This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What 2C-B does in the body
An unapproved psychedelic now entering controlled brain-imaging research.
2C-B is a partial agonist at the 5-HT2A serotonin receptor, the receptor LSD and psilocin act through. Partial rather than full matters: it activates the receptor less completely, which is the usual explanation for the milder and more manageable effect that users describe. It also binds other serotonin receptors and interacts with monoamine transporters more than the classical tryptamines do, and the 2026 imaging work found that the spatial pattern of its brain effects tracked those extra interactions rather than 5-HT2A alone.
What happened in people
In 22 healthy volunteers, it changed brain connections differently from psilocybin.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Claims of less distress than psilocybin still come from user reports, not direct measurement.
Where it acts
Cortical and subcortical 5-HT2A receptors; the 2026 imaging study mapped its effects across transmodal cortex and subcortical-cortical connections
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · V77772N32H · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C10H14BrNO2, weighing 260.13.
PubChem record · 98527 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
The recorded explanation is written in label language rather than for a beginner. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 103 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Protein
A protein is a folded chain your body builds to do a specific job.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A protein is like a tool bent into one shape for one task.
Where that stops being true. A tool keeps its shape. A protein can change shape and stop working.
What people get wrong. Protein in food and a protein in the body are related but not the same thing.
A polymer of amino acids folded into a defined structure that determines its function.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Acute effects on static, global and dynamic functional connectivity and brain complexity at 7 tesla
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Mallaroni et al. 2026 2C-B versus psilocybin 7T imaging crossover (Maastricht)
Both drugs reduced intranetwork static connectivity and increased between-network and subcortical-cortical connectivity versus placebo; 2C-B showed less pronounced between-network dynamic connectivity reduction and elevated transmodal static connectivity versus psilocybin
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The dose match of 20 mg 2C-B to 15 mg psilocybin is a judgement, not a measured equipotency, so part of any between-drug difference may be a dose difference. Neither compound can be blinded against placebo in participants who feel the effect.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, capsule or powder
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
DEA rule: Temporary Placement of 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine Into Schedule I, 59 FR 671, 6 January 1994 (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/19… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Comparative receptor binding profiles of NBOMe drugs, their 2C analogues and LSD
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Rickli et al. 2015 receptor interaction profiles of 2C and NBOMe drugs
How many people
0
Study design
In vitro binding characterisation
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
NBOMe derivatives bound 5-HT2A substantially more tightly than their 2C parent compounds in a single-laboratory comparison against common reference ligands
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Binding affinity is not efficacy, and neither predicts a human active dose directly. The value of the study is the internal comparability of the series rather than any absolute number.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, capsule or powder
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
DEA rule: Temporary Placement of 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine Into Schedule I, 59 FR 671, 6 January 1994 (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/19… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 2 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm), Drosophila (fruit fly). A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
2C-B
What a person takes: Oral tablet, capsule or powder.
The measurement behind this step
Administration in the controlled study was a weighed 20 mg oral dose in a monitored imaging session. Outside it the compound is sold as pressed tablets or loose powder, both of which are indistinguishable by appearance from the far more potent NBOMe derivatives, and neither of which carries verified content.
Getting in
Taken by mouth, in tens of milligrams
The controlled study used 20 mg. Recreational doses reported span a wide range, which is the main source of variability in what people experience.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Oral administration of 20 mg in the crossover imaging study, matched against 15 mg oral psilocybin. Onset over roughly an hour with a duration shorter than LSD, and a steep dose-response that is the usual explanation for the reported variability between doses.
A small substituted phenethylamine, structurally related to mescaline, that reaches cortical tissue readily.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Substituted phenethylamine with a 4-bromo substituent that raises lipophilicity and 5-HT2A affinity relative to the unsubstituted parent. Structurally closer to mescaline and to the amphetamines than to the tryptamine psychedelics.
Partially activates 5-HT2A, and binds more besides
It switches on the classic psychedelic receptor incompletely, and unlike psilocybin it also interacts appreciably with monoamine transporters.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Partial agonism at 5-HT2A with additional 5-HT2C and 5-HT1A binding and measurable monoamine-transporter interaction. PET density modelling in the 2026 study showed the spatial pattern of its neural effects aligned with these differences beyond 5-HT2A.
