Yes, this does deal with weapons...but loosely. I don't mean to talk about nasty chemicals that can kill people, because anyone can do that, but
rather different chemicals to mimic the actions against the body caused by naturally occuring Toxins.
I saw a perfect example of this as I was researching T-2 Mycotoxin for a school project... The skin lesions caused by T-2 are the result of the
Toxin's cytotoxic effects and its interference with DNA and RNA synthesis. Does this sound like any chemicals we know? It did to me- Mustard.
Mustard also interferes with DNA and RNA synthesis, causing its characteristic blistering and necrosis.
There are other nerve poisons in nature, such as Botulinum, Tetanus, Polio, and Atropine. However, the nerve agents we are most accustomed to are the
ones that cause such overactive nervous responses that they kill from hyperactive paralysis...much the opposite.
Nevertheless, the point is this: Suppose we were to create chemicals to mimic the toxins of nature. Nature's toxins and poisons are endlessly
more toxic than our own- Micrograms of T-2 can cause the same effects as a "standard" exposure to Mustard. I don't expect our
"artificial" toxins to be nearly as potent as nature's, but it gives us ideas...
For example, Strychnine causes nasty nasty effects by inhibiting the Amino Acid glycine. So, surely there can be some chemical we can create that
could do the same?Blind Angel - 26-3-2003 at 13:16
Atropine is a nerve agent? I always thought it was more a psychotrop than a poison (maybe you include the two in the same category).
Anyway, there surely a way to do it since most of the medicament are variant of poisonDDTea - 26-3-2003 at 14:21
Atropine isn't really a nerve agent, as in Anti-Cholinesterase. But it is indeed a nerve poison...it causes paralysis .vulture - 26-3-2003 at 14:46
IIRC, atropine is poisonous because it overstimulates the nerve synapses. This is also why it is used as an antidote against nerve agents.
Im making a database of Chem Weapons
Darkfire - 26-3-2003 at 15:45
Well ive found some chems that i will put up, i have about 100, that have ld50's of 100ppm or less but some im unsure of the stucture, as this is
where all of my info will come from. If any of you have some time to kill ill leave the names of some. I know the formulas for some but not
structures.
From the above you see that some are familly members! Darkfire - 26-3-2003 at 17:15
Thanks I will post more as i write up this info.
Sarin is a fairly easy synth to find, it doesnt seem all that complicated, but making thats strait up crazy. That poses a real hazard to youself and
your surrondings no matter what precautsions you take. I cant say id recomend it, if you get caught you will be royaly fuck over to boot, but i
respect your dedication to your intrests.
CTRBlind Angel - 26-3-2003 at 18:06
Darfire: is your site online?
And so atropine is like MDMA as i see?DDTea - 26-3-2003 at 22:27
I'm not sure we're all understanding the point of this thread... It's not to be about the agents we already know, like the
Anti-Cholinesterase Organophosphates (Although I am very interested in these too- Phosphorus is a very fascinating element), but novel agents
altogether. However, I imagine this would deal with Biology and Pathology as much as it would with Chemistry...but it makes the topic that much more
interesting!
Alright, so we have a target body chemical now- Glycine. It's an Amino Acid- a Carboxylic Acid bonded to an Amine. Its structure is as follows:
NH2-CH2-C=O-OH. The name "Aminoacetic Acid" is a good way to describe it. Its purpose in the mammalian Central Nervous System (CNS) is
primarily in the Spinal Cord and Brain stem, and it is, "One of the major inhibitory neurotransmitters in the mammalian CNS." It also acts
as, "a modulator of excitatory amino acid transmission mediated by NMDA receptors."
As you would imagine, inhibiting the action of Glycine would lead to potentially dangerous hyperactivity.
Now, the question is... How do we inhibit it? My guess for finding the answer to the question would proceed as follows:
-Theorize a body chemical to inhibit.
-Find a chemical that inhibits the target chemical in nature.
-Find the reaction that takes place between said chemical and the target chemical.
-Theorize a simpler chemical that mimics that action.
-Find a means for the theorized chemical to get to the target site (I imagine this part to be the most difficult...).
Now, the chemical we theorize does not necessarily have to specifically target the desired chemical...we are not medicine-makers, we're not
worried about side effects .
