A legal Opioid [Archive]

Hammilton

12-01-2006, 06:05 PM

I was doing some research today, like I sometimes do, and I discovered a antitussive commonly abused in Korea. It's called "Zipeprol"- it has opioid and non-opioid effects. It can cause siezures at high doses, but it seems pretty safe when used by people who know a thing or two about it (like DXM- those who don't know end up shitting and puking, and those who do have incredible trips)

The best thing about this opioid is that it's totally legal. It's virtually unknown in the US except among Koreans. Heck, you can even buy it online, and buy it by the kilo.

Hammilton

red26

12-01-2006, 06:12 PM

cool beans! thanx! I been looking into what I can and cant do with my lagal situation. So this stuff has an opiate buzz to it? I really dont like DXM except in small doses so if its anything like that...

nick

12-01-2006, 06:17 PM

If it's legal it's bullshit.

Black_Pony

12-01-2006, 06:42 PM

My only experience with DXM was when i was W/D'ing so bad, and i had to sit through this corporate seminar for work. Anyway, in between shits I went and downed a large bottle of 'tussin, got it all down! The good news is I made it through the meeting and couldn't feel my legs for a few hours. Then I hopped a jet back to Cali (the lady next to me must have thought I was on tweek my legs were shaking so bad by then)and scored some oxy (closer to the airport than the smack was). After I railed 60mgs i puked the blackest $h!t out of my stomach, it was offensive! Didn't matter of course cuz I fixed...

But ya, the above product sounds like something to keep around the house in case of emergency, thanks!

Black_Pony

12-01-2006, 06:49 PM

Ya, appears to contain the opoid alfentanil used by waismann(sp?) for RAD.

Can anyone say "Alfentanil Extraction"?!?

alowishus

12-01-2006, 07:10 PM

Wow seems it's been a issue over there for a while, used by US teens on the US Army bases, can't believe I'll never heard of it.
It seems like some pretty bad stuff, side effects in all; the rats didn't respond to it to help w/ W/D's but the monkeys did. Wonder what the high is like. To many neuropsychic side-effects and seizure for me. But we all know I'd give it a go if I had it!!

On another though, that's gotta suck SOOO bad for junkie rats & monkeys nice and high all the time then WHAM hard core full on W/D's for days. Then they're made to do it all over again time after time....no wait is that us or the lab animals?:o

jacky

12-02-2006, 01:19 PM

very interesting find....

I dont see anything on it being a nmda antagonist?

seems similiar MAYBE to cyclazocine. need someone in canada to send me some of that material.

but now how to get zipeprol? find a freind in korea, or another country perhaps...cause I looked for online sources for this material and didnt come up with anything with a shopping cart.

OD is a concern, but looks like the standard dose is around 50 milligrams.

clinton

12-02-2006, 10:07 PM

poppy seeds, keep them around the house, use them as a last resort....they work for wds......

greenfox

12-02-2006, 11:05 PM

chemboy7

12-02-2006, 11:57 PM

If it's legal it's bullshit.

No offense (if you take offense to this then I get to slap you with my LONG LOW GREEN FOXY TAIL!) but..! If it's legal, chances are....ITS CRAP!

OK, I won't take offense to that so you can spare me your green wrath... and don't take offense to this, but if you honestly believe that just because a substance isn't schedualed that it's "bullshit", or "crap", than your just ignorant. There are many, many substances that are great as recreational drugs that fall under the radar. Drugs become illegal when they start to become popular and alot of people start abusing it and a few assholes OD, it makes the press, and suddenly it's a national epidemic. I am not going to go into what drugs that I know of that are 100% legal, easily obtainable, and very enjoyable because I don't want to fuck a good thing (and no, I'm not talking about RCs) but I will use past experiences to prove my point. Before LSD was illegal people would order it straight from Sandoz, saturate blotters, and make shit loads of money... also what lead to it's schedualing, got too popular. Next example, early 80's MDMA was completely legal, and was being used for quite some time by an underground crowd, but then hit the club scene in Texas, quickly spread acrossed the nation, and was placed under emergency schedualing. Don't think that just because a drug can't be looked up in the DEA's most wanted list that it isn't worth merit... that in itself, is BULLSHIT.

As for the drug in question, I've never heard of it but it doesn't sound like too pleasant of a substance... something to look into anyways.

Paregoric Kid

12-03-2006, 02:02 AM

there are chemical suppliers overseas that sell this.

jacky

12-03-2006, 01:47 PM

I dont want to say anything other than if someone thinks that the 99.99999% of plants out there that are not controlled must have shitty potential as psychoactives then this person is in the DARK.

or maybe it was meant more as a catch all phrase made in jest.

either way nick, spend a good 50$for the "encyclopedia of psychoactive plants" by Ratsch and you might find something that doesnt suck too bad.

also, the supreme court case against the UDV importation of ayahuasca fell flat on its face....the DEA even gave up a portion of the way through the appeals process, so now DMT/ayahuasca in its classic form at least can be considered a legal import if you are using it for ceremony.
This means that say you are buddhist, and you import ayahuasca, and the DEA busts you, or customs siezes the product, you can make an appeal to the courts that you are using for religious purposes. I highly doubt the DEA is going to go through the process once again to embarrass themselves this way. too much media exposure and people will realize that they might have the right as a practitioners of the plant arts and as observers of many faiths to consume, produce many natural plant materials.
so that is one legal plant material that doesnt suck too bad also...

I am interested in this zipeprol, but dont know if I would go for trying to obtain any...my last incident with dxm being used just for opioid tolerance control was real shitty, with very minimal payback. my days with anti-tussive cough syrups may be over.

possibly considered a related subject, I recently consumed 50 milligrams of 98% pure glaucine hydrobromide....a natural/semi sythetic compound that has anti-tussive qualities. this compound originates from a particular poppy species known for medicinal value.
the compound has been researched for opioid withdrawl use, and shows some interest there, and the compound also has sedative and other seeming psychoactive effects. I caught a little buzz of this stuff, and possibly some opioid potentiation. I am not aware of specific pharmacology, nor aware if this is an nmda antagonist. I do know that at 50 milligrams a dose, the effect I felt might be interestingly increased with futher consumption.
I experienced very strong hypnacognic imagery when sitting in the dark watching tv on this stuff. in the periphery of my vision colors and designs danced a little, and It seemed that I was more content than usual.

nick

12-03-2006, 05:59 PM

yes,many apologies to Chem and Jacky.You're both right.my only excuse for my last post in this thread is I was very drunk.I'm off to stand in the corner and model my very fetching dunces cap. Later guys.

tptptp

12-03-2006, 09:19 PM

No offense (if you take offense to this then I get to slap you with my LONG LOW GREEN FOXY TAIL!) but..! If it's legal, chances are....ITS CRAP!

Go eat a nice amount of Datura and come back and tell me that, theres tons of stuff out there legal that will f you up royally. Datura can make people trip for days on end and is completely legal.

Papa Verine

12-03-2006, 10:22 PM

Go eat a nice amount of Datura and come back and tell me that, theres tons of stuff out there legal that will f you up royally. Datura can make people trip for days on end and is completely legal.

STOP RIGHT THERE!!!
DON'T GO DO ANYTHING WITH ANY DATURA!!! I KNOW IT'S LEGAL AND IT'S ALSO FREE AROUND HERE BECAUSE IT GROWS EVERYWHERE HERE. (DATURA STRAMONIUM) I DID IT AND YOU DON'T WANT TO. IT'S VERY DANGEROUS. AN OVERDOSE ON TROPANE ALKALOIDS IS NOBODY'S IDEA OF A GOOD TIME. TRUST ME...PLEASE!!!!!

I HAD TO CHIME IN!

OxyContinuously

12-04-2006, 09:04 AM

The Korean cough syrup sounds interesting, the Datura (like Papa Ver said) is a total nightmare. I wouldn't even f*** with that in any way. That plant and all its relatives (belladonna etc) are bad news.

Hammilton

12-04-2006, 12:30 PM

Seems that every instance of seizures occurs when people take massive doses. I think this is something along the lines of Tramadol. Even has the same "ol" on the end heh.

I like to think that people wouldn't abuse the stuff if they didn't enjoy it. And it seems people enjoy it over there. S. Korea's native population (excluding our soldiers' kids) has their own Zipeprol problem, that seems to be quite large.

It'd probably be worth buying some and trying it out a couple times, and to keep a kilo on hand in case you ever can't get dope. If it worked in primates, it should work in us. I mean, they're a lot closer to us than mice are.

