[eric82]

Sorry if this is inappropriate (i read the forum rules and assumed no drug is illicit before it's synthesized) or in the wrong place ( I have only the most basic high school knowledge about chemistry).

I just watched a documentary about ecstasy and Alexander Shulgins work was wondering how hard/easy would it be to create a recreational drug with specific properties (say similar to ecstasy) from scratch? Also on a side note how much of a risk is Shulgin taking testing each new drug on himself?

[jeffrey.struss]

Actually because of the Federal Analog Act anything that is similar to a drug currently in existance is de facto illegal. If you are talking about inventing a new category, that is super hard.

He was risking quite a lot. Small changes in chemical structure can drastically change the properties of a drug. He could have easily killed himself. THis is why medicines are always tested on computers, then animals, then start 3 levels of human trials.

[Grundalizer]

He was obviously a brilliant  organic chemist and I've seen a couple of videos online as well as a .pdf of his lab notebook.  I'd like to read some more books by him though and get more into what his thoughts were of modifying certain functional groups.

I thought I heard of a story of some student at MIT or Yale or something making a new psychadelic drug, and because it was totally new and (I assume not an analog of another class?) it wasn't illegal yet.  There was an article in Wired or SCIAM about "underground psychadelic drug taking groups at ivy league schools/colleges

[Borek]

I don't remember enough details to easily locate the story, but somewhere in the sixties or seventies group of students tried to synthesize a modified version of a known drug. Long story short - several people died, several were paralyzed.

[Knights of Tabor]

you might regard this response as somewhat off-topic, but from the biological side psychoactive drugs affect the release of neurological substances the brain already produces.

For example -- I have identified a few types of headaches located in different areas of the head, often resulting directly from a type of visual or cerebral activity.  If the substances or electrical phenomena causing these can be isolated and regulated, in addition to a simple analgesic, it could be the start of new recreational drugs, since the regulation of these substances is the source of recreational drug effect. In other words, if a person experiences a certain kind of headache repeatedly, which is very likely, then the remedial substance that alleviate that would called an analgesic. Since the causes of chronic conditions are always latent in each individual, a drug that went further than merely temporary relief of the extreme condition might provide the consumer with a very welcome feeling of relief from pain he had experienced for so long he was even unable to recognize as pain. This would be almost definitional for euphoria.

What constitutes "recreation" varies between individuals, and it would be better to relabel these as therapeutic or remedial, since the term, recreational, has assumed a pejorative connotation owing to state repression and the sympathetic reflex of those professions that are allied with the state.  But the right of each individual to deal with their own psychology as long as they do not infringe on others rights should be reaffirmed.

Would it be therapeutic/remedial for some to have inhibited or increased a hormone or electrical impulse that dulled the senses or that stimulated them, resulting in a better state of consciousness?

[billnotgatez]

To: Knights of Tabor

Then ethanol and nicotine are therapeutic or remedial

it would be better to relabel these as therapeutic or remedial

Just curious
Bill


-----------------------------------------
Just a side note ====
Also to make sure we are all on the same page with the forum rules and i think we have been -- here is one of the rules

Black Violations:A single violation will result in a ban.

0. Discussions on illicit drug synthesis are strictly forbidden as well as discussions on synthesizing explosives. Although intellectual discussions on the chemical physical properties of such explosives and drugs are allowed. Violators will have their topic deleted and banned.

[Grundalizer]

Here is the pdf of one of his lab notebooks.


http://www.erowid.org/library/books_online/shulgin_labbooks/book1/pharmacologynotes01shulgin.pdf

As a chem student, I always have to organize my lab notebook differently for each professor, and so I've never really gotten to use "my own style" which frustrates me a lot.  I've always wanted to see a REAL scientist's lab notebook...from a grad student etc but never had the chance, so I found this pretty cool to see how this guy wrote everything out

[Fluorine]

Also on a side note how much of a risk is Shulgin taking testing each new drug on himself?

I don't think the risk Dr. Shulgin took was as high as most assume. Many read P/TiHKAL and assume he was blindly consuming these compounds. 1) He began dosing from microgram doses and worked his way up over time 2) studies had been done on some, if not most, of the compounds by himself and others since the early 1960s or some are from old references, patents, studies, and so forth of abandoned compounds, and 3) he did not consume every single compound himself - some are excerpts from previous trials, not limited to MK-ULTRA (eg. 5-HO-DMT). Though he has self-administered a lot of them with his group.

how hard/easy would it be to create a recreational drug with specific properties (say similar to ecstasy) from scratch?

If 'from scratch' means a new untested molecular family, it would be very difficult. Even if one knew the structure-activity relation (SAR) and had the receptor docking model for a compound it does not; 1) limit it's activity to this site only, meaning it could activate other site(s) causing potential contradicting (side) effect(s) to the target (see pharmacodynamic) or 2) guarantee it will ever reach the site, ie. crossing blood brain barrier, metabolization, distribution/absorption, etc (see pharmacokinetics. If you mean a new molecule but based off of an existing drug(s), this is much more plausible, however still not a simple task. There is simply too much that needs to be considered with a living system.

If you are interested in this field, please pursue it with the formal chemistry, biology, and pharmacology education.

I don't remember enough details to easily locate the story, but somewhere in the sixties or seventies group of students tried to synthesize a modified version of a known drug. Long story short - several people died, several were paralyzed.

Pethidine analogue, MPPP's byproduct metabolite. Another case, at the pharmaceutical level, is fenfluramine which is based off of amphetamine analogues. I believe 5-HT_2B activity has since become standard in the pre-clinical stage testing for new drugs - or am I incorrect?

[Borek]

Pethidine analogue, MPPP's byproduct metabolite.

Thanks, that helped me locate the story I was thinking about:

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Frozen-Addicts-William-Langston/dp/0679424652

Obviously I had some facts twisted.