************************************************************** alt.drugs Clandestine Chemistry Primer & FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) Version 2.51 95-05-19 (c) 1995 Yogi Shan yshan@bnr.ca ************************************************************** "Give me an underground laboratory, half a dozen atom-smashers, and a beautiful girl in a diaphanous veil waiting to be turned into a chimpanzee, and I care not who writes the nation's laws." -- S.J. Perelman Copyright Notice ---------------- This document is Copyright (c) 1995 Yogi Shan. This text, in whole or in part, may not be sold in any medium, including but not limited to electronic, CD-ROM, or print, without the express written permission of Yogi Shan. Permission is granted to reproduce for individual, personal, non- commercial use, in electronic form *ONLY*, provided that no part of this document is modified in any way, including this notice. I reserve the right to revoke this permission at any time (though I don't presently anticipate doing so). Any commercial, organizational, institutional, or governmental use is expressly forbidden without prior written permission. REWARD OFFERED!: If you know of any violation of this copyright notice, please show your gratitude to the author for making available this document, by letting him know. As well, I'll give you 25% of any damage award (net) I get from legal action. If you have found this document of use, a $5 donation is requested to any of the following: the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Amnesty International, or any schizophrenia/mental health charitable organization. Please let the author (yshan@bnr.ca) know if you have made such a donation. It will truly brighten his day. Thanks! Revision History ---------------- Initial Draft Release...........................v. 1.0 950319 Major Revision: correction of an ungodly number of typos & errors; most sections revised, and new material added....... v. 2.0 950419 Added Synthetic Heroin section, & amphet. impurities, and many small corrections..........v. 2.5 950518 Acknowledgements ---------------- Thanks to Malcolm, Denni, and Lamont for their comments and input. Disclaimer ---------- Nothing in this document should [obviously] be construed as advocating or promoting the criminal violation of any laws. Neither does the author take responsibility should you poison, injure, or blow yourself or others to smithereens doing something alluded to in this document. Introduction ------------ It was the best of times. It was the worst of times. UseNet is one of the most amazing phenomenon I have ever seen: a dynamic synthesis of human knowledge, thought, and under- standing. Where else but on the 'net could I post a comment about an obscure line from the SF cult movie "Bladerunner" in the evening, and have half a dozen follow-ups from fellow aficionados scattered across the globe, by the next day? But as the human spirit soars to unimaginable heights, so does it wallow in the gutter of depravity with equal, if not greater joy. As a high traffic newsgroup, alt.drugs generates about 130 posts a day. And according to news.lists estimates (Jan. 1995), has 120,000 daily readers, a possibly conserv- ative figure. A topic of continuing interest -- enough to result in the 1994 spawning of its own subgroup, alt.drugs.chemistry -- is the subject of "underground" or "clandestine" chemistry: the covert manufacture of illicit drugs. In an undoubtedly vain attempt to stem the flow of wasted bandwidth arising from idiotic "How do you make ?" questions on the alt.drugs* and sci.chem newsgroups, I have assembled this FAQ/Primer. ************************************************************** Table of Contents ----------------- 1. Net.resources alt.drugs alt.drugs.chemistry sci.chem misc.legal & misc.legal.moderated anon remailers 2. Books: The Good, The Bad, And the Ugly Psychedelic Chemistry PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story Marijuana Chemistry The Anarchist Cookbook Other Books Pop Culture 3. So You Want to make The Merck Index Chemical Abstracts 4. Historical References on Underground Chemistry "No One Expects the Spanish Inquisition!" Speed Labs LSD Manufacturing A Brief Bibliography on Synthetic Heroin 5. "You Have Greatly Misunderstood the Purpose of the Net" Trade Secrets Killing the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg "Please e-mail me the answer to my [Stupid] Question." "Why Didn't Anyone Answer my [Stupid] Question?" Is the DEA on the Net? Can I Rely on Net.answers to my Questions? 