Author Topic: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals! (Read 207 times)

Enkidu · « **on:** March 30, 2009, 10:53:32 PM »

While there are relatively few posts on this board as of yet, many of the posts are about the oldies and the goodies, like explicitly scheduled phenethylamines and LSD. Penalties (and further consequences) relating to the possession of these substances are quite severe. The repercussions of being caught cooking, selling, or even preparing to cook are much, much more severe. They can ruin your life! Many people can attest to this.

Additionally, regardless of the philosophies for and against prohibition, many drugs are scheduled for good reasons. (There are, of course, glaring exceptions.) Many are highly addictive, both physically and psychologically. If used on a regular basis, the alteration of thought processes caused by recreational drugs can damage your mental capacity and your personality! These alterations are virtually never positive. Modification of your bodies' equilibrium with drugs can lead to many health issues, including neurotoxicity and permanent damage to the CNS. Please research the health issues surrounding any drug that you take, whether or not it is scheduled.

Better solutions are out there, but you have to dig past the rhodium archives!

Vesp · « **Reply #1 on:** March 30, 2009, 11:07:20 PM »

What are the better solutions?

Enkidu · « **Reply #2 on:** March 30, 2009, 11:15:37 PM »

Well, that's a bit of a broad question. It's easy to leave the scheduled drugs behind and move to analogues, etc. How about the JWH series?

Here is an example of something interesting.

Vesp · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2009, 11:32:54 PM »

It seems any drug that is worth doing, and isn't illegal is that it's effects probably are not understood as well as the illegal ones. Also if they are worth doing they will become scheduled later. The JWH series may get metabolized into carcinogens, for example. Which has worried many people since it will really depend on how the naphthyl part of it is metabolized. I'm with you on the harm-reduction approach for safety reasons for ourselves, but I think it is also important to show them that this war on drugs has failed.

I'm sure THC is a lot safer then JWH-018. THC is understood very well compared to JWH-018, so this becomes another thing to consider when it comes to our safety.

Enkidu · « **Reply #4 on:** March 31, 2009, 12:05:22 AM »

True, the less understood recreational drugs could be dangerous. As Mark Twain (?) said, "It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand." While we should never underestimate what we don't understand, we KNOW that MDMA is neurotoxic, yet it is still widely abused.

Don't forget that there are hundreds of compounds in the JWH series! As for JWH-018, I have seen tox studies, and it doesn't look particularly toxic. To quote another poster,

Quote

I am happy to see that these results indicate JWH-018 as a reasonably safe compound. The epoxide intermediates that form on metabolism of the naphthyl group of JWH-015 (see [1]), will most probably also form on metabolism of JWH-018. This might account or contribute to both the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity only partly noted in the Green-Screen-HC analysis.

As more-or-less stated by Huffman himself[2], the AAI JWH's currently on the legal and illegal markets are certainly not optimized, tested or in any way 'evolved' for commercial exploitation. For example, the formation of epoxide intermediates can be avoided relatively easy, e.g. by a adding a simple substitution on the naphthyl. Moreover, there are certain JWH AAI analogues with substitutions on this exact naphthyl group, which would be safer options to choose. Yet JWH-018 still reaches the market, while some of the hypothetically safer options do not..... Of course I am fully aware that 'commercially favorable' or 'more effective' (as opposed to the 'safest' or the 'best') products reach consumers through both regulated and unregulated markets, but it continues to amaze me how this happens....

[1] Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2006, 386, 1345-1355.
[2] http://www.pierre-markuse.de/2008/12/16/spice-jwh-018-email-von-prof-john-w-huffman/

I hope that my post wasn't taken as derogatory! I was attempting to encourage you all to be forward thinking, as there is good reason for it.

Vesp · « **Reply #5 on:** March 31, 2009, 12:14:23 AM »

Quote

I hope that my post wasn't taken as derogatory! I was merely encouraging you all to look forward.

wasn't taken derogatory at all, so don't worry.

Good information and points though. I'd still think it is important to fight the war on drugs, and not seemly flee from one designer drug to the next. It certainly is smart to look for safer drugs. safer legally and health wise, but I feel it is pretty difficult to find substitutes for many of the drugs that could quality as safe and legal. I haven't seen any for stimulants, opioids, or anything like that, and most "legal" psychedelic drugs are analogues, which in America can be treated as the drug they resemble and so aren't much better.

How neurotoxic is MDMA? I didn't think it's toxicity was significant.

Enkidu · « **Reply #6 on:** March 31, 2009, 12:36:35 AM »

Absolutely. The Drug War has failed and will continue to do so. I have worked with Students for Sensible Drug Policy to raise awareness (about saftey, policy, and law), to try to end marijuana prohibition, and to try shift the policy-makers focus from the drugs themselves to drug abuse.

MDMA is neurotoxic primarily due to the alpha-methyldopamine metabolite.

Vesp · « **Reply #7 on:** March 31, 2009, 12:58:43 AM »

I see! I wonder what other drug could inhibit the enzyme that produces the aphla-methyldopamine? Might be worth looking into eh?

