• Bluelight Article Discussion Welcome Guest
    Bluelight Rules Posting Rules
    Articles Page Submission Guidelines
  • BAD Moderators: (Wordy)

ARTICLE: 'Grey area cannabis in the US (2026)'

The issue is that the US employed Markush structural definitions so rather than the previous system in which each unique chemical (even the specific isomers in some cases) had to be systematically brought under legal control, whole scaffolds were controlled.

I noted that initially 'synthetic THC' was usually one of the many selective CB1 ligands that had been patented in the 1970s and 1980s.

BUT

As all selective CB1 scaffolds became controlled, Chinese cooks simply tried out a non-selective CB1/CB2 ligand on the pragmatic grounds that it was technically legal and if users accepted it, it was 'good enough'.

So now compounds that may not have even gone through animal models are being produced.

Oh, and having been called on to interpret the GC-MS/NMR pairs of thousands if not tens of thousands of samples, the ONLY class of compound where impurities (dimers/trimers/polymers) was more commonly found than not were these synthetic cannabis ligands.

I have said it before but it isn't a case of IF, only WHEN one will turn out to have an unexpected chronic toxic effect. For people who smoked these things, I would be surprised if there wasn't an increase in the rate of respiratory system cancers associated with their use.
 
I noticed despite being in a legal state THC/A is appearing at a headshop --- along with "mushrooms" got me for 50$ for lionsmane! (OUCH!) bastards wouldnt say if it had psilocybin or not --- shoulda known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top