• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

My nanna can't tell an amphetamine from a methamphetamine!

Copied from Erowid
Q : Is meth the same thing as Amphetamines such as prescription drugs like adderall and ritalin?
Answer : "Meth" is meth-amphetamine, which is a type of amphetamine. The "meth" from Meth-amphetamine comes from the chemical name "methyl". The chemical Methamphetamine is composed of an amphetamine molecule with an additional methyl group attached to its nitrogen (amine group). A methyl is one of the simplest atomic groups which can be added to a molecule: it is a single carbon atom with a set of (usually) 3 hydrogens.
Take a look at Chem Compare. If you look on the far right end on these images, you can see that there is a "NH-CH3" on the Methamphetamine where there is a "NH2" on the amphetamine. For many of the known psychoactives, adding a methyl group slightly alters the effects, duration, and/or potency. As you start to pay attention to other chemical names, you'll see "meth" show up in many names and this will almost always indicate that there is a methyl group on the molecule somewhere. For Methamphetamine, the methyl allows it a little better fat solubility and thus better penetration into the brain.
Adderall is simply a brand name for a particular mix of different "stereoisomers" (same atoms connecting at the same places, just pointing in different directions in space at one point in the molecule) and salts of amphetamine. Take a look at the page describing Adderall for a little more info about this.
Ritalin (methylphenidate) does contain an amphetamine-like backbone, however it is more complex. Take a look at the difference in Chem-Compare. The additional structures on this molecule also alter its interaction with the body and the neurons in our brains. Methylphenidate is reported to have less euphoric effects (some people describe it as 'more dull') than methamphetamine, but every individual is unique in their reaction to psychoactives, so no statement is universally true. While similar in backbone structure, amphetamine, methamphetamine, and ritalin are all quite unique drugs, with somewhat similar, but distinct, effects.
Another thing to note when talking about the differences in the amphetamine-class stimulants is that one of the strange effects of current culture is that particular drugs are demonized in the news, entertainment media, government information, and school curricula. Methamphetamine is particularly demonized, amphetamine somewhat less so, even though amphetamine-related stimulant drugs -- including methylphenidate (Ritalin), amphetamine (Adderall, Dexedrine), & methamphetamine (Desoxyn) -- are commonly prescribed for children from as young as age 3. All three of these can lead to difficult-to-break habits and can become a problem for some people who try them. But the marketing teams of the pharmaceutical companies do what they can to soothe parents' concerns by separating the image of street-speed users from the clean, clinical, healthy use of their products.
All of these substances are swallowed, snorted, smoked, and injected by users (in estimated order of frequency) and all can be dangerous in combinations with MAOIs, at high doses, or at high frequencies of use.
 
Well, i think this thread deserves a bump, and I also have somequestions :)
1. What Pre/Post load is useful for methamphetamine which would not be harmful in conjunction with MDMA. (I did find a thread on meth post-loads, but this question is more specific).
2. I was always under the impression that methamphetamine was smokeable, is this not the case?
Love the thread :)
 
L-tyrosine is probably safe to take as a pre-load to amphetamine if it's to be taken with MDMA, but not as a post load (dopamine being implicated in MDMA toxicity)
The freebase form of amph, like cocaine will not decompose upon heating to sublimation. The hydrocholide or sulphate salt will decompose, although some may be vaporised. Many will claim smoking salts will work, but most of the salt be destroyed and in the proces produce toxic products.
 
judging from reading this whole thread, the freebase should be a gluggy brownish oil stuff, correct?
most of the "smokeable speed", ie, crystal, i had then determined was the salt of methamph. is this correct?
Phase_dancer stated:
The hydrocholide or sulphate salt will decompose, although some may be vaporised. Many will claim smoking salts will work, but most of the salt be destroyed and in the proces produce toxic products.
if so, then what's ^ that guy talking about?
[ 12 September 2002: Message edited by: cactusgenie ]
[ 12 September 2002: Message edited by: cactusgenie ]
Click to expand...
 