Don't worry- this won't be incredibly complex medical biology crap. My own experience with Biology is simply a Highschool General Biology
class! So it's really not stuff that is too complicated; just a lot of things with fancy names. With our knowledge of Organic Chemistry, we
should be able to do this. If you don't understand the Biology things, take a little while and look them up, and we can engage in a really fun
topic! Blind Angel - 27-3-2003 at 13:35
The hardest thing would be to create a product that is
when inhaled:
a) pass the pulmonar barrier
b) is not attacked by blood enzyme or blastocyte or any other white cell
c) would pass the blood barrier
d) and that after their modification (or none if your really lucky) is still effective
when ingested:
a) not attacked by stomach enzyme
b) not attacked by liver enzyme
c) not attacked by any other enzyme in the digestive system
(the rest is the same that when inhale)
The body is well done really toxic substance are hard to make, specialy those affecteing the brain whic is like the fortress of the body. I got a book
here call Synthesis of Organ Targeting Drug (in pdf) which may interest you and that i can upload on the ftp. So instead of doing a nerve agent why
not making something that kill you by another way (like creating strong acid inside of your organ and thing like that)PHILOU Zrealone - 27-3-2003 at 16:24
Usually you have 3 ways of action:
You have a biological molecule that has a regulatory effect on a physiological response!
This implies good knowledge of the molecule and how it triggers the response!
A --> physiological effect A
no A --> other effect B or no effect at all!
If you look closer the system with a larger spectra:
a+b -E1->A -R1-> Physiol effect A
Then you can:
1°)induce permanent production of A when it is not needed --> permanent Physiological effect and no more regulation! You have to work on a,b
(various molecules, orders,enzymes) or E1 (last enzyme that synthetise A).
2°)induce blocking of formation of A! Same ways of action as in 1°!
3°)You may alterate A as soon as it forms then R1 will not recognise it!
4°)You may block the Receptor 1 so it remains activated for permanent physiological effect or permanent lack of effect!A is stil formed but useless!
Usually in pharmaceutics, they know very well biochemistry and the regulation cycles involved (very interesting organic chemistry) then they use
molecules that have similar groups but at different place or groups that have about the same charge/the same electronegativity to mimic trigler
molecule; but it blocks enzyme activ site by formation of permanent link or stronger interaction than normal ligand!
PHILOU Zrealone - 27-3-2003 at 16:27
Actually 4 ways
Sleep and my confortable bed calls me!
DDTea - 28-3-2003 at 21:09
Quote:
If you look closer the system with a larger spectra:
a+b -E1->A -R1-> Physiol effect A
Very interesting responses coming from everyone so far! But Philou- could you clarify the above quote a bit more? I understood everything in your
post except that .
[Edited on 3-29-03 by Samosa]
[Edited on 3-29-03 by Samosa]PHILOU Zrealone - 30-3-2003 at 14:29
Starting from various molecules a,b,... and various required conditions c,d,...; an enzyme E1 produces the active molecule A that goes further in a
receptor R1 to provide physiological effect!
This very synthetic way expressed simply the multi and pluricausality to produce A!
A quick example will give you a better idea!
Ingesting NaCNdon't do it it is lethal).
NaCN goes in the mouth were you have some CO2 dissolved in your saliva!
NaCN + H2CO3 <--> HCN + NaHCO3
A part goes then in your lungs where it enters the blood!
Another part of the NaCN goes in your stomach where HCl is!
NaCN + HCl --> NaCl + HCN
HCN enters the blood via the intestinal blood capillars!
You thus have 2 pathways that lead HCN in the blood! While they travel to that point they can already damage proteins and some organs providing
physiological effects!
In the blood HCN goes in O2 fixating hemoglobin Enzyme in th eplace of O2; then O2 being a weaker ligand for the hemoglobin than HCN will be displaced
by HCN and no more O2 will be carried by hemoglobin; asphyxie occure and then necrosis (cyanosis).
So here normal process:
O2 -hemogl-> hemogl(O2) (in the lungs)
hemogl(O2) --> O2 + hemogl (in the organs)
The simple equation can be written:
A(lungs)-E1->A(organs) simple transportation use!
NaCN + H(+) --> HCN
HCN + hemogl(O2) --> O2 + hemogl(HCN)
Here HCN produced from NaCN in the mouth and in the stomach block E1 and form the less reversible cyanhydrichemoglobine compound E'1
A(lungs)-E'1->//
Another example: a,b,c etc are amino acids
a+b+c+...+z -Enzyme(insuline Protein Synthetase)-> insuline (proteine) -Receptor specific to insuline-> suggar regulation in teh blood
So here:
a+b+... -E1-> E2 (or A) -R1-> Physiol effect 1
That's it! Nick F - 31-3-2003 at 09:44
Samosa, in your research into mycotoxins from fusarium sp., did you find out anything that might be useful to someone who was trying to grow the
mould?
I've set up a little experiment to see what I can grow on some corn inocculated with soil (with water and 1/3 of a multivitamin tablet), and will
need some way to find out what I have, and how fusariums grow best etc.