Hoss

12-04-2006, 01:00 PM

Reading at numerous Google-searched pages that there are a lot of cases in Korea of same time dosing of Zipeprol and DXM; wonder how the moon would talk to ya after that cocktail, eh?

jacky

12-05-2006, 01:12 PM

the problem ordering compounds from chinese and overseas bulk chemical companies, is that most times they will only consider 10-100 kilo amount orders.

10 gram amounts are sometimes sent out as samples,but you really need a company letterhead/website for them to consider it. and then it is sometimes just ignored.

I tried to buy a little pure matrine, and instead they sent me 10 grams as a sample. then they inquired what amounts I might be interested in, and when I said 1 kilo, they said it wasnt worth their time.

same thing with buying most herbs from africa from wholesale botanical suppliers. they will ship a kilo as a sample...but anything under 100 kilos is considered a personal favor, and I have worn out my personal favors it seems with a few suppliers. even orders for 10 kilos has been turned down or ignored.

maybe just maybe I might get this stuff sent as a sample...but I would rather just get some OTC product that can get shipped without maybe as much attention as 10 grams of pure powder with all the paperwork that is entailed.

tptptp

12-06-2006, 06:33 PM

STOP RIGHT THERE!!!
DON'T GO DO ANYTHING WITH ANY DATURA!!! I KNOW IT'S LEGAL AND IT'S ALSO FREE AROUND HERE BECAUSE IT GROWS EVERYWHERE HERE. (DATURA STRAMONIUM) I DID IT AND YOU DON'T WANT TO. IT'S VERY DANGEROUS. AN OVERDOSE ON TROPANE ALKALOIDS IS NOBODY'S IDEA OF A GOOD TIME. TRUST ME...PLEASE!!!!!

I HAD TO CHIME IN!

I know, that was just my response to people saying chances are if its legal its crap, I hate ignorance - just because its legal doesn't mean its crap NEWSFLASH EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LEGAL BEFORE IT CAN BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT HAS TO EXIST BEFORE IT CAN BE OUTLAWED. That would be like saying that when heroin first came out that its crap cuz its legal, its just stupid to blanket statement something. My brother took some of this once and tripped very hard. It's potentcy varies greatly and is easy to OD on. I also read of someone eating some cooking with this stuff in it unkowingly and ended up in the psych ward because they LOST THEIR FUCKING MIND and it lasted for days, now that has got to be traumatic and scary as hell. Tripping super hard for days and not purposely intending to, they probably thought they were going crazy.

SpecialGuy69

12-06-2006, 06:49 PM

NEWSFLASH EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LEGAL BEFORE IT CAN BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT HAS TO EXIST BEFORE IT CAN BE OUTLAWED. quote from the DEA's handbook for scheduling drugs.

superman

12-06-2006, 07:44 PM

Papa Verine

12-06-2006, 07:58 PM

jacky

12-07-2006, 01:31 AM

one of the reasons I started this site was so people who are using heroin might realize that there are alot more tools out there than alot of people know about that might help them kick or ween or whatever. its catch 22, keep the info for oneself seems hardly plausible to me, unless you all want to just start a zine thing like the entheogen review did.

but for me to actually do something like that, I would need AT LEAST 5000 monthly/bi monthly subscribers, another 5,000 issues sold from record stores/headshops etc. I would need to charge 6$ an issue, and that would mean I would always be busy. those numbers are why the entheogen review almost threw in the towel. too much work and too little money. you have to edit posts, and the speed of communication is some 24x30x slower than using an internet forum

I am all for hiding some of our information in member only, donation only sectors...but I really really doubt that us discussing OTC drugs that exist in other countries, and are almost unheard of here is really going to influence much. me and billi posted shit about poppy seeds ALL OVER the place 5 years ago, and alot of people used that info to their advantage, and I havnt seen ONE inflammitory news article about the fact, or any movement from the DEA to put a stop to it. I have only seed one san pedro bust of a commercial business in the last 20 years, and that incident didnt end up with any charges being filed.......the DEA even took one schedule one psychedelic off the list a few years ago.
DMT/ayahuasca has been legalized for ceremonial use by the supreme court, and so much more positive stuff is happening.

there is some stuff that I keep secret. but it is not because I dont want anyone else to find out about it, it is because I havnt finished researching it yet. I think the DEA is doomed, that the 1200 or so known psychoactive plants list will keep growing and growing, and there is no way that they will be able to illegalize them all. we just found a new iboga species, that isnt listed as a controlled plant, so that means that soon, people will be able to grow this plant in the USA, and that means that some enteprising individuals might someday benefit from that. alternate coca species also exist, and who know what else will be brought to light.

I think the more information the better, fools will missuse and bumble their way through the psychoactive plant list, but many people will use the information like herbalists, and have a fine time enjoying their freedoms.

my instincts are to lay low, and defend my rights when and where I feel I can, and should.

I am not really intent on trying this material zipeprol, but wouldnt mind having a few samples. now all we need is some good 1st hand experience reports.

tptptp

12-07-2006, 05:21 PM

http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&lr=&client=opera&rls=en&hs=XCn&q=Zipeprol+buy&btnG=Search

OK guys, I have to raise this conern. If every good thing we come across is instantly visible on google, then we're ruining it for everyone.

Seriously guys, why fuck shit up for everyone not just on this forum, but world-wide as well?????

maybe I am insane, but i think that what we're doing is even more insane. and as much as i hate to say it, but finding this thread within seconds of noticing it here on the forum has been enough encouragement for me to not post anything like this here again until the forum is no longer so public.

I agree, even the DEA's article quoted an online website or forum in their article about kratom, that people were using it to get high. We are doing all the legwork for them, anyone who finds something good and shares it publicly...then the DEA catches wind and outlaws it. A catch 22, I guess.

HistoryofMadness

12-07-2006, 10:08 PM

I know, that was just my response to people saying chances are if its legal its crap, I hate ignorance - just because its legal doesn't mean its crap NEWSFLASH EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LEGAL BEFORE IT CAN BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT HAS TO EXIST BEFORE IT CAN BE OUTLAWED. That would be like saying that when heroin first came out that its crap cuz its legal, its just stupid to blanket statement something. My brother took some of this once and tripped very hard. It's potentcy varies greatly and is easy to OD on. I also read of someone eating some cooking with this stuff in it unkowingly and ended up in the psych ward because they LOST THEIR FUCKING MIND and it lasted for days, now that has got to be traumatic and scary as hell. Tripping super hard for days and not purposely intending to, they probably thought they were going crazy.

sorry man not only is this poor logic, its false... the gov outlaws types and classes and derivatives and things that have certain effects ALL THE TIME...

there is a whole world of legal language out there that automatically schedules future drugs

feds don't want to have to legislate every drug into illegality, one at a time, so congress has passed that legislative power over to the executive agencies that administer and enforce the laws... namely the DEA and the FDA

so yes, a drug can be illegal as soon as it is created, even if it has never been mentioned by the DEA... ever heard of khat? study the evolution of its use and subsequent clamp down by the DEA for a real-life example...

and I'll be glad to break this down for you but a fair warning - it gets extremely technical, and at a point forward it is all in legalese so you may need a translator and a couple of law classes

tptptp

12-08-2006, 09:37 PM

sorry man not only is this poor logic, its false... the gov outlaws types and classes and derivatives and things that have certain effects ALL THE TIME...

there is a whole world of legal language out there that automatically schedules future drugs

feds don't want to have to legislate every drug into illegality, one at a time, so congress has passed that legislative power over to the executive agencies that administer and enforce the laws... namely the DEA and the FDA

so yes, a drug can be illegal as soon as it is created, even if it has never been mentioned by the DEA... ever heard of khat? study the evolution of its use and subsequent clamp down by the DEA for a real-life example...

and I'll be glad to break this down for you but a fair warning - it gets extremely technical, and at a point forward it is all in legalese so you may need a translator and a couple of law classes

Something still has to EXIST before it can be illegal, if it doesnt EXIST it cant be illegal....I never said it had to be MENTIONED i just said it has to EXIST. Re-read my post. This is a really trivial anal technicality you were trying to catch me on anyways, I mean c'mon. Now yes something can have properties that make it illegal as soon as it is created, but if it doesnt EXIST it cant yet be illegal. Because existing by definition is "to have actual being; be", to have life or animation; live.

chemboy7

12-08-2006, 10:03 PM

tptptp

12-08-2006, 10:38 PM

Something can be illegal without ever having been synthesized, that's where the analoge act comes in. If it is similiar enough chemically (atleast in the legalese that they use) to an illegal substance it is a crime to synth or possess it, whether it is an unknown compound or not.

So you're admitting it exists?

