New bill up, banning "bath salts"-US

That's what happens when the grey market doesn't butter up it's politicians. Not enough money... not enough reason to keep it around.
 
You go get 'em DEA.

Meanwhile, most illegal drugs that work better are widely available for those who look. And the lazy can still get really high from Benzedrex or, hell, morning glory seeds! How about ordering Soma or Ultram online hassle-free with a bullshit online consultation? They'll send you a pill bottle with your name on it! Next day shipping!

The world continues on spinning. The druggies get their drugs. Nothing changes.
 
Looks like MDAI is in there too. I wonder what research they did, if any, that concluded MDAI was a dangerous substance with no medical value.

It's the controversial substances that get in the media. The non-controversial substances get banned at the same time. Some one needs to shine a big, bright media spotlight on what their scientific/medical justification is for banning every one of those substances listed, especially the ones that haven't got into the media because they don't send people to ER.

It wouldn't be so bad if only potentially dangerous substances got banned. Part of the problem is the banning of all safer options too.

The list of banned substances in the US and UK includes many substances no one has ever heard of. For example, in the UK, the entire list of substances listed in PIKAL was banned. Was each substance really evaluated for actual evidence of harm? It's time the DEA and ACMD were held accountable for their decisions and recommendations. To some extent this is starting to happen. Certainly whenever they ban something now it gets in the news whereas before they could ban things quietly without anyone noticing.
 
Methylone might have more therapeutic value than MDMA. Good word DEA. I bet this is what will finally stop people from getting high. you go girl.
 
I was wondering if there is anyone in the US who is concerned with researching the medical value of these types of substances. Certainly in the UK, Prof David Nutt has drawn attention to the loss to the medical community when substances such as NRG-1 get scheduled/classified. Apparently there was some promising medical research being done into that substance.

Would be nice to have someone highlight the harm to medicine done by banning substances on a whim.
 
This isn't the DEA's doing. This is congressmen reacting to the media and their constituents. Use your heads.
 
Hammilton said:
This isn't the DEA's doing. This is congressmen reacting to the media and their constituents. Use your heads.
Click to expand...

OK. Thanks for the clarification. In the UK the ACMD "recommend" anything that might make someone high gets banned.
 
another sad day...

i dont particularily like mdpv. so whatever.
but m1, 4mmc, and the cannabinoids damn

i think im going to stop looking in the media forum. it never fails to tick me off

i wonder if they will actually be able to get all of them scheduled?
 
i wonder if they will actually be able to get all of them scheduled?
Click to expand...

without a doubt.

I doubt even a handful of members will vote against the "Synthetic Drug Control Act of 2011"

cause drugs are bad and criminalizing is obviously the way to control their use, you know?
 
Cannibinoids to be made illegal-
(a) CANNABIMIMETIC AGENTS.—Schedule I, as set
4 forth in section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act
5 (21 U.S.C. 812(c)) is amended by adding at the end the
6 following:
7 ‘‘(d)(1) Unless specifically exempted or unless listed
8 in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or
9 preparation which contains any quantity of
10 cannabimimetic agents, or which contains their salts, iso11
mers, and salts of isomers whenever the existence of such
12 salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the
13 specific chemical designation.
14 ‘‘(2) In paragraph (1), the term ‘cannabimimetic
15 agents’—
16 ‘‘(A) means any substance that is a cannabinoid
17 receptor type 1 (CB1 receptor) agonist as dem18
onstrated by binding studies and functional assays
19 within the following structural classes:
20 ‘‘(i) 2-(3-hydroxycyclohexyl)phenol with
21 substitution at the 5-position of the phenolic
22 ring by alkyl or alkenyl, whether or not sub23
stituted on the cyclohexyl ring to any extent.
24 ‘‘(ii) 3-(1-naphthoyl)indole or 3-(1-
25 naphthyl)indole by substitution at the nitrogen
26 atom of the indole ring, whether or not further
VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:57 Mar 31, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1254.IH H1254 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
3
•HR 1254 IH
1 substituted on the indole ring to any extent,
2 whether or not substituted on the naphthoyl or
3 naphthyl ring to any extent.
4 ‘‘(iii) 3-(1-naphthoyl)pyrrole by substi5
tution at the nitrogen atom of the pyrrole ring,
6 whether or not further substituted in the indole
7 ring to any extent, whether or not substituted
8 on the naphthoyl ring to any extent.
9 ‘‘(iv) 1-(1-naphthylmethyl)indene by substi10
tution of the 3-position of the indene ring,
11 whether or not further substituted in the indene
12 ring to any extent, whether or not substituted
13 on the naphthyl ring to any extent.
14 ‘‘(v) 3-phenylacetylindole or 3-
15 benzoylindole by substitution at the nitrogen
16 atom of the indole ring, whether or not further
17 substituted in the indole ring to any extent,
18 whether or not substituted on the phenyl ring
19 to any extent.; and
20 ‘‘(B) includes—
21 ‘‘(i) 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-
22 hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (CP-47,497);
23 ‘‘(ii) 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-
24 hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (cannabicyclohexanol
25 or CP-47,497 C8-homolog);
VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:57 Mar 31, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1254.IH H1254 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
4
•HR 1254 IH
1 ‘‘(iii) 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole
2 (JWH-018 and AM678);
3 ‘‘(iv) 1-butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-
4 073);
5 ‘‘(v) 1-hexyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-
6 019);
7 ‘‘(vi) 1-[2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naph8
thoyl)indole (JWH-200);
9 ‘‘(vii) 1-pentyl-3-(2-
10 methoxyphenylacetyl)indole (JWH-250);
11 ‘‘(viii) 1-pentyl-3-[1-(4-
12 methoxynaphthoyl)]indole (JWH-081);
13 ‘‘(ix) 1-pentyl-3-(4-methyl-1-naph14
thoyl)indole (JWH-122);
15 ‘‘(x) 1-pentyl-3-(4-chloro-1-naph16
thoyl)indole (JWH-398);
17 ‘‘(xi) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-3-(1-naph18
thoyl)indole (AM2201);
19 ‘‘(xii) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-3-(2-
20 iodobenzoyl)indole (AM694);
21 ‘‘(xiii) 1-pentyl-3-[(4-methoxy)-ben22
zoyl]indole (SR-19 and RCS-4);
23 ‘‘(xiv) 1-cyclohexylethyl-3-(2-
24 methoxyphenylacetyl)indole (SR-18 and RCS-
25 8); and
VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:57 Mar 31, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1254.IH H1254 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
5
•HR 1254 IH
1 ‘‘(xv) 1-pentyl-3-(2-
2 chlorophenylacetyl)indole (JWH-203).’’.
Click to expand...

If you go to the link it starts with cannibinoids, the copy+ paste thing I did messed with the format a bit. Anyway, you get the idea, they're banning a very large number of synthetics. In fact, the ban seems to be on anything that works as a cannabimimetic (I wish I could change my user name now) agent. Which is some bullshit.
 
dang well at least we know the black market dealers are going to thrive again
 
Last edited:
Does this mean I can't buy echinacea at the corner store any more... its happens to contain certain aklyamides that bind to CB1 and CB2 . . .

also the cannabinoid section says " any substance that is a cannabinoid
receptor type 1 (CB1 receptor) agonist as demonstrated by binding studies and functional assays."

Does this mean they have to test and assay each chemical before its banned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top