UK - Scientist says designer drug makers 'stole' his blueprint

edgarshade

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
1,954
Location
UK
BBC News
5 January 2011 Last updated at 18:07
By Neil Bowdler
Science reporter, BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12122039

An American chemist has spoken out against the misuse of scientific research to create designer drugs.

Writing in the journal Nature, Professor David Nichols of Perdue University, Indiana, says he is "haunted" by deaths linked to a drug based on his own research.

MTA or "flatliners" used a blueprint published by the professor and was sold as a "legal high", drugs which mimic the effects of illegal substances. It has since been banned as a class-A drug in the UK.

Back in the 1990s, Professor Nichols and colleagues were experimenting with chemicals similar to the one used in the drug ecstasy.

The hope was they the research might lead to new drugs to treat depression. He published three papers on the effects on rats of one chemical called 4-methylthioamphetamine or MTA.

It later emerged the work had been used to create pills dubbed "flatliners", which were linked with at least six deaths.

But it is only recently that the professor has become fully aware of how the designer drugs industry has been systematically mining his work for recipes.

"It's not like you took a gun and shot somebody because then you would know you'd been responsible," he told the BBC, "but people were taking something that you had published and I was alerting them that this might be an active molecule."

Kitchen lab
Professor Nichols says MTA, and other chemicals he has developed, can be created in a kitchen laboratory.

"It is something that someone with a PhD, if they're really determined to do it, could probably set up in a laboratory in their kitchen.

"If they could get the necessary chemicals, they could make some of these things, but these drugs are being made on a much larger scale than just the occasional chemist with the curiosity.

"It sounds like these things have really become a small industry."

The professor is by no means the only scientist to have his work plundered by the drug makers.

He says several synthetic drugs which mimic the effects of cannabis have been developed using data from publicly available scientific literature.

The British authorities have moved to ban a host of "legal highs" in recent years including GBL, BZP and mephedrone.

Mephedrone, also known as "meow", was banned last year, after it was associated with a number of deaths.
 
Scientist Haunted By Misuse Of Drugs He Invented

David Nichols studies the way psychedelic drugs act in the brains of rats. But he is haunted by how humans hijack his work to make street drugs, sometimes causing overdose deaths.

Nichols makes chemicals roughly similar to ecstasy and LSD that are supposed to help explain how parts of the brain function. Then he publishes the results for other scientists, hoping his work one day leads to treatments for depression or Parkinson's disease.

But Nichols' findings have not stayed in purely scientific circles. They've also been exploited by black market labs to make cheap and marginally legal recreational drugs.

"You try to work for something good, and it's subverted in a way," Nichols said. "I try not to think about it."

Now the 66-year-old chairman of the Purdue University pharmacology department is speaking out in one of the world's most prestigious scientific journals to describe an ethical struggle seldom discussed by brain researchers.

"You can't control what people do with what you publish, but yeah, I felt it personally," he said in a phone interview, explaining that his struggles are probably somewhat similar to those faced by the inventor of the machine gun, although not as severe. The journal Nature published his essay online Wednesday.

"What if a substance that seems innocuous is marketed and becomes wildly popular on the dance scene, but then millions of users develop an unusual type of kidney damage that proves irreversible and difficult to treat, or even life-threatening or fatal?" Nichols wrote. "That would be a disaster of immense proportions. This question, which was never part of my research focus, now haunts me."

Nichols has studied psychedelic drugs for more than 40 years, concentrating on serotonin. That's a basic chemical "that goes to every part of the brain. It's involved in appetite, sleep, sex, aggression, you name it," Nichols said in the interview with The Associated Press. "It really plays a key role in brain activation, the difference between being awake and being asleep."

Nichols estimates that at least five of his compounds — out of hundreds have been turned into street drugs.

His drug work used to be a joking matter. People would ask him if he needed human test subjects, and he would respond: "No, it's just rat stuff."