6. The Law 7. Morality & Ethics ************************************************************** 1. Net.resources ************************************************************** "It's propping up the governments, In Columbia & Peru, You ask any DEA man, He'll say, 'There's nothin' we can do.' From the Office of the President, Right down to me & you. Me & you." -- "Smuggler's Blues" Glenn Frey/Jack Tempchin (1984) alt.drugs --------- A document listing a plethora of net.resources may be found at: http://hyperreal.com/drugs/faqs/resources.html ftp://hyperreal.com/drugs/00-MORE.FILES Other WWW sites are: http://www.pitt.edu/~mbtst3/druginfo.html http://www.hyperreal.com/~lamont/pharm/pharm.html There are a variety of excellent FAQs and other documents available in the hyperreal.com anonymous FTP site (the "official" alt.drugs FTP site). In case it changes (making this reference stale), the pointer to the FTP site is regularly posted to alt.drugs as the alt.drugs FAQ and the Net Resources FAQ. The "Australian Natural Highs FAQ" and "Chemical Extraction FAQ" are particularly note-worthy, since extraction of botanical drugs is the procedure most likely to be successful for the amateur. The chemical synthesis section of "PIHKAL" (supra) may also be found at hyperreal.com. The book "E for Ecstasy" (1993), by the Englishman, Nicholas Saunders (Nicholas@neals.cityscape.co.uk) is also available at hyperreal.com as well as at: http://www.cityscape.co.uk/users/bt22/ There's an interesting piece in the Notes section (at the end), describing the trials and tribulations of clandestine MDMA manufacture as experienced by some English entrepreneurs. The appendix (by Alexander Shulgin) lists a number of synthetic references for MDMA, though it is far from complete. The MDMA FAQ at hyperreal.com has a good chemistry section too. As well, some very high quality chemical and pharmacological information is occasionally posted by some readers of alt.drugs. However, the signal-to-noise ratio is very low (< 1:100), so you have to pay close attention. Even worse are the idiots who have read a book or two and now fancy themselves as experts. They are not. As with the rest of the net, reputation is a good *indication*. Majority rules is not. Never gamble where issues concern health, safety, or freedom. In the interests of eugenics, feel free to ignore the previous statement. Though the focus is on "smart" drugs, alt.psychoactives is a related group with a much lower traffic level that you might want to check out/post to. Ditto for alt.drugs.psychedelic. alt.drugs.chemistry ------------------- Make it easy for the DEA: post your chemistry questions here. After all, we wouldn't want them having to wade through a lot of silly "I'm really baked! (Hi, Mom!)" posts. Less well propagated on the net (by half!) than alt.drugs, for obvious reasons. In order to maximize your audience, cross-post to alt.drugs if you're going to post here. sci.chem -------- Many a great mind will attempt to tap into the knowledge-base of *real* chemists in their glorious quest for riches, er, I mean enlightenment, by posting thinly disguised drug manufact- uring questions to sci.chem. Usually related to the manufact- ure of methamphetamine, these queries generally fool only the totally naive. The questions are generally phrased around the topic of reduction of benzylic alcohols, reductive amination, or the ever-popular benzyl methyl ketone, the archaic pre-IUPAC name for P-2-P, the notorious (and illegal) amphetamine precursor. Such questions seldom produce the desired result, though I suppose there's no harm in trying, as long as you don't mind being flamed, or having your name passed to the relevant civil authorities. On the other hand, I've also seen some craftily worded drug synthesis questions successfully run the gauntlet without detection. Posting anonymously tips off many people to the true nature of your (nefarious) motivations, by the way. misc.legal & misc.legal.moderated --------------------------------- Get all your legal questions answered NOW. There's no Newsfeed in Leavenworth. anon remailers -------------- Anon.penet.fi is good, the many U.S. cypherpunks anon remailers are better, and PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), for encrypting e-mail, should be de rigueur. The fact that these utilities are easily available (check out alt.security.pgp, alt.privacy.anon-server, alt.anonymous, and sci.crypt; or wait for the two PGP FAQs to appear in news.answers or alt.answers; ask around if you need help!), but not widely used, is _de facto_ evidence that drug use impairs good judgement, if not the mental faculties, in general. Finger remailer-list@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu for a list of various anonyous remailers. ************************************************************* 2. Books: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly ************************************************************* "[It's] the last American folk adventure... the light in the moon...narcotics agents chasing you all over the land. It's a fantasy made real." -- George Marquardt, convicted drug chemist, on clandestine chemistry As with the net in general, there is a paucity of accurate information available on the subject of illicit drugs. Even the fact of publication is not necessarily a guarantee of any sort of technical legitimacy, particularly, though not limited to, "counter-culture" efforts. There are many reasons why people write books, but making money is one of the biggest. When the subject is of an illegal nature, the likelihood of inadequate, incomplete, or blatantly