Why are most Research Chemicals psychedellics or amphetamine like psychedellics?

[Orchid_Suspiria]

Swim has never really used any rc's,but reading this forum and erowid he has noticed most rc's are psychedellic.Why are they putting so much effort into just psychdellics?Why no narcotic painklling rc's or sedative like rc's?These could actually have more benefit,especially in medical use than psychedellics or amphetamine like psychedellics.

[Paracelsus]

There is quite a number of novel stimulants.

I think the pharma companies work enough on novel opiates. If I would be a recreational drug designer, I would look into opiates with maximum euphoria, even if they would provide very few analgesia. The pharma companies are usually looking for the exact opposite (except Bayer back in the late 1800s with their 'Heroin' cough suppressant). I'm pretty sure any extraordinary euphoric opiate RC sold over the internet (or worse, on the streets) would be emergency scheduled in a minute, mainly because many drug users prefer opiates over psychedelics or other hallucinogens.

[enquirewithin]

There is at least one benzo sold as an "RC", but it's really more like a pharmaceutical.

SWIParacelsus is right. Drug companies can't really work on euphoric drugs. That's just not allowed. Euphoria= 'abuse potential'! I suppose there have been "RC" opiates, but they are worth millions-- look at oxycontin.

A lot of people would like to see an improved cocaine-like drug-- think of the trouble that would cause!

[Nagognog2]

And a plethora of antineoplastics (anti-cancer) RC's abound as well. It depends on the journals you read. In these forums, you can expect RC's to be centered around those that are centrally acting like stimulants and psychedelics.

[enquirewithin]

"RC's" is often used as a euphemism for experimental recreational drugs.

[Cirkeln 6]

I think it simply has to do with the fact that stimulants and depresants has a wider teraputical usage. This means that the drugs have a bigger comersial value as a medicine. This results in patents and other obsticles in the quest to sell them as recreational drugs.

[NeonCortex]

PIHKAL and TIHKAL plays a major role in the cause of this phenomenon. This is changing though, since a lot of the diamonds from those books are illegal in most parts of the western world.

[rxbandit]

It does help that shulgin fell in love with Mescaline and MDMA and dedicated his life to tweaking these pyschedelic amphetamine molecules...

[NeonCortex]

There is also a good reason that designer opioids are not easily available, and that reason is that it would be fucking dangerous to offer them. Both to the potential users and the seller. Both physically and morally. Potent psychedelics and stimulants can very well cause harm, but opioids would certainly be abused big time, cause heavy addiction and many deaths.

[trptamene]

It is probably also much easier to make derivatizes of phenethylamines and tryptamines from some of the more standard chemicals in the laboratory (in the case of phen's all u need is a bunch of differ benzene like molecules and then the reagents). In contrast, opiates have a much more complex structure with many stereocenters. If you have ever looked at a paper on total synthesis of drugs like morphine and tried to follow the chemistry behind it you can see how much more difficult this task is than the synthesis of something like mdma or 2c-b...the ergot alkaloids do not fall into this category though.

The majority of clandenstine drug chemists will leave this work to the pharm companies.

Even if you did come out with some new opiate, most wouldn't classify it as a RC (that is in my understanding of the word), it is simply a derivitized opiate. And if you mean research chemical as in a chemical people research on, then there are millions if not billions of these that have no biological action and are probably toxic. You could throw in there a biologically active chemical people do research on, but in the urban definition of the word this would not be accurate as it would include all drugs that are in clinical trials and those that are yet to be at that point.

I do wish Shulgin had printed opiates i have known and loved though.

Reputation Comments on this post:

nice well thought out post

[Felonious Skunk]

One thing he'll never publish is Furanyls I Have Known And Loved.

[Spelvin]

Originally Posted by enquirewithin

There is at least one benzo sold as an "RC", but it's really more like a pharmaceutical.

what benzo is that?

[bhmoab1]

^^^most likely phenazepam

[Jacco]

Originally Posted by Felonious Skunk

One thing he'll never publish is Furanyls I Have Known And Loved.

Eh, Nichols would if he'd actually admit to trying any of his creations (has he? He doesn't seem to want to be associated with Shulgin).

Why aren't there any lysergic acid derivatives sold? ALD-52, ETH-LAD and PRO-LAD seem promising just to name a few. Perhaps because LE would really have a fit over things related to the "dangerous" LSD?

[chrisn]

Aren't these derivatives known to decompose into LSD fairly quickly? If so, that would certainly be a reason many would be hesitant to produce them. Also, if I remember correctly, one of the steps in the synthesis process would inevitably produce LSD, even if that was later changed into something else, therefore the actual synthesis of these would be illegal even if they weren't themselves.

Reputation Comments on this post:

I've always had the same question you just answered, thanks

[Paracelsus]

Yes, synthesis of all of the above-mentioned compounds require LSD. And ALD-52 rapidly decomposes into LSD.

[Jacco]

Now that I think of it, another reason is probably that unlike being able to order chemicals off the internet, LSD-base RC manufacturers would have to grow their own claviceps to get LSA. (Not to mention that at least in most countries LSA is a controlled substance itself). Ah well, hopefully furanyls have a bright future.

