DEA redefines "positional isomer"

[radiometer]

Our friends in Washington have been keeping busy. Very busy. According to my reading of this, any compound which shares an empirical formula with a scheduled drug will now also be illegal. I wonder what the consequences of this truly absurd ruling will be.

Definition of ``Positional Isomer'' as It Pertains to the Control
of Schedule I Controlled Substances

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Justice.

ACTION: Final Rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On May 25, 2006, DEA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
which proposed the addition of a specific definition for the term
``positional isomer'' to allow for the systematic determination of
which isomers of schedule I substances would be considered to be
``positional,'' and therefore, subject to schedule I control. This
rulemaking finalizes that definition.
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and its implementing
regulations specify which hallucinogenic substances are considered
schedule I controlled substances. The CSA states that all salts,
isomers, and salts of isomers of these substances are also schedule I
controlled substances. In non-technical terms, an isomer of a substance
is a different compound, but a compound which has the same number and
kind of atoms. The terms ``optical isomer'' and ``geometric isomer''
are specific scientific terms and it is easy to determine whether one
substance is an optical or geometric isomer of another. The term
``positional isomer,'' however, is subject to scientific
interpretation.
The addition of a definition for the term ``positional isomer''
will assist legitimate research[ers] and industry in determining the
control status of materials that are ``positional isomers'' of schedule
I hallucinogens. While the DEA will remain the authority for ultimately
determining the control status of a given material, providing a
specific definition for ``positional isomer'' will ensure consistent
criteria are utilized in making these determinations.
This rule does not change existing laws, regulations, policies,
processes, and procedures regarding the determination of control status
for schedule I hallucinogenic substances. This rule merely makes
available to the public the longstanding definition of ``positional
isomer'' which DEA has used when making these scheduling
determinations.
This rule is relevant only to specialized forensic or research
chemists. Most of these individuals are existing DEA registrants who
are authorized by the DEA to handle schedule I hallucinogenic
substances.

DATES: Effective January 2, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief,
Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug
Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537 at (202) 307-7183.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On May 25, 2006, DEA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) [71 FR 30097] which proposed the addition of a specific
definition for the term ``positional isomer.'' As DEA discussed in the
NPRM, in many instances, the control of a substance under the CSA often
includes the specific substance listed under the CSA, as well as the
substance's salts, isomers, and/or salts of isomers. In most instances,
the term isomer includes only optical isomers. In other instances,
however, the term isomer includes positional and/or geometric isomers.
As DEA discussed in its NPRM, in non-technical terms, isomers are
different compounds that have the same molecular formula (the same
number and types of atoms). The terms ``optical isomer'' and
``geometric isomer'' are specifically defined and well understood
scientific terms, and it is easy to determine whether one substance is
an optical or geometric isomer of another. The term ``positional
isomer,'' however, is not universally defined, and, therefore, is
subject to scientific interpretation. In order to ensure that
consistent criteria are utilized in determining whether one substance
is considered a ``positional isomer'' of another, the DEA is
establishing a specific definition for ``positional isomer.'' This
definition will be added to 21 CFR 1300.01(b)(21).

Existing CSA and CFR References to ``Positional Isomers''

The CSA and its implementing regulations (21 CFR 1308.11(d))
specify which hallucinogenic substances are considered schedule I
controlled substances. Under the CSA and its implementing regulations,
there are only three references to the term ``positional isomer'':
(1) Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 802(14), ``the term `isomer' means the
optical isomer, except as used in schedule I(c) and schedule II(a)(4).
As used in schedule I(c), the term `isomer' means any optical,
positional, or geometric isomer. As used in schedule II(a)(4), the term
`isomer' means any optical or geometric isomer.''
(2) Under 21 CFR 1300.01(b)(21), ``The term `isomer' means the
optical isomer, except as used in Sec. Sec. 1308.11(d) and
1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter. As used in Sec. 1308.11(d) of this
chapter, the term `isomer' means the optical, positional, or geometric
isomer. As used in Sec. 1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter, the term
`isomer' means the optical or geometric isomer.''
(3) 21 CFR 1308.11(d) states, ``Hallucinogenic substances. Unless
specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any
material, compound, mixture, or preparation, which contains any
quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances, or which contains
any of its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers whenever the existence
of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the
specific chemical designation (for purposes of this paragraph only, the
term 'isomer' includes the optical, positional and geometric
isomers).''

