Anyone have any information on this substance I've had a good look but can't find anything.
homprenorphine
Anyone have any information on this substance I've had a good look but can't find anything.
Re: homprenorphine
um, u wouldnt happen to be posting on BL under the UID (zonk) would ya?Originally Posted by FlapJack
...
"...i paid a visit to Schrodinger in his vienna apartment before his death... There were no cats. I was told he did not like cats." -quantam leaps, bernstein.
(thanatos)
[
'thiscapriciouswhim'
]
'grass is greener
over here'
Re: homprenorphine
Me curiosity is peaked, a wee bit^^^^
to OP sorry , no info - ( vhat is?)
perhaps others will-
Re: homprenorphine
not to burst anyones bubble, but theres NO user reports of this chem anywhere on any search engine,
if ya aint seen a report here, likely noone has experienced it here...
ya can google as well as the rest of us...
lotsa chinese suppliers,
little else...
if was anything worth a damn thered prob be some reports of its use,
unless totally new...
would still fall under the analouge act tho as a close relative to bupreorphine...
(wheres borohydride when we could actually use him?)
the good doc may be able to comment on the structure as well...
otherwise anyone with any curiosity can try a googEL serch...
"...i paid a visit to Schrodinger in his vienna apartment before his death... There were no cats. I was told he did not like cats." -quantam leaps, bernstein.
(thanatos)
[
'thiscapriciouswhim'
]
'grass is greener
over here'
Re: homprenorphine
(bor-prolly bizzy looking ferpartnerin shell cor.)
OKAY-
I did the googlz-
and sure wouldn't want to risk thee pwned factor, (or me body)
with anything coming from china
IMO-
just sayin'
PS- yes would be interest in the good doc opinion,
and doc keep it fairly simple , if you do chime in--tanks
.
Re: homprenorphine
haha naww but I saw that thread on there and became interested.um, u wouldnt happen to be posting on BL under the UID (zonk) would ya?
...
Re: homprenorphine
prob cant figger out how to log into opiophile from his acct on the DEA's server when hes at WORK...
"...i paid a visit to Schrodinger in his vienna apartment before his death... There were no cats. I was told he did not like cats." -quantam leaps, bernstein.
(thanatos)
[
'thiscapriciouswhim'
]
'grass is greener
over here'
Re: homprenorphine
I've not looked at the chemical, but the Analogue Act only covers substances in CI and CII.
EDIT: Finally, I got a look at the chemical's structure in ChemBook: it appears that it would be a slightly stronger partial agonist - due to the cyclopropylmethyl's presence - with a higher ceiling effect, due to the sidechain's similarity to etorphine instead of buprenorphine. It should have a similar binding affinity. However, even though it clearly is an analogue of buprenorphine, the sidechain makes it have (except for the cyclopropylmethyl and one bare hydroxyl) a much closer similarity to etorphine than buprenorphine itself has (structurally), but it would definitely still have a ceiling effect, but it would likely be a kappa agonist. I don't know how much more potent it would be; Bentley's opioids are notorious for their SAR-unpredictability and steric issues.
This mix of similarities and dissimilarities leaves it out of my league to tell whether the government would judge it a CI analogue, but, in reality, you, the producer or possessor of such substance, are not going to get the benefit of the doubt, and the court will bilk each and every ilk of connection to CI molecules it has out of it.
That's why phenazepam, a dead-ringer for bromazepam (one atom difference) is legal - because bromazepam is CIV, and substances CIII through CV(I in some states) are not controlled by the analogue act.
Buprenorphine is CIII in most states, and CV in some (Ohio, namely): therefore it is in no jurisdiction applicable to the analogue act, even in the slightest modifications (such as replacing the 17-cyclopropylmethyl with a regular methyl, which should release the "ceiling effect"), being legal and unscheduled, but not necessarily - *see below*
In America, drugs with a substantial chemical similarity, similarity in effects, or drugs that are sold as being chemically similar or effectually similar to drugs in Schedules I or II are considered the same as if they were explicitly scheduled. Therefore, fake blotter sold as acid is the same as selling acid, as is lumi-LSD, as it has the same structure as LSD, but is psychologically inert, as is (this is where it gets tricky) any hallucinogenic substance with a subjective effect similar to LSD (this is being replaced by receptor binding assays, but, there is a first time for everything, when no analogue is known).
For Schedules III, IV, and V, drugs must be explicitly scheduled to fall under the controlled substances act; all benzos that are not specifically listed are de jure legal, as are all analogues of the shitty opioids (nalbuphine, pentazocine, tramadol, butorphanol, buprenorphine) *as long as the modification to them does not make them an analogue to a CI or CII substance.*
This could be the case, if you view buprenorphine, for example; many modifications move it further away from CI and CII opioids; however, Bentley's opioids are all CI. Buprenorphine is a modified Bentley opioid. Many, if not most, potency enhancing, ceiling-effect eliminating, full-agonist making modifications - including the methyl substitution mentioned above - give significant grounds for a case under the analogue act based on chemical similarity to etorphine, if not all modifications, as it can be argued that buprenorphine itself is an analogue of a CI drug.