[sweetsweetmary]

Originally Posted by trptamene

It is probably also much easier to make derivatizes of phenethylamines and tryptamines from some of the more standard chemicals in the laboratory (in the case of phen's all u need is a bunch of differ benzene like molecules and then the reagents). In contrast, opiates have a much more complex structure with many stereocenters. If you have ever looked at a paper on total synthesis of drugs like morphine and tried to follow the chemistry behind it you can see how much more difficult this task is than the synthesis of something like mdma or 2c-b...the ergot alkaloids do not fall into this category though.

The majority of clandenstine drug chemists will leave this work to the pharm companies.

Even if you did come out with some new opiate, most wouldn't classify it as a RC (that is in our my understanding of the word), it is simply a derivitized opiate. And if you mean research chemical as in a chemical people research on, then there are millions if not billions of these that have no biological action and are probably toxic. You could throw in there a biologically active chemical people do research on, but in the urban definition of the word this would not be accurate as it would include all drugs that are in clinical trials and those that are yet to be at that point.

I do wish Shulgin had printed opiates i have known and loved though.

Shulgin's next book should help...

Which new "target compounds" are you researching?
S: I am currently totally caught up with an earlier interest I had had with the relationship between the structures of the alkaloids of the cacti and the poppy world. Most of this I had never published, but now I am resynthesizing and getting spectroscopic definitions of many fascinating compounds. One hears about a psychoactive cactus, thinks of peyote and mescaline. One hears about a psychoactive poppy, one thinks of morphine. And then turns to another topic. But both families are treasure houses of some remarkable compounds called tetrahydroisoquinolines, and I hope to put these findings together into a new book in the near future.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Thanks for the info.

[trptamene]

^^^^Do you have a source for this, if it is an article in the forum could you please direct us? If it is not in this forum, could you please add it?

That's pretty damn sweet

[sweetsweetmary]

It was just a piece of an interview with Sasha. I don't beleive Sasha will release this book in his lifetime (due to the backlash he received with Pihkal and Tihkal). As you said these compounds that he is currently synthesizing probably have a better chance of abuse. I think this book is already done. Maybe Sasha is just enjoying his new legal chemicals while he lives, and has a plan to have it published after his death. Also there are lots of other researchers doing research with non active plants that have chemical compounds that if infused in an active plant, can become active and psychadelic. Sasha went on to say some are doing it quietly (probably for personal use, so there is no scheduling by the ass hole DEA), but some are not, so who knows what other endless compounds are out there. One thing for sure, they are endless, considering you can fuse poppy and cacti and create a more potent and active compound

[jazzmetalguitar]

Are we sure it is not this book which was being referenced and the interview was old? SWIM found it fairly easily...though it didn't seem to be well-known...

http://www.amazon.com/Simple-Plant-I.../dp/0963009621

The book supposedly lists all simple isoquinolines by common name, structure, and containing plant: once one finds what they want in the list it provides the two unknowns...possibly the same book?

Erkkk....just caught this tidbit:

The Pictet-Spengler reaction combines a β-phenylethylamine and an aldehyde in an acid medium, which cyclizes the imine in a reaction of the Mannich type, producing the tetrahydroisoquinoline

Let's not forget PiHKAL was lots about phenylethylamines...

[Samadhi]

making a RC opiate would lead to alot of very bad things and ultimately the end of research chemicals... although the end is coming due to the worlds fear of anything that can change a persons consciousness it would just bring about a quicker and more forceful end

the drug world is already filled with morons... take erowid experience reports for example. Swim was looking in the Dimenhydrinate (dramamine) section and almost every report of the 154 had a heading of "i almost died" or "like no known suffering". needless to say that some individuals refuse or are just plain ignorant of the facts involved in using chemicals that are vastly unresearched.

Opiates already account for a fair amount of drug related deaths (compared to the few that phenethlamines or tryptamines produce the number is amazing.) so i can see why releasing these would be very very dangerous to the people using them and the responsible users who can use them right.

[Felonious Skunk]

Originally Posted by Jacco

Eh, Nichols would if he'd actually admit to trying any of his creations (has he? He doesn't seem to want to be associated with Shulgin).

I believe Nichols wrote the introduction to PIHKAL.

Originally Posted by sweetsweetmary

I don't beleive Sasha will release this book in his lifetime (due to the backlash he received with Pihkal and Tihkal). As you said these compounds that he is currently synthesizing probably have a better chance of abuse. I think this book is already done. Maybe Sasha is just enjoying his new legal chemicals while he lives, and has a plan to have it published after his death.

Don't you know that, like Hofmann, Shulgin will live to be 100+? The drug warriors having been racking up bad karma for almost 40 years and this is just one small way for it to bite 'em on the ass.

So Sasha should just keep tasting and publishing and forget about this "death" thing...

[PitfromGreece]

bumping this up, any new experiences?

[lineartransform]

Why are most RC's psychedelics or amphetamines?

1. It is easy. The groundwork has been done already, and human trials have already been done (ie Shulgin).
2. It attracts relatively little attention. Psychedelics, as much as we don't want to admit, are a fringe interest. Simply ask any drug dealer what brings in the most money - it certainly isn't psychedelics. Imagine the shockwave an RC that's similar to cocaine in the way 2C-E is similar to LSD - what effects it would have. It would be catastrophic for the entire scene, and I think that's a large reason why it's avoided.