Connections within networks weaken and connections between networks strengthen — the same broad signature as psilocybin, with differences in the detail.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Selective reduction of intranetwork static connectivity with broad increases in between-network and subcortical-cortical connectivity, shared with psilocybin. Against psilocybin, 2C-B showed less pronounced reduction in between-network dynamic connectivity and elevated transmodal static connectivity, with spatially divergent global connectivity increases and similar brain-complexity increases.
Users describe less anxiety and less impairment than with psilocybin. The imaging is consistent with that, and the study was not designed to test it.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Behavioural markers of psychedelic effect corresponded to decoupling of the transmodal axis of functional brain organisation. The comparative dysphoria claim remains a user report that motivated the study rather than an endpoint it measured.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Recreational users, among whom it is widely used, and 22 healthy volunteers in the Maastricht crossover imaging study.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
The compound was scheduled in 1994 and 1995 and then attracted no controlled human central-effects research for three decades
The commercial products sold in Europe as Nexus and Erox were withdrawn without any published clinical characterisation
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Not available
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral tablet, capsule or powder
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Administration in the controlled study was a weighed 20 mg oral dose in a monitored imaging session.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold. The rest of the recorded wording: Outside it the compound is sold as pressed tablets or loose powder, both of which are indistinguishable by appearance from the far more potent NBOMe derivatives, and neither of which carries verified content.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
The controlled crossover in 22 healthy volunteers reported no findings that prevented completion of the study, and this record does not have a published adverse-event breakdown to quote from it. The identified acute risks in the general literature are those of a 5-HT2A partial agonist — anxiety, nausea, tachycardia, hypertension and vasoconstriction from the phenethylamine structure — and the dominant product-level risk is substitution by an NBOMe derivative at a dose appropriate for 2C-B. Because no controlled study of repeated administration exists, nothing on this page speaks to effects beyond a single supervised dose.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear∅Nothing found in the sources checked
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral tablet, capsule or powder
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
A recorded note compares this form with the others that are sold. It is kept below, word for word.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
The recorded note, unchanged: Outside it the compound is sold as pressed tablets or loose powder, both of which are indistinguishable by appearance from the far more potent NBOMe derivatives, and neither of which carries verified content.
No source is stored against this line.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of 2C-B studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That 2C-B produces less dysphoria and impairment than psilocybin at equivalent doses — the premise of the study rather than a finding of it
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That 20 mg 2C-B and 15 mg psilocybin are equipotent; the match is a judgement and any difference in effect may partly be a dose difference
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That connectivity changes measured under 7-tesla imaging correspond to any therapeutic property; no clinical trial of 2C-B exists
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a substance sold as 2C-B is 2C-B; the NBOMe derivatives are visually identical and roughly two orders of magnitude more potent
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of 2C-B are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
First controlled comparison against psilocybin, at matched doses
In plain words
Twenty-two healthy volunteers received 20 mg of 2C-B, 15 mg of psilocybin and placebo on separate occasions in a blinded crossover, with 7-tesla brain imaging each time. Both drugs reorganised brain connectivity, and they did it differently.
What was measured
Static, global and dynamic functional connectivity and brain complexity under 20 mg 2C-B, 15 mg psilocybin and placebo, n=22 crossover
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Mallaroni et al. used 7-tesla resting-state functional MRI in 22 healthy volunteers in a within-subjects, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover comparing 20 mg 2C-B, 15 mg psilocybin and placebo. Against placebo, both compounds selectively reduced intranetwork static functional connectivity while broadly increasing between-network and subcortical-cortical connectivity. Against psilocybin, 2C-B produced less pronounced reductions in between-network dynamic connectivity but elevated transmodal static connectivity. The two produced spatially divergent increases in global connectivity and similar increases in brain complexity. PET density modelling showed the spatial distribution of neural effects aligned with documented differences in monoaminergic transporter and serotonergic receptor binding beyond 5-HT2A. Behavioural markers of psychedelic effect corresponded to decoupling of the transmodal axis of functional brain organisation. This is the first controlled human neuroimaging characterisation of a compound scheduled in 1994.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The neural pattern tracks pharmacology beyond 5-HT2A
In plain words
The researchers checked whether the brain regions each drug affected matched maps of where different receptors and transporters sit. The pattern followed differences beyond the 5-HT2A receptor alone.
