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

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  2    4
Author: Subject: What is wrong with MDMA production nowdays?
OldNubbins
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 78
Registered: 2-2-2017
Location: CA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Comfortably Numb

[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 14:34


This is the hardest "two trains leave a station" problem I have ever seen...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Tsjerk
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1862
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Mood

[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 15:15


Do I really want to tell this? Probably not, but everyone probably already knew anyway so who cares...

These "MDMA pills are getting different" stories are bullshit. I have used a lot, weight out a lot for other people and have seen a lot of different reactions to the compound. After many usages the user does respond differently. I don't even consider taking it anymore, I only experience the (negative) side effects nowadays, no way around it.

First time? 80 mg is nice and fun and everyone is in heaven, second time, 90 does the same. After thirty times better take something else, because yes, you fried your brain. Doesn't have to be bad, but you did fry your brain. There is a Dutch case of a guy taking 3000 mg a day for ten years, just to stay normal. In the end he was normal.. You get used to about anything and MDMA is one you get used to easily.

Summary: it is your mind telling it could always be so good. A minor spike on a NMR spectrum is an impurity, and not a active one.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
sodium_stearate
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 193
Registered: 22-4-2011
Location: guard duty at the checkpoint
Member Is Offline

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

[*] posted on 13-1-2020 at 18:26
"Hey yer Honor Man...."


I only did acid like 22 times....

Ah, twice.:D




"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
brubei
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 118
Registered: 8-3-2015
Location: France
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 14-1-2020 at 03:58


in another way... as i know, different polymorphism tend to yield in bioavailability issues. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209580991...)

If we assume that new synthesis give new byproducts and maybe new polymorphic crystal, this may change some things...

need more data.




I'm French so excuse my language
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Tsjerk
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1862
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Mood

[*] posted on 14-1-2020 at 05:05


Quote: Originally posted by brubei  
in another way... as i know, different polymorphism tend to yield in bioavailability issues. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209580991...)

If we assume that new synthesis give new byproducts and maybe new polymorphic crystal, this may change some things...

need more data.


That is for poorly soluble compounds. MDMA dissolves like a charm in the stomach and after that all crystal structure is gone.

This compound is structurally as simple as it gets... I really don't believe it would be missed if something really changed.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
brubei
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 118
Registered: 8-3-2015
Location: France
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 16-1-2020 at 02:17


indeed

That's the deal with unregulated products, Also when speaking with drug users, everybody is saying that "things have changed". At any time.




I'm French so excuse my language
View user's profile View All Posts By User
SWIM
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 577
Registered: 3-9-2017
Location: 26 Ancho street
Member Is Offline

Mood: I feel more the way I do right now than I ever have before

[*] posted on 16-1-2020 at 11:56


Quote: Originally posted by brubei  
indeed

That's the deal with unregulated products, Also when speaking with drug users, everybody is saying that "things have changed". At any time.


Very true.
And not just drug users.

My great-grandmother always insisted that deer meat just don't taste the same anymore.

She blamed the advent of jet aircraft.:o

She and many of her old pals insisted that the noises jets make scare the animals and make them taste bad.

People can get mighty creative justifying their disappointments.

I once tried suggesting to her that the deer that she was shooting in her back yard probably didn't quite have the same diet as the ones she used to get in the woods, but she insisted it must be those durned jets.

(She was like 90, and couldn't get around too well anymore, so she'd leave kitchen scraps out for the deer, and shoot one every month or so.
She'd brace her gun against the wall to shoot, and she'd drag it up on the porch with a rope to butcher it. )









I'm melting! I'm melting! -Margret Hamilton having a bad acid trip.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 516
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 16-1-2020 at 13:13


Well, but high levels of stress hormones really make meat taste bad, and deer is easily scared.
Your great-gram might be onto something there.
Of course, diet matters a lot too.

Nonetheless, your great-gram sounds like quite a women :D



[Edited on 16-1-2020 by karlos³]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
draculic acid69
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 634
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 17-1-2020 at 00:26


Still shooting and butchering deer at 90 is pretty impressive
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chemist1243
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 71
Registered: 7-8-2019
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 17-1-2020 at 05:43


its probably due to the formation of optical isomers which have slighlty different effects. for example, you can buy
levo-MethAmphetamine at any drugstore without perscription for around 3 dollars. even though its physical properties are exactly the same as Methamphetamine, its isomerism still exibits differnt effects.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 516
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 17-1-2020 at 06:03


Quote: Originally posted by chemist1243  
its probably due to the formation of optical isomers which have slighlty different effects. for example, you can buy
levo-MethAmphetamine at any drugstore without perscription for around 3 dollars. even though its physical properties are exactly the same as Methamphetamine, its isomerism still exibits differnt effects.

