JWH-250... If it's toxic, how so?

[DoseMeHomie]

i have some jwh-250 on the way to my house, ill let u know what my experiences entail once i try it

 

[K1nGp1N]

i heard somewhere that one of the metabolites is a known carcinogen. you might wanna look into that

 

[DoseMeHomie]

i believe ive read that about jwh-018, not sure about 250 though

 

[MurphyClox]

There are some points that really hurt...

This is hardly surprising, as napthalene's epoxide metabolites are the body's own version of synthetic SUPER-GLUE!

Super-what? The naphthalene-moiety is metabolized via an epoxy-intermediate (there's recent discussion about this at ADD!), which is the culprit in this case. Nothing is 'glued'.

PENTYL: [...] pentanol [...] Pentyl pentanoate [...] Pentylamine [...] Amyl acetate (pentyl acetate) [...]

This comment goes to the whole post in general and is actually what made my toe-nails crimp:
It makes absoultely no sense whatsoever to compare a C5-acid, -alcohol, - amine, or the combination thereof, the ester. Only because all these have a C5-chain doesn't mean too much.
IIRC is the alkyl-chain at indole's pos. 1 metabolised to the corrensponding aldehyde (by MAO), i.e. pentanal, which is even missing in your above list. It then goes further to pentanoic acid, which is broken down to a C2- (acetate) and C3-fragment (propionate) via beta-oxidation. Everything totally harmless at the relevant doses.

METHOXY [...] The word is used in organic nomenclature usually to describe an ether. It is also an electron-donating group and can cause an organic compound to become less acidic.

'Ether' is correct; 'electron-donating' is correct only in the context of aromatic methoxy ethers. In aliphatic compounds is the -I-effect predominant (=electron-withdrawing!) and leads to an increase of acidity in nearby groups. Example:

pKa(Acetic acid) = 4.75
pKa(2-Methoxy acetic acid) = 3.54​

In other words, acidity of the 2nd one is ca. 10x stronger.

PHENYL GROUPwhere the six carbon atoms are arranged in a cyclic ring structure. This hydrophobic, highly-stable and aromatic hydrocarbon unit can be found in many organic compounds. It can be thought of as being derived from benzene (C6H6). In fact, in chemical literature benzene itself is sometimes denoted as PhH.

1. Six carbons in a cycle can also be cyclohexane.
2. Phenyl per se is not problematic!!! There are countless pharmaceutical compounds with a phenyl-moiety. HEY! There is actually phenylalanine everywhere in your body. No need to panic though.

ACETYLThe acetyl moiety is a component of many organic compounds, including the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, acetyl-CoA, acetylcysteine and the analgesics acetaminophen, and acetylsalicylic acid (better known as aspirin) NOT TOO SCARY

Not 'scary' at all, but downright harmless. Acetyl is an essential building block in nature. Wouldn't dare to drink concentrated vinegar though, or glacial acid.

INDOLENotably, the indolic amino acid tryptophan is the precursor of the neurotransmitter serotonin.

Look, in this case you noticed it...

Natural jasmine oil, used in the perfume industry, contains around 2.5% of indole. Since 1 kilogram of the natural oil requires processing several million jasmine blossoms and costs around $10,000, indole (among other things) is used in the manufacture of synthetic jasmine oil (which costs around $10/kg).

Interesting, but pointless indole-trivia. The english Wiki-entry has several pages

Does this help? ;~}

I'm afraid, the correct parts didn't help a lot. The wrong ones were even misleading.

No offense intended.


Peace! - Murphy

 

[dread]

Murphy got to this before me, but anyway...

You can't just break a molecule in "pieces" and google each part separately to find out if the molecule is safe. Real life chemistry is a bit more complex than that...

Heck, if the toxicity of benzene was any indication of the safety of all compounds with a phenyl ring, none of us would exist, probably...

 

[raybeez]

There are some points that really hurt...


2. Phenyl per se is not problematic!!! There are countless pharmaceutical compounds with a phenyl-moiety. HEY! There is actually phenylalanine everywhere in your body. No need to panic though.
Murphy

Unless of course you have phenylketonuria (phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency)

 

[MurphyClox]

^Even in that case is phenylalanine essential. Just the one or the other 'overdose' can be problematic

 

[kken]

and down the toilet it goes. this substance is whacked

on top of the RLS symptomps it seems to have way stronger influence on the thermoregulatory function than other jwh substances ive tried

 

[kken]

I developed a rare subtype of asthma called small airway disease after smoking JWH-018 and -073, 1-2x a day for 18 months (asthma is normally located in the large airways). It's an obstructive lung disease almost exclusively caused by chemical/toxin exposure.

It initially began as tightness in the chest feeling, then progressed to racing heart. I was convinced it was just paranoia/panic attack thing because at first it would only happen when I'd smoke a hero dose. Fast-forward 3 months later and I was in the hospital with 45% lung function.

It took me 4 months of oral steroids to reduce my lung inflammation until I was up to about 80%. I'll need to be intranasal steroids, inhaled steroids and bronchodialators for the rest of my life.

I'm a healthy male mid 20's, never had any lung problems before (eg childhood asthma, allergies, etc). Never smoked cigarettes, but was a frequent smoker of cannabis before switching to the JWH's.

I used to dissolve them in acetone, drop them them onto catnip, dry with gentle heating, and smoke in a vaporizor.

I can't conclusively say it was the JWH's (vs the catnip or trace ammounts of acetone ) that did it, but if you're experiencing any kind of chest/breathing symptomology, even if its just mild, I'd advice you to stop smoking them immediately!