Also, it's tricky ground, because with even a distant chemical similarity, the drug has psychological and physiological effects similar to all other opioids - a ceiling effect doesn't disqualify it as long as it binds to the µ receptor, disregarding all sidechains, &c. - so, the phenanthrene/morpholine backbone is probably enough for a case under the controlled substances act for any drug that has an opioid effect.
Basically:
Part 1: The drug has effects that are substantially similar to a CI drug (etorphine) or a CII drug (morphine, in a looser yet still well-within-the-analogue-act-legal interpretation).
Part 2: The drug has been sold as having these effects, or as a substitute for a CI or CII drug.
Part 3: The drug has very substantial chemical similarity to a CI (etorphine) substance. (Or enough-to-be-illegal-under-the-analogue-act similarity to a CII substance.)
Part 4: Conviction.
In this way, all morpholine opioids that bind µ receptors are likely illegal under the analogue act, because they all have opioid-like effects and a structural similarity, while not very scientifically sound (equivalent to saying C1 and C2 receptors are the same, because they both bind cannabinoids), is sound enough to pass muster under the FAA's parameters to morphine alone.
The argument could be straightforward: "Buprenorphine itself is an analogue of a CI drug, etorphine, therefore analogues of buprenorphine are analogues of etorphine" (bad logic, but would hold up in court).
It could be convoluted: "Buprenorphine is a chemical substance with opioid effects that is not covered by the analogue act. The prosecution will endeavour to prove that this substance, homprenorphine, is not only an analogue of buprenorphine, but is an analogue of etorphine or morphine."
Or: ""Buprenorphine is a chemical substance with opioid effects that is not covered by the analogue act. The prosecution will endeavour to prove that this substance, homprenorphine, is a distant analogue of the CI opioid etorphine, along with fulfilling the other criteria for prosecution under the FAA: it has substantially similar psychological and physiological effects to not only buprenorphione, but CI etorphine as well; in fact, we will argue that as buprenorphine is unique amongst opioids for its effects as a partial agonist of mu with a ceiling effect and an antagonist of kappa, this is why it was scheduled at a level lower than CII, and that the substance, homprenorphine, lacking these distinctive effects, shares more in common with the CI etorphine or CII morphine than it does with the CIII buprenorphine. Finally, this drug is sold and used as a replacement for CI and CII opioid drugs.**
*(Trying to argue it's used as a replacement for buprenorphine won't pass muster in court.)
In reality: "This drug is an opioid, with opioid effects similar to those drugs listed CI and CII. It shares a morpholine (or even less specifically, phenanthrene) skeleton. Therefore it is an illicit analogue."
To beat that last scenario may be impossible, even with the best lawyers around, and it's the least specific and most open to interpretation and abuse.
In conclusion, when challenging the analogue act, it's hard as Hell to get anything past it because of the vacuous wording. In essence, any morpholine backboned structure that binds µ receptors could be argued to be an analogue, even if that was not the spirit of the law. It is the letter.
This is why there is an extreme dearth of opioid substances on the designer drug market: the major classes: morpholine, Bentley, fent, pethidine, and open chain, already have one member thoroughly entrenched in CI or CII. This is why all you find are tramadol analogues, and shit like mitragynine (even it has three rings in it that bear a striking similarity to the untrained eye to a phenanthrene core), and possibly a Darvon analogue.
Lefetamine may pass muster as an opioid, but it would probably be considered an amphetamine analogue. All the other good shit: esters of fent (4-fluoro analogue of the reversed methyl ester of the correct isomer of ohmefentanil, or even, the ester of α-methyl-fentanil for that matter), methadone analogues with sulphur substitutes or extra ring groups, even reversed esters of pethidine (the notorious MPPP), and completely outrageous ones, like etorphine, are all illegal.
You're left with a few odd indoles and terpenoids, along with whatever you can squeeze out of what is essentially a super-stripped codeine molecule with myriad undesirable side-effects (tramadol), and the most deadly (due to Ca or Na channel blocking in the heart, which causes it to have essentially the same cardiotoxic effects as does cocaine) and generally most unwanted of all opioids: propoxyphene.
That is, if you want to be completely safe from the analogue act, as long as you don't claim your modified Darvon is cocanoin.
"For whatever you have done, or have not done, unto the least of my brethren, it is as if you have done it, or failed to do it, unto me." (Matthew 25, paraphrase)
Society of Jesus:
"If the church calls black what our senses perceive rightly to be white, then we have a duty to the church to bring our minds in to conformity, and pronounce what is white to be black." - St Ignatius of Loyola
Re: homprenorphine
interesting info good DR, thanks for that!
I think I followed most or at least some of what you posted.
Re: homprenorphine
morpholine? That's one of the most basic ring systems in organic chemistry...?
There are literally hundreds of active opioids that fall outside the MoDA:
-Viminol
-BDPC
-W18
-AH-7921 (which I posted a synth)
-Azaprocin
-Methapholine (and it's nitro analog!)
The list goes on, those were just of the top of my head... the MoDA only stops the LAZY. Oh, and norbuprenorphine is a much better mu agonist - place a methyl or N-PE there & you have a winner!!!
Last edited by borohydride; 10-31-2010 at 12:38 PM. Reason: Stupidity
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote