for the effects, maybe the safrole that they have used have had myristicin,elemicin or other esential oils in it even in minor percentages and that makes the differences, because the MDMA now is pure than ever.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 12-12-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 12:59


Quote: Originally posted by sodium_stearate  
Maybe it's because it's being cooked
somewhere in a garage, in a garbage can lid.

quite likely, this stuff is being produced in thousands of kilos around the globe..
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Corrosive Joeseph
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 735
Registered: 17-5-2015
Location: The References Forum
Member Is Offline

Mood: Cyclic

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 13:07


Yes...... But on a huge scale by a small number of producers.


/CJ




MSDS Addict and OTC Slut
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Cou
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 651
Registered: 16-5-2013
Location: Dallas, Texas
Member Is Offline

Mood: Mad Scientist

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 13:28


This thread better not be placed in detritus.

it dismays me how many chemists frown upon discussion of recreational drug synthesis.

they're too serious. they can't take a joke.

there's a difference between talk, and actual doing.

even if i will never take the risk of making MDMA, it's fun to know that if i really really ever wanted to make some for myself, i could do it, if i wanted to.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
S.C. Wack
bibliomaster
*****




Posts: 2108
Registered: 7-5-2004
Location: Cornworld, Central USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Enhanced

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 13:48


Quote: Originally posted by Corrosive Joeseph  
This sounds like the classic safrole vs PMK Glycidate debate


That's a pretty hot precursor for like 15 years now, maybe people have switched and are ordering something wrong or something is getting lost in translation. I'd look for things like Shulgin's methyl-j.




"You're going to be all right, kid...Everything's under control." Yossarian, to Snowden
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 618
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 14:19


Nah I did methyl-j, and it feels totally different, but even better than MDMA, no way someone can mistake that for it.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
sodium_stearate
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 216
Registered: 22-4-2011
Location: guard duty at the checkpoint
Member Is Offline

Mood: "may we see your papers, please?"

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 14:24
street drugs


The simple answer is that anyone can make anything
and sell it named whatever they want.

There is absolutely no quality control.

Make it in some garage somewhere in a garbage
can lid.

Or maybe in a big factory somewhere in a huge
open rusty kettle of some sort.

Then you buy it. Then you take it. Then you die.:D

Any questions?




"Opportunity is missed by most people
because it is dressed in overalls and it
looks like work" T.A. Edison
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 12-12-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 14:51


You are missing the point of the thread.
This substance test as MDMA, not only on Marquis and other reagents, but it fools even testing companies that use GC/MS and other tools to determine substance composition.
So besides the fact that you may die it should be interesting from a chemical point of view why a substance test as another one, but its effects and dosage are totally different?

View user's profile View All Posts By User
j_sum1
Administrator
********




Posts: 5137
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Oz
Member Is Offline

Mood: Metastable, and that's good enough.

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 15:58


You say that it has the same profile as MDMA in gas chromatography mass spectroscopy. You also say that you have identified the product as racemic (although you did not mention how). Your third test is anecdotal physiological effect, which is really insufficient for any kind of conclusion: although it has caused you to raise the question. A scientific approach requires you to be a lot more systematic than swapping stories.

Logically your next step is NMR.


Posters are right: a street drug could have all manner of junk in there. Even though different sources describe similar properties, this is in no way a guarantee that you are all describing the same thing. That is the nature of illicit drugs.

There are limitations to the efficacy of the harm reduction philosophy. Lack of quality control and lack of proper identification are but two. Inability to address the nature of addiction and dependence is a third.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
morganbw
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 500
Registered: 23-11-2014
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 16:17


As Sir @j_sum1 stated NMR needs to be done and then read by someone who can understand the results.

If still confusing then go from carbon NMR to proton NMR. Someone in the field can say exactly what the compound is.

I am so happy that I do not have to suffer the effects of the market.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
sodium_stearate
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 216
Registered: 22-4-2011
Location: guard duty at the checkpoint
Member Is Offline

Mood: "may we see your papers, please?"

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 17:49
contaminated stuff


If it was made in a proper lab, using properly
pure and unadulterated ingredients, and performed
by properly trained people using the proper procedure,
it would have the correct properties.

Only someone with the knowledge and the background
of Shulgin would be able to answer this question
and find the exact answer to "what's wrong?".

The short answer is someone's obviously using bad
ingredients or using a bad procedure which allows
contamination.

Street drugs can be anything.




"Opportunity is missed by most people
because it is dressed in overalls and it
looks like work" T.A. Edison
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Assured Fish
National Hazard
****




Posts: 318
Registered: 31-8-2015
Location: Noo Z Land
Member Is Offline

Mood: Misanthropic

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 18:21


@pastor
You have made an unsubstantiated claim and then expected us to disucss it as if it were unfalsifyable.
The references you have posted do not support your claim but instead suggest solution to your unsubstantiated claim.
The bluelight thread is pretty much all anecdotal evidence as j_sum pointed out.

Do you really expect us to believe you have put together a culmination of reports where people have taken street drugs and analytically analysed them to find them all relatively pure before ingesting and accurately recording data on the effects.

