DEA Gives Final Approval to Synthetic Marijuana Drug - Sensationalist Headlines

[quote][B]The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has approved a synthetic form of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) – the active ingredient in marijuana that makes people “high” – as a Schedule II controlled substance. The move is the final regulatory hurdle for dronabinol (Syndros), an oral solution already being prescribed for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients, and as an appetite stimulant for AIDS patients.[/B] The DEA announced the scheduling of dronabinol in a notice quietly published in the Federal Register the day before Thanksgiving. The agency adopted an interim rule classifying dronabinol as a Schedule II substance in March, and the Food and Drug Administration approved a new drug application for dronabinol in July, recommending that DEA make its rule final. This week’s action was not unexpected, but is weirdly ironic on several levels. [B]The classification of dronabinal as a Schedule II substance means that a synthetic version of marijuana can be legally prescribed throughout the country, while real marijuana is still classified as a dangerous Schedule I substance and remains illegal under federal law[/B] – except in the 29 states and the District of Columbia where medical cannabis is legal. Dronabinol is sold under the brand named Syndros by Insys Therapeutics, a controversial Arizona drug maker beset by allegations that another one of its products – a potent fentanyl spray called Subsys – is responsible for hundreds of overdose deaths. The DEA has been aggressively going after doctors who prescribed Subsys and accepted speaking fees from Insys, and several company officials have been indicted on fraud, racketeering and kickback charges. Snydros is similar to Marinol, another medication derived from marijuana that comes in pill form. The DEA's action is also notable because it gives Insys the exclusive right to manufacture and sell its liquid formulation of dronabinol without having to worry about competition. Any other synthetic version not sold as Syndros will still be considered a Schedule I substance, on par with LSD, heroin and marijuana. “[B]It should be noted as a preliminary matter that any form of dronabinol other than in an FDA-approved drug product remains a schedule I controlled substance[/B], and those who handle such material remain subject to the regulatory controls, and administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions, applicable to schedule I controlled substances set forth in the CSA (Controlled Substance Act) and DEA regulations,” the DEA said. According to Healthcare Bluebook, a one-month supply of Syndros will cost about $2,000 at major pharmacy chains. A "fair price" for Syndros is listed as $1,000. Insys Thereapeutics drew the ire of marijuana advocates last year when it donated $500,000 to a campaign against the legalization of marijuana in Arizona. [B]The company is worried about the medical use of “natural cannabis,” but has petitioned the DEA to reschedule another synthetic cannabidiol (CBD) that is derived from marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule IV. [/B][/quote] [url]https://www.painnewsnetwork.org/stories/2017/11/24/dea-gives-final-approval-to-synthetic-marijuana-drug[/url] Emphasis my own

For reference This is Dronabinol, the "synthetic THC" [t]http://www.newdruginfo.com/pharmacopeia/usp28/v28230/uspnf/pub/images/v28230/g-298.gif[/t] This is natural THC [t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Tetrahydrocannabinol.svg/1200px-Tetrahydrocannabinol.svg.png[/t] And this is the alternative to Dronabinol, Marinol [t]https://theodora.com/drugs/images/406.jpg[/t] This is an interesting move, does this mean that in states where medical marijuana is legalized, you can be prescribed this Dronabinol by your doctor for insomnia/malnourishment/glaucoma? Or are the original rules still in place - cancer/AIDS patients only?

I think you've got your structures confused. The last one is closer to THC as the steriochemistry is not defined. Dronabinol and marinol are the same compound, just different names.

DEA approved? Synthetic? I'll pass, and the DEA can take a god damn hike with their ridiculous scheduling of cannabis. The US government has known this whole time that cannabis is not as dangerous/more-so than heroin, yet this dumb-ass DEA can't get it's shit together and reclassify the god damn plant. Who pays these assholes? Can we stop paying them until they smarten the fuck up? Either way, I'm gonna keep buying and smoking black market cannabis and I ain't about to stop any time soon. I've been smoking since the 80's, and I'm gonna still be smoking when I'm 80. Come and get me DEA, I'm in Canada so good fucking luck.