Why Definition Is Needed

As DEA discussed in the NPRM, the CSA (21 U.S.C. 802(14) and 21
U.S.C. 812(c)(I)(c)) and its implementing regulations (21 CFR
1308.11(d)) specify which hallucinogenic substances are considered
schedule I controlled substances. The CSA further states that all
salts, isomers, and salts of isomers of these substances are also
schedule I controlled substances.
Under the definition of ``isomer'' found in 21 CFR 1300.01(b)(21),
``The term `isomer' means the optical isomer, except as used in
Sec. Sec. 1308.11(d) and 1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter. As used in
Sec. 1308.11(d) of this chapter, the term `isomer' means the optical,
positional, or geometric isomer. As used in Sec. 1308.12(b)(4) of this
chapter, the term `isomer' means the optical or geometric isomer.''
Therefore, according to this definition as it specifically applies
to hallucinogens, the term ``isomer'' includes all optical, positional,
or geometric isomers. As such, all salts, isomers (including optical,
positional, or geometric isomers), and salts of isomers (including
optical, positional, or geometric isomers) of the hallucinogenic
substances listed in 21 U.S.C. 812(c)(I)(c) and 21 CFR 1308.11(d) are
considered schedule I controlled substances.

Page 67851

Because the determination as to whether a substance is considered a
``positional isomer'' can be subject to scientific interpretation, the
DEA believes it is necessary to specifically define the term
``positional isomer''. This definition will only pertain to those
substances that are ``positional isomers'' of schedule I controlled
substances pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 812(c)(I)(c) and 21 CFR 1308.11(d).
As DEA noted in the NPRM, DEA is not establishing definitions for
either optical or geometric isomers. The DEA believes that these terms
are highly specific and are not subject to differing scientific
interpretation.

Comments

The definition of ``positional isomer'' will be used in the
determination of the control status of substances as schedule I
controlled substances pursuant to 21 CFR 1308.11(d). This definition is
highly technical in nature and the DEA has sought to provide specific
criteria for determination as to whether a substance is a ``positional
isomer'' of schedule I hallucinogens. In writing the definition
contained in this rulemaking, DEA consulted a wide variety of reference
sources including, but not limited to, Chemical Abstracts, the IUPAC
Compendium of Chemical Terminology, World Health Organization (WHO)
documents, and various encyclopedias and chemistry textbooks.
The NPRM sought input from all interested parties regarding the
proposed definition of ``positional isomer.'' DEA received one comment
in response to the proposed definition. That comment did not raise any
specific objections to the definition, but expressed the opinion that
instead of DEA adding this definition, this duty should be the
responsibility of Congress and the definition added via legislation.
DEA disagrees. 21 U.S.C. 821 authorizes the Attorney General to
``promulgate rules and regulations and to charge reasonable fees
relating to the registration and control of the manufacture,
distribution, and dispensing of controlled substances.'' Expanding on
this authority, 21 U.S.C. 871(b) further provides that the Attorney
General ``may promulgate and enforce any rules, regulations, and
procedures which he may deem necessary and appropriate for the
efficient execution of his functions.'' The authority has been
delegated by the Attorney General to the Administrator of DEA pursuant
to 28 CFR 0.100, and redelegated to the Deputy Administrator pursuant
to 28 CFR 0.104.
It is, therefore, well within the Deputy Administrator's purview to
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to define a term relating to the
control of certain schedule I controlled substances. By inviting
comment to the proposed definition, DEA ensured that potentially
affected persons, such as researchers, were given the opportunity to
review the definition and submit comments or changes. No other comments
were received by DEA. Therefore, this rulemaking finalizes the
definition exactly as it was proposed in the NPRM.

Criteria That Will Apply to Positional Isomers

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 802(14), 21 U.S.C. 812(c)(I)(c), and 21 CFR
1308.11(d), positional isomers of schedule I hallucinogens are any and
all substances which:
(1) Are not already controlled in a different schedule I category,
or are listed in another schedule, or are specifically exempted from
control by law; and
(2) Have the same molecular formula and core structure as a
schedule I hallucinogen; and
(3) Have the same functional group(s) and/or substituent(s) as
those found in the respective schedule I hallucinogen, attached at any
position(s) on the core structure, but in such manner that no new
chemical functionalities are created and no existing chemical
functionalities are destroyed relative to the respective schedule I
hallucinogen; except that
(4) Rearrangements of alkyl moieties within or between functional
group(s) or substituent(s), or divisions or combinations of alkyl
moieties, that do not create new chemical functionalities or destroy
existing chemical functionalities, would be within the definition of
positional isomer (and therefore be controlled).
As clarification, note that the ``core structure'' is the parent
molecule that is the common basis for the class; for example,
tryptamine, phenethylamine, or ergoline. The following are examples of
rearrangements resulting in creation and/or destruction of chemical
functionalities. These rearrangements result in compounds which are not
positional isomers: ethoxy to alpha-hydroxyethyl, hydroxy and methyl to
methoxy, or the repositioning of a phenolic or alcoholic hydroxy group
to create a hydroxyamine. Examples of rearrangements resulting in
compounds that would be positional isomers include, but are not limited
to: tert-butyl to sec-butyl, methoxy and ethyl to isopropoxy, N,N-
diethyl to N-methyl-N-propyl, or alpha-methylamino to N-methylamino.