I thought I might save myself some research time if you had already found what I was looking for...
If you have anything you think might be of interest, could you post it or e-mail it to me?
I found one source that said that artificially infected grain could have >600mg/kg of mycotoxins, consisting of various interesting things
including vomitoxin. No prizes for guessing what that does! Also, other more toxic things...DDTea - 31-3-2003 at 11:26
Hmm, actually I found a lot of information related to the growing of the Fusarium molds that produce T-2 Toxin. I will just list them, as I am short
on time at the moment (need to get to Orchestra rehearsal ).
-Fusarium molds like Corn as a growth medium.
-Fusarium molds tend to grow on corn that has been exposed to frost
-They like moist environments
-They also like warm environments, somwhere in the area of 70-80* F (maybe 25*C)
-T-2 Toxin is soluble in Ether, DMSO Alcohol, Acetone, Propylene Glycol, Ethylene Glycol, and Polypropylene Glycol
-The mold that produces T-2 is pinkish in color.
-Fusarium molds are ubiquitous in soils almost all over the world.
-T-2 and Aflatoxin glow under black light...this should help you locate moldy grains.
Several of these conditions would not be favorable to other bacteria and competing molds, especially the frost. That could be used early on to kill
off the competitors in the culture.
That's all I can think of now, as I have to run! But I will add more later, as I think of it....
Anyhow, has anyone ever thought of straight Fusaric Acid? It is quite toxic, somewhere in the area of 230 mg/kg LD50 rat/oral! Furthermore, it seems
potentially synthesizable... It's name is "Butyl Pyridinecarboxlyic Acid," to help give you an idea of its structure. It is found in
some plant poisons.Darkfire - 31-3-2003 at 15:25
Myotoxins... arent they basicly what rattle snakes produce? They are suposed to destroy tissue, but i know rattle snake venom isnt all that deadly
when ingested. So my question is if snake myotoxin is old deadly when injected why is mold myotoxin deadly when eaten, exepcting the two chemicals to
be at least somewhat similar?
CTRDDTea - 31-3-2003 at 23:26
Snake venom does not contain Mycotoxins, as far as I know... Do you know what specific species might, however? Because as far as I know, Snake Venom
is designed mostly to paralyze the prey and start the digestion process (as such, they will contain many enzymes).
Mycotoxins are a motley group of toxins, but in this case we are focusing most on T-2 since that is the one that is most suitable for
weaponization... T-2 is poisonous because it interferes with DNA and RNA synthesis. Not sure how specifically it kills, however...
However, T2 works by any route of exposure because it attacks just about any tissue. In the eyes, it causes conjunctivitis, by ingestion it causes
intestinal bleeding, by inhalation it causes dyspnia, and by dermal exposure it causes skin lesions.
Nevertheless- you do bring up another interesting point which I had not considered... Are there any chemicals that simulate different snake venoms?Darkfire - 1-4-2003 at 15:37
As for snakes they were my first motivation in science, in 8th i hade catolgued every venomus snake by genuse, spieces, and subspieces. Well if im
correct (its been a while) myotoxins are the main component of rattlesnake vemon. You are right, tho all elapids (cobras and the like) are neurotoxic,
other snake venoms inclued saffarotoxin, hemotoxin, cardiotoxin, along with other less common things.
CTR
[Edited on 1-4-2003 by Darkfire]PHILOU Zrealone - 1-4-2003 at 17:01
Read better:
MyCotoxin and Myotoxin; see the difference?
Mycos -->linked to Muchrooms and yeasts!
Myos --> linked to muscles!
MyCotoxins --> Toxins generated by muchrooms and yeasts
Myotoxins --> Toxins that acts on the muscles
As always, in chemistry; one letter makes the difference!
Nitrite /Nitrate
Hydrazine/Hydrazone
...
So better read twice!
Darkfire - 1-4-2003 at 17:10
To tell ya they truth its been over 3 or 4 years since i even thought of myotoxin, it was off the top of my head.
I think if my newest experiment doesn't work I'll go and buy some organically grown wheat and see what I can grow from that (except wheat,
of course!).
Fusaric acid would certainly be the easiest to synthesise out of the mycotoxins that I've seen from Fusarium sp.! It would also be more effective
(in terms of doses/effort) I suspect to make this than to extract other mycotoxins.PHILOU Zrealone - 7-4-2003 at 02:42
Synthesis of fusaric acid shouldn't be that complicated!
Let me get this right.Are you trying to for example make snake venom or(another example)inject large amounts of acetocholine into the target as opsed
to binding the acetocholineerase with a nerve agent?