Freebase amphetamines do exist as oils at room temperature. These are almost NEVER consumed by any user.
They are less stable and cannot be snorted or injected as they do not dissolve in water. Plus 1ml of oil; which doesnt seem like much is over 1 GRAM of straight salt!! so u can understand the overdose potential there.
The colour of the oil is anywhere from brown (rather impure producing a yellow/brownish salt) to clear (closer to 100% and producing a briliant white salt)
The reason people get confused when smoking meth and think they must be smoking the freebase is due to CRACK.
Cocaine is a much larger molecule than methamphetamine. In general larger molecules have higher melting and boiling points. Also salts have higher MP and BP than freebases.
Hence at room temperature:
Meth freebase = oil (liquid)
meth-HCl (salt) = powder
Cocaine freebase (e.g Crack) = Beigy/waxy rocks (solid)
Cocaine-HCl (snortable powder coke) = powder
Hence if u want to smoke something u must vaporise it. (similar to boil) The temperature required to achieve this adequately with cocaine-HCl is simply too high; hence people use Crack if they want to smoke cocaine. (much lower BP)
Often things when they are heated to high temperatures decompose, they do not vaporise; and hence this would happen if someone tried to smoke cocaine powder.
But in the case of meth, the temperature needed to vaporise the salt is low enough; u dont need the freebase as in cocaine (and u wouldnt want it anyway as its an oily mess)
What phase-dancer is referring to i think is that meth salts do not vaporise as well as people think and a lot is lost in the process.
Also as meth is synthetic (unlike cocaine) there are many dangerous chemicals still contained in it from the synthesis procedure. Those when heated, vaporised and inhaled may be very different in their potential deleterious effects than if simply eaten or snorted.
Phase: please confirm what u were referring to in case i have misinterpreted.
 
Apologies, I was a bit hasty with that last post- thanks Biscuit. I’m not sure the boiling point thing fully explains. Anyway here’s my thoughts.

I can’t believe how difficult some of this data has been to find.
Looking at meth/ amphetamine free base and their salts, we see melting points of the salts are significantly higher

Freebase Amph/meth <20 deg. C.
Meth HCl salt 172-174 C (Merck)
Amphet. SO4 salt 280 C (CRC)
The melting points of cocaine are:
Freebase Cocaine 98 deg. C (CRC)
HCl salt 197 deg. C (CRC)

(It would be expected that meth SO4 and amph SO4 would not vary too much between their boiling/melting points)

The boiling point of freebase cocaine is 187-188 C, and freebase amphetamine 200-203 This is at odds with the general rule which states higher molecular weight compounds usually have higher boiling points.

However, it appears the melting points of the HCl salts behave, with the cocaine salt melting at 197 C compared to 172 C for meth. The boiling points for the salts aren’t given in any literature I’ve searched, with the probable reason being that these compounds are expected to decompose before or at boiling temperatures.

Looking at amphetamine salts; using the mole weight / boiling point guide, it would be expected the SO4 salt would have a boiling point substantially higher than the HCl; there being ~31g between a mole of HCl and a mole of SO4.

So unless we are to assume the boiling point of cocaine HCl is substantially higher than that of meth HCl (and SO4), and using the melting points of both HCl salts as a rough guide - my thoughts are they probably wouldn’t be too far apart - then something else has to account for the fact that smoking meth SO4 does produce some substantial effect. Remember the boiling point of the SO4 (MP 280 C) is expected to be higher than the either of the HCl salts.

It is well claimed that smoking meth salts does give effect, and although cocaine HCl is also largely destroyed by smoking, it can’t be argued that it too creates some effect (although poor compared to basing). In attempting to explain this, I concluded that because cocaine is a di-ester, it is reasonable to think the ester linkages could be hydrolysed under high temperatures (H2O being a product of burning). This could mean amphetamines may be more resilient and not decompose as easily. Amph/meth does not have ester linkages.

The method of administration may also improve this. The salt is normally smoked in a bong or joint. Perhaps the drawing of the smoke, which creates a partial vacuum, reduces vaporization temperatures. I have read where a cold surface placed above heated MethHCl causes it to sublimate and condense on the cold surface. It is considered the best way of obtaining pure crystal needed to seed a crystal of Shabu. With Meth, it is mentioned anything not vaporized before the temperature goes much over 170 C (1atm) is either destroyed or transformed into something more sinister. If it goes black or brown it’s burning.

I hope this has helped explain something. The bottom line is a little coke and some meth salts gets through, but most is likely to be destroyed. See below


If you burn your methamphetamine with tobacco beware!

