Purity - Tips to judge MDMA w/out testing kit, please!!

[jester1]

Hello all,

SO SWIM's friend has a friend of a friend who claims to have MDMA in powder form for sale.
SWIM's friend says his Friend vouches for the guy.
SWIM trusts his friend but since this connection isn't someone his friend knows, he is wary of the product not being pure.

SWIM's question to the more knowledgeable is: How can SWIM judge the quality by eye? Is there any thing to look for? Appearance, taste, consistency anything at all that could tell SWIM that the powder isn't pure MDMA?

*Normally, SWIM would just buy a small amount and try it to see if it's legit. BUT SWIM is leaving the area in a couple days and will only have one shot..
**SWIM would also normally test it but his testing kit is on the way in the mail. And far as SWIM knows the regents can only test for the presence of a MDxx agent, not for MDMA itself. Right?

SWIM would buy about 3-4g's if it is indeed pure, so there is considerable money involved. Please help!!! Thanks to all for their time.

Jester

jester1 added 1 Minutes and 8 Seconds later...

Oh and this is SWIM's first post!!! hehe. not a newbie to the game just to this website. thanks again for any advice.

[bman1]

with out a test there is not a way. Even a test does not tell one how pure the product is. It varfies the presence of MDxx MDxx has a distinct taste and smell, but this does not confirm MDxx or purity. Is your friend from the area the MDxx is in? If so maybe trust him/her with a little cash and take a little home with you and wait for the tester. If it is good ask you friend to get you more.

Reputation Comments on this post:

best answer in the thread

[dr elph]

I had a dream in which the chemist from Bad Boys II was telling me that MDMA is usually bitter and very crystally. This was a dream, however, and have never seen the drug so confirmation would be appreciated. =]

[Aar0n]

Originally Posted by dr elph

I had a dream in which the chemist from Bad Boys II was telling me that MDMA is usually bitter and very crystally. This was a dream, however, and have never seen the drug so confirmation would be appreciated. =]

It is very very bitter indeed, and usually, the larger the crystals the better the product as it's less prone to being cut.

Personally, SWIM would avoid "MDMA" that was sold in a powder like form as opposed to smaller shards or even a large lump.Then again, SWIM is based in Europe where MDMA appears to be much more common to get a hold of than the USA.

Hopefully SWIY is lucky and manages to obtain decent MDMA.

[dazedandconfused44]

if it's rocked up then it is cut. pure mdma cannot be compressed without having a binder.

[jester1]

thanks to all.

to bobdoley: "rocked up" as in not in the form of one solid chunk?

- if it looks powdery and not crystallized, is it not legit or could it just be crushed up?
- if it tastes bitter but not as extremely bitter and unpleasant, as people are describing it, does that mean its been cut a good deal?

SWIM is going to look at it tomorrow, so help from anyone from tonight-tomorrow afternoon would be greatly appreciated!

Jester

[Aar0n]

Originally Posted by bobdoley

if it's rocked up then it is cut. pure mdma cannot be compressed without having a binder.

SWIM has never heard of this, and SWIM is quite sure that the large rocks SWIM obtained were nearly pure MDMA, without a binder.

Originally Posted by jester1

- if it looks powdery and not crystallized, is it not legit or could it just be crushed up?
- if it tastes bitter but not as extremely bitter and unpleasant, as people are describing it, does that mean its been cut a good deal?

If it looks powdery and not crystallised, then it may just be crushed up, but it may also have been crushed up to cut with a powder.

SWIY's really bitter taste may be anyone elses "bitter" taste.

It's virtually impossible to say "yes this is a good deal" or "no it isn't" over the internet, and this thread is a prime example of just that.

It's up to SWIY to decide whether or not to buy this MDMA, and it's a gamble, but if MDMA doesn't come around often to SWIY, then maybe it's worth taking the risk.

If SWIM's FOAF vouches then it may be good MDMA.

Good luck, and let us know how it turns out.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good points

[Micklemouse]

Originally Posted by bobdoley

if it's rocked up then it is cut. pure mdma cannot be compressed without having a binder.

This is simply not true, unless talking about a compressed lump that is obviously compressed powder. Fresh MDMA is a crystal. Once crushed & powdered it may be impossible to re-compress without a binder & it would certainly be very hard to simulate a true crystal, but generally if it is crystalline it is as pure as it's gonna get.

