• Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Meth You've never had racemic methamphetamine

A major paradigm shit for me came when I discovered how different generic forms of the same pharmaceutical can have such radically different effects. I've used a lot of different drugs in my life, both licit and illicit. This is really the first time in my life that I've been on pharmaceuticals for an extended period of time, changing brands and such.

I agree. My conjecture is that drugs that increase extracellular dopamine faster are more euphoric, more liable to produce addiction.

Look at Oxycontin. I'm prescribed a generic and take the tablets whole and on a very strict schedule. So I only notice two things - the pain being controlled when I take them, agony and a proper opioid withdrawal if I do not. No other effects. So I am dependent but not addicted.

I believe the idea behind lisdexamphetamine was to slow down the onset. I checked and it simply slows the time to the peak plasma concentration. I don't know if it's any less abusable as stimulants beyond (and sometimes including) caffeine mess me up terribly.

I also suggest that euphoria is a dynamic experience with sites in the brain binding and unbinding with the drug so compounds with a longer occupancy are less euphoric but this has yet to be shown because every technology we have is too granular to watch individual receptors.

The above statement is bases on my own experiences with compounds with high affinity - yes, they ARE more potent so the 'novelty' of such high occupancy overall will induce euphoria, I sense that when the novelty wears off, they become much less euphoric.

Tricky one - but a very clever insight by Kief, IMO.
 
I'd love to talk with you about this. And so much more. I've just started my research in this direction over the past two weeks and I love it. Love to learn about the drug that has occupied my mind and choices more times than not...
I'll add to this too; be very mindful of the road you're walking down.

Obsessing over this stuff and abusing meth egregiously became a very serious feedback loop for me that I had to walk away from entirely in order to break.

Even now having removed myself from the drug I can only handle so much of this kind of discussion and research a day/week before I begin to notice cravings and have to tap out and invest my energy into my diversity of interests and responsibilities. Don't focus too deeply on one single thing is all... There's so much more to life than meth mysteries (although obviously I find them fun to think about too)
 
I believe the idea behind lisdexamphetamine was to slow down the onset. I checked and it simply slows the time to the peak plasma concentration. I don't know if it's any less abusable as stimulants beyond (and sometimes including) caffeine mess me up terribly.
Since lisdexamfetamine is an inactive prodrug; it has a meaningfully reduced abuse potential in that alternate RoAs to oral ingestion either do not work at all or make no difference to the onset speed of the medicine. Lisdex begins conversation into d-amph in the bloodstream I believe, and as you say the conversion process occurs at a fixed rate regardless of stomach pH or other potentiation tricks like taking Adderall on an empty stomach.

But given that it is in essence a composition which releases d-amphetamine it still carries plenty of abuse potential and indeed is abused by users who simply take higher doses of the drug than they're prescribed
I also suggest that euphoria is a dynamic experience with sites in the brain binding and unbinding with the drug so compounds with a longer occupancy are less euphoric but this has yet to be shown because every technology we have is too granular to watch individual receptors.
Very efficient and wise observation friend, agreed.
The above statement is bases on my own experiences with compounds with high affinity - yes, they ARE more potent so the 'novelty' of such high occupancy overall will induce euphoria, I sense that when the novelty wears off, they become much less euphoric.
I've echoed this very same sentiment many times but in far more words and far less elegantly. But this I believe is the major culprit in drugs 'losing their magic'. You can only go to Disney World so many times before it becomes so routine that even a multi-year break won't make returning to Disney World anywhere near as magical as those first dozen times.

Neuroplasticity eventually takes hold as well, and negative experiences with the drug can become more frequent and eventually cause it to 'turn' on a user. I suspect with dopamergenic drugs this process is accelerated.
 
I'll add to this too; be very mindful of the road you're walking down.

Obsessing over this stuff and abusing meth egregiously became a very serious feedback loop for me that I had to walk away from entirely in order to break.

Even now having removed myself from the drug I can only handle so much of this kind of discussion and research a day/week before I begin to notice cravings and have to tap out and invest my energy into my diversity of interests and responsibilities. Don't focus too deeply on one single thing is all... There's so much more to life than meth mysteries (although obviously I find them fun to think about too)
Yea bro honestly I was 10 days away from 5 years clean.. and I slipped once and I've done it every day now for about 2 months.the craziest thing is a lot has changed over that five year period. Meth barely has the taste, or you can't get it unless you overly heat it. It's ridiculous. I go through a gram a day. I am very generous though. The high from a line last about 3 hours smoking last about 45 minutes or so. I haven't relapsed on the point yet. I. Don't think I'll take it that far. I'm going to wrap up this little hooray up in the next week or so.

So is there any sites that have information like you have discussed? Any other forums you recommend?
 
