• 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

Sedatives of the Future

I don't know if that's entirely true. Obviously the DEA has increasingly wide leeway here, so some things that aren't are becoming. I think there's a point where the DEA isn't going to try stretching any more, which will hopefully be after they announce their all-inclusive definition of a "positional isomer."

Afloqualone seems significantly different, but I suspect it'd still be considered an analogue. It is awfully substituted, though, and pharmacologically as I recall, I dunno if it'd be considered "substantially similar"- but then again, there's a huge difference in the subjective effects of some psychedelics considered "substantially similar"- that part of the law isn't one the DEA seems to care about, though. The law was created for opioids, not psychedelics, though, so I can see why that clause poses a problem for them. But unless it's been used as a prescription drug, odds are they'll stretch the law for a prosecution.

There seems to be a huge number of sedatives that were phased out of use and never scheduled. I did some searching today through one of those chinese-chem supplier search pages. It had a huge collection of various drugs categorized by activity (I paged through the "stimulants and depressants" category at echinachem- they're not a supplier or sell anything, afaik).

These are some that seemed like good candidates for legal sedatives that might have abuse potential.

Primidone (deoxyphenobarbital)- an uncommon, but unscheduled drug used to control epilepsy. It metabolizes into phenobarbital. Are other deoxy-barbitals likely to metabolize into barbiturates? A deoxy-version of a short-acting barb might be legal and enjoyable as hell.

Alpidem
Carbamate derivatives (Felbamate, for instance- though theres the obvious potential for toxicity)

any benzo that hasn't been scheduled yet. I don't think there's chance in hell the analogue act will ever been expanded to include benzos.

GABA-derivatives galore. Has the GHB-analogue of Gabapentin been synthed? How about a GHB-analogue of pregabalin?

There's a whole lot more, but these seem the most likely to have recreational potential. I also looked through most of the anti-epileptics listed at the bottom of Wikipedia's tab on primidone.

I think Chloral Hydrate analogues aren't going to ever become popular. Even addictive shit doesn't have much potential if it's burning holes in your stomach or brain.

The problem with a lot of these drugs is that they're not easy to synthesize. If they ever became popular drugs of abuse the DEA would schedule them and it'd be a pain in the ass to import. When you can have China mix up a kilo for you and airmail it, it'll be expensive, I'm sure, but not nearly the hassle it'll become if the only potential source is clandestine labs.
 
Law, logic, and US prosecutional power are not all the same, by any means

The gray area of the analogue law certainly allows them the liberty to prosecute, which in and of itself even barring conviction is not something one usually wants to court

IMO the line for a substance that certainly would be harder to class as an analogue, which only applies to Sced 1 and 2, is if the drug has a related counterpart or is a true analogue of drugs classed in lower schedules

So since barbituates are Sched 1 any barbituate (analogue to them does not even seem to really have to do with the true meaning at this time, especially still being undefined in any hard manner) will be an analogue

But since all benzos are Sched 4 I believe then no "analogue" of a benzo can be deemed an analogue as the term relates to the law that only applies for Sched 1 and 2

This includes Ketamine (Sched 3), fencamfamine (sched 4, and thus should NOT hold illegal the analogues of such we discussed herein recently), amongst others

any simple substitution or difference from the scheduled compound technicaly is NOT scheduled for all compounds classed below Sched 1 and 2

Can they still bring about a prosecution...of course, they do as they please. But it is less likely as they do know that under the wording of law it would not stand.
 
Most barbs are C2, though, I haven't went and looked again, but I don't know of any that are C1- and some are C3, no? Isn't phenobarbital or butalbital C3 or 4?

The schedule has this "all derivatives of barbituric acid" or some such, though.

Primidone is an FDA approved drug, though- and it isn't scheduled. It's a barbiturate though, too. An approved unscheduled barb- that's pretty interesting.

Barbs can be pretty heavily substituted though without a loss of activity, though, so I can see why they included that catch-all, though.

Any judge would see through a prosecution for Primidone possession, though- unless it was an illegal possession of prescription drug deal. I don't think possession of powder counts, though- only the approved tablets, right?

I wonder what the DEA's position would be on other deoxy-barbs. Well, I know what their position would be. I wonder how a judge would see it, though.

There was that case, in Denver, I think- this guy was selling some amphetamine analogue, 4-fluoroamphetamine, maybe? And the judge tossed it out saying that it wasn't an analogue, but that if he got brought before the judge again he might not be so lenient.

