A Collection of Novel Unscheduled Opioids

[Hammilton]

Hey guys. I've been pretty busy with Blacklight.in so I haven't been around hardly at all anymore. I was working on the repository of drug articles and chemicals we're building and came across some that probably haven't been discussed a whole lot or at all here.

Bromidol (a Lednicer compound, image thanks to Haribo1 taken from a bluelight:ADD post). Bromidol's not a BAN or INN approved name, but it's a lot shorter than the IUPAC. It wasn't published, but X can be a methyl group and retain potency. That's a lot easier to synth.

Note where it says it's 1000x morphine? That's wrong. It's actually 10-12,000x more potent than morphine. So, if you IV 5mg of morphine, you'd IV .0005mg of this. Yikes! This one is also very easy to make (aside from the dangers of making it that is- obviously being this potent, you've gotta use extreme care). If I do my math right, you'd need 25mg to equal 1/2 a kg of 30% heroin.
http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii129/haribo1_photos/Bromidol.png
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is SC-17599. As you can see, it's a steroid derivative. It isn't extremely potent (less than morphine, more than tramadol)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/SC-17599.png

W-18- This is a Knaus opioid that's about as potent as carfentanil. Impressive.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/1-%284-Nitrophenylethyl%29piperidylidene-2-%284-chlorophenyl%29sulfonamide.png/200px-1-%284-Nitrophenylethyl%29piperidylidene-2-%284-chlorophenyl%29sulfonamide.png
A 3-amino-3-phenylpropionamide -- I don't know how potent it is, but it is also legal. Not sure about the synth, tyrosine is a precursor.

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/6099/tyrosinederivedopioidrc5.gif

[jonny-5]

wow. thanx man, now we need someone who can snythesize em. robo?

[Indy]

Wouldn't they be scheduled as analogs of scheduled compounds?

[Hammilton]

Wouldn't they be scheduled as analogs of scheduled compounds?

If they were analogues, then yes. But fortunately, they're not.

[Indy]

I dunno, i'm skeptical of anything that makes claims of a full delta/mu agonist that's perfectly legal. Of course there's poppy seed tea, so it's not like EVERYTHING legal is bullshit, but even that is "technically" illegal when you concentrate it.

Basically i have the all-too-common opinion of "sounds cool, but i'm not using my money to test it, i'll wait until somebody else tests it"

[Consumed.]

id be too scared to even fuck with something as strong as carfentanyl. I wouldnt have any idea how to measure or cut it. YOu couldnt even buy somethign to measure amounts that minute.

[jonny-5]

ya id be afraid to try something that potent, maybe id load up on bupe first...but i dont think these are bullshit just cause theyre legal, all it means is that the stupid government hasnt come across them yet. they cant illegalize something they dont know about...

[Papa Verine]

I'll take some of each please...

[Consumed.]

I dont think any amount of narcan could bring you back from a carfentanyl overdose.

[cracksinthepavement]

they cant illegalize something they dont know about...


Hate to point out that you are wrong here brother, since I have nothing but respect for you. But this is not true. Please take a look at the federal analogue act

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

[jonny-5]

i know but as was pointed out, these arent analogues

[cracksinthepavement]

I just want to point out a few things, and let you guys know that this is not legal. The federal analogue act allows for very, very loose connections - and regardless of the name of the act - it does NOT need to technically be an analogue of another drug.

Part III of the Federal Analogue Act:
with respect to a particular person, which such person represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II.

This is so vague, and there has been no precedent set in the court systems that bring any challenge to this. Things such as salvia are still legal ONLY because they can be sold as a natural incense - synthesized drugs, regardless of analogues, cannot claim this or anything similar. They are exactly what is described in part III of the federal analogue act.

The wikipedia articles goes on to say:
Under part A(iii), which can stand alone and is sufficient by itself to cause a substance to be classed as an analogue, any substance which is represented as having similar effects to a controlled drug will be treated as if it were that controlled drug. If you sold ordinary dextrose for the purpose of human consumption, but advertised it as being "like cocaine", you could be prosecuted as if the sugar were actually cocaine.

In short, sorry to rain on your parade here - hopefully these can stay hush, be produced in a manner that is not going to cause mass overdoses, and make it to the street markets. This will DRAMATICALLY lower the cost of being an opiate/opioid lifer. That said, I gurantee these drugs will up the overdose rate - so again there needs to be a sufficient means - a very good cutting agent perhaps - to make it about as safe as street grade heroin is today.

