Neither methane nor methanol. I hope I'm not being overly presumptuous here but, if you look at the structural model on the site you linked, there's a
line sticking off the O at the bottom. This denotes a carbon single-bonded to the oxygen, and that all the other valence spots on said carbon are
taken up by a hydrogen. 4 spots, one occupied by the bond with the oxygen, leaving -CH3, a methyl group. The fact that that methyl group is
single-bonded onto that oxygen is the difference between, "amineptine methyl ester," and amineptine.
Kinetically, I'd be astonished to find that this molecule doesn't readily hydrolise in vivo, yielding amineptine, and actually yes, there's your
methanol. So it's a effectively a prodrug for amineptine, and a shitty one at that; amineptine didn't get traction partly because it's a bit of a
blunt instrument but also because it has potentially wild hepatotoxicity.
Dynamically, it would appear to be a potentially more hepatoxic version of amineptine, nothing more. I see scepticism in your post and I think that's
barking up the right tree; the link says it's a serotonin agonist whereas amineptine has a very, very low affinity for 5HT receptors.
It's a bullshit molecule. |