Actually it is just the opposite, in the libertarian world the market to develop fantastical new drugs and combinations of drugs for getting high would be unlimited
As the text you omitted (underlined) from your "reply" shows, you're flat wrong - people who want to get high but not get arrested have an incentive under drug criminalization to use new poorly-understood drugs that they would not have under drug legalization. There would probably still be a small number of nuts with no sense of self-preservation - but drug criminalization can't stop them today because it's not possible to write a law against drugs that don't yet exist.
they wouldn't have to worry about safety concerns or side effects or fatalities, since they would all fit the libertarian area of recreational drugs.
You're hallucinating - libertarians believe the law has a proper role in punishing actual direct harms such as you describe.
No, a few little variations in concoctions have not had any great meaning in the drug world, but if it were legal to play with all the drugs and drug cocktails and creation of new ones by big business and marketing them, then the last 50 years of getting stoned would have destroyed us.
As it is, because of the laws, very few Americans could even name one of those variations, whatever they might be.
*”You’re hallucinating - libertarians believe the law has a proper role in punishing actual direct harms such as you describe.”*
Libertarian position: “ We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, since only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes.”
Do libertarians want drugs to be legal, or not?