If it was 4-fluoro that'd be pretty interesting, for sure.

Dealing with analogues is a risk for sure. Even if the odds are a judge will consider it legal, it's still risk and waste of money, imho.

I wondered about the legality of setting up a research chemical site and selling only things that weren't analogues- like THIQs or carbamates with opioid affinity. I'm really suprised no one has tried to go out, find some drugs with X or Y activity that aren't related to any of the scheduled drugs. Probably too much work since there's not a book with a big list and syntheses laid out. But that's the only way I can see to avoid the analogue act completely. I had to hire a lawyer for my business (unrelated) so I asked him to research the issue while I was paying him for doing nothing. He got in contact with someone at the DEA, I don't know who the guy was, but apparently he's involved with drug law (beyond that I really know nothing, but I could probably find out if anyone really wants to know). Basically, he said that the DEA couldn't bring any prosecution for this sort of thing, but he figured that if there was evidence that anyone was actually taking them internally (an overdose, a death, hospitalization or DUI) they'd probably emergency schedule it, and probably everything else that was being sold.
 
The schedule has this "all derivatives of barbituric acid" or some such, though.
Click to expand...

That's what I like about Britains Misuse of Drugs Act - it's very specific as to derivatives that are controlled and those that arent. Regarding barbiturates it states 'any 5,5-disubstituted barbituric acid derivative
 
Is that the US version?? Oh, the UK MoDA, right? Yeah, we need to get a government with a real interest in creating good law.

If the DEA was really serious about creating good laws, or cleaning up the CSA schedules we have now, it'd be a huge pain in the ass. I can't imagine how much work it'd be to go through and clear up all the possible ambiguities the analogue act has created.

Britain's version is much better than ours. It'd be so much nicer if they'd even just put together an analogue act that spells out the analogues of classes of drugs with what activity are prohibited.

Why not something like, "Subsituted PEAs that are psychedelic in nature." Though it'd be nice to know which substitutions are covered.

I dunno if it'd be in their best interest to do this, though. They'd oprobably appreciate knowing for sure what cases they can win and which they can't, though.
 
Ham-milton said:
Is that the US version?? Oh, the UK MoDA, right? Yeah, we need to get a government with a real interest in creating good law.

If the DEA was really serious about creating good laws, or cleaning up the CSA schedules we have now, it'd be a huge pain in the ass. I can't imagine how much work it'd be to go through and clear up all the possible ambiguities the analogue act has created.

Britain's version is much better than ours. It'd be so much nicer if they'd even just put together an analogue act that spells out the analogues of classes of drugs with what activity are prohibited.

Why not something like, "Subsituted PEAs that are psychedelic in nature." Though it'd be nice to know which substitutions are covered.
Click to expand...

the only workable analogue act must use objective chemical definitions rather than definitions that rely on the subjective. "substituted PEAs that are psychedelic in nature" is hopeless. Just try and define define psychedelic using objective measures, then what evidence is there that the substance in question is psychedelic (however defined) in humans. Analogue acts are very dubious in any case.

The UK law has become more and more messy, the Pihkal index cut n paste duplicated a load of substances which were already illegal. and the blanket 1977 modification made a lot of things illegal that were not even invented at that point. Given the justification for the law is to prevent the manufacture distribution and use of dangerous drugs which cause significant social harm it is difficult to justify scheduling something which has no history whatsoever of human use. The members of the ACMD should hang their heads in shame.

Things that should be scheduled, if the law was even handed, are not, 5MeO AMT should by rights be scheduled if 2-CB is. Despite the much safer profile of 2-CB compared to 5MeO AMT or AMT it is class a schedule 1 and explicitly named. the two alpha methyl tryptamines are not, which substances have killed people??

throw in the dusting off of the Medicines Act thanks to the head shops irresponsibility (hey thanks again guys! first mushrooms, now BZP and GBL and probably salvia and kratom), and things get complex.

If one accepts that some substances should be illegal (which is not a given), if only to protect the stupid from themselves, then the law should justify its position rather than being arbitrary and irrational. When something appears and there is evidence of harm or good reason to believe it will cause harm, then it is more justified to control it, the law should only be reactive rather than proactive.

The best laws are those which explicitly list substances and have an easy mechanism for adding substances that cause problems to the list.

However the only long term solution is to remove criminal sanctions from the possession of chemicals, and instead switch to controlling behavior which causes harm to others. There is a tendency of the politicians to enact more and more legislation, because it is easy for them and it gives them a sense of power. The fact that they have lost control of the situation on the ground doesn't seem to matter to them.

.......begin OT rant........

We don't need more laws we need better laws, ones with a chance of actually working. We are not going to get them because the government uses the ACMD to give it expert advice on the situation regarding drug misuse.

In case anyone wonders who the ACMD, Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, are here is the list of the unaccountable appointees in 2004-2005: the current list is around somewhere but I cannot be bothered to find it.
These people owe their position on this commitee to the patronage of the Home Secretary.
Recently the ACMD has been at odds with the government over policy, but their recommendations were ignored. if the toadies are turning then there is something very rotten in the state of Denmark. /rant :X

The people who brought you ketamine as a class C..
Methamphetamine as a class A...

Professor Sir Michael Rawlins (Chair) Professor of Pharmacology, Newcastle University
Dr Dima Abdulrahim Briefings Manager, National Treatment Agency (NTA)
Lord Victor Adebowale Chief Executive - Turning Point
Mr Martin Barnes Chief Executive,
Chief Constable Norman Bettison Chief Constable, Merseyside Constabulary
Dr Margaret Birtwistle General Practitioner (Sub *Misuse*), Clinical Tutor, Forensic Medical Examiner
Rev Martin Blakebrough Chief Executive, Kaleidoscope
Dr Cecilia Bottomley Specialist Registrar in O&G (Obs and gyney )
Mr Raj Boyjoonauth Deputy Director/Lead Nurse Central and North West London Mental Health Trust
Ms Carmel Clancy Lecturer in Mental Health and Addictions, Middlesex University
Professor llana Crome Professor of Addiction Psychiatry, Keele University
Ms Robyn Doran Mental Health Nurse and Director of Substance Misuse Services CNWL MHT
Ms Dianne Draper Young People's Substance Misuse Commissioner, Bradford Department of Social Services
Mr Robert Eschle Magistrate & Essex County Councillor
Professor Hugh Edmondson Consultant Maxillo Facial Surgeon
Ms Vivienne Evans Chief Executive, Adfam
Professor C Robin Ganellin Emeritus Professor of Medical Chemistry, UCL
Dr Clare Gerada General Practitioner, London
Dr Laurence *Gruer * Director of Public Health Medicine NHS Scotland
Mr Paul *Hayes * Chief Executive , National Treatment Agency
Assistant Commissioner Andrew Hayman Assistant Commissioner of Metropolitan Police and Chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers
Mr Russell Hayton Clinical Nurse Specialist and Manager of Drug & Alcohol Services Plymouth NHS
Ms Caroline Healy Health Adviser to Sure Start, London
Dr Matthew Hickman Deputy Director, Centre for Research on Drugs & Health Behaviour, Senior Lecturer in Public Health
Mr Peter Housden Chief Executive , Nottinghamshire Council
Mr Roger Howard Chief Executive, Crime Concern
Mr Alan Hunter Director, Law, Regulatory & Intellectual Property and Secretary to British Pharmaceutical Industry
Professor Les Iversen Professor of Pharmacology, University of Oxford
His Honour Judge Thomas Joseph Resident Judge, Croydon Crown Court
Dr John Marsden Senior Lecturer in Addictive Behaviour , Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College London
Mr Peter Martin Chief Executive, Addaction
Professor David Nutt Professor of Psychopharmocology, Bristol University
Dr Richard PatesConsultant Clinical Psychologist, Clinical Director - Community Addiction Unit, Cardiff
Mr Trevor Pearce Acting Director General, National Crime Squad
Mr Arthur Preddy Chief Executive West Glamorgan Council Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Mrs Kay Roberts Pharmacist, Glasgow
Ms Patricia Roberts Teaching (Substance Misuse) Oxford University
Dr Roy Robertson General Practitioner, Muirhead Medical Group
Dr Mary Rowlands Consultant Psychiatrist (Substance Misuse), Devon Partnership Trust
Dr Polly Taylor Veterinary Surgeon, Gravelhead Farm
Ms Monique Tomlinson Freelance Consultant, Substance Misuse
Mr Arthur Wing Assistant Chief Officer, Sussex Probation Area 12

this is also an open challenge to any past or present member of the ACMD to come here and justify the commitees actions in an accountable and public way.
 