AWOL

12-08-2006, 10:43 PM

the supreme court case against the UDV importation of ayahuasca fell flat on its face....the DEA even gave up a portion of the way through the appeals process, so now DMT/ayahuasca in its classic form at least can be considered a legal import if you are using it for ceremony.
This means that say you are buddhist, and you import ayahuasca, and the DEA busts you, or customs siezes the product, you can make an appeal to the courts that you are using for religious purposes.

I always thought Buddhist was the way to go. I've smoked DMT before, the elves were frekin crazy. Now to become a buddhist, off I go ...

Also to add. DPT is not a controlled substance (nor an analog), and having IV'd it once I'll attest that there are many a substance that are not controlled that will make you cry like a little girl if you're not carefull.

chemboy7

12-08-2006, 11:39 PM

So you're admitting it exists?

What are you talking about? No. I guess the only way that I am going to get my point acrossed to you is to speak hypothetically.

OK, say a chemist thinks up and creates compound X (I am using X as a variable, not a synonym for MDMA). Compound X has never been recorded in literature and as far as the chemist knows it is the first time it has ever been created. Let's say no one has even thought about the possibility of compound X. Compound X, according to the analoge act, is chemically similiar enough to lets say Amphetamine, thus it is illegal. The wording of the analoge act covers not only what is but what could be; but there is absolutely no way that they could revise it to where all recreational drugs are illegal.

tptptp

12-09-2006, 09:17 AM

What are you talking about? No. I guess the only way that I am going to get my point acrossed to you is to speak hypothetically.

OK, say a chemist thinks up and creates compound X (I am using X as a variable, not a synonym for MDMA). Compound X has never been recorded in literature and as far as the chemist knows it is the first time it has ever been created. Let's say no one has even thought about the possibility of compound X. Compound X, according to the analoge act, is chemically similiar enough to lets say Amphetamine, thus it is illegal. The wording of the analoge act covers not only what is but what could be; but there is absolutely no way that they could revise it to where all recreational drugs are illegal.

I get what you guys are saying but you are being so technical that I was too. What I said was taken out of context to begin with I can only see why if it was to measure wangs. I was talking about someone saying that something is crap because its legal. At points in history, like when H was first made, it was legal. So you are saying that nothing great, wonderful, and fun will ever be made that isnt already classified, or hell I take that back it doesnt have to be that great and wonderful...can no other class of drugs ever be formed or drugs found that arent blanketed to be illegal?

Alot of what I was trying to say is that throughout history EVERYTHING was legal at some point.

A future drug in theory might be illegal but unless you've made it already and it EXISTS you cant get in trouble for it because its not there, unless of course it can be proved you're conspiring to.

This is a really pointless conversation though, if anyone wants to debate it they win it will be like discussing politics: No one ever thinks they're wrong.

jacky

12-10-2006, 08:32 PM

whatever you get away with is legal.

I know what the technical schedules mean, the analog law is vauge for a reason...but that doesnt mean that the analog law will always hold up in court.

customs lets tons of asian herbals into the country, a few contain usable amounts of 5meo dmt, ibogaine, there has never been an issue there.

plus, alot of stuff is commonly moved through customs, and if the particular species is not specifically scheduled, then that plant is legal to posses.

tabernanthe elliptica for example contains alkaloids, of which 80% is ibogaine. a jasmine species contains ibogaine in small amounts, it is a chinese medicinal. ephedra herb is not controlled as a plant.....there are a few coca species that are not technically scheduled...a few people grow them within the USA...
the list goes on and on.
hundred of dmt containing species....
even nopalito cactus at the supermarket contains traces of mescaline.and dont forget about the legal to possess san pedro and related cacti.

if coca leaf is teabagged it will get through customs 95% of the time, it is evenly sold openly in some latino neighborhood markets in san diego and LA.

one poppy species, the hens and chicks variety, looks very different from your standard pod-head, also, one plant can have up to 20-30 different pod heads, all fringed with an assortment of mutated crowded smaller pods around them, giving them a very different look to the casual observer than the typical opium poppy.

its a weighing game...weighing your options and the risks you percieve as smaller than the pay off is all you can do.

I know one business that was raided by the dea and fda. the made them stop selling research chems period...but the powers that be didnt even question the other plants, mescaline, dmt, opium containing materials that were allowed to be kept on the companys catalog. even two deaths were associated ultimately with this companys products, but they did no wrong selling them as non consumables.

some supplement companies sell materials that have sceduled compounds within, trace amounts maybe, but still no attempt to legalize the materials is made. they take a risk.

the federal government decided that it is OK for people to consume ayahuasca as a ceremonial sacrament. a certian amount of personal freedom I think will be afforded to those that take the time and mental energy to sanctify their drug use. within ceremony I think most substances will be ignored. even opium and cannabis would be sacred to those who worship SHIVA under this new observation of just what religious freedom means. thank the Clintons partially for the freedom of religion restoration act.

basically if you are casually using substances, you should watch out, but if you have intent, and a strong desire, wrap it up into an act of art, or ceremony, and maybe you will create something bulletproof, the UDV did and prevailed. 5 years before they did, and individual fought a state drug charge in oregon, and the decision was found in his favor, 1 person!! not a church recieved the right to consume ayahuasca religiously in oregon. I doubt the state will prosecute another.

what happens if you import zipeprol for research purposes, probably nothing. anything that causes inebriation has been deemed an illegal act, not an illegal substance. this is why when the DEA a few years ago tried to muscle people to stop selling betel nut material, only white people were targeted to my knowledge, the asian community was completely avoided, the dea doesnt want betel nut use spreading within the white community obviously. a racially charged illegal act, telling someone that something is on the schedule 1 list when it isnt.

its funny, the dea hassled people for nothing really, when loads of poppy pods were coming into the country, they just suggested the flower dealers stop it. they made not a movement to bring the importers and food brokers down. they instead went to Monticello and ripped all the pods out of the garden and seized all the seed stock. they went for a message more than really trying to control industry.

its one big mess. and because of that an industry has prevailed in the last 20-30 years, that for the most part, has been successful. a few companies started this, and now it has become quite strong in especially the last few years.

I dont think most people have the level of intensity that it would take to really police all the psychoactives out there. it takes alot of learning, reading,and common sense to know what it really going on, and I think it is beyond most law makers and such to come up with something that really would put a stop to all this.
they would have to limit industry more for one....that is "our" biggest "protection" in my opinion.
and if they allow industrys like tobacco and alchohol they have a harder time policing other materials, people just dont give a flying fuck, they will gladly spend a few months in jail for their habits.
I know I have, and will.

one state took Richard Evans Schultes older books on possible and known hallucinogens, and illegalized everything in it. big move, but they also allow for the materials to be grown, just not distributed as dried prepared material.
In my opinion, this will just spur more growing of the materials, and possibly create far larger amounts of biomass avialable than if people were just still growing.
alot of the plant species listed are not really being persued by the entheogen/ethnobotanical community, some have been found to be more medicinal than hallucinogenic. so really the law is bunk in alot of areas, if something is not technically a hallucinogen, then how can you enforce laws that state that it is?
bungled law making here folks, which will most likely encourage furthering of peoples sidestepping, rebellious nature. salvia divinorum will be sold as a houseplant there, instead of people buying a gram of salvia, they will guarantee that these people become producers of the same plant they seek to controll.

I think the bigger worry for people should be your local police, and what happens if your house gets raided for something like a noise complaint, and then they notice different suspicious items laying around, most of the incidences that I have heard of involving scheduled plant materials other than cannabis were such incidences.

I would look to states that have legalized medical cannabis as states that might not have alot of energy and reason to control other plants. especially plants that are used as spices and dietary supplements.

HistoryofMadness

12-10-2006, 09:45 PM

Something still has to EXIST before it can be illegal, if it doesnt EXIST it cant be illegal....I never said it had to be MENTIONED i just said it has to EXIST. Re-read my post. This is a really trivial anal technicality you were trying to catch me on anyways, I mean c'mon. Now yes something can have properties that make it illegal as soon as it is created, but if it doesnt EXIST it cant yet be illegal. Because existing by definition is "to have actual being; be", to have life or animation; live.

uhh... me being technical? I was simply making the point that your statement was incorrect.

the first point I made was that your logic was bad... you said:

NEWSFLASH EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LEGAL BEFORE IT CAN BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT HAS TO EXIST BEFORE IT CAN BE OUTLAWED.

