Synthetic marijuana officially illegal

AfterGlow

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 21, 2000
Messages
4,544
Location
Manchester, NH
By Jessica Fender
The Denver Post
Posted: 03/01/2011 02:35:04 PM MST
Updated: 03/01/2011 03:46:29 PM MST

20110301__cd04Spice_02_03_hc358~p1.jpg

Synthetic marijuana is a difficult drug to track, since chemists can simply tweak the formula to avoid DEA bans and drug screenings. (Hyoung Chang, The Denver Post)

As anticipated, the federal Drug Enforcement Administration today announced that five variations of synthetic marijuana - sometimes called Spice - have been added to its list of illegal drugs.

The chemicals in synthetic pot are created in laboratories to produce effects similar to marijuana plants but remain different enough on a molecular level to escape detection in urine tests.

The formulas are then sprayed on smokable, organic materials that are ultimately sold in head shops as "incense."

The DEA's emergency order makes possessing or selling products containing any of five popular chemical recipes for Spice illegal for the next 12 months.

"Young people are being harmed when they smoke these dangerous 'fake pot' products and wrongly equate the products' 'legal' retail availability with being 'safe,'" said DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart in a statement.

The DEA listed the chemical compounds under Schedule 1, the most restrictive classification. The agency and the U.S. Health and Human Services Department continue to look at whether Spice should be permanently banned.

Long before the restrictions became final, head shops in Colorado began selling varieties of Spice that claim to use different chemical recipes than those banned by the DEA.

Colorado lawmakers are working to close that loophole.

Senate Bill 134 in most cases would ban any chemical that interacts with the brain in the same way that traditional marijuana does.

The legislation, sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Mike Kopp, is scheduled for its first hearing March 9 in the chamber's judiciary committee.

link


DEA bans chemicals used for 'fake pot'
Published: March. 1, 2011 at 5:28 PM

WASHINGTON, March 1 (UPI) -- A federal agency said Tuesday it is putting restrictions on five chemicals used to make "fake pot" products to prevent a public health threat.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration said it was using its emergency scheduling authority to control five chemicals -- JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497 and cannabicyclohexanol -- used in making the products.

"Except as authorized by law, this action makes possessing and selling these chemicals or the products that contain them illegal in the United States," the DEA said in a statement. "This emergency action was necessary to prevent an imminent threat to public health and safety. The temporary scheduling action will remain in effect for at least one year while the DEA and the United States Department of Health and Human Services further study whether these chemicals should be permanently controlled."

The agency said a final order describing the move was published Tuesday in the Federal Register.

"Emergency room physicians report that individuals that use these types of products experience serious side effects which include: convulsions, anxiety attacks, dangerously elevated heart rates, increased blood pressure, vomiting and disorientation," the DEA said.

The DEA said the chemicals are now designated as Schedule I substances, the most restrictive category under the Controlled Substances Act. "Schedule I substances are reserved for those substances with a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use for treatment in the United States and a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision," the DEA said.

The statement said during the past couple of years "smokeable herbal products marketed as being 'legal' and as providing a marijuana-like high, have become increasingly popular, particularly among teens and young adults. ... Brands such as 'Spice,' 'K2,' 'Blaze' and 'Red X Dawn' are labeled as herbal incense to mask their intended purpose."

At least 16 states have taken steps to control one or more of the chemicals.
© 2011 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Any reproduction, republic

link
 
Senate Bill 134 in most cases would ban any chemical that interacts with the brain in the same way that traditional marijuana does.

fucking hypocrites 8)
 
I thought that had been debunked.

I do believe you're correct. I was getting my info from a 1996 Science News article.

From Wikipedia (yeah, I know):

Later studies confirmed that anandamide is not found in chocolate and the two compounds reported earlier did not interact with cann[a]binoid receptors and the neurological basis of chocolate's appeal still remains elusive.

^ Mann, John (2009). Turn On and Tune In - Psychedelics, Narcotics and Euphorics. Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry Publishing. p. 95. ISBN 978-1-84755-909-8.

