2c e where to get

As with any drug, how long you will feel the effects of 2C-B, 2C-E and 2C-I depends on individual body weight, tolerance, metabolism, and personal sensitivity — basically what makes you, you.

Like the dosage information, these numbers are based on ingestion. We do not recommend snorting because it carries its own set of risks:. You can read more about these risks in our blog post on why snorting is a bad idea.

Shulgin originally synthesised the 2Cs hoping they would be used as a therapeutic aid. With increased interest and clinical work on MDMA, it will be interesting to see if any conclusions from this work highlight potential links to other substances Shulgin synthesised, and whether this provides justification for further studies into the likes of the 2Cs. The standard doses for ingestion are: 2C-B: mg 2C-E: mg 2C-I: mg If you have a history with mental health curveballs, send these 2Cs for six and give them a wide berth.

Mix and match your outfit, not your drugs We strongly advise against take 2C-B, 2C-E and 2C-I with other substances or if you are on prescription medication.

Alcohol — it can be particularly dangerous to mix 2Cs with alcohol because alcohol can substantially increase the risks of 2C stimulant-style effects see below. Cannabis — cannabis can unpredictably intensify the effects of 2Cs and therefore increase the risk of things like anxiety and psychosis. Read — not much fun. Enthusiastic, informed consent is key. Journal of Medical Toxicology. ISSN June 26, Retrieved January 10, December 5, Isomer Design. Retrieved October 10, September 27, Archived from the original on September 6, Retrieved December 10, Bundesgesetzblatt Jahrgang Teil I Nr.

Bundesanzeiger Verlag published December 12, November 10, Retrieved January 1, Bundeskanzlei [Federal Chancellery of Switzerland]. UK Government. Retrieved August 20, Letter to F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Office of Legislative Affairs. Categories : Psychoactive substance Psychedelic 2C-x Research chemical. Hidden categories: Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls CS1 German-language sources de CS1 Portuguese-language sources pt CS1 Chinese-language sources zh CS1 Latvian-language sources lv All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements.

Navigation menu Personal tools Create account Log in. Namespaces Page Discussion. Views Read View source View history. Yolo Donate. Donate Contact us Guidelines Recent changes Open source. Assessments were performed by at baseline pre-dose and 2, 4, and 6 h after 2C-E self-administration.

The experiment was conducted from to h. Urine spot samples were collected prior administration to exclude prior substance drug use benzodiazepines, barbiturates, morphine, cocaine, amphetamines, methamphetamine, MDMA, marijuana, phencyclidine with Instant-View, Multipanel 10 Test Drug Screen Alfa Scientific Designs Inc. Self-administration of 2C-E took place around The sequence of procedures at each time point of the session was: physiological measures, oral fluid collection, and subjective effects questionnaires.

A psychiatry was present during the entire session. Adverse effects were assessed during study session. Oral temperature was measured simultaneously. Subjective effects of 2C-E were reported at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 h after self-administration.

The ARCI item short form is a validated instrument that includes five subscales related to drug sedation pentobarbital-chlorpromazine-alcohol group, PCAG , euphoria morphine-benzedrine group, MBG , dysphoria and somatic symptoms lysergic acid diethylamide group, LSD , intellectual efficiency and energy benzedrine group, BG and d-amphetamine-like effects A Lamas et al.

Maximum effects E max were determined and the area under the curve of the effects AUC 0 — 6 h were calculated using the trapezoidal rule.

Although it is remarkably that the participant that selected the lowest dose 6. When the dose factor was statistically significant, a post hoc analysis for the two defined groups were done using a Student T -test lower dose group: 6. To evaluate the effects along time and to study the effects of the substance in comparison to baseline, a one-way repeated measures ANOVA, with time as factor baseline, 2, 4, and 6 h , was done to evaluate the time-course of effects for all doses.

When the time condition was statistically significant, a Dunnett multiple comparison post hoc test was conducted to compare the different time points with baseline 0—2 h, 0—4 h, 0—6 h. All ten selected subjects participated in the study 4 females and 6 males. The mean weight-adjusted dose of 2C-E was 0. Seven of them were current tobacco smokers range 0. All drugs of abuse urine tests were negative at baseline. As explained in the statistical analysis for dose-response analysis we grouped doses in two groups 6.

Supplementary Figures S1 — S3 presented individual data in order to show the elevated variability of the acute effects and concentrations. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. For HR significant differences were detected in the comparison of baseline and 4 hand 6 h after administration.

Regarding T, only statistically significant differences were detected at 2 and 4 h. No dose-response relationship was observed. Table 1. Summary of result on the physiological effects observed after self-administration of 2C-E. Some effects were related to dose, as higher doses produced more intense effects. The substance produced more intensity of effects in comparison to baseline for most variables. Table 2.