wrong information is even higher than usual. Companies like Paladin, Delta Press, and Loompanics are typical purveyors of such trashy misinformation under cover of the U.S. First Amendment. Ever seen the list of "underground" books by Ragnar Benson & Duncan Long? How many things can these guys be "expert" in? Not bloody likely. What's that maxim? If you can't do, teach. One of the more egregious examples of gross error in the drug book realm, was the "Cocaine Consumer's Handbook" by one David Lee (Berkeley, California: And/Or Press, 1976). In it, Mr. Lee flogged the notorious "Clorox [bleach] Test" for cocaine. This test, described in excruciating detail, and complete with color photographs, purported to detect not only eight different adulterants and diluents, but the relative percentage purity of the cocaine itself. Alas, several years later, the test was finally unmasked as utter nonsense by PharmChem, a reputable Menlo Park, CA street drug analysis organization. Undeterred, Mr. Lee -- shameless scallywag and possible shill for the Clorox Company -- came out in 1981 with a brand new book, "The Cocaine Handbook: An Essential [sic] Reference." Alluding coyly to the PharmChem "controversy", Lee continued to include the Clorox Test (now illustrated with black & white photos), but added an equally useless "foil burn" test (with color pics), along with the detailed procedure for home manufacture of freebase ("crack") cocaine. Cocaine use had by now begun to lose its cachet, as well as more than the occasional user, so the ever-helpful Lee covered his bases and assuaged his conscience by including a dozen-odd page list of addiction service agencies. So it goes. There are many other such errors large and small that have made it into print. Books like the "Anarchist Cookbook" (infra) are ridden with them. For instance grafting a hop plant onto a marijuana root (debunked by Crombie & Crombie (1975) and Starks (1990), infra), and making meth from soft coal, ammonia, and bluing compound (described in "Complete Guide to the Street Drug Game" by Scott French. Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart (1976)) are all complete bunk. Militating against the writing of quality books is that the fact of the matter is that if you gain enough knowledge to be a competent underground chemist, you can snag good paying employment -- and not risk your freedom and mortal soul through involvement with the drug business. (Then again, there's the infamous case of the DuPont chemist ["Chem & Eng News" 851223 & 860310] who, inspired by lurid media accounts of Fentanyl analog manufacture, decided to go into the synthetic heroin business out of the blue. Unfortunately for him, he had no contacts for distributing it. In attempting to make such contacts he was promptly indicted, convicted, and sentenced to a long prison term. For apostasy, more than anything else. Cf. "New Scientist", 930807, p. 21-22, for a different case at Parke-Davis Pharmaceuticals.) Nonetheless, reliable books on clandestine chemistry have been published. Below are some of the more accurate efforts I have seen. It is no coincidence that the "good" ones originate from Berkeley, California, a center of politically-motivated underground chemistry since the early 60's. These books may be illegal and/or subject to confiscation by postal/customs authorities in countries such as Australia. "Psychedelic Chemistry" ---------------------- M.V.Smith. Port Townsend, Washington: Loompanics (1981). (loompanx@olympus.net) (P.O. Box 1197, Port Townsend WA 98368). Largely abstracted from the specialist literature, PC is the hands-down leader in a very small field. It's a classic. LSD, mescaline, psychedelic amphetamines, and THC are thoroughly covered, among others. One of the more interesting "recipes" is an actual underground one for the large-scale production of LSD; to wit, a 2.6 million (!) dose batch. M.V. Smith (a reference to Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land") is a pseudonym for Michael Starks, author of "Marijuana Chemistry" (see below). PC was originally published by San Francisco's RipOff Press, and -- unfortunately for the budding felon -- requires a thorough grounding in organic chemistry to make heads or tails of. Though out of date, it is generally accurate. There are two known serious mistakes. One where hydrogen peroxide is substituted for water, with possibly unfortunate results. The second error is the extension of the Ritter reaction to MDA. According to JACS 74:763 (1952), this reaction apparently fails with safrole and other ring-substituted allylbenzenes. Loompanics also sells a few other books on clandestine chemistry, which range from trash to OK. An example is Jim DeKorne's "Psychedelic Shamanism", which is in the worthless trash category. DeKorne is apparently a devotee of botanical psychedelics -- though not devoted enough to bother accurately documenting chemical extraction procedures. "PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story" ------------------------------ ("Phenethylamines I Have Known And Loved"), Alexander & Ann