Greetings folks. Like others in the meth community; methodists if you will... I've heard many a tale of a bright young tweaker scoring that fresh bag only to take a hit and be plagued with nasty side effects and no pleasurable euphoria. The dreaded racemic batch; a 50/50 mixture of the dextrorotary and levorotary methamphetamine isomers often abbreviated simply d-meth and l-meth (sometimes R-meth and S-)meth.

As many are aware the d-meth isomer is said to be responsible for the desired recreational effects, whereas the l-isomer is reportedly at best entirely inert causing no effect and at worst exacerbating the unpleasant peripheral nervous system side effects to a point where any euphoria or motivation is shrouded in unpleasantness. At a glance this makes sense, the dextro isomer has a massive affinity for dopamine neurotransmitter release often called the pleasure chemical or the reward chemical, whereas the levo isomer has nearly no dopamine affinity but rather a massive and lengthy surge of adrenaline via norepinephrine release. I mean, up until quite recently levomethamphetamine was the active ingredient in Vicks brand over the counter congestion inhalers. The DEA wouldn't let any old 12 year old walk into CVS and buy a stick of meth right? (Laughs nervously while chewing on a Benzedrix cotton)

I'm here to tell you all that the chances of accidentally scoring a bag of racemic methamphetamine on the street is near enough to absurd that most meth users have never had it happen; and if they did have it happen it would but quite obvious.

So how would this happen anyways? I'm going to skip the lesson on stereochemistry and isomers as I assume the Bluelight audience is familiar enough with the concept to understand this material. Why would anyone even synthesize racemic meth if it's possible to simply make pure dextromethamphetamine. It starts with the precursors, essentially the starting point when making methamphetamine. A precursor is simply the chemical that a chemist intents to transform into the desired product using other chemicals called reagents or reactants. Think of it like a square that a sculptor will chisel away into a triangle. You would start with a circle as that would be more difficult; so you pick a shape that is already somewhat close to the one you want.

In the case of methamphetamine, the known precursors chemists use are two alkaloids that are naturally present within certain species Ephedra bush called ephedrine and pseudoephedrine (I will use PSE to refer to both of these chemicals as in this write up they are essentially interchangeable) which have existed since the dawn of time, and a metabolite of methamphetamine discovered in the mid 20th century called 1-phenyl-2-propanone(P2P/phenylacetone) in the USA and is also called benzyl-methyl-ketone(BMK) in Europe. All three chemicals are closely monitored and or illegal/difficult for a consumer to aquire in meaningful quanitites pretty much globally. Thus, a common way to source these chemicals is to purchase legal and unmonitored essential chemicals and create PSE or P2P from scratch.

PSE are chiral molecules just like methamphetamine, and interestingly only one of the two isomers actually exists naturally. The other is never produced by nature and didn't exist until it was made artificially. As it happens; the natural isomers reduce in chemical reaction into simply d-meth, it is not possible to yield any l-meth from a PSE reduction therefore any meth made using PSE as a starting material can only be the pure desired recreational version of meth.

P2P on the other hand is not chiral, it has no d and l isomer, and because of that it is randomly divided into d-meth and l-meth during the reaction process. This statistically gives you a racemic product; or an even half and half isomer content. It's somewhat puzzling why someone would then use P2P as a pecursor... ever. Even pharmaceutical compositions of meth for theraputic medical purposes requires the d isomer for best results, so there's really no meaningful reason to produce l-meth... it's not THAT good of a decongestant.

The reason pharmaceutical companies and clandestine Willy Wonkas like P2P over PSE come down to cost and efficiency; as it stands in 2024 P2P is much easier to make from legal chemicals than PSE, the reaction is consistently high yielding and pure regardless of your skill at chemistry, and most of all the most popular route from P2P to meth is the easiest one to scale up to a manufacturing level that can produce massive quantities of meth very quickly. All the major routes of reducing PSE either are impossible to scale up, or logistically far too risky either due to the destructive and dangerous chemicals that can't be handled in bulk, or the near impossibility of perform large reductions discreetly due to smells, sounds, or the size of facility required.

PSE is a good material to use as a precursor for an amateur "cook" in the garage making a few grams a month, but not for Cartels gangs, and the CIA to make in a large lab. Even in the popular fiction Breaking Bad; the process Walt uses in the superlab under the laundromat is a P2P reaction. Despite many inaccuracies or improbabilities in the show they do get this right.

In fact it is true that the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico which sources almost all street meth for the United States alternates between a handful of reactions to make meth from P2P. "So hold on Dan!" You say while inserting a fat shard into your asshole with your Cheetah covered nubbins "then almost all the meth in the lower 48 is racemic!" No, you beautiful sweet stupid bastard. And I'll explain why.