Just imagine - it could be produced within the united states - it would not have to be shipped, mulled, submarined up here from south america or the middle east or wherever.. It would be like meth, except I bet he crime rate would go DOWN instead of up.

The federal analogue act is incorrectly named, and should be challanged on that basis alone - however precedent takes years to set and no challanges that I know of have made it to the supreme court.

[jonny-5]

i dont think these are going to actually be synthesized for people to use at any point in the near future if at all. i completely understand your point, and youre prolly right, but no one is going to make these and even if they did, i dont think anyone would do them. i know if someone came up to me with some carfentanil i wouldnt do it.

[Somanax]

Missed you, bro

Hammilton, almost alway's doe's his own legwork

Now the analogue act is so fuzzy it make's my piss illegal

Any halfassed lawyer can further muddy the water

I assume if it is worth making

It is worth a fullassed lawyer

If you can patent it

Well then you are a bonafide research facility

and you are fully aware of the fact that

Government grant's are actually used to to suppress info like this

just to keep it proprietary information

FULL FLEDGED CONSPIRACY THEORIST :p

[pharmboy]

I dont care if its legal or not, I want a new drug.

[Hammilton]

I just want to point out a few things, and let you guys know that this is not legal. The federal analogue act allows for very, very loose connections - and regardless of the name of the act - it does NOT need to technically be an analogue of another drug.

Part III of the Federal Analogue Act:
with respect to a particular person, which such person represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II.

This is so vague, and there has been no precedent set in the court systems that bring any challenge to this. Things such as salvia are still legal ONLY because they can be sold as a natural incense - synthesized drugs, regardless of analogues, cannot claim this or anything similar. They are exactly what is described in part III of the federal analogue act.

The wikipedia articles goes on to say:
Under part A(iii), which can stand alone and is sufficient by itself to cause a substance to be classed as an analogue, any substance which is represented as having similar effects to a controlled drug will be treated as if it were that controlled drug. If you sold ordinary dextrose for the purpose of human consumption, but advertised it as being "like cocaine", you could be prosecuted as if the sugar were actually cocaine.

In short, sorry to rain on your parade here - hopefully these can stay hush, be produced in a manner that is not going to cause mass overdoses, and make it to the street markets. This will DRAMATICALLY lower the cost of being an opiate/opioid lifer. That said, I gurantee these drugs will up the overdose rate - so again there needs to be a sufficient means - a very good cutting agent perhaps - to make it about as safe as street grade heroin is today.

Precedent has already been set, it's not something that has to go to the supreme court (although there are restrictions on where rulings before there apply).

If you'd take the time to read the decisions that have come out since the analogue act was passed, you'd know that that wikipedia article is entirely wrong. I should go in and change it. There was a decision from Minnesota around 1993 with the government claiming that all a successful prosecution required was to satisfy part A, B or C. The Court rejected that claim and instead said that you needed to satisfy part A and then either B or C. Since then, that's been the standard in all cases brought up.

None of these chems remotely meet the requirement for part A (Substantially similar structure) although they would meet the requirements for B (or C if you're stupid). Let's pretend that "substantially similiar" just meant that 50% of the structure was required.

None of these share even 50% of their structures with a scheduled opioid.

Edit: Part A(iii) only applies if you're claiming that it's 'like blank schedule I or II' which would be pretty stupid. However, the court's interpretation of this law says that part A(iii) only applied when A(i) is satisfied).

[nick]

Very interesting Hamm.

[Hammilton]

The scary thing is that bromidol is really easy to synth and "methidrol" (my name) is even easier to synth- and probably only slightly less potent.

Although according to lednicer, they didn't take any special precautions when they made it (and I don't think they expected it to be a tenth as potent, either, though).

Here are some more:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a8/Azaprocin.png/180px-Azaprocin.png

Azaprocin, 25x morphine

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/16/Viminol.svg/180px-Viminol.svg.png
Viminol (It's not scheduled but apparently US approved, definitely legal, but without a stereo-selective synth, it's not that great).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0b/Methopholine.svg/180px-Methopholine.svg.png
Methopholine. Definitely legal. Not that potent, though. Swap the chloro group for a nitro, and you're 20x codeine. However, then you have concerns about the aromatic nitro group (although I haven't gotten to see the paper that covers the actual dangers of aromatic nitro's, obvious aromatic amines are horrible).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Tapentadol.svg/220px-Tapentadol.svg.png

duh- Tapentadol. Not a horrible drug if you don't mind a little 'slop' (as it's also a NARI- compare to something like Atomoxetine)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1d/NNC630532.png/200px-NNC630532.png

NNC 63-0532- not a mu agonist, but an ORL-1 agonist. I'm not aware of any studies done to see if ORL-1 agonists are abusable. I'm thinking that they do, but I'm not positive.