Shulgin. Berkeley, California: Transform Press (1991). (P.O. Box 13675, Berkeley, CA 94701). Authored by a published, legitimate, and respected chemist (his wife is co-author), PIHKAL thoroughly outlines the synthesis of a couple of hundred psychedelic amphetamines (N,a-alkylarylethylamines and congeners), including MDMA. PIHKAL is an expanded and metamorphosed version of a lengthy chapter by Shulgin in the "Handbook of Psycho- pharmacology", 11:243-333 (1978). Like PC, you have to be a chemist to understand the recipes, since the explanation of the synthetic routes are either sparse or non-existent. The recipe section is available at the hyperreal.com FTP site. It is believed that Dr. Shulgin is less respected -- in more staid circles -- since publication of his magnum opus. "Marijuana Chemistry" -------------------- Michael Starks. Berkeley, California: Ronin Press (1990). (P.O. Box 1035, Berkeley, CA 94701). A detailed examination, written for the layman, of the world's most thoroughly persecuted peasant inebriant. Extensively covers potency issues in growing, home hash oil manufacture, and isomerization. Good discussion on the pros and cons of various extraction solvents. Contains an updated section on THC synthesis from PC, which Starks also wrote. Originally published as "Marijuana Potency" (And/Or Press, 1977). "The Anarchist Cookbook" ----------------------- William Powell. Secaucus, NJ: Barricade Books (1971) ($22 [includes S&H] from P.O.Box 1401, Secaucus, N.J. 07096). I mention the infamous AC because of its notoriety, popular appeal (over a million copies in circulation), and simply because it was the first. The AC, containing sections on the home manufacture of drugs and explosives, was the first mass market publication created with the express purpose of subverting modern technology in order to overthrow the government. For this reason alone, the book is a classic. Unfortunately, the book is outdated and full of all sorts of mistakes, though most of the dangerous ones are confined to the explosives chapter. The DMT recipe will *not* work (you have to use anhydrous dimethylamine, not the 40% aqueous commerical solution that the AC implies), for instance, Aldrich won't sell you trimethoxyphenylacetonitrile, and the "bananadine" and peanut skin recipes are nonsense. Thus, I cannot recommend the AC except as a curiosity, a stepping stone to more serious works, or to impress cheap dates with your hipness. But then again, with its healthy dollop of revolutionary leftist ideology, I think that the AC was never meant to be so much an end in itself, but more a beginning. Other Books ----------- "Cannabis Alchemy" (by D.Gold), "Dr. Atomic's Marijuana Multiplier" (by Larry Todd), "Basic Drug Manufacture", and "The Book of Acid" (by Adam Gottlieb) are several old, but reasonably accurate pamphlets. They are are available from a number of counter-culture suppliers (such as FS Book Co., P.O. Box 417457, Sacramento, CA 95841) that advertise in such drug publications as the mass-market "High Times" (hightimes@echonyc.com) and the smaller "Psychedelic Illuminations" (PIMagazine@aol.com or jkent@jkent.seanet.com) (P.O. Box 3186, Fullerton, California 92634). There are other books available from Loompanics that I have seen mentioned in alt.drugs, however I off-loaded my rakish friends many years ago, and so haven't had the opportunity to borrow and review them (donations cheerfully accepted!). These include "Recreational Drugs" (by Prof. Buzz), "Secrets of Methamphetamine Manufacture" (3rd ed., Uncle Fester), and "The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories" (Jack B. Nimble). No word on whether a "Get Out of Jail Free" Card comes with purchase. The imaginative pseudonyms may give you some clue as to the quality of these books, which is quite uneven. Fester seems to focus on the Leuckart reaction, which though simple to do, has a rather low yield. It's obvious he was clever enough to locate the Org. Synth. Collective Volumes, though this is not particularly clever, in my mind. He repeats the Ritter reaction error mentioned previously. Pop Culture ----------- In the fiction category, "The Alchemist" by Kenneth Goddard (N.Y.: Bantam, 1985), is a cliche-ridden potboiler about a manufacturer of PCP analogs. Gives the whole business a bad name [the fiction book business, that is]. A sleazy biker chemist is portrayed as a minor character in the 1991 movie "Rush". He's the one that doses the female undercover cop [Jennifer Jason Leigh] with some sort of psychedelic. "Fixing the Shadow", stars Charlie Sheen as a narc infilitrating some bikers running a speed lab. A nice color poster showing a ninja-ed out raiding party member sporting a "DEA Clandestine Laboratory Enforcement Team" patch is available from Delta Press (deltagrp@eldonet.com) for $11.95 + 3.75 S&H. ************************************************************** 3. So You Want to Make ************************************************************** "And then there came the night of the greatest ever raid, They arrested every drug that had ever been made, They took 82 