2,5-DMA

2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine

Sources

1 strong · 11 moderate · 7 weak · 1 insufficient

Studies and references cited across this article, graded by evidence strength.

Values approved

142/142 (100%)

Data points an editor reviewed and accepted for publication.

Value Provenance

Dosing

oraltrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Threshold	10 mg	10 mg	medium
Low	40–80 mg	40–80 mg	medium
Common	80–160 mg	80–160 mg	medium
Strong	160–200 mg	160–200 mg	medium
Heavy	200+ mg	200+ mg	medium
Editorial	Common (moderate) range of 80–160 mg from PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991) — the only published human dose reference. Light range revised upward from DB's 10–40 mg to 40–80 mg based on PiHKAL characterization of sub-active doses. Threshold of 10 mg retained from existing DB but has no primary source support. Strong (high) range of 160–200 mg inferred from PiHKAL upper range. Heavy 200+ mg has no primary source. ⚠️ DOSE RANGE FLAG: Existing DB 'Common' of 40–80 mg is substantially lower than PiHKAL's 80–160 mg. PiHKAL is treated as primary.
	ReasoningReasoning Common (moderate) range of 80–160 mg from PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991) — the only published human dose reference. Light range revised upward from DB's 10–40 mg to 40–80 mg based on PiHKAL characterization of sub-active doses. Threshold of 10 mg retained from existing DB but has no primary source support. Strong (high) range of 160–200 mg inferred from PiHKAL upper range. Heavy 200+ mg has no primary source. ⚠️ DOSE RANGE FLAG: Existing DB 'Common' of 40–80 mg is substantially lower than PiHKAL's 80–160 mg. PiHKAL is treated as primary. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Duration

oral

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Onsettrace	30–60 minutes	30–60 minutes	low
Editorial	No published onset data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from DOx class oral onset times. Reference compounds: DOI, DOM.
	ReasoningReasoning No published onset data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from DOx class oral onset times. Reference compounds: DOI, DOM. Evidence basis: structural_analogy
Peaktrace	2–4 hours	2–4 hours	low
Editorial	No published peak duration data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from total duration of 6–8 hours minus estimated onset and resolution phases. Stimulant arc pattern assumed.
	ReasoningReasoning No published peak duration data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from total duration of 6–8 hours minus estimated onset and resolution phases. Stimulant arc pattern assumed. Evidence basis: structural_analogy
Offsettrace	2–3 hours	2–3 hours	low
Editorial	No published offset data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from total 6–8 hours minus onset (0.5–1h) and peak (2–4h). Gradual stimulant resolution pattern.
	ReasoningReasoning No published offset data for 2,5-DMA. Inferred from total 6–8 hours minus onset (0.5–1h) and peak (2–4h). Gradual stimulant resolution pattern. Evidence basis: structural_analogy
Totaltrace	6–8 hours	6–8 hours	medium
Editorial	Confirmed by PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991). The only published duration value for 2,5-DMA.
	ReasoningReasoning Confirmed by PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991). The only published duration value for 2,5-DMA. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Safety