(your caps)

Now, where your logic fell apart was at "because"... your point - that everything has to be legal before it is illegal, and is not even close to being proved by your reasoning - because it has to exist to be outlawed

but I'm not trying to "catch" you I'm just making a point that many people, including you, do not know, but might be interested in...

when people exchange information its always a good thing to correct information and challenge bad ideas as needed... nothing personal, ok?

zombiewoof23

12-10-2006, 10:23 PM

I get what you guys are saying but you are being so technical that I was too. What I said was taken out of context to begin with I can only see why if it was to measure wangs. I was talking about someone saying that something is crap because its legal. At points in history, like when H was first made, it was legal. So you are saying that nothing great, wonderful, and fun will ever be made that isnt already classified, or hell I take that back it doesnt have to be that great and wonderful...can no other class of drugs ever be formed or drugs found that arent blanketed to be illegal?

Alot of what I was trying to say is that throughout history EVERYTHING was legal at some point.

A future drug in theory might be illegal but unless you've made it already and it EXISTS you cant get in trouble for it because its not there, unless of course it can be proved you're conspiring to.

This is a really pointless conversation though, if anyone wants to debate it they win it will be like discussing politics: No one ever thinks they're wrong.

Chem is absolutely correct on this. The act was purposely written loosely and could easily cover things that have not been created yet. There is definitely no debate here.

The US Federal Analogue Act has 3 parts:

'chemical substantially similar'
AND EITHER

effects similar to substance in Schedule I or II OR
someone represents it as having the effect of a controlled substance
http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/law/analog/analog_info1.shtml

tptptp

12-10-2006, 10:29 PM

uhh... me being technical? I was simply making the point that your statement was incorrect.

the first point I made was that your logic was bad... you said:

(your caps)

Now, where your logic fell apart was at "because"... your point - that everything has to be legal before it is illegal, and is not even close to being proved by your reasoning - because it has to exist to be outlawed

but I'm not trying to "catch" you I'm just making a point that many people, including you, do not know, but might be interested in...

when people exchange information its always a good thing to correct information and challenge bad ideas as needed... nothing personal, ok?

It's cool, I did word it poorly, but I think its still valid......Heroin was legal before it was illegal, kratom is legal now and will probably be illegal sooner or later, MANY good things were legal before they were illegal. I mean you're saying that the DEA schedule covers things that are similar to other drugs tyhat makes them illegal instantly....but it cant be that powerful of an enforcement, for example kratom acts on opiate receptors (and I've personally gotten REALLY high off that a couple times, its just a weird drug that doesnt always seem to create the same effect)...theres quite a bit of things that have similar effects of opiates/hallucinogens etc. that are completely legal. Another example would be salvia. Unless a drug is very similar to one that is already outlawed It doesnt seem as though its instantly illegal. So I will say MOST drugs have to exist before they can be made illegal. At least natural drugs that aren't created in labs....

tptptp

12-10-2006, 10:31 PM

Chem is absolutely correct on this. The act was purposely written loosely and could easily cover things that have not been created yet. There is definitely no debate here.

The US Federal Analogue Act has 3 parts:

'chemical substantially similar'
AND EITHER

effects similar to substance in Schedule I or II OR
someone represents it as having the effect of a controlled substance
http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/law/analog/analog_info1.shtml

If theres no debate how about kratom that acts on opiate receptors (which isnt illegal)? I could go on. Its represented frequently as having the effect of a controlled substance but I have yet to hear of anyone being arrested for it, and the DEA even says its not illegal on their website and they themselves say it acts as a painkiller and is "opiate-like"

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/dr...ern/kratom.htm (http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugs_concern/kratom.htm)

jacky

12-10-2006, 11:08 PM

yeah, under the analog act even coffee would end up being scrutinized if it werent for common sense prevailing in some situations.

a guy gets busted with GHB, but his lawyer knows the analog law can be exposed as being too vauge. so the lawyer buys a steak, and has it tested for ghb. the test is positive, and the judge tells the defendant he is one lucky mother, and to keep his shit clean. now they find ghb in wine, and maybe other prepared products.

is the federal government going to create a cut-off % for all illegal substances and the analog materials that might represent illegal substances. highly highly doubt it.
poppies seeds and milk would be illegal due to morphine content.
bread and milk products further scrutinized for opioid like precursors.
nopalito cactus for mescaline....
various dietary supplements....
wine, and other ghb containing materials....
. if you create a legalized content, then people might be able to manipulate the system easier. right now, you could spray opium on poppy seeds, and if it wasnt too much, pretty much legally use poppy seeds to smuggle opium into whatever country. what is the allowed % of opium on poppy seeds? there is none...get caught in the act, that is one thing, but get caught with the seeds, that is legal.

the analog act is a catch all blanket, that doesnt get respect in every court that sees these type of cases.

the dea declares a schedule 1 compound illegal with no accepted medical use, but in some cases, like cannabis and ibogaine, when they made thc and ibogaine schedule 1, the compounds were already being used by the medical establishment. there was an ibogaine containing tonic for older people avialable in the US when they illegalized the material anyway. its a jumbled mess....
the more they push, the bigger the muck pit gets.
someday more and more scientists will point out these contradictions, with cannabis this is well documented. how can you bring a schedule 1 charge up against someone, when it is actually a schedule 2 or three materials?

perhaps betel nut, that contains a dopamine active compound, that can be used as a starting material for cocaine synthesis, can be considered an analog, due to the very nature of it stimulant action, or perhaps cause it is a precursor. but I doubt the dea will move against this material, as tobacco would be just as applicable here.
if they push too much the protective shell that surrounds tobacco a dopamine stimulant more potent than cocaine ,and alcohol, a gaba agonist with qualities similar to GHB (alcohol a ghb "analog", sure, in action, but not structural) will eventually be broken as far as public perception is concerned.

so while I consider the analog act very real, I dont consider it scientific valid, and the future, I believe, belongs to scientific validity, and moderation.

imagine if the black market was suddenly "responsible" for the distribution of all materials deemed covered by the analog act, the federal governments would hand over a bulk of the worlds spice trade to criminals.
coffee is the worlds second largest commodity, if I make a snortable caffeine spray, and market it as a cocaine supplement, as some people have, among other additives, I really doubt it will endanger coffees reputation as a safe drug. not that coffee is that safe, but relatively speaking.

so that analog act really can apply to things like research chems I think, but doesnt have alot of weight with other materials.

a person active in psychoactive research and sales of ethnobotanicals told me a few years ago that the DEA doesnt really have time and money to test materials that are not purified. they dont want to get involved with costly scientific analytical research. they want research chems and such, but dont really have alot of interest in the plant materials till they are extracted into a purer form.
meaning that you should leave your MHRB in its natural state, and if you extract the DMT...SMOKE IT QUICK.
He feels solid enough on this statement to run a business. he has already been raided once, and has all of his equipment and materials returned. they returned plenty of plant materials that contain schedule 1 materials.

it is good to be paranoid...and this is just jackys slippery opinion at work here, probably based on some innaccuracies.
I havent ever had a felony conviction, and very few drug charges except for cannabis. so I have a little room to play with I feel when it comes to relatively unknown plant materials and future convictions that might arise in my life time.
I will claim ceremonial use. creative expression, and my belief systems as intent.

some people think you have to have licenses to buy alot of research materials, but that isnt true, there is very little control in the world of phyto-research. it is wide open, and the GOLDEN AGE is upon us in the sense that many of the worlds offerings are being presented in a way that has never been as convenient to the researcher.

zombiewoof23

12-10-2006, 11:09 PM

If theres no debate how about kratom that acts on opiate receptors (which isnt illegal)? I could go on. Its represented frequently as having the effect of a controlled substance but I have yet to hear of anyone being arrested for it, and the DEA even says its not illegal on their website and they themselves say it acts as a painkiller and is "opiate-like"

Read the link I posted to get a better understanding of what is being said here. Also take note of one of the DEA's main targets opinion on the subject at the end of the page on that link.

Kratom is usually not sold or marketed for human consumption on most sites. I would also assume that the molecular structure is not similar to the scheduled drugs that you are referring to. If Kratom were marketed and distributed with the intent of intoxicating people, then I think you would see some action eventually taken. Once again, this Act was written vaguely for a reason and that reason is not to protect your rights.

This act was designed to go for the root of the "problem," which would be chemists who can change the molecular structure of an existing Scheduled drug or create something totally new for similar end results. As of right now Kratom has not been the focus of the DEA's efforts. It's fairly obvious who the target is on this particular act. There are several examples of vendors who have been popped for selling RC's that are not yet scheduled. http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/research_chems/research_chems_info1.shtml

The explicit intention of Congress when they created the law was to be able to allow the DEA to arrest and prosecute underground chemists who make minor changes to an existing illegal chemical, resulting in a new chemical which can be sold as a recreational drug but which is not specifically listed as illegal. Because the law is written so broadly and vaguely, however, it is considered by experts in the field of psychoactive chemistry to be one of the most oppressive laws ever written, making the very creation of a new, unknown and untested chemical, illegal.

tptptp

12-10-2006, 11:15 PM

Read the link I posted to get a better understanding of what is being said here. Also take note of one of the DEA's main targets opinion on the subject at the end of the page on that link.