You haven't provided us with any evidence that any of this has occurred. If you were to actually find some new scientific observation like the one you claim, then the first thing you would do is scrupulously analyse the methods to find flaws or mistakes that would have changed your results from the predicted theory.
You cannot even do this with what little information you have provided, for all we know you could be talking out your asshole.

If i didn't know any better id assume this as another exotic ploy to get us to spill our dirty little secrets on how to make drugs.

[Edited on 13-1-2020 by Assured Fish]




Sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from madness.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1797
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood: Big

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 18:39


My pet theory is still that old ecstasy was spiked with amphetamine (duration 3-6 hours) and today's ecstasy is either not or it's got methamphetamine (duration 10-20 hours). Methamphetamine's half-life is mismatched with MDMA which makes it a poor adjuvant, but it's more likely to be synthesized in clandestine labs these days than regular old d-amph.



[Edited on 04-20-1969 by clearly_not_atara]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Corrosive Joeseph
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 735
Registered: 17-5-2015
Location: The References Forum
Member Is Offline

Mood: Cyclic

[*] posted on 12-1-2020 at 20:21


https://www.reddit.com/r/Drugs/comments/3v5m3n/are_there_2_t...


/CJ




MSDS Addict and OTC Slut
View user's profile View All Posts By User
draculic acid69
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 789
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 02:00


Quote: Originally posted by karlos³  
Nah I did methyl-j, and it feels totally different, but even better than MDMA, no way someone can mistake that for it.


I got arrested once for possession of xtc tablets.they were mbdp or methyl-j which is far superiority to mdma but the lab report said it was mdma.so whether they ran a gcms or whatever and knew it was mbdp and just ran with the mdma cause they could or they only confirmed it was a md amine of some sort of if they didn't do more than a presumptive feild test i don't know.and a few wks ago they found 700kgs of mdma and said it's the purest they've ever seen.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
draculic acid69
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 789
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 02:05


Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara  
My pet theory is still that old ecstasy was spiked with amphetamine (duration 3-6 hours) and today's ecstasy is either not or it's got methamphetamine (duration 10-20 hours). Methamphetamine's half-life is mismatched with MDMA which makes it a poor adjuvant, but it's more likely to be synthesized in clandestine labs these days than regular old d-amph.


In my country ppl stopped adding meth to pills when mdma became cheaper than meth 13 yrs ago.around the same time as psuedoephedrine became hard to get.and while there was always ppl mixing mdma and meth in xtc pills it wasn't more common than 'occasionally happened'.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 12-12-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 13:25


Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  
You say that it has the same profile as MDMA in gas chromatography mass spectroscopy. You also say that you have identified the product as racemic (although you did not mention how). Your third test is anecdotal physiological effect, which is really insufficient for any kind of conclusion: although it has caused you to raise the question. A scientific approach requires you to be a lot more systematic than swapping stories.

Logically your next step is NMR.

Not only testing companies were involved but also private labs. I'm reporting their findings.
NMR has been done, check it here: https://www.bluelight.org/xf/threads/what-is-wrong-with-the-...

Quote:

A "meh" sample was submitted for testing. The testers ran NMR 1H and 13C along with MALDI.
The MALDI came up 193.25 g/mol the mol weight of MDMA.

This batch of MDMA is a mixture of something that has practically the same NMR spectra as MDMA (both 1H and 13C) which means it has to contain the same carbon backbone and the same structural features, it cannot be an isomer because there are no isomers of MDMA which have the same mass and the same NMR spectrum.

1H NMR showed the issue on peak 9. Also, there is a mini peak at 207. Perhaps an an aldehyde or ketone. Overall, the sample has carbonyl impurities. The structure seems very close to what MDMA should look like in NMR but not quite.


@Assured Fish
Quote:
Do you really expect us to believe you have put together a culmination of reports where people have taken street drugs and analytically analysed them to find them all relatively pure before ingesting and accurately recording data on the effects.
If i didn't know any better id assume this as another exotic ploy to get us to spill our dirty little secrets on how to make drugs.

Many individuals has gotten their substance analyzed by the many companies that does substance testing, both european and north american.
range of purity (from what i can recall, it's a 180 pages long thread) is from 85 to 95%.
You can check the bluelight thread if you want.
there's plenty of info around (including here!) on how to make mdma, not my goal.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 618
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 13:48


There is no way that some enantiomer mixture is achieved, it is either racemic(always) or enantiopure(never).
The only people who resolve enantiomers are curious home laboratorists.
And their produced enantiopure compound never makes it on the black market.

In short, be it safrole or the glycidate, MDMA is always made from piperonyl ketone.
So it should not differ at all from each other.
I even know people who got other routes to work(i.e. the halosafrole one), but it is just the same of course.

My opinion is, these are just plain urban myths, as the usual drug users do spread for most of the time, simply because they don't know better.
I don't give a damn about their unverified ramblings.

[Edited on 13-1-2020 by karlos³]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
j_sum1
Administrator
********




Posts: 5137
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Oz
Member Is Offline

Mood: Metastable, and that's good enough.

[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 14:19


Let's see if I have your story correct.

Here are a bunch of lab results from an assortment of samples of unknown origin. (They are all bona fide. Honest.)
Here are pages of uncorrelated anecdotal evidence on a message board.
My junkies are unhappy.
Guess what crap is in the pills.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1    3  4

  Go To Top