order 2c e
24/24 Hours Help Line
Toll Free +1(832) 303-0971
POWER BATH SALTS
buy percocet
chem supply interiorscape | chem supply eu
About Us
Shipping & Return
Contact Us
Privacy Policy
Frequent Ask Question
20015-2016 Power Bath Salts  All rights Reserved
buy 4-MEC online
buy Buphedrone online
buy JWH-018 online
buy methanone online
buy JWH-122 online
buy JWH-200 online
buy Methedrone online
buy R-MMC online
buy TMA-6 online
buy JWH-203 online
buy JWH-210  online
buy LY-218 online
2,5-dimethoxy-4- iodophenethylamine
2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4- propylphenyl)ethanamine
2-FMA
buy 4-FMC online
Methylone | Methedrone | 2C-I | 5apb | 2-FMA | 4-FMC | 4-MEC | Buphedrone | JWH-018 | A-pvp | JWH-200 | R-MMC | JWH-210 | LY-218 | MDPV | JWH-073 | TMA-6
2C-I
2,5-dimethoxy-4- iodophenethylamine
2C-I (50g) $200
2C-I (500g) $750
2C-I (1kg) $1400
2C-P
2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4- propylphenyl)ethanamine
2C-P (5g) $100
2C-P (50g) $450
2C-P (100g) $700
2C-P (1kg) $1400
2-FMA
D2Fluromethamphetamine
2-FMA (100g) $450
2-FMA (10g) $110
2-FMA (1kg) $2500
2-FMA (500g) $1500
4-FMC
T4-Fluoromethcathinone / Flephedrone
4-FMC (100g) $450
4-FMC (10g) $110
4-FMC (1kg) $2500
4-FMC (500g) $1500
Buphedrone
2-(methylamino)-1- phenylbutan-1-one
Buphedrone 10g $150
Buphedrone 100g $500
Buphedrone 1kg $3500
Buphedrone 500g $1900
4-MEC
2-(Ethylamino)-1-(4- methylphenyl)propan-1-one
4-MEC (100g) $350
4-MEC (10g) $100
4-MEC (1Kg) $1500
4-MEC (500g) $750
JWH-018
Naphthalen-1-yl-(1- pentylindol-3-yl)methanone
JWH-018 (10g) $150
JWH-018 (100g) $350
JWH-018 (1kg) $1200
JWH-018 (500g) $700
JWH-073
naphthalen-1-yl-(1-butylindol- 3-yl)methanone
JWH-073 (10g) $150
JWH-073 (100g) $350
JWH-073 (1kg) $1200
JWH-073 (500g) $700
JWH-122
4-ethylnaphthalen-1-yl-(1- pentylindol-3-yl)methanone
JWH-122 (10g) $100
JWH-122 (100g) $500
JWH-122 (500g) $1400
JWH-200
(1-(2-morpholin-4-ylethyl)indol- 3-yl)-naphthalen-1-ylmethanone
JWH-200 (10g) $200
JWH-200 (100g) $300 JWH-200 (500g) $500
Methedrone
methoxymethcathinone, bk- PMMA, PMMC, methoxyphedrine
Methedrone (50g) $300 Methedrone (500g) $750 Methedrone (1kg) $1400
R-MMC Replacement for Methylone.