Reductive Amination

The two most popular routes to make meth out of P2P are called Leuckhart and reductive amination. Leuckhart fell out of style, and generally you would choose reductive amination as your synthesis route because it's easy to get a high yield, relatively danger free, and the materials involved are painlessly easy to aquire for a consumer. This method was the one Walter White used to make his blue meth.

The process simply boils all the reagents together in one "pot", and the methamphetamine condenses from steam as the ketone and amine (P2P and methylamine typically) trade atoms. None of the chemicals are at a big risk of explosion or emitting deadly fumes, and as long as you can set a temperature on a burner, you really can't "overcook" or "undercook" the product by getting your measurements wrong or not watching the time. On paper the reaction looks much more complex and dorky than some of the popular PSE reductions, but anybody even moderately dedicated enough to purchase proper glassware and make the starting materials can pull it off anywhere with a heat source. In fact: THIS METHOD IS VERY POPULAR WITH INDIVIDUALLY OPERATING "COOKS". It isn't just the cartel who likes reductive amination.

But the product only contains 50% of the desired chemical still. And when competing with Billy Bob living in a Unibomber shed in the woods shaking up soda bottle bombs of PSE, you need a more powerful product than that.

Luckily since man began cooking up fat shards in the basement, optical resolution has existed. Yes, it's simple and cheap for anyone be it the cartel or grandma, to remove L-meth from a racemic product and be left only with d-meth. "WHAT?" You scream, both from the sweet sharp burn of your tight butthole flesh dissolving a point fiver of dirty crystal and in shock "but I thought it was like a super complicated procedure and a tight lipped secret?" No. Actually a liquid chemical called L-taurtaric acid is able to be simply poured over your racemic meth, and it dissolves and washed away only the L-meth and leaves behind only the D-meth.

But you do need to have high ranking laboratory and academic credentials to purchase L-taurtaric acid. Just kidding it's used in wine making and you can buy in cheaply online or in any high end liquor store anywhere. This procedure has been used forever, there's even an Erwoid article describing it from like the 1990s. Yes, you do waste half of the product you made but because of how cheap, easy, and consistently high yielding reductive amination is YOU LIKELY STILL WILL HAVE MORE, CLEANER, AND HIGHER QUALITY PRODUCT MADE IN A SHORTER SPAN OF TIME THAN PSE, EVEN WHEN THROWING HALF OUT.

I could go on about how there are various ways to convert the "wasted" l-meth back into a racemate and then do the process over and over again until you have all d-meth and waste 0 L-meth but that process is actually a bit more complex and expensive unless you're the cartel and can make meth by the tons. Oh but wait, there's a dumb as rocks easy method to convert L-meth into P2P and you can just use it again to make more meth so basically there's no reason you'd even be wasting anything at all.

In fact, for any chemist serious about making methamphetamine for the black market there's basically no reason at all to even consider using PSE. Reductive amination, resolving the product, and recycling the l-meth back into P2P is a money printing factory.

While meth makers and users are famously stereotyped for their honesty, virtues, and high standards of customer service, we have to assume there's at least one or two bad apples out there. What if a chemist makes meth from P2P and simply leaves the product racemic to save time and money, essentially selling a product that's pre-cut with L-meth and low quality in order to get more cash? Sounds unlike the peace loving and good hearted nature of stimulant users and dealers but suspend your disbelief and entertain this possibility for a minute.

There's no evidence what so ever that racemic meth is less potent in it's desirable high than D-meth, and there's no evidence whatsoever that it produces greater negative side effects than d-meth.

There is actually evidence though that racemic meths melting point is absurdly lower than the melting point of d-meth, and that forming shard like crystals from a racemate is insanely difficult and only a fine grained powder is achievable realistically.


The Truth about the Isomers


Without getting into insane detail here, most of the common street knowledge on meths isomers is entirely wrong. It's easy to understand why as I described early in the essay why at first glance one would think a racemate is only 50% as pleasurable as pure d-meth at best, shit I never even gave it much thought to research when writing my book initially. It was only after I tried a racemic product and a pure product back to back that I noticed "huh. These feel literally exactly the same."

There are a handful of animal studies that support the notion that racemic meth is weaker or unpleasant. But animal studies quite often don't reflect human reactions. There is only one single study I've found after days and days of researching this question that puts the effects of d-meth pure, l-meth pure, and racemic meth to comparison in humans. And this is what it found:

L-meth administered alone produced a pleasant high that was very short lived, followed by a long period of peripheral stimulation. The total effects of l-meth lasted the longest amount of time. WHEN HEART RATE AND BLOOD PRESSURE WERE MEASURED L-METH RESULTED IN THE SMALLEST CHANGE OF ALL THREE. IT HAD THE LEAST NEGATIVE PERIPHERAL NERVOUS SYSTEM IMPACT.