It's worth noting that the spiro motif has been used in the methadols ('spirodone') and often results in quite potent drugs.

[Consumed.]

carfentanil or wildanyl or whatever the name is, is used to put down large animals such as elephants. It's got to have been diverted at some point. Has anyone every heard of any one of the fent analogues getting into the wrong (or right) hands (depending how you look at wrong or right!) I think thats the only one that has a legal use at all.

[underide]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a8/Azaprocin.png/180px-Azaprocin.png




^^
looks to me like one molecule is having sex with anorther one. Shows you how much i actually know about chemistry

I wish i could understand even a fraction of what is required to do a synthesis on any of those compounds.
Way to go if you can actually hack it!
Seriously.

[nick]

carfentanil or wildanyl or whatever the name is, is used to put down large animals such as elephants. It's got to have been diverted at some point. Has anyone every heard of any one of the fent analogues getting into the wrong (or right) hands (depending how you look at wrong or right!) I think thats the only one that has a legal use at all.

Yeah,there was a guy on here called paesan.He claimed to have scored wildinil in a Mexican vets and tried it.Then he disappeared!

Check his posts out man.

[Hammilton]

Fentanyl analogues are constantly in the 'wrong' hands. There was just a story this week about how fentanyl deaths have just broke 1,000 in the past few years. They weren't all (or even mostly) vanilla fentanyl.

There is a least on person I know making one from the first series I posted (one more than 1K x more potent than morphine). Not in the US though (somewhere there's an even more restrictive analogue act, but one that is far more concrete than ours), and he's being meticulous about it.

I'm still not sold on injecting window panes, though.

[Hammilton]

^^
looks to me like one molecule is having sex with anorther one. Shows you how much i actually know about chemistry

I wish i could understand even a fraction of what is required to do a synthesis on any of those compounds.
Way to go if you can actually hack it!
Seriously.

Don't worry, I know very little about the chemistry involved in making these. Considering a clomethiazole synth, though because it's basic-level easy.

I'm guessing most people could handle making methidrol if they had access to the precursors.

[Consumed.]

Yeah,there was a guy on here called paesan.He claimed to have scored wildinil in a Mexican vets and tried it.Then he disappeared!

Check his posts out man.


http://forum.opiophile.org/showthread.php?t=292

I cant believe he cooked it and just eyed it. I dont know how you do that with something 10k stronger than morphine. Fuck it, he's convinced me that I;d try it.....

At least he finished the post. But I have a bad feeling as to the future use he had with it....

[allover]

I dont care if its legal or not, I want a new drug.


You beat me to it!

[SynthMorph]

I'm absolutely mesmerized by this stuff, especially the fact that 1g would be enough to keep me well for over a year and an ounce could last a lifetime of heavy opiate use. If anyone needs a guinea pig...

[Hammilton]

Sorry I don't post more; I thought this collection would be enough to keep you guys drooling for another 6 months. I'm pretty busy with blacklight.in and the Blacklight Foundation right now (I think we broke 400 members today, been around since feb.; it's mostly chemists and pharmacologists (and a couple MDs), and since we launched the Blacklight Repository (for synth's and journal articles and general data), I've been working nonstop.

[cracksinthepavement]

Precedent has already been set, it's not something that has to go to the supreme court (although there are restrictions on where rulings before there apply).

If you'd take the time to read the decisions that have come out since the analogue act was passed, you'd know that that wikipedia article is entirely wrong. I should go in and change it. There was a decision from Minnesota around 1993 with the government claiming that all a successful prosecution required was to satisfy part A, B or C. The Court rejected that claim and instead said that you needed to satisfy part A and then either B or C. Since then, that's been the standard in all cases brought up.

None of these chems remotely meet the requirement for part A (Substantially similar structure) although they would meet the requirements for B (or C if you're stupid). Let's pretend that "substantially similiar" just meant that 50% of the structure was required.

None of these share even 50% of their structures with a scheduled opioid.

Edit: Part A(iii) only applies if you're claiming that it's 'like blank schedule I or II' which would be pretty stupid. However, the court's interpretation of this law says that part A(iii) only applied when A(i) is satisfied).

