methamp is much more recreational than amphetamine, here's why:

[rc_benzo]

I always thought that Amphetamine and Methamphetamine were nearly identical, except that meth had a faster onset of action and longer duration... I was wrong.

I was reading about the selectivity of monoamine releasing agents, and I came across a table which listed various stimulants and their selectivity for norepinephrine, dopamine and serotonin.

And here's the interesting part:

Amphetamine has EXTREMELY high selectivity for Norepinephrine, having a K_i (nM) of 7.1
HOWEVER, it has only minor selectivity for Dopamine, having a K_i (nM) of 110.3

Methmphetamine on the other hand, has high selectivity for Dopamine, having K_i (nM) of 24.5,
BUT, it has very low selectivity for Norepinephrine, having only K_i (nM) of 489.

Norepinephrine is the chemical that causes ALL of the shit side effects of amphetamines, and it gives no euphoria whatsoever.

This means that Methamphetamine is much more euphoric than Amphetamine, has far less side effects, and is far more potent in terms of release of dopamine.

What do you guys think?

Source for the info: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoamine_releasing_agent

EDIT: The rough estimation is that Methamphetamine is x5 more potent than Amphetamine.

 

[PsychedelicWizard]

Forget about the neuroscience chemistry stuff for a moment and look at what they are actually made of.

Both are made from ephedrine or psuedoephedrine, no? I mean chemsitry is not unlike baking, in that the ingredients determines the recipe, or in the case of chemistry, the reagents determine the synthesis.

Now... if you are baking chocolate chip cookies, you might have one recipe that calls for more sugar and less chocolate chips, the other, might call for more chocolate chips and less sugar.

Thus is the difference between amphetamine and methamphetamine. They literally just have a different ratio of ingredients.

So one might be sweet, the other, more chocolatey.

As simple as this sounds, it is the truth. Chemistry just uses a lot of complicated-sounding words to obfuscate this simple truth.

Now there is never going to be a way to objectively measure "euphoria", "attention", "reflexes", or any other such subjectively-experienced emotional states of conciousness.

Looking for answers like these in this form of thinking is like finding what color is by closing your eyes and listening to sounds. True, both hearing and seeing are detecting energy, but you will not be able to hear colour or see sound.

Thusly, there is never going to be a concrete answer to this. I personally can verify that a high dose of amphetamine does in fact give a tremendous amount of euphoria, not unlike methamphetamine.

Even using your neuroscience, dopamine is believed to be the "task-reward" chemical, whereas norepinephrine is believed to be the attention and reflexive response chemical.

How could norepinephrine be euphoric, then? Think of dancing or any physical activity. Higher amounts of attention, physical reflexes, heart rate, skeletal muscle blood flow, and heart rate, are going to lead to much more satisfactory physical performance, whereas dopamine might be seen as a more "sit-there-and-be-happy" chemical.

Thus, even in your example, amphetamine is concluded to be a better physical-high, methamphetamine a better mental-high.

Which I think is true, based on experiences, most meth tweakers I meet like to just sit around organizing things or socializing, whereas the amphetamine-crowd seem to be your body builders, professional athletes, dancers, etc.

Still... because I've had 100 different experiences on methamphetamine alone, sometimes seeing incredible things, other times having a tonne of energy, other times being relaxed and chill, and yet other times, being physically super-charged, I can conclude that all science we have combined is a serious laughing matter into the real nature of chemical/brain/consciousness/nervous system reality.

 

[PsychedelicWizard]

I'll actually add that all amphetamine is not the same. There's a difference between Adderall, Dexedrine, and Vyvanse. There's dextro and levo amphetamine, for starters, plus there's an infinite amount of micro-variations.

Going back to the baking analogy, just like no two bakeries would serve the exact same type of chocolate chip cookie, neither does each manufacturer produce the same amphetamine or methamphetamine. There's a lot of variance within the ingredients themselves. Was ephedrine or psuedoephedrine used? Was the ephedrine cultivated well? I mean look how many different strains of cannabis you have, surely there are just as many strains of ephedrine?

How long was each process and what ratios were used? What altitude, room temperature (or outdoors), humidity, etc, was it synthesized in? Was it a full moon or a lunar eclipse? Was it synthesized in the daylight out in the sun, thus factoring in the effects of UV and UW rays of the sun, or in a wooden shed during a blizzard, with the room heated by a wood fire? Furthermore, what route-of-administration was used? How old, what gender, age, race, balance of macro-and-micro nutrients of the users' bodies? Their mental state, activities engaged in, amounts taken, other combination of drugs, cutting agents, etc?

Think on that for a moment, at the literally infinite amount of variables to see why we'll never have useful answers this simply.

PS: Dopamine is not universally dopamine, just as there are a huge amount of varying protein strains, and this is just based on what we know, and neuroscience itself is an infant field, as is chemistry.

We only discovered the electrical current and put it to mass use a hundred or so years ago, just recently left the solar system, as well as found the world was perhaps not flat, keep that in mind.

I also wonder what effect radiation has on chemicals. Surely there's a lot of radiation emanating everywhere from cellphones to satellites to nuclear power remnants mostly contained, not to mention the collateral adaption of a generation of users.

Hard to say.

 

[rc_benzo]

Your answer would be great if we were talking about street Amphetamine and Methamphetamine. They're always of unpredictable quality and sometimes impurities (such as amphetamine analogues) can be found which produce a variety of effects. Which is why you mentioned having very different experience with meth, it's because you have no idea what you were using.

I was comparing pharmaceutical grade d-amphetamine (Dexedrine) and d-methamphetamine (Desoxyn), and as we know today, d-amphetamine has very VERY high selectivity for Norepinephrine, but only little selectivity Dopamine, where as d-methamphetamine has very high selectivity for Dopamine.

Remember, Norepinephrine is the chemical that causes all of the nasty side effects of amphetamines, including anxiety, paranoia, jitteriness and trembling along with chest pains. What's fun about that? No euphoria, at all.

d-amphetamine is x15 more selective for Norepinephrine than Dopamine, and that's not fun AT ALL.

d-methamphetamine has barely any selectivity for Norepinephrine, but has huge selectivity for Dopamine, and that means: no shitty side effects, much more euphoria, and overall a smoother and more enjoyable experience.

These are facts you just can't dismiss, unless of course we're talking about street crap, then yeah, scientific facts are not necessary, because street shit is always unpredictable.

 

[《Plasticity》]

It's pretty common knowledge that meth is far more recreational... or at least is capable of producing more intense effects than regular amphetamine. Never knew this was even contested or misunderstood.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

It's pretty common knowledge that meth is far more recreational... or at least is capable of producing more intense effects than regular amphetamine. Never knew this was even contested or misunderstood.

Qft