Drug Policy Discussion, Research Papers, New Laws, Misc.

Health Canada has been dropping the ban hammer quite a bit lately. First salvia, then cannabinoids, and now the 2C-phenethylamines. I'm a bit confused though; they've already scheduled the main NBOMe compounds, of which there were 70 exhibits in 2014, but there were only 18 exhibits of the other 2C-phenethylamine that year. Seems like a big waste of time and resources.
 
This is very bad... :(

[éS]Infinite said:
I'm a bit confused though; they've already scheduled the main NBOMe compounds, of which there were 70 exhibits in 2014, but there were only 18 exhibits of the other 2C-phenethylamine that year. Seems like a big waste of time and resources.
Click to expand...

Canada actually hasn't scheduled the NBOMe compounds yet. They have been scheduled internationally, but that does not affect national laws. As for all the other 2Cs, Health Canada banning them for the same reason they ban everything: because they are drugs that people like to take to get high. That is sufficient reason to ban a substance according to most of the world, unfortunately.
 
paranoid android said:
WTF! Now they are adding whole classes of fucking drugs? I saw somewhere the other day that they are also apparently making Salvia a controlled substance in Canada now as well. Yes because those Salvia addicts really take up a burden on the health care system in this country compared to all the morbidly obese people we have currently clogging up the ER's.

This one i didn't see and again how can we call Canada anything resembling a Democracy when some goddamn stuck up bureaucrat in Ottawa who probably doesn't even know anyone personally who has actually taken one of the drugs they are trying to ban (then again they probably lack friends altogether) can decide what is good for a entire nation. Hopefully when the election comes up Canadian voters will remember just how badly things have sucked under our dickless führer Mr.Stevie. A NDP win federally would be the best outcome as i would not trust that slimy prick Trudeau as far as id throw him after he signed that bullshit anti-terrorist legislation.

How they are planning on going about enforcing any of this is another thing altogether. This may very well end up as just another law that has no teeth.
Click to expand...

I completely share your concerns, frustration and anger regarding Mr. Harper and his fellow cons, and their scientifically contradicted views which are based on religious beliefs based on a flawed interpretation of a really, really old book (the Bible) which was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek by at least 40 different authors over the course of ~1,500 years from roughly 1,500 B.C. to 50 A.D.

As for Mr. Trudeau, by doing a 180 and choosing to vote yes for Bill C-51, he has lost a ton of support, and as a result, his stupidity will almost assuredly result in him and his party losing the election.

Regardless, I'll be extremely happy to see this fucking sociopath and goon of a Prime Minister kicked out of Ottawa for good. And I will also be delighted to see our current Health Minister Rona Ambrose fade into obscurity, because together, she and our con PM Harper have not only cock-blocked progressive, scientifically backed policies with respect to controlled substances, but they have actually managed to run the clock backwards by way of counter-productive and frankly ridiculous amendments such as the one noted up above.

P.S. - With respect to the NDP, admittedly I'm not sure how they fare in terms of their political compass. Are they far-left, or, be they more so center-left? I honestly don't know (would you know?) :(
 
Last edited:
ro4eva said:
P.S. - With respect to the NDP, admittedly I'm not sure how they fare in terms of their political compass. Are they far-left, or, be they more so center-left? I honestly don't know (would you know?) :(
Click to expand...

I would say centre-left.
 
Also working on AH-7921 & MT-45

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CONTROLLED DRUGS AND SUBSTANCES ACT

Notice to interested parties — Proposal regarding the scheduling of AH-7921 and MT-45 under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Narcotic Control Regulations

This notice provides interested stakeholders with the opportunity to provide comments on Health Canada’s proposal to add AH-7921 (1-(3,4-dichlorobenzamidomethyl)cyclohexyldimethyamine), its salts, isomers and salts of isomers and MT-45 (1-cyclohexyl-4-(1,2-diphenylethyl)piperazine), its salts, derivatives, isomers and analogues and salts of derivatives, isomers and analogues to Schedule I to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) and to the Schedule to the Narcotic Control Regulations (NCR).

AH-7921 is a synthetic opioid developed in 1974 as a potential analgesic by Allen & Hanburys, a pharmaceutical company based in the United Kingdom, but it was never marketed commercially. AH-7921 does not have any recorded therapeutic applications or industrial use. In 2012, AH-7921 began to be marketed by internet retailers as a “research chemical.” In March 2015, the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs voted in favour of controlling AH-7921 under Schedule I of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 (1961 Convention). As a signatory, Canada has an obligation to adopt the controls required by the 1961 Convention. The CDSA is the statutory instrument through which the Government of Canada fulfills its international obligations under the UN drug control conventions. As substances that are structurally related to AH-7921 are also known to have abuse potential and are included in the Convention, the salts, isomers and salts of isomers of AH-7921 will also be scheduled along with the parent substance.

