Water soluble CB1 agonists, other cannabinoid RCs

[resorcinol]

This is an avenue potheads may enjoy traveling down in the future....

Here's one that keeps it simple... it's a THC prodrug that's water soluble.

THC-O-phosphate
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c6/D8THCphosphate.png

The phosphate group is diacidic (can donate two protons). Either as the free acid or as a salt (like THC-O-Phosphate Sodium, for example), this compound is soluble in water and could be injected intravenously with ease, unlike regular THC. The high is probably very similar to THC and weed itself (although some say pure THC feels different than weed). This compound is a classical cannabinoid modeled after the ones in Cannabis.

The second one here is more unique --

WIN 55-212-2
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3c/WIN55212-2.svg/170px-WIN55212-2.svg.png

This one has basic nitrogens in it, an unusual trait for a CB1 agonist. It's also in a different chemical class than classical cannabinoids from cannabis. It's a full CB1 agonist while THC is only a partial and there's some evidence that full CB1 agonists cause mild respiratory depression but may also be more fun. Here's a glowing review on Bluelight: http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=355579

The third one I'm posting about here is way unique in that it's a straight up hydrocarbon. It has NO functional groups at all, just straight up carbons and hydrogens! This shows us that receptor interactions can occur via london dispersion interactions only if the compound fits the receptor well enough -- no hydrogen intermolecular bonding, no coordinate covalent, no electronegative functional group interactions, etc etc. Pretty cool!

JWH-171
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fc/JWH-171.png

Only thing with this one is, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (hydrocarbons with multiple ring systems) tend to be carcinogenic or mutagenic to varying degrees. With no functional groups to metabolically attack, the liver enzymes resort to epoxidation, and epoxides of these compounds tend to be kinda nasty on the body. This one might be better off remaining a novelty and evidence to how simple a molecule can be and still activate receptors. The less toxic more readily metabolized cousins can be sampled.

[duper]

I want some of that WIN 55 shit.. I wonder if it would make you piss dirty for THC? ;)

[resorcinol]

I want some of that WIN 55 shit.. I wonder if it would make you piss dirty for THC? ;)

You'll piss clean. The tests test you for metabolites of known drugs with known metabolites.

The WIN 55 compound is chemically distinct from THC. The only obvious thing they have in common is that they both agonize CB1, and thus produce cannabis-like effects :)

If it ever really caught on the Gestapo would come down on it pretty fast though, I'm sure (caught on like, say, MDMA did). As long as it stays on the RC market only though, I doubt you'll ever in your life be tested for it.

[Hammilton]

I don't think that JWH compound you posted will even be water soluble, but I couldn't swear to that.

There are a lot better, and safer JWH compounds. JWH-018 and 081- both of which I've had- are pretty good and definitely water soluble.

At blacklight.in Murphy put together a PDF of the entire JWH series. They're not just the naphthoylindoles, but some are simplified versions of the THCs. There are even some alkylpyrans that are active; very simple molecules, but I know almost nothing about them.

In the next week (*fingers crossed*) at wiki.blacklight.in we should have all of the papers referenced in any of the wikipedia articles (and more- for those not covered in those articles) available for free download. Anyone who wants to help us get them up more rapidly is more than welcome!

[duper]

You'll piss clean. The tests test you for metabolites of known drugs with known metabolites.


Well, I was just wondering.. Somebody could produce and ingest a previously unknown benzo that would cause them to test positive for benzos, no? :confused:

[resorcinol]

In the benzo case, all benzos are very chemically similar and many produce overlapping metabolites. So in that case, it's possible that an unknown benzo will make you fail. WIN 55 doesn't resemble THC chemically at all.

Yea I know the last one wouldn't be soluble in water. I forgot that part of my post title was "water soluble". The other two will be soluble in water. The last one is really only there because it's interesting, there are def better and safer ones in the JWH series.

[resorcinol]

Adding to my WIN 55 212-2 ramblings:

I didn't know up until recently that d-9-tetrahydrocannabinol was only a partial agonist at CB1 receptors. Now those of us who enjoy weed know what a pleasure it can be to smoke it, and while tolerance does happen (lets ignore physical dependence totally here, for a moment), it isn't quite the cruel mistress that opioid tolerance is. Opioid tolerance seems to develop more swiftly and comletely than cannabinoid tolerance does. Perhaps this is why, even though d-9-THC is only a partial CB1 agonist, heavy potheads can still get stoned if they smoke enough; with opioid partial agonists, if your tolerance is high enough, the partial agonist (ie, bupe) isn't gonna get you high.

But this begs the question -- what would a CB1 full agonist like WIN 55 212-2 feel like? The people on BL that tried it seemed to like it a lot. I also wonder... could compounds like WIN 55 bring the magic back a little bit for heavy potheads that have burned out on reefer, since WIN 55 is a full agonist and d-9-THC is only a partial agonist? Are CB1 full agonists more euphoric? Do they cause respiratory depression?

These are all questions that could begin to be answered if WIN 55 212-2 was cheaper :P