First I want to make it clear that I am not affiliated with Isomer Design, do not represent them or reflect their beliefs. I suggest supporting them because they provide the clearest, bast and most up-to-date situation regarding the drug laws in the USA, Canada & The United Kingdom. I did buy a poster off them about 7 years ago (I was the first, I am told) to support them and I know they are doing a lot of work used by lawmakers, lawyers, scientists, the media and many, many other groups and it's FREE.
So, that out of the way - the CsA
U.S.C. ? 802(32)
(i) the chemical structure of which is substantially similar to the chemical structure of a controlled substance in schedule I or II;
(ii) which has a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II; or
(iii) with respect to a particular person, which such person represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II.
A few years ago, before the UK brought in the Psychoactive Substances Act so on-line sellers now sell items in a hugely different manner and test outside the UK, I did a little study.
After reading Bmchemd Pharmacology. Vol. 32, No I. pp. 1267-1273. 1983 (INDOLEALKYLAMINE AND PHENALKYLAMINE HALLUCINOGENS EFFECT OF a-METHYL AND N-METHYL SUBSTITUENTS ON BEHAVIORAL ACTIVITY)
I had one of our suppliers send me about 12g of the 2 isomers of AMT and from the price, I suspect they were not 'skilled in the art' of using d-(+)-IO-camphorsulfonic acid and had to repeatedly resolve a much larger batch to obtain the >97%ee I had specified. Never mind, boss convinced, time to book a day off if things get out of hand.
Initially I smoked tiny amounts off foil and had my wife use the dark-room/pupillometer method of checking for dilation. While I couldn't FEEL any subjective difference at low doses, the (R) enantiomer reliably increased pupil size, the (S) isomer did not. A test they cannot readily use on rodents. Even these low doses made me nauseous so next day I resolved to find out more about (S) AMT. At about 10:30AM I swallowed 50mg in a glass of cranberry juice to help mask that awful flavour. Then I did the worst possible thing. I worried. As it turned out, I didn't have too much to worry about. For the first 30 minutes I had a few heady moments and learned that the (S) isomer causes nausea. Then an improvement in mood and energy overcame me. I would liken it to about the same dose of (S) MDA but lacking the body-rushes and 'sledging' effect i.e. I wasn't taking deep breathes and mouthing 'wow' every 60 seconds for the first 30 minutes. It was very good. Not great, but very good. MDA good, not MDMA good. Also, importantly, not like racemic AMT.
If people delve into the 1960s Upjohn patents (Jacob Szmuszkovicz, Jackson B. Hester, Daniel Lednicer - Upjohns CNS 'dream team')) dealing with AET, 7-methyl AET and for the lone article on α7-DMT then they might discover something to their benefit. Their research showed that the methyl-->ethyl lead to a serious increase in MAOI activity so forget AET & 7-methyl AET. The least studied (due to existing patents from the 50s) one was α7-DMT which a group of Russian scientists looked into as a potential antidepressant. Don't forget, Russia prescribed AMT for depression way back then. I don't speak Russian but from the few OCRed Acrobat papers give a briefing on their work. They had concluded that it was the (S) isomer of AMT that was responsible for most of it's antidepressant action and what is more, the introduction of a 7-methyl grouping resulted in a dose only 25% of the existing agent was as effective.
In their rather cloistered medical research periodicals, they were by the standards of the day VERY positive. I wondered firstly why this compound hadn't been researched in the west (and is still unresearched - Shulgin never went for 7-substitution AFAIK and Nichols may well have, but won't be publishing his findings after the 4-MTA debacle.
So I am left with the question. If, as I suspect, (S)-α7-DMT is a derivative of AMT BUT subjectively significantly different to AMT (having if anything a lower potency and only VMAT-2 activity and no 5HT2a affinity) then how on earth does the CsA law deal with it? I'm not asking because I seek to test this law. I'm asking because it's a HUGE hole. I'm sure that if people take a look around, they will be quite amazed at how drugs have been classified by their subjective effects and NON-chiral naming, doesn't the law just fail in these circumstances?
My only thought is that the people who are still producing 'bath salts' operate the 'gray market' using the classic black market business model (higher profit margins, victims cannot go to police, monopoly of supply, associated criminal activity and lack of media interest in a 'bath salts' death when compared to MDMA death story, acceptance of bribery of law-enforcement and politicians.... I could go on but it's now been over 100 years since the first drug was outlawed. Heroin was made illegal under then 1916 DORA (Defense Of The Realm act) law to stop soldiers sat in trenches being gassed, bombed and blasted from taking heroin, morphine or cocaine to alleviate the unconscionable conditions that the public were shielded from (we call it propaganda when another country does it). Until 1916 Harrods sold tin boxes containing a hypodermic syringe, blocks of morphine and pouches of cocaine. The strap-line?
