[justin999]

Recently I had the chance to obtain 2C-I (2,5-dimethoxy, 4-iodophenethylamine).
Being unsatisfied with the iodine atom i decided to try to replace it with chlorine.
Using a chlorine generator, i turned 2c-i into an unknown compound.
It turned from pure white to slightly yellow. Does anybody have an idea of what this substance might be? email: jwellis86@msn.com

[Limpet Chicken]

Wouldn't it bee a safer bet to try and chlorinate using some sort of nucleophilic substitution reaction, for the reason that you would avoid the possibility of Cl gas acting as an oxidiser and consigning your precious batch of 2-C-I to chemical hell?


Good luck.

If you are lucky and the Cl didn't destroy the material, you might well have caused chlorine to substitute for iodine at the 4 position, forming 2-C-C


Jdurg - Sorry Limpet, but I really can't allow that type of advice to be given here at the forums.  Advising someone to ingest a compound that they aren't sure what it is is akin to telling someone to go play Russian Roulette.  Please refrain from doing that in the future.

[Mitch]

2,5-dimethoxy, 4-iodophenethylamine can only undergoe electrophilic attack not nucleophillic.

[Namiantor01]

I thought the rules said you couldn't talk about drugs.

And especially ask for them.

[macman104]

I thought the rules said you couldn't talk about drugs.

And especially ask for them.

You are correct.

[Controlled Substance]

This thread should be serve as an example to anyone foolish enough to post the common names of such chemicals on public forums.

People will find it through search engines and will ask stupid questions.

Then, worse words will come from local rule-freaks; inevitably attracting more attention, possibly even from public servants harassing the moderators for I.P. addresses...

[digitalframeguy]

these chemicals are dangerous

[Arctic-Nation]

'Being unsatisfied with the iodine atom'... now that's comedy.

[408]

 2c-i is not a 'common name'...haha it is the name given to the compound in one reference only, a drug cook manual...

[Fluorine]

For future reference a few common reagent tests could have determined whether 2C-I was converted into 2C-C, which I highly doubt. Cross referencing the reagent results with known results confirm or as expectedly deny results. This concept is absurd from chemically and pharmacologically; it's just reducing potency and selectivity.

@408
Actually 2C-I is the common name following naming scheme given by the chemist who initially synthesized the series. It is referred to as 2C-I in many peer-reviewed pharmacology journals. If the reference is PiHKAL "drug cook manual" is a gross misrepresentation (see SAR, bioassay, activity).

Edit: Grammar.

[408]

lolz.  Go back to modifying your consciousness to escape reality.  The rest of the adults will work at modifying reality.

Not just pihkal is a drug cook manual, also tihkal.  Granted it is more than a manual, it is also a trip diary. 

Show any non-cook chemist 2C1 and they will have no idea what you are talking about.

[Fluorine]

lolz.  Go back to modifying your consciousness to escape reality.  The rest of the adults will work at modifying reality.

I'm not in this thread to "modify my consciousness" or "reality" rather correct false statements. 5-HT2A agonists shed light on thermoregulation, sleep, sexuality, imagination/creativity, intraoccular pressure regulation, among many other biological aspects. These claims can readily backed up with published journals.

Show any non-cook chemist 2C1 and they will have no idea what you are talking about.

I don't recall the periodic table having a "1" as an element symbol. It's "I" for the iodine place on the para-position of the phenethylamine. This is not for (medicinal) chemists so I wouldn't be surprised at all. Considering the extent of all chemicals, I would be very surprised if I could pick a chemical out of the Merck Index and a chemist could get it.

Whether you like a topic or not will not inhibit it's value scientifically. These phenethylamine derivatives are a huge key aspect in both receptor elucidation and functional selectivity (in the least). Besides, Angewandte Chemie pushs out chemicals majority of chemists won't recognize and they are explosives - yet no one raises a brow. Science will progress despite your closed mind.