Racemic meth and d-meth were reported by subjects to feel EXACTLY THE SAME. The pleasurable effects, residual effects, peripheral effects and duration all were THE SAME. Blood pressure and heart rate readings were IDENTICAL TO D-METH. Essentially someone given a racemic product would be getting the exact same results as a pure d-meth product.

So d-meth alone had the worst side effects, the heaviest body load, and the shortest duration of effects. But if it's so heavy on dopamine, why?

It's pretty much exactly as potent at releasing norepinephrine as l-meth for one. It's not a simple matter of "d-meth is all dopamine no adrenaline, and l-meth is all adrenaline no dopamine". Beyond that, dopamine isn't as simple as people tend to treat it, and PLEASURE IS NOT CAUSED BY DOPAMINE. In fact ADRENALINE is more likely to induce euphoria than dopamine, and is responsible for the rush meth users tend to chase.

At high recreational doses, it doesn't matter whether it's d-meth or racemic YOU'RE MAXING OUT YOUR DOPAMINE AND ADRENALINE EITHER WAY. If a one product has the potential to release 200% of dopamine, and another only has the potential to release 125% of dopamine then YOU STILL ARE HAVING 100% OF YOUR DOPAMINE RELEASED. THE EXTRA POTENTIALL 100% OR 25% IS MEANINGLESS.


Besides, a smoker would notice immediately if their product was racemic as it would be sold as a fine powder only which is rather uncommon most places, and the melting point of racemic meth is 130 degrees rather than 175 degrees which any seasoned smoker would instantly notice. That's a MASSIVE difference



So then. Why does the meth from some bags make you feel like shit and some doesn't? Well, it's because your dealer put doo doo and piss and cum into it because it's a street drug. From the street. So it's dirty and yucky you spoon. Also meth makes you feel like shit.


Thank you for your time
I tried to direct message you... It want let me..
 
I really didn't intend it to take on such an ironic meaning, but the amusing way it's played out hasn't been lost on me either lol


The start of the issue I have with these claims is that they're rarely consistent. The issues you describe are lock step with Sam Quionnes and his lazy article written for the Atlantic titled 'the new meth', where Sam makes a lot of assertions about P2P (including that it is a new precursor... Which is just blatantly false) based mainly on the tales of a homeless meth addict he interviews on Skid Row. Most of his supporting evidence can be explained very easily with the reality that meth is more abundant, cheaper, and widely abused than ever before. Hacker I believe wrote a decent rebuttal.

However Sam's claims aren't exactly consistent with the community. N-isopropylbenzylamine has transformed throughout its history as a benign filler cut, to a tranquilizing 'sleepy' active cutting agent and finally a stimulant which induces negative effects which all conveniently are known to also be associated with amphetamine abuse. The reactions that users attribute to this 'widrspread' 'new' meth coming from 'Mexico' have never been consistent, nor have they even consistently identified a United problem. Is it that P2P somehow makes more toxic meth? (Hard to believe as d-meth is exceptionally toxic alone) Is it that the cartel doesn't perform a resolution of the enantiomers, and racemic meth is to blame? Is in MSM? Fentany? N-isopropylbenzylamine? Ask a random person on a random day and you'll hear a mix and match of answers and explanations, never with evidence...

I'm not prepared to dismiss that a significant portion of the community is having a good faith negative or underwhelming reaction to meth produced since 2017ish(the year meth changed also gets changed a lot) and that it's worthy of discussion, theorizing, and investigation. My issue is that there's simply assertion of myths as fact, and no one ever bothers with actually investigating and finding a real answer if not for harm reduction but for intellectual curiosity.

There is however plenty of evidence and plenty of plausible explanations for the issues happening that suggests meth is more pure and more potent than ever before; but is simply being used in new ways like massive mega dosing since a gram is a fraction of the cost it was in the 1990s-2000s; and that new inexperienced users are at a number never seen in the US before... So of course there's moee hoslitalizations and incidents of psychosis. There's simply way more users using way more drug than ever before.


If there is alternative evidence that can fill in all the gaps as well as that explanation, I'll be 100% on board. It's not about being right, it's about transparent and accurate information being provided to users. It's just that these N-isopropylbenzylamine claims date back over a decade, not just seven years. And yet here we are, still empty handed. As we are with all the other 'meth is meaningfully and significantly different now' hypothesis and theories.

So I just can't pretend to take the same old tired claims seriously when they always are backed by an anonymous forum member or Redditor's assertion that they were around and using meth in the 90s/00s, and 'trust me bro'. I don't trust it, tbh.