R-MMC (10g) $100
R-MMC (100g) $500
R-MMC (1Kg) $2200
R-MMC (500g) $1200
TMA-6
Trimethoxyphenyl)propan-2- amine, 2,4,6- trimethoxyamphetamine
TMA-6 (10g) $200
TMA-6 (1kg) $1500
LY-218
LY-218 (10g) $100
LY-218 (100g) $500
LY-218 (500g) $1200
JWH-203
2-(2-chlorophenyl)-1-(1- pentylindol-3-yl)ethanone
JWH-203 (10g) $200
JWH-203 (100g) $750
JWH-203 (1kg) $1300
JWH-210
4-ethylnaphthalen-1-yl-(1- pentylindol-3-yl)methanone
JWH-210 (10g) $150
JWH-210 (100g) $500
JWH-210 (1kg) $1500
Most research chemicals are seen as new drugs, either completely new syntheses or chemicals which have previously lain dormant in the writings of Alexander Shulgin. However, some research chemicals have a much longer history of use in research, illicit and licit use.AMT is one of these, having been originally discovered by the pharmaceutical manufacturing company Upjohn while researching novel anti-depressants. It saw particular study due to its properties as a MAOI; eventually, a similar drug (the alpha-ethylated homologue of AMT) was made available as an anti-depressant in the USA during the 60s as ‘Monase.’ Curiously, AMT itself was actually available as the anti-depressant ‘Indopan,’ sold in the Soviet Union between the 60s and the 80s, when it was phased out due to its tendency for interesting side-effects.Being one of the new psychedelics developed around the 60s, it was included in several studies into the potential psychotherapeutic use of psychedelics along with the likes of psilocybin and LSD. Shulgin himself notes a curious coincidence in the disappearance of a research supply of the chemical, suggesting that recreational use of the drug may have occurred as early as the late 60s - though widespread use did not occur.Since then, the drug remained in relative obscurity until the 90s, where several online pharmaceutical vendors sold the drug legally with use of the infamous clause ‘not for human consumption’ for as little as $50 a gram. It was available along with several other chemicals such as GHB, and could really be considered the birth of the Internet-borne research chemical movement.
This led to the drug being outlawed in the USA in 2003, though it remained largely legal in most parts of the world. As a result of this failure to ban the chemical worldwide, it has become a mainstay among Web-based research chemical vendors as the movement has grown massively in the first years of the 21st century.The drug itself receives a wide variation in reports, being a very long-lasting mix between a psychedelic and a stimulant; its visual profile likened very much to LSD while also reported as carrying much more of an empathogenic feel than other psychedelics. Either way, it remains a popular fixture in the research chemical scene. In 2014, more countries have moved to illegalise the chemical, and it has recently been recommended for scheduling in the UK.Another of the popular research chemicals available on the Internet of late is Etizolam, which is an analogue of the more traditional benzodiazepines; carrying an almost identical effect profile to its short-acting hypnotic counterparts, such as Xanax. As it stands, etizolam is one of the most popular research chemicals widely available on the Internet - despite this, it remains largely unscheduled worldwide.The availability of etizolam in the more general research chemical scene began around 2011, and attention has only increased since. Its prevalence is probably due to both the low cost of the drug (with 500 standard doses costing around £100, and is available in bulk powder form for even less), and the highly addictive nature it shares with benzodiazepines.Though relatively new to the recreational research chemical scene, etizolam differs from most other research chemicals in that it is actually approved and actively prescribed as a medical treatment for anxiety in many countries around the world (such as India) under brand names such as Etilaam and Etizest. Its origins as a medical drug are actually very unclear, though medical papers citing its use in the treatment of anxiety are recorded as early as the 90s. Perhaps these approved medical uses have slowed the train for countries wishing to schedule the drug for recreational use?Despite the similar effect profile to benzos, studies have shown some major differences between etizolam and the more traditional benzos used for treatments; it suffers much less from the build-up of tolerance to the drug, and also has a tendency to almost-consistently induce the side-effect of blepharospasm (eye twitching) with continued use.Benzodiazepines, as common drugs prescribed in many countries to combat issues such as depression,
