Modified ecstasy 'attacks blood cancers"

mattnotrik

mattnotrik

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
2,867
Location
UK
Modified ecstasy could one day have a role to play in fighting some blood cancers, according to scientists.

Ecstasy is known to kill some cancer cells, but scientists have increased its effectiveness 100-fold, they said in Investigational New Drugs journal.

Their early study showed all leukaemia, lymphoma and myeloma cells could be killed in a test tube, but any treatment would be a decade away.

A charity said the findings were a "significant step forward".

In 2006, a research team at the University of Birmingham showed that ecstasy and anti-depressants such as Prozac had the potential to stop cancers growing.
Click to expand...

First, however, chemists in the UK and Australia are going to try to tweak the modified ecstasy even further as they think it can be made even more potent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14572284
 
^ for real, mixes of random chemicals and binders don't do this, pure mdma does. Id be glad if people had more reasons to reconsider thinking bad about chemicals that can change the world.

Woo 1000th post! : D
 
This is stupid sensationalism. The compounds discussed therein are no more 'ecstacy' than safrole is... I think the presence of a methylenedioxymethylphenethylamine skeleton is as far as you can go in saying the two are related.

Here's a link to the original paper if anyone's interested: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21850491
And the compounds themselves:
SwLeo.png


Now to the nitty gritty pharmacology. I know that 1,2 diphenyl ethanamines are active as NMDA channel blockers. Generally modification of the alpha position of MDMA to things other than methyl or ethyl has a tendency to decrease abusability. Even propyl is stretching it a bit far. So I think going as far as to make stupid jokes about $4 water bottles and loud EDM with your cancer treatment is a bit much. Chancers are this 'ecstacy' won't make you roll at all - though I bet it would have significant effects as a dissociative (maybe).

Research chemicals, indeed.
 
^^ I wonder what would the starting point / raw material for the synthesis of these compounds be? Safrole? How ironic, when you consider that the DEA got sassafras oil pulled off the market due to the alleged "carcinogenic" effects of safrole found in sassafras oil. BTW, has the carcinogenic effect of safrole ever been confirmed by other independent studies?
 
why are drugs illegal? why can't people who are 21 decide what to consume in their body... I mean alcohol is perfectly legal this way and by no means does it kill cancer. people should be educated on safety and interactions of chemicals and use them as they please... in safe forms, not street cut crap...
 
severely etarded said:
why are drugs illegal? why can't people who are 21 decide what to consume in their body... I mean alcohol is perfectly legal this way and by no means does it kill cancer. people should be educated on safety and interactions of chemicals and use them as they please... in safe forms, not street cut crap...
Click to expand...
Why cant people who are 18
AHEM AHEM
 
The modified drug is 100 times more powerful as a cancer-busting compound than Ecstacy, which is already known to be effective against over half of white blood cell cancers.
Click to expand...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/233070.php

I didn't know that MDMA has been shown to kill more than half of white blood cell cancers.
I guess the press/gov forgot to make that information widely available :|
 
severely etarded said:
People who are 21+ will share with younger people if they think they can handle their shit... Just like alcohol... Ain't too hard to get if someone older is willing get it for you...
Click to expand...

It ain't too hard to get crack or weed either, regardless of age, but that doesn't mean that it's ok for it to be illegal (not saying that you were suggesting prohibition is ok, but the argument is analogous). 18 is old enough to own a gun, drive a car and go fight in a war, it should be old enough to get legally intoxicated.
 
psychomimetic said:
It ain't too hard to get crack or weed either, regardless of age, but that doesn't mean that it's ok for it to be illegal (not saying that you were suggesting prohibition is ok, but the argument is analogous). 18 is old enough to own a gun, drive a car and go fight in a war, it should be old enough to get legally intoxicated.
Click to expand...

i dont think people should go to war so young tbh. or prison. I think people should be adults at 20 or so. I don't think kids should be legally allowed to do crack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top