Wow, very interesting - you should definately go in and change the wikipedia article! Thats the beauty of the wiki platform, its so, so easy to just jump in and make changes (which are reflected immediately, later peer reviewed usually for accuracy). I try to start an article for everything I cannot find on wikipedia, and add resource links and small updates wherever I find it is needed.. It is actually needed a lot.

Thanks for correcting me, I appreciate that. However, the law DOES state that part III can stand alone.. That is how people selling chalk and baby teething pills crushed (or anything white and powdery) as coke get the same sentence as someone selling coke. That definitely happens

[Hammilton]

Wow, very interesting - you should definately go in and change the wikipedia article! Thats the beauty of the wiki platform, its so, so easy to just jump in and make changes (which are reflected immediately, later peer reviewed usually for accuracy). I try to start an article for everything I cannot find on wikipedia, and add resource links and small updates wherever I find it is needed.. It is actually needed a lot.

Thanks for correcting me, I appreciate that. However, the law DOES state that part III can stand alone.. That is how people selling chalk and baby teething pills crushed (or anything white and powdery) as coke get the same sentence as someone selling coke. That definitely happens

However the court said that it could not. There is already a seperate law in most states (and I'm almost sure federally) to provide punishment for those sorts of offenses.

[dugwylor]

Interested in knowing more about exactly what is required to synthesize bromidrol and "methidrol" ... out of curiosity only, of course. Hypothetically, that is, if one were a support tech for a laboratory, did all the ordering and shelving, and had access to all kinds of interesting stuff... uh, hypothetically. Is there more info on your site?

Also, for the naysayers, even if something is thousands of times as strong as morphine, as long as it's safe for consumption, you can always dilute it down in water (if it'll go in water, at least), so long as you stir it sufficiently... take Carfent. You know the exact potency -- such and such micro or picograms per ml or mcl or whathaveyou. Do your math right, and while you may end up with a barrel full of liquid at the end, so long as you know that 10ml of your solution (or whatever it'd be with how much it was diluted) won't kill you, you're fine. If the guy who went to Mexico got through the 7th grade, he's a genius for getting the Wildnil. Set for life if he does it properly. Of course I'm not certain I would be wild about injecting the stuff... 'scuse the pun.

[Hammilton]

Yeah, you could probably ask someone for a brief overview at blacklight.in, they might be a little hesitant (it is, for all intents and purposes, a chemical weapon), but if you make it clear that you can't do the synth, but just want an idea of the sort of work that'd be required, some sure someone could give you a basic overview.

[SynthMorph]

Yep, its just simple math to get the concentrations right and bamo! There are scary side effects associated with these opiates with extremely high affinity to the receptors. They desensitize the receptor and build tolerance to such a level that once addicted to etorphine you'd never be able to get off from normal opiates like heroin, morphine or oxycodone. That and etorphine has amongst the highest affinity to all opiate receptors, including the kappa which can lead to pretty bad side effects.

[dugwylor]

Yeah, you could probably ask someone for a brief overview at blacklight.in, they might be a little hesitant (it is, for all intents and purposes, a chemical weapon), but if you make it clear that you can't do the synth, but just want an idea of the sort of work that'd be required, some sure someone could give you a basic overview.
Excellent, thanks. Wasn't able to access the site yesterday, but it contains some really great stuff. Reading up about conversion from morphine to hydromorphone right now. The reference to the patent for extracting M alone was worth the registration. Methanol's preferred, apparently (though if someone were to do it in a rough fashion he'd stick with ethanol so that the product could at least be consumed properly if not able to be evaporated fully). Taken to pH9 or above, they claim a 90% extraction rate of alkaloids (not morphine in particular, but about that an enterprising youth wouldn't care). The further steps could then be accomplished with very few reagents and equipment.

including the kappa which can lead to pretty bad side effects.
Was reading that kappa receptors may also be the ones chiefly responsible for increased tolerance as well. From what I understand, this is the reason that low-dose naltrexone is an effective potentiator, because it will first almost exclusively bind to kappa receptors, and only once they're properly blocked will it move on to mu. Guess the hard part is finding the spot where most of the kappa receptors are blocked, but not so much that you're getting mu blocking and a normal opiate isn't able to bind. As the standard opiate can't bind to the kappas anymore, it goes straight to the mus, requiring "less," after a fashion. But the part that I've always been most interested in is that most of tolerance is apparently acquired through kappa receptors, so that by dosing every time with LDN or ULDN, you develop tolerance to the naltrexone and not your DOC. Naltrexone is of course much more readily and cheaply available than most drugs of abuse, especially for the miniscule quantities needed, and if one were either to be able to measure material accurately at small quantities, or much easier, just crush up a pill of a known amount and dissolve it completely in solution... well, you could basically stop your tolerance in its tracks right where it is while only acquiring a slow new tolerance to naltrexone. I'm hoping to take up this experiment personally very soon. Anyone ever tried this? (Presently taking DXM for roughly the same thing, and it's working to some degree, but I think the naltrexone will work better.)

