Is methylone an analog of mdma?

[lane321]

In my observations mdma is roughly twice as potent.

I think the effects argument is way too subjective though.

What I was really hoping is that one of our chemist friends here could make an argument against structural similarity. In the case I posted they make good arguments with regards to GHB and 1,4 - Butanediol. They mention polarity and the way the molecule folds in 3d as well as.

"Each of the three experts agreed that the two substances in question contain a different "functional group": 1,4-butanediol has an alcohol major functional group while GHB has a carboxylic acid major functional group. That is, one is commonly classified as an alcohol or diol, and one is an acid. Those functional groups impart [*5] physical properties to the chemicals, such as acidity levels, melting and boiling points, and odors. All three also agreed that 1,4-butanediol can be converted into GHB within the human body upon ingestion.

Both of the defendants' experts concluded that 1,4-butanediol and GHB are not substantially similar in chemical structure, and that the majority of experts in their field would agree with them. Both based their conclusions upon a number of criteria, including the fact that GHB is an acid and 1,4-butanediol is generally classified as an alcohol. They testified that the two substances would be classified in different parts of an organic chemistry book, which is organized by functional group, and that a student who stated on a college exam that GHB and 1,4-butanediol were similar in chemical structure would indeed fail such an exam.

Dr. Haley related that GHB has a negative charge at one end of its structure, and a positive charge at the other, so that the ends necessarily attract, thereby effectively rendering GHB an unstable molecule. In contrast, 1,4-butanediol does not have such properties and would remain linear. Likewise, Dr. Schuster stated that when illustrated three dimensionally, [*6] GHB folded over upon itself, and would not appear static because of its instability.

Both experts testified that results from a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectometer, routinely used by chemists to analyze the nature of the functional groups present, documents the structural dissimilarity of 1,4-butanediol and GHB.

The Government's witness, a DEA employee with a degree in polymer (rather than organic) chemistry, disputed the conclusions drawn by Dr. Haley and Dr. Schuster that the two chemicals were not structurally similar. Dr. DiBernardino's principal disagreement was the importance placed on the functional group in assessing chemical structure. He testified that while comparing functional groups might illustrate different properties and reactivity of the chemical substances, such comparisons were not relevant in determining structural differences."

 

[seep]

The Government's witness, a DEA employee with a degree in polymer (rather than organic) chemistry, disputed the conclusions drawn by Dr. Haley and Dr. Schuster that the two chemicals were not structurally similar. Dr. DiBernardino's principal disagreement was the importance placed on the functional group in assessing chemical structure. He testified that while comparing functional groups might illustrate different properties and reactivity of the chemical substances, such comparisons were not relevant in determining structural differences.

This is absurd.

If you want an example of how rigorous an analysis should be in order to determine pharmacological analogy, read the US DOJ's very own examination of the diastereomers of 4-methylaminorex.

Then again, a bucket of donkey shit could be considered an analogue of MDMA if I market it as such.

And what people seem to forget is that a U.S. jury has the power to make any decision it wants to make, so long as they follow decorum.

 

[Hammilton]

Then again, a bucket of donkey shit could be considered an analogue of MDMA if I market it as such.

Not true. Case law says that the last bit can't stand on it's own, because then the analogue act becomes nothing but a counterfeit drug law, which it wasn't meant to be. They consider both the spirit and the letter, of course, and the spirit it was drafted in quite obviously did not mean for it to be a counterfeit drug law.

I'd have to dig up the law, and I'm pressed for time at the moment, but it shouldn't be hard to find.


Still, Methylone is definitely an analogue of MDMA. No doubt about that.

There are more difficult things like is MDPV an analogue of MDMA. I think most would say, yes, it has a stimulant effect equal or stronger than MDMA and has substantial structural similarity. However, the case law goes back and forth and experts can't seem to agree when it comes to trials.

 

[lane321]

This is absurd.