The war on drugs could have succeeded if they had a better idea of what everyone's incentives are, if they made drugs legal, but the trade, production, and sales of, but not purchase, of them illegal, and then adding a reward to turning in anyone who sold, traded, or produced them. Doing this would certainly destroy the drugs market. The government knows this also, so why haven't they done this? Clearly they must be getting something out of fighting this war. I wonder what that is?

poisoninthestain · « **Reply #8 on:** March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM »

Enkidu-Yes, MDMA is neurotoxic(there is no debate) but you forget that ethanol(tastey tastey alcohol) is also neurotoxic by a similer metabolic pathway. Their damage is almost as similer in intensity(this is just a generalization). I reccomend you read a book on neurochemistry that I *think* I uploaded to the archive explaining in details how MAO and reductive enzymes decompose MDMA.

I mean no disrespect but studies don't mean dirt shit, man.Half the ones released are biased. Once you actually UNDERSTAND how it works there will be no more question. Half the syntheses and bioassay's online are ripe with errors. I could sit down and error correct syntheses without too much difficulty. The devil is in the details.

You also forget and generalize that we are all cooks which couldn't be further from the truth. At least 1/4 are formally trained. I for example am 2 years into my degree in chemistry specifically organic which includes neurochemistry, inorganic, microbiology(i hate micro), and gen. chem., not too mention a few other minor things. Degrees don't mean shit either.

I have know several chemists, some of which who are 45, who have made MDMA, dozens of times over(no exagerration), and are still ticking just as fine as they were the day they were 18(according to them). THEY will tell you there is nothing wrong with moderation of MDMA.

Let me ask you this HOW does alpha-methyldopamine affect the pathway, eh?

That's the problems with studies. They give you scarey words to threaten you. OH, by ALPHA!

I'll tell you what for a fact it's not A-MD which causes the major neurotoxicity. Dare I give you the references straight out of my university book(not some pro-bias book). It's the oxidative states of the metabolites plain and simple.

If you did your homework you'd know it's H202 that fills the empty vesicles and "burns the neurons"...

I feel like I'm preaching to the choir. Unless you have specific references to back up your claims I'm going to call you out.

Don't believe me. There is, I kid you not look it up, a patent, for MDMA(i think it was Merck who patented it under the name Nexator?) and was later approved by the FDA for perscription in psychotherapy until it caught wind of the psychonaut community in the late 80's(i'm too lazy to look up the exact years)...and was later scheduled for that reason. If it weren't for the uprising of people using it illicitely back then it would still be legal today. It has nothing to do with neurotoxicity and the arugment is only used as a scare tactic. It really pisses me off.

...also for someone, and i'm assuming now, who has hardly experienced(if at all) MDMA you sure tout a lot of uninformed hate. I don't appreciate it good sir.

Enkidu · « **Reply #9 on:** March 31, 2009, 08:05:52 AM »

Quote from: Enkidu on March 31, 2009, 12:05:22 AM

I hope that my post wasn't taken as derogatory! I was attempting to encourage you all to be forward thinking, as there is good reason for it.

Quote

...also for someone, and i'm assuming now, who has hardly experienced(if at all) MDMA you sure tout a lot of uninformed hate. I don't appreciate it good sir.

Wow. You inferred quite a bit that is absolutely wrong, and your knowledge on the subject is lacking. I don't really know where to begin, so I won't.

poisoninthestain · « **Reply #10 on:** March 31, 2009, 08:22:28 AM »

"Delay is the deadliest form of denial.”

-C. Northcote Parkinson

Enkidu · « **Reply #11 on:** March 31, 2009, 08:55:18 AM »

LULz!! Here comes the flaming!!! 8====> ---

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

Enkidu-Yes, MDMA is neurotoxic(there is no debate) but you forget that ethanol(tastey tastey alcohol) is also neurotoxic by a similer metabolic pathway. Their damage is almost as similer in intensity(this is just a generalization). I reccomend you read a book on neurochemistry that I *think* I uploaded to the archive explaining in details how MAO and reductive enzymes decompose MDMA.

Ethanol works on the GABA system. MDMA primarily works on the 5HT system. Tell me how it's toxic by... what? the same metabolic pathway? I am waiting for you to tell me that ethanol is 'metabolized' into MDMA!!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

I mean no disrespect but studies don't mean dirt shit, man.Half the ones released are biased. Once you actually UNDERSTAND how it works there will be no more question.

Are we talking about MDMA or the JWH compounds? Either way, didn't we just say that MDMA was neurotoxic? How we know that? STUDIES. Tox studies, Muther Fucker!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

Half the syntheses and bioassay's online are ripe with errors. I could sit down and error correct syntheses without too much difficulty. The devil is in the details.

I seriously doubt that you can do anything better than get cum on your hands.

