Meth What is "Super Meth" ?

[Methamphetanonymous]

Neurologists don't publish monoamine binding assays. Neurologists are doctors who are clinicians and deal with patients, treating disorders of the nervous system (including but not limited to the brain). Very few publish scientific articles, and medical school does not teach the type of skills needed to perform binding assays. Doctors are not scientists. They apply the scientific findings of scientists. Some neurologists are also scientists (ie., have a PhD and work in academia), but this is uncommon.

So you'll come up short if you check your notes for what neurologists published on the subject.



I'm not sure what you "know about the molecules" but here is one such assay, depicting l-meth as highly specific for NE over DA



From a qualitative standpoint, as far as how the addition of l-meth to a sample of d-meth changes the perceived effect; does adderall feel different than dextromethamphetamine? Yes. Some might not notice the difference, but those accustomed one or both can often tell the difference.

From a scientific standpoint does the addition of l-amphetamine alter the pharmacokinetic profile of d-amphetamine? Yes (look it up). It also leads to higher BP and HR than an equivalent dose of dextromethamphetamine.

But l-amphetamine is actually less adrenergic than l-methamphetamine, with l-methamphetamine being more specific for NE. Meaning, l-amphetamine is more dopaminergic. So the high specificity of l-meth for NE leaves an even more adrenergic stamp than l-amphetamine does in the drug combination known as adderall.

Yeah okay, then it wasn't a neurologist. Wasn't super worried about it but I'm still looking for that paper
 

I saw your post and looked into it more considering everything I've seen suggest L-meth is just a weaker D-meth


So there's this which suggests L-meth behaves very similarly to D-meth but weaker

Human pharmacology of the methamphetamine stereoisomers - PubMed

The pharmacokinetics of the methamphetamine enantiomers are similar, but there are substantial pharmacodynamic differences between the isomers. At high doses, l-methamphetamine intoxication is similar to that of d-methamphetamine, but the psychodynamic effects are shorter-lived and less desired...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This one suggests L-meth is very similar to D-meth, but weaker

Effects of Methamphetamine Isomers on d-Methamphetamine Self-Administration and Food-Maintained Responding in Male Rats - PMC

Rationale. Methamphetamine (METH) abuse is generally attributed to the d-isomer. Self-administration of l-METH has been examined only in rhesus monkeys with a history of cocaine self-administration or drug-naïve rats using high toxic doses. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[negrogesic]

Yeah okay, then it wasn't a neurologist. Wasn't super worried about it but I'm still looking for that paper
 

I saw your post and looked into it more considering everything I've seen suggest L-meth is just a weaker D-meth


So there's this which suggests L-meth behaves very similarly to D-meth but weaker

Human pharmacology of the methamphetamine stereoisomers - PubMed

The pharmacokinetics of the methamphetamine enantiomers are similar, but there are substantial pharmacodynamic differences between the isomers. At high doses, l-methamphetamine intoxication is similar to that of d-methamphetamine, but the psychodynamic effects are shorter-lived and less desired...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This one suggests L-meth is very similar to D-meth, but weaker

Effects of Methamphetamine Isomers on d-Methamphetamine Self-Administration and Food-Maintained Responding in Male Rats - PMC

Rationale. Methamphetamine (METH) abuse is generally attributed to the d-isomer. Self-administration of l-METH has been examined only in rhesus monkeys with a history of cocaine self-administration or drug-naïve rats using high toxic doses. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I'm guessing you dont know how to read the table I provided.

It explains the pharmacodynamic differences.

You said, "my understanding was that L-meth only kindof is [sic] a better norepinephrine releasing agent than d-meth"

If you read the table i provided you'd see that your understanding is incorrect.

 

[Skorpio]

Yeah okay, then it wasn't a neurologist. Wasn't super worried about it but I'm still looking for that paper
 

I saw your post and looked into it more considering everything I've seen suggest L-meth is just a weaker D-meth


So there's this which suggests L-meth behaves very similarly to D-meth but weaker

Human pharmacology of the methamphetamine stereoisomers - PubMed

The pharmacokinetics of the methamphetamine enantiomers are similar, but there are substantial pharmacodynamic differences between the isomers. At high doses, l-methamphetamine intoxication is similar to that of d-methamphetamine, but the psychodynamic effects are shorter-lived and less desired...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This one suggests L-meth is very similar to D-meth, but weaker

Effects of Methamphetamine Isomers on d-Methamphetamine Self-Administration and Food-Maintained Responding in Male Rats - PMC

Rationale. Methamphetamine (METH) abuse is generally attributed to the d-isomer. Self-administration of l-METH has been examined only in rhesus monkeys with a history of cocaine self-administration or drug-naïve rats using high toxic doses. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The top paper mentions a decrease in liking of the l-meth, but describes a lot of the kinetics and body responses as the same.