Kratom is usually not sold or marketed for human consumption on most sites. I would also assume that the molecular structure is not similar to the scheduled drugs that you are referring to. If Kratom were marketed and distributed with the intent of intoxicating people, then I think you would see some action eventually taken. Once again, this Act was written vaguely for a reason and that reason is not to protect your rights.

This act was designed to go for the root of the "problem," which would be chemists who can change the molecular structure of an existing Scheduled drug or create something totally new for similar end results. As of right now Kratom has not been the focus of the DEA's efforts. It's fairly obvious who the target is on this particular act. There are several examples of vendors who have been popped for selling RC's that are not yet scheduled. http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/research_chems/research_chems_info1.shtml

The explicit intention of Congress when they created the law was to be able to allow the DEA to arrest and prosecute underground chemists who make minor changes to an existing illegal chemical, resulting in a new chemical which can be sold as a recreational drug but which is not specifically listed as illegal. Because the law is written so broadly and vaguely, however, it is considered by experts in the field of psychoactive chemistry to be one of the most oppressive laws ever written, making the very creation of a new, unknown and untested chemical, illegal.

I get what you're saying, but I'm saying its not enforced very well or not holding up in court as jacky said. There are some sites selling it with advertisements of consumption and opiate like buzz. If you read the link the DEA's own report on kratom says it is a painkiller that is "OPIATE-LIKE" and it is not illegal. It also acts on opiate receptors. If the blanket statement doesnt cover that, than how effective can it be?

HistoryofMadness

12-11-2006, 01:50 PM

It's cool, I did word it poorly, but I think its still valid......Heroin was legal before it was illegal, kratom is legal now and will probably be illegal sooner or later, MANY good things were legal before they were illegal. I mean you're saying that the DEA schedule covers things that are similar to other drugs tyhat makes them illegal instantly....but it cant be that powerful of an enforcement, for example kratom acts on opiate receptors (and I've personally gotten REALLY high off that a couple times, its just a weird drug that doesnt always seem to create the same effect)...theres quite a bit of things that have similar effects of opiates/hallucinogens etc. that are completely legal. Another example would be salvia. Unless a drug is very similar to one that is already outlawed It doesnt seem as though its instantly illegal. So I will say MOST drugs have to exist before they can be made illegal. At least natural drugs that aren't created in labs....

Got it... just something I learned in law class that I thought I'd share

tptptp

12-11-2006, 04:32 PM

Got it... just something I learned in law class that I thought I'd share

You in law school? I'm thinking of going to law school after i get my bachelors, just quit my job and am going back to college, feel like a bum going at my age though.....not TOO old but yeah....still in the damn paperwork process and will probably miss signing up this semester, but gonna try to knock a bachelors out in 2 years or less goin year round and some independ. study, I dropped out the first time around to take up a career type job that I ended up hating

stvip

12-11-2006, 04:48 PM

tptptp

12-11-2006, 05:02 PM

HistoryofMadness

12-11-2006, 05:53 PM

Kratom does not have a molecular structure similar to any scheduled opiate. Hence it is not an analogue, even if it does have similiar effects to scheduled substances and is also sometimes marketed as such.

It will be explicitly outlawed however, if purified alkaloids and strong extracts will continue to be sold. That is, if we, the buyer community, allow them to continue to be sold.

or we could just encourage the community to use responsibly and not to mix with drugs that are known to increase the likelihood of ODs for standard opies.

You in law school? I'm thinking of going to law school after i get my bachelors, just quit my job and am going back to college, feel like a bum going at my age though.....not TOO old but yeah....still in the damn paperwork process and will probably miss signing up this semester, but gonna try to knock a bachelors out in 2 years or less goin year round and some independ. study, I dropped out the first time around to take up a career type job that I ended up hating

not yet... getting more time in the real world and making 'friends' so I can do better when I get out... not in a huge hurry, but time is getting shorter

superman

12-11-2006, 10:14 PM

HistoryofMadness

12-12-2006, 01:38 AM

can anybody comment on whether 100 grams of 15x kratom for $260 is a deal?

could 1g of 15x per day be comparable to 30mg oxycodone/day?

I can't decide what to grab as a backup stash, this or 20 grams of tramadol for $8.50 a gram.....

I would say no and no...

I would also say I recommend that you get the straight leaf kratom, seems to be the better deal to me... unless you go for the 99% pure extract...

And the second one I KNOW is no... you're probably going to need to taper down a little before kratom will do a lot... to take enough kratom alone to reach the eq. of 30mg oxy will make you sick... but you CAN use kratom to bring your tolerance down, then switch over

fuck tramadol

superman

12-12-2006, 02:37 AM

I would say no and no...

I would also say I recommend that you get the straight leaf kratom, seems to be the better deal to me... unless you go for the 99% pure extract...

And the second one I KNOW is no... you're probably going to need to taper down a little before kratom will do a lot... to take enough kratom alone to reach the eq. of 30mg oxy will make you sick... but you CAN use kratom to bring your tolerance down, then switch over

fuck tramadol

from the same site 1kg of leaf is going for $250, would you also consider that expensive?
100g 15x for $260 seemed like the best i could find after some serious searching. I came to this conlusion by assuming that 15x100g would be equal to 1.5 kilograms.

SobrietyBinge

12-12-2006, 03:29 AM

Jacky your discussion of the Analog Act is really interesting. It's nice to see these boundaries broken down with some sensible logic. Too bad logic doesn't seem to make the world go round.

HistoryofMadness

12-12-2006, 05:47 PM

from the same site 1kg of leaf is going for $250, would you also consider that expensive?
100g 15x for $260 seemed like the best i could find after some serious searching. I came to this conlusion by assuming that 15x100g would be equal to 1.5 kilograms.

well in my experience (and from what I've heard, in a lot of people's experience) the 15x kratom isn't exactly accurate.. the name comes from the way its processed, not the impact it has... now dont' get me wrong, it IS stronger than the leaf, but not THAT much...

I'd just go with the kilo.. I don't know about that one, but you should start a thread on the prices of kratom (volume) in the kratom section because I know there are at least a few people here that buy keys and would know

tptptp

12-12-2006, 08:02 PM

from the same site 1kg of leaf is going for $250, would you also consider that expensive?
100g 15x for $260 seemed like the best i could find after some serious searching. I came to this conlusion by assuming that 15x100g would be equal to 1.5 kilograms.

If you buy ANYTHING except the commercial leaf you may as well throw your money in the trash, it just doesnt compare, doses that would get me really high from straight leaf tea in extract form have only kept me from getting sick.....so yeah, read my threads/comments in the kratom section...

The extracts S-U-C-K

$250 is about right for a kilo, but I sure as hell wouldnt buy a kil from a source without trying them first, theres alot of fake/weak shit around.

applesauce

12-17-2006, 11:15 AM

I know, that was just my response to people saying chances are if its legal its crap, I hate ignorance - just because its legal doesn't mean its crap NEWSFLASH EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LEGAL BEFORE IT CAN BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT HAS TO EXIST BEFORE IT CAN BE OUTLAWED. That would be like saying that when heroin first came out that its crap cuz its legal, its just stupid to blanket statement something.

Actually that is sort of how it happened. Since the Analog Drug Act, any chemicals related to currently controlled compounds that are used as drugs are illegal. So if heroin had been invented after the Analog Drug Act, it would have been illegal to use it as a drug because it is chemically related to morphine.

That's why it is illegal to cook up new types of fentanyl (as has been done) and sell them for consumption.

Most RCs are illegal to use as drugs.

RC's can be sold for horticulture, or as bug repellent or as ink remover, but not as drugs.

I understand and agree with what you are saying, I just wanted to say that if zipeprol is related to a controlled drug, it might *already* be illegal, at least as a drug. Without any new law being written to outlaw it specifically. You may not get popped for having it, or even for buying it, but if it is bought or sold as a medical or recreational compound, it might get someone into trouble.

Again, I am agreeing with you, I just felt like this was a good place to interject this thought into this thread.

tptptp

12-17-2006, 11:24 AM

Yea, I was just saying - shit as good as heroin was once legal. Now okay, NOW anything chemically similar to certain drugs such as heroin may be illegal. But can no good drugs that arent chemically similar to any current ones ever be formulated? Have we really found all classes of drugs that exist? I know its hard to fathom. Think of this - Kratom isnt "chemically similar to opiates" as chemboy says, but it certainly acts just like an opiate, so is it a different class of drug? If not, then the analog act must not be very valid. Meaning many drugs may act in the same way current classes of drugs do but arent chemically similar, therefore making them legal before they can become illegal.

