5-MeO-DiBF

Sources

3 strong · 19 moderate · 8 weak

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

Values approved

171/172 (99%)

Data points an editor reviewed and accepted for publication.

Value Provenance

Dosing

oraltrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Threshold	20 mg	20 mg	low
Low	50–80 mg	50–80 mg	low
Common	80–110 mg	80–110 mg	low
Strong	110–140 mg	110–140 mg	low
Heavy	140+ mg	140+ mg	low
Editorial	Values from existing DB seed, matching PsychonautWiki community consensus. Corroborated by Erowid report showing mild effects at 100 mg insufflated. HandWiki reports conflicting values approximately 5–8× lower (Light=10mg, Common=20mg, Strong=40mg) — likely representing nasal/insufflation doses rather than oral. No published pharmacological dose-finding study exists. All values are community estimates and safety-critical — editorial review required.
	ReasoningReasoning Values from existing DB seed, matching PsychonautWiki community consensus. Corroborated by Erowid report showing mild effects at 100 mg insufflated. HandWiki reports conflicting values approximately 5–8× lower (Light=10mg, Common=20mg, Strong=40mg) — likely representing nasal/insufflation doses rather than oral. No published pharmacological dose-finding study exists. All values are community estimates and safety-critical — editorial review required. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Duration

oral

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Onsettrace	30–45 minutes	30–45 minutes	low
Editorial	HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Work-notes timeline places onset at 0–45 min. No controlled measurement exists. Proposed with low confidence.
	ReasoningReasoning HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Work-notes timeline places onset at 0–45 min. No controlled measurement exists. Proposed with low confidence. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Come uptrace	30–45 minutes	30–45 minutes	low
Editorial	Inferred from work-notes timeline (come_up 45–90 min absolute, i.e. ~30–45 min phase duration). No published data. Class inference from oral tryptamine pharmacokinetics.
	ReasoningReasoning Inferred from work-notes timeline (come_up 45–90 min absolute, i.e. ~30–45 min phase duration). No published data. Class inference from oral tryptamine pharmacokinetics. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Peaktrace	30–60 minutes	30–60 minutes	low
Editorial	DB seed and PsychonautWiki list peak as 30–60 minutes (oral). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement.
	ReasoningReasoning DB seed and PsychonautWiki list peak as 30–60 minutes (oral). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Offsettrace	90–150 minutes	90–150 minutes	low
Editorial	Inferred from work-notes timeline (offset 150–300 min absolute, i.e. ~90–150 min phase duration after peak ends). One user report mentions residual visual disturbances beyond 4–5 hours. No controlled data.
	ReasoningReasoning Inferred from work-notes timeline (offset 150–300 min absolute, i.e. ~90–150 min phase duration after peak ends). One user report mentions residual visual disturbances beyond 4–5 hours. No controlled data. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Totaltrace	4–6 hours	4–6 hours	low
Editorial	DB seed and PsychonautWiki list total duration as 4–6 hours (oral). Corroborated by Erowid user report (~4–5 hours to near-baseline for insufflated route). Community consensus only.
	ReasoningReasoning DB seed and PsychonautWiki list total duration as 4–6 hours (oral). Corroborated by Erowid user report (~4–5 hours to near-baseline for insufflated route). Community consensus only. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
After effectstrace	30–60 minutes	30–60 minutes	low
Editorial	Work-notes timeline places afterglow at 300–360+ min. One user report mentions residual visual disturbances persisting beyond the main experience. No controlled data.
	ReasoningReasoning Work-notes timeline places afterglow at 300–360+ min. One user report mentions residual visual disturbances persisting beyond the main experience. No controlled data. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Safety

