• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Etizolam blotters
#1
I have bought 200 etizloma blotters off highly respected source. But they dont work at all I have tried to have them in my mount to the get dissolve thats a houre aporx. under my tongue  15min swallow in been up to 8mg and nothing happens. Scammed? They look professional stamped on the back and all.

What can  I just trow them ib already used 111 risked jail and all for this crap.

Are there other ways to takes blotter? dissolve them in something live in Norway so cant use everclear and pg.

ANyone htey should be wokring alll reivews are great and many too.
Reply
#2
Your spelling suggests they work. I'm guessing you are familiar with Etizolam though? They are not really that recreational IMO.. just good for sleep 1-2mg or anxiety at 0.5-1.. with no tolerance.

I never understood why people would take loads of them but hey ho... people will be people.
Reply
#3
There was, i believe, A czech vendor of good repute who has allegadly been selling bunk etiz blotters if i remember correctly from reddit RC chatter. This was perhaps a couple of months ago i read about this dont know if it was resolved but alot of people said the same
  
Try everything twice Because who knows, you might have got it wrong the first time
.
  
C
Reply
#4
This is right on they where located in czech what a story.. No way to get money back bought  200 ffs they are nothing om them.. Riksed jail for thi shot so pissed now. 

Tails i have tired pellets real Etix and reason why i took this much was to see if they worked i should be asleep. But nothing-

I tired  ot tell thme that dont work and he said he didn't and that because the dont sell for use.

Is there are cheap please to send it ti check i? to have proof? for money back-
Reply
#5
I know the source you got them from. They just made them during vaycay. They have never sold bunk product. If you want it tested send it to wedninos in the uk. If you want to pay send it to energy control in spain, where they came from ;-) and they will send you the results chances are its 100% eitz wothout a doubt.
You are slurring your words typing so they look like whatever you took is workimg pretty good on you locomotor skills.
love the world and it will love you back. chin
Reply
#6
Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup
Reply
#7
Thanks for the link tails. But isnt wedninos only for uk based researchers? Pretty sure O.P said he is from norway. That could be a problem.....
I know that the private company that made those wouldnt risk sending out bunk product. That would be a first. There is a good chance the powder they used was cut and not tested for purity leading to weaker than average tabs. But inactive no way.

niamh edited 05-10-2016 04:11 PM this post because:

Not even in jest, please.

love the world and it will love you back. chin
Reply
#8
(05-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Tails Wrote: Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup

Energy Control will test international submissions for a fee and can provide quantitative analysis.

Going off topic for the rest of this comment...

I think the utility of the not for human consumption line was debatable and the liability of admitting knowledge of human consumption less than was assumed. Labelling as not for human consumption was well on its way to being regarded as not meaningful by the courts and certainly didn't prevent a series of successful prosecutions under the General Product Safety Regulations. Selling without this label may have opened up the possibility of prosecution under the Human Medicines Regulations, but EU Court of Justice decisions in the last few years made that less likely and the direction was to exclude substances intended for recreational use from the definition of a medical product.

Making the admission and then providing labelling and safety information intended to provide consumers with an accurate perception of the risks and guidance on how to use in safer ways would then have made it much more difficult to prosecute under the GPSR.

(In theory anyway, I'm not a laywer and this is all academic now that the PSA is in place).

The terms and conditions that vendors had were laughable. Vendors could indeed refuse sale to anyone as long as they weren't discriminating on the basis of a protected attribute, but you can't place arbitrary restrictions on post-sale use in a sales contract and such clauses were likely without force. Vendors were essentially disclaiming that their products were fit for the purpose of human consumption and freeing themselves from the implied warranties that would otherwise result, but I suspect that this would not have been convincing if anyone had taken legal action under consumer rights law since it's an obvious attempt to limit the vendors liability and deny consumers' their rights to legal redress. I wonder how many vendors took legal advice on this rather than just copying what everyone else was doing.
Reply
#9
(04-10-2016, 12:37 PM)Tails Wrote: Your spelling suggests they work. I'm guessing you are familiar with Etizolam though? They are not really that recreational IMO.. just good for sleep 1-2mg or anxiety at 0.5-1.. with no tolerance.

I never understood why people would take loads of them but hey ho... people will be people.
Im from norway 
(04-10-2016, 10:58 PM)Borderline Wrote: There was, i believe, A czech vendor of good repute who has allegadly been selling bunk etiz blotters if i remember correctly from reddit RC chatter. This was perhaps a couple of months ago i read about this dont know if it was resolved but alot of people said the same

(05-10-2016, 06:36 PM)niflheim Wrote:
(05-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Tails Wrote: Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup

Energy Control will test international submissions for a fee and can provide quantitative analysis.