Hopefully this isn't fucking destructive like every previous synthetic marijuana product that has come before. I knew some pepole who got permanently screwed up from spice back when it was legal to sell in every gas station

[QUOTE]According to Healthcare Bluebook, a one-month supply of Syndros will cost about $2,000 at major pharmacy chains. A "fair price" for Syndros is listed as $1,000.[/QUOTE] For $2000 I could buy at least [I]half a pound[/I] of medical-grade weed, or about as much weed as a daily smoker might smoke in a year and change.

[QUOTE=ThatOldAgeDud;52927658]DEA approved? Synthetic? I'll pass, and the DEA can take a god damn hike with their ridiculous scheduling of cannabis. The US government has known this whole time that cannabis is not as dangerous/more-so than heroin, yet this dumb-ass DEA can't get it's shit together and reclassify the god damn plant. Who pays these assholes? Can we stop paying them until they smarten the fuck up? Either way, I'm gonna keep buying and smoking black market cannabis and I ain't about to stop any time soon. I've been smoking since the 80's, and I'm gonna still be smoking when I'm 80. Come and get me DEA, I'm in Canada so good fucking luck.[/QUOTE] The DEA doesn't give a shit about you if you're not an american :v:

[QUOTE=PaChIrA;52927741]The DEA doesn't give a shit about you if you're not an american :v:[/QUOTE] Oh. v:v:v They can still take a fuckin' hike with their stupid classifications. What ever happened to common god-damn sense in this world? If the shit isn't actually as dangerous as heroin like the old white racists of yesteryear claimed, then reclassify the fucking thing and stop trying to prolong this retarded "war" against cannabis. And fuck the big corporations who shell out money to anti-cannabis things.

[QUOTE=_Kent_;52927695]Hopefully this isn't fucking destructive like every previous synthetic marijuana product that has come before. I knew some pepole who got permanently screwed up from spice back when it was legal to sell in every gas station[/QUOTE] I think I have smoked spice once, and boy let me tell you, as someone who smoked for a few years never have I ever felt as shitty as I did smoking that, and I even smoke a dirty once or twice in my life. I think I'd steer clear of any synthetic shit, and just stick to the godly grown green.

[QUOTE=Quark:;52927605]For reference This is Dronabinol, the "synthetic THC" This is natural THC And this is the alternative to Dronabinol, Marinol This is an interesting move, does this mean that in states where medical marijuana is legalized, you can be prescribed this Dronabinol by your doctor for insomnia/malnourishment/glaucoma? Or are the original rules still in place - cancer/AIDS patients only?[/QUOTE] Marinol is a registered trademark of AbbVie Inc. for their formulation of dronabinol, which is the generic name for THC when used in drug formulations. They are all the same molecule.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52927726]For $2000 I could buy at least [I]half a pound[/I] of medical-grade weed, or about as much weed as a daily smoker might smoke in a year and change.[/QUOTE] DEA: "Well this isn't profitable, should be illegal'

I've never heard anything but bad shit when it comes to synthetic marijuana. Ironic that they consider the natural form to be more dangerous and harmful. I'd stick with the natural form, especially if that stuffs manufactured by government goons.

[QUOTE=Cureless;52927799][b]Ironic[/b] that they consider the natural form to be more dangerous and harmful.[/QUOTE] I think the word you're looking for is "Idiotic".

[QUOTE=Cureless;52927799]I've never heard anything but bad shit when it comes to synthetic marijuana. Ironic that they consider the natural form to be more dangerous and harmful. I'd stick with the natural form, especially if that stuffs manufactured by government goons.[/QUOTE] The "bad shit" you heard was probably about synthetic cannabinoids that have a much higher potency than THC, and a longer half-life.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52927832]The "bad shit" you heard was probably about synthetic cannabinoids that have a much higher potency than THC, and a longer half-life.[/QUOTE] Does "longer half-life" mean "you stay higher for longer"? If so, sign me the fuck up for some of that shit, son!

I can't believe we are doing research into synthesizing cannabis when there is so much of the natural shit out there and the plant has so many more benefits than any synthesized drug. Fuck the DEA and fuck the pharmaceutical companies.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;52927847]I can't believe we are doing research into synthesizing cannabis when there is so much of the natural shit out there and the plant has so many more benefits than any synthesized drug. Fuck the DEA and fuck the pharmaceutical companies.[/QUOTE] What? It's literally the same thing. In all likelihood it is easier to synthesise THC in high purity rather than extract, isolate, and purify it from the plant material.

