We've Moved! Visit our NEW FORUM to join the latest discussions. This is an archive of our previous conversations...

You can find the login page for the old forum here.
CHATPRIVACYDONATELOGINREGISTER
DMT-Nexus
FAQWIKIHEALTH & SAFETYARTATTITUDEACTIVE TOPICS
Toxicology of 2-CB Options
 
Jim Beem
#1 Posted : 8/21/2021 3:51:03 PM
2-CB is a fascinating psychedelic compound created by Alexander Shulgin which first made its appearance in the market during the 1970's. This is close to to the time that the empathogen MDMA also made its first appearance. Yet while the latter has had an extensive amount of scientific research gone into it, 2-CB the most popular of the 2-CX family on the other hand has had barley any attention and is still labeled to this day, as a research chemical.


So far I've only come across one study giving a good scientific description of 2-CB which I've linked below this post. The toxicology of the compound is something I'm most concerned with tbh since I don't want to kill myself. I did find some information that did sound a bit concerning, quoting:

Quote:
2C-B produced an increase in SBP, DBP, and HR. Maximum effects (Emax) were +19 mmHg, +13 mmHg, and +13 bpm, respectively


I'm by no means a medical expert and do not know how similar these peripheral effects are relative to the compounds that have established a good safety record, LSD and Psilocybin being two good examples. If any of you guys have any information about the safety of this compound please let me know. Thanks, JB.


Source of information:

Acute Pharmacological Effects of 2C-B in Humans: An Observational Study - Published 13 March 2018 - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih...pmc/articles/PMC5859368/
 
Dirty T
#2 Posted : 8/22/2021 9:24:53 PM
I personally wouldn't chance anything that has no real information available like 2cb. This is just another example of the negative impact of the war on drugs, RCs that are widely available and potentially dangerous or toxic with no information or quality control (you could be ordering from Walter's basement with a fancy page, shinyflakes anyone?) while naturally occurring relatively safe substances are illegal and have serious consequences. I suggest sticking to the studied RCs if you insist on going that route. My experience is don't trust other people when it comes to substances. Unless you have access to chromatography you really don't know what's in there.
 
dreamer042
Moderator | Skills: Mostly harmless
#3 Posted : 8/23/2021 12:50:03 AM
Here are a couple more studies of interest:

Nugteren-van Lonkhuyzen, Johanna J., et al. "Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and toxicology of new psychoactive substances (NPS): 2C-B, 4-fluoroamphetamine and benzofurans." Drug and alcohol dependence 157 (2015): 18-27.

Nugteren–van Lonkhuyzen, Johanna J., et al. "The Clinical Toxicology of 4-Bromo-2, 5-dimethoxyphenethylamine (2C-B): The Severity of Poisoning After Exposure to Low to Moderate and High Doses." Annals of emergency medicine 76.3 (2020): 303-317.

This compound has been explored for nearly 5 decades now without many issues. It may not have enough data to call it safe as classical psychedelics, but I think we can put this one in the "generally recognized as safe" category at this point.
Row, row, row your boat, Gently down the stream. Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily...

Visual diagram for the administration of dimethyltryptamine

Visual diagram for the administration of ayahuasca
 
downwardsfromzero
ModeratorChemical expert
#4 Posted : 8/25/2021 10:36:54 PM
Thanks for those, dreamoar.

2C-B does appear to be broadly physically safe at doses that are more than challenging for the mind:
Quote:
Conclusion: In this study, most 2C-B poisonings resulted in moderate toxicity even at high reported doses up to 192 mg. No
severe cases were observed. The clinical course was usually short-lived (up to 24 hours) and typically involved hallucinations in
addition to mild somatic effects. [Ann Emerg Med. 2020;76:303-317.]




[Disclaimer: This doesn't mean that doses upwards of 200mg wouldn't at some point be harmful.]




“There is a way of manipulating matter and energy so as to produce what modern scientists call 'a field of force'. The field acts on the observer and puts him in a privileged position vis-à-vis the universe. From this position he has access to the realities which are ordinarily hidden from us by time and space, matter and energy. This is what we call the Great Work."
― Jacques Bergier, quoting Fulcanelli
 
 
Users browsing this forum
Guest

DMT-Nexus theme created by The Traveler
This page was generated in 0.022 seconds.