Summary of result on the subjective effects and saliva concentrations observed after self-administration of 2C-E. No dose-response was observed when comparing both groups of doses. In relation to ARCI questionnaire, significant increases in the scores of all subscales were detected, however, differences in dose were not statistically significant. Similarly, differences from baseline were observed for all subscales at different times.

No dose-response was observed. With respect to the VESSPA, significant changes were shown in Sedation, Change in perception and Psychotic symptoms, with significant differences from baseline in all except Psychotic symptoms. Dose-response relationship were detected for Changes in Perception and Psychotic symptoms. Most of the effects dissipated after 6 h, and all subjects returned to their usual routine.

Two of them presented residual mild visual hallucinations lights at 6 h which disappeared 1—2 h later. Concentrations of 2C-E increased rapidly, reaching a peak 2 h after ingestion. Concentrations rapidly decrease from 2 to 6 h after ingestion. Mean maximum concentration C max values of 5. Plasma concentrations varied considerably among doses and subjects. All ten subjects presented positive concentrations of 2C-E at 4 h; only 5, however, had 2C-E concentrations in saliva at 6 h.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the acute behavioral subjective and physiological effects and oral fluid concentrations of 2C-E after the administration of known doses 6. The main finding is that 2C-E induced primarily a group of psychedelic-like effects, a profile consistent with prior data from surveys and poisonings symptoms Matthews et al. Moreover, our study provides unique results about concentrations of 2C-E in oral fluid.

In our non-controlled setting, 2C-E only partially mimicked the prototypical sympathomimetic-like effects of other psychedelic and psychostimulant drugs Schmid et al. The physiological actions induced by 2C-E included a mild-moderate increase of HR, without changes in blood pressure.

The effects were lower than those produced by 2C-B Papaseit et al. It is possible that the wide range of doses in the present study from 6. For 2C-E the maximal cardiac effect was observed at the 2 h assessment, maintained over 2—4 h, and returned to baseline at 6 h post-administration.

Under 2C-E influence participants reported euphoria, stimulation, and altered state of consciousness due to the psychedelic experience. Changes in mood were more pronounced than perceptual ones. It is possible that euphoria could be an important issue of the psychedelic experience after 2C-B or 2C-E use, as previously postulated for other psychedelics Bouso et al.

Moreover, alteration in perception varied from changes in perceptions to hallucinations, that were experienced by 5 volunteers 3 only visual and 2 visual and auditory hallucinations. Results differ in intensity from other psychedelics probably because in this study subjects self-administered low to moderate doses of the substance.

Overall, the subjective effects induced by 2C-E appear to be closely related to psychedelic drugs indicating that it produces mind-altering and hallucinogenic effects which could be primarily mediated by the 5HT 2 A receptor.

As expected, in our study 2C-E produced the prototypical effects of psychedelic substances that include visual hallucinations, perceptual changes, somatic symptoms, and activation of euphoria. Although it also induced headache, confusion, and breathing difficulty, no severe adverse reactions were observed. Our results show that in a recreational setting, self-administration of low-moderate doses of 2C-E by healthy experienced users is well tolerated and relatively safe.

The results are consistent with a relatively low number of severe acute toxicity cases associated to 2C-E use Iwersen-Bergmann et al. The pharmacokinetics of 2C-E in humans has not yet been fully known.

Our results on oral fluid concentrations of 2C-E are the first data in humans to be reported. Oral fluid 2C-E showed a similar time course with effect outcomes. Nevertheless, because the study included five different 2C-E doses in a limited number of subjects, a dose-concentration relationship was not observed. We do not have an explanation for the high variability observed, with higher concentrations after lower doses.

Problems in the collection of the samples or an erratic distribution of 2C-E in saliva could be possible causes. Concentrations in oral fluid were present in all subjects until 4 h, and5 of them were positive at 6 h post-administration. Oral fluid, in contrast to plasma, is a suitable, non-invasive, and easy biological matrix to collect in a non-controlled setting. Nevertheless, the interpretation of oral fluid 2C-E concentrations without data from plasma is extremely difficult not obtained in this study or any other.

Our study has several limitations mainly associated with its design as naturalistic-observational. An expectancy bias could appear due to the non-placebo-controlled design. Because participants selected the dose according to their preferences, it resulted in low-moderate doses ranging from 6. A limited number of subjects could be responsible for a lack of power in some measures. Our findings may not refer to other 2C-E routes of administration. Moreover, the recreational setting could have influenced the effects reported by participants.

However, it should be noted that there are a number of strengths: the participation of female subjects, the dose selection by the subjects according to their preferences 6.