And applesauce thanks for the tact in your posting.

So ok if you make a drug chemically similar to other drugs now its illegal.
My words were taken out of context though. ANYONE can break down any statement using logic, so technically something still has to exist before it can be illegal. If it doesnt exist its not there, thats like saying air is illegal =P Technically technically technically

HistoryofMadness

12-17-2006, 01:53 PM

*The below, written in 2005, seems to agree w/ Tptptp's hypothesis. I just found it interesting....

Excerpt from "Doctor Esctasy" by DRAKE BENNETT

"Once a Shulgin compound develops a reputation, it is almost invariably placed on the Drug Enforcement Agency's list of Schedule I drugs, those deemed to have no accepted medical use and the highest potential for abuse or addiction. It is therefore rather striking that Shulgin is not only still a free man, but also still at work. His own explanation is that, quite simply, ''I'm not doing anything illegal.'' For more than 20 years, until a government crackdown, he had a D.E.A.-issued Schedule I research license. And many of the drugs in his lab weren't illegal because they hadn't existed until he created them."

"He and Ann started work on a book called ''PiHKAL'' (short for ''Phenethylamines I Have Known and Loved,'' after a family of compounds particularly rich in psychoactivity), self-publishing it in 1991. To date, ''PiHKAL'' has sold more than 41,000 copies, a figure nearly unheard-of for a self-published book.

TiHKAL'' (''Tryptamines I Have Known and Loved''), self-published six years later, follows the same model...."

Source: New York Times
Date: 30 January 2005

true and fine, but this isn't exactly a legal ruling or anything.. besides the point isn't that things will either be or not be legal before illegal, the point (at least the one I was making) is that it isn't necessarily going to be legal first if it just came into existence... you know?

it CAN and probably WILL be legal first if it is a new compound, but it MAY not be legal first...

there's a little more going on than the analogue act too.. there's case law as well as some state laws (that other states often defer to) that make certain 'types' of drugs illegal based on other criteria...

I wish I had time and energy to drop the legal info in here... and then it'd be a better discussion...

satori

12-31-2006, 12:34 AM

If it's legal it's bullshit.

Heroin used to be legal.

SuperJunky

01-01-2007, 04:48 AM

I've definatlty heard of cases were variouse gov organizations have tried to prosacute under the analog act simply because it has similair affects. If you get a lawyer and fight it wouldnt hold (or it shouldn't) but if you dont have a lot of money and you get a public defender that wont even talk to you untill its time for trial and then says "take a deal or your fucked" and they get away w/ it once it gets a whole lot easier for them to do it again.

norman$

05-17-2007, 12:12 PM

IN fact these drugs (belladona alkaloids) are amongst the few that cause true hallucinations- like really seeing and believing what is simply not there. It's not a good thing, and it's not a fun thing.
A friend consumed a few belladonna-based pharmaceutical dosages (this was maybe 25 years ago, it was used fairly regularly then for stomach problems and asthma) and was found having a beer and pizza party with absolutely no-one in a model unit of a new subdivision- but talking, dancing and joking with a bunch of non-existent people.

He did not recommend the stuff.

Oh... and it can kill you, or just knock you into a coma for several days at the same dose as might have mind-altering effects.

There's a reason it's legal.

Nominally,
Norman$

Chipper

05-17-2007, 07:01 PM

Welcome to the forum, Norman$

gauchoamigo

05-17-2007, 07:25 PM

Is it true that it's illegal to grow opium poppies in the USA, or is my mate just kidding me on?
Gaucho

jacky

05-22-2007, 12:25 AM

yeah, the bulk produced 15x extract that came out a few years ago is made in china with equipment used to extract chinese medicinal herbs...
for some reason that particular 15x extract seems more like a 3-5x extract...definitely not as good a deal as the raw leaf when considering price to potency.

200-250 for a kilo of kratom is not too bad.

hussness

07-19-2007, 09:01 PM

I think zipeprol is Schedule III in Canada -- at least according to isomerdesign.com

Hammilton

08-09-2007, 01:48 PM

that's interesting to know.

This thread has been super duper derailed. It's nice to see you hee Hussness, getting my thread back on point. Did I ever respond to your PM? I wasn't able to at first, but am now. I saved the PM now.

Anyway, about the legality of compounds never created- it's not quite as simple as you're all making it.

If I create a new compound that's chemically similar to an illegal compound, say Amphetamine as was used as an example before. We'll continue saying that this compound has never been reported in literature.

Now, based on the Analogue Act's wording, then that compound must be legal. You're the only one who's used it, right? Okay- now how are they going to prosecute you for using this substance? They have to prove that it has ssubstantially similar effects. They can't just say "oh we think it does" that's doesn't meet the burden of proof. They'd have to conduct some extensive studies to prove it first.

I doubt they'd be willing to do that.

still though, I guess that it could be illegal before it's been created, but what it comes down to is a matter of proof. It shouldn't be too hard for any decent lawyer to get the charges dropped.

jacky

08-13-2007, 05:17 PM

last year the dea filed the proper paperwork to get statements from industry that utilize chemicals for production and the pharmaceutical industry on just how much potential for their feilds certian compounds have..
the list contained mostly "shulgin" compounds, meaning that the dea might be interested in furthering the control on analog materials, getting the analogs themselves put into schedule 1 status...

depending on industry use, or potential for future drugs, each compound would have a rating I guess on what the projected use for society is and how much potetial for harm each compound has.

the dea seems very interested in controlling new synthetic compounds, and on the flipside, seem mostly un interested with most organic compounds that are psychoactive.

they(the dea) have even told a chemist that I know that if he is working with illegal compounds, then potency is a consideration for them. meaning that pure compounds, or nearly pure isolates are much cheaper to analyze, and that crude extracts that contain alot of impurities are more expensive to analyze, so extracts of yopo might not attract their attention, but isolated bufotenine would ......

it seems lately that amphetamines demand their attention, as public concern over amphetamines is a priority, so even the khat plant is getting media play and active investigations and busts are taking place...
but morphine/codeine, cocaine, dmt, and other organic compounds found in nature are pretty much being ignored.

at this point kratom does not meet the criteria for illegalization.....on a federal level at least....there might be some state bans of the herb in the near future possibly, but on the federal level I think things are going well.

a freind I know is using kratom instead of narcotics/opiates lately, he is a nurse in training. recently he fucked up and tested positive for oxy's.....
during his detox meetings, his counselor asked him if he used anything to help with opiate cravings. he told them about kratom.
the counselor had actually heard of it, and thought that it was good that he was sharing the information, and that he had found something legal that wouldnt comprimise his job/training.
then the counselor told him that another patient of theirs, and older alcoholic veteran, was using kratom instead of drinking, and that he seemed to be doing great with the supplementation.
both of us were suprised to hear this, especially that the counselors were supportive of such things..

maybe if some good news precedes the medias bullshit kratom can keep a good name.

Hammilton

08-14-2007, 03:50 PM

Yeah, I posted about the DEA move in General earlier this week. Pretty shitty. "Positional Isomers"- as if such a thing exists.

I'm thinking about using Kratom to replace Buprenorphine for me. I'm just worried that if I get into Kratom I'm gonna be out of a good drug to keep myself sober. Well, that should be sober in quotes.

Haven't some states already banned Kratom?

There are so many psychoactive plants that I fail to see the need to go to synthetics except for real special substances like 2C-B, MDMA and (possibly) 4-Hydroxy-Diisopropyltryptamine. I tried that one when Bliss Herbs was still in business and really loved it.

The problem is that there aren't very many opioid-psychoactives found in nature. We're really lucky that we're able to get Kratom into this country.

I really wish that someone would develop a kratom-based pharmaceutical for opioid dependence.

Actually, I'd like to open a business selling a supplement designed for substance abuse.

In the past 3 or 4 months I've been playing with various potentially opio-active substances in combo. So far I like Kratom, Mentha piperita and arvensis, possibly thymol and a few others I have a list of.

MttJocy

08-21-2007, 07:22 AM

Yeah, I posted about the DEA move in General earlier this week. Pretty shitty. "Positional Isomers"- as if such a thing exists.

Sorry to burst your bubble here but positional isomerism is a valid chemical term, it refers to when a functional group changes position on a carbon chain, ie Pentan-2-ol and Pentan-3-ol are positional isomers (see image bellow)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Position_isomer.png/300px-Position_isomer.png
The first compound is Pentan-2-ol the latter one is Pentan-3-ol.