"I never thought of these getting out of the lab," he told the AP. Sure, the field includes research into LSD and other hallucinogens, but Nichols never imagined his work escaping the lab and causing death. The worst would be maybe someone getting high on stuff they shouldn't, he figured.

"Every time we make a molecule now, I do think, 'Is this the one that's going to be a problem?' I never used to think that before," Nichols said.

One chemical was so potent that "I just stopped and said, 'We're not going to study this one. This stuff would hit the market big-time,'" he said.

That was not the case almost 20 years ago, when he developed something similar to ecstasy, but not nearly as potent. Back then it was a little-known street drug. He published his study, found little interest from pharmaceutical companies in his chemical, called MTA, and moved on.

But somebody in the illicit world of drug abuse read his research and synthesized that drug into tablets for street use. It was eerily called "flatliners." But it really didn't provide much of a high.

"Flatline implies that you're brain dead," Nichols said. "Why would anyone take it?"

People did. They took too much. Their brains were flooded with serotonin, and they died. The first time Nichols was told about it, only two people had died.

"I sat in my office and thought. 'Wow, if you shoot somebody with a gun, you know you killed them, but if technology escapes and someone dies," Nichols said, his voice trailing off. "You're kind of disconnected from it."

At least five or six people died from that first drug. A second drug, a hallucinogenic called bromo-dragonfly, has killed two others. It could have been worse because it was chemically similar to a potent toxin that causes liver cancer, Nichols said.

A story last year in The Wall Street Journal said Nichols' published research is a favorite for European chemists who make black market street drugs. That hit him hard, but didn't surprise him. In the past year or so, he's been getting inquiries about his research from investigators and forensic labs.

Johns Hopkins University behavioral biology professor Roland Griffiths struggles with the same ethical questions when he studies the chemicals behind hallucinogenic mushrooms. But Griffiths believes the key to scientific progress is the free exchange of ideas, saying it's better than no information.

Read more at: http://www.npr.org/2011/01/05/132685131/scientist-haunted-by-misuse-of-drugs-he-invented
 
But Griffiths believes the key to scientific progress is the free exchange of ideas, saying it's better than no information.
let's put a little blip at the end, making it look sort of balanced.
 
So by this logic whoever made smoking tobacco popular is/are turning in his/her/their grave(s) due to the countless amount of smokers who've succumbed to lung cancer and yet countless smokers still choose to smoke even though they know the risks.

You've concocted a recreational psychotropic chemical. People are usually gonna continue to use/do something they enjoyed. Don't beat yourself up over it, even if it is dangerous in certain situations.
 
Last edited:
So by this logic whoever made smoking tobacco popular is/are turning in his/her/their grave(s) due to the countless amount of smokers who've succumbed to lung cancer and yet countless smokers still choose to smoke even though they know the risks.

You've concocted a recreational psychotropic chemical. People are usually gonna continue to use/do something they enjoyed. Don't beat yourself up over it, even if it is dangerous in certain situations.
he shouldn't feel bad... he should feel good.

if society was mature about illicit drugs, they wouldn't be illicit and we would be using them for more positive ends. if they weren't illicit, they would be a tiny problem compared to what they currently are.

politicians and anyone else supporting the war on drugs are the ones who should feel bad...
 
He is right now on BBC4 talking about it. You can probably catch it on the iPlayer later, it's part of "the material world"
 
Here's what I posted not so long ago in the 25C-NBOMe thread:
Shulgin never intended for his creations to be (ab)used so extensively. Neither was that Nichols intention. Alas, if you publish papers or write books like this, people will catch on to it. It's human nature to explore the unknown and wanting to expand the mind. These will be used by the drug taking culture they've helped to create; potent or not, selective for specific receptors or not, they pretty much all have "psychedelic potential"

I feel for Nichols though, if it haunts him that bad.
 
Quote: One chemical was so potent that "I just stopped and said, 'We're not going to study this one. This stuff would hit the market big-time,'" he said.

Kidnap him, force him to make this drug!
Then kill him.
 
Top