The second one shows a strong preference for d-meth in all of the behavioral tests measuring reward, but shows similar effects in appetite suppression to l-meth.

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

From a scientific standpoint does the addition of l-amphetamine alter the pharmacokinetic profile of d-amphetamine? Yes (look it up). It also leads to higher BP and HR than an equivalent dose of dextromethamphetamine.

But l-amphetamine is actually less adrenergic than l-methamphetamine, with l-methamphetamine being more specific for NE. Meaning, l-amphetamine is more dopaminergic. So the high specificity of l-meth for NE leaves an even more adrenergic stamp than l-amphetamine does in the drug combination known as adderall.

L-methamphetamine is

I'm guessing you dont know how to read the table I provided.

It explains the pharmacodynamic differences.

You said, "my understanding was that L-meth only kindof is [sic] a better norepinephrine releasing agent than d-meth"

If you read the table i provided you'd see that your understanding is incorrect.

I see the table

I understand what you're saying about L-meth. I also see that it does not appear that L-meth does have physiological effects that are more significant than D-meth. D-meth raises heart rate and blood pressure more than L-meth. Breathing is more rapid with D-meth. L-meth seems to be mildly stimulating, but needs much higher doses to match D-meth. Pleasant mood only last for a brief amount of time

I just don't buy that 5-10% of the L isomer is significant in someone's meth experience. Racemic meth was what hit the West coast in the 60s, and exploded after 1970s drug schedule was passed. Folks very much enjoyed crank.

If there's something different about the meth, it isn't the L isomer.

On a seperate note have there been any samples of meth taken that have shown how much if any L-meth is present since 2019 or so?

The cartel would be able to pull any remaining L-meth with their taurtaric acid on the final seperation, yes?



I see you're resorting to a little rudeness. It doesn't make me feel like you're discussing this in good faith man.

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

The top paper mentions a decrease in liking of the l-meth, but describes a lot of the kinetics and body responses as the same.

The second one shows a strong preference for d-meth in all of the behavioral tests measuring reward, but shows similar effects in appetite suppression to l-meth.

Correct

L-meth is just pretty weak

 

[Skorpio]

Correct

L-meth is just pretty weak

Its a bit weaker, but not by much. It just is a poor releaser of dopamine. The table Negrogesic posted is accurate.

L-methanpgetamine is legal over the counter in nasal inhalers. If it was simpler weaker D-meth, people would abuse it, and that's saying something because people abuse propylhexidrine inhalers.

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

Its a bit weaker, but not by much. It just is a poor releaser of dopamine. The table Negrogesic posted is accurate.

L-methanpgetamine is legal over the counter in nasal inhalers. If it was simpler weaker D-meth, people would abuse it, and that's saying something because people abuse propylhexidrine inhalers.

Oh sure that's not my point

My point is a sample of methamphetamine that is 95% d-meth and 5% l-meth isn't going to create a high which is unpleasant. Both isomers are working on dopamine and norepinephrine (and serotonin).

That's why racemic biker meth wasn't some shitty jittery mouth biting nightmare. The L-meth is just basically filler

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

Its a bit weaker, but not by much. It just is a poor releaser of dopamine. The table Negrogesic posted is accurate.

L-methanpgetamine is legal over the counter in nasal inhalers. If it was simpler weaker D-meth, people would abuse it, and that's saying something because people abuse propylhexidrine inhalers.

My bad I wasn't trying to suggest that L-meth alone is recreation worthy, just that it's presence in recreational d-meth is not going to increase negative side effects, it just makes the overall sample weaker

 

[Skorpio]

My bad I wasn't trying to suggest that L-meth alone is recreation worthy, just that it's presence in recreational d-meth is not going to increase negative side effects, it just makes the overall sample weaker

Racemic meth will have more "edge" and physical stimulation when compared to a reduced dose of D-meth.

I imagine something 90% D would feel somewhere between the two.

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

Racemic meth will have more "edge" and physical stimulation when compared to a reduced dose of D-meth.

I imagine something 90% D would feel somewhere between the two.

I suppose I can kindof see the edginess. Crank based on the elimination half life profiles would likely have a more unpleasant comedown since the L isomer lasts a couple of hours longer

I think 90% would feel pretty damn close to 100%, maybe imperceptibly close to most users

 

[negrogesic]

I see the table

You saw it but clearly didn't understand it. Nor digested anything I said.