Tryptamines and phenethylamines are two broad categories of psychoactive substances with a long history of licit and illicit use. Profiles of users of recently emerging tryptamines and phenethylamines are nonexistent, however, since surveillance studies do not query the use of these substances. This manuscript describes the types, modes of administration, onset of use, and context of use of a variety of lesser known tryptamines and phenethylamines among a sample of high-risk youth. Findings are based upon in-depth interviews with 42 youth recruited in public settings in Los Angles during 2005 and 2006 as part of larger study examining health risks associated with injecting ketamine. Youth reported that their use of tryptamines and phenethylamines was infrequent, spontaneous, and predominately occurred at music venues, such as festivals, concerts, or raves. Several purchased a variety of these “research chemicals” from the Internet and used them in private locations. While many described positive experiences, reports of short-term negative health outcomes included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, disorientations, and frightening hallucinations. These findings, based upon pilot study data, move toward an epidemiology of tryptamine and phenethylamine use among high-risk youth.Tryptamines and phenethylamines are two broad categories of psychoactive substances that produce a range of hallucinogenic effects. More commonly known tryptamines, such as LSD, Ibogaine, and psilocybin (“magic mushrooms”), and ordinary phenethylamines, including mescaline and MDMA (“ecstasy”), have been widely researched (see Griffiths, Richards, McCann, and Jesse, 2006; Kalant, 2001; Nichols, 2004; Sewell, Halpern, and Pope, 2006; Vastag, 2005). However, little is known about less common tryptamines, such as DMT, AMT, and 5-MEO-DiPT (“Foxy”), or phenethylamines, such as 2C-B (“Nexus”), 2C-E, and 2C-T-7 (“Blue Mystic”). This study describes the types and contexts of use among these lesser known tryptamines and phenethylamines among a sample of high-risk youth.
Tryptamines and phenethylamines have a long history of licit use for spiritual and medicinal purposes and illicit use for recreational purposes (Halpern, 2004; McKenna, 2004; cf. Jacob and Presti, 2005). More recently, tryptamines and phenethylamines, such as DMT, 2C-B, and 5-MEO-DIPT have been consumed by young people in club and rave environments (Measham, 2004; Sanders, 2006; cf. Yacoubian et al., 2004), and traces of these substances have been found in pills sold as “ecstasy” in the United States, the UK, and elsewhere (Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence [ABCI], 2002; Carmo et al., 2005; Drug Enforcement Administration [DEA], 2003, 2005; Laks et al., 2004; Winstock, Wolff, and Ramsey, 2001). The Internet has also facilitated the illicit use of tryptamines and phenethylamines in recent years. Various Web sites now offer information about where to find plants that naturally contain a tryptamine or phenethylamine and how to extract these drugs from plants (see Halpern, 2004). Tryptamines and phenethylamines can be ordered over the Internet through companies selling them as “research chemicals” (McCandless, 2004; cf. Halpern and Pope, 2001; Kikura-Hanajiri, Hayashi, Saisho, and Goda, 2005).Despite increased access at raves and on the Internet, tryptamines and phenethylamines are not included in drug monitoring surveys and, therefore, surveillance data do not exist. A handful of clinical accounts, however, have emerged in recent years, each concerned with individual cases of one type of tryptamine or phenethylamine (e.g., Carmo et al., 2005; Muller, 2004; Tanaka, Kamata, Katagi, Tsuchihashi, and Honda, 2006; Wilson, McGeorge, Smolinske, and Meatherall, 2005). Moreover, international concern over tryptamines and phenethylamines has increased. In Great Britain, for instance, most tryptamines and phenethylamines were outlawed in 2002 and are now considered Class A (Schedule I) substances (see McCandless, 2004). In the United States, the DEA classified some tryptamines and phenethylamines as Schedule I substances but not others. For instance, while it remains illegal to possess DMT or 2C-B, possession of their chemical cousins, 5-MeO-DMT or 2C-I, continues to be legal. Under the Analogue Statue of the Controlled Substance Act, however, it is illegal to traffic any substances chemically analogous to scheduled tryptamines and phenethylamines. Due to the increasing availability of these substances on the Internet, the DEA launched Operation Web Tryp in 2004, which targets individuals and companies illegally selling tryptamines and phenethylamines. Despite the increasing restrictions on access and manufacture, many of the tryptamines and phenethylamines discussed here remain legal to use and posses.The use of tryptamines and phenethylamines among high-risk youth was discovered during a two-phase, three-city study examining health risks associated with injecting