-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
Do you buy research chemicals?
- Thread starter Fiashly
- Start date
"Honestly guys Heroin is KNOWN (key word) to be safer than these RCs, we just don't know what they are going to do!"
I dont agree with that..if we dont know what they are going to do how can we say which is safer?..the problem is that we dont know at all.
I dont agree with that..if we dont know what they are going to do how can we say which is safer?..the problem is that we dont know at all.
69ron
Esteemed member
narmz said:
After 50-100 years, we'll know which ones are truly safe and which ones aren't, hopefully. But until we know, I don't recommend using them unless you think of yourself as a test subject and don't plan to have children. It's especially horrible when a drug ends up damaging your children. Many drugs have been recalled because of such issues, many of which were tested far more than any of the RC's out there.
It's risky. There are risk takers. There always will be. For me personally, I wouldn't take the risk. I'm a family guy and I have responsibilities that go far beyond me. I need to be healthy and alive. My children depend on me.
ambi-lysergance
Rising Star
1992 said:
I agree
blue lips are defo not cool
though i am curious about some of them (4-AcO-DMT, 2c's, DPT) i find it unnessecary when i have acces to san-pedro, peyote, shrooms, caapi and all the major DMT-plants.
With excessive resources for all these precious goods, i don't feel the urge to take a gamble with some chemical of wich i don't know it's purity, toxicity, etc.
With excessive resources for all these precious goods, i don't feel the urge to take a gamble with some chemical of wich i don't know it's purity, toxicity, etc.
ambi-lysergance
Rising Star
polytrip said:
thats a really good point polytrip!
w0mbat
Rising Star
Some of them seem interesting to me, but there is no way I am gonna injest some "research chemical" of questionable purity bought from shady vendors in a country like China where they can't even guarantee that their milk is not laden with industrial toxicants.
People have died buying RC's, nuff said. Unless you have access to a GS/MS or 1H NMR so you can absolutely 100% guarantee that they are what you think they are, you should not be taking these drugs!
People have died buying RC's, nuff said. Unless you have access to a GS/MS or 1H NMR so you can absolutely 100% guarantee that they are what you think they are, you should not be taking these drugs!
PerPLexED has been offered DOI before as much as he wanted, but refused. It is NOT in their best interest to refine their chemicals so its more than likely you're consuming undesired chemicals used in synthesis/extractions. Also, why would he bother with such things whne he could very cheaply get a huge array of highly pure natural substances that have continually more and more studies showing their positive effects? It's one thing to see colors and shit, and its another thing to have your mind elevated. The latter is most desired. The former is not.
wikiwahwah
Rising Star
I've tried 2CI and 2CB. Both were pleasant experiences similar in effect to taking acid and MDMA in combination, but not as good. I wouldn't say I'm particularly interested in trying them again.
W
W
Narmz, you make a good point and I do agree with you, but... I am not Alexander Shulgin. I lack the expert knowledge to assess the safety of such chemicals. If I were him, maybe I'd try them.
Hell, the experts themselves lacked the knowledge to properly assess the safety of thalidomide and control its proper use. You only need to come across one bad apple and you're done for. Variety just isn't that important to me, the plants I trust because I can rely on the bravery of the ancestors. You are braver than I, maybe my descendents will be grateful to you one day
Hell, the experts themselves lacked the knowledge to properly assess the safety of thalidomide and control its proper use. You only need to come across one bad apple and you're done for. Variety just isn't that important to me, the plants I trust because I can rely on the bravery of the ancestors. You are braver than I, maybe my descendents will be grateful to you one day
This is sort of how I feel about genetically modified foods..how do I know that it's actaully safe?..things like seedless cucumbers..sterile fruits..will I then end up sterile?..
narmz
Rising Star
Even established psychedelics that we consider to be "safe" haven't really undergone much in terms of a highly structured scientific study evaluating them on all levels of usage and dosage. Do we actually know the long term health effects (maybe 10 to 20 years) of daily smoked DMT or bufo? Do we know the long term effects of cacti or lsa? No, not really, we do know that there are cultures that use these things on a frequent basis, and will often use this as support for their safety "the natives have been using this for centuries", but that's about as detailed support as saying, "well, they obviously didn't all die from it, so it must be safe". I'm not sure how you derive any more comfort from such reasoning, but I do think it is somewhat short-sighted to suggest that RC's in general are dangerous. Somewhat like the blanket statement of saying drugs are dangerous, you group them up and polarize them into black and white and say these are good, these are bad, when the actual story requires a much more complex understanding (these are bad when mislabeled, stuck up the nose, taken in exorbitant amounts, while these others ones are bad when taken by pregnant women, or individuals with heart problems).
Here's an interesting thought, if our knowledge of some of these research chemicals developed in a way similar to our knowledge of DMT, would you be more likely to try them? That is, if after having synthesized these chemicals, we discover they already exist within nature. We discover a concoction made from some rare succulent used by some native group who claims to have had the wisdom of the plant passed down to them from their ancestors. Ship it back to civilization, test it out, and golly gosh it's full of 2c's. They use it ceremoniously and as a shamanic tool. If this scenario played out, would you be more willing to ingest these chemicals? If so, for what reasons? (for me it would be being able to do the extraction myself)
I agree with most everyone who has posted here, and am not trying to convince anyone that these are safe, but I am trying to suggest that most all of us who use psychedelics for long periods of our lives, are treading through murky water as well, regardless of the psychedelic, the majority of the research just hasn't been done. Even with something like LSD which has undergone a fair amount of research, we still don't have very solid ground to stand on, much of the research is misleading. A good example is this heavily referenced debate over the health effects of LSD, make sure to make it down to the comments section, where most of the original post is refuted.