What was measured
Spatial correspondence between drug-induced connectivity change and PET-derived receptor and transporter density maps
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The 2026 study modelled the spatial distribution of each drug's neural effects against published PET density maps. The alignment followed documented differences in monoaminergic transporter and serotonergic receptor binding affinity beyond 5-HT2A — meaning the divergence between 2C-B and psilocybin in where they act corresponds to their divergence in what they bind, and not only to the receptor they share. This matters for the field beyond this compound: psychedelic neuroimaging results are routinely attributed to 5-HT2A alone, and this analysis is a direct test of whether that attribution is complete for a given drug. For 2C-B it is not. It also supplies a mechanism for the widely reported subjective difference, without establishing it.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A single-laboratory binding profile across the whole 2C and NBOMe family
In plain words
One group measured 2C-B alongside its chemical relatives and the far more potent NBOMe versions, all against the same reference compounds, so the differences between them can actually be compared.
What was measured
Comparative binding affinities of 2C drugs, their NBOMe derivatives and LSD across serotonin receptors, measured in one laboratory
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Rickli et al. characterised the receptor binding profiles of a series of N-2-methoxybenzyl (NBOMe) drugs against their 2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine analogues — including 2C-B, 2C-C, 2C-D and others — and against LSD, in one laboratory using consistent radioligands. The design matters more than any single number in it: affinities for related compounds published by different groups using different ligands and preparations are not comparable, and structure-activity claims assembled from such numbers are unreliable. A single-laboratory series against a common reference is what allows a statement such as "the NBOMe derivatives are substantially more potent at 5-HT2A than their 2C parents" to be made as a measurement. That specific difference is the practical reason a tablet mis-sold as 2C-B is dangerous.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Sold legally in Europe, then scheduled, then studied thirty years later
In plain words
2C-B was on sale in European shops as Nexus and Erox in the early 1990s. The DEA scheduled it in 1994 and permanently in 1995, and the first controlled human imaging study appeared in 2026.
What was measured
Interval between commercial availability, scheduling actions and the first controlled human study
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
DEA published a temporary Schedule I placement of 4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine on 6 January 1994 (59 FR 671), extended it in December 1994, and finalised permanent Schedule I placement on 2 June 1995 (60 FR 28718). The compound appears at 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(3) under DEA code 7392, listed with the trade names 2C-B and Nexus — the regulation itself records that it had a commercial identity. Between the 1995 scheduling and 2026 there was no controlled human study of the drug's central effects. The pattern is the same one the LSD and psilocybin records describe, with a longer gap: a substance moves from open commerce to Schedule I in eighteen months, and the science that would have informed either decision arrives three decades afterwards.
Source
DEA rule 59 FR 671 (6 January 1994); DEA rule 60 FR 28718 (2 June 1995); 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(3)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
contested
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
"Less dysphoric than psilocybin" is a user report the study was designed around
In plain words
The premise of the 2026 study — that 2C-B causes less distress and impairment than psilocybin — comes from what recreational users report, not from a head-to-head measurement of distress.
What was measured
That 2C-B produces less dysphoria and subjective impairment than psilocybin at equivalent doses
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The paper introduces 2C-B as "reported to produce less dysphoria and subjective impairment than the psychedelic tryptamine psilocybin". That is the motivation for the comparison, and the study measured brain organisation rather than a validated dysphoria endpoint powered for a between-drug difference. It found neural differences, including less pronounced reduction in between-network dynamic connectivity under 2C-B, which is consistent with the report — and consistency is not confirmation. Twenty-two participants in a crossover can detect large neural differences and cannot establish a comparative tolerability claim. The dose matching also carries an assumption: 20 mg 2C-B against 15 mg psilocybin is a judgement about equivalence, and if the doses are not in fact matched for effect intensity, some of the difference is a dose difference.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The dangerous confusion is with the NBOMe derivatives
In plain words
Adding one chemical group to 2C-B produces 25B-NBOMe, which is far more potent. Material sold as 2C-B has repeatedly turned out to be that instead.