Toxicity Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Acute	low	low	low
Chronic	moderate	moderate	low
Organs Affected	neurological, cardiovascular	neurological, cardiovascular	low
Editorial	Zero substance-specific toxicity data. Acute: user reports describe mild effects at 100 mg insufflated, no adverse events documented, Mohr 2022 NPS review excluded 5-MeO-DiBF. Chronic: 5-MeO-DiPT (structural analog) produces persistent DNA strand breaks and dopaminergic tissue damage in rats — transferability to benzofuran derivative unknown, so discounted one level and set confidence low.
	ReasoningReasoning Zero substance-specific toxicity data. Acute: user reports describe mild effects at 100 mg insufflated, no adverse events documented, Mohr 2022 NPS review excluded 5-MeO-DiBF. Chronic: 5-MeO-DiPT (structural analog) produces persistent DNA strand breaks and dopaminergic tissue damage in rats — transferability to benzofuran derivative unknown, so discounted one level and set confidence low. 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-consistent assessment. DB seed confirms 'not habit-forming.' Gatch 2011 shows low abuse liability for DiPT-class in DOM-trained rodents (ED50 = 1.94 mg/kg). Rapid tolerance prevents dose escalation. No substance-specific dependence data exist for 5-MeO-DiBF.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-consistent assessment. DB seed confirms 'not habit-forming.' Gatch 2011 shows low abuse liability for DiPT-class in DOM-trained rodents (ED50 = 1.94 mg/kg). Rapid tolerance prevents dose escalation. No substance-specific dependence data exist for 5-MeO-DiBF. 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 expected. Serotonergic psychedelics do not produce physical dependence or withdrawal. No published data for 5-MeO-DiBF.
	ReasoningReasoning No withdrawal syndrome expected. Serotonergic psychedelics do not produce physical dependence or withdrawal. No published data for 5-MeO-DiBF. Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Tolerance Profiletrace

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Buildup	rapid	rapid	medium
Half-life	3 days	3 days	medium
Full Reset	7 days	7 days	medium
Cross-tolerances	LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DMT, 5-MeO-DiPT	LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DMT, 5-MeO-DiPT	medium
Editorial	DB seed data (buildup: almost immediately, half-life: 3 days, full reset: 7 days) matches community consensus for serotonergic psychedelics. Cross-tolerance with 5-HT2A agonists well-documented (Fantegrossi 2006, Glatfelter 2023). Specific timeline values are community estimates, not confirmed by substance-specific research.
	ReasoningReasoning DB seed data (buildup: almost immediately, half-life: 3 days, full reset: 7 days) matches community consensus for serotonergic psychedelics. Cross-tolerance with 5-HT2A agonists well-documented (Fantegrossi 2006, Glatfelter 2023). Specific timeline values are community estimates, not confirmed by substance-specific research. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Effects & Profile

