And a methyl group, in other compound families, often downgrades the potency, as is the case with codeine for instance, methyl-morphine. Makes it 1/3
or 1/10th less potent, I forget?
would just like to point out that the drop in potency is only because its on the phenol, when the methyl is on the cyclohexenol alcohol as in
heterocodeine it is actually 6x the potency of morphine. so your theory is flawed. a bit late i know but thought it should be pointed out. and of
course N and O substitutions are totally different and so are totally different pharmacalogically.
Ergo-TheMadMen- - 11-6-2009 at 00:19
Quote:
[quote=&author=ergoamide]
would just like to point out that the drop in potency is only because its on the phenol, when the methyl is on the cyclohexenol alcohol as in
heterocodeine it is actually 6x the potency of morphine. so your theory is flawed. a bit late i know but thought it should be pointed out. and of
course N and O substitutions are totally different and so are totally different pharmacalogically.
Ergo
Thankyou for so effortlessly disproving my mocked up theory egoamide, i must admit that i am ashamed, if what you say is true, which i assume it is,
then the methyl group itself is indeed a unworthy excuse for the downgrade in potency, rather, as you pointed out, and, due to my lack of having
studied morphine analogs in-depth, i failed to realize that it was the positioning of the functional group, not the functional group in itself, which
caused the decrease in motion. Thankyou for correcting and enlightening me.
1-(thien-2-yl)isopropylamine is long known for its stimulant activity and recently its activity in men was described. The tester described it as
equipotent to amphetamine by dose, but distinctively different.
Do you know how were the effects different? Nicodem - 22-7-2009 at 03:18
Read the whole thread before posting obsolete questions. I already gave the references a dozen posts further from the one you quoted (it is even on
the same first page).Formula409 - 26-7-2009 at 22:26
There is some interesting work by Demonic of the Hyperlab forum on amphetamine derivatives of Eugenol (3-methoxy,4-(GROUPOXY) substituted
amphetamines). I don't think they like people making links to their site public, so if anyone wants it, please chuck me a U2U
Formula409.Sedit - 27-7-2009 at 07:01
That should be interesting Formula considering 3-methoxy-4hydroxy-N-methylamphetamine(HMMA) is a powerful agent in enhancing oxytocin(or was it
vasopressin) levels in the body IIRC(Ill try to find the reference). These variations will more then likely deviate from the "normal" action of
amphetamines if the variations are kept to a minumum yet still give some level of biological effect that could prove useful to the medical industry
one day. My thoughts are uses in easing childbirth and things of that nature due to the effects of enhanced levels of oxytocin in the body.
Would you be able to send me the link to the threed? I have hyperlab address but am unsure of the threed in question.Globey - 27-7-2009 at 10:46
aren's some simple alkyl branched amines (non aromatic) active stimulants? like tetra butyl?Formula409 - 28-7-2009 at 19:29
That should be interesting Formula considering 3-methoxy-4hydroxy-N-methylamphetamine(HMMA) is a powerful agent in enhancing oxytocin(or was it
vasopressin) levels in the body IIRC(Ill try to find the reference). .
What does everyone think of the pharmacology of chemicals such as 3,4-dimethoxy-N-(methyl)amphetamine and 3,methoxy-4-bromo-N-(methyl)amphetamine. Any
risk of Parkinson's or other neurological problems?
The following articles appear of interest, I will request them in the Refs section:
Serotonin receptor affinities of psychoactive phenalkylamine analogs. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry (1980), 23(3), 294-9.
Pharmacological evidence for the central serotonergic effects of monomethoxyamphetamines.
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (1976), 197, (2), 272-9
Comparative actions of monomethoxyamphetamines of the release and uptake of biogenic amines in brain tissue.
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (1976), 197, (2), 263-71.
Vasopressor effect of 3-methoxyamphetamine in man.
Adipositas, Kreislauf, Anorektika, [Vortr. Symp.] (1974), Meeting Date 1970, 175-83.
Role of biogenic amines in the actions of monomethoxyamphetamines.
Psychopharmacol. Hallucinogens, [Workshop] (197, Meeting Date 1976, 13-22.
Sedit: U2U sent mate.
I await your responses.
Edit: Added link I forgot.
Formula409.
[Edited on 29-7-2009 by Formula409]
[Edited on 10-19-2009 by Polverone]Nicodem - 29-7-2009 at 09:17
What does everyone think of the pharmacology of chemicals such as 3,4-dimethoxy-N-(methyl)amphetamine and 3,methoxy-4-bromo-N-(methyl)amphetamine.
More than happy to try them, but I don't want to end up giving myself Parkinson's or something
The way you ask makes it look you know about nothing in regard to either monoamine releasers SAR or 5-HT2A agonists SAR. You confuse the two.
3,4-Dimethoxyamphetamine is not known as a monoamine releaser and its activity at 5-HT2A receptor is negligible (it is only active at huge doses). The
N-methylation of amphetamines reduces their 5-HT2A receptor mediated activity by at least tenfold or even more, therefore
N-methyl-3,4-dimethoxyamphetamine would be completely inactive (unless trough some other mode of action).
Animal tests on 4-bromo-3-methoxyamphetamine indicate it is relatively potent (J. Med. Chem., 14 (1971) 370-372.). Extrapolating the animal
tested dose to humans would make it active in the range of tens of milligram. Even though these tests indicate it to be a psychedelic, a later study
found it to have no relevant activity at 5-HT2A receptor which is very strange to say the least (J. Med. Chem., 29 (1986) 194-119). Therefore
not much can be said on the activity of N-methyl-4-bromo-3-methoxyamphetamine counterpart.
The 4-bromo-3-methoxyamphetamine might have some monoamine releasing abilities, because it is isosteric to 4-methyl-3-methoxyamphetamine, which is
known to posses a hybrid activity (monoamine release + 5-HT2A receptor agonism), but as far as I know this was never demonstrated.
In any case, I would suggest you to read the SAR theory instead of making speculative assumptions - it is by far more reliable.