Smoking methamphetamine mixed with tobacco II: The formation mechanism of pyrolysis products. J Forensic Sci 35, 580-90 (1990)
The pyrolysis products of smoking methamphetamine mixed with tobacco were determined by gas chromatography (GC) and GC/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) methods. The mainstream smoke contained methamphetamine (14.5% of the initial methamphetamine), phenylacetone (3.1%). N-cyanomethylmethamphetamine (1.9%), trans-beta-methylstyrene (1.7%), N-formylmethamphetamine (1.5%), and other products (each less than 1%). The amount of each pyrolysis product in the sidestream smoke was less than that in the mainstream smoke by a factor of over 5, except for methamphetamine (10.5%)
….Although several products (for example, dimethylamphetamine and trans-beta-methylstyrene) were formed by thermal self-decomposition of methamphetamine alone, most of the products, except N-cyanomethylmethamphetamine, were formed chiefly by the thermal reaction of methamphetamine with cigarette components…..
Click to expand...

Note that only 25% of the initial meth was found after burning.
I found two such publications. If anyone is interested, I’ll post both full abstracts.

Edit: added paragraphs and page breaks
 
Last edited:
To repeat the very obvious, this is possibly the single best thread I've come across in Bluelight and really does give at least one good reason to be optimistic and proud of this site.
Apologies beforehand if this post goes a little off-topic but after doing a search on 'amphetamine mode mechanism action etc.', I decided that this was the best thread in which to bring this up. Defensive? Me? ;)
I noticed that there hasn't been any mention of the mode of action of amphetamines and methamphetamines. Surprisingly, I found just about nothing on the net (including the Lycaeum and Erowid) except for this little excerpt from Henry's Page - Methamphetamine:
The mode of action of the narcotic analgesics is still not fully understood. Recent research has determined that specific regions of the brain and spinal cord have an affinity for binding opiates, and the binding sites in the brain are in the same general areas where pain centers are believed to be. This research has also succeeded in isolating compounds, called enkephalins, that are produced in the body to reduce pain; the compounds consist of five amino acids. Apparently they can depress neurons throughout the central nervous system. They belong to a group of larger compounds called endorphins, consisting of many amino acids, that have also been isolated in the body and that are produced by the pituitary gland. Administration of endorphins, including the enkephalins, results in effects similar to those produced by opiates.
and this one from www.inchem.org - Methamphetamine:
Amphetamine appears to exert most or all of its effect in the CNS by causing release of biogenic amines, especialy norepinephrine and dopamine, from storage sites in nerve terminals. It may also slow down catecholamine metabolism by inhibiting monoamine oxidase (Hardman, et al., 1997).
Although the part on Henry's page about it 'not being fully understood' probably answers my questions (i.e. What is the actual mode of action? Is there a significant difference in mode of action between amphetamine and methamphetamine?), do any of you have any more up-to-date information on this?
----------
Notes:
from www.encyclopedia.com:
catecholamine (katekôl´emen):
Any of several compounds occurring naturally in the body that serve as hormones or as neutrotransmitters in the sympathetic nervous system . The catecholamines include such compounds as epinephrine , or adrenaline, norepinephrine, and dopamine. They resemble one another chemically in having an aromatic portion (catechol) to which is attached an amine, or nitrogen-containing group. Epinephrine and norepinephrine, which are also hormones, are secreted by the adrenal medulla, and norepinephrine is also secreted by some nerve fibers. These substances prepare the body to meet emergencies such as cold, fatigue, and shock, and norepinephrine is probably a chemical transmitter at nerve synapses. Dopamine is an intermediate in the synthesis of epinephrine; in addition, a deficiency of dopamine in the brain is responsible for the symptoms of Parkinson's disease . Medical administration of the drug L-dopa, which is presumed to be converted to dopamine in the brain, relieves the symptoms. Epinephrine is used medically to stimulate heartbeat and to treat emphysema, bronchitis, and bronchial asthma and other allergic conditions, as well as in the treatment of the eye disease glaucoma.
epinephrine (epenef´rin):
Hormone important to the body's metabolism, also known as adrenaline. Epinephrine, a catecholamine , together with norepinephrine , is secreted principally by the medulla of the adrenal gland . Heightened secretion caused perhaps by fear or anger, will result in increased heart rate and the hydrolysis of glycogen to glucose. This reaction, often called the “fight or flight” response, prepares the body for strenuous activity. The hormone was first extracted (1901) from the adrenal glands of animals by Jokichi Takamine; it was synthesized (1904) by Friedrich Stolz. Epinephrine is used medicinally as a stimulant in cardiac arrest, as a vasoconstrictor in shock, as a bronchodilator and antispasmodic in bronchial asthma, and to lower intra-ocular pressure in the treatment of glaucoma.
norepinephrine (nôrepinef´ren):
A neurotransmitter in the catecholamine family that mediates chemical communication in the sympathetic nervous system, a branch of the autonomic nervous system. Like other neurotransmitters, it is released at synaptic nerve endings to transmit the signal from a nerve cell to other cells. Norepinephrine is almost identical in structure to epinephrine , which is released into the bloodstream from the adrenal medulla under sympathetic activation. The sympathetic nervous system functions in response to short-term stress; hence norepinephrine and epinephrine increase the heart rate as well as blood pressure. Other actions of norepinephrine include increased glycogenolysis (the conversion of glycogen to glucose ) in the liver, increased lipolysis (the conversion of fats to fatty acids; see fats and oils ) in adipose (fat) tissue, and relaxation of bronchial smooth muscle to open up the air passages to the lungs. All of these actions represent a mobilization of the body's resources in order to meet the stressful challengesuch a response is often termed the “flight or fight” syndrome.
[ 15 September 2002: Message edited by: yaya ]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I have also heard of ephedrine being used in gym's across melbourne to help lose weight (get ripped).
Just thought id add that
 