N-isopropylbenzylamine isn't really used to cut meth in the US but it it is in other countries like Australia and New Zealand as the evidence actually shows

In New Zealand, many products of ‘pure METH’ sold in the street are adulterated with at least 50% of N‐ipb. 17 Additionally, drug dealers in China have sold N‐ipb as fake ‘Ice’ METH in many recorded cases. Although N‐ipb is a border controlled substance in Australia, it is not currently known as a controlled substance in other countries




"Over the course of the next month the origins and links between multiple consignments seized by the ABF were reviewed and found to contain border controlled substances, including eight kilograms of isopropylbenzylamine (a methamphetamine analogue) and quantities of heroin, cocaine and other drugs from various source countries"



New Zealand’s drug checking organisations (KnowYourStuff, NZ Needle Exchange and NZ Drug Foundation) have been seeing something called n-isopropylbenzylamine (shortened to n-iso) turning up in substances that people thought were methamphetamine."


 
N-isopropylbenzylamine isn't really used to cut meth in the US but it it is in other countries like Australia and New Zealand as the evidence actually shows

In New Zealand, many products of ‘pure METH’ sold in the street are adulterated with at least 50% of N‐ipb. 17 Additionally, drug dealers in China have sold N‐ipb as fake ‘Ice’ METH in many recorded cases. Although N‐ipb is a border controlled substance in Australia, it is not currently known as a controlled substance in other countries




"Over the course of the next month the origins and links between multiple consignments seized by the ABF were reviewed and found to contain border controlled substances, including eight kilograms of isopropylbenzylamine (a methamphetamine analogue) and quantities of heroin, cocaine and other drugs from various source countries"



New Zealand’s drug checking organisations (KnowYourStuff, NZ Needle Exchange and NZ Drug Foundation) have been seeing something called n-isopropylbenzylamine (shortened to n-iso) turning up in substances that people thought were methamphetamine."


I was actually about to respond to you on that other thread about n-iso being a hoax. Theirs report's in America as well about up n-ISO being in it. I would have to look it up. It definitly has N-iso or MSM. Not discounting any ones opinion though this is purely speculation, its getting cut with something though we know there is an extraction method where you re crystalize stuff into it. Theres meth like that doesn't smoke feels like research chemically its bizarre.
 
Greetings folks. Like others in the meth community; methodists if you will... I've heard many a tale of a bright young tweaker scoring that fresh bag only to take a hit and be plagued with nasty side effects and no pleasurable euphoria. The dreaded racemic batch; a 50/50 mixture of the dextrorotary and levorotary methamphetamine isomers often abbreviated simply d-meth and l-meth (sometimes R-meth and S-)meth.
Can this guy write?
I hope that along the treachery winding road of chemistry, such a talent will finds its way back to the euphoric root of a youth smitten by beauty.
 
I was actually about to respond to you on that other thread about n-iso being a hoax. Theirs report's in America as well about up n-ISO being in it. I would have to look it up. It definitly has N-iso or MSM. Not discounting any ones opinion though this is purely speculation, its getting cut with something though we know there is an extraction method where you re crystalize stuff into it. Theres meth like that doesn't smoke feels like research chemically its bizarre.

Yes you are right about that and I was wrong with new methods for detecting n-iso used on examples from America showing it was the majority of substance used. In Australia the Crystal Meth being sold on the Dark Web expect for a few exceptions heavily cut with n-iso. I especially know when it's heavily used in product I order as it doesn't really stimulant you, can fall asleep between 1-2 hours after using 0-5g-1g and causes extreme vasoconstriction which causes very bad nerve pain in some scar tissue I have from surgery which never happened with the vasoconstriction from actual meth I got from the street and used for 6 years as a functional stimulant for work

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jnm/2021/6679515/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090780721002275

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Mass-spectra-of-N-isopropylbenzylamine-N-IBA-a-Molecular-ion-spectrum-by-a-mass_fig5_349013611


H. Segawa, Y. T. Iwata, T. Yamamuro et al., “Simultaneous chiral impurity analysis of methamphetamine and its precursors by supercritical fluid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry,” Forensic Toxicology, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 145–153, 2019.

View at: Publisher Site
 
Greetings folks. Like others in the meth community; methodists if you will... I've heard many a tale of a bright young tweaker scoring that fresh bag only to take a hit and be plagued with nasty side effects and no pleasurable euphoria. The dreaded racemic batch; a 50/50 mixture of the dextrorotary and levorotary methamphetamine isomers often abbreviated simply d-meth and l-meth (sometimes R-meth and S-)meth.

As many are aware the d-meth isomer is said to be responsible for the desired recreational effects, whereas the l-isomer is reportedly at best entirely inert causing no effect and at worst exacerbating the unpleasant peripheral nervous system side effects to a point where any euphoria or motivation is shrouded in unpleasantness. At a glance this makes sense, the dextro isomer has a massive affinity for dopamine neurotransmitter release often called the pleasure chemical or the reward chemical, whereas the levo isomer has nearly no dopamine affinity but rather a massive and lengthy surge of adrenaline via norepinephrine release. I mean, up until quite recently levomethamphetamine was the active ingredient in Vicks brand over the counter congestion inhalers. The DEA wouldn't let any old 12 year old walk into CVS and buy a stick of meth right? (Laughs nervously while chewing on a Benzedrix cotton)

I'm here to tell you all that the chances of accidentally scoring a bag of racemic methamphetamine on the street is near enough to absurd that most meth users have never had it happen; and if they did have it happen it would but quite obvious.

