Amphetamine Anti-Dote ?

the_highest_mormon said:
they have the same thing for weed, it binds to the canaboid receptors in the brain and prevents it from effecting your brain (used as an appetite suppressant)

but i dont think the focus is to create "drug vaccine", i think it would be most effectively used to help treat meth addiction
Click to expand...

That isn't at all the same thing from weed. You're thinking of a CB1 antagonist. These are vaccines- which cause the body to destroy the molecule before it can bind.

---

Phrozen- I don't know if a vaccine would prevent it from working as a local aneastetic. Most of the 'caines commonly used in medicine are subsantially different. Certainly enough so that they should safe from destruction.
 
Just because it doesn't really get into the blood stream, and it works so rapidly. It'd take too long for the thingies to destroy it, I think.
 
Tryptamite said:
Why not just wait till the drug goes from the bloodstream itself. It doesn't take that long at all. Why remove it in the first place?? Is for for o.d.s?
Click to expand...
I would say so.

Meth has a long active life and many ERs have people who've taken too much presenting and needing to be restrained by security and calmed down as they think their heart is going to explode and they basically freak out.

I have never been in that situation in 3years of meth use but I can see it happening especially with people who don't know what they're doing or go a few days without sleep and are bordering on a psychotic episode from sleep deprivation.

Being able to stop the drug working instantly would be a boon top the ER staff the world over. However, the article does not read as though it is an instantaneous effect.
 
Right Or Ron

Ham-milton said:
The Scientologists will love it though.
Or do they hate this stuff too?
Click to expand...

I went to an
'Anti-Psychiatrist Exhibition'
the year before last,
thought it was jus'tan
example of Psychiatric Abuse
over the years...

...It claimed to be independent,
but,
at the end of the 'display',
we were stopp'd
&
two women tried to Hubbard me.

Front'd.
Scientology gets to moi,
as they are SO not FRONT-UP...

They were operatin' under a diff'rent name,
an' it took me about 2 minutes of
beat-down questions
to get their REAL
identity
out'a'dem.

Scientologists (as I've experienced)(excerpt) said:
In public statements, especially to newcomers, Scientology claims that medical drugs are fine and says there's no problem with Scientologists taking drugs prescribed by a physician.

However, in materials presented by Scientology front group Narconon, they claim that all drugs are poisonous and remain in the body permanently - claims that are thoroughly discredited by modern science.

Psychiatric drugs are seen differently: Scientology forbids the use of all psychiatric drugs, and works to prevent non-Scientologists from using them as well. Scientologists are vehemently opposed to all forms of psychiatry - not just for themselves, but for everyone....
Click to expand...

http://www.scientology-lies.com/faq/teachings/medical-drugs.html

But are they against drugs that
are against drugs?

I've look'd at the pamphlets since,
it seems so.

PEACE
:\
UnSquare
 
A Cowardly New World

Ham-milton said:
I have no problem with immunizing people from drug abuse, to be honest, but this seems like too much of a danger to do.
Click to expand...
Ham-milton said:
I think that drugs that aren't likely to ever have widespread medical application could be immunized against. Cocaine, PCP, for instance.
Click to expand...
I think I may be mis-interpreting Ham-milton's statements - Are You for the involuntary vaccination that would inhibit the brain's ability to derive pleasure from a substance? Perhaps what you intended to convey is that you have no problem immunizing a person from becoming addicted to a sustance? In which case, that would be the greatest advancement in pharmacology (that would be the word, I think) the world has even seen.
I fear it must be easier, or perhaps simply possible, to engineer a method of blocking the enjoyable effects of chemicals all together, rather than sinking money into a advancement in tolerance prevention - which would benefit people who use these chemicals recreationally and I suppose a few examples of legitimate medical use could benefit, i.e. pain management and ADD/ADHD medication come to mind. As we all know, tolerance --> physical addiction --> otherwise kind and respectable people doing anything to get fixed....see "Stealing Pills." thread, but even that is pretty tame considering what some of us have seen addicts do (or done ourselves) to get a fix.
 
Psychiatric drugs are seen differently: Scientology forbids the use of all psychiatric drugs, and works to prevent non-Scientologists from using them as well. Scientologists are vehemently opposed to all forms of psychiatry - not just for themselves, but for everyone....
Click to expand...


L Ron Hubbard uber alles!

Have the people coming up with these even thought about what it might do to the immune system of the person receiving the therapy. It could ste the immune systen into overdrive, resulting in diseases like rheumatoid arthritis, lupus etc
 
Considering neural amines are found everywhere it seems very silly. You'll fuck up your pancreas if you don't get enough dopamine and your heart will also suffer-i.e.- erractic rhythm, not beating. The body might stop producing specific endogenous antibodies and all sorts of bizarre diseases that people were previously immune to might possibly reoccur or occur for the first time in a long time. Seems like modifying the immune system is a very bad way to go about this. Competitive inhibitors seem like a safer route, but I'm no expert just a neuroscience student fio musician. But all the same how would this be useful "therapy"? It seems like its only use would be in prisons to force sobriety. Am I missing something? Meth NEVER leaves the body? Even in the most hardcore of meth addicts 100% of the drug and 100% of metabolites, or at least an amount detectable by standard drug tests, are out of the body in a week. If I'm wrong someone please tell me/us what actually happens.