Impact of Rule Limited to Specialized Forensic or Research Chemists

As DEA discussed in the NPRM, the addition of a definition for the
term ``positional isomer'' as it applies to 21 CFR 1308.11(d) will
assist legitimate research[ers] and industry in determining the control
status of substances that are isomers of schedule I hallucinogens.
While the DEA will remain the authority on ultimately determining the
control status of a given substance, providing a specific definition
for ``positional isomer'' will greatly reduce any potential confusion
or inconsistencies in making these determinations.
This definition will enable researchers and industry to determine
definitively whether a substance is a ``positional isomer'' of a
schedule I hallucinogen. As such, they will be able to know the control
status of a particular substance when considering new research.
This rule is relevant only to specialized forensic or research
chemists. Most of these individuals are existing DEA registrants who
are authorized by the DEA to handle schedule I hallucinogenic
substances.

Specific Changes and Definition

As currently defined in 21 CFR 1300.01(b)(21), the term ``isomer''
means the optical isomer, except as used in Sec. 1308.11(d) and Sec.
1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter. As used in Sec. 1308.11(d) of this
chapter, the term ``isomer'' means any optical, positional, or
geometric isomer. As used in Sec. 1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter, the
term ``isomer'' means any optical or geometric isomer.
Pursuant to this Final Rule, 21 CFR 1300.01(b)(21) is revised to
include a specific definition for the term ``positional isomer''. The
modification specifies that, as used in Sec. 1308.11(d), the term
``positional isomer'' means any substance possessing the same molecular
formula and core structure and having the same functional group(s) and/
or substituent(s) as those found in the respective schedule I
hallucinogen, attached at any position(s) on the core structure, but in
such manner that no new chemical functionalities are created and no
existing chemical functionalities are destroyed relative to the
respective schedule I hallucinogen. Rearrange ments of alkyl moieties
within or between functional group(s) or substituent(s), or divisions
or combinations of alkyl moieties that do not create new chemical
functionalities or destroy existing chemical functionalities, would be
within the

Page 67852

definition of positional isomer. For purposes of this definition, the
``core structure'' is the parent molecule that is the common basis for
the class. Some examples would include tryptamine, phenethylamine, or
ergoline. Examples of non-permissible rearrangements resulting in
creation and/or destruction of chemical functionalities (that therefore
would not be considered positional isomers) include, but are not
limited to: ethoxy to alpha-hydroxyethyl, hydroxy and methyl to
methoxy, or the repositioning of a phenolic or alcoholic hydroxy group
to create a hydroxyamine. Examples of permissible rearrangements (that
are within the definition of positional isomers) include: tert-butyl to
sec-butyl, methoxy and ethyl to isopropoxy, N,N-diethyl to N-methyl-N-
propyl, or alpha-methylamino to N-methylamino.

Scientific/Technical Nature of Definition

As DEA discussed in its NPRM, DEA understands that the definition
is highly technical and laden with scientific terms. However, the DEA
believes that such a highly technical definition is necessary to ensure
that consistent criteria are utilized in determining whether one
substance is a ``positional isomer'' of another.

Regulatory Certifications

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Deputy Administrator hereby certifies that this rulemaking has
been drafted in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this regulation, and by approving it
certifies that this regulation will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The inclusion of the
definition of positional isomer set forth herein is unlikely to subject
any new substances to CSA control. Also, this rule does not require the
obtaining of new DEA registrations. Most persons affected by this rule
are already DEA registrants (or would have to become registrants even
absent this rule in order to handle schedule I hallucinogens). Further,
this rule does not impose any additional regulatory burden on the
regulated community. The change simply will ensure that consistent
criteria are utilized in making scheduling determinations.