So how would this happen anyways? I'm going to skip the lesson on stereochemistry and isomers as I assume the Bluelight audience is familiar enough with the concept to understand this material. Why would anyone even synthesize racemic meth if it's possible to simply make pure dextromethamphetamine. It starts with the precursors, essentially the starting point when making methamphetamine. A precursor is simply the chemical that a chemist intents to transform into the desired product using other chemicals called reagents or reactants. Think of it like a square that a sculptor will chisel away into a triangle. You would start with a circle as that would be more difficult; so you pick a shape that is already somewhat close to the one you want.

In the case of methamphetamine, the known precursors chemists use are two alkaloids that are naturally present within certain species Ephedra bush called ephedrine and pseudoephedrine (I will use PSE to refer to both of these chemicals as in this write up they are essentially interchangeable) which have existed since the dawn of time, and a metabolite of methamphetamine discovered in the mid 20th century called 1-phenyl-2-propanone(P2P/phenylacetone) in the USA and is also called benzyl-methyl-ketone(BMK) in Europe. All three chemicals are closely monitored and or illegal/difficult for a consumer to aquire in meaningful quanitites pretty much globally. Thus, a common way to source these chemicals is to purchase legal and unmonitored essential chemicals and create PSE or P2P from scratch.

PSE are chiral molecules just like methamphetamine, and interestingly only one of the two isomers actually exists naturally. The other is never produced by nature and didn't exist until it was made artificially. As it happens; the natural isomers reduce in chemical reaction into simply d-meth, it is not possible to yield any l-meth from a PSE reduction therefore any meth made using PSE as a starting material can only be the pure desired recreational version of meth.

P2P on the other hand is not chiral, it has no d and l isomer, and because of that it is randomly divided into d-meth and l-meth during the reaction process. This statistically gives you a racemic product; or an even half and half isomer content. It's somewhat puzzling why someone would then use P2P as a pecursor... ever. Even pharmaceutical compositions of meth for theraputic medical purposes requires the d isomer for best results, so there's really no meaningful reason to produce l-meth... it's not THAT good of a decongestant.

The reason pharmaceutical companies and clandestine Willy Wonkas like P2P over PSE come down to cost and efficiency; as it stands in 2024 P2P is much easier to make from legal chemicals than PSE, the reaction is consistently high yielding and pure regardless of your skill at chemistry, and most of all the most popular route from P2P to meth is the easiest one to scale up to a manufacturing level that can produce massive quantities of meth very quickly. All the major routes of reducing PSE either are impossible to scale up, or logistically far too risky either due to the destructive and dangerous chemicals that can't be handled in bulk, or the near impossibility of perform large reductions discreetly due to smells, sounds, or the size of facility required.

PSE is a good material to use as a precursor for an amateur "cook" in the garage making a few grams a month, but not for Cartels gangs, and the CIA to make in a large lab. Even in the popular fiction Breaking Bad; the process Walt uses in the superlab under the laundromat is a P2P reaction. Despite many inaccuracies or improbabilities in the show they do get this right.

In fact it is true that the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico which sources almost all street meth for the United States alternates between a handful of reactions to make meth from P2P. "So hold on Dan!" You say while inserting a fat shard into your asshole with your Cheetah covered nubbins "then almost all the meth in the lower 48 is racemic!" No, you beautiful sweet stupid bastard. And I'll explain why.

Reductive Amination

The two most popular routes to make meth out of P2P are called Leuckhart and reductive amination. Leuckhart fell out of style, and generally you would choose reductive amination as your synthesis route because it's easy to get a high yield, relatively danger free, and the materials involved are painlessly easy to aquire for a consumer. This method was the one Walter White used to make his blue meth.

The process simply boils all the reagents together in one "pot", and the methamphetamine condenses from steam as the ketone and amine (P2P and methylamine typically) trade atoms. None of the chemicals are at a big risk of explosion or emitting deadly fumes, and as long as you can set a temperature on a burner, you really can't "overcook" or "undercook" the product by getting your measurements wrong or not watching the time. On paper the reaction looks much more complex and dorky than some of the popular PSE reductions, but anybody even moderately dedicated enough to purchase proper glassware and make the starting materials can pull it off anywhere with a heat source. In fact: THIS METHOD IS VERY POPULAR WITH INDIVIDUALLY OPERATING "COOKS". It isn't just the cartel who likes reductive amination.