Toxicity Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Acute	low	low	low
Chronic	low	low	low
Organs Affected	cardiovascular	cardiovascular	low
Editorial	Acute 'low' reflects absence of adverse event reports and weak receptor activity, but is entirely class-inferred from DOx/25I-NBOMe sympathomimetic toxidrome data — no substance-specific toxicity data exist. Chronic 'low' (downgraded from work-notes 'no data' to lowest assignable level) is structural analogy from DOI/DOM with evidence discount applied. Reference compounds: DOI, DOM, 25I-NBOMe (Hieger et al. 2015).
	ReasoningReasoning Acute 'low' reflects absence of adverse event reports and weak receptor activity, but is entirely class-inferred from DOx/25I-NBOMe sympathomimetic toxidrome data — no substance-specific toxicity data exist. Chronic 'low' (downgraded from work-notes 'no data' to lowest assignable level) is structural analogy from DOI/DOM with evidence discount applied. Reference compounds: DOI, DOM, 25I-NBOMe (Hieger et al. 2015). Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Dependence Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Physical	none	none	medium
Psychological	negligible	negligible	medium
Compulsive Redosing	negligible	negligible	medium
Dose Escalation	negligible	negligible	medium
Editorial	Class-level evidence for 5-HT2A agonist non-dependence is strong (Halberstadt & Geyer 2011). Substance-specific dependence data absent, but the absence of monoamine transporter activity (Kolaczynska et al. 2019) and weak 5-HT2A partial agonism make dependence formation implausible.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-level evidence for 5-HT2A agonist non-dependence is strong (Halberstadt & Geyer 2011). Substance-specific dependence data absent, but the absence of monoamine transporter activity (Kolaczynska et al. 2019) and weak 5-HT2A partial agonism make dependence formation implausible. Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Withdrawal Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Severity	none	none	medium
Symptoms	—	—	medium
Fatal	No	No	medium
Medical Supervision	Not required	Not required	medium
Editorial	No withdrawal syndrome documented for any 5-HT2A agonist. Class-level evidence strongly supports absence of withdrawal.
	ReasoningReasoning No withdrawal syndrome documented for any 5-HT2A agonist. Class-level evidence strongly supports absence of withdrawal. Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Tolerance Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Buildup	rapid	rapid	low
Half-life	4 days	4 days	low
Full Reset	8.5 days	8.5 days	low
Cross-tolerances	DOI, DOB, DOM, DOC, LSD, psilocybin, mescaline	DOI, DOB, DOM, DOC, LSD, psilocybin, mescaline	low
Editorial	Tolerance data from DOI (de la Fuente Revenga et al. 2022) and DOI/2C-T-7 cross-tolerance (Smith et al. 2014). Half-life and full reset values carried from existing DB (class-inferred from psychedelic 5-HT2A agonist cross-tolerance data). NOT substance-specific PK.
	ReasoningReasoning Tolerance data from DOI (de la Fuente Revenga et al. 2022) and DOI/2C-T-7 cross-tolerance (Smith et al. 2014). Half-life and full reset values carried from existing DB (class-inferred from psychedelic 5-HT2A agonist cross-tolerance data). NOT substance-specific PK. Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Effects & Profile

Contraindications

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
cardiovascular Cardiovascular diseasetrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from DOx sympathomimetic profile; Shulgin directly documents cardiovascular stimulation at active doses. No substance-specific contraindication studies exist.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from DOx sympathomimetic profile; Shulgin directly documents cardiovascular stimulation at active doses. No substance-specific contraindication studies exist.
cardiovascular Pre-existing hypertensiontrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from sympathomimetic amphetamine/DOx profile. Shulgin documents cardiovascular stimulation as primary effect at active doses.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from sympathomimetic amphetamine/DOx profile. Shulgin documents cardiovascular stimulation as primary effect at active doses.
cardiovascular Cardiac arrhythmiastrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from DOx/sympathomimetic stimulant profile. Abnormal heartbeat is a seeded effect in the DB for this substance.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from DOx/sympathomimetic stimulant profile. Abnormal heartbeat is a seeded effect in the DB for this substance.
neurological Seizure disorderstrace	relative	relative	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from sympathomimetic stimulant profile and 25I-NBOMe case series showing seizures. Reference compound: 25I-NBOMe (structurally related 2,5-dimethoxyphenyl compound).
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from sympathomimetic stimulant profile and 25I-NBOMe case series showing seizures. Reference compound: 25I-NBOMe (structurally related 2,5-dimethoxyphenyl compound).
other Concurrent MAOI usetrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from 5-HT2A agonist/MAOI interaction pattern and CYP2D6 metabolism pathway (Ewald & Maurer 2008).
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from 5-HT2A agonist/MAOI interaction pattern and CYP2D6 metabolism pathway (Ewald & Maurer 2008).
other Concurrent SSRI/SNRI usetrace	relative	relative	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from serotonergic psychedelic interaction pattern. 2,5-DMA's weak receptor affinity may reduce but not eliminate this risk.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from serotonergic psychedelic interaction pattern. 2,5-DMA's weak receptor affinity may reduce but not eliminate this risk.
other Concurrent tramadol usetrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Class-inferred from general serotonergic psychedelic–tramadol interaction pattern. DB lists tramadol interaction as 'dangerous' but no primary source was found. Flagged for editorial review.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-inferred from general serotonergic psychedelic–tramadol interaction pattern. DB lists tramadol interaction as 'dangerous' but no primary source was found. Flagged for editorial review.
pregnancy breastfeeding Pregnancy and lactationtrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Precautionary contraindication due to absence of any reproductive safety data for 2,5-DMA or closely related DOx compounds.
	ReasoningReasoning Precautionary contraindication due to absence of any reproductive safety data for 2,5-DMA or closely related DOx compounds.