It is either racemic or chiral, not something in between.
No one makes chiral MDMA, too expensive and requires too much effort, while providing a inferior product.
It is always a racemate.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
G-Coupled
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 210
Registered: 9-3-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: Slightly triturated

[*] posted on 17-1-2020 at 15:39


Quote: Originally posted by karlos³  
Quote: Originally posted by chemist1243  
its probably due to the formation of optical isomers which have slighlty different effects. for example, you can buy
levo-MethAmphetamine at any drugstore without perscription for around 3 dollars. even though its physical properties are exactly the same as Methamphetamine, its isomerism still exibits differnt effects.

It is either racemic or chiral, not something in between.
No one makes chiral MDMA, too expensive and requires too much effort, while providing a inferior product.
It is always a racemate.


What about the ratios - is it 50/50? And if so, is it always?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1658
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 17-1-2020 at 19:03


Yes, a chiral compound produced from achiral precursors will always have a near exact 50:50 ratio of isomers because there is nothing that can break the symmetry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_breaking

Usually this is the case with MDMA production because the chiral center is fixed in the last step (reductive amination) unless the bromosafrole technique is used, in which case the chiral center is fixed when the carbanion is protonated. Enantioselective catalysts or exotic precursors are necessary to achieve enantiomerically enriched ecstasy.

The one other thing I can think of is that if MDMA is produced by methylating MDA (particularly via the benzaldehyde/MeI method) it's possible that some amount of MDA would remain in the final product and affect the experience. This could be unintentional and may result in a stronger experience than MDMA alone. The assays you've provided have low confidences e.g. 85% purity which leaves plenty of room for an error like this.

[Edited on 18-1-2020 by clearly_not_atara]




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




Posts: 733
Registered: 14-12-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: satyric

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 23:22


Is everybody skimming over the fact that...i'm transforming into an idiot?

But seriously, how can MDMAs neurotoxicity be ignored here? Your users' anecdotal reports of declining quality may very well just be, like Tsjerk already said, effects related to neurological injury from regular use, quite possibly exacerbated, but most likely not attenuated by polytoxicomanic behaviour.

As long as you don't provide full substance profiling of the good ol' stuff vs the meh new stuff, including analysis for synthetic pathway specific impurities, where do you think this discussion is gonna go other than into a torrent of pure and ultimately meaningless speculation?

I mean, look at this:

Quote: Originally posted by chemist1243  
its probably due to the formation of optical isomers which have slighlty different effects.


Quote: Originally posted by G-Coupled  

What about the ratios - is it 50/50? And if so, is it always?


It's always 50/50 in racemic syntheses and never 50/50 in asymmetric syntheses. You could have known that if you had wanted to.

[Edited on 24-1-2020 by stoichiometric_steve]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 09:59


2 new NMR were posted. The file ending ...207.pdf is confirmed magic, and the file ending ...579.pdf is confirmed meh.


On page 37 onwards there are reference 1H NMR plots.

The magic sample (...207.pdf) seems to match the reference MDMA HCL in D2O (page 45)
The meh sample ( ...579.pdf) appears be closest to MMDA base in CDCl3 (page 44). Not a super close match but I think its the best on my initial look
The other meh sample (...312.png) perhaps is also closest to MMDA but even less good a fit

So the big differences in the <7ppm range are: magic - peak around 4.87 (missing integration value?) that is not present in the meh sample. meh - big peak around 3.70 that is missing from the magic sample.



MAgic sample...

https://www.bluelight.org/xf/attachments/20200120115844207-p...


Meh sample #2
https://www.bluelight.org/xf/attachments/20200120174950579-p...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 10:03


stoichiometric_steve It's def not excessive use, because we LITERALLY change batches and BAMB it's hits us.

MDMA virgins, drug virgins, Heavy users....

So it can't be effects related to neurological injury from regular use, quite possibly exacerbated,


[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]

Attachment: 20200120115844207 (1).pdf (62kB)
This file has been downloaded 22 times

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]

Attachment: 20200120174950579.pdf (34kB)
This file has been downloaded 19 times

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Texium (zts16)
Administrator
********




Posts: 3060
Registered: 11-1-2014
Location: San Marcos, TX
Member Is Offline

Mood: Graduated

[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 10:29


@pastor: Could you please repost the NMR data directly in this thread? I would like to take a look at it, but I don't want to make a Bluelight account.



View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Sigmatropic
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 241
Registered: 29-1-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 10:38


4.87 seems close to residual solvent signal of D2O, could be shifted due to pH effects of the ammonium salt. 3.7 in CDCl3 could be the NH on the amine itself. Can you attach them as a PDF? I'm not going to register at some site just to take a look at the NMRs. Also remember NMR is only sensitive to about 1% impurity so it's not going to tell you much.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1658
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 11:38


Sigmatropic: that's a really big peak for a residual solvent signal.