Anyways it seems to me the digestive juices of a scavenger like a crow might make for some rather intersting things.Think about it they eat just about
anything.Lugh - 5-6-2003 at 18:13
Cows and their ilk use a system of several stomachs to digest grass slowly over an extended period of time which they regurgitate, chew, swallow and
digest for some more time (chewing the cud). they use time and a massive intestine to deal with the problem of indigestible food. They do have a prity
rich bacterial content in their intestines to help them deal with this problem though.
They also avoid plants which are bad for them.
I suppose if you were desperate for something to use from a cow in a toxic kind of way (apart from the meat from tha mad beasties), the simolest would
be to isolate E. coli from the dung and use that. It is kind of nasty after all when in the wrong place.
Or you could saddle one up and use it to run down civilians.Iv4 - 5-6-2003 at 22:16
Personally I think a crow would have better digestiv enzymes than cow.
A rather weird thought I've had for quite a while(as in since I was 12).The gland of(say)a sea snake could be placed in some sort of blood like
fluid I supose it might be kept alive and electrical stimulation could be used to give venom.Lugh - 6-6-2003 at 04:56
Apologies Iv4. I miss read your post last night (too much to drink and too little sleep). I thought it didnt make sense.
"Crows" make much more sense in a scavanger kind of way.
You will be glad to hear I am being punished for my stupidity through dehydration, an overworked liver and sore head.
I dont know too mucg about the digestive strengths of crows. I would presume they are similar to most other animals.
We after all are scavangers by trade, even though we traded it in for the cooking gig.
Acid in the stomach and enzymes in the gut would do a satisfactory job.
on the other hand they probably have a good immune system to deal with the amount of bugs and viruses they would come in contact with.
The snake gland thing sounds interesting. I dont think it would work like that, but it might be possible to crush it up extract the enzymes and use
them to synthesize the venom. you would need to know the starting materials used in the natural system though.
Could be intresting if you can get your hands on snakes.
[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Lugh]Iv4 - 6-6-2003 at 21:20
NP,I've had more than my share of drunken posts.
In theory the experiment could be as simple as throwing up on a piece of meat and seeing what hapens.
As for the snake gland it might be something like this.The gland is crushed and DNA extracted.Venom is then added as this should cause teh needed
parts to be attracted(my turn to be drunk).Then it could be cultured.Lugh - 7-6-2003 at 09:51
unfortunately adding a protein to a mix of DNA does not pull out the DNA specific for that protein.
If you had the equipment and the knowledge it would be possible to cut out the necessary gene, put it into a bacteria and get the little buggers to
pump it out.
Of course if you do this you wll be invaded by certain countries for trying such a foul experiment before them.
Or if you could get the genetic sequence you might be able to build it up from scratch. A bit out of reach for the amatuer but we can dream.Iv4 - 8-6-2003 at 00:39
Yeah that's a bitch.Desperate idea:potatos blasted with venom.They're prety good proteins and out of sheer number of mutations a few might
churn out something usefull.Lugh - 8-6-2003 at 08:33
Again not quite right. Potatoes are a good source of carbohydrates not protein. Unfortunately the chemestry of proteins are not quite as simple as -
put them beside an other one and they will morph into the same kind of molecule.
I think you might benifit from a good biochem - genetics book.
But at the same time its good to have lots of ideas and think in different ways.
Does any one know if companies will supply the rank amatuer with sets of restriction enzymes, vectors etc.
And before anybody says it, I know theyre expensive, but when I finally get out of college and get a job - I might be able to save up.
i supose most of this stuff is highly regulated now .
Just for the record Im not interested in the whole BW kind of stuff. But lots of other stuff can be done (8 assed monkeys spring to mind ).
don't think they're regulated
Polverone - 8-6-2003 at 13:28
The biggest problem is probably cost, unless you're trying to get pathogen strains. Equipment is expensive. Reagents are expensive. I don't
know how much training is necessary to begin doing "interesting" stuff, but that is probably expensive (in terms of time/effort, if not
money) as well. Homemade and secondhand equipment might be able to save you some money, but I don't know if you'll be able to get around
the high material costs. It's easy to blow a week's paycheck on 500 mg of Fancy Enzyme X from Sigma, or at least it was a decade ago. Maybe
improved technology and expanded scale have driven prices down. But I suspect that lab suppliers are still going to try to plunder your wallet for
every last penny, especially in the fancy biological realm.Iv4 - 8-6-2003 at 23:20
Alcoholics anonymous would be better.I was thinking about nanobots and got confused with potatos(sounds weird but the first project of some dead group
was suposed to be making potatos).Lugh - 10-6-2003 at 07:33
Polverone - dont talk to me about price. I ordered an anti-CD25 antibody yesterday. It cost ~ £70 for 400uL. Shit that would hurt.