Timeline Phases

oral

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Onsettrace	1800–3600 sec(i=0.20)	1800–3600 sec(i=0.20)	low
Editorial	Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds.
	ReasoningReasoning Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds. Evidence basis: structural_analogy
Peaktrace	7200–14400 sec(i=1.00)	7200–14400 sec(i=1.00)	low
Editorial	Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds.
	ReasoningReasoning Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds. Evidence basis: structural_analogy
Resolutiontrace	7200–10800 sec(i=0.40)	7200–10800 sec(i=0.40)	low
Editorial	Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds.
	ReasoningReasoning Only the total duration (6–8 hours, PiHKAL #54) is published. Individual phase timings are inferred from DOx class oral pharmacokinetics and the simple stimulant arc described by Shulgin. Come_up, ascent, plateau, and afterglow phases are not distinctly documented — the experience appears to have a simple onset/peak/resolution structure without the complex phase profile of psychedelic DOx compounds. Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Dose Tier Summaries

thresholdtrace

low

No primary source establishes a threshold dose for 2,5-DMA. The existing value of approximately 10 mg is unverifiable. At this level, effects — if present — would be sub-perceptual, limited to possible mild physiological awareness such as a faint increase in heart rate or subtle alertness. Physical effects are minimal to absent. No cognitive, perceptual, or emotional changes are expected. The user may not be certain whether any effect has occurred. No published report documents effects at this dose. Functional impairment is not expected, though individual sensitivity varies.

Editorial

Work-notes specify no primary source for threshold. DB value of 10 mg retained with low confidence. Description inferred from sub-active dose characterization in PiHKAL.

Reasoning

Work-notes specify no primary source for threshold. DB value of 10 mg retained with low confidence. Description inferred from sub-active dose characterization in PiHKAL.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

lighttrace

low

Mild sympathomimetic activation begins — slight cardiovascular awareness with possible increase in heart rate and blood pressure. Wakefulness and a subtle increase in environmental interest may emerge. No perceptual or sensory changes occur at this dose range. Physical effects are the dominant experience: mild stimulation, possible faint muscle tension or restlessness. Appetite suppression may begin. These effects are qualitatively similar to a low dose of amphetamine. Duration is expected to track the 6–8 hour range. Sleep may be delayed if taken in the evening. Functional impairment is minimal.

Editorial

Work-notes describe light tier as mild sympathomimetic activation with physical effects only, based on PiHKAL characterization of sub-active doses. Revised upward to 40–80 mg per work-notes.

Reasoning

Work-notes describe light tier as mild sympathomimetic activation with physical effects only, based on PiHKAL characterization of sub-active doses. Revised upward to 40–80 mg per work-notes.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

commontrace

medium

The core 2,5-DMA experience. Cardiovascular stimulation becomes prominent — increased heart rate and blood pressure are clearly noticeable. Tremor, muscle tension, and sustained wakefulness define the physical profile. Shulgin described 80 mg as 'totally a physical trip' with 'nothing of a sensory nature.' Cognitive effects are limited to enhanced interest in surroundings and mild cognitive euphoria. The experience is 'largely pleasant' but lacks any visual, auditory, or perceptual alterations. No psychedelic phenomenology occurs despite 2,5-DMA's structural relationship to the DOx series. Duration is 6–8 hours. Appetite suppression and insomnia are likely. Temperature dysregulation and excessive sweating may occur.

Editorial

Directly sourced from PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991), the only published human dose reference. Common range revised to 80–160 mg per work-notes, matching PiHKAL.