This is alarming indeed! i hope the jwhs are not the culprit here and im sorry for your health troubles.

i know few people who smoked jwh-018 daily (being high 6-10h per day) on the stuff for about a year and they seem fine

 

[golden1]

weird because I've had no problems with it, seems much more benign than the other JWHs.

 

[hamhurricane]

Not to bang the OP with the obvious stick, but the toxicity of any drug is dependent on thousands of staggeringly complex biological systems - even drugs like amphetamine and cocaine are not fully understood. Fuck, the first paper on the thermal degradation products derived from the smoke of Salvia just came out this month. If I were you I wouldn't hold my breath for such studies to come out on JWH-250, especially if you've got cannabinoid induced obstructive pulmonary disease. I wish there was a solemn wink emoticon for this occasion (+)

This is hardly surprising, as napthalene's epoxide metabolites are the body's own version of synthetic SUPER-GLUE!

I do think it's interesting how all the discussion of epoxides makes one think of the assonant epoxy adhesives (which are made with epichlorohydrin, an epoxide) and this subliminally makes people think that the napthyl cannabinoids are metabolized or thermally converted into a glue of some sort. I see this repeated both IRL and on bluelight, people discuss how the their JWH glues-up their pipe or glues-up their lungs.

 

[kken]

you could use JWH compounds as a glue if you dont have anything else... the substance is very sticky after heating (not oily) :D

 

[seep]

I do think it's interesting how all the discussion of epoxides makes one think of the assonant epoxy adhesives (which are made with epichlorohydrin, an epoxide) and this subliminally makes people think that the napthyl cannabinoids are metabolized or thermally converted into a glue of some sort.

Epoxide adhesives don't work like that (not that I think you think this).

 

[hamhurricane]

Maybe that can be the next marketing ploy; forget "bonsai root growth inhibitor" meet "alveolar duct adhesion facilitator"!

 

[atara]

Maybe that can be the next marketing ploy; forget "bonsai root growth inhibitor" meet "alveolar duct adhesion facilitator"!

I order lots of inexpensive catalysts for plastic manufacturing, myself.

 

[raybeez]

Maybe that can be the next marketing ploy; forget "bonsai root growth inhibitor" meet "alveolar duct adhesion facilitator"!

^^^^ hahaha, that just made my day, thanks!

 

[DoseMeHomie]

what's the final consensus on jwh-018 and jwh-250 are they toxic or cancerous?

 

[skillet]

If I were you I wouldn't hold my breath for such studies to come out on JWH-250, especially if you've got cannabinoid induced obstructive pulmonary disease.

That's funny too, though I feel bad for the guy/girl.

I guess the final consensus is there is no consensus, maybe they're bad for some people, maybe not. Out of interest, how would a pharmaceutical company go about tox. testing new compounds? Give it to rats and look for potentially harmful metabolites, look for effects of chronic exposure?

 

[mpomk]

weird because I've had no problems with it, seems much more benign than the other JWHs.

This is my take, at least to this point. It does not have the duration of JWH-018, nor does it have the degree of beneficial effects for my unusual neurological issues as does JWH-018, but it does help quite a bit, and overall it feels much less problematic. I don't have the degree of heart racing or chest tightness with 250 that I have with 018, though even the tightness from 018 is just enough to register as such - but has never caused any problems. 250 has never once caused me a panic attack, even at quite high doses, and it has never pushed me into a dissociative state. (It has come close, but the 'bad' part of that was missing, whereas 018 brought that out in spades.) It is a bit more cognitively disorienting than 018, but feels much lighter and more "up".

Two things I would mark on the potential down side, personally, between 250 versus 018 are:

1. 250 does leave behind noticably more residue/gunk than does 018 (whether that indicates it's doing the same in the lungs, I don't know. Nearly everything that's smoked leaves gunk in the pipe, and with the length of time I've been smoking I would have to think that my lungs would be substantially diminished in capacity if what was happening to my smoking gear was happening to my lungs.

2. 250 definitely causes a slight but noticable loss of visual acuity (really only noticable when reading a monitor or smaller print) for me that extends into the next day after much use. I don't seem to get this with 018. It's the same sort of thing I've gotten on some prescription drugs.

 

[fryingsquirrel]

This is my take, at least to this point. It does not have the duration of JWH-018, nor does it have the degree of beneficial effects for my unusual neurological issues as does JWH-018, but it does help quite a bit, and overall it feels much less problematic. I don't have the degree of heart racing or chest tightness with 250 that I have with 018, though even the tightness from 018 is just enough to register as such - but has never caused any problems. 250 has never once caused me a panic attack, even at quite high doses, and it has never pushed me into a dissociative state. (It has come close, but the 'bad' part of that was missing, whereas 018 brought that out in spades.) It is a bit more cognitively disorienting than 018, but feels much lighter and more "up".

Two things I would mark on the potential down side, personally, between 250 versus 018 are:

1. 250 does leave behind noticably more residue/gunk than does 018 (whether that indicates it's doing the same in the lungs, I don't know. Nearly everything that's smoked leaves gunk in the pipe, and with the length of time I've been smoking I would have to think that my lungs would be substantially diminished in capacity if what was happening to my smoking gear was happening to my lungs.

2. 250 definitely causes a slight but noticable loss of visual acuity (really only noticable when reading a monitor or smaller print) for me that extends into the next day after much use. I don't seem to get this with 018. It's the same sort of thing I've gotten on some prescription drugs.

I have noted no loss of visual acuity, perhaps because my vision is quite poor to begin with. Otherwise your post matches my personal experience perfectly.