But the product only contains 50% of the desired chemical still. And when competing with Billy Bob living in a Unibomber shed in the woods shaking up soda bottle bombs of PSE, you need a more powerful product than that.

Luckily since man began cooking up fat shards in the basement, optical resolution has existed. Yes, it's simple and cheap for anyone be it the cartel or grandma, to remove L-meth from a racemic product and be left only with d-meth. "WHAT?" You scream, both from the sweet sharp burn of your tight butthole flesh dissolving a point fiver of dirty crystal and in shock "but I thought it was like a super complicated procedure and a tight lipped secret?" No. Actually a liquid chemical called L-taurtaric acid is able to be simply poured over your racemic meth, and it dissolves and washed away only the L-meth and leaves behind only the D-meth.

But you do need to have high ranking laboratory and academic credentials to purchase L-taurtaric acid. Just kidding it's used in wine making and you can buy in cheaply online or in any high end liquor store anywhere. This procedure has been used forever, there's even an Erwoid article describing it from like the 1990s. Yes, you do waste half of the product you made but because of how cheap, easy, and consistently high yielding reductive amination is YOU LIKELY STILL WILL HAVE MORE, CLEANER, AND HIGHER QUALITY PRODUCT MADE IN A SHORTER SPAN OF TIME THAN PSE, EVEN WHEN THROWING HALF OUT.

I could go on about how there are various ways to convert the "wasted" l-meth back into a racemate and then do the process over and over again until you have all d-meth and waste 0 L-meth but that process is actually a bit more complex and expensive unless you're the cartel and can make meth by the tons. Oh but wait, there's a dumb as rocks easy method to convert L-meth into P2P and you can just use it again to make more meth so basically there's no reason you'd even be wasting anything at all.

In fact, for any chemist serious about making methamphetamine for the black market there's basically no reason at all to even consider using PSE. Reductive amination, resolving the product, and recycling the l-meth back into P2P is a money printing factory.

While meth makers and users are famously stereotyped for their honesty, virtues, and high standards of customer service, we have to assume there's at least one or two bad apples out there. What if a chemist makes meth from P2P and simply leaves the product racemic to save time and money, essentially selling a product that's pre-cut with L-meth and low quality in order to get more cash? Sounds unlike the peace loving and good hearted nature of stimulant users and dealers but suspend your disbelief and entertain this possibility for a minute.

There's no evidence what so ever that racemic meth is less potent in it's desirable high than D-meth, and there's no evidence whatsoever that it produces greater negative side effects than d-meth.

There is actually evidence though that racemic meths melting point is absurdly lower than the melting point of d-meth, and that forming shard like crystals from a racemate is insanely difficult and only a fine grained powder is achievable realistically.


The Truth about the Isomers


Without getting into insane detail here, most of the common street knowledge on meths isomers is entirely wrong. It's easy to understand why as I described early in the essay why at first glance one would think a racemate is only 50% as pleasurable as pure d-meth at best, shit I never even gave it much thought to research when writing my book initially. It was only after I tried a racemic product and a pure product back to back that I noticed "huh. These feel literally exactly the same."

There are a handful of animal studies that support the notion that racemic meth is weaker or unpleasant. But animal studies quite often don't reflect human reactions. There is only one single study I've found after days and days of researching this question that puts the effects of d-meth pure, l-meth pure, and racemic meth to comparison in humans. And this is what it found:

L-meth administered alone produced a pleasant high that was very short lived, followed by a long period of peripheral stimulation. The total effects of l-meth lasted the longest amount of time. WHEN HEART RATE AND BLOOD PRESSURE WERE MEASURED L-METH RESULTED IN THE SMALLEST CHANGE OF ALL THREE. IT HAD THE LEAST NEGATIVE PERIPHERAL NERVOUS SYSTEM IMPACT.

Racemic meth and d-meth were reported by subjects to feel EXACTLY THE SAME. The pleasurable effects, residual effects, peripheral effects and duration all were THE SAME. Blood pressure and heart rate readings were IDENTICAL TO D-METH. Essentially someone given a racemic product would be getting the exact same results as a pure d-meth product.

So d-meth alone had the worst side effects, the heaviest body load, and the shortest duration of effects. But if it's so heavy on dopamine, why?

It's pretty much exactly as potent at releasing norepinephrine as l-meth for one. It's not a simple matter of "d-meth is all dopamine no adrenaline, and l-meth is all adrenaline no dopamine". Beyond that, dopamine isn't as simple as people tend to treat it, and PLEASURE IS NOT CAUSED BY DOPAMINE. In fact ADRENALINE is more likely to induce euphoria than dopamine, and is responsible for the rush meth users tend to chase.

