• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | someguyontheinternet

MDPV - So how dangerous is it?

No, I would doubt the neurotoxicity, at least from the SAR of other neurotoxins. The alkyl chain is too long and the amine too non-polar (tertiary), and the methylenedioxy neurotoxins (MDMA, MDA, etc.) all have primary or secondary amines and require much larger doses than the active dose of MDPV to cause toxicity. For instance the active dose of MDPV in me is 0.04mg/kg while for MDMA is 1.4mg/kg. The methylenedioxy group on an amphetamine derivative just seems to be a poor molecule as far as being a substrate for whatever releases monoamines, be it DAT or SERT or VMAT2.

Of course, there is no KNOWN neurotoxicity, but do you guys think its safer than amphetamine and/or meth? How bout addiction potential?
Click to expand...

I mean, from that standpoint, probably. AMPH and METH are both dopaminergic neurotoxins while METH is also a serotonergic neurotoxin.

It probably has a big abuse potential though, but not for people like me. If you're into abusing stimulants, you should probably not be playing with this.
 
one question that keeps popping up is "are MD compounds inherently toxic?" i know there are several non-stimulant MD containing pharmaceuticals - Oxolinic acid and some ADs i cant remember off the top of my head which presumably do not have pro-oxidant effects (not to mention MDAI et al). i could care less about MDPV as the chem is total garbage IMO, but i find MDPPP incredibly nice stuff (probably the closest thing to an RC adderal) so i wonder if it will form some pro-oxidant MDMA type metabolites, i have asked the question before but does anyone have new thought on the matter?
 
This excerpt is about cocaine, but I have a feeling that it could be relevant here too...

There exists a widely held but utterly mistaken notion that cocaine-related deaths are due to drug overdose. Except in the case of drug couriers (body packers) with massive drug exposure, death is not dose related, and cocaine blood levels cannot be used to predict toxicity. Most deaths occur after prolonged drug use, which initiates a series of changes at the molecular, cellular, and tissue levels. All of these changes favor sudden death. Potentially lethal myocardial alterations include hypertrophy, fibrosis, and microangiopathy.
Click to expand...

Source: http://journals.lww.com/smajournalonline/Abstract/2005/08000/Cocaine_Cardiovascular_Toxicity.12.aspx


If this holds for MDPV as well, then maybe we have concluded too early that it's benign physically?

I guess whether it applies to MDPV depends on whether the damages they enumerate are due to DA/NA reuptake inhibition, or due to cocaine's other actions?


P.S.: Could antihypertensives be used in a preventative manner? Maybe alpha blockers? (As I understand it, beta blockers are a Bad Idea with stimulants)
 
Last edited:
I doubt that you can extrapolate from the unhealthiness of cocaine anything relevant to MDPV.

For one, cocaine is a local anaesthetic, which makes it cardiotoxic, and generally unhealthy to all tissues. Injecting cocaine causes necrosis. MDPV has no anaesthetic activity though.
 
They're both NARIs too, no?

I presumed that the NARI action is at least partly responsible for the long-term cardiovascular stuff they're talking about, but I'd gladly be corrected ;)

@dread: Does the local anaesthetic property of cocaine explain just acute cardiotoxicity, or long-term too?
 
Forgive me for sounding thick (not hard round the likes of you lot, who're rather well-versed), as I'm not as clued up on MDPV as I am on other things, so bear with me here - if I understand it correctly, the general consensus is that as a result of 4-methyl ephedrine metabolites, mephedrone is considered well toxic. However, despite its potency, longevity and capacity for creating anxiety, paranoia, arrhythmia, nervousness etc, MDPV is (again, by consensus amongst some BLiters) considered the less toxic of the two?

I'm just a little confused as to how, on the one hand, MDPV is given a clean(ish) bill, whilst 4MMC is shot down in flames every time it's mentioned. Is this cos of the 4-methyl-ephedrine issue? Does MDPV not have an equally dodgy chemical effect? Or is it possible that MDPV, despite having such a capacity for typical amphetamine anxiety/paranoia etc, is in fact less harmful on the body than 4MMC?

The reason I ask is that thus far I've experienced none of the negative side effects of 4MMC but am well wary now, having done some reading and been informed in no uncertain terms by those more informed than I that it's toxic as fuck. In my quest for the most enjoyable stim with the least downside, I had thought 4MMC was OK. Corrected, I'm now looking at alternatives which aren't as toxic. I had hoped that MDPV might be an option, but judging by some reports, it's as bad as meth? ('far more dangerous then amphetamine' 'arrhythmias from high dose of MDPV' 'fuck is it addictive. I lost my meth habit for peevee')

Please throw some light my way, cheers.
 