Contraindications

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
psychiatric Psychotic-spectrum disorderstrace	absolute	absolute	medium
Editorial	Class-level 5-HT2A psychotomimetic risk. Applies to all serotonergic psychedelics including 5-MeO-DiBF by structural analogy with 5-MeO-DiPT.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-level 5-HT2A psychotomimetic risk. Applies to all serotonergic psychedelics including 5-MeO-DiBF by structural analogy with 5-MeO-DiPT.
other Concurrent MAO inhibitor usetrace	absolute	absolute	medium
Editorial	Class-level pharmacological contraindication. Mechanistic basis well-established for serotonergic tryptamines; Gillman 2005 documents fatal serotonin toxicity with MAOIs + serotonergic agents.
	ReasoningReasoning Class-level pharmacological contraindication. Mechanistic basis well-established for serotonergic tryptamines; Gillman 2005 documents fatal serotonin toxicity with MAOIs + serotonergic agents.
other Concurrent tramadol usetrace	absolute	absolute	medium
Editorial	Gillman 2005 mechanistic support for tramadol serotonin toxicity risk. DB interaction already classified as 'dangerous'. Class-level inference from serotonergic psychedelic pharmacology.
	ReasoningReasoning Gillman 2005 mechanistic support for tramadol serotonin toxicity risk. DB interaction already classified as 'dangerous'. Class-level inference from serotonergic psychedelic pharmacology.
other Concurrent SSRI/SNRI usetrace	relative	relative	low
Editorial	Class inference from serotonergic psychedelic pharmacology. No substance-specific data for 5-MeO-DiBF.
	ReasoningReasoning Class inference from serotonergic psychedelic pharmacology. No substance-specific data for 5-MeO-DiBF.
other Concurrent CYP2D6 inhibitor usetrace	relative	relative	low
Editorial	Inferred from CYP2D6 involvement in indolealkylamine metabolism (Yu 2008). No substance-specific CYP mapping exists for 5-MeO-DiBF.
	ReasoningReasoning Inferred from CYP2D6 involvement in indolealkylamine metabolism (Yu 2008). No substance-specific CYP mapping exists for 5-MeO-DiBF.
pregnancy breastfeeding Pregnancy and lactationtrace	absolute	absolute	low
Editorial	Precautionary principle — no reproductive toxicity data exist for 5-MeO-DiBF or its structural analog 5-MeO-DiPT.
	ReasoningReasoning Precautionary principle — no reproductive toxicity data exist for 5-MeO-DiBF or its structural analog 5-MeO-DiPT.
cardiovascular Severe cardiovascular diseasetrace	relative	relative	low
Editorial	Class inference from 5-HT2A sympathomimetic pharmacology. No substance-specific cardiovascular data. User reports noted tremor but no cardiovascular adverse events.
	ReasoningReasoning Class inference from 5-HT2A sympathomimetic pharmacology. No substance-specific cardiovascular data. User reports noted tremor but no cardiovascular adverse events.

Timeline Phases

oral

Field	Published	AI Proposed	Confidence
Onsettrace	1800–2700 sec(i=0.05)	1800–2700 sec(i=0.05)	low
Editorial	Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes.
	ReasoningReasoning Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Come uptrace	1800–2700 sec(i=0.30)	1800–2700 sec(i=0.30)	low
Editorial	Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes.
	ReasoningReasoning Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Peaktrace	1800–3600 sec(i=1.00)	1800–3600 sec(i=1.00)	low
Editorial	Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes.
	ReasoningReasoning Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Resolutiontrace	5400–9000 sec(i=0.40)	5400–9000 sec(i=0.40)	low
Editorial	Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes.
	ReasoningReasoning Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large
Afterglowtrace	1800–3600 sec(i=0.05)	1800–3600 sec(i=0.05)	low
Editorial	Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes.
	ReasoningReasoning Timeline derived from work-notes (onset 0–45 min, come_up 45–90 min, peak 90–150 min, offset 150–300 min, afterglow 300–360+ min) and DB seed data (peak 30–60 min, total 4–6 h). Community consensus only — no controlled measurement. HandWiki suggests ~45 min onset but route context uncertain. Phases represent duration of each phase, not absolute timestamps. Driving advisory from work-notes. Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Dose Tier Summaries

thresholdtrace

low

At threshold doses (~20 mg oral), 5-MeO-DiBF produces a subtle awareness of altered state — a faint shift in baseline consciousness that confirms pharmacological activity without generating meaningful perceptual or cognitive changes. Mild body sensations may emerge: a slight warmth, marginal increase in tactile awareness, or barely perceptible bodily lightness. Physical effects are minimal. There is no significant stimulation, nausea, or pupil dilation at this level. The threshold dose serves primarily as a sensitivity test — establishing individual reactivity before committing to a full experience. Functional impairment is negligible; most users would remain capable of routine tasks.

Editorial

Work-notes specify threshold at ~20 mg oral. Descriptions derived from class-level tryptamine threshold phenomenology and user reports characterizing 5-MeO-DiBF as mild. No controlled threshold data exist.

Reasoning

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

lighttrace

low

Light doses (50–80 mg oral) introduce mild somatic stimulation and the first hints of perceptual shift. Faint color enhancement may appear — colors slightly more vivid or saturated — alongside a gentle sense of bodily lightness. Touch enhancement and early sexual arousal may emerge, foreshadowing the compound's characteristic somatic-sexual signature. Physically, mild stimulation and wakefulness are noticeable. Body load remains minimal. Nausea is unlikely but possible. The cognitive state is largely unaffected — thought patterns remain organized, and functional capacity is only modestly reduced. Duration commitment is approximately 4–5 hours. Sleep may be delayed by mild residual stimulation.