Here's an interesting thought, if our knowledge of some of these research chemicals developed in a way similar to our knowledge of DMT, would you be more likely to try them? That is, if after having synthesized these chemicals, we discover they already exist within nature. We discover a concoction made from some rare succulent used by some native group who claims to have had the wisdom of the plant passed down to them from their ancestors. Ship it back to civilization, test it out, and golly gosh it's full of 2c's. They use it ceremoniously and as a shamanic tool. If this scenario played out, would you be more willing to ingest these chemicals? If so, for what reasons? (for me it would be being able to do the extraction myself)
I agree with most everyone who has posted here, and am not trying to convince anyone that these are safe, but I am trying to suggest that most all of us who use psychedelics for long periods of our lives, are treading through murky water as well, regardless of the psychedelic, the majority of the research just hasn't been done. Even with something like LSD which has undergone a fair amount of research, we still don't have very solid ground to stand on, much of the research is misleading. A good example is this heavily referenced debate over the health effects of LSD, make sure to make it down to the comments section, where most of the original post is refuted.
Many of these agents are completely novel and have only (as far as we know) existed in a lab (JWH-XXX, Butylone, methylone mephedrone). However many like MDMA, MDA, DOM and shulgins creations have been explored in humans for decades without causing any serious problems. Also many of the non-hallucinogenic compounds were actually developed as therapeutic agents (MDPV, 2-DPMP, desmethyl-tramadol) by the pharmaceutical companies and were discontinued when a drug more suitable for there needs was found. These agents were tested for safety in the lab and in many cases in humans as well. Also some are acetylated drugs that have been used for thousands of years without issue. Although many of these agents have not been evaluated in the lab and are being evaluated in humans as we speak. This has to be done eventually. As long as those who decide to do it know what they are doing.
It would be moronic for anyone to take these things everyday for recreation but if one is careful and cautious about dose and quality there is nothing wrong with exploring these chemicals carefully. Yes you take some risk but it is "rare" that a single chemical can cause irreversible damage after a few exposures. Also these agents are "rarely" completely novel chemical classes either. It is typically the long term chronic use of a chemical that causes problems. So don't make a habit out of anyone chemical, move on and try some others... and start with low doses until you get a feel for how your body responds to the agent.
Know the risks but know that the risk is needed to advance neuro-pharmacology and the study of consciousness itself. Science needs consenting adults to explore these compounds and chart the subjective effects. Some people like to be explorers, they are not just looking for spiritual experiences and good times but want to understand the nature of the mind.
People mentioned that you don't always know what you are getting. This can be true and people have at least twice died due to these mix ups. However these things are much more reliable then any street drugs. I have seen many research chemicals analysis in my day, not one was not what it said it was. Whereas I have seen street drugs be all sorts of crap. I realize that most people on this forum are not interested in street drugs however many of you have at one point likely tried and ingested these things without knowing what it was. Research chemicals at least "tend to be" what they say they are, for now anyway. If the law-enforcement tries to crack down this luxury will likely deteriorate.
It would be moronic for anyone to take these things everyday for recreation but if one is careful and cautious about dose and quality there is nothing wrong with exploring these chemicals carefully. Yes you take some risk but it is "rare" that a single chemical can cause irreversible damage after a few exposures. Also these agents are "rarely" completely novel chemical classes either. It is typically the long term chronic use of a chemical that causes problems. So don't make a habit out of anyone chemical, move on and try some others... and start with low doses until you get a feel for how your body responds to the agent.
Know the risks but know that the risk is needed to advance neuro-pharmacology and the study of consciousness itself. Science needs consenting adults to explore these compounds and chart the subjective effects. Some people like to be explorers, they are not just looking for spiritual experiences and good times but want to understand the nature of the mind.
People mentioned that you don't always know what you are getting. This can be true and people have at least twice died due to these mix ups. However these things are much more reliable then any street drugs. I have seen many research chemicals analysis in my day, not one was not what it said it was. Whereas I have seen street drugs be all sorts of crap. I realize that most people on this forum are not interested in street drugs however many of you have at one point likely tried and ingested these things without knowing what it was. Research chemicals at least "tend to be" what they say they are, for now anyway. If the law-enforcement tries to crack down this luxury will likely deteriorate.
The damage shown by MDMA has been refuted and several other studies have questionable methodologies and inferences. Science does not know if recreational MDMA use causes any real brain damage in humans. Changes in metabolism of 5-HT are different than neuron damage.
Where has shulgin said he used MDMA many times? I do not think this is true. Shulgin always states that he never uses a given chemical more than a handful of times,so as to not interfere with his metabolic enzymes and receptor levels. I know Ann has used it a lot. is that what you are thinking of?
A lot of people like to experiment with psychoactive substances. I am actually surprised that more people don't here. Using research chemicals is not stupid in itself, it depends how you use them. If one uses them in a safe and exploratory manner there is minimal risk and the benefit to future generations is worth it.
Where has shulgin said he used MDMA many times? I do not think this is true. Shulgin always states that he never uses a given chemical more than a handful of times,so as to not interfere with his metabolic enzymes and receptor levels. I know Ann has used it a lot. is that what you are thinking of?
A lot of people like to experiment with psychoactive substances. I am actually surprised that more people don't here. Using research chemicals is not stupid in itself, it depends how you use them. If one uses them in a safe and exploratory manner there is minimal risk and the benefit to future generations is worth it.
I think many research chemicals as long as they are legal are interesting for personal exploration if used in a safe and responsible manner. They are also excellent tools for science and potential therapeutic (or as bufoman said were therapeutic) agents.
Similar threads