Reasoning

Directly sourced from PiHKAL #54 (Shulgin 1991), the only published human dose reference. Common range revised to 80–160 mg per work-notes, matching PiHKAL.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

strongtrace

low

Intensified stimulant effects dominate — pronounced tachycardia, blood pressure elevation, tremor, and temperature dysregulation. The amphetamine-like character becomes more apparent at the upper end of the dose range, as noted by the WHO ECDD's characterization of high-dose effects as similar to amphetamine. Physical discomfort may become the primary experience. Restlessness, anxiety, and muscle tension can reach uncomfortable levels. Excessive sweating and vasoconstriction are more likely. Whether any weak perceptual effects emerge at these doses has not been documented. The cardiovascular load at this tier warrants particular caution. Pre-existing cardiovascular conditions are an absolute contraindication.

Editorial

Work-notes describe intensified stimulant effects with pronounced sympathomimetic activation. ECDD characterization of amphetamine-like high-dose effects supports this description. No direct human dose-escalation data exist beyond PiHKAL's 80 mg observation.

Reasoning

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

heavytrace

low

Doses exceeding 200 mg are undocumented in published literature. No human experience reports exist at this level. The expected profile is severe sympathomimetic activation — significant cardiovascular strain including dangerous tachycardia and hypertension, potential hyperthermia, and pronounced tremor. Whether psychedelic or perceptual effects emerge at extreme doses is unknown. The risk of serious adverse cardiovascular events increases substantially. Anxiety, agitation, and paranoia are plausible based on stimulant class pharmacology. This dose range carries meaningful risk of medical emergency. No data exist to characterize the upper safety boundary. The toxic dose of 2,5-DMA is completely unknown.

Editorial

Work-notes specify no published documentation at 200+ mg. Description reflects expected severe sympathomimetic toxicity risk from class inference. All claims are speculative.

Reasoning

Work-notes specify no published documentation at 200+ mg. Description reflects expected severe sympathomimetic toxicity risk from class inference. All claims are speculative.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

History

current version

published Oct 2, 2026system—

versions

2 total · since previous: +0 / −0 citations

publication ledger

publish Oct 2, 2026 · by agent-psx

backfill Jun 4, 2026

Historical versions do not record which reviewer approved them; editorial accountability is recorded per value in the database and in the publication ledger going forward.