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

You also forget and generalize that we are all cooks which couldn't be further from the truth. At least 1/4 are formally trained. I for example am 2 years into my degree in chemistry specifically organic which includes neurochemistry, inorganic, microbiology(i hate micro), and gen. chem., not too mention a few other minor things. Degrees don't mean shit either.

?? Shulgin was the greatest cook ever!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

I have know several chemists, some of which who are 45, who have made MDMA, dozens of times over(no exagerration), and are still ticking just as fine as they were the day they were 18(according to them). THEY will tell you there is nothing wrong with moderation of MDMA.

Great, anecdotal evidence. Way, way better than studies.

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

Let me ask you this HOW does alpha-methyldopamine affect the pathway, eh?

Well, the alpha-methyl substituent slows metabolism. That's why many PEAs aren't active, while the AMPs are.

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

That's the problems with studies. They give you scarey words to threaten you. OH, by ALPHA!

Yeah... OH, by God, THERE'S REASONING IN THEM STUDIES!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

If you did your homework you'd know it's H202 that fills the empty vesicles and "burns the neurons"...

*Shakes in fear*

You mean there's really H₂₀₂ in my vesicles?!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

I feel like I'm preaching to the choir. Unless you have specific references to back up your claims I'm going to call you out.

Um, there's no choir. So, A) you should probably get off the drugs if you see a choir and B) then maybe you'd figure out how to use that saying.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to tell you that you've got no references at all!

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

Don't believe me. There is, I kid you not look it up, a patent, for MDMA(i think it was Merck who patented it under the name Nexator?) and was later approved by the FDA for perscription in psychotherapy until it caught wind of the psychonaut community in the late 80's(i'm too lazy to look up the exact years)...and was later scheduled for that reason. If it weren't for the uprising of people using it illicitely back then it would still be legal today. It has nothing to do with neurotoxicity and the arugment is only used as a scare tactic. It really pisses me off.

Yes, it was patented by merck a long, long time ago. What about amphetamines? They've been patented, to. Methamphetamine used to be able to be bought at your local drug store, along with heroin (also by merck?)!!

Then we discovered something called abuse potential, and still later we're learning about neurotoxicity.

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 05:17:47 AM

...also for someone, and i'm assuming now, who has hardly experienced(if at all) MDMA you sure tout a lot of uninformed hate. I don't appreciate it good sir.

Wrong. Oh, you are so wrong.

poisoninthestain · « **Reply #12 on:** March 31, 2009, 01:43:15 PM »

Nice.

Instead of debating like I hoped you would you instead chose to attack me.

Flaming is not allowed, debating is.

I will say one thing, I thought you originally typed "tons" as a typo and not "tox" for reports...that was a mistake on my part. That I will admit to. I misspoke. That would explain the confusion because I thought you were saying "i read tons of reports" when it said "i read tox reports" or something similer.

Also, when I said scare tactics by big words I did not mean it in the context you pointed out. There's nothing wrong with "big words". It's just most studies don't go past the word and the reader gets the impression "this must be the real deal. they wouldn't make this up"...when I could say "alcohol promotes production of acetylaldehyde. don't drink alcohol" and the general population would say "hmmm ok"...that's what i was trying to reference. It's because a majority of studies don't go into detail when it's released to the general public so it's often abridged.

...oh and not to be a dick(like you've been since you've arrived here) but to refute my point...GABA and 5-HT don't end up in the same places. That's gen. pharmacology 101. Ethanol works on GABA receptors and is *metabolized* by the liver into acetylaldehyde, and MDMA into another.

You're splitting hairs ad nauseum...and just taking everything WAY too far out of context. I said metabolic pathway meaning something(acetylaldehyde or H2O2/A-MD,ect...) being filled and denaturing the cell membrane around the neuron. That's it. Nothing more.

Enkidu · « **Reply #13 on:** March 31, 2009, 07:18:15 PM »

The bold remarks are my 'debate points.' Everything else is a joke/flame. I responded in kind to each of your quotes.

And talk about hijacking... look what you've done here!

Quote

"tons" as a typo and not "tox"

Oh, and by the way, those tox studies (several diff types as a set of studies performed by one group) for JWH-018 that I saw are the only one of their kind, as far as I know, and they were not released to the general public.

Quote

I said metabolic pathway meaning something(acetylaldehyde or H2O2/A-MD,ect...) being filled and denaturing the cell membrane around the neuron.

Perhaps you should elaborate. Because I believe that I am talking about a completely different cause for the toxicity.

Vesp · « **Reply #14 on:** March 31, 2009, 10:24:16 PM »

Quote from: poisoninthestain on March 31, 2009, 01:43:15 PM

Flaming is not allowed, debating is.

Correct, and now this thread is locked. If you have something to post about a similiar topic, go for it but no more cat fights!

Author Topic: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals! (Read 207 times)

Enkidu

Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Vesp

Re: Look for safe, unscheduled, recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Vesp

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Vesp

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Vesp

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

poisoninthestain

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

poisoninthestain

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

poisoninthestain

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Enkidu

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!

Vesp

Re: Look for safer, unscheduled recreational pharmaceuticals!