Since the plant is so easy to grow I expect that "synthetic" THC is just extracted from the plant and then purified to get the one enantiomer. The only reason why the "natural" method of administration is safer is probably because you get less of the good stuff unless you smoke enough to be at risk of oxygen deprivation.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;52927847]I can't believe we are doing research into synthesizing cannabis when there is so much of the natural shit out there and the plant has so many more benefits than any synthesized drug. Fuck the DEA and fuck the pharmaceutical companies.[/QUOTE] Synthesizing it affords a lot of consistency and security though, they'd be certain of the dosage, strength, and the source of the chemicals. To pharmaceutical companies that makes a lot of difference. This drug isn't for recreational purposes, it's very specifically for treating patients with the symptoms that regular marijuana would treat. Alternatives are (usually) always good. This may even lead to the DEA and FDA taking an additional look at natural cannabis.

[QUOTE=ThatOldAgeDud;52927752]Oh. v:v:v They can still take a fuckin' hike with their stupid classifications. What ever happened to common god-damn sense in this world? If the shit isn't actually as dangerous as heroin like the old white racists of yesteryear claimed, then reclassify the fucking thing and stop trying to prolong this retarded "war" against cannabis. And fuck the big corporations who shell out money to anti-cannabis things.[/QUOTE] Ah, but here's where it makes sense: It's profitable to everyone but the average citizen. The politician gets increased popularity/re-elected by being tough on drugs. The police department gets its budget renewed and increased to give it more tools to fight the war on drugs. The DEA gets its powers maintained and increased, and its budget as well, the more it promotes the war on drugs. Private prisons make a shitton of money on the backs of everyone locked up for having a quarter-ounce and a bong. Lawyers make bank off of prosecuting or defending simple drug offenders. Hydroponics equipment manufacturers profit from their goods being hotly desired not only by legitimate applications but tons of grow-ops, and since these ops are built for illicit profit, not above-board sustainability, equipment is frequently replaced from being poorly maintained, abandoned, confiscated in drug busts, and a number of other ways grow-ops need new stuff regularly. The growers, driers, trimmers, and distributors all profit via the obvious black market mechanism of selling to dealers. Dealers obviously profit by selling weed (and fuck knows what else) to consumers on the street. Everyone above benefits from marijuana remaining illegal and scarce on the black market. The greater the black market activity, the better for them all. They all profit the more weed is made illegal and the harsher the punishments. Legalized marijuana undercuts the growth and benefit to all of the above groups; the growers and the production chain can still operate, but their prices have to come down because they can't charge the premium of black market contraband anymore and they'll be in competition with large industrial-farming producers. The only one who gains if weed is made legal is the citizen consumer, and everyone else loses out. Well, that and a [I]massive[/I] windfall in taxes, but those taxes don't go to funding police to continue to do their existing jobs (with less to do now that marijuana users aren't criminals), they don't fund the DEA, they don't fund lawyers for public defenders and state prosecutors, so they're still losing out, and they're the ones keeping it illegal. It makes perfect sense. It's just another symptom of how bought out the USA's governance is. For a more detailed look at how this dynamic works and a short history of marijuana prohibition, here is an award-winning documentary called The Union: The Business Behind Getting High. It is available on Netflix, but the documentary was previously uploaded to YT by the creators themselves in order to ensure that anyone could watch it. [video=youtube;Cg2ZQDXzJr0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg2ZQDXzJr0[/video] [QUOTE=Protocol7;52927847]I can't believe we are doing research into synthesizing cannabis when there is so much of the natural shit out there and the plant has so many more benefits than any synthesized drug. Fuck the DEA and fuck the pharmaceutical companies.[/QUOTE] In fairness to the pharma machine, there is a justifiable reason. Synthetic THC can be measured out in precise dosages. Natural cannabis flowers vary in potency from branch to branch and even nug to nug. Unless you move to an extracted/purified form that's been averaged out across such a large sample that purity can be controlled for precisely, this level of variation is unacceptable in pharmacological drug applications. A physician must be able to account for precise dosage when prescribing or administering a drug because a patient death or a malpractice suit is the last thing they want to have happen due to an unpredicted drug interaction or a severe side effect from an incorrect dosage that either overdoses the patient or overstays the expected half-life when trying to time drugs apart to avoid direct interaction. This is a problem that's really difficult to solve for something like a marijuana plant which may have different potencies on the sides facing away from and to the sun in the field. A fatal or severe interaction is unlikely to be a problem with effectively smoking a bit more weed than intended, but you can also cause a patient to get higher than expected and cause them to be legally impaired at inconvenient/legally hazardous times. Also, in very controlled circumstances, low/no-THC marijuana is prescribed to children (e.g. cancer patients); the margins for a correct dose are much tighter with a child and while they'll be taking cannabis to relieve them of a much bigger problem, there's evidence that childhood weed use has developmental impairment effects so they should definitely not exceed dosage unless their doc signs off on it. This is a real issue with the wider acceptance of medical marijuana as an accepted, prescribed medical treatment taken seriously by medical professionals: it must be controlled precisely, and only the most expensive (meaning, not cost-effective) grow-ops are even somewhat comparable to easily-achievable standard acceptable laboratory conditions for a chemically-synthesized pill. Smoking weed has to come with a "your mileage may vary" disclaimer on it if it's prescribed, while a pill is an entirely repeatable experience unless there's a major quality control failure somewhere.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52927904]For a more detailed look at how this dynamic works and a short history of marijuana prohibition, here is an award-winning documentary called The Union: The Business Behind Getting High. It is available on Netflix, but the documentary was previously uploaded to YT by the creators themselves in order to ensure that anyone could watch it. [/QUOTE] I've seen that before. Same with Reefer Madness and pretty much every other marijuana documentary out there. Harry Anslinger needed a scapegoat to make more money for his corporation or whatever the hell it was he was a part of and needed money for, so he decided to exploit white people's fears about minorities ("blacks & mexicans" as it was put back then) going crazy from da reefer and chasing white wimminz. And thus, here we are today with old outdated racially-motivated laws regarding cannabis still in place. If time travel was real, I'd go back in time and kick Anslinger in the family jewels.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;52927847]I can't believe we are doing research into synthesizing cannabis when there is so much of the natural shit out there and the plant has so many more benefits than any synthesized drug. Fuck the DEA and fuck the pharmaceutical companies.[/QUOTE] When you have minor pains, do you chew on a hunk of willow bark, or do you take a synthetically-produced aspirin tablet? This isn't a recreational application we're talking about, it's medicinal use, where the dosage, half-life, and uptake rate all need to be consistent and controllable. It's far easier to do that synthetically than to try to extract it from a natural product.