At high recreational doses, it doesn't matter whether it's d-meth or racemic YOU'RE MAXING OUT YOUR DOPAMINE AND ADRENALINE EITHER WAY. If a one product has the potential to release 200% of dopamine, and another only has the potential to release 125% of dopamine then YOU STILL ARE HAVING 100% OF YOUR DOPAMINE RELEASED. THE EXTRA POTENTIALL 100% OR 25% IS MEANINGLESS.


Besides, a smoker would notice immediately if their product was racemic as it would be sold as a fine powder only which is rather uncommon most places, and the melting point of racemic meth is 130 degrees rather than 175 degrees which any seasoned smoker would instantly notice. That's a MASSIVE difference



So then. Why does the meth from some bags make you feel like shit and some doesn't? Well, it's because your dealer put doo doo and piss and cum into it because it's a street drug. From the street. So it's dirty and yucky you spoon. Also meth makes you feel like shit.


Thank you for your time
Where can I find the tartaric acid procedure? Thanks!
 
This just sounds like an AI summary of that article from The Atlantic

Meth is meth. The information is out there on the product coming into the country; but if folks want to stop using meth because they're concerned about P2P more power too them. Not a good drug
I thought it sounded like an article too.

Racing Fuel is a hyperbolic fear mongering way of saying methanol.
 
I worked in the pharmaceutical industry for some years and one of the key tests for generics is that they are supposed to behave in precisely the same manner as the original patented and branded product. If memory serves, the total dose must be within 5% of the stated dose. I suggest that in the months or even years leading up to loss of patent protection, makers of the branded product er on the side of +5% so patients will note the difference. Not charity. A cynical way of maintaining brand loyalty.

Now I'm aware of several generics being removed from the market because they failed such simple requirements. If you have ever seen the licencing form (in fact it comes as of two ring bound books each with >1000 pages) required to obtain a GSL for a generic, there is a simply vast number of requirements. Everything from livery (both packaging and product) to the PIL to the excipients to physical properties such as stability.

Even then, we still saw several common medications containing unacceptable quantities of nitrosoamines which are extremely potent carcinogens! That one I can make an informed guess - the manufacturers altered the synthesis to reduce the volume of solvent used. It's happened before. Tryptophan was removed from the market because it contained a toxic impurity caused by synthesis using insufficient amounts of solvent.

But I suppose bupropion is the most infamous example with the generic modified (sustained) release formulation dose-dumping which resulted in a number of patients suffering tonic-clonic (grand mal) seizures!

Only a few months ago a BLer noted that the oral morphine tablets they were prescribed had been mis-labelled with the 30mg tablets containing 60mg and vice versa. In that case it's likely that the two formulations were produced using a single press and someone confused the dies.

Before that I recall patients prescribed buprenorphine buccal films opening the package to discover that the film was absent and in it's place was a simple piece of thin cardboard. That must have been awful because I suppose some pharmacists are suspicious of people undergoing opioid detoxification asking for more opioids. Patients may feel they wouldn't be believed. Luckily someone opened a film IN the pharmacy thus proof in the form of video evidence expedited recall and replacement.

In that last case it's hard to know if that was a production error or someone stealing the stuff. IS there a market for the stuff? I have no idea.

In short, it's not supposed to be the case and yet we see it again and again. Presuming it's equally likely to occur in the formulation of non-psychoactive medicines, it seems likely that people have needlessly died because their generic medication turned out to be unreliable.

I have said this before but if anyone decides to have instrumental analysis carried out on a sample, I am experienced in GC-MS (and related technologies), NMR as well as X-ray crystallography (still widely used in China) and I WILL interpret such data for BLers gratis. I'm not saying that the product sold as tilmetamine is toxic, but the instrumental analysis posted on BL clearly showed that it was not, in fact, the N-methyl homologue of tiletamine i.e. 2-(methylamino)-2-(thiophen-2-yl)cyclohexan-1-one. It was the positional isomer, 2-(methylamino)-2-(thiophen-3-yl)cyclohexan-1-one, a compound I could find no data on.

To me, CMXE (2-(2-chloro-5-methoxyphenyl)-2-(ethylamino)cyclohexan-1-one AKA SMILES COc1ccc(Cl)c(c1)C1(CCCCC1=O)NCC) seems likely to be the last 'great' arylcyclohexylamine NMDA antagonist/DRI that has yet to be seen on the RC market. It's more potent than K and MXE. It's also a good option because if the balance of the two discrete actions isn't favourable, the N-ethyl can be substituted with an N-methyl to reduce NMDA activity OR with an N-isopropyl which will increase NMDA activity. It can be 'tuned'. On top of that, the way Parke-Davis hurridly patented that specific compound suggests that they felt it was of particular utility.

So take care and consider it to be my own small part in keeping all BLers in the loop, in the community and safe from harm.
20% not 5% is the allowable variance in dose. Which I think is a lot.

 
Top