MT-45 is a synthetic opioid with potential health risks similar to those of other controlled opioids. Although MT-45 is not currently controlled under the UN drug control conventions, the European Union (EU) Council adopted the decision to control MT-45 across the EU in December 2014, in part as a result of 28 deaths associated with MT-45 in Sweden. To date, there is no known evidence demonstrating that MT-45 has actual or potential uses apart from scientific research. In order to capture substances that are structurally related to MT-45 and have psychoactive effects, it is also proposed that the salts, derivatives, isomers and analogues of MT-45 and the salts of these substances be scheduled along with the parent substance.

These proposed amendments would prohibit, among other activities, the possession, trafficking, possession for the purpose of trafficking, importation, exportation, possession for the purpose of exportation, and production of the above substances, except as authorized under the NCR or via an exemption under section 56 of the CDSA.

SOURCE: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2015/2015-08-01/html/notice-avis-eng.php
 
looks like they've got all the common synthetics covered.

also, be wary of the Mulcair's centrist rhetoric. Much of the NDP is extremely socialist and we'll end up with a serious case of voter's remorse if they're put in power. Remember that you aren't voting for the figurehead, you're voting for your local candidate and by extension for the party's policies. We know the Cons need to take a break, but Liberals are the best choice overall for not-crazy leadership even if they are twaddling around the bush like always. This will be an important election so go and vote, but don't just throw your vote in for the dark horse just because you like their colour.
 
Synthetic Drug Control Act 2015 (USA)

Last week, several congressional representatives announced the introduction ofH.R. 3537, the “Synthetic Drug Control Act of 2015.” If enacted, the Synthetic Drug Control Act would strengthen existing federal law (specifically, the Controlled Substances Analogue Enforcement Act) (“Analogue Act”), which provides that any compound that is chemically or pharmacologically similar to a controlled substance in Schedule I or II under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) must be treated as if it is controlled in that same schedule.
Click to expand...
The significant limitation found in the Analogue Act, which the legislators hope to address with passage of the proposed legislation, is that the Analogue Act currently addresses substances that are substantially structurally and pharmacologically similar to a controlled substance as long as they are intended for human consumption. (21 U.S.C. § 816 (a “controlled substance analogue shall, to the extent intended for human consumption, be treated, for purposes of any Federal law as a controlled substance in Schedule I.”)) Schedule I substances have a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S. and there is a lack of accepted safety for their use under medical supervision. 21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(1). The use of newly derived analogues, which crop up on a very regular basis and include “flakka” and “molly,” are often sold legally in colorful, readily identifiable, and branded packaging. These drugs are distributed by convenience stores, head shops, or online, and, importantly, they typically bear the legal fig leaf ‘not for human consumption’ to avoid regulation by the federal Food and Drug Administration.
The legislation intends to facilitate the prosecution of synthetic drug manufacturers and distributors and make Analogue Act law a more useful tool for law enforcement. It adds to the end of 21 U.S.C. § 813, which currently states “A controlled substance analogue shall, to the extent intended for human consumption, be treated, for the purposes of any Federal law as a controlled substance in schedule I” the following language: “for purposes of prohibitions, restrictions, and other requirements with respect to manufacture, importation, distribution, and sale.” The bill also removes all references of the term “substantially” from the definition of a controlled substance analogue (21 U.S.C. § 802(32)(A), so that substances may be more readily classified as an analogue without having to show that they have a substantial similarity to their alleged counterpart. Finally, it adds a detailed and long list of known synthetic drugs identified by the DEA into schedule I, thus bypassing the need for DEA to temporarily place substances in Schedule I on an emergency basis and await scheduling by DEA. Note that at least one court has noted that the Analogue Act as applied is unconstitutionally vague. See United States v. Forbes, 806 F. Supp. 232, 234 (D. Colo. 1992).
To ensure that the legislation targets manufacturers and distributors rather than end users, the Synthetic Drug Control Act narrows the Analogue Act to provide that it should apply to the sale, manufacture, import, and distribution of drugs – not simple possession. A concern likely remains here, however, because the legislation does not address another loophole in the Analogue Act – the fact that synthetic compounds often are not sold as drugs or “for human consumption,” but are instead sold as non-food products (i.e., bath salts) not intended for human consumption and thus elude a clear FDA regulatory status. Whether the supplier of the product or substance is a manufacturer, distributor, or end user, the fact that the Analogue Act applies to products for human consumption (and the burden is on law enforcement to demonstrate that the suspect product is intended for human consumption) will likely still be an availing loophole throughout the distribution chain. One other way to close this loophole is to remove the requirement “intended for human consumption” from Section 813.
Congressman Jim Himes (CT) made the following statement concerning the importance of this legislation:
Synthetic drugs are being marketed in convenience stores and other markets as a safe, legal alternative to controlled substances . . . . This is far from the truth. Without any serious regulation or enforcement, the manufacturers of these drugs are exploiting a legal loophole to put untested, potentially dangerous drugs on the street, where the people buying them have no idea what sort of effect they’re going to have. The side effects can include aggression, disorientation and hallucination, which can lead to harm for the user and others. We need them off the street.
​
Click to expand...


http://www.fdalawblog.net/fda_law_b...&utm_campaign=Feed:+FdaLawBlog+(FDA+Law+Blog)


 
As long as they don't touch Kratom and useful plants, well, I guess I don't so much care. Although I'm never happy to see another law more tightly controlling drug use with criminal sanctions...
 