full version history suggest a correction contact@psychedex.org

Sources

1 strong · 11 moderate · 7 weak · 1 insufficient

[1]
weak
Binding and functional structure-activity similarities of 4-substituted 2,5-dimethoxyphenyl isopropylamine analogues at 5-HT2A and 5-HT2B serotonin receptors.
Hemanth P, Nistala P, Nguyen VT, Eltit JM, Glennon RA, Dukat M · 2023 · Frontiers in Pharmacology
doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1101290no claims checked
[2]
weak
Amines related to 2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine
Baltzly R, Buck JS · 1940 · Journal of the American Chemical Society
linkno claims checked
[3]
insufficient
PiHKAL: A Chemical Love Story - Entry #54: 2,5-DMA
Shulgin A, Shulgin A · 1991
linkno claims checked
[4]
weak
Critical Review Report: 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine (DMA)
WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence · 1985
linkno claims checked
[5]
moderate
Multiple receptors contribute to the behavioral effects of indoleamine hallucinogens
Halberstadt AL, Geyer MA · 2011 · Neuropharmacology
doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2011.01.017 pubmed 21256140no claims checked
[6]
weak
2,5-DMA - ECDD Information Repository
WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence · 1985
linkno claims checked
[7]
moderate
Receptor Interaction Profiles of 4-Alkoxy-Substituted 2,5-Dimethoxyphenethylamines and Related Amphetamines.
Kolaczynska KE, Luethi D, Trachsel D, Hoener MC, Liechti ME · 2019 · Frontiers in Pharmacology
doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.01423 pubmed 31849671no claims checked
[8]
moderate
Tolerance and Cross-Tolerance among Psychedelic and Nonpsychedelic 5-HT2A Receptor Agonists in Mice
de la Fuente Revenga M, Jaster AM, McGinn J, Silva G, Saha S, Gonzalez-Maeso J · 2022 · ACS Chemical Neuroscience
doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.2c00170 pubmed 35900876no claims checked
[9]
moderate
1-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-iodophenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOI): From an Obscure to Pivotal Member of the DOX Family of Serotonergic Psychedelic Agents - A Review.
Glennon RA, Dukat M · 2024 · ACS Pharmacology & Translational Science
doi.org/10.1021/acsptsci.4c00157 pubmed 38898956no claims checked
[10]
weak
Legal status of 2,5-DMA in major jurisdictions
DEA, ECDD, GOV.UK · 2023
linkno claims checked
[11]
strong
The 4-alkyl chain length of 2,5-dimethoxyamphetamines differentially affects in vitro serotonin receptor actions versus in vivo psychedelic-like effects
Luethi D et al. · 2026 · Molecular Psychiatry
doi.org/10.1038/s41380-025-03325-1 pubmed 41193673no claims checked
[12]
moderate
Effect of a chiral 4-alkyl substituent in hallucinogenic amphetamines.
Oberlender R, Ramachandran PV, Johnson MP, Huang X, Nichols DE · 1995 · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
pubmed 7658446no claims checked
[13]
weak
2,5-DMA (2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine) - Chemical Identity
CAS Common Chemistry, PubChem · 2024
linkno claims checked
[14]
moderate
5-HT1 and 5-HT2 binding properties of derivatives of the hallucinogen 1-(2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (2,5-DMA)
Shannon M, Battaglia G, Glennon RA, Titeler M · 1984 · European Journal of Pharmacology
pubmed 6479216no claims checked
[15]
moderate
2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine-derived designer drugs: studies on the identification of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes involved in formation of their main metabolites and on their capability to inhibit CYP2D6.
Ewald AH, Maurer HH · 2008 · Toxicology Letters
doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2008.09.014 pubmed 18938231no claims checked
[16]
moderate
LC-MS/MS screening method for designer amphetamines, tryptamines, and piperazines in serum
Wohlfarth A, Weinmann W, Dresen S · 2010 · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
doi.org/10.1007/s00216-009-3394-4 pubmed 20069283no claims checked
[17]
moderate
Analysis of 2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamines and 2,5-dimethoxy-phenethylamines aiming their determination in biological matrices: a review.
Nieddu M, Baralla E, Sodano F, Boatto G · 2023 · Forensic Toxicology
doi.org/10.1007/s11419-022-00638-6 pubmed 36652064no claims checked
[18]
moderate
Comparison of the behavioral effects of mescaline analogs using the head twitch response in mice
Halberstadt AL, Chatha M, Chapman SJ, Brandt SD · 2019 · Journal of Psychopharmacology
doi.org/10.1177/0269881119826610 pubmed 30789291no claims checked
[19]
weak
Severe poisoning after self-reported use of 25-I-NBOME: a case series
Hieger MA, Rose SR, Cumpston KL, Stromberg PE, Miller S, Wills BK · 2015 · American Journal of Emergency Medicine
doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.065 pubmed 25983267no claims checked
[20]
moderate
Tolerance and cross-tolerance to head twitch behavior elicited by phenethylamine- and tryptamine-derived hallucinogens in mice.
Smith DA, Bailey JM, Williams D, Fantegrossi WE · 2014 · The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics
doi.org/10.1124/jpet.114.219337 pubmed 25271256no claims checked

Claim Verification

No claim verification has run for this version.

Coverage & Gaps

effect links

117 links · 117 approved · 15 audited0/117 with evidence basis

interactions

2 approved pairs0/2 graded

2,5-DMA

Value Provenance

Dosing

oraltrace →

Duration

oral

Safety

Toxicity Profiletrace →

Dependence Profiletrace →

Withdrawal Profiletrace →

Tolerance Profiletrace →

Effects & Profile

Contraindications

Timeline Phases

oral

Dose Tier Summaries

History

Sources

Claim Verification

Coverage & Gaps

oraltrace

Toxicity Profiletrace

Dependence Profiletrace

Withdrawal Profiletrace

Tolerance Profiletrace