Luckly college pays for such extravigances.
It seems that home experimentation would be a tad pricey, but other reagents such as medium and incubators should be cheap to accuire.
That said I suppose its not really "chemical substitution for biological agents".
But using mo's to produce products is a possibility.Iv4 - 11-6-2003 at 01:58
I just had this weirded idea.My dumbfuck cosuin tossed out some blood I had(of a lukemia ptaient).Stupid school of his tought him it's bad to
have any blood in a vial lying around.I was thinking that the lukemia blood might be introduced to other samples(was going to experiemt on human
blood,cows blood and beef).
Now we all know what radiation can do to cells.I know the chances of getting a bio agent out of nuking(in some way)are low but consider how many cells
there are in (say)300 mls of blood.Lugh - 11-6-2003 at 03:39
"I was thinking that the lukemia blood might be introduced to other samples"
To what end exactly?
What do you think it would do?Iv4 - 4-7-2003 at 02:19
I dont know.But I was wondering if they could recreate(can't remember th right word)doubted it but still something to do instead of staring at
walls.Lugh - 4-7-2003 at 02:55
Its kinda hard to grow human cells, they're fussy little buggers. To do it properly you need to add antibiotics to the medium to keep them
healthy and they become infected at the drop of a hat.
If you can get your hands on it a mixture of PBS with about 10% fetal calf serum might keep them going for a while. Could be worth trying with a meat
broth that has been filtered and sterilised.
But if you leave the sample sitting around for a couple of days you'll end up with v dead cells.
I can't think of much you can do with them but if you got a microscope it could be a bit of fun.
The dangers of blood are very over rated. Once you keep some level of safety when handling it, it's harmless.
I've handled smaples with HIV and Hepatitis for a long time and so far i seem fine.
Only thing to be worried about is if your dealing with unscreened samples which it sounds like you might have had, you need to treat them as
potentially infectious.
So just protect yourself and you can kick the shit out of the other guy for not asking questions of teacher.Iv4 - 4-7-2003 at 18:57
We seem to be ugetting to know eachother better(yeah I beat him to a pulp).You probably are'nt going to like this but I got it from a
corps(litrely)no one was looking and I managed to get a sample out(one of the inters got balmed for the marks).Hmm maybe HIV is worth looking into.Too
bad I wont be around this region long term since I could probably get monkeys...Lugh - 6-7-2003 at 04:39
Interesting I've never talked to a real live ghoul before
How long was the ex-person dead? If its too long then the sample would be useless.
Monkeys eh?
What you plan on doing with them?
Don't suppose it involves funny costumes.Iv4 - 7-7-2003 at 07:55
Really?Well what do you think of us?
Don't know what you mean about the monkeys(and honestly dont want to).I wanted to use thier blood for cultures.It's almost impossible to get
though( thought about going somehwere else to get them but I'm broke now).Lugh - 27-7-2003 at 08:33
Something for the insane and skilled out there.
Also if there is any journal papers that people want let me know. I have access for another 2 months and I for one intend to make use of it.
Hmm the attachment didnt stick
[Edited on 27-7-2003 by Lugh]Lugh - 29-7-2003 at 02:56
Sorry for my absence(I know you missed me,dont try to hide it :p).I'm told the best to use is the monkeys spleen and kidneys can anyone confirm
this?Lugh - 8-8-2003 at 17:03
oh ya you were missed big time.
This monkey thing has me intrigued. what exactly are the organs good for.... stew?
Ofcourse I was lol
Iv4 - 9-8-2003 at 02:59
In a way yes.It's said to be a good host for virus cultivation(hell it was even in a Clancy book-thought that not saying much).Lugh - 9-8-2003 at 05:40
Ya they would have some use in the culture of viruses. But the best would be the live animal. On the other hand you need to be sure that the animal is
not capable of destroying the virus in the first place.
Not too sure but I presume you could create a growth medium with stuff like amino acids, transcription factors, enzymes and the like.
Or you could build your own like has been done with the polio virus.
But that'll have to wait for the fortune to come along and the deeds to a asian island with a mushroom shaped rock in the bay.Iv4 - 10-8-2003 at 06:41
Yes in thoery its possible.But more often than not nature has a better solution.Easier to obtain too(the natural way).Though the artificial route will
porbably give you morte control.joe69cool - 22-1-2006 at 19:22
The only reason this sort of thing to be discussed is to avoid it, and even so this information is too dangous to be useful in ANY way.
.
C5H5N)-NH2
.