[SWWRRA]

Agreed, crystals are generally a good sign of purity, SWIM gets his with almost no powder at all, just one big rock and maybe a few little ones. Powder could just as easily be crushed up pill in all fairness. Worth a shot, but SWIY should go for it in crystal form if SWIY can.

[TMM]

Yes, if there are solid crystals, that's a very good sign. It's basically impossible to tell by taste - it just tastes of chemical, really - unless SWIY is really experienced. Even a test kit will only tell you if it does or does not contain MDMA, it won't give an indication of purity. Only way to know is to sample it, or word of mouth. The latter usually works for SWIM.

[SWIH]

Originally Posted by TMM

- it just tastes of chemical, really - .

oh no no no - MDMA tastes like MDMA, it's as distinctive a taste as coke or gbl, which could probably all be described as tasting 'of chemical' to the uninitiated, but taste nothing at all like one another (SWIM tells me). MDMA is easily the worst taste SWIM has experienced and paradoxically his favourite

SWIM would be wary of purchasing MDMA in powder form, having only ever had crystals... and just to reiterate what others have posted, the bigger and clearer/whiter the crystals the better the gear in SWIMs experience.

[TMM]

Originally Posted by SWIH

oh no no no - MDMA tastes like MDMA, it's as distinctive a taste as coke or gbl, which could probably all be described as tasting 'of chemical' to the uninitiated, but taste nothing at all like one another (SWIM tells me). MDMA is easily the worst taste SWIM has experienced and paradoxically his favourite

Consider SWIYself 'really experienced' then. My electric snake goes to great lengths to taste it as little as possible.

[SWIH]

granted 'MDMA tastes like MDMA' maybe wasn't the most helpful advice for someone not familiar with it....

i did consider SWIM quite experienced on the subject to be fair, but judging from some of the responses to my posts regarding dosage etc, SWIM has been dabbling blindly in a haze of blissfull ignorance for the best part of the last two decades

[Aar0n]

Originally Posted by TMM

My electric snake goes to great lengths to taste it as little as possible.

Same here, it tastes absolutely awful, which is why SWIM primarily bombs it these days.

Originally Posted by SWIH

SWIM would be wary of purchasing MDMA in powder form, having only ever had crystals... and just to reiterate what others have posted, the bigger and clearer/whiter the crystals the better the gear in SWIMs experience.

The larger the crystals, the better. But colour isn't always too important SWIM has found. SWIM has obtained large crystals of greeny, brown and clear/white variety and found each to be quite similar. Supposedly the brown crystals haven't been washed in the final production processes, whereas the white/clear ones have.

[KomradeShivi]

SWIM believes that George Washington once said pure MDMA has no odor detectable by humans.

If SWIY is unsure about quality SWIY should do an acetone rinse (see the sticky) and if SWIY wants to get it as pure as possible SWIY can attempt a recrystallization.

[SWIH]

Originally Posted by KomradeShivi

SWIM believes that George Washington once said pure MDMA has no odor detectable by humans.

if this washington guy speaks the truth, then i would surmise there is some impurity or bi-product that is unique to the process of sythnesisng MDMA and very difficult to remove, cos all the crystals SWIM has ever had from various sources over the years, tasted the same - and it was pretty fucking detectable, believe. mind you we are talking *taste* here not *odour* aren't we, can't say SWIM recalls them ever smelling of anything particularly.

[radiometer]

^ No one ever said that pure MDMA was flavorless!

It takes only a tiny amount of impurity to cause a noticeable change in the color and/or odor of MDMA. It seems that the majority of MDMA on the market has not been washed enough to obtain a white, odorless product.

Eddie has never noticed any difference in the potency or subjective effects from batches of MDMA he has obtained which have been variously white or tinted, powdered or in large crystals, anise-odored or odorless.

It is my opinion that there is no reliable way for a human being to analyze a substance from its appearance, period, and that it does somewhat of a disservice to suggest otherwise, from a harm-reduction standpoint. Marquis reagent is cheap and easily obtainable.