[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;52927874]Since the plant is so easy to grow I expect that "synthetic" THC is just extracted from the plant and then purified to get the one enantiomer. The only reason why the "natural" method of administration is safer is probably because you get less of the good stuff unless you smoke enough to be at risk of oxygen deprivation.[/QUOTE] Naturally-occurring THC is exclusively the (–)-trans [i.e. the (6a[I]R[/I],10a[I]R[/I])] isomer. I did a brief search but I haven't actually found any solid literature procedures for the preparation of dronabinol so I'm actually quite curious as to how and why they synthesise it.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52927954]Naturally-occurring THC is exclusively the (–)-trans [i.e. the (6a[I]R[/I],10a[I]R[/I])] isomer. I did a brief search but I haven't actually found any solid literature procedures for the preparation of dronabinol so I'm actually quite curious as to how and why they synthesise it.[/QUOTE] Perhaps they chemically modify to make purification easier or to get an intermediate that they can easily make derivatives from. I can't imagine that purifying tons of the stuff via chromatography can be very fun or cost efficient.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52927904]Ah, but here's where it makes sense: It's profitable to everyone but the average citizen. The politician gets increased popularity/re-elected by being tough on drugs. The police department gets its budget renewed and increased to give it more tools to fight the war on drugs. The DEA gets its powers maintained and increased, and its budget as well, the more it promotes the war on drugs. Private prisons make a shitton of money on the backs of everyone locked up for having a quarter-ounce and a bong. Lawyers make bank off of prosecuting or defending simple drug offenders. Hydroponics equipment manufacturers profit from their goods being hotly desired not only by legitimate applications but tons of grow-ops, and since these ops are built for illicit profit, not above-board sustainability, equipment is frequently replaced from being poorly maintained, abandoned, confiscated in drug busts, and a number of other ways grow-ops need new stuff regularly. The growers, driers, trimmers, and distributors all profit via the obvious black market mechanism of selling to dealers. Dealers obviously profit by selling weed (and fuck knows what else) to consumers on the street. Everyone above benefits from marijuana remaining illegal and scarce on the black market. The greater the black market activity, the better for them all. They all profit the more weed is made illegal and the harsher the punishments. Legalized marijuana undercuts the growth and benefit to all of the above groups; the growers and the production chain can still operate, but their prices have to come down because they can't charge the premium of black market contraband anymore and they'll be in competition with large industrial-farming producers. The only one who gains if weed is made legal is the citizen consumer, and everyone else loses out. Well, that and a [I]massive[/I] windfall in taxes, but those taxes don't go to funding police to continue to do their existing jobs (with less to do now that marijuana users aren't criminals), they don't fund the DEA, they don't fund lawyers for public defenders and state prosecutors, so they're still losing out, and they're the ones keeping it illegal. It makes perfect sense. It's just another symptom of how bought out the USA's governance is. For a more detailed look at how this dynamic works and a short history of marijuana prohibition, here is an award-winning documentary called The Union: The Business Behind Getting High. It is available on Netflix, but the documentary was previously uploaded to YT by the creators themselves in order to ensure that anyone could watch it.[/QUOTE] There's a lot of weird problems. Hurts the average person, who happily apparently vote for tough-on-drugs policy, ergo bought politicians? The windfall in tax revenue sounds incredibly unlikely too given that illegal marijuana is thought to be worth about $50 bn a year. especially because you could justify a pretty nice tax on marijuana due to its strong links to psychosis and other associated problems that just come with smoking shit. The DEA budget is tiny too. Cops [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/01/11/survey-two-thirds-of-cops-say-marijuana-laws-should-be-relaxed/"]don't even want marijuana[/URL] the way it is either. Private prisons are bad, but they don't have much to do with marijuana. A tiny amount of marijuana arrests lead to prison, and those who are imprisoned overwhelmingly fall under either the categories of being charged with other crimes at the same time, or distribution, not merely possession.

