It certainly appears that the "altered isomeric (enantiomeric) ratios of MDMA made from PMK-glycidate theory" is gaining traction. There is no question in my mind that this may provide the answer for why the new generation of MDMA pills produced from this pre-precursor seem to produce a more "mongy" and less "loved-up high"; and also why the pills themselves need to be packing 200-250mg of MDMA, when 100-150mg of (the apparently same) MDMA used to do the job entirely.
Routine laboratory testing of the enantiomeric/isomeric ratios of MDMA pills
The information which we need to help solve this problem is already out there, for some people it is literally at their fingertips. We all know that government forensic laboratories the world over are tasked with the job of identifying and weighing seized quantities of drugs. However, they are also routinely asked to compare a particular drug seizure with other seizures of the same type of drug to determine if they all originated from the same source. Whilst conducting a chemical comparison of different batches of MDMA pills is relatively rare, chemical comparisons of seized quantities of methamphetamine is common. When carrying out this comparison the forensic chemist will always determine the enantiomeric ratio of the samples to be compared. That is the ratio of D:L or S:R isomers in each. Obviously, if samples taken from different seizures have different ratios, then the drugs most likely did not originate from the same source and almost certainly did not come from the same individual manufacture.
Therefore, the European and North American laboratories conducting quantitative chemical analysis of "ecstasy" pills sent to them by the public, could in theory conduct this same analysis as the government forensic laboratories do, which would confirm the R:S isomeric ratio of the MDMA contained in any given pill. Whilst this additional testing is obviously more time consuming and may not be able to be done for every single MDMA pill that is analysed, it could certainly be done for particular pills of interest or where someone is prepared to pay the additional cost for the service (if this was allowed). Not only would such a test prove immediately whether this theory is indeed correct, but it would also create another way of ascertaining the MDMA pill's quality and help to distinguish the seemingly endless array of MDMA tablets entering the market.
MDMA from PMK-glycidate - how and why can there be any difference?
An ongoing source of confusion related to this issue has arisen because it is now routine for users to describe MDMA as either "PMK-glycidate produced MDMA" or "safrole/isosafrole produced MDMA”. This is so despite basic organic chemistry principles telling us that there should be NO difference at all between the two methods --> in fact it is due to these same basic principles that the altered isomer theory is so controversial and why for now it remains only a theory.
MDMA manufactured from "pure" (i.e. properly distilled) PMK or MD-P2P via any of the well-known reaction methods, will always produce racemic MDMA (50:50). This is what we want. Where safrole/isosafrole is used, PMK or MD-P2P is produced and this can then be purified and turned into near pure PMK. The same goes for another precursor, piperonal, it too being first converted into PMK or MD-P2P before being turned into MDMA. There is no reason whatsoever that PMK-glycidate cannot also be turned into PMK or MD-P2P, a product which can then be purified into near pure PMK and ultimately turned into MDMA in identical fashion. If this process occurred then there would be NO difference at all between safrole produced MDMA and PMK-glycidate produced MDMA. It is chemically impossible. If the MDMA is made from the same high quality PMK via the same of any one of a number of reactions known to be effective, then a high quality racemic (50:50) mix of MDMA will be produced irrespective of what precursor is used to begin with.
This explanation then leads into the other source of information or chemistry knowledge which if provided would undoubtedly help prove or disprove the theory. If the theory is true then a chemist should be able to explain WHY the new precursor produces the result that it does and that other possible causes of the altered enantiomeric ratios can be excluded. I have no doubt that government forensic chemists with experience in dismantling these particular MDMA labs would either know, or at least be able to work out, the answers.
PMK-glycidate, unlike PMK but like MDMA, does exist as two possible enantiomers. Therefore, is it possible that particular labs are using PMK-glycidate which exists in only one particular enantiomeric/isomeric form and that this somehow influences how the reaction proceeds from PMK to MDMA, so that the production of the R isomer of MDMA is favoured? Could it be that rather than purifying the PMK from the glycidate as they should, the manufacturers are also employing some new and unknown "one-pot" type synthesis, whereby the glycidate is turned into the ketone and then immediately reacted with the necessary reagents to produce MDMA? Such a one-pot synthesis (which would surely be a significant cost saving measure for the mega labs) would very likely favour the production of one MDMA enantiomer over the other, especially if the PMK-glycidate was not racemic to begin with! This explanation may also account for why some of the mega dose pills still seem better than some of the others.
By way of example, suppose there are three labs all using the glycidate to make the MDMA:
(i) Lab 1 purifies the PMK before then making the MDMA in an entirely separate reaction - the result is 50:50 racemic MDMA; this MDMA should be no different to "safrole produced MDMA".
(ii) Lab 2 uses some new "one-pot" synthesis and their glycidate precursor comes out of the jar as a 50:50 racemic mixture - perhaps such a reaction favours the production of the R a little bit over the S; so this MDMA might have a R:S ratio of 65:35.
(iii) Lab 3 uses the same "one-pot" synthesis as lab 2 but their glycidate precursor comes out of the jar as only one of the possible enantiomers (it is enantiomerically pure like dexamphetamine is) - perhaps such a “one-pot” reaction to MDMA with only one of the two possible isomers for the glycidate favours the production of the R a lot more than the S; so this MDMA might have a R:S ratio of 80:20.
Now I have no idea at all if any of this is even close to correct and my figures have simply been plucked out of the air to illustrate the point. However, it is one possible explanation that I have come up with and it is an explanation which someone with an understanding of these new processes must be able to rule in or rule out.
Catalysts - are these the real culprits?
Of course this entire discussion has assumed that the glycidate is the culprit. Logic would suggest that it must be however there is another possibility which has nothing to do with the glycidate at all…
These mega labs may well be manufacturing and purifying perfectly good PMK/MD-P2P from the glycidate as we would hope and consequently any MDMA produced from that ketone should be the desired 50:50 mix. However, PMK must obviously be converted to MDMA by reacting it with another precursor, in the presence of other chemical reagents or a CATAYLST to make the reaction work. Catalysts are more commonly used by large scale chemical factories than chemical reagents because catalysts can be used over and over again, whereas the reagent is generally converted into something else and becomes waste.
It is a well-known fact that many catalysts are stereoselective - meaning that they will favour the production of a particular isomer, even though the precursor would otherwise make a racemic product if that particular catalyst was not used. Is it possible that at the same time the large scale manufacturers started using the glycidate, they also started using some new highly effective but sadly stereoselective catalyst to produce the final product? If such a catalyst is being used by any of the manufacturers, then it wouldn't matter if the MDMA was originally made from safrole, piperonal, PMK-glycidate or Tinkerbell's fairy dust, it would eventually end up as a non-racemic mix of MDMA isomers; the proportions of which may not only be completely different, but could well change from batch to batch to batch. So that is another option.
-----------------
I apologise for the length of this post but I have been mulling over this matter for some time and this is the first thread I have come across where the topic has been raised in this direct way. I realise I have made some reference to synthesis however I have deliberately avoided mentioning the other various chemicals and steps which would be necessary to even come close to making anything illegal. Given the nature of the discussion, it seems impossible to be able to speak about the topic sensibly without at least mentioning the different precursors by name and providing a very simple explanation of the two main steps involved. Finally, if there is another thread where this topic is being discussed that would be a more appropriate home for my endless spiel, I would be most thankful if a moderator could move it.
