Can someone clear something up about SSRI pharmacology?

[Epsilon Alpha]

I never said 4-FA wasn't reinforcing or addictive. It is. Especially to someone with ADHD who got addicted to cigarettes after smoking only one of them. I'm saying it's not AS reinforcing as d-amp.

I have no intention of trying it, but I'll cede you that point. The issue is that to get new chemical entity drug like that approved in this day and age with it basically providing the exact same effects as regular amphetamine solely on the fact that it's "less reinforcing" is just not going to happen, especially since there's a large body of evidence pointing to its abuse already. They'd just make a extremely difficult to abuse amphetamine perpetration long before that, like shoving Vyvanse inside a Concerta, and putting a layer of bear mace on it first.

 

[JackiesBabyy]

I have no intention of trying it, but I'll cede you that point. The issue is that to get new chemical entity drug like that approved in this day and age with it basically providing the exact same effects as regular amphetamine solely on the fact that it's "less reinforcing" is just not going to happen, especially since there's a large body of evidence pointing to its abuse already. They'd just make a extremely difficult to abuse amphetamine perpetration long before that, like shoving Vyvanse inside a Concerta, and putting a layer of bear mace on it first.

That isn't the ONLY reason. 4-FA also has(for me, YMMV) a mellower comedown assuming you don't go on a 5-day binge, less physical stimulation(than d-amp itself, not even with l-amp taken in to the equation), less jaw clenching, etc. and one dose lasts 10-12 hours, while XR adderall and vyvanse last 8.(for me)

I just find it has a much cleaner, smoother feel to it. Heart rate and BP elevation only happen in very VERY high doses for me.

 

[sekio]

The problem I see is that 4-FA is less potent in terms of affinity, but more potent in terms of efficacy. A study in rats with 2mg/kg amphetamine and 7mg/kg 4-FA*(comparable to 30mg amphetamine and 100mg 4-FA) found 4-FA elevated dopamine much more than the comparable dose of amphetamine with a similar duration of action).

It's still reinforcing. If you want a non-reinforcing ADHD treatment go look at the NRI class of drugs. The thing is, the FDA doesn't care "how" reinforcing it is, it's a binary decision - the drug is either reinforcing or it is not.

The days when every amphetamine and opioid derivative under the sun are prescribed have long gone.

 

[P A]

http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/search.php?searchid=5515029
http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/showthread.php?t=241329
http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/showthread.php?t=240565
Lolololololololol

Dee lawd.

Your logic, for lack of a better word, sucks. You're basically saying 4-FA shouldn't be approved because a somewhat distantly related compound that's better-studied, MDMA, hasn't been approved for toxicity concerns? How does that warrant 4-FA not deserving to be studied more? By your logic, no newly-synthesized compounds at all related to any toxic compounds should even be studied?

For the love of christ, NO, that is not what I'm basically saying. I am trying (unsuccessfully, it would seem) to explain to you why 4-FA has not been and likely will not be studied by Big Pharma for the indications you specified in your post. Need I repeat the whole "not a shill" speech again? I think I've made it perfectly apparent by now that I don't necessarily like Big Pharma/FDA and their inherently cowardly, stringent policies any more than you do. Stop assuming adversarial intent on my part by default. All I said was that 4-FA has not been and probably will not be developed, then I attempted a cogent explanation as to exactly why. This is not 'my' logic we're talking about. It is that of the entire industry that you have to thank for just about every drug you've ever used to nurse an injury, relieve discomfort, or cure an ailment.

 

[JackiesBabyy]

Dee lawd.



For the love of christ, NO, that is not what I'm basically saying. I am trying (unsuccessfully, it would seem) to explain to you why 4-FA has not been and likely will not be studied by Big Pharma for the indications you specified in your post. Need I repeat the whole "not a shill" speech again? I think I've made it perfectly apparent by now that I don't necessarily like Big Pharma/FDA and their inherently cowardly, stringent policies any more than you do. Stop assuming adversarial intent on my part by default. All I said was that 4-FA has not been and probably will not be developed, then I attempted a cogent explanation as to exactly why. This is not 'my' logic we're talking about. It is that of the entire industry that you have to thank for just about every drug you've ever used to nurse an injury, relieve discomfort, or cure an ailment.

Zoklet is a troll site, so I choose to act as such there.

Anyway, I understand that 4-FA will probably never be really developed, tested and used. I just find that fact a bit sad seeing as how much it helped me, and that many people with the same thing I do don't know RCs exist. I'm not trying to assert that it will be developed someday, I'm just saying it's rather sad that it won't and that if, hypothetically, it were, it'd improve more lives than it'd detriment. I have yet to see anyone have a bad experience with 4-FA unless they (of course) OD'd or binged on it.

 

[P A]

it'd improve more lives than it'd detriment

One of my main points of contention, though, was that this is simply not for you to say. You have no sound basis upon which to stake such confident claims. What you do have is a series of anecdotal experiences, misplaced optimism, and internet accolades of a suspected human neurotoxin. We don't know what exactly 4-FA does in humans. MDMA and speed are quite different in that regard, for better or for worse; regarding their toxicity, we do know more than a little, which makes them much safer bets for the present. See what I mean?

 

[Dysphoric]

Are you certain of this? I don't see it in my PDR, but then again, that might just mean that the drug is being cooked up overseas by some generic manufacturer and shipped over here. That scenario is pretty unlikely though, considering it's like, Schedule >IV.

So, its possible to still get it? Now that you know what I'm talking about, Fencamfamine and not Fenfluramine. What do you have to say about it?

 

[P A]

Now that you know what I'm talking about, Fencamfamine and not Fenfluramine. What do you have to say about it?

I just misspoke, that's all. Sorry.

Everything that I said re. fencamfamine should be read as applying to fenfluramine.

 

[Foreigner]

Something that a lot of researchers aren't acknowledging is that SSRIs only seem to work in the short term (couple of months tops), but then it tapers off. Sometimes the depression comes back after that, even worse, and the anti-depressants make suicidal ideation easier.

To say whether SSRIs work or don't work in general is a blanket statement, same with SSREs and SNRIs. They probably work in most cases, for a certain duration. I am dubious about them working long-term.

 

[JackiesBabyy]

Something that a lot of researchers aren't acknowledging is that SSRIs only seem to work in the short term (couple of months tops), but then it tapers off. Sometimes the depression comes back after that, even worse, and the anti-depressants make suicidal ideation easier.

To say whether SSRIs work or don't work in general is a blanket statement, same with SSREs and SNRIs. They probably work in most cases, for a certain duration. I am dubious about them working long-term.

I've heard a major cause of SSRI suicides is something relating to bipolar disorder and mixed depressive-manic states induced by them when not taken with a mood stabilizer, or something like that.(Rather than the depression coming back later) But, I'm rather sleep deprived so I have no idea where I remember that from, or if that even makes sense. Let's hope it does.