> MDMA is difficult to find in pure forms and impurities can kill you. If you buy MDMA from a vendor with a 4.9/5 rating
Could this be selection bias? If you're dead you can't give a bad rating?
Could this be selection bias? If you're dead you can't give a bad rating?
Testing kits and services are also available so you could review the quality without even taking the drug.
If regeant testing a pill break it in half and test the inside too since often the outside is coated in mdma and the inside is shitty pipes
MDMA almost never kills people, it's far safer than alcohol or most other drugs. The chance of serious selection bias is unlikely.
More likely there is bias because sellers can edit listings without losing the existing rating.
I guess that it depends on how easy it is to test it. If it requires a chemistry degree and a lab I am guessing they won't test even if they are otherwise smart.
[0]: http://www.dancesafe.org/product/coomplete-adulterant-screen...
Anyways, as someone stated above, these kits test for the presence of MDMA, not necessarily all adulterants. There is the issue of cross-reactivity as well.
It's better than nothing, but I'm not sure I would trust a drug that hadn't been run through an HPLC.
The Silk Road (and presumably the darknet markets that followed it) let any user contest the charge and get their money automatically, which they almost certainly would do if they got MDMA that tested badly.
Further, if this happens too many times, the marketplace will just seize the account. Vendor accounts are expensive, so it doesn't make economic sense to sell bad shit.