[SWIH]

Originally Posted by radiometer

It is my opinion that there is no reliable way for a human being to analyze a substance from its appearance, period, and that it does somewhat of a disservice to suggest otherwise, from a harm-reduction standpoint.

there's no *reliable* way to analysise the substance from its appearance - obviously, there's plenty of other stuff that looks just like MDMA crystals... but if someone's SWIM was to adopt a general rule of thumb to seek out larger, clearer crystals that taste like MDMA, i'd bet my left nut over a reasonable period he'd fare better than another SWIM who rather than take any account of appearance relied soley on arsing about with reagents or whatever post-purchase* . and i'm talking from value for money, and buzz maximization as well as harm reduction standpoints.

*if your SWIMS are buying gear from sources who are happy to let SWIY chemically test the wares beforehand, i'd suggest that by and large negates the need to do so!

[podge]

Radiometer is right, anyone interested in harm reduction should be aware that appearance's can be and usually are deceiving when it comes to street drugs. Yes appearance can potentially be useful for spotting some major impurities but many impurities/mixing agents are completely undetectable with the naked eye. Testing kit is the way to go if one wants to be safe.

[SWIH]

Originally Posted by podge

Testing kit is the way to go if one wants to be safe.

what exactly do these testing kits consist of? my understanding was that the chemical reagents would enable the user to detect the presence of MDMA within what they have already purchased. i'm struggling to see how this would prevent the user from coming to harm from whatever else the product may be cut with, and i can only reiterate the benefits of developing a good idea of what the product should look and taste like prior to purchase rather than relying solely on this chemical test after SWIY've already made payment (I assume most swims are keen to avoid getting ripped off as well as reducing harm). kindly enlighten me if i have the wrong end of the stick somehow cos it seems like pretty straightforward commonsense to me.

[podge]

Originally Posted by SWIH

my understanding was that the chemical reagents would enable the user to detect the presence of MDMA within what they have already purchased. i'm struggling to see how this would prevent the user from coming to harm from whatever else the product may be cut with

It wont prevent the user from being harmed, but it will at the very least indicate whether MDMA is present or not, and it may also reveal other drug which may be present depending on the test in question. Obviously to explore fully what is contained in the sample it will have to be sent to a lab.

Originally Posted by SWIH

and i can only reiterate the benefits of developing a good idea of what the product should look and taste like prior to purchase rather than relying solely on this chemical test after SWIY've already made payment (I assume most swims are keen to avoid getting ripped off as well as reducing harm). kindly enlighten me if i have the wrong end of the stick somehow cos it seems like pretty straightforward commonsense to me.

And how does one develop a good idea of what a product should look and taste like unless they know for certain exactly what they are getting or have gotten in the past ? It seems to me that if someones " personal comparative drug purity scale " has been developed with impure/adulterated chemicals in the first place then their entire rating system is automatically flawed and potentially dangerous.


There is indeed a good case for knowing the tell tale visible signs and even tastes of particular drugs.....but this is only possible by having a sound model to work from in the first place .... which requires testing chemicals. Trying to develop this knowledge by untested trial and error is not uncommon but is also not safe. And yes swim doesnt want to see any swimmers get ripped off either..... but.... this being a harm reduction site primarily and not a money saving guide for drug users, i will usually give my best harm reduction advise. Swim would prefer to know that someone who reads swims posts may have wasted a small amount of money as opposed to dieing from chancing an unknown street drug because it "looked" ok.

Also the issue of paying people first and getting ripped off is something all swimmers have to deal with at some point if not on a regular basis due to the illegality of drugs. It is not a problem which is conquered solely by knowing what to look for and what it should roughly taste like, this issue is better resolved with better more trustworthy connections but this is a seperate issue.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Well put. Thank You!

[SWIH]

Originally Posted by podge

IObviously to explore fully what is contained in the sample it will have to be sent to a lab.

...

Trying to develop this knowledge by untested trial and error is not uncommon but is also not safe.

podge, in the real world for most users of this site i would imagine the facility to send samples of recreational drugs to the lab for testing doesn't exist. the only surefire way to prevent causing harm to oneswimself is not to take these substances at all. however, given that most will still choose to do so, it is irresponsible to discourage them from establishing as much pertinent information as possible ie appearance, taste etc as dicussed. swim's 'entire rating system' may indeed be 'automatically flawed and potentially dangerous' as you contend, but it's significantly more use to swim than testing kits that will just identify the presence or absence of MDMA. incidently swim's continued survival and rude health suggests the rating system probably isn't too far from bang on is it.