ketamine (see Lankenau, 2006; Lankenau et al., 2007; Lankenau and Sanders, 2007). Ketamine is a dissociative anesthetic that has emerged as a drug commonly used in the dance/rave scene (Jansen, 2001) and among subgroups of young IDUs (Lankenau et al., 2007). Phase one comprised a cross-sectional, ethnographic survey of young IDUs recruited in New York, New Orleans, and Los Angeles. Phase two consisted of a two-year longitudinal study of young IDUs recruited in Los Angeles during Phase one. Data described in this manuscript are largely based upon respondents recruited in Los Angeles; therefore, the discussion of methods primarily focuses on the Los Angeles site (see Lankenau et al., 2007, for a discussion of three-site methodology).Data collection began with a community assessment process (CAP; Clatts, Rees Davis, and Atillasoy, 1995) by two trained ethnographers in Los Angeles to determine the locations of groups of young people who injected ketamine. Ethnographers interviewed key informants, such as directors of homeless shelters, health clinic staff, needle exchange coordinators, or outreach workers. Based upon the CAP, ethnographers recruited young ketamine injectors using a combination of chain referral sampling (Biernacki and Waldorf, 1981; Penrod, Preston, Cain, and Starks, 2003) and targeted sampling (Watters and Biernacki, 1989). Guided by this sampling methodology, ethnographers entered three neighborhoods in Los Angeles reported to contain populations of young people and IDUs, observed the activities in the area, engaged young people in informal conservations, and screened individuals who might meet the enrollment criteria. Recruitment and observations occurred during an 18-month period during 2005 and 2006.Young people were eligible for study enrollment if they were between the ages of 16 and 28 and had injected ketamine at least once within the past two years. These criteria were selected to enroll a sample of young IDUs who could describe recent ketamine injection events. A series of screening questions focusing on health behaviors, recent drug use, and history of homelessness were asked in order to hide the true enrollment criteria. Before beginning an interview, individuals signed informed consent documents approved by an Institutional Review Board at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles. Each interview lasted between 60 and 90 minutes and was conducted in the vicinity of recruitment locations, either in private areas of restaurants, parks, or in the ethnographer's offices. Subjects received a $20 cash payment after the interview, as well as referral information for local needle exchanges, health clinics, homeless shelters, and other service organizations for high-risk youth populations.Ketamine injectors recruited in Los Angeles during phase one were eligible for enrollment into the phase two longitudinal study. All IDUs consented for participation in a series of seven follow-up interviews occurring approximately every 3-4 months. During the cross-sectional baseline interviews in Los Angeles, locator information, such as telephone numbers and e-mail addresses, were collected from each participant. Additionally, ethnographers provided each participant with a toll-free telephone number that connected directly to an ethnographer's cell phone. Respondents who traveled outside of Los Angeles following baseline were interviewed over the telephone, and payments were sent via Western Union. Cash incentives increased for each interview by $5, so that participants earned $25 for the first follow-up, $30 for the second follow-up, and so on. Subjects were consented at each follow-up interview to detail any changes to the study design and to remind them of their rights as human subjects. Measures and Analyses The phase one interview guide, which was administered to all subjects recruited in New York, New Orleans, and Los Angeles, contained eight domains or modules and captured data on demographics, drug using histories, recent drug use, and risk behaviors. The phase two interview guides, which were utilized only in Los Angeles, followed up on key risk behaviors, such as changes in homeless status, injection drug using behaviors, criminal justice involvement, and drug using behaviors. Additionally, new modules were included in each subsequent interview to probe important areas that emerged during earlier interviews, such as use of tryptamines and phenethylamines.Interview guides, which contained both structured, close-ended questions and probing, qualitative questions, were administered on laptop computers using Questionnaire Development Software, and interviews were recorded with digital recorders. Open-ended, qualitative questions were analyzed using ATLAS ti., and closed-ended quantitative questions were analyzed using SPSS and SAS.