'A Welcome Present for Friends at the Front'.
So have fun and play legal.
So, that out of the way - the CsA
U.S.C. ? 802(32)
(i) the chemical structure of which is substantially similar to the chemical structure of a controlled substance in schedule I or II;
(ii) which has a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II; or
(iii) with respect to a particular person, which such person represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II.
A few years ago, before the UK brought in the Psychoactive Substances Act so on-line sellers now sell items in a hugely different manner and test outside the UK, I did a little study.
After reading Bmchemd Pharmacology. Vol. 32, No I. pp. 1267-1273. 1983 (INDOLEALKYLAMINE AND PHENALKYLAMINE HALLUCINOGENS EFFECT OF a-METHYL AND N-METHYL SUBSTITUENTS ON BEHAVIORAL ACTIVITY)
I had one of our suppliers send me about 12g of the 2 isomers of AMT and from the price, I suspect they were not 'skilled in the art' of using d-(+)-IO-camphorsulfonic acid and had to repeatedly resolve a much larger batch to obtain the >97%ee I had specified. Never mind, boss convinced, time to book a day off if things get out of hand.
Initially I smoked tiny amounts off foil and had my wife use the dark-room/pupillometer method of checking for dilation. While I couldn't FEEL any subjective difference at low doses, the (R) enantiomer reliably increased pupil size, the (S) isomer did not. A test they cannot readily use on rodents. Even these low doses made me nauseous so next day I resolved to find out more about (S) AMT. At about 10:30AM I swallowed 50mg in a glass of cranberry juice to help mask that awful flavour. Then I did the worst possible thing. I worried. As it turned out, I didn't have too much to worry about. For the first 30 minutes I had a few heady moments and learned that the (S) isomer causes nausea. Then an improvement in mood and energy overcame me. I would liken it to about the same dose of (S) MDA but lacking the body-rushes and 'sledging' effect i.e. I wasn't taking deep breathes and mouthing 'wow' every 60 seconds for the first 30 minutes. It was very good. Not great, but very good. MDA good, not MDMA good. Also, importantly, not like racemic AMT.
If people delve into the 1960s Upjohn patents (Jacob Szmuszkovicz, Jackson B. Hester, Daniel Lednicer - Upjohns CNS 'dream team')) dealing with AET, 7-methyl AET and for the lone article on α7-DMT then they might discover something to their benefit. Their research showed that the methyl-->ethyl lead to a serious increase in MAOI activity so forget AET & 7-methyl AET. The least studied (due to existing patents from the 50s) one was α7-DMT which a group of Russian scientists looked into as a potential antidepressant. Don't forget, Russia prescribed AMT for depression way back then. I don't speak Russian but from the few OCRed Acrobat papers give a briefing on their work. They had concluded that it was the (S) isomer of AMT that was responsible for most of it's antidepressant action and what is more, the introduction of a 7-methyl grouping resulted in a dose only 25% of the existing agent was as effective.
In their rather cloistered medical research periodicals, they were by the standards of the day VERY positive. I wondered firstly why this compound hadn't been researched in the west (and is still unresearched - Shulgin never went for 7-substitution AFAIK and Nichols may well have, but won't be publishing his findings after the 4-MTA debacle.
So I am left with the question. If, as I suspect, (S)-α7-DMT is a derivative of AMT BUT subjectively significantly different to AMT (having if anything a lower potency and only VMAT-2 activity and no 5HT2a affinity) then how on earth does the CsA law deal with it? I'm not asking because I seek to test this law. I'm asking because it's a HUGE hole. I'm sure that if people take a look around, they will be quite amazed at how drugs have been classified by their subjective effects and NON-chiral naming, doesn't the law just fail in these circumstances?
My only thought is that the people who are still producing 'bath salts' operate the 'gray market' using the classic black market business model (higher profit margins, victims cannot go to police, monopoly of supply, associated criminal activity and lack of media interest in a 'bath salts' death when compared to MDMA death story, acceptance of bribery of law-enforcement and politicians.... I could go on but it's now been over 100 years since the first drug was outlawed. Heroin was made illegal under then 1916 DORA (Defense Of The Realm act) law to stop soldiers sat in trenches being gassed, bombed and blasted from taking heroin, morphine or cocaine to alleviate the unconscionable conditions that the public were shielded from (we call it propaganda when another country does it). Until 1916 Harrods sold tin boxes containing a hypodermic syringe, blocks of morphine and pouches of cocaine. The strap-line?
'A Welcome Present for Friends at the Front'.
So have fun and play legal.
Last edited:
