• 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

Stimulants of the Future II

Status
Not open for further replies.
dsg.jpg
 
Alright girls, listen close:

Four Words: Cooler/Muriatic Acid/ Lava Rocks/ 2 pieces of string


bury it for a month, then congradulate me.
 
Is this "morphine skeleton" you posted in another thread active? I never did find out. With phenethylamines there's at least some sense of the potency the compound will have, with opiates it's just too complex.
MorphineRule.jpg
 
That's the structure you'd get if you take the morphine rule and use it to draw a structure.

Yes, it's active, but IIRC, weaker than codeine, stronger than tramadol. There's a paper that looked at it, I think I posted it.
 
Oh right, well I guess it could still be groundwork for some synthetics.

Pethidine as it turns out is a DAT and NET inhibitor, substitutes for cocaine, some of the analogues are supposedly even more stimulant-like.
 
Yeah, that's well known. The structure isn't far off of PCP, a well known DARI. I wonder if anyone has made a sort of BTCP analogue of pethidine.

Oh right, well I guess it could still be groundwork for some synthetics.
Click to expand...

It's pretty much the basis for all synthetics. Some aspects of the rule aren't as important, others are more important.
 
Last edited:
Except everyone here on Bluelight and most scientists who followed that story have come to the conclusion that the results were faked. It's a joke/scam.
 
Meth does occur in nature, meaning its not totally synthetic man made.
Click to expand...

I don't get this logic. Even if meth did occur in some tree (unlikely), none of the meth you can buy from the streets is extracted from a tree, it's all "synthetic man made" stuff, usually made from (pseudo)ephedrine or phenylacetone.
 
People think the results from lab tests done on that tree were faked?
Really?
Why?
Any links/explanations? I'd like to know, thats really curious.

And Dread, how does that not make sense?

I'm not stating anything concerning the actual origin of street meth, of course all that stuff is made synthetically...

If that tree does actually contain meth, then that only means that meth is a naturally occuring chemical... thats all.

If a chemical exists in nature, then it is by definition natural, correct?

I'm not saying that means its any better or worse...
I'm definitely not in the camp of minds that claim that natural substances are better for you, solely on the basis of being natural, thats just silly.
 
A quick google search, and I found an interview with Shulgin questioning the validity of the lab results.
 
I've heard many rumors that other scientists and journalists have attempted to contact these researchers and their calls are never returned.
 
^
Yeah, Shulgin said he tried to contact them via email and snail mail and got no response.

I wonder if anyone has done another test?

It seems like naturally someone would have by now.
 
Right Hammilton, some pcp analogues like "benocyclidine" apparently are almost purely DARIs.

I was actually thinking pethidine looks more like "nocaine", the acetate obviously in the wrong position, nocaine being a significant structural change from cocaine... but it's like when you did that overlay of dimethocaine over cocaine, perhaps they all have similar enough positioned groups to inhibit the DA transporter the same way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top