Both isomers are working on dopamine and norepinephrine (and serotonin".

Again, that table tells a very different tale, the isomers behave very differently, far more so than the isomers of amphetamine.

My point is a sample of methamphetamine that is 95% d-meth and 5% l-meth isn't going to create a high which is unpleasant.

This is another product of a tweaked out mentality; ruminating on something that someone never said. I never said it was unpleasant. I said, for some discriminating users who have had enantiomerically pure d-meth and this new stuff, it is noticeably less pleasant, particularly via certain routes, yet almost indistinguishable when taken orally. I explained why this is.

I'm not going to belabor the point further or go back and forth (particularly with someone with such a fractured understanding of the subject, one who think neurologists conduct binding assays, some who can't understand a table ec50s). At this point I become the fool who's arguing with a fool.

This is the problem with trying to discussing things with someone who is high on methamphetamine; they're fixated on a idea, on the basis of emotion (particularly once the serotonin reserves have been washed out), and have difficulty changing their perspective. If one day you reread what I wrote with a clear head it will make alot of sense. But as of now it seems as though you're reading things I never said, and ruminating on them.

Bottom line, 90:10 d:l methamphetamine is still a potent and wildly addictive psychostimulant. It will still get you high. But just like some experienced people can tell the difference between adderall and dextroamphetamine (with the former feeling notably more adrenergic), some can tell the difference between this stuff and d-meth. I thought the adderall-dexedrine analogy was the simplest one for you to digest, but you've oddly ignored that one. The human brain is an incredibly complex and sensitive instrument and is capable of perceiving the tiniest of differences in inputs.

But again, I'm not a fan of meth in even its best state. Enantiomerically pure d-meth is a nasty drug that takes a heavy toll on its abusers.

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

You saw it but clearly didn't understand it. Nor digested anything I said.

I understand the table lol, it's not super complex man. Like I said I've seen other tables listing neurotransmitter binding affinities. Low number means more activity, and typically norepinephrine is associated with more fight or flight response. It doesn't neccesarily mean that L-meths behavior can be determined purely off of the table alone, however the journal I was searching for was comparing meth and amph, so I'll take your table for what it is.

I guess I misunderstood you then. Sure, I'll walk myself back. I'm sure some trace L-meth may make a high a somewhat different flavor. But I suspect just set, setting, tolerance, sleep, hydration, meals, etc play a stronger role there. I also doubt it would reprofile the drug so substantially that people would consider it to be entirely unsimilar to meth pre- Combat Meth Act. It's a possibility no doubt. But it's not one that I'm anymore confident of than theories related to the nitrostyrine process, or simply that it's a stronger product that gets overdone due to newbie users increasing, and availability of product.

Look dude, idk what I did to you that you feel like you gotta be a dickhead. You're clearly pretty smart. That goes a lot farther when you're patient too. I get it, I use meth and am using it currently. You can be bogus and make fun if you like, it doesn't make me have an emotional agenda or whatever but sure it's easy prey. I think I'm just gonna concead man, I lost my appetite for the discussion

As for your last sentence I can definitely agree with you there. It's not a pleasant recreational drug, and I've seen what the next year and onwards looks like for me if I continue, I've spoken with people with all sorts of relationships with meth, and none are left better than when they started. Sad, honestly. And sad that most folks who are heavily hooked have gotten started on it from trauma or sexual abuse, usually from parents. Hopefully I can set it down for longer this time.


(Edited because I was rude. Don't like handling rudeness with rudeness back, and their logic is reasonable)

 

[Bongoloid100]

I'm so tired of these guys wanting to show who knows more about chemistry than the other.. I don't know anything about chemistry and I admit it but I just want to know why the meth isn't what it used to be and put it in layman's terms.. Is that too much to expect from a harm reduction site?

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

I'm so tired of these guys wanting to show who knows more about chemistry than the other.. I don't know anything about chemistry and I admit it but I just want to know why the meth isn't what it used to be and put it in layman's terms.. Is that too much to expect from a harm reduction site?

they don't use ephedrine anymore - they use some other bullshit now and it almost all comes from out of the country

 

[Methamphetanonymous]

I'm so tired of these guys wanting to show who knows more about chemistry than the other.. I don't know anything about chemistry and I admit it but I just want to know why the meth isn't what it used to be and put it in layman's terms.. Is that too much to expect from a harm reduction site?

I mean the answer is nobody knows, plenty of people don't think that it is different

But enough people insist that it's different that I think it's worth looking into more, the problem is it's not a question that people with the kind of time or dedication are interested in answering.