Some helpful links for members

Gulp2788 · Nov 25, 2025

Hey all, I just wanted to start a thread regarding links for information regarding research and magazines, maybe just a general purpose link thread (NOT FOR SOURCING DO NOT POST ANY SOURCES HERE) I would like to increase my bookmarks tab when I look for research perhaps we can help everyone out. I would love to post some onion links but I need to make sure that's okay with staff of DBG before I do, none of what I post would have anything to do with sourcing, more like indexes.

RC.community - A fantastic first line resource I use often for beginning my search when thinking of experiments I can conduct on reagents. Website has built in privacy features as well for those researchers concerned with OPSEC
harm reduction lab - A directory linking you to free services to send research for GC/MS testing
A free GC/MS analysis lab - Run by a university, fantastic service allows you to search your area and determine what contaminates may be in local drugs

Would love more links in this vein I want INFORMATION, my brain must eat!

username7F8 · Nov 25, 2025

That RC.community website looks cool but not so sure about the data or where it comes from. For example it says 25–75 mg is a "light" dose of SR-14968 and I do not think that is the case. 5mg might be a light dose. I believe it's 10x as strong as SR-17 and no one is taking 750mg doses of SR-17 and calling them light.

Gulp2788 · Nov 25, 2025

I agree, they do post their sources however I think sometimes the information can be misleading, I use it only as a starting point usually. I don't know how they aggregate their data but I like the indexing.

fyjclol · Nov 27, 2025

Im pretty sure a lot of it is anecdotal experiences posted on reddit (which, lol. Take with a grain of salt obviously). They list sources on some of their posts and I've seen reddit as a source more often than not. Still a great tool nonetheless. I hope they expand it more.

Gulp2788 · Dec 7, 2025

Another link for your enjoyment, it is an AI chatbot for ɦǟʀʍ ʀɛɖʊƈȶɨօռ IDK how useful it is for most people but I played around with it and it seems like it is better than trying to use any of the mainstream AI tools: https://psyai.chat/

LW815 · Dec 9, 2025

username7F8 said:
That RC.community website looks cool but not so sure about the data or where it comes from. For example it says 25–75 mg is a "light" dose of SR-14968 and I do not think that is the case. 5mg might be a light dose. I believe it's 10x as strong as SR-17 and no one is taking 750mg doses of SR-17 and calling them light.

Yeah the page count section(thresh-heavy if that’s unclear) is very hit or miss and could very much so include dangerous information for people that put blind faith into a single website. In recent months I stumbled across a collection of obscure or rare books, and while I spent a long time looking into some of them I gave up on any hope of actually holding them in my hands long ago. So my memory on how many pages to read was foggy, shit, my memory’s always foggy. But I’d recently discovered that community page and was digging it, until I looked up a specific name and saw a number that immediately raised question as I’d looked this name up on a syco w¡ki days before and remember seeing a very conflicting answer.

Which lead to a rabbit hole of cross-referencing a lot of titles that I either personally knew page count of or knew the w¡ki to be accurate of and the results were pretty mixed. I’ve been looking into it semi often and some of them have update to better numbers, some haven’t.

Always cross reference multiple sites as well as book(experience) reports until you’re confident you have a number that is at the very least agreed on between a few individuals that still have a pulse. Preferably a criteria with higher standards, but sometimes that’s the best you can find.

Gulp2788 · Dec 9, 2025

LW815 said:
Yeah the page count section(thresh-heavy if that’s unclear) is very hit or miss and could very much so include dangerous information for people that put blind faith into a single website. In recent months I stumbled across a collection of obscure or rare books, and while I spent a long time looking into some of them I gave up on any hope of actually holding them in my hands long ago. So my memory on how many pages to read was foggy, shit, my memory’s always foggy. But I’d recently discovered that community page and was digging it, until I looked up a specific name and saw a number that immediately raised question as I’d looked this name up on a syco w¡ki days before and remember seeing a very conflicting answer.

Which lead to a rabbit hole of cross-referencing a lot of titles that I either personally knew page count of or knew the w¡ki to be accurate of and the results were pretty mixed. I’ve been looking into it semi often and some of them have update to better numbers, some haven’t.

Always cross reference multiple sites as well as book(experience) reports until you’re confident you have a number that is at the very least agreed on between a few individuals that still have a pulse. Preferably a criteria with higher standards, but sometimes that’s the best you can find.

Wonderful reply, I agree I think that the website as I put it is probably only at best a first line reference. Never take anything at face value alone, I have commented to the poster of the site where I found this about some of the issues within the site that they should take up with the owner. Hopefully the developer makes updates to that site to make it so that it can be utilized more safely. Always cross-reference your research, it isn't good to rely on one website alone to provide you with the answers you need. This is true for life as well as the environment we work within.

Some helpful links for members

Gulp2788

Member

username7F8

Member

Gulp2788

Member

fyjclol

Member

Gulp2788

Member

LW815

Member

Gulp2788

Member