Discussions of tryptamines and phenethylamines were first encountered during phase one interviews in New York. After being read an extensive list probing for overall substance use, youths were then asked, “Have you used any other drugs?” Ethnographers in Los Angeles and New Orleans later discovered during phase one interviews that some youth mentioned using these same drugs. Tryptamines and phenethylamines use, however, was most extensively probed during the first follow-up interview in Los Angeles when youth were asked about the types, administrations, frequencies, locations, and experiences regarding their tryptamine and/or phenethylamine use. We report findings based upon data collected in Los Angeles since descriptions of tryptamine and phenethylamine use were most complete at this site.Sample Characteristics The Los Angeles sample consisted largely of young White men, with a median age of 22, with histories of homelessness, incarceration, and drug treatment (see Table 1). Out of these youth, 42 mentioned using at least one tryptamine and/or phenethylamine in their lifetime. Youth who had used a tryptamine and/or phenethylamine were likely to report being male, White, heterosexual, and a “traveler.” Travelers are nomadic, predominantly homeless youth who travel around the country for various reasons (see Des Jarlais, Perlis, and Settembrino, 2004; Hathazi, Lankenau, Sanders, and Jackson-Bloom, 2005; Hyde, 2005). Selected demographic characteristics
The sample also has an extensive history of drug use (see Table 2). Categorizing these youth as “heroin users,” “cocaine users,” or “ketamine users,” however, would be inaccurate. Rather, these youth could be more accurately described as “polydrug users” who regularly used two or more drugs simultaneously or over a short period of time (e.g., over the course of a day; see Lankenau and Clatts, 2005; Sanders, 2006). Youth who used a tryptamine and/or phenethylamine had an overall earlier mean age of initiating most other illicit substances, including common tryptamines, such as LSD and psilocybin mushrooms, and a common phenethylamine, ecstasy. Moreover, tryptamine and phenethylamine users were more likely to have ever used other drugs, including LSD, ecstasy, and psilocybin mushrooms, but also many others, such as PCP, GHB, cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, and a range of prescription drugs non-medically. Substance use characteristics (N = 42) Range, Frequency, Onset of Use, Modes of Administration, and Dosages Youth used between one and 12 different tryptamines at least once, and between one and eight different phenethylamines at least once (see Table 3). Sniffing and swallowing were the most common administrations. Dosages were difficult to gauge since very few mentioned measuring what they ingested. Rather, youth talked about swallowing “a capsule”; “sprinkling” drugs in a joint, pipe, or bong, filled with marijuana; sniffing a “line”; injecting a “solution”; or swallowing an
Tryptamine and phenethylamine: Age at onset, lifetime use, lifetime frequency, administrations, and dosages (n = 42) Contexts of Tryptamine and Phenethylamine Use The majority of users in the sample (n = 34) only consumed a tryptamine and/or phenethylamine on one or two occasions in their lifetimes. Use occurred while intoxicated on a combination of other substances (e.g., alcohol, cannabis, heroin, LSD, cocaine) at music festivals, concerts, and parties, whereby individuals-both friends and strangers-offered them a tryptamine (primarily DMT or AMT) or a phenethylamine (primarily 2C-B, 2C-I, or 2C-E), which they either smoked or swallowed immediately. Often, these youths did not have knowledge of the tryptamine or phenethylamine they ingested, what to expect, or the amount ingested.A smaller number (n = 8) of youth used many different tryptamines and phenethylamines. Some purchased these substances from the Internet, where they were promoted as “research chemicals.” These youth knew exactly what they consumed, how much they used, and what effects to expect from these substances. Such youth administered these substances in a variety of ways, including sniffing and injecting. Significantly, they were able to describe the effects and distinguish differences
best online research chemicals