What was measured
Comparative 5-HT2A binding affinity of the NBOMe derivatives against their 2C parent compounds
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The N-2-methoxybenzyl derivatives — 25B-NBOMe, 25I-NBOMe, 25C-NBOMe — are formed by adding a single substituent to the amine of the corresponding 2C compound, and they bind 5-HT2A far more tightly, which was the central finding of the Rickli comparison. Active doses drop by roughly two orders of magnitude as a result, so a quantity appropriate for 2C-B is a large overdose of the NBOMe analogue. Because the compounds are visually indistinguishable as powder and are not separated by any presumptive test, the substitution is not detectable without instrumental analysis. This is filed as measured because the potency difference is a laboratory result rather than an inference, and because it is the specific fact that makes the identification step of this page's workflow load-bearing rather than routine.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A phenethylamine, not a tryptamine — and the field has studied only tryptamines
In plain words
Nearly all modern psychedelic research uses psilocybin, LSD or DMT, which are tryptamines. 2C-B belongs to the other chemical family, and until 2026 nobody had imaged what it does.
What was measured
Number of controlled human neuroimaging studies of 2C-B, against those of the tryptamine psychedelics
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The classical psychedelics in current clinical development are tryptamines and ergolines: psilocybin, LSD, DMT, 5-MeO-DMT. 2C-B is a substituted phenethylamine, structurally closer to mescaline and to the amphetamines, with a receptor profile that includes greater monoamine-transporter interaction. The 2026 authors position it explicitly as a "next-generation" candidate whose distinct pharmacodynamics might suit different populations, and note that its neural correlates had remained unexplored despite its popularity. The measured content of this record is the gap itself: a widely used compound, scheduled for three decades, with one controlled human central-effects study.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A Shulgin phenethylamine scheduled in 1994 and largely unstudied for thirty years, which in 2026 became the subject of a 22-person double-blind crossover 7-tesla imaging study against matched-dose psilocybin — the first controlled evidence for the long-standing user report that it produces less dysphoria.
Recorded evidence blocks (6)
Q1
What did 2C-B's largest trial (50 people) and its longest (15 months) measure?
50 people in 2C-B's largest registered study, 15 months in its longest registered window, measuring Compliance on CPAP. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
1 na, 1 phase1; NCT05523401; 2024-11-05; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2024, NCT05523401.
These counts include studies where 2C-B was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na
1
phase1
1
Last recorded human testNCT05523401
2024-11-05
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From C. elegans to human: where has 2C-B shown lifespan?
Interpretation Compliance on CPAP — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
Drosophila
lifespan
humanNCT01013207
mechanism-only; Compliance on CPAP; 2
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
More 2C-B was worse in human: at what point?
U-shaped in human: "Our findings reveal: (1) a significant U-shaped AGG-GTFP nexus, wherein low-level agglomeration suppresses GTFP while high-level agglomeration fosters it; (2) positive spatial spillovers of GTFP, with neighboring AGG exerting inverted U-shaped effects on local GTFP; (3) energy efficiency serving as a partial mediator;…" Europe PMC · dose-response search · 2026-05-12
5 recorded sentences naming 2C-B; U-shaped, biphasic
Show the evidence
U-shaped
PMID 42031952
"Our findings reveal: (1) a significant U-shaped AGG-GTFP nexus, wherein low-level agglomeration suppresses GTFP while high-level agglomeration fosters it; (2) positive spatial spillovers of GTFP, with neighboring AGG exerting inverted U-shaped effects on local GTFP; (3) energy efficiency serving as a partial mediator; and (4) markedly heterogeneous policy moderating effects—National Pilot Program…"
"The study contributes to the literature by providing a more nuanced understanding of the CSR-Firm value nexus, especially by exploring the U-shaped relationship and the dual roles of innovation (mediator and moderator) in an emerging market context."
