• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

MDOH... Why hasn't it had it's popularity?

Ian224

Ian224

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
148
Location
On the mothership
According to PiHKAL, MDOH has almost the exact same effects as MDA. If people love MDA so much then why not just have MDOH synthesized since it's still technically quasi-legal instead of going and creating substances such as 5 and 6-APB? Just out of curiosity.
 
Maybe the fact that in PIKHAL it says the MDOH had mysteriously turned into MDA on the first synthesis could have something to do with it. It sounds fabulous though.
 
Then it says the second synthesis was correct but yielded same effects as MDA... I wonder if it de-oxidizes extremely quickly therefore leaving just MDA by its self?
The only difference between this and MDA is an OH chain which I'm assuming once de-oxidized leaves just MDA.

Edit: Or could we quite possibly be seeing an effect similar to how 4-AcO-DMT metabolizes into Psilocin in the body?
 
Ian224 said:
According to PiHKAL, MDOH has almost the exact same effects as MDA. If people love MDA so much then why not just have MDOH synthesized since it's still technically quasi-legal instead of going and creating substances such as 5 and 6-APB? Just out of curiosity.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how MDOH is "quasi-legal", its an extremely close analog of a schedule-1 substance. It is 100% illegal to possess under US federal law.

Also, if someone has access to MDP2P (or safrole, isosafrole, etc, etc) why would they make the oxime compound when they can just make good ol' tried and true MDA or MDMA? That's the answer right there.
 
Roger&Me said:
I fail to see how MDOH is "quasi-legal", its an extremely close analog of a schedule-1 substance. It is 100% illegal to possess under US federal law.

Also, if someone has access to MDP2P (or safrole, isosafrole, etc, etc) why would they make the oxime compound when they can just make good ol' tried and true MDA or MDMA? That's the answer right there.
Click to expand...

Oh, duh. *smacks forehead* 8)
 
Roger&Me said:
I fail to see how MDOH is "quasi-legal", its an extremely close analog of a schedule-1 substance. It is 100% illegal to possess under US federal law.

Also, if someone has access to MDP2P (or safrole, isosafrole, etc, etc) why would they make the oxime compound when they can just make good ol' tried and true MDA or MDMA? That's the answer right there.
Click to expand...

It's not an oxime, missing the double bond. Oximes are what you use to make n-hydroxyl compounds though. Your totally right here though. This would be flat out illegal. Using sodium cyanoborhydride to reduce the oxime as in pihkal would still leave trace amounts of MDA. The rest would be counted as "container weight". You'd be even more fucked than if you just had MDA because that oxygen adds a bit of weight lol
 
I tried this one once in the 1990's. It was similar to MDMA, quite nice.
 
Wouldn't this degrade to MDA even if a sample that was initially free of it was produced? But yeah, why on earth would anyone bother?
 
Roger&Me said:
I fail to see how MDOH is "quasi-legal", its an extremely close analog of a schedule-1 substance. It is 100% illegal to possess under US federal law.

Also, if someone has access to MDP2P (or safrole, isosafrole, etc, etc) why would they make the oxime compound when they can just make good ol' tried and true MDA or MDMA? That's the answer right there.
Click to expand...
The US analogue law is so vague that just about anything may be considered an analogue of something under it. And the US is not the only market, if it's possible to prevent it from degrading to MDA it may still be legal in some European countries. bk-2c-b was thought to be impossible to make stable and yet it's available now and other. AL-LAD was thought to be impractical to make and yet it's widely available today.
 
MDOH isn't at all quasi-legal. It is explicitly listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, ref #7402:

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1308/1308_11.htm

FLEA (MDMOH), however, does not seem to be scheduled. Other N-hydroxy drugs, notably HOT-7, have appeared as RCs, but suppliers are wary (not spelled "weary", kaatz!) of doing this because the substance will invariably contain some of the desoxy parent compound, and the hydroxylamines are difficult to synthesize at scale due to the explosive instability of hydroxylamine itself.
 
Exactly, these things have been "tried" before but they never work out, so far the only one to escape the seeming path is 4-AcO-DMT, and I have a feeling where just lucky on that note as most people will just assume mushrooms were consumed most likely, unless the person explicitly says they took 4-AcO-DMT. It's been asked before about these, that are so close to the parent molecule they never seem to work out or they just are the parent compound labeled as say HOT-7.
 
i know in Australia MDOH is illegal. but what makes me wonder if one had MDOH and if it was easily reduced to MDA or MDMA of course with knowledge of chemistry. Why wouldnt they do that? Has anyone ever heard that its even possible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top