Last edited:
There are several reports of ppl experiencing severe vasoconstriction from mephedrone which lasts months after using the drug, there isnt a single report of MDPV causing such side effects.

Thats pretty much the reason why meph is looked at as a dangerous substance.
 
frozenorange said:
Could that not be put down to MDPV being used far less frequently by a much lower number of people? Or is there some chemical explanation as to why MDPV is considered 'safer'?
Click to expand...

on the subject of MDPV toxicity how does it compare to Buphedrone. personally i have found buphedrone to have very benign side effects worst being lack of sleep and moderate paranoia. i can eat on buphedrone but its downside is it is brutally addictive.

it has been described by someone on this site who had consumed both as "like MDPV without the side effects".

any more info?
 
frozenorange said:
Could that not be put down to MDPV being used far less frequently by a much lower number of people? Or is there some chemical explanation as to why MDPV is considered 'safer'?
Click to expand...

Ppl tend to bing on this stuff and its pretty popular so if it was as bad we would have definatly seen some cases of severe side effects.

Considering 4 methyl methcathinone there are some bad stories about its amphetamine counterpart 4 methylamphetamine. As they are related this isnt good news.

Chemically wise mephedrone metabolizes into 4 methyl ephedrine which is the cause of those side effects. While MDPV according to f&b (and he can be trusted) is less toxic then a commonly prescribed med that itself isnt much of a toxic drug.

So yeah there is enough reason to beleive that mephedrone isnt all too great and worse then other chems.
 
@frozenorange: Maybe it's all in one's head and mephedrone feels less dangerous because the serotonin release decreases anxiety? Just speculating :)

By current consensus, MDPV is the opposite: Panic attacks where you think you'll die any minute are common, yet it seems to be somewhat benign, physically -- but let's wait for more longer-term experiences before we declare this a definite fact, I say. The internet echo-chamber sometimes makes evidence seem larger than it is, with relayed information being counted as independent evidence...
 
Last edited:
frozenorange said:
Could that not be put down to MDPV being used far less frequently by a much lower number of people? Or is there some chemical explanation as to why MDPV is considered 'safer'?
Click to expand...



It doesn't produce a dodhy metabolite like 4-methylephedrine - all the pharmacological action is due to MDPV and none to metabolites


By current consensus, MDPV is the opposite: Panic attacks where you think you'll die any minute are common, yet it seems to be somewhat benign, physically -- but let's wait for more longer-term experiences before we declare this a definite fact, I say.
Click to expand...

Been using peevee (sometimes stupidly large amounts) since 2004 and still received a clean bill of (physical) health after my recent OD incident


Chemically wise mephedrone metabolizes into 4 methyl ephedrine which is the cause of those side effects. While MDPV according to f&b (and he can be trusted) is less toxic then a commonly prescribed med that itself isnt much of a toxic drug.
Click to expand...

Look up pyrovalerone & associated side effects; MdPv was the least toxic of the substituted pyrovalerones (ie less than pyrovalerone, which strangely enough has a 4-methyl substituent on the ring)
 
Last edited:
chaosbydesign said:
I know someone who is addicted to mdpv the way you would be addicted to methamph...



I would think even though it is an MDXX, FAB is right about the probably insignificant effect on SERT (although im sure there is some), but i do think its probably neurotoxic (no evidence, of course) in the same way as amphetamine is, assuming use is frequent... plus, who knows, an MDXX-series chemical used daily definitely sounds like bad news to me.

Anyway, this friend had partial amnesia from MDPV after 3 days of use and an amphetamine-like psychosis. I dunno whether this was a 3 day full-on tweekend or just 3 doses spaced 24hrs apart but either way, I would definitely use with caution and id THINK its about the same as using methamph or methcathinone.

Of course, there is no KNOWN neurotoxicity, but do you guys think its safer than amphetamine and/or meth? How bout addiction potential?
Click to expand...


wait. To my knowledge amphetamine isn't neurotoxic. Perhaps in extremely high doses but in safe dosage range even daily i don't think it is. After all amphetamines are prescribed for adhd and If amphetamine was neurotoxic I would be brain dead by now...

Now methamphetamine.... thats another story it is addictive and neurotoxic. Too bad people haven't done much testing on MDPV to know.
 
Amphetamine is a known toxin to dopaminergic neurons. There was a study by Ricaurte on primates that suggested that even ADHD doses of amphetamine could damage neurons.
 
It's def addictive, I speak from experience, but I feel (purely personal opinion) that it's not as bad for you as amphetamine. As for interaction with SERT, it fails on two counts 1) it has an alpha propyl group which Shulgin tested & found inactive as a serotonogic 2) it has a tertiary amine function with same results from Shulgin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top