Editorial

Work-notes outline for light tier. Values from PsychonautWiki community consensus (50–80 mg oral). Experiential texture from Erowid user reports emphasizing mildness and sexual arousal prominence.

Reasoning

Work-notes outline for light tier. Values from PsychonautWiki community consensus (50–80 mg oral). Experiential texture from Erowid user reports emphasizing mildness and sexual arousal prominence.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

commontrace

low

At common doses (80–110 mg oral), 5-MeO-DiBF's characteristic profile becomes fully apparent. Visual enhancement is moderate: color alteration and color enhancement are noticeable, with mild visual drifting of surfaces and textures. The psychedelic headspace remains notably subdued compared to other tryptamines at equivalent experiential intensity — cognitive effects like analysis enhancement and conceptual thinking are present but faint. The somatic signature dominates: a clear body high, moderate stimulation, and prominent sexual arousal enhancement — the latter disproportionately strong relative to the visual and cognitive components. Touch enhancement is marked. Temperature dysregulation and mild involuntary body movements (tremor) may occur. Nausea is possible but typically mild. Time alteration is noticeable. Total duration is 4–6 hours. The experience is often described as "mild" relative to expectations set by the tryptamine class.

Editorial

Work-notes common tier outline. Dose range from PsychonautWiki/DB (80–110 mg). Experiential profile synthesized from Erowid user reports (4 reports) consistently describing mild cognitive effects and prominent sexual arousal. Effects taxonomy names used throughout.

Reasoning

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

strongtrace

low

Strong doses (110–140 mg oral) intensify effects across all domains while preserving the compound's characteristic profile: somatic-sexual effects remain more prominent than cognitive psychedelia. Visual effects become more pronounced — tracers appear, environmental surfaces show increased movement and drifting, and color alteration deepens. The visual field may take on a hazy quality. Body load increases: temperature dysregulation, involuntary body movements (tremor), and nausea become more likely. Sexual arousal enhancement remains prominent. Stimulation is marked. Abnormal heartbeat sensations (palpitations) may emerge. The psychedelic headspace, while present — with some thought acceleration and pattern recognition enhancement — remains relatively clear compared to equipotent doses of 5-MeO-DiPT or other classical tryptamines. Full duration commitment of 5–6 hours should be expected. Functional impairment is significant; driving and complex tasks are unsafe.

Editorial

Work-notes strong tier outline. Dose range 110–140 mg from PsychonautWiki/DB. Qualitative descriptions extrapolated from user reports and analog comparison with 5-MeO-DiPT. No controlled data at these doses.

Reasoning

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

heavytrace

low

Heavy doses (140+ mg oral) push 5-MeO-DiBF into poorly characterized territory. Effects are expected to intensify across all domains — visual, somatic, and cognitive — but the safety profile at these doses is entirely unknown. No published reports document experiences at this level in detail. Body load may become overwhelming: nausea, pronounced temperature dysregulation, tremor, and cardiovascular effects (tachycardia, palpitations) are plausible. Despite intensification, full ego dissolution is unlikely based on the compound's overall mild cognitive profile at lower doses. The risk of adverse reactions — psychological distress, severe nausea, cardiovascular strain — increases substantially. Heavy doses represent an unacceptable risk-benefit ratio given the complete absence of toxicological data. No LD50, therapeutic index, or toxic dose has been established.

Editorial

Work-notes heavy tier outline. Threshold for 'heavy' (140+ mg) from PsychonautWiki/DB. All descriptions are extrapolative — no controlled data or detailed user reports exist at these doses. Safety warning per work-notes.