From Pharmacology by Rang, H.P; Dale, M.M; & Ritter, J.M.
Page 157
...The most important drugs in the indirectly acting sympathomimetic amine category are tyramine, amphetamine and ephedrine, all of which are structurally related to noradrenaline. They have only weak actions on adrenoreceptors, but sufficiently resemble noradrenaline to be transported into nerve terminals by uptake 1.
Once inside the nerve terminals they are taken up into the vesicles by the vesicular monoamine transporter, in exchange for noradrenaline which escapes into the cytosol. Some of the cytosolic NA is degraded by MAO, while the rest escapes via uptake 1, in exchange for the foreign monoamine, to act on postsynaptic receptors. Exocytosis is not involved in the release process, so their actions do not require the presence of calcium. They are not completely specific in their actions, and act partly by a direct effect on adrenoreceptors, partly by inhibiting uptake 1 (thereby enhancing the effect of the released noradrenaline), and partly by inhibiting MAO.
…These drugs, especially amphetamine, have important effects on the central nervous system, which depend on their ability to release, not only noradrenaline, but also 5HT and dopamine
Page 158

mode_of_amphetamine.gif


Page 609
Pharmacokinetic aspects
Amphetamine is readily absorbed from the intestinal tract, and freely penetrates the gastrointestinal barrier. It does this more readily than other acting sympathomimetic amines, such as ephedrine and tyramine, which probably explains why it produces more marked central effects than those drugs. It is also readily absorbed by the nasal mucosa...
Amphetamine is mainly excreted unchanged in the urine, and the rate of excretion is increased when urine is made more acidic. The plasma half-life of amphetamine varies from 5 hours to 20-30 hours, depending upon urine flow and pH.
-----------------------
I have a little more on the modes of action from other sources but some is rather outdated, and none is very in depth.


Edit Updated picture hosting link
 
Last edited:
These excerpts were from a poster to a thread on *** ****. Having studied some basics of Traditional Chinese medicine when learning Tai Chi, I found this rather interesting. Western medicine does not see things in quite the same way as does TCM.

From ClearLight:

“TCM = Traditional Chinese Medicine...I've had some training in it...
TCM deals mainly with rna synthesis efficiency, dna substrate, ion charges across cell membranes and endo/exo crine gland homeostatic balance
With a TCM model ( and it is only a model ) you can make a much better analysis of both cause and effect than you can with western medicine. you can then translate that analysis into a western medical paradigm, and apply the appropriate treatment principals.

What I was talking about was the effect of the dopamine/serotonin/norephenephrine axes and MDMA interactions, and how the kidney adrenal cortex has similar receptor sites that affect function....
It's like with meth, in tcm, the flourishing of the kidney chi causes strong bones, good teeth and clear brain function. Meth burns the kidney chi ( noreph.) at both ends... In tcm when the kidney chi is "exhausted", either through old age or illness, the teeth fall out... and meth users think it's because of "vascular constriction".... Kidney's regulate ( in TCM) the yin or moisture in the body... when it's gone, everything get's hard and brittle...

Meth heads may not worry ( or have a choice about worrying ) what their chronic consumption does to their bodies, but when they are 50 and need a walker to get around and have false teeth, and look at dying around 60 or so, they might have wished then, that they were a little wiser about their choice of substances...
Click to expand...


A common view point regardless of the system of medicine seems to be that chronic use of meth/ amphetamines hastens the aging process.