The point I was alluding to is this: when you ban an entire class of chemicals, certain double-standards will arise. Pharmaceutical companies already produce cannabinoids, and at least one of these is available to US citizens right now. Will pharmaceutical outfits give up on these substances in accordance with a new ban? Or will they maintain their rights to distribute cannabinoids via prescription while everyone else is prohibited from growing/administering their own?

Things can only become worse from there. Future bans on other chemicals could theoretically make many compounds that work on many different receptors illegal. Somehow I doubt pharmaceutical companies will simply drop their investments :p
 
Last edited:
The point I was alluding to is this: when you ban an entire class of chemicals, certain double-standards will arise. Pharmaceutical companies already produce cannabinoids, and at least one of these is available to US citizens right now. Will pharmaceutical outfits give up on these substances in accordance with a new ban? Or will they maintain their rights to distribute cannabinoids via prescription while everyone else is prohibited from growing/administering their own?

if we're talking federal law then it's the latter IIRC. If something is already an approved drug then it is exempt from categorical bans. An example is buproprion, which is a chemical analogue of methcathinone but is exempted from the analogue act.

Things can only become worse from there. Future bans on other chemicals could theoretically make many compounds that work on many different receptors illegal. Somehow I doubt pharmaceutical companies will simply drop their investments :p

imagine laws that target all DARIs, or all monoamine releasers? Cops are already going on wikipedia while arresting people (this is entirely true).
 
if we're talking federal law then it's the latter IIRC. If something is already an approved drug then it is exempt from categorical bans. An example is buproprion, which is a chemical analogue of methcathinone but is exempted from the analogue act.

I'm becoming more and more unsettled by all of this. If these trends continue, some of us will be unable to take cannabinoids in any form because our doctors will not prescribe them to us. In the event we are able to obtain prescriptions, we will be forced to pay pharmaceutical companies instead of freely growing strains that work for us.

This hard-nosed approach of dictating how we should/should not alter our minds is an affront to every person's basic human rights. We'll have eventually to overthrow this government, because it's not working. True harm reduction isn't a concept most legislators understand.

imagine laws that target all DARIs, or all monoamine releasers? Cops are already going on wikipedia while arresting people (this is entirely true).

How does that work?
 
How does that work?

there's a thread posted recently where someone got caught with an RC and told the cop what it was and that it was legal, and the cop looked it up on the computer in his cruiser and came back and told the poster that wikipedia says it's an analogue of something else. State case. I'm not sure where the thread is, but maybe someone does.
 
there's a thread posted recently where someone got caught with an RC and told the cop what it was and that it was legal, and the cop looked it up on the computer in his cruiser and came back and told the poster that wikipedia says it's an analogue of something else. State case. I'm not sure where the thread is, but maybe someone does.

I'm pretty sure the analog act can only be applied by federal agencies, including the DEA, FBI, etc only if the product is being marketed for human consumption.
 
I'm pretty sure the analog act can only be applied by federal agencies, including the DEA, FBI, etc only if the product is being marketed for human consumption.

indeed. and the dude who got arrested for the analogue by the cop who wiki'd it just had a bag of raw powder in his pocket which screams human consumption.
 
^they do.
stores over here just stay in constant contact w/suppliers for the next blend and replace it the day after the bans took effect.
 
If they're scheduled then it doesn't matter if they're "for human consumption" or not, AFAIK.

Of course, if they're analogs and "not for human consumption" its a different story.

oh, loopholes.
 
the entire scheduling system is condescending to the idea of an autonomous citizen that can make his own medical choices. it should be flushed.
 
Which is common knowledge by now. Our OWN BRAINS produce a potentially illegal drug. Chocolate is no different. Next thing you know, we'll be going after the Swiss

"Swiss Miss has been charged with violation of RICO statues for distibuting massive ammounts of chocolate powder and is also facing charges for her involvement with the assassination of rival cartel leader the Nestle Quick rabbit."
 
Top