Reasoning

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

History

current version

published Oct 2, 2026system—

versions

2 total · since previous: +1 / −1 citations

+ 5-MeO-DiBF (HandWiki) (2024)

− 5-MeO-DiBF HandWiki (2024)

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

3 strong · 19 moderate · 8 weak

[1]
weak
5-MeO-DiBF (HandWiki)
2024
linkno claims checked
[2]
weak
5-MeO-DiBF (PsychonautWiki)
2024
linkno claims checked
[3]
weak
EMCDDA-Europol 2016 Annual Report on New Psychoactive Substances
2016
linkno claims checked
[4]
weak
PeakAL: Protons I Have Known and Loved, Too — Another Fifty Shades of Grey-Market Spectra
Chapman SJ · 2017
doi.org/10.16889/isomerdesign-5no claims checked
[5]
moderate
Hallucinogen-like actions of 5-methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine in mice and rats.
Fantegrossi WE, Harrington AW, Kiessel CL, Eckler JR, Rabin RA, Winter JC, Coop A, Rice KC, Woods JH · 2006 · Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior
pubmed 16460788no claims checked
[6]
weak
5-MeO-DiBF Experience Vault Index (Erowid)
2015
linkno claims checked
[7]
moderate
Neurotoxic Effects of 5-MeO-DIPT: A Psychoactive Tryptamine Derivative in Rats.
Noworyta-Sokołowska K, Kamińska K, Kreiner G, Rogóż Z, Gołembiowska K · 2016 · Neurotoxicity Research
doi.org/10.1007/s12640-016-9654-0 pubmed 27461536no claims checked
[8]
strong
Receptor Binding Profiles for Tryptamine Psychedelics and Effects of 4-Propionoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine in Mice
Glatfelter GC, Naeem M, Pham DNK, Golen JA, Chadeayne AR, Manke DR, Baumann MH · 2023 · ACS Pharmacology & Translational Science
doi.org/10.1021/acsptsci.2c00222 pubmed 37082754no claims checked
[9]
weak
DEA Final Rule: Placement of AMT and 5-MeO-DiPT into Schedule I (2004)
2004
linkno claims checked
[10]
moderate
Schedules of controlled substances: placement of alpha-methyltryptamine and 5-methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine into schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. Final rule.
DEA Deputy Administrator · 2004 · Federal Register
pubmed 15455477no claims checked
[11]
weak
Foxy methoxy: a new drug of abuse.
Smolinske SC, Rastogi R, Schenkel S · 2005 · Journal of Medical Toxicology
pubmed 18072099no claims checked
[12]
moderate
Pharmacological profile of novel psychoactive benzofurans
Rickli A, Kopf S, Hoener MC, Liechti ME · 2015 · British Journal of Pharmacology
doi.org/10.1111/bph.13128 pubmed 25765500no claims checked
[13]
moderate
5-Methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine (Foxy), a selective and high affinity inhibitor of serotonin transporter
Sogawa C, Sogawa N, Tagawa J, Fujino A, Ohyama K, Asanuma M, Funada M, Kitayama S · 2007 · Toxicology Letters
pubmed 17382495no claims checked
[14]
moderate
Psychedelics and the human receptorome
Ray TS · 2010 · PLoS ONE
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0009019 pubmed 20126400no claims checked
[15]
moderate
Neurobiological research on N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) and its potentiation by monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibition: from ayahuasca to synthetic combinations of DMT and MAO inhibitors
Egger K, Aicher HD, Cumming P, Scheidegger M · 2024 · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
doi.org/10.1007/s00018-024-05353-6 pubmed 39254764no claims checked
[16]
moderate
Indolealkylamines: biotransformations and potential drug-drug interactions
Yu AM · 2008 · The AAPS Journal
doi.org/10.1208/s12248-008-9028-5 pubmed 18454322no claims checked
[17]
moderate
In vitro screening of psychoactive drugs by [(35)S]GTPgammaS binding in rat brain membranes.