Over the past six months or so I have known 3 people who are/have been big speed users, who have all developed polyps in their colons which often bleed when defecating. As amphetamines reduce gastrointestinal motility, and absorbs moisture from the same area, it is not really surprising. Add copious amounts of alcohol, it too dehydrating in nature, and you certainly haven’t got a recipe for good health.

When your body needs water and you aren’t drinking enough, a large proportion is absorbed from matter in the colon, further drying the contents. While occasional amphetamine use is probably not too destructive for most people, there is little doubt long term, high dose use is damaging. From snorting or swallowing, mucous bound balls of meth can end up settling on the mucosa of the stomach, duodenum, or colon - anywhere along this path. As things are also moving slowly, it makes sense that such deposits may sit for some time, damaging tissue and causing either an ulcer or a repair response which may ultimately produce a polyp. This is subject to further aggravation from foods, drink and substances.

We all talk of taking supplements to reduce deficiencies caused from drugs. It may also be a good idea to focus upon eating well and drinking water before your binge, and having something (but not too much) in your bowel before you take speed.
It would want to be something which promotes motility (slippery elm, roughage etc.) Eating suitable foods after will promote healthy elimination of the remaining toxins. This will also relieve the stress placed upon your kidneys. After all, anything toxic in your bowel which is not moving usually demands more from your kidneys, and they have a hard enough job already.

By the way, 2 of three sufferers said if they don’t play up, sleep and eat well, they don’t get the bleeding. Pretty simple message I guess.

Bringing things back to the thread title; Biscuit reminded me in an email of the hygroscopic (or is that deliquescent) nature of meth HCl compared to the SO4. Referring to the above scenarios, it would then be reasonable to expect the HCl salt could be more dehydrating than the SO4.

My question is; would amphetamine SO4 be more or less dehydrating than methamphetamine SO4? I don’t know which is more hygroscopic, but pharmaceutical preparations used the sulphate or phosphate (BENZEDRINE, DEX etc.) for amphetamine and the hydrochloride for methamphetamine (DESOXYN, FETAMIN)
Any thoughts on this anyone?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps it would be fair to point out that heavy use of any of the amphetamine family is likely to suppress the immune system, making people more vulnerable to infections, both due to the action of the drugs themselves and to the associated lack of sleep and nutrition.
On a separate point, there have been three or four related threads in recent weeks. Most of these threads have a link to this one, but not vice versa.
I'd just like to ask that if anyone who's interested enough and less technically challenged than I am could put some links to those other threads in HERE, that would be very useful.
Ta!
:)
 
so I have one doubt
what is the medicine used for people who wanna lose weight called "cloridrate of amphepramona " sp? something like that.. is it amphetamine?
 
Ok, i may well have missed this somewhere in all the info posted in this thread. What is the deal with the two meth isomers I and D. I understand that the d-isomer is the desired chemical structure for a stimulant and the i-isomer for a decongestant. Just how usless is this i-isomer and can it be changed to the desired d-isomer?
 
Its actually the L isomer; or levo; D stands for DEXTRO which is why dexies are called dextroamphetamine.
The D is what stimulates the CNS.
L is meant to have a more periperhal effect.
It is possible to alter the L amphetamine/methamphetamine into the D but i think it is rather difficult, requiring very pure reagents.
And besides, where are u going to find the L anyway? it USED to be used as a decongestant i think, L-deoxyephedrine, but certainly not anymore!
Pseudoephedrine used instead.
I will say this however: whilst D-meth is what you need for its CNS effects, whose to say that DL-meth, a 50:50 mixture of the two, doesnt have the better effects.
A certain extremely infamous meth cook/author has claimed that the effects of the 50:50 meth, or that produced from the precursor P2P, and not pseudoephedrine is better.
Yes u need comparatively more (as 50% in inactive in the brain), but apparently the synergistic effect of the L with the D gives a better, more "rushing/bouncing" experience, which is often what meth consumers are after.
Of course this is coming from one of the most controversial and often contradicted individuals in the field so take it for what u will.
 
Cheers for the info Biscuit, All this chemistry gets pretty confusing. I got told that Vicks Inhalers were being used to make meth but was pretty sceptical. But then i heard that heavy use of some vicks inhalers can give a positive drug test result for meth. I thought that mabey this could be due to the presence of some relative of meth or mabey the i-isomer for its decongestant properties. Still, this is all just unreliable and probably outdated information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top