Going off topic for the rest of this comment...

I think the utility of the not for human consumption line was debatable and the liability of admitting knowledge of human consumption less than was assumed. Labelling as not for human consumption was well on its way to being regarded as not meaningful by the courts and certainly didn't prevent a series of successful prosecutions under the General Product Safety Regulations. Selling without this label may have opened up the possibility of prosecution under the Human Medicines Regulations, but EU Court of Justice decisions in the last few years made that less likely and the direction was to exclude substances intended for recreational use from the definition of a medical product.

Making the admission and then providing labelling and safety information intended to provide consumers with an accurate perception of the risks and guidance on how to use in safer ways would then have made it much more difficult to prosecute under the GPSR.

(In theory anyway, I'm not a laywer and this is all academic now that the PSA is in place).

The terms and conditions that vendors had were laughable. Vendors could indeed refuse sale to anyone as long as they weren't discriminating on the basis of a protected attribute, but you can't place arbitrary restrictions on post-sale use in a sales contract and such clauses were likely without force. Vendors were essentially disclaiming that their products were fit for the purpose of human consumption and freeing themselves from the implied warranties that would otherwise result, but I suspect that this would not have been convincing if anyone had taken legal action under consumer rights law since it's an obvious attempt to limit the vendors liability and deny consumers' their rights to legal redress. I wonder how many vendors took legal advice on this rather than just copying what everyone else was doing.

(07-10-2016, 05:07 AM)WORSEELITE Wrote:
(04-10-2016, 12:37 PM)Tails Wrote: Your spelling suggests they work. I'm guessing you are familiar with Etizolam though? They are not really that recreational IMO.. just good for sleep 1-2mg or anxiety at 0.5-1.. with no tolerance.

I never understood why people would take loads of them but hey ho... people will be people.
Im from norway 
(04-10-2016, 10:58 PM)Borderline Wrote: There was, i believe, A czech vendor of good repute who has allegadly been selling bunk etiz blotters if i remember correctly from reddit RC chatter. This was perhaps a couple of months ago i read about this dont know if it was resolved but alot of people said the same

(05-10-2016, 06:36 PM)niflheim Wrote:
(05-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Tails Wrote: Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup

Energy Control will test international submissions for a fee and can provide quantitative analysis.

Going off topic for the rest of this comment...

I think the utility of the not for human consumption line was debatable and the liability of admitting knowledge of human consumption less than was assumed. Labelling as not for human consumption was well on its way to being regarded as not meaningful by the courts and certainly didn't prevent a series of successful prosecutions under the General Product Safety Regulations. Selling without this label may have opened up the possibility of prosecution under the Human Medicines Regulations, but EU Court of Justice decisions in the last few years made that less likely and the direction was to exclude substances intended for recreational use from the definition of a medical product.

Making the admission and then providing labelling and safety information intended to provide consumers with an accurate perception of the risks and guidance on how to use in safer ways would then have made it much more difficult to prosecute under the GPSR.

(In theory anyway, I'm not a laywer and this is all academic now that the PSA is in place).

The terms and conditions that vendors had were laughable. Vendors could indeed refuse sale to anyone as long as they weren't discriminating on the basis of a protected attribute, but you can't place arbitrary restrictions on post-sale use in a sales contract and such clauses were likely without force. Vendors were essentially disclaiming that their products were fit for the purpose of human consumption and freeing themselves from the implied warranties that would otherwise result, but I suspect that this would not have been convincing if anyone had taken legal action under consumer rights law since it's an obvious attempt to limit the vendors liability and deny consumers' their rights to legal redress. I wonder how many vendors took legal advice on this rather than just copying what everyone else was doing.

I have trown aprox 120 got so pissed. And now even more then i could prove them. Anyone got a report on low test on etizolam i could tip for ?
Reply
#10
(07-10-2016, 05:07 AM)WORSEELITE Wrote:
(04-10-2016, 12:37 PM)Tails Wrote: Your spelling suggests they work. I'm guessing you are familiar with Etizolam though? They are not really that recreational IMO.. just good for sleep 1-2mg or anxiety at 0.5-1.. with no tolerance.

I never understood why people would take loads of them but hey ho... people will be people.
Im from norway 
(04-10-2016, 10:58 PM)Borderline Wrote: There was, i believe, A czech vendor of good repute who has allegadly been selling bunk etiz blotters if i remember correctly from reddit RC chatter. This was perhaps a couple of months ago i read about this dont know if it was resolved but alot of people said the same

(05-10-2016, 06:36 PM)niflheim Wrote:
(05-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Tails Wrote: Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup

Energy Control will test international submissions for a fee and can provide quantitative analysis.

