I may be pushing the limits a little with this question, but I thought I might ask it anyway.
I am currently dealing with warts and my grandmother said that the sap from Chelidonium majus would kill them. I've heard of people using dandelions to get rid of warts, but I was sceptical about the effectiveness
of this plant.
In doing a background search, I found that this common plant contains a significant number of related alkaloids which all have a similar shape (none
of which are proven to be effective against warts). According to wikipedia, this plant contains coptisine, protopine, allocryptopine, stylopine,
norchelidonine, berberine, chelidonine, sanguinarine, and chelerythrine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_celandine#Pharmacology
If you look closely at the chemical structures of these chemicals, you might be able to pick out a backbone similar to that of MDMA. You can't quite
get the complete backbone of MDMA, only something pretty close. That pesky methyl group makes things complicated.
My question:
Is it possible to make MDMA from the alkaloids in this plant? I'm not asking how, because I have no interest in making anything of the sort.
The only thing I find interesting about this, is that if someone is able to pull it off, those pesky cooks would perhaps leave the Brazilian
rainforest alone and use this benign plant instead. The demand would remain the same no matter where the raw materials come from, but by shifting the
source of raw material from a rare tree to a benign weed, there might be less damage done on rainforests and their pristine ecosystems.
Thanks in advance for your tolerance.bahamuth - 11-5-2012 at 19:14
One could make MDMA from coal, water and air if you had time , skills and equipment....White Yeti - 12-5-2012 at 06:14
I'm not asking for an arrogant response. If you don't have anything useful to say, just keep your mouth shut.
I'm guessing one could start an Emde degradation of coptisine. Then what?
[Edited on 5-12-2012 by White Yeti]Nicodem - 12-5-2012 at 08:01
I'm not asking for an arrogant response. If you don't have anything useful to say, just keep your mouth shut.
I don't think bahamuth's was meant to be arrogant, at least not in the same way as your reply above. What he says is true and I think it was meant to
reflect the unreasonable aspects of your unreferenced proposition.bahamuth - 12-5-2012 at 16:13
Sorry for the unelaborated post.
My response was partially what Nicodem stated and partially that one should use ones brain power on something more straightforward, and not on random
flights of thought..
Granted my knowledge in organic chemistry is limited at best compared to most guys that delve in that school around here but even I can see that it
would be messy, unyielding, labour intensive and very costly in regards to reagents and solvents, and thus not more than a brain fart, like the brain
fart I produced in my post. If you said your target molecule would be something other than a illicit drug than my response may have been different..
I gave you a fair answer though, extrapolate it to yes if you will.
Additionally, let me add something hopefully constructive.
If you don't want to, and I quote "I'm not asking how, because I have no interest in making anything of the sort.", what do you want? A
discussion on the conservation of the rainforest? Then I have to ask, what does the Emde degradation of coptisine have to do with conservation of the
rainforest? Also what precursor to the drug in question is found in Brazilian rainforests?
Finally, need to vent this..
With the steady stream of junkie cooks posting on this forum (not that I imply anything mind you, to lazy to go through your post to prove or disprove
anything) I feel the need to be a little aggressive on the "drug" side, not that I don't mind a discussion of drug synthesis but if you google any of
the illicit drugs known to man this forum comes out first on many of those, which draws a lot of unnecessary attention to the forum and its
respectable visitors. Even a IUPAC name of the molecule you target would really lessen the load IMO..
turd - 13-5-2012 at 04:04
Ok, some (constructive) criticism:
First of all the title of the thread is terrible. It doesn't describe to content at all.
Then, the idea is not odd at all - I'd say it's pretty unoriginal and questions like this are frequently asked by noobs with no formal training in
chemistry who discover that methylenedioxy isoquinolines and tetrahydroisoquinolines are commonly found in the plant kingdom (which is usually taught
in 1st or 2nd semester - the whole class of papaverine like opiates, etc).
Furthermore, I'd characterize the idea as naïve on multiple fronts:
It's chemically naïve to think that just because a compound has a 3,4-methylenedioxy-phenetylamine backbone there is reasonable way to turn it into
MDMA. You have to learn about reactivity, selectivity and all that. Bahamuth's answer was spot on: Sure it's possible (for a wicked definition of
possible), but doing it from scratch would still make much more sense chemically.
It's also naïve to think that clandestine chemists would go to the length of multi-step routes to synthesize MDMA. It seems you have no idea of the
volume of the MDMA market: Where I live price for MDMA went down in the last ~15 years by a factor 10(sic!). On every larger party you get quite pure
MDMA.HCl.H2O for prices that were unimaginable ten years ago. The market is swamped with MDMA and the profit margins are minuscule. Therefore batches
have to be done in the kg range and precursors have to be acquired from industrial sources (in Asia). These industrial sources certainly will not make
the precursors from some minor alkaloids. They will do it either from natural safrole (~80% in sassafras oil) or from heliotropin. This is not
academic mg-level chemistry.
And finally it's naïve to think that you are smarter than people who manage to produce MDMA in the kg range despite intense prosecution.
All in all, I'd say: Not every brainfart is worth posting. Do some research before posting. There are worse offenders, but you had the misfortune of
picking a topic that I find at least somewhat interesting.
Quote:
I feel the need to be a little aggressive on the "drug" side
Yes, because the worst that could happen is that we get a few members that actually DO something beyond kindergarten-chemistry. I think if people are
unable to convey their point without becoming aggressive, they should let it be. The hostility towards newcomers on this board is annoying.
Quote:
Even a IUPAC name of the molecule you target would really lessen the load IMO
The last time a noob used formal names he was accused by the lynch mob of deception. Talk about hypocrisy. IMHO MDMA is such a common name, that it
passes as a trivial name, just like amphetamine or LSD.bbartlog - 13-5-2012 at 04:53
If someone wanted to use easily available plant precursors to manufacture the stuff, they'd dig up sassafras. Separating something specific from the
stew of isoquinoline alkaloids, then breaking the carbon-carbon bonds in a controlled way... it looks formidable. Harder than starting from phenol,
where at least one could imagine kilos of pure substance as a starting point (to make up for what would probably be a crappy yield in such a
multi-stage synthesis).
GreenD - 13-5-2012 at 04:59
I've been making MDMA from dandelions for years now.
Thanks a lot you bastard, now dandelions are going to go extinct.White Yeti - 13-5-2012 at 05:07
All right, I apologise for posting this. It seemed interesting at the time and I thought there was something to it.
Nicodem, feel free to move [this thread] to detritus.