Executive Order 12866

The Deputy Administrator further certifies that this rulemaking has
been drafted in accordance with the principles in Executive Order 12866
Sec. 1(b). It has been determined that this is a significant
regulatory action. Therefore, this action has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 12988

This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in
Sec. Sec. 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice
Reform.

Executive Order 13132

This rulemaking does not preempt or modify any provision of state
law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any state; nor
does it diminish the power of any state to enforce its own laws.
Accordingly, this rulemaking does not have federalism implications
warranting the application of Executive Order 13132.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$120,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) in any one year, and will
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no
actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

Congressional Review Act

This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(Congressional Review Act). This rule will not result in an annual
effect on the economy of $114,000,000 or more; a major increase in
costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of
United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies
in domestic and export markets.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1300

Controlled substances, Definitions, Drug Traffic Control.

0
For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR part 1300 is amended as follows:

PART 1300--DEFINITIONS [AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 1300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802, 871(b), 951, 958(f).


0
2. Section 1300.01 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(21) to read as
follows:


Sec. 1300.01 Definitions relating to controlled substances.

* * * * *
(b) * * *
(21) (i) The term isomer means the optical isomer, except as used
in Sec. 1308.11(d) and Sec. 1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter. As used in
Sec. 1308.11(d) of this chapter, the term ``isomer'' means any
optical, positional, or geometric isomer. As used in Sec.
1308.12(b)(4) of this chapter, the term ``isomer'' means any optical or
geometric isomer.
(ii) As used in Sec. 1308.11(d) of this chapter, the term
``positional isomer'' means any substance possessing the same molecular
formula and core structure and having the same functional group(s) and/
or substituent(s) as those found in the respective schedule I
hallucinogen, attached at any position(s) on the core structure, but in
such manner that no new chemical functionalities are created and no
existing chemical functionalities are destroyed relative to the
respective schedule I hallucinogen. Rearrangements of alkyl moieties
within or between functional group(s) or substituent(s), or divisions
or combinations of alkyl moieties, that do not create new chemical
functionalities or destroy existing chemical functionalities, are
allowed i.e., result in compounds which are positional isomers. For
purposes of this definition, the ``core structure'' is the parent
molecule that is the common basis for the class; for example,
tryptamine, phenethylamine, or ergoline. Examples of rearrangements
resulting in creation and/or destruction of chemical functionalities
(and therefore resulting in compounds which are not positional isomers)
include, but are not limited to: ethoxy to alpha-hydroxyethyl, hydroxy
and methyl to methoxy, or the repositioning of a phenolic or alcoholic
hydroxy group to create a hydroxyamine. Examples of rearrangements
resulting in compounds which would be positional isomers include: tert-
butyl to sec-butyl, methoxy and ethyl to isopropoxy, N,N-diethyl to N-
methyl-N-propyl, or alpha-methylamino to N-methylamino.
* * * * *

Dated: November 21, 2007.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator,
[FR Doc. E7-23413 Filed 11-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-09-P

Reputation Comments on this post:

Thanks for the info.

[Alekseev]

Originally Posted by radiometer

Our friends in Washington have been keeping busy. Very busy. According to my reading of this, any compound which shares an empirical formula with a scheduled drug will now also be illegal. I wonder what the consequences of this truly absurd ruling will be.

Does this include the phenethylamines and piperazines commonly known as "Research Chemicals...?"

[trptamene]

I would think only if that chemical is specifically illegal, but others might be able to do through the analog act...but if this is based on empirical formula there really doesn't need to be much before a HUGE amt of chemicals could be called illegal.

All these compounds have the same empirical formula (C21H30O2):

Dehydroabietic acid, methyl ester
Pipamperone
Cafestol
Avarol
Progesterone
Vinkadine
Tetrahydrocannabinols

[Alekseev]

Originally Posted by trptamene

I would think only if that chemical is specifically illegal, but others might be able to do through the analog act...but if this is based on empirical formula there really doesn't need to be much before a HUGE amt of chemicals could be called illegal.

All these compounds have the same empirical formula (C21H30O2):

Dehydroabietic acid, methyl ester
Pipamperone
Cafestol
Avarol
Progesterone
Vinkadine
Tetrahydrocannabinols

Uhhhhhhh! The Federal Analog Act...

[Evil GIR]

So does this mean Tryptamine is now illigal ?

[Paracelsus]

What positional isomer that is a schedule I hallucinogen does tryptamine have?

The classical game. The law exists so anything can be declared illegal, yet only those of interest are prosecuted. Of course, special exemptions will be made for progesterone and such, if they will not be simply ignored.