The functional group (in this case an alcohol functional group) is on different carbon atoms, of course a functional group changing position can change the properties of a chemical considerably, in cases where the molecule in question is a drug moving the functional group could make it more/less effective, make it not work at all, have the opposite effect completely, Increase/Decrease/Change the side effect profile or any combination of the above. So while saying positional isomerism does not exist is wrong, using the fact something is a positional isomer of a known drug as grounds to make the substance illegal without doing research on it first is complete nonsense.

OxyContinuously

08-21-2007, 08:51 AM

Sorry to burst your bubble here but positional isomerism is a valid chemical term, it refers to when a functional group changes position on a carbon chain, ie Pentan-2-ol and Pentan-3-ol are positional isomers (see image bellow)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Position_isomer.png/300px-Position_isomer.png
The first compound is Pentan-2-ol the latter one is Pentan-3-ol.

The functional group (in this case an alcohol functional group) is on different carbon atoms, of course a functional group changing position can change the properties of a chemical considerably, in cases where the molecule in question is a drug moving the functional group could make it more/less effective, make it not work at all, have the opposite effect completely, Increase/Decrease/Change the side effect profile or any combination of the above. So while saying positional isomerism does not exist is wrong, using the fact something is a positional isomer of a known drug as grounds to make the substance illegal without doing research on it first is complete nonsense.

Sure, I agree with you, and I do this shit for a living, LOL.. I like the example diagram too. But there seems to be some confusion (not with you, Mtt, w/ other peeps that mis-understood) about positional isomer-ism, so to speak. You are quite right in how u describe it, and bring up a valid, and sometimes overlooked point, just because the molecualr weights. etc. may be the same, that of course in no way means that the compounds are identical in effects or anything. And like u said, moving a group (hydroxy, methyl, whatever the case may be) from one carbon to another (in the case of alcohols for arguement's sake) *completely* changes the original compound as far as what it does, potency, and related.

A good way to remember is to think of "isomer" and just know that isomers of compounds will share the same molecular formula as the original, with the same molecualr weights, etc. but the way the atoms are arranged, as a formula or diagram will be different; in other words in different places, like Mtt points out. Positional isomers can refer to the arrangement of substituents (like the -OH from the above example) OR they can also refer to the bonds being in different places--double or triple bonds, common with carbon atoms, oxygen, and others...

Good post, bro ;-)

later
Oxy

Hammilton

08-21-2007, 11:07 AM

yeah, that's absolutely true, and I understand that. The way they're using the term is technically correct, but based around the framework of the analogue act makes absolutely no sense. The point of the analogue act was to make illegal compounds that were going to be almost identical in effect and action.

The way they want to use the term "positional isomer" is going to illegalize hundreds of substances that have absolutely nothing in common with eachother. I mean, fuck- this would make melatonin illegal. How the fuck can that be?

This really shows the lengths the DEA is willing to go to beat a non-problem. How many people are using R/Cs today? The number has to be below what it was even 5 years ago. They have our asses in the corner, and they want to stomp the fuck out of us.

oh well... what's new, right?

kingdxm

09-27-2007, 06:23 PM

Here is the chemical structures of zipeprol, cyclazocine, and pentazocine
Zipeprol

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:9thEV13CaDuEdM:http://www.isomerdesign.com/Cdsa/S/s3_31.gif (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.isomerdesign.com/Cdsa/S/s3_31.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.isomerdesign.com/Cdsa/schedule.php%3Fschedule%3D3%26section%3DALL&h=130&w=279&sz=2&hl=en&start=1&sig2=AhGFT7ilsUJjudy5O6EFgQ&tbnid=9thEV13CaDuEdM:&tbnh=53&tbnw=114&ei=EDz8Ro_dHafIeJLp8b4C&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dzipeprol%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl% 3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG)
pentazocine

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:KGuBG5UbCac2zM:http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/cheight/pentazocine.GIF (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/cheight/pentazocine.GIF&imgrefurl=http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/cheight/pentazocine.html&h=105&w=183&sz=2&hl=en&start=25&sig2=-INPiPx-mynUI3q4cJgz6w&tbnid=KGuBG5UbCac2zM:&tbnh=59&tbnw=102&ei=Xjz8RuOeIoa2eLSc0K8C&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpentazocine%26start%3D20%26gbv%3D2%26 ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa %3DN)

cyclazocine

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:pgrd4_dgHoSRDM:http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/chfive/cyclazocine.GIF (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/chfive/cyclazocine.GIF&imgrefurl=http://holivo.pharmacy.uiowa.edu/morphine/chfive/cyclazocine.html&h=75&w=122&sz=2&hl=en&start=5&sig2=U9SYQRb9kyF7mjSzeM877w&tbnid=pgrd4_dgHoSRDM:&tbnh=55&tbnw=89&ei=vDz8RsDlMISMeZ7M8bIC&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcyclazocine%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26 hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG)

As you can see pentazocine and cyclazocine are ver similar but zipeprol is different. They are definatly not related chemically.

BTW, the analog act only covers C1 and C2 controlled substances. So if you make an analog of a C3, C4, or C5 it is legal.

Tea Time

09-28-2007, 08:17 AM

[quote=chemboy7;61643]Next example, early 80's MDMA was completely legal, and was being used for quite some time by an underground crowd, but then hit the club scene in Texas, quickly spread acrossed the nation, and was placed under emergency schedualing. Don't think that just because a drug can't be looked up in the DEA's most wanted list that it isn't worth merit... that in itself, is BULLSHIT.[quote]

Also GHB analogs were legal up until about 2001 or so...And don't forget the research chemicals. Those definitely were not crap!

Indy

10-01-2007, 09:08 AM

Just think, all these minds who are brilliantly searching for a legal opioid that's a full agonist, and doing all this chemistry research, etc..... they could all be curing cancer right now if we'd just legalize drugs!

That does it, I've just about had it with this drug prohibition thing, TOMORROW I'M GOING TO LEGALIZE DRUGS!

Tea Time

10-01-2007, 10:38 AM

That does it, I've just about had it with this drug prohibition thing, TOMORROW I'M GOING TO LEGALIZE DRUGS!

So it was your decision to make all along?!?! Well it's about fucking time you decided to legalize drugs!!! What took you so long!!! :D

Hammilton

10-01-2007, 05:36 PM

Well, 90% of RCs are illegal, as they're obviously analogues. Once the DEA clarifies what a positional isomer is, they all will be.

Indy

10-03-2007, 01:26 AM

Uh, bad news guys. Drugs are gonna have to stay illegal i guess. Turns out anybody can't just walk down to the courthouse and repeal laws whenever they want. Seriously, who thought of that shit?

chemboy7

10-03-2007, 04:27 PM

Well, 90% of RCs are illegal, as they're obviously analogues. Once the DEA clarifies what a positional isomer is, they all will be.

Yeah, alot of stuff will be. Bullshit, huh Hammy.

Hammilton

10-19-2007, 05:31 PM

There are so many fucking stimulants out there, I'm amazed there aren't more opioids. I guess it's because the structure isn't as easy to replicate on other backbones, huh?

4-Methyl-aminorex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methyl-aminorex) • Aminorex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aminorex) • Bemegride (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bemegride) • BPAP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%28-%29-1-%28Benzofuran-2-yl%29-2-propylaminopentane) • Clenbuterol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clenbuterol) • Clofenciclan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clofenciclan) • Cyclopentamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclopentamine) • Cypenamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypenamine) • Cyprodenate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprodenate) • Desoxypipradrol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desoxypipradrol) • Diphenyl prolinol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphenyl_prolinol) • Ethylphenidate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylphenidate) • Ethamivan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethamivan) • Fencamfamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fencamfamine) • Fenozolone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fenozolone) • Gilutensin • Hexacyclonate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexacyclonate) • Indanorex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indanorex) • Indatraline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indatraline) • Isometheptene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isometheptene) • Mazindol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazindol) • MDPV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPV) • Mesocarb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesocarb) • Methylphenidate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate) (Dexmethylphenidate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexmethylphenidate)) • Naphthylisopropylamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naphthylisopropylamine) • Nikethamide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikethamide) • Nocaine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocaine) • Nomifensine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomifensine) • Pemoline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pemoline) • Phacetoperane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phacetoperane) • Pipradrol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipradrol) • PPAP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%28-%29-1-phenyl-2-propylaminopentane) • Prolintane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolintane) • Propylhexedrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propylhexedrine) • Pyrovalerone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrovalerone) • Sibutramine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibutramine) • Tuamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuaminoheptane) • Vanoxerine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanoxerine) • Yohimbine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yohimbine) • Zylofuramine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zylofuramine)

The majority of these are legal, and abusable. Well, maybe not the majority, but plenty are, and are good starty points for other recreational stimulants.