Synthetic marihuana is fucking horrifying! I can't believe that shit is going to be anywhere near a substitute for natural thc. I got scared of my own hight on it, and my motor skill movements was all kinds of fucked up so it looked like a was quasimodo the way i was hunched over. Scary shit bro!

[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;52927972]Perhaps they chemically modify to make purification easier or to get an intermediate that they can easily make derivatives from. I can't imagine that purifying tons of the stuff via chromatography can be very fun or cost efficient.[/QUOTE] That's what I thought too, a lot of literature procedures were small scale and involved column chromatography. As it turns out, there [I]is[/I] a fairly well-known semisynthetic route to crude THC, and derivatization of the crude product to a sulfonate ester allows for purification via crystallization. Hydrolysis of the sulfonate ester then affords highly pure dronabinol. [url="https://www.google.com/patents/US8106244"]This patent[/url] describes the whole process. That route certainly isn't the only one, but I'd imagine for large scale production it's more economical to synthesise rather than extract and purify it from the plant material.

[QUOTE=dannass;52927980]Synthetic marihuana is fucking horrifying! I can't believe that shit is going to be anywhere near a substitute for natural thc. I got scared of my own hight on it, and my motor skill movements was all kinds of fucked up so it looked like a was quasimodo the way i was hunched over. Scary shit bro![/QUOTE] This isn't referring to spice, this is actual synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol, which is actually pretty impressive if it works the way it's intended.

Nothing good is ever associated with the word Synthetic. Esp drugs

[QUOTE=HookerVomit;52928427]Nothing good is ever associated with the word Synthetic. Esp drugs[/QUOTE] Synthetic is good. Synthetic means controlled, repeatable, and precise dosage. Synthetic means extremely pure ingredients, guaranteed to be free of a wide variety of toxic impurities. Synthetic means sterile. All of these valuable properties are achievable with drugs derived from natural sources, but it requires so much more effort to ensure that they meet the very stringent specifications that it's [I]usually[/I] not worth it. I say usually because some complex natural products are too difficult to synthesise in any reasonable yield, so they're either isolated directly from the biological material (morphine, quinine, artemisinin), or synthesised from precursors produced biologically (paclitaxel, cephalosporins, LSD).