[Shampoo]

Mescaline (C11H17NO3) also has a few counterparts with identical empirical formulas including l-Isoprenaline, Orciprenaline, Metaproterenol that will now fall under the act. Thousands of important chemical building blocks will be lost as a result of a drive to inhibit conscious exploration. To answer Evil GIR and Paracelsus, Tryptamine will in fact now be illegal.

"
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 802(14), 21 U.S.C. 812(c)(I)(c), and 21 CFR 1308.11(d), positional isomers of schedule I hallucinogens are any and all substances which:

(1) Are not already controlled in a different schedule I category, or are listed in another schedule, or are specifically exempted from control by law; and
(2) Have the same molecular formula and core structure as a schedule I hallucinogen; and
(3) Have the same functional group(s) and/or substituent(s) as those found in the respective schedule I hallucinogen, attached at any position(s) on the core structure, but in such manner that no new chemical functionalities are created and no existing chemical functionalities are destroyed relative to the respective schedule I hallucinogen; except that
(4) Rearrangements of alkyl moieties within or between functional group(s) or substituent(s), or divisions or combinations of alkyl moieties, that do not create new chemical functionalities or destroy existing chemical functionalities, would be within the definition of positional isomer (and therefore be controlled)."





-The term "core-structure" as defined by the DEA refers to the parent molecule that is the "common basis for the class." This includes, as confirmed by 2007 Dept. of Justice Docket # DEA-260F RIN 1117-AA94, Ergoline, Phenethylamine, and Tryptamine.

Reputation Comments on this post:

helpful, pertinent information

[Stephenwolf]

This would now mean melatonin, serotonin, and god knows what other useful necessary non-psychoactive chemicals that are powerfully useful in medicinal researches are illegal. YAY fascism.

[MrG]

Originally Posted by radiometer

While the DEA will remain the authority for ultimately
determining the control status of a given material

Shit, look at GHB, it has the dubious honour of being both Schedule I and Schedle III - apparently having *no* accepted medical use and, at the same time, having accepted medical use.

Originally Posted by Paracelsus

The law exists so anything can be declared illegal, yet only those of interest are prosecuted.

Bingo.

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by Stephenwolf

This would now mean melatonin, serotonin, and god knows what other useful necessary non-psychoactive chemicals that are powerfully useful in medicinal researches are illegal. YAY fascism.

Clearly we're all criminals for having serotonin in our bodies.

[Evil GIR]

Originally Posted by Paracelsus

What positional isomer that is a schedule I hallucinogen does tryptamine have?

The classical game. The law exists so anything can be declared illegal, yet only those of interest are prosecuted. Of course, special exemptions will be made for progesterone and such, if they will not be simply ignored.

DMT, there both very simular, just chop of the amino NH2 group on the trypamine to give N and then add two CH3 groups in its place.

Tryptamine

[allyourbase]

this is only a change in the singular LE entity's perception of the law, not at all a change in the law itself. any discriminating jurist would quickly throw these cases out of court, and if you notice it says "the term 'positional isomer' means any substance possessing the same molecular formula and core structure and having the same functional group(s)". now your average person would probably take that to mean any of the three, but in legal terms the use of and instead of either means the only chemicals subject to this interpretation would have to meet every one of those three criteria. which if you look at shulgins phenethylamine series, et cetera, almost none do. this will most likely put pressure on drug companies who are producing medications that have the same structure and formula than it will have to do with newly emerging drugs or research chemicals. for example, if methamphetamine were schedule 1, wellbutrin would not be subject to this interpretation, because of its two extra carbons. DXM on the other hand very well could be since its just an ester of a phenanthrene opiate and its methods of action are mostly through opiate receptors.

[fnord]

Originally Posted by c0c0nut

Clearly we're all criminals for having serotonin in our bodies.

we should have a massive demonstration in front of dea head quarters where 1000's of psychonauts turn them selfs over to the dea for arrest and prosecution for possession of melitonin supplements.

[Paracelsus]

DMT, there both very simular, just chop of the amino NH2 group on the trypamine to give N and then add two CH3 groups in its place.

Yes, but DMT is not an isomer of tryptamine. However, this isn't relevant anymore, because "core structures" are also illegal now (see post #7).

[Bajeda]

Originally Posted by fnord

we should have a massive demonstration in front of dea head quarters where 1000's of psychonauts turn them selfs over to the dea for arrest and prosecution for possession of melitonin supplements.