What about Tesofensine? It's legal, and being so similar to cocaine, I wonder how abusable it'll be.

oxydose

10-21-2007, 03:38 AM

theres a shitload of opiods too bro...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioids
Opioids Opiate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opiate) derivatives 6-methyldihydromorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=6-methyldihydromorphine&action=edit) • Acetyldihydrocodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetyldihydrocodeine) • Acetyldihydrocodeinone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetyldihydrocodeinone) • Acetylmorphone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetylmorphone) • Benzylmorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzylmorphine) • β-4-morpholinylethylmorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beta-4-morpholinylethylmorphine&action=edit) • Codeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codeine) • Codeine-N-Oxide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Codeine-N-Oxide&action=edit) • Codeinone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codeinone) • Desomorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desomorphine&action=edit) • Diacetyldihydromorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diacetyldihydromorphine) • Dihydrocodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrocodeine) • Dihydrocodeinone enol acetate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrocodeinone_enol_acetate) • Dihydrohydroxycodeinone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrohydroxycodeinone) • Dihydrodesoxymorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dihydrodesoxymorphine&action=edit) • Dihydroheroin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydroheroin) • Dihydroisocodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dihydroisocodeine&action=edit) • Dihydromorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydromorphine) • Dipropanoylmorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipropanoylmorphine) • Ethylmorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylmorphine) • Heroin (Diamorphine) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin) • Heterocodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterocodeine) • Hydrocodone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocodone) • Hydromorphinol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hydromorphinol&action=edit) • Hydromorphone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydromorphone) • Laudanum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laudanum) • Methyldesorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methyldesorphine&action=edit) • Methyldihydromorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methyldihydromorphine&action=edit) • Metopon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metopon) • Monoacetylmorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoacetylmorphine) • Morphine-N-Oxide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Morphine-N-Oxide&action=edit) • Morphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphine) • Morphinone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphinone) • Morphine-6-glucuronide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphine-6-glucuronide) • Myorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Myorphine&action=edit) • Nalbuphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalbuphine) • Nalmefene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalmefene) • Nalorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalorphine) • Naloxone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naloxone) • Naltrexone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naltrexone) • Nicocodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicocodeine) • Nicodicodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicodicodeine) • Nicomorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomorphine) • Norcodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norcodeine&action=edit) • Normorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Normorphine&action=edit) • Omnopon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnopon) • Opium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium) • Oripavine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oripavine) • Oxycodone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxycodone) • Oxymorphone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymorphone) • Pantopon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantopon) • Papaveretum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papaveretum) • Paregoric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paregoric) • Pholcodeine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pholcodeine) • Pseudomorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pseudomorphine&action=edit) • Tetrapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tetrapon&action=edit) • Thebacon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thebacon) • Thebaine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thebaine)

Morphinans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphinan) Butorphanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butorphanol) • Cyclorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyclorphan&action=edit) • Dextro-3-hydroxy-N-allylmorphinan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dextro-3-hydroxy-N-allylmorphinan&action=edit) • Dextorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dextorphan&action=edit) • Levallorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Levallorphan&action=edit) • Levorphanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levorphanol) • Levorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Levorphan&action=edit) • Levophenacylmorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Levophenacylmorphan&action=edit) • Levomethorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levomethorphan) • Norlevorphanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norlevorphanol&action=edit) • Phenomorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomorphan) • Racemethorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racemethorphan)

Benzomorphans Cyclazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclazocine) • Dezocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dezocine) • Ethylketocyclazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethylketocyclazocine&action=edit) • Ketazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketazocine) • Metazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metazocine) • Pentazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentazocine) • Phenazocine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phenazocine&action=edit)

4-Phenylpiperidines Anileridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anileridine) • Carbetidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carbetidine&action=edit) • Carperidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carperidine&action=edit) • Difenoxin (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Difenoxin&action=edit) • Diphenoxylate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphenoxylate) • Etoxeridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etoxeridine&action=edit) • Furethidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Furethidine&action=edit) • Ipropethidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipropethidine) • Loperamide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loperamide) • Morpheridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Morpheridine&action=edit) • MPPP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPPP) • Oxpheneridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oxpheneridine&action=edit) • PEPAP (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PEPAP&action=edit) • Pethidine (Meperidine) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pethidine) • Pethidine Intermediate A (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pethidine_Intermediate_A&action=edit) • Pethidine Intermediate B (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pethidine_Intermediate_B&action=edit) • Pethidine Intermediate C (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pethidine_Intermediate_C&action=edit) • Pheneridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pheneridine&action=edit) • Phenoperidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenoperidine) • Piminodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piminodine&action=edit) • Properidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properidine) • Sameridine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sameridine&action=edit) • Trimeperidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Trimeperidine&action=edit)

Prodines α-prodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alphaprodine&action=edit) • Allylprodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allylprodine&action=edit) • β-prodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Betaprodine&action=edit) • β-meprodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Betameprodine&action=edit) • Prodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prodine&action=edit) •

Bemidones Bemidone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bemidone) • Hydroxypethidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxypethidine) • Ketobemidone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketobemidone) •

Anilidopiperidines 3-methylfentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-methylfentanyl) • 3-methylthiofentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-methylthiofentanyl) • Alfentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfentanil) • α-methylacetylfentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphamethylacetylfentanyl) • α-methylfentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphamethylfentanyl) • α-methylthiofentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphamethylthiofentanyl) • β-hydroxyfentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betahydroxyfentanyl) • β-hydroxythiofentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betahydroxythiofentanyl) • Bezitramide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bezitramide) • Brifentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brifentanil) • Carfentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carfentanil) • Fentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl) • Lofentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lofentanil) • Ohmefentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohmefentanyl) • Parafluorofentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parafluorofentanyl) • Remifentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remifentanil) • Sufentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufentanil) • Thiofentanyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiofentanyl) • Trefentanil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trefentanil)

Open chain opioids β-acetylmethadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beta-acetylmethadol&action=edit) • Dextromethadone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dextromethadone&action=edit) • Dextromoramide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextromoramide) • Dextropropoxyphene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextropropoxyphene) • Diethylthiambutene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diethylthiambutene) • Dimethylthiambutene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethylthiambutene) • Dipipanone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipipanone) • Ethylmethylthiambutene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylmethylthiambutene) • Isomethadone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Isomethadone&action=edit) • Lefetamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lefetamine) • Levo-α-acetylmethadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levomethadyl_Acetate) • Levomethadone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Levomethadone&action=edit) • Levomoramide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Levomoramide&action=edit) • Levopropoxyphene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levopropoxyphene) • Methadone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methadone) • Methadone Intermediate (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methadone_Intermediate&action=edit) • Moramide Intermediate (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moramide_Intermediate&action=edit) • Noracymethadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Noracymethadol&action=edit) • Norpipanone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norpipanone&action=edit) • Phenadoxone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenadoxone) • Propoxyphene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propoxyphene) • Racemoramide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Racemoramide&action=edit)

Oripavine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oripavine) derivatives Acetorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetorphine) • Buprenorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buprenorphine) • Cyprenorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprenorphine) • Dihydroetorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydroetorphine) • Diprenorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diprenorphine) • Etorphine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etorphine)

Phenalkoxams Dextropropoxyphene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextropropoxyphene) • Dimenoxadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimenoxadol&action=edit) • Dioxaphetyl Butyrate (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dioxaphetyl_Butyrate&action=edit) •

Ampromides Diampromide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diampromide&action=edit) • Phenampromide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phenampromide&action=edit) • Propiram (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Propiram&action=edit) •

Others Ciramadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciramadol) • Clonitazene (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clonitazene&action=edit) • Codomine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Codomine&action=edit) • Dimepheptanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimepheptanol&action=edit) • Drotebanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Drotebanol&action=edit) • Ethoheptazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethoheptazine&action=edit) • Etonitazene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etonitazene) • Faxeladol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faxeladol) • Heptazone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heptazone&action=edit) • Meptazinol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meptazinol) • Metheptazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metheptazine&action=edit) • Narcotine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcotine) • O-Desmethyltramadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Desmethyltramadol) • Picenadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Picenadol&action=edit) • Piritramide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piritramide) • Proheptazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proheptazine&action=edit) • Racemorphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Racemorphan&action=edit) • Semorphone (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semorphone&action=edit) • Tapentadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapentadol) • Tilidine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilidine) • Tramadol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tramadol) • Zipeprol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipeprol)

Hammilton

10-21-2007, 12:21 PM

Except that (as best I can tell) there's less than 5 unscheduled, not an analogue drugs on that list.

Dioxaphetyl Butyrate is even an analogue, AFAIK.