• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • 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

Misc Vimpat (Lacosamide)

homeydontplaythat

homeydontplaythat

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
1,218
Location
LOS ANGELES
Anyone been scripted this/heard of it? It is in the same vein as gabapentin and pregabalin. I am interested because it is C-V. I am wondering if anyone has found it useful for anxiety. I am curious it if is somehow a cleaner version of pregabalin. It is very new, alas I am quite curious. I think this is the next big off label anxiolytic.8o
 
im sorry i dont know anything about this,
but i do know about pregabalin, and i also know that some people people find it to potentiate opiates, wonder if this does?
 
Doesn't sound like it'd be any good for anxiety..

Definately doesn't sound like it could be recreational.
 
yeah im not sure where you are getting the same vein as pregabalin and gabapentin. Maybe quite broadly. Lacosamide works on sodium channels, and has no effect on the calcium channels, unlike pg or gp. It has no effect on GABA-A or GABA-B. It also doesnt effect GAD or substance P. It is quite (disturbingly?) specific...no effect on dopamine, serotonin, noradrenaline, or muscarinic receptors. This makes it quite different than pregab and gabapentin...and it bears no structural resemblance either. But it is C-V, and I guess its use for diabetic pain and its scope as an ion channel blocker make it kinda similiar. But yeah, it sounds distinctly unrecreational. Maybe dizziness qualifies as C-V material? ;D
 
it is indicated for the exact same stuff that pg and gp are. im not debating the phamakinetics.

so it working on sodium channels as opposed to calcium channels makes it less recreational?

i have a feeling its too new for anything to be decided about its effects.
 
Definately doesn't sound like it could be recreational.

the DEA begs to differ.

VIMPAT is a Schedule V controlled substance.
Abuse

In a human abuse potential study, single doses of 200 mg and 800 mg lacosamide produced euphoria-type subjective responses that differentiated statistically from placebo; at 800 mg, these euphoria-type responses were statistically indistinguishable from those produced by alprazolam, a Schedule IV drug. The duration of the euphoria-type responses following lacosamide was less than that following alprazolam. A high rate of euphoria was also reported as an adverse event in the human abuse potential study following single doses of 800 mg lacosamide (15% [5/34]) compared to placebo (0%) and in two pharmacokinetic studies following single and multiple doses of 300-800 mg lacosamide (ranging from 6% [2/33] to 25% [3/12]) compared to placebo (0%). However, the rate of euphoria reported as an adverse event in the VIMPAT development program at therapeutic doses was less than 1%.
 
amanitadine said:
yeah im not sure where you are getting the same vein as pregabalin and gabapentin. Maybe quite broadly. Lacosamide works on sodium channels, and has no effect on the calcium channels, unlike pg or gp. It has no effect on GABA-A or GABA-B. It also doesnt effect GAD or substance P. It is quite (disturbingly?) specific...no effect on dopamine, serotonin, noradrenaline, or muscarinic receptors. This makes it quite different than pregab and gabapentin...and it bears no structural resemblance either. But it is C-V, and I guess its use for diabetic pain and its scope as an ion channel blocker make it kinda similiar. But yeah, it sounds distinctly unrecreational. Maybe dizziness qualifies as C-V material? ;D
Click to expand...

Concur.

If it has no effect on GABA-A or -B, nor GAD, sub P or any or the notable neurotransmitters, I find it difficult to believe it would have any anxiolytic action whatsoever, perhaps my understanding of psychopharmacology is primitive though... :\
 
homeydontplaythat said:
Definately doesn't sound like it could be recreational.

the DEA begs to differ.

VIMPAT is a Schedule V controlled substance.
Abuse

In a human abuse potential study, single doses of 200 mg and 800 mg lacosamide produced euphoria-type subjective responses that differentiated statistically from placebo; at 800 mg, these euphoria-type responses were statistically indistinguishable from those produced by alprazolam, a Schedule IV drug. The duration of the euphoria-type responses following lacosamide was less than that following alprazolam. A high rate of euphoria was also reported as an adverse event in the human abuse potential study following single doses of 800 mg lacosamide (15% [5/34]) compared to placebo (0%) and in two pharmacokinetic studies following single and multiple doses of 300-800 mg lacosamide (ranging from 6% [2/33] to 25% [3/12]) compared to placebo (0%). However, the rate of euphoria reported as an adverse event in the VIMPAT development program at therapeutic doses was less than 1%.
Click to expand...

Hehehe you made my day =D "The DEA begs to differ." They also consider hey, that is what horses eat, to be "potentially psychoactive." 8) (Sarcasism)

Seriously though, if this drug is a stretch to reach the "euphoria" of alprazolam.... :p

EDIT: also note that statistics, confined to a null hypothesis test as it would seem they used, are worthless real-world... that is, "statistically significant" does NOT equal significant... fuck, it's a backwards way of testing a hypothesis, pity it's still so prevalent... or at least prevalent when convenient. FYI p-values mean DICK
 
Last edited:
i have heard elsewhere that people think the dea was retarded in scheduling it.

what im trying to gather is WHY the scheduled it. are sodium channels somehow less reinforcing than calcium channels? i just dont understand why it would be C-V if it was not somewhat reminiscent of lyrica.
 
Is the only link you made between this and Lyrica the fact they are prescribed as anti-epileptics?
 
i dont fucking have any, otherwise i would try it.

the link im making is that yes they are both anti epileptics, both for diabetic neuropathy and both work on ion channels instead of actual neurotransmitters.

im really looking for someone that HAS EXPERIENCE with the drug. i dont think anyone that has commented on in on BL has actually taken it.
 
The studies used to assess abuse potential of lacosamide are widely held as the standard methods of evaluation. Behavioral effects of lacosamide in animals and humans were found to be similar to, but transient relative to, those of the schedule IV drugs alprazolam and phenobarbital. Preclinical studies indicated that lacosamide is self-administered at rates higher than saline and partially mimics discrimitive stimulus effects to the schedule IV substances alprazolam and phenobarbital. In clinical trials, lacosamide produced subjective responses similar to alprazolam but these effects did not last as long as alprazolam. After careful consideration of positive indicators from preclinical and clinical studies, DEA finds lacosamide has abuse potential supporting placement in schedule V under the CSA. The DHHS recommended control in schedule V of the CSA and the DEA concurs.
Click to expand...

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2009/fr0521.htm

apparently it has some sort of downer effect. still, i don't think it should be a controlled substance, and i find it hard to believe it has similar effects to alprazolam considering it's not a GABAergic(which is responsible for the recreational effects of benzos) or has any other type of mechanism that would give it abuse potiential(doesn't affect opioid receptors, dopamine levels, etc.).

the DEA had the need to schedule this while tramadol and somas are still federally uncontrolled. :|
 
homeydontplaythat said:
what im trying to gather is WHY the scheduled it. are sodium channels somehow less reinforcing than calcium channels? i just dont understand why it would be C-V if it was not somewhat reminiscent of lyrica.
Click to expand...

it is controlled because tests showed that rats self administered it over saline, which really only proves it is psychoactive.

however, the DEA being as stupid as they are, overreacted as usual and had a series of questionable tests done and the results showed it had a short lived depressant effect that resembled that of benzos. also euphoria was reported in another test, but occured in less than 1%(doubtful at best, in these kinds of tests some report "euphoria" even in the "control" group a.k.a. the people getting sugar pills).

so why did they schedule it?... because the good folks over at the DEA are idiots.
 
i dont know, man. i think i read the incidence of euphoria was as high as 12% in some groups.

what it comes down to is unless someone here has tried it we wont know if it recreational. i think it is just too new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top