Melatonin will probably be made illegal soon enough when big pharma decides its too great a threat to their sleeping pills biz.

[sg43]

Wow this is very interesting and could mean almost all RC's might be illegal now, I wish somone who could understand this better could confim or deny.

[trptamene]

The law is always open to interpretation, in america this is meant to be the job of the judicial system. Unfortunately today, the executive branch has decided to take more of this power and the system of checks and balances is stressed daily by the government head.

Luckily one can still ask for a trial, but for many this is a lost cost as they do not have the money to make the legal system work correctly & are often pressured into admitting to things they should probably not by the threat of seizures of property, jail time, a criminal record, and much more, or maybe most sad of all loss of children and loved ones.

Often the law is worded vaguely so that it can be open to interpretation and be applied to many cases that might develop after the law is made and was not thought of during its writing.

You are likely right that the system will take this to effectively illegalize all RC's, but also likely illegalizes several anti-depressants and potential theraputic drugs.

This law will probably be applied "as needed" and will be called upon when innocent people can not be prosecuted under other current laws. Something they will fall back on. With a high powered legal team this could probably be torn apart in court, but for the average person this is not possibible and with no one questioning this law for them they would likely get prosecuted under it.

[Pino]

Is drugs use illegal in America? And can this be proven by solely taking a blood test or a hair test?
One funny thing popped up in swims mind....

[LookingForHer]

Why don't they just go outright and say that they are outlawing certain states of mind?

Spirituality is banned.

Free will is banned.

Free thought is banned.

Why emphasise and endlessly hunt down certain drugs that help open the mind, but ignore and allow those which don't?

The US government is a piece of shit. It needs to be knocked down. ANd all those who willingly participate in it's domination of innocent people also need to be knocked down.

KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK to your fucking heads you arrogant government employed assholes.

[sarbanes]

Originally Posted by Paracelsus

What positional isomer that is a schedule I hallucinogen does tryptamine have?

The classical game. The law exists so anything can be declared illegal, yet only those of interest are prosecuted. Of course, special exemptions will be made for progesterone and such, if they will not be simply ignored.

I hope there is some way we can all drown in too many laws, because that might be the only way to clean things up. The only new law we need is one to compel them to enforce equally every single frigging law they create. They MUST start arresting every single US citizen for having GHB in their body. They must start arresting laboratory owners/managers/techs who work with otherwise benign compounds, and don't have an exemption for them (which happen to have the same empirical formula as a scheduled compound). Either that, or have an constitutional amendment making certain laws fall off the books if a certain threshold of prosecution over a certain amount of time is not met. This is beyond ridiculous. Even more ridiculous than the fact that people buy Brittney records, and hip hop is so big (which is ridiculous enough). I feel the law is not being treated seriously here.

[Triple7]

First thing I thought of when I glimpsed at that article. What about DXM? ADHD medication? sleeping aid?

This law, among others, is to bust anyone the system doesn't like. If you have 3 beers in a pub in Texas, you risk getting jailed (seriously!). Drugs laws, copyright laws, tax laws and all kind of other laws, are made so that anyone the system doesn't like, can get jailed. Every "civil" government use some kind of abuses. This includes tampering or removing opposing politicians. For example, the scandinavian governments apply astronomical taxes, in such extent that everyone must cheat to survive. It is only for the belief of the stupid cattle to believe in democrazy.

In many cases, it is all about money (and power). Why is Snoop Dog free? Why is Michael Jackson free? Why is any other American celebrity free?

One day, someone will get busted for some exotic plant, that has no use. Because of "isomer".

[Mona Lisa]

so true, unfortunately

[thrackelsby]

It saddens me that the United States of America constitution was created for the sole purpose of freedom, yet the United states government seems to now exist for the sole purpose of control.

My grandparents grew up in the Great Depression, while it seems that I, as a young American, will soon be growing up in the Great Oppression.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Great line. Must remember it for my own use in RL!

[toe]

. . .and the Mad Hatter said to Alice, "a word means what I want it to mean. I say you're mad."

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Quite.
	good post

[Alfa]

I think this is very relevant:

Originally Posted by everhopeful

The consensus I have heard so far is that it probably wouldn't come in as a structural analogue but I had the "pleasure" of listening to a lawyer in the USA who knew zero about cannabinoids or chemistry, laugh and crow that if an association no matter how tenuous, could be drawn between it and cannabis he could virtually guarantee he could convince the average Judge it was a functional analogue and therefore illegal. So I guess in places that allow such things it (and everything else) is in trouble.