[SynthMorph]

There's no way in hell I'd ever let even a let bit of naltrexone in my body. It might work, try it and let us know. DXM with morphine is a neat high i think and it does help with tolerance if you take it every 6 hours

[dugwylor]

There's no way in hell I'd ever let even a let bit of naltrexone in my body. It might work, try it and let us know. DXM with morphine is a neat high i think and it does help with tolerance if you take it every 6 hours
Hahah. Very true. Well, it's still useful if you dose just once a day, or every other day.

I think that's how a lot of people feel about naltrexone... if it totally blocked your receptors, well, you're fucked. But the pills they sell are usually the 50mg size, whereas if I remember right, 1 microgram is a good starting dose of ultra-low-dose naltrexone (might be wrong; have to look it up again). One pill could contain up to 50,000 doses, then. I'll probably measure out 100mcg and put that into solution, as a starting point. This link claims it can reduce tolerance and prevent withdrawals:

http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/ullownaltopr.html

This one claims it can be used effectively to ween a person off H. They don't talk about dose, but the name of the pills (MicroNaltrexone Plus and Naltrexone Lite) seem to suggest it's LDN or ULDN:

http://www.beatingheroin.com/Cure.asp

Definitely worth looking into. I'll risk full WDs in the name of science. Going to order some tomorrow (it's about $35 for 6x50mg pills).

[Hammilton]

Naltrexone is definitely useful in ultra-low dosing, and even LDN style dosing. I don't think I've read any papers about it comparing the two, but I'm willing to bet that it's a median between ULD and LDN is the best. ULD uses such tiny doses, I can't imagine it's very useful.

What does ULN actually do in your brain, though? Does the really minor antagonism prevent receptor internalization or something?

[Hammilton]

I have slightly increased this list, but I just wanted to note that if anyone is interested in the synthesis of these, you can post at blacklight.me (we've moved after I took control of the site). All of our old info is safe, though, and secured.

almost 1000 members now.

Ham

[northernstar]

I just want to point out a few things, and let you guys know that this is not legal. The federal analogue act allows for very, very loose connections - and regardless of the name of the act - it does NOT need to technically be an analogue of another drug.

Part III of the Federal Analogue Act:
with respect to a particular person, which such person represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in schedule I or II.

This is so vague, and there has been no precedent set in the court systems that bring any challenge to this. Things such as salvia are still legal ONLY because they can be sold as a natural incense - synthesized drugs, regardless of analogues, cannot claim this or anything similar. They are exactly what is described in part III of the federal analogue act.

The wikipedia articles goes on to say:
Under part A(iii), which can stand alone and is sufficient by itself to cause a substance to be classed as an analogue, any substance which is represented as having similar effects to a controlled drug will be treated as if it were that controlled drug. If you sold ordinary dextrose for the purpose of human consumption, but advertised it as being "like cocaine", you could be prosecuted as if the sugar were actually cocaine.

In short, sorry to rain on your parade here - hopefully these can stay hush, be produced in a manner that is not going to cause mass overdoses, and make it to the street markets. This will DRAMATICALLY lower the cost of being an opiate/opioid lifer. That said, I gurantee these drugs will up the overdose rate - so again there needs to be a sufficient means - a very good cutting agent perhaps - to make it about as safe as street grade heroin is today.

Just imagine - it could be produced within the united states - it would not have to be shipped, mulled, submarined up here from south america or the middle east or wherever.. It would be like meth, except I bet he crime rate would go DOWN instead of up.

The federal analogue act is incorrectly named, and should be challanged on that basis alone - however precedent takes years to set and no challanges that I know of have made it to the supreme court.


actually there is a few.......AMT was not considered a analog by a judge due to "structure functional grouping" or some crap. but it then got scheduled seperatly as its own thing.

a company selling a 2-cb analog ( 2ic or something) did all sorts of dodgy shit to hide it as " carpet cleaner" and got nailed. more from pissing the judge off tho with transparent scams.