If you want an example of how rigorous an analysis should be in order to determine pharmacological analogy, read the US DOJ's very own examination of the diastereomers of 4-methylaminorex.

Then again, a bucket of donkey shit could be considered an analogue of MDMA if I market it as such.

And what people seem to forget is that a U.S. jury has the power to make any decision it wants to make, so long as they follow decorum.

I think you can decide to go with a trial by judge. You are right to think that all of this would go way over a jurys head and you would probably be convicted as a result.

Also you are correct about they can charge you with whatever you presented it as.

Obviously the example you give is an analog. Theyre the same molecule right?

So can noone make the argument against "structural similarity" between methylone and mdma?

What exactly does this functional group argument mean? Im glad you pointed that out. That confused me from the beginning.

 

[seep]

Obviously the example you give is an analog. Theyre the same molecule right?

Donkey shit and MDMA?

Oh, you mean the cis and trans diastereomers of 4-methylaminorex. No, they're not:

versus

In the image on the left (the trans) think about where the hydrogens would be if the methyl and phenyl in question became coplanar.

 

[-25]

I think it depends on how much you pay your lawyer

 

[Break777]

What do you think the chances are of being prosecuted for possession of 1-2 grams if found by customs?

 

[any major dude]

you'd probably just receive the envelope and instead of methylone a note from customs saying your stuff had been seized. Or at least that's what happened to one of my friends who had a letter sent to him with a bowl or two's worth of reefer from a buddy growing abroad.

Also, I'm unaware of any prosecutions of individuals for small amounts of M1 and the like under the analogue law. Though if any exist and someone has links to them I'd love to read the decision etc. I'd love it even more if there weren't any though.

As for pharmacological action, you might have a good argument there as M1 does release some DA, NE, & 5HT, however, IIRC it functions mostly as a reuptake inhibitor, whereas MDMA is a releaser with no reuptake inhibition AFAIK. Also, whether its correct or not, most people attribute the bulk of MDMA's effects to serotonin (anyone who's taken MDAI know that this is most likely inaccurate). Since M1 has only ~20% of the serotonergic activity of MDMA that would be another significant difference.

In as far as chemical arguments going over a jury's head, one could use a more linguistic angle to attempt to convince them it is not an analogue. M1 is a cathinone, MDMA is an amphetamine, different class of chemicals. Also, if it goes over the jury's head, it might not be terribly difficult to convince them that the law is so vague as to put you in the legally untenable situation of not being able to figure out if you were committing a crime or not. If they can't understand it i doubt it would be hard to convince them you couldn't either

my 2¢

If any of the above info is inaccurate I welcome corrections

I think it depends on how much you pay your lawyer

this factor shouldn't be underestimated either

 

[Hammilton]

Donkey shit and MDMA?

Oh, you mean the cis and trans diastereomers of 4-methylaminorex. No, they're not:

versus

In the image on the left (the trans) think about where the hydrogens would be if the methyl and phenyl in question became coplanar.

It is the same molecule. Same formula, same structure. Just optical isomers of the same molecule. Interestingly, only one isomer was scheduled. Still, the others would definitely be considered analogues if they were ever sold.

 

[seep]

They're not optical isomers.

As to whether or not they're the same molecule, it depends on what is meant by same. If the trans diastereomer is forced into the high-energy conformation of a coplanar phenyl and methyl, the hydrogen atoms at the stereocenters become flagship hydrogens. This cannot happen in the cis diastereomer.

 

[fastandbulbous]

Is methylone an analog of mdma?

Like asking if the pope is catholic

 

[TallStack]

It is the same molecule. Same formula, same structure. Just optical isomers of the same molecule. Interestingly, only one isomer was scheduled. Still, the others would definitely be considered analogues if they were ever sold.

Quite a bummer.

On an unrelated note: If I'm not mistaken, are you Hamilton Morris from Vice Magazine? Loved your DMT feature on vbs.tv.