The Secret behind Potency of Meth

[SHORTY]

Swim has asked this once in the past but has yet to find a clear explaination.  So what is the secret behind the potency of meth?
I understand that when pseudo/ephed are properly reduced their chemical structure is that of meth.  This should be quite simple ie; either it is or isn't meth. 
But, if this were actually true then why is it that swim as well as most other bees find that the potency varies from each batch?  Even after a proper recrystalization is performed and one should have nearly 100% pure meth, the potency is never quite the same.
Swim has been thinking it was all in his head.  however, a recent post by geez in which he states that the potency of the product of a long reflux is much higher than a short dry rxn, (swim agrees w/geez) has got swim wondering once again what the scientific explaination is.
Swim has heard that it is due to certain impurities due to side rxns etc.  however, a proper rxtalzzation should take care of most of those impurities.
Swim has also heard it is due to the state of swims body condition ie; wether or not swim has eaten, drinking, sleeping properly etc. 
but although that seems to make sense, swim just doesn't feel that this is the answer either. 

So does anybee have a reasonable xplaination? 

I just wannabeeabee cause I wannabee!

[Aurelius]

look at the stereochemistry of the molecules, the d and l isomers are what you need to be concerned with.  d-meth is more potent than l-meth (somebody here needs to verify this, aurelius can't remember for sure)

racemic mix (50/50 of each d and l isomers)

[Tiny]

u dont get l-meth from rp/i reduction.

[zibarium]

from what swim has seen, most people do not weigh out their dosage...they go by eye...and it can vary quite dramaticly.
have you noticed this phenomena when weighing equal amts. of different batches? (assuming both are recrystalized)

slow or fast shouldn't matter, except in terms of yield...assuming the unreduced portion does not make it into the final crystal.

they say the best go-go has been blessed by the pope.

[geezmeister]

Your question is based on the assumption that crystalization works to selectively isolate methamphetamine and that no other molecules appear in the crystal lattice. If that were true, all meth would be of equal potency. I suspect the assumption is at least in part incorrect. Pure methamphetamine crystals would no doubt form under ideal circumstances. I doubt very much that the cicumstances most meth crystals are grow in are ideal, or that most meth crystals are pure methamphetamine. Most contain some by products and some unreduced iodomethamphetamine.

If you recrystalize the meth crystals several times, they will become cleaner, purer, and stronger. You will notice after each recrystalization that the mother liquor has the odor of something other than meth. It will have trash that is not included in the crystal lattice this time, but was the last time that crystal formed. Slow crystal formation results in purer crystals than rapid crystal formation. Neither assures you that the crystal is "pure" methamphetamine. An improvement, yes. Pure, probably not.

It may also be that when one grows meth crystals, these crystals may be intermixed with crystals of unreduced iodometh, or other such impostors. How can you be sure that the multitude of crystal formations one sees are all meth?

Interestingly enough, the meth from SWIG's first 36 hour reflux was not recrystalized at all. It was used as it was, after evaporation and acetone flashing. (Time was short, and the demons were hungry.) The potency that was noticed was no doubt the result of there being fewer byproducts in the mix of what was in the pile. It had nothing to do with recrystalization. The product of his second long reflux was recrystalized once, in a rather fast fashion rather than a long, slow growth mode. Not what SWIG would call artful crystals, but definitely potent. Stuff that spinouts for the unwary are made of. Not to say that a long, slow recrystalization would have improved the product, it would. The product was not completely clean after one crystalization. It left noticable trash on glass, and he has made it before that left virtually no traces after being vaporized in glass.  The long reflux allowed more complete reduction, and a greater concentration of methamphetamine among the molecules in the crystals formed. The crystals were of greater potentcy than those which contained more impurities. The stuff from which the crystals were grown was purer and the crystals themselves purer than those obtained from less completely reduced batches.


Mostly harmless

[Scottydog]

A longer reflux does not necessarily produce more potent meth.

The biggest factor is the overall reduction of pseudo/ephy.

Other factors come into play as well. Purity of precursors come to mind. (Trash in, trash out) PEG will do this I believe (IMHO) Unclean RP and overused RP without adjustment of ratios...

Swis has had 4 hr rxns come out stronger then a 12 hr reflux without a recrystalization even becoming necessary.