What I can say is that those two NMRs show different compounds :p

EDIT: the following analysis should have the warning that reading NMR is not exactly my strong suit

If I were to guess, the peak at 4.9 is the benzodioxole O-CH2-O shift. A carbon alpha to an ether increases the chemical shift from 1 to 3 ppm so at an acetal you might see something around 5 ppm. It's pretty rare for any moiety to have a peak here -- the only other thing is an alkene, which shouldn't be present. The high peaks are the aryl hydrogens.

Moving forward with this theory, the absence of the 4.9 peak in the second sample indicates that the "mehDMA" does not have a benzodioxole ring. Based on the descriptions of effects and the ability to simulate MDMA on test kits I suggest that the mystery compound is something like 3,4-dimethoxymethamphetamine. The "extra" peak around 3.7 is consistent with a phenolic ether, methinks.

Possibly, compounds like this are being introduced into the ecstasy supply by high-volume drug traffickers because they are cheap to produce and known to fool colorimetry.

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by clearly_not_atara]




[Edited on 04-20-1969 by clearly_not_atara]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 516
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 11:57


This reminds me so much of drug users who speculate again and again if their meth contains either this benzylamine derivative or "it could be 4-MAR bruh!", when it is either bad or good...
They just talk shit and know nothing.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 15:34


Quote: Originally posted by Sigmatropic  
4.87 seems close to residual solvent signal of D2O, could be shifted due to pH effects of the ammonium salt. 3.7 in CDCl3 could be the NH on the amine itself. Can you attach them as a PDF? I'm not going to register at some site just to take a look at the NMRs. Also remember NMR is only sensitive to about 1% impurity so it's not going to tell you much.


4.87 is the residual solvent signal of D2O i'm told by the NMR...

That 3.7 is what is a huge mystery thou and is in BOTH meh sample MDMANMR and file 78985

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]

Attachment: 20200120115844207 (1).pdf (62kB)
This file has been downloaded 18 times

Attachment: 20200120174950579.pdf (34kB)
This file has been downloaded 18 times

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]

Attachment: MDMAnmr.pdf (110kB)
This file has been downloaded 19 times

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 15:52


Quote: Originally posted by Texium (zts16)  
@pastor: Could you please repost the NMR data directly in this thread? I would like to take a look at it, but I don't want to make a Bluelight account.




all 3 NMR uploaded, ill look for the extended 13c on the VERY first MDMA meh sample I know we ran 1H and 13c

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by pastor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 516
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 15:57


What atara says has hand and feet.
It is not MDMA what you see on the other NMR, it is another substance, likely the 3,4-dimethoxymethamphetamine he suggested.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 15:59


Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara  
Sigmatropic: that's a really big peak for a residual solvent signal.

What I can say is that those two NMRs show different compounds :p

EDIT: the following analysis should have the warning that reading NMR is not exactly my strong suit

If I were to guess, the peak at 4.9 is the benzodioxole O-CH2-O shift. A carbon alpha to an ether increases the chemical shift from 1 to 3 ppm so at an acetal you might see something around 5 ppm. It's pretty rare for any moiety to have a peak here -- the only other thing is an alkene, which shouldn't be present. The high peaks are the aryl hydrogens.

Moving forward with this theory, the absence of the 4.9 peak in the second sample indicates that the "mehDMA" does not have a benzodioxole ring. Based on the descriptions of effects and the ability to simulate MDMA on test kits I suggest that the mystery compound is something like 3,4-dimethoxymethamphetamine. The "extra" peak around 3.7 is consistent with a phenolic ether, methinks.

Possibly, compounds like this are being introduced into the ecstasy supply by high-volume drug traffickers because they are cheap to produce and known to fool colorimetry.

[Edited on 25-1-2020 by clearly_not_atara]


Possibly, compounds like this are being introduced into the ecstasy supply by high-volume drug traffickers because they are cheap to produce and known to fool colorimetry.


Check the 3rd MDMAnmr sample.

This was MADE from safrole, and was NOT CUT... this sample is what started this whole NMR/MDMA debate XD. This was non darknet, private supplier type situation so it's def synthesis issue at least with a few/majority of the batches. We had the 3rd NMR looked at Bluelight and for all purposes it LOOKS like MDMA... so like meh i give up until we get more data

[Edited on 26-1-2020 by pastor]

[Edited on 26-1-2020 by pastor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pastor
Harmless
*




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


[*] posted on 25-1-2020 at 17:04


The magic sample looks just like the reference NMR plot from this paper: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1... However, they mention something about 4.5 - 4.7ppm being a peak from the water used in the sample prep. So should that be ignored? How come it isn't in the other two plots?


View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  2    4

  Go To Top