PAX,
PL
 
If it's something they could use to reverse amphetamine overdoses then that would be fine. But if it's something they are going to eventually use to stop people from getting high then thats just shit. The government shouldnt have any control over what people use to alter their minds even if it is something that can be as bad as meth.

It wouldnt surprise me if they started to use so called vaccines in court orders. But that will be a long way down the road. Hopefully.

The meth never leaves the body thing is full of shit. Ive known people who have used then gotten a drug test a few days later and passed it. Without having to even fuck with the drug test :\ .
 
An antidote sounds like a helluva way to treat chemical dependence to me. I don't know about you guys, but I can sure think of a few times in my life when I wished like Hell I could get the fuck away from dopaminergic drugs. Cocaine? Yes, please. Cocaine dependence? Please God, no.
 
holy shit. this could be useful, but its scary that science is developing such advanced techniques to block highs.
 
What uses do they plan on using this "antidote" for? Would this be used in MDMA/methamphetamine overdose situations? Or possibly something that drug offenders might have to take as a court order? Or what, any other ideas that you guys have? (I highly doubt that they will start giving babies this drug, as it is not researched enough at all yet) How long does it last, I wonder?
 
fastandbulbous said:
Have the people coming up with these even thought about what it might do to the immune system of the person receiving the therapy. It could ste the immune systen into overdrive, resulting in diseases like rheumatoid arthritis, lupus etc
Click to expand...

They probably have. I'm sure they're aware of what happened with other attempts to immunize the body against toxins, especially beta-amyloid (one of the proteins that is a culprit in Alzheimer's). After extremely promising preclinical studies in which antibodies against beta-amyloid completely cleared plaques from the brains of experimental animals, they went into clinical trials on Alzheimer's patients. Unfortunately, many of them got extremely sick from the antibody, and two of them died. Somehow they managed to get the brains of one of the deceased subjects and found that, lo and behold, that person's brain had no plaques! Now they've restarted studies trying to find an antibody that doesn't make monkeys sick, and then move again to try it in humans.

What I'm trying to illustrate with this little vignette is that the U of Arkansas' researchers' findings in rodents do not mean that use of this technology in humans is right around the corner. On the contrary, I'm sure that they will be required to do extensive studies in nonhuman primates before even clinical trials on people can begin. Even if it makes its way to the market, it's possible that it may be withdrawn if long-term side effects emerge.
 
i agree, messing around with the immune system seems like some sci-fi'ish side effects could present themselves. Any one see "I am Legend"?
 
this is fucking stupid. A vaccination? What are we gonna have all kids vaccinated against amphetamine based drugs at school (oh wait, like a 3rd take adderall), along with a flu shot? And ecstasy? What does this have to do with anything besides the structural similarity. Plus, it prolly would only block mdma's stimulant effects, the serotonin-induced euphoria does not work like amphetamine.

In the future, all kids will be vaccinated against cannabis, mdma, lsd, opioids, ketamine/pcp (nmda-acting dissociatives), and all the usual suspects. Then new RC's will come our way.

2c-e is the new lsd. =p
 
^oh, and what about an alcohol antidote? dont see that happening (and i dont mean those sadistic "drink and you will get very, VERY sick" treatments).

I would think alcohol is a bigger problem than amphetamine, and certainly kills alot more people. But no, we'll just look past that. And cigarettes, naahhhh... tobacco lobbyists are good people, after all. They want the best for our children =).
 
Methamphetamine antidote: a make-over and a bus ticket out of Bakersfield.
 
FractalStructure said:
this is fucking stupid. A vaccination? What are we gonna have all kids vaccinated against amphetamine based drugs at school (oh wait, like a 3rd take adderall), along with a flu shot? And ecstasy? What does this have to do with anything besides the structural similarity. Plus, it prolly would only block mdma's stimulant effects, the serotonin-induced euphoria does not work like amphetamine.

In the future, all kids will be vaccinated against cannabis, mdma, lsd, opioids, ketamine/pcp (nmda-acting dissociatives), and all the usual suspects. Then new RC's will come our way.

2c-e is the new lsd. =p
Click to expand...
Did you even read the article? The proposed mechanism has nothing to do with the neuropharmacology of the compounds.
 
Seems like a dangerous road to go down. Treating drug abuse like a disease is a mistake.




FractalStructure said:
I would think alcohol is a bigger problem than amphetamine, and certainly kills alot more people. But no, we'll just look past that. And cigarettes, naahhhh... tobacco lobbyists are good people, after all. They want the best for our children =).
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the government can make money off of Alcohol and Cigs.=)
 
i can easily imagine courts using this for people convicted of a DUI for example, where if you agree to take this one could eliminate it from their record, or hell it might be required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top