It stands to reason that the longer the rxn, a higher percentage of starting feed is reduced. 36 hr refluxes do not "necessarily" produce better honey then a 12 hr cook.

Keeping all ratios and factors (time/temp) consistent can also produce varying results.

I believe Jacked said it best when he said something to the effect that the end result is directly proportionate to effort applied.

Cleanliness of feed is the dominant factor (IMHO)

36-72 hr refluxes are overkill for PIE unless one chooses to employ a method calling for hydriotic acid.

Something to think about... How often does one see any remaining activity in the flask after 12 hrs?

Get out the PEG...
___________
Refuse/Resist

[wareami]

Geez Summed it UP and his confirmations are a welcome addition. Ibee stumbled onto a five dayer about a year ago and was instantly converted, never to return to the daze of old!
He agrees with Scottydog on the point about Pristeen Cleanliness. Why do you think he's been force feeding this to newbees and oldbees alike! I agree that Ibee's methods of discription leave much to be desired, but don't let that muddle the facts! He's been working more on that by playing less with the aroma's of Kittylitter!!!
Scotty: Ibee knows SWISD well enough to know that he doesn't hold contempt for anything, prior to investigation....Ibee implores SWISDC to try the long slow reflux! The benefits are well worth the intial mindset needed to wait it out and TEND to it like he was growing something with a cathexis!
Ibee and the Kidz....or Geez would never intentionally steer anybody wrong....whether they got Brakes or Not!
Ibee's recreated an HI situation(which BTW is what is produced when Marrying I2 and RP) by holding off on the the addition of dh20 at the time it is called for when refluxing for days! He'll prolong the rxn with the addition of I2 and sometimes RP, like the big boys would do when using HI straight!
Then at thelast minute, bring it to completion with the final addfiton of dh2o!
Gotta run for now!
Try It you'll like it!

Everything Ibee says should be taken with a Large Grain of Sympathomimetic Amine Salt
ô¿ôWareami

[Hematite]

u dont get l-meth from rp/i reduction.

And how was it you came to validate this fact exactly?

Regards, Hematite.

[PoohBearium]

He likely meant that commonly employed optical isomer of pseudo that many dream of using in their synths will not the give l-isomer when using standard synth protocol; however, racemic pseudo/ephedrine would, of course, yield a racemic product, hence the l-methamphetamine, as you suggested above...

That my guess,



PB 
To achieve, you must.
The answer will hit, like a big orgasm.
If you listen, they never lie.

[epistemologicide]

direct reduction of l-eph sulfate using some acid shyte from rhodiums large scale production wood zip doc gets the strongest meth you can make beez.
hatred of ontological wastes, and the marathon!!!!
i cook to save the planet!!

[zibarium]

geez?

if iodometh is compatible with meth hcl, as far as making a large transparent crystal, than why would re-crystalizations necessarily squeeze it out of the lattice? why would one ever bee rid of it?

[Stonium]

C'mon guys. Meth is meth. You either have it...or you don't.

It really is that simple.
_{Of all 36 ways to get out of trouble, the best way is – leave}

[Hematite]

Zib, the key to this is in one's choice of solvent, either prior to or during the re-xtl process, exploiting their differing solubility to effect seperation.
Regards, Hematite.

[Stonium]

Don't ignore me, Heme!  
_{Of all 36 ways to get out of trouble, the best way is – leave}

[Hematite]

You know I'd never do that chickadee, there just wasn't a naughty angle available for me to sneak in on hehehe.
Regards, Hematite.

[12345x]

one factor over looked
is the ph of the final product.
because adding of limiting amounts of pool acid
will result in a mixture of meth hcl and a little
free base meth.this

and adding the correct amount of pool acid
will result in pure meth hcl at whatever ph that is

and adding more pool acid then is nessary.
will result in meth hcl and some pool acid "traped
in the crystals"

these three extraction ratios will give a PRODUCT
with three differnt PHs
the most acidic with the excess pool acid
then higher for the correct pool acid to meth ratios
and the highest with the meth to pool acid in excess.

and because all meth gets free based in your blood
before it goes into your brain.
and the fact that high PH meth goes into your brain
faster.
this factor plus the state of your blood ph
will affect how stong the drug feels.

i dont think iodioephed has any bearing as because it
is black tar "its that black stuff that doesnt wash
out of the 1/2 cooked batchs flask."
there isnt very much in white cristals.