Nice...I'd actually like to have an informed opinion about drug legislation. Here in the US chemists tend to shy away from learning about drug laws because laws and prosecution are very random. Nobody seems to be bothered by logical inconsistency in drug laws and conflicting court rulings. There's a huge temptation to just be cynical and glad you haven't been fucked personally, but I would actually like to think this through, even if I have no plans of becoming a senator.
 
I'm glad I live in Finland. There are no analogues acts or anything like that.
cool.gif
 
Pipequaline (PK-8165) is an anxiolytic drug with a novel chemical structure that is not closely related to other drugs of this type. It has a similar pharmacological profile to the benzodiazepine family of drugs, but with mainly anxiolytic properties and very little sedative, amnestic or anticonvulsant effects, and so is classified as a nonbenzodiazepine anxiolytic.[1][2][3]

Panadiplon acts as a non-selective GABAA receptor partial agonist.[4][5][6] While its profile of anxiolytic effects without sedation would appear to have potential medical applications, pipequaline has never been developed for medical use and is currently only used in scientific research.
Click to expand...
Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipequaline
 

Attachments

  • Pipequaline.png
    Pipequaline.png
    3.1 KB · Views: 72
I think lyrica will be HUGE!
It will be the next best abused drug in america in 5 years.
 
almost- said:
I'm glad I live in Finland. There are no analogues acts or anything like that.
cool.gif
Click to expand...

Britain doesn't have one either, but it does have a fairly wide ranging series of derivatives of phenethylamine, tryptamine, pethedine & fentanyl; these are all specifically defined in terms of chemical structure though, none of this, 'substantially similar' shit.

I prefer the UK method of dealing with potential future compounds much better!
 
Ham-milton said:
There was that case, in Denver, I think- this guy was selling some amphetamine analogue, 4-fluoroamphetamine, maybe? And the judge tossed it out saying that it wasn't an analogue, but that if he got brought before the judge again he might not be so lenient.

If it was 4-fluoro that'd be pretty interesting, for sure.
Click to expand...


The compound was AET. The judge did not say it "wasn't an analogue." He dismissed the charges because of disagreement among the "expert" witnesses on either side. Soon after, AET was placed in schedule I.
 
Last edited:
:X :!
The interesting thing strictly to the letter of the analogue law (US) is that basically as i recall it implies one can possess any analogue as the contingency is not to possess it with intent for human use purposes, whereas any directly scheduled item is directly prohibited from sale or possession without proper license and requiring no other burden be satisfied

Now whose burden is it to prove that -- the prosecutorial agency, as there is no burden to prove that one is not using it for human use or to state any other use as one technically has the right to possess the item and to the privacy therein to not divulge their use intent other than perhaps simply stating it is other than for human use

Being a strict provision of the clause it would in at least all logical sense impose the absolute burden of the prosecutorial agent to prove beyond reasonable doubt that human use intent was intended...if there is no hard evidence of such one would clearly have to say that burden is not met

To the letter of that law this should hold, though of course the justice system is little more than a cog of the gestapo that is at present what sadly exists 'ironically'within a State founded on preeminence of individual liberty and freedom and the desire for minimal government infringement on one's pursuit of happiness as they so choose

thanks for indulging the legal masturbation and rant =D ;)
 
^ my post above?...if referring to such it was an off the cuff reaction to the post above it as i feel strongly on issues of logic/truth being authority (which is the standard of the letter of law of any rationale basis) and not the other way around, authority dictating what is 'truth'; as well as freedom, liberty and the core founding principles this nation was founded upon that are being eviscerated
 
It would be very interesting if Dr.Heckyll could elude on what methaqualone analogs that were synthesized and tested, as the "2,4-dimethylphenyl" and "2-ethylphenyl" both are very easy to prepare and should be very active. I remember reading something back at The Hive that several analogs were tested and were in fact inactive but as those 2 compounds for example obviously have been prepared in clandestine laboratories I doubt that would be the case (and they should still be legal). Maybe they were not tested, or the synthesis were not successfull?
 
Gamma-decanolactone is a monoterpene compound, which is shown to be active in some animal models. The psychopharmacological evaluation of this compound in mice has revealed that it has a dose-dependent effect on the central nervous system, including hypnotic, anticonvulsant and hypothermic activities.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

It is readily available from chemical suppliers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top