Going off topic for the rest of this comment...

I think the utility of the not for human consumption line was debatable and the liability of admitting knowledge of human consumption less than was assumed. Labelling as not for human consumption was well on its way to being regarded as not meaningful by the courts and certainly didn't prevent a series of successful prosecutions under the General Product Safety Regulations. Selling without this label may have opened up the possibility of prosecution under the Human Medicines Regulations, but EU Court of Justice decisions in the last few years made that less likely and the direction was to exclude substances intended for recreational use from the definition of a medical product.

Making the admission and then providing labelling and safety information intended to provide consumers with an accurate perception of the risks and guidance on how to use in safer ways would then have made it much more difficult to prosecute under the GPSR.

(In theory anyway, I'm not a laywer and this is all academic now that the PSA is in place).

The terms and conditions that vendors had were laughable. Vendors could indeed refuse sale to anyone as long as they weren't discriminating on the basis of a protected attribute, but you can't place arbitrary restrictions on post-sale use in a sales contract and such clauses were likely without force. Vendors were essentially disclaiming that their products were fit for the purpose of human consumption and freeing themselves from the implied warranties that would otherwise result, but I suspect that this would not have been convincing if anyone had taken legal action under consumer rights law since it's an obvious attempt to limit the vendors liability and deny consumers' their rights to legal redress. I wonder how many vendors took legal advice on this rather than just copying what everyone else was doing.

(07-10-2016, 05:07 AM)WORSEELITE Wrote:
(04-10-2016, 12:37 PM)Tails Wrote: Your spelling suggests they work. I'm guessing you are familiar with Etizolam though? They are not really that recreational IMO.. just good for sleep 1-2mg or anxiety at 0.5-1.. with no tolerance.

I never understood why people would take loads of them but hey ho... people will be people.
Im from norway 
(04-10-2016, 10:58 PM)Borderline Wrote: There was, i believe, A czech vendor of good repute who has allegadly been selling bunk etiz blotters if i remember correctly from reddit RC chatter. This was perhaps a couple of months ago i read about this dont know if it was resolved but alot of people said the same

(05-10-2016, 06:36 PM)niflheim Wrote:
(05-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Tails Wrote: Yes. You can send one to http://wedinos.org/ for free testing. It will only tell you the content though not exact amount.

Sadly the law made it quite possible for vendors to send out bunk then ban or ignore any user that broke the erms and conditions by admitting consumption..

If they sold to somebody knowingly consuming they were in fact breaking the law. Of course all vendors knew but to admit or discuss it in email is a different story.

Good luck thumbup

Energy Control will test international submissions for a fee and can provide quantitative analysis.

Going off topic for the rest of this comment...

I think the utility of the not for human consumption line was debatable and the liability of admitting knowledge of human consumption less than was assumed. Labelling as not for human consumption was well on its way to being regarded as not meaningful by the courts and certainly didn't prevent a series of successful prosecutions under the General Product Safety Regulations. Selling without this label may have opened up the possibility of prosecution under the Human Medicines Regulations, but EU Court of Justice decisions in the last few years made that less likely and the direction was to exclude substances intended for recreational use from the definition of a medical product.

Making the admission and then providing labelling and safety information intended to provide consumers with an accurate perception of the risks and guidance on how to use in safer ways would then have made it much more difficult to prosecute under the GPSR.

(In theory anyway, I'm not a laywer and this is all academic now that the PSA is in place).

The terms and conditions that vendors had were laughable. Vendors could indeed refuse sale to anyone as long as they weren't discriminating on the basis of a protected attribute, but you can't place arbitrary restrictions on post-sale use in a sales contract and such clauses were likely without force. Vendors were essentially disclaiming that their products were fit for the purpose of human consumption and freeing themselves from the implied warranties that would otherwise result, but I suspect that this would not have been convincing if anyone had taken legal action under consumer rights law since it's an obvious attempt to limit the vendors liability and deny consumers' their rights to legal redress. I wonder how many vendors took legal advice on this rather than just copying what everyone else was doing.

I have trown aprox 120 got so pissed. And now even more then i could prove them. Anyone got a report on low test on etizolam i could tip for ?

This reminds me of when people we're drinking Etiz solution....
I'm spannered and your typing looks worse,
No offence
GN
They say pain is relative, it certainly feels like a relative of mine... One that I can't get rid of.
Reply

Reddit   Facebook   Twitter  




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

   
DISCLAIMER
Any views or opinions posted by members are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the UKCR staff team.