and uncooked E in the product will also be very small
if the meth cristlizes quickly when melted.

i would say if your shit recristalizes when melted
it is pure.
or purer then you can tell the differnce bettween it and 100%.

so id say "asuming you can when doing A/B etc"
get shit that comes back quickly.

that your differnces are in the final ph of the product
and /or the PH of your blood.

if you dont think your blood PH has that big
of an effect.
try this the next time you do a hit and start feeling
like you did to much.

when you wish to come down just breath in a paper bag.
this saturates your blood with acidic CO2 gas
and acidic blood pulls the shit out of your CNS into
your water soluble blood where you dont feel it.
"notice thou when you stop breating into the bag
some of the high returns"

and vice versa if you want to feel it more.
just hperventalate....
like you would breath if you were running.

this lowers the CO2 in the blood and raises the PH
that causes the meth in your blood to croos the
blood/brain bearer into your CNS where you will feal
its effects. 

[zibarium]

(btw, i agree)

though i don't really know.

but i suspect that, especially if one is inhaling vaporized meth, it would bee quite obvious (flavor) if a good percentage of the vapours were iodo-meth

[geezmeister]

Lattice compatibility of an intermediate suggests a basis for increased potentcy of a crystal of meth obtained after a long reflux as compared to a crystal obtained after a shorter one.

I agree that if the batch is unfinished, or only partly finished, you can detect the adulterant when you vaporize the meth crystal. (A fairly recent posts by Geez notes the aroma and taste of incomplete by products, notably iodometh when smoking) This odor and taste is apparent particularly with the fast-hot-dry cook street meth in my area. It burns clean on glass, it rerocks, it crystalizes. It is not a powerful form of meth. It is not pure enough. It takes a quarter paper to get Geez off. Even crystalized. Some other intermediate is present in the lattice and stays in the lattice. If the same batch of ingredients is processed for four to five hours, rather than the forty five minutes of the fast cook, the potentcy goes up by an order of magnitude. SWIG has done this and compared results with the young street cook he was trying to persuade with the same ingredients from the same bags in each batch.

If you took what SWIG considered done at five hours and refluxed it for the rest of the day, for twelve hours or so, the product is noticeably stronger still. SWIG notes the greatest increase in product potentcy between the first and fifth hours; observes an increase at twelve, but not as substantial; has noted that the thirty six hour product is very potent, but not what he would call an order of magnitude more potent than the 12 hour product.

When the only variable is the length of the cook, and the product increases in strength with time on a less than direct proportion, this suggests to SWIG and Geez that the shorter term cook simply fails to convert as much feedstock to final product as the longer term cook, and leaves in the mix a partially reduced intermediate compatible with the crystal meth lattice.

That, of course, is his opinion. He could be wrong, and frequently is. This would not mark the first time he was wrong by any stretch of the imagination. The idea that an intermediate is compatible with the meth crystal lattice sure seems to fit his understanding of what is happening, and logically answers the distinctions he notes. Too bad the local forensic lab does not do qualitative analysis of meth from the street. It would be easy to have some tested if they did to verify whether Geez' suppositions were correct.

Mostly harmless

[Hematite]

Since iodometh is easily removed in acetone (unsure of iodoephedrine solubiltiy) this at least should not be a factor in a re-xtal anyway.
Geez, remember we had agreed on the fact that one noticable difference in the feel of the lengthy reluxed gear, was a certain euphoria? To me this is the clue. I believe the euphoric aspect of the reluxed gear is easily noticed, as it is lacking in gear from most other rxns proported to yield d-meth that account for the greater portion of meth around today, regardless of the thouroughness of the reduction, in fact I would be more inclined to say thye difference is not so much potency but a tasty 'quality'.

I think it's safe to assume that over time even between you and I geez, that we would have both managed at least one rxn whereby the reduction was at it's optimum and the gear in it's purest possible state.....and the euphoric angle I speak of has not been present for me, and your comments here reflect the same, so I don't think it's at all to do with purity, but the mechanics of the reductive process.
Argue as everyone may, I still think this is to do with chirality. But then I also like being the odd one out
Regards, Hematite.

[Hematite]

The dude or dude-ess with the pool acid...........interesting stuff!
Regards, Hematite.