laws, Through 82 doors, And they didn't halt the pull, Till the cells were all full, Cuz Julie's workin' for the Drug Squad, Julie's been workin' for the Drug Squad." -- "Julie's in the Drug Squad" The Clash (1978) The "Merck Index" ---------------- I can answer 90% of the technical questions posted to alt.drugs by merely leafing through the copy I have at home of this exceedingly useful book. It's truly the chemist's bible. The Merck is a dictionary of thousands of chemicals, listing their structure, basic chemical and pharmacological properties, and pointers to synthesis and more detailed info. "The Merck" -- as it's referred to by those in the know -- will be in the reference section of any university science library, and any decent public library. No, it isn't available on the Net. The Merck -- not to be confused with the "Merck Manual" -- is a window to the scientific specialist literature. Expect to have to learn some chemistry to use it effectively. Your librarian can help you on locating the journals referenced (Don't worry, I doubt she'll have the slightest clue what you're up to.) Most of the articles you seek will be well-thumbed. Some will have been razored out of their volume: living testimony to the morals of many a drug user, unaware that desecrating books is the mark of low-born barbarians, and a sin against God and Man. "Chemical Abstracts" ------------------- Most of the syntheses referenced in the Merck will be in old, obscure, and sometimes difficult to obtain journals, even if you do live near a university. [Side Note: A number of people may have been needlessly harmed by a poorly made batch of the synthetic opiate, MPPP, because a paper on a previous instance of this happening was rejected by the mainstream medical journals (it was finally published in an obscure journal, "Psychiatry Research").] Have no fear, Chem. Abs. is here! Though the actual paper is *always* best, abstracts of U.S. and foreign chemical patents and journal articles can also be found in this invaluable journal. Any chem student, or the reference librarian, can show you how to use it. You'll have to learn even more chemistry to effectively use Chem. Abs. (Hint: Me = methyl, Ac = acetyl). Chem.Abs. is also good if you only read English, providing a convenient translation of foreign papers. (Personally, I have found that being able to translate German -- as well as the occasional French and Italian paper -- extremely useful in my forays into the literature). ************************************************************* 4. Historical References on Underground Chemistry ************************************************************* "I had a number of projects that I wished to pursue in France. I wanted to learn to speak the language, I wanted to break my father loose from his grief over the death of my mother, and especially, I wanted to put a methylenedioxy group in place of two of the methoxy groups in Trimethoxyamphetamine." -- Dr. Alexander Shulgin "PIHKAL" Ah yes. History, "the lie that all historians can agree on." (Mencken). There is a dearth of historical information available on the subject of underground/clandestine chemistry. Considering the shadowy and covert nature of the business, this is really not surprising. If I've missed any noteworthy publications, please let me know. I could also have written sections on MDMA, Quaaludes, PCP/Angel Dust, and heroin (both natural and synthetic analogs), but for reasons of brevity, I won't (except for a biblio on synthetic heroin). Interestingly, different drugs have radically different stories reflecting their unique origins, histories, markets, and pharmacology. Going back a few decades, the moonshining business in the rural Eastern U.S. provides an interesting historical antecedent to the modern day drug manufacturing business. Serious researchers are advised to examine this angle. I found the parallels quite fascinating, from the analogous precursor controls on sugar, to the flurry of Federal laws passed. "No One Expects the Spanish Inquisition!" ---------------------------------------- "A little poison now and then, that makes for agreeable dreams. And much poison in the end, for an agreeable death." -- "Thus Spake Zarathustra" Friedrich Nietzsche Probably the best layman's overview of the chemistry of illicit drugs may be found in the ground-breaking paper, "The Clandestine Drug Laboratory Situation in the U.S.", J.For.Sci., 28(1):18-31 (1983) by Richard S. Frank, then Chief of the DEA's Forensic Science Division. Complete with chemical diagrams, and covering the detailed synthetic routes to methamphetamine, amphetamine, P-2-P, MDA, PCP, and metha- qualone (quaaludes), the actual literature citations are conspic- uously absent, no doubt to prevent amateurs from using the article as a cookbook. Nonetheless, publication of such a complete blueprint represented a significant shift in strategy for the DEA's Forensic Division, which apparently decided that underground laboratory activity had become so widespread (it had: see next section) that the advantages of dissemination in the open