PMID 38852413
"The empirical outcomes unveiled that AFP and GDP have U-shaped nexus with ecological intensity."
PMID 36547846
"For the most part, the findings reveal that the (1) inverted U-shaped energy-Kuznets curve holds; (2) U-shaped globalization-Kuznets curve is evident; (3) inverted U-shaped turning points for nonrenewable energy are 496.03 and 640.84, while for globalization are 38.83 and 39.04, respectively; (4) globalization-emission relationship indicates a U-shaped relationship at the median and 75th…"
biphasic
"We hypothesize that salinity transiently uncouples the sucrose–trehalose-6-P (Tre6P)– Sucrose non-fermenting kinase 1 (SnRK1) nexus, aligning with a biphasic root metabolic response and altered root architecture."
recorded 2026-05-12 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Could one person measure 2C-B's effect on acute subjective effects i?
Acute subjective effects i: measured in 2C-B's trials.
Interpretation acute subjective effects i is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
acute subjective effects i; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
1
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
24; NCT05523401; PHASE1; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; COMPLETED
Q5
At the median, 2C-B's trials enrolled 37 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
37
Largest enrolment
50
Registered trials counted
2
Q6
What is recorded about 2C-B and mTOR?
"The AMP-activated protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (AMPK/mTOR) pathway serves as a critical nexus between energy metabolism, oxidative stress, and cell survival." — where 2C-B and mTOR appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-05-28
"The AMP-activated protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (AMPK/mTOR) pathway serves as a critical nexus between energy metabolism, oxidative stress, and cell survival."
AMPKPMID 40887290
"The AMP-activated protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (AMPK/mTOR) pathway serves as a critical nexus between energy metabolism, oxidative stress, and cell survival."
mTORPMID 40540722
"Targeting the AMPK/mTOR signaling nexus, which senses cellular energy status, emerges as a strategic intervention."
AMPKPMID 40540722
"Targeting the AMPK/mTOR signaling nexus, which senses cellular energy status, emerges as a strategic intervention."
sirtuin
PMID 37379905
"In terms of the SIRT1-ACD nexus, identifying SIRT1-activating small molecules and understanding the possible mechanism triggering ACD could be a potential therapeutic avenue for cancer prevention."
PMID 42209711
"Our findings establish HK2 as a metabolic-epigenetic nexus driving angiogenesis via lactate-dependent H3K18la modification and propose SIRT2 inhibition as a novel therapeutic strategy to bypass HK2 deficiency in PAD."
autophagy
PMID 41703156
"HMOX1 appears to act as a molecular nexus connecting impaired autophagy with immune microenvironment alterations in PCOS, highlighting its potential as both a diagnostic marker and a target for immunomodulatory therapy."
PMID 41192632
"Here, we review the molecular mechanisms governing the LD-autophagy axis in cancer, discuss its pivotal roles in tumor progression, metastasis, and therapeutic resistance, and explore the promise of targeting this nexus for future cancer therapies."
PMID 41899419
"Ferroptosis-an iron-dependent form of regulated cell death distinct from apoptosis, autophagy, and necrosis-has emerged as a critical regulatory nexus in the progression and therapeutic response of these malignancies."
mTORPMID 38718656
"These impacts were partially mediated via the activation of autophagy flux, as proven by the increased expression of beclin1, LC3-II, and the curbing of p62 protein, alongside the regulation of the p-AMPK/mTOR nexus."
AMPKPMID 38718656
"These impacts were partially mediated via the activation of autophagy flux, as proven by the increased expression of beclin1, LC3-II, and the curbing of p62 protein, alongside the regulation of the p-AMPK/mTOR nexus."
NAD+PMID 42190515
"The oxidoreductase NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1) stabilizes the core metabolic regulator hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF-1α), which further transcriptionally activates the homeobox transcription factor SIX1, forming a coordinated NQO1/HIF-1α/SIX1 signaling axis that drives metabolic reprogramming and immune evasion in MIBC, yet targeted therapies disrupting this metabolic-immune nexus…"
recorded 2026-05-28 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 6 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.