On one hand I kinda agree.
Starting from the original compound that introduced them into public awareness and prompted the takeoff of the chinese RC labs(methcathinone aka bathsalts.) There hasn't been a single stimulant/entactogenic/halucinogenic(excluding ergot/LSD analogues) compound discovered/produced as an RC that has any redeeming therapeutic advantage over the previously known and widely understood psychoactives. From Amphetamine and meth* to DMT and psilocybin. Despite a pretty huge amount of newish cathinone/amphetamine/tryptamine analogues, each and every one of them have had shorter half-lifes, higher abuse potentials, less therapeutic/more euphoric or undesirably intoxicating psychological effects, higher risk of short term cardiovascular complications, and a myriad of inaccurate/overhyping negative press attention which invariably spills over into what I'll vaguely term "Non-RC" PEA's.
On the other hand, in recent years there has been a slight change in focus towards some LSD analogues. Nothing overly exciting has come of it so far but several biologically active derivatives have been released that show a promising change of direction from the "inferior desired qualities, amplified undesired/toxicities"
It's kinda disappointing that they pull the rug out from under them just as they show some potential in contributing true improvements to current synthetic psychophamacology.