literature -- education of state, local, and international forensic scientists and investigators -- outweighed the disadvantages. It is also interesting to note that this article deliberately provided clandestine chemists with a correction to a wrong procedure. An obscure method for producing methamphetamine involves the condensation of the Grignard, benzyl magnesium chloride, with other reactants. However the order of mixing of these reagents in one of the reaction's original literature cites (a Chem. Abs. abstract of a British Patent) is incorrect. This error was then reproduced in an underground drug-making guide. Unfortunately, even incorrectly mixed, instead of the reaction simply failing, a white, crystalline -- and toxic -- solid will still be produced ("Microgram", DEA, unpublished). Apparently open source publication was authorized with the knowledge that the information would reach clandestine chemists, and thereby avoid some potential deaths. No doubt this departure from the DEA's normal caginess must have sparked heated internal debate over its propriety. Speed Labs ---------- "Polydichloric Euthimal! Those stupid bastards are taking Polydichloric Euthimal! It's an amphetamine. Strongest thing you ever saw. Makes you feel *wonderful*." -- Dr. Lazarus "Outland" The amphetamines occupy a unique position in the world of underground chemistry, in that they are highly marketable, profitable, as well as easy to make, chemically-speaking. The rise of the speed lab during the early 60's is documented in "Love Needs Care" (David Smith & John Luce. Boston: Little, Brown, 1970), a chronicle of the travails of the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic during the Summer of Love, "The Speed Culture" (Lester Grinspoon & Peter Hedblom), and "Licit and Illicit Drugs" (Edward Brecher. Mt. Vernon, NY: Consumers Union, 1972). The first two books are out-of-print, but all three are classic works well worth locating for anyone interested in a variety of aspects of drug use in society. The years 1979/1980 ushered in an explosion in the number of clandestine speed labs, and an eleven-fold increase in speed lab busts, as the DEA and State narcotics enforcement agencies became proficient in tracking them down (GAO Report GGD-82-8 (1981) and Frank (1983), supra.). February 1980 saw the scheduling of the main clandestine precursor, phenyl-2-propanone (aka P-2-P). Within a few years the unregulated l-ephedrine had replaced P-2-P as the main methamphetamine precursor. Since P-2-P produces the racemic mixture, and l-ephedrine the more potent d-isomer, this was actually a step backward, from a law enforcement and public health perspective. Tandem legislative efforts culminated in a 1989 Texas State Law (Texas Health & Safety Code 481.080 - .81) making it a felony to purchase a round-bottomed flask (and other glassware) without a license ("Science", 263:753 (1994) and "New Scientist", 941022, p. 88). As a result of the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine, which appears to be centered in California and Texas, and is strongly correlated with the Big Four bike gangs (HAs, Banditos, Pagans, and Outlaws), who both finance the labs and run the distribution network, what I call the "golden age" of underground chemistry -- the late 60s to mid 70s -- is over. [One story I've heard was an HA method from the old days in Northern California. A 55-gallon steel drum would be filled with a mixture of P-2-P, methylamine, aluminum foil, etc. The lid was quickly sealed, and the drum rolled into a mountain stream for cooling. On returning after three days, if the drum had not exploded, it would now be filled with raw methamphetamine ready for purification.] The 60's bred a generation of "hippie" chemists, smugglers, and high-level dealers at least superficially motivated by idealism and the radical rejectionist politics of the times. This change of attitude was not lost on the pursuers: "It appears that the illicit production of dangerous drugs has become an intellectual and professional challenge to many individuals associated with their misuse." (Gunn et al., "Clandestine Drug Labs", J.For.Sci. 15(1):51-64 (1970)). Changing times and the maturation of law enforcement efforts to counter the drug threat invariably elicited a "changing of the guard", as these idealists retired or were busted, and their organizations dismembered. In a form of negative evolution, the idealists were replaced by common criminals, attracted from their normal anti-social pursuits solely by the easy, and outrageously high profit margins of drug trafficking, and frequently schooled in jail by the imprisoned old-timers. Ironically, the problem had been metastasized by the very efforts of society to stamp it out. The end result was an amoral business aggressively pursued by the government, which could dismantle organizations like a domino game, rolling over one defendant after another with ruthless efficiency. A business riddled with informants and marked by endemic violence, rip-offs, and government sting operations. The wary should note that the mere purchase or