[podge]

Originally Posted by SWIH

podge, in the real world for most users of this site i would imagine the facility to send samples of recreational drugs to the lab for testing doesn't exist.

And in the real world people also die from bad quality drugs and from overdosing. And many countries have lab facilities which test samples, i think you mean that most people wont bother doing this. What people do or do not do is their own business, simply reminding people of these services and recommending them over taking potentially lethal drugs is my intention.

Originally Posted by SWIH

the only surefire way to prevent causing harm to oneswimself is not to take these substances at all.

Yes, and the least surefire way to prevent harm is to take completely untested drugs.

Originally Posted by SWIH

however, given that most will still choose to do so, it is irresponsible to discourage them from establishing as much pertinent information as possible ie appearance, taste etc as dicussed.

When exactly did i discourage people from learning anything ? Im recommending people gain maximum possible information on these things before they take them.

Originally Posted by SWIH

swim's 'entire rating system' may indeed be 'automatically flawed and potentially dangerous' as you contend but it's significantly more use to swim than testing kits that will just identify the presence or absence of MDMA.

That is unless swiy gets tricked or makes a mistake and takes a drug which turns out to be something different to MDMA....if someone expecting MDMA drops 200mgs of powder and it turns out to be an RC with a low LD-50 or worse they could find themselves way out of their depth.

Also swiy hasnt explained how anyone develops this ability to safely rate random drugs without having to endure trial and error testing on themselves?

Originally Posted by SWIH

incidently swim's continued survival and rude health suggests the rating system probably isn't too far from bang on is it.

Swims delighted to hear swiy's survived his drug usage. But swiy is completely missing the point..... there are other people who have died who would not have died had they known what they were really taking....fact.

And there are people who will read threads on this forum and may take the advice presented, so its always better to give the safest advice and not downplay the dangers of untested chemicals just because swiy has been lucky. Swim has also taken untested chemicals and been lucky.....that still doesnt mean swim will advise anyone else to do.

[Micklemouse]

Originally Posted by SWIH

what exactly do these testing kits consist of? my understanding was that the chemical reagents would enable the user to detect the presence of MDMA within what they have already purchased. i'm struggling to see how this would prevent the user from coming to harm from whatever else the product may be cut with, and i can only reiterate the benefits of developing a good idea of what the product should look and taste like prior to purchase rather than relying solely on this chemical test after SWIY've already made payment (I assume most swims are keen to avoid getting ripped off as well as reducing harm). kindly enlighten me if i have the wrong end of the stick somehow cos it seems like pretty straightforward commonsense to me.

Validation of twelve chemical spot tests for the detection of drugs of abuse (O'Neal et al 2000) will begin to answer the first question, & also give a guide as to the results that can be expected from various reagent tests.

When considering a Reagent kit it is worth investing in one that contains more than just Marquis. Marquis is useful in that it will give an indication of strength & purity of MDx/x ("x" meaning that it will react to other variations of the chemical such as MDA, MDEA) from the speed & volatility of the reaction, but it will react to MDx/x primarily if MDx/x if MDx/x is present. Other reagents are geared towards other chemicals, & can give an indication of whether substances, or even mixtures of chemicals are present. Blindly using just one reagent without doing some research could be seen as being as much use as using none at all. And keep the user guide in a safe place!

Experience is not to be dismissed as a guide to judging, but as stated above experience can only come from, well, experience, & is only truly valuable if it comes from experience of the substance from a trusted source close to a trusted source close to a trusted manufacturer, or if it has been verified by a test.

Beyond this, A Certain Mouse tells me that MDMA tastes like nothing on earth, & beyond tasting like an incredibly bitter ass, it is impossible to describe. He has been lucky enough in his history to have been close to source. If his main experience had been cut powder he would say it had a slightly sweet edge, but this would be a poor guide as pure MDMA does not taste like glucose or lactose. If it comes in separate crystals the test free ptarmigan is closer to being onto a winner, but again there is no guarantee. For the new user, judging alone without a test kit is just not possible.

[distantauthority]

SWIM doesn't trust "powder" MDMA since the time when he bought 4 grams of some shit, that wasn't MDMA. :\