Nonaka R, Nagai F, Ogata A, Satoh K · 2007 · Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin
pubmed 18057721no claims checked
[18]
moderate
Structural pharmacology and therapeutic potential of 5-methoxytryptamines.
Warren AL, Lankri D, Cunningham MJ, Serrano IC, Parise LF, Kruegel AC, Duggan P, Zilberg G, Capper MJ, Havel V, Russo SJ, Sames D, Wacker D · 2024 · Nature
doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07403-2 pubmed 38720072no claims checked
[19]
moderate
In vivo and in vitro toxicokinetics including metabolism, isozyme mapping, and MAO inhibition of three APBT psychedelics
Wagmann L, Brandt SD, Kavanagh PV, Meyer MR · 2026 · Toxicology
doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2026.154402 pubmed 41519460no claims checked
[20]
moderate
Effects of 5-Methoxy-N,N-di(ISO)propyltryptamine hydrochloride (Foxy) on cognitive development in rats
Compton DM, Selinger MC, Testa EK, Larkins KD · 2006 · Psychological Reports
pubmed 16933659no claims checked
[21]
moderate
N-Benzyl-5-methoxytryptamines as Potent Serotonin 5-HT2 Receptor Family Agonists and Comparison with a Series of Phenethylamine Analogues
Nichols DE, Sassano MF, Halberstadt AL, Klein LM, Brandt SD · 2014 · ACS Chemical Neuroscience
doi.org/10.1021/cn500292d pubmed 25547199no claims checked
[22]
moderate
Pharmacologic Activity of Substituted Tryptamines at 5-HT2A, 5-HT2C, 5-HT1A Receptors and SERT
Kozell LB, Eshleman AJ, Swanson TL, Bloom SH, Wolfrum KM, et al. · 2023 · Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
doi.org/10.1124/jpet.122.001454 pubmed 36669875no claims checked
[23]
moderate
Reports of Adverse Events Associated with Use of Novel Psychoactive Substances, 2017–2020: A Review
Mohr ALA, Logan BK, Fogarty MF, Krotulski AJ, Papsun DM, et al. · 2022 · Journal of Analytical Toxicology
doi.org/10.1093/jat/bkac023 pubmed 35445267no claims checked
[24]
weak
5-MeO-DiBF Experience Report: Disappointed (Erowid)
2015
linkno claims checked
[25]
strong
Abuse liability profile of three substituted tryptamines
Gatch MB, Forster MJ, Janowsky A, Eshleman AJ · 2011 · Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
doi.org/10.1124/jpet.111.179705 pubmed 21474568no claims checked
[26]
moderate
Serotonin syndrome: understanding pathophysiological bases and managing a growing clinical challenge
Szalanski F, Sieminski M · 2025 · Neurologia i Neurochirurgia Polska
doi.org/10.5603/pjnns.106987 pubmed 41263645no claims checked
[27]
moderate
Serotonin syndrome (toxicity): pathophysiology, incidence, clinical assessment and management
Chiew AL, Isbister GK · 2025 · British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16152 pubmed 38926083no claims checked
[28]
strong
Monoamine oxidase inhibitors, opioid analgesics and serotonin toxicity.
Gillman PK · 2005 · British Journal of Anaesthesia
pubmed 16051647no claims checked
[29]
moderate
Efficacy of cyproheptadine in the management of serotonin toxicity following deliberate self-poisoning - A systematic review
King E, Rotella JA · 2025 · Emergency Medicine Australasia
doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.14554 pubmed 39791184no claims checked
[30]
moderate
Neuropsychotoxicity of abused drugs: molecular and neural mechanisms induced by methamphetamine, MDMA, and 5-MeO-DiPT.
Nakagawa T, Kaneko S · 2008 · Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
pubmed 18198474no claims checked

Claim Verification

No claim verification has run for this version.

Coverage & Gaps

effect links

144 links · 143 approved · 29 audited0/144 with evidence basis

interactions

2 approved pairs0/2 graded

5-MeO-DiBF

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