There's a staggering number of tryptamines that ain't ever hurt nobody mang! Seriously though, Im glad they've left some things alone.... For now I guess!
Wtf, why would zopiclone be on there, and why would they move etizolam to sch 1 when benzos are sch 4? Stupid fucks! Weird things like that make me question if this'll pass.
 
Here ya go... Copy & pasted (not my deciphering)
121 phenylalkylamines
α-PVT
α-PVP (?!)
α-PHP
PV-8
4-F-α-PVP
4-MeO-α-PBP
4-F-α-PBP
4-Ethyl-α-PBP
2-FA
2-FMA
3-FA
3-FMA
3C-E
4-FA
4-FMA
5-APB
5-APDB
5-IAI
5-MAPB
6-APB
6-APDB
Bromo-DragonFLY
Butylone
DOC
Ethylone
MDAI
MDDMA
NM-2-AI
Pentylone
Phenethylamine
β-Methylphenethylamine
PMA
PCA
Some NBxx
117 cannabimimetics
Sorry guys, I'm not that crazy. There's thousands of possible cannabinoids so it doesn't matter.
16 arylcyclohexamines
2-Chloro-2'-Oxo-PCE
2-MeO-2'-Oxo-PCM
3-HO-PCP
3-MeO-PCP
3-MeO-PCPr
4-Me-PCP
4-MeO-PCP
4-MeO-PCPr
MXE
PCPr
26 tryptamines
4-AcO-DET
4-AcO-DMiPT
4-AcO-DMT
4-AcO-DPT
4-AcO-EiPT
4-AcO-MET
4-AcO-MiPT
4-HO-DET
4-HO-DiPT
4-HO-DPT
4-HO-MET
4-HO-MiPT
4-MeO-DMT
5-AcO-DMT
5-HO-DMT
5-MeO-DET
5-MeO-DMT
5-MeO-DPT
5-MeO-MET
5-MeO-MPT
5-MeO-αMT
DPT
MET
MiPT
8 benzylpiperidines
3,4-Dichloromethylphenidate
3-Chloromethylphenidate
4-Fluoromethylphenidate
4-Methylmethylphenidate
D2PM
Desoxy-D2PM
Desoxypipradrol
Ethylphenidate
5 benzodiazepines
Etizolam
Zopiclone
3 benzos that have never appeared on the RC market or anywhere else.
13 opioids and opioid-like substances
AH-7921
Butyrfentanyl
Salvinorin A (this would likely ban Salvia Divinorum)
O-Desmethyltramadol
Acetylfentanyl
8 piperazines
2-Methoxyphenylpiperazine
2C-B-BZP
3-Methylphenylpiperazine
4-Chlorophenylpiperazine
4-Fluorophenylpiperazine
4-Methoxyphenylpiperazine
Dibenzylpiperazine
Methylbenzylpiperazine
2 tropane alkaloids
3-(p-Fluorobenzoyloxy)tropane
WIN 35428
 
^ LOL, so true.

Yeah, good luck law makers with expanding prohibition . That is a dying beast. Also some of those like DPT are exempt for the church in NY (Temple Of The True Inner Light). Some others are valid medications that are used and all the others may get some interest from science.

Also there was some concern of a massive law last Spring in England that was getting some feedback because it was so expansive. I haven't heard anything with that in a while so I have to check that out. These huge bills have so many problems I am not seeing it. (too vague, too many lawyers ready to pounce for people's rights, etc...) What I can see is prevention from publicly selling them in stores and making them over 18. I can agree with that though. Laws can be smart and fair to everyone with a little intelligence.
 
US is slowly pushing , and trying somewhat covertly from my opinion, to tighten the war on drugs.

one concern
"13 opioids and opioid-like substances"
i'm near certain lettuce opium is included.
ah the land of the free.

DEA is increasing operations against synthetic drugs and opiates. (sort of a good and bad thing i guess)
I know they're working on trying to infiltrate heroin/prescription opiate trafficking from the midwest region
and they recently seized a huge synthetic cache in D.C
 
Tightening prescription opiate trafficking is within the realm of the plausible, and really they've already accomplished that. It's plausible because the fact that those substances are legal gives some level of state control over their distribution. Heroin, however, is completely illegal in the United States and that's more plentiful/cheap than ever, with a boom of poppy production in Mexico, so I don't know how they're going to tighten up that trade.

I don't think that this new synthetic RC boogeyman is really any more popular than the traditional illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine, and when they're made illegal the market for them dries up while those other aforementioned drugs have had staying power that's lasted decades (well, with perhaps a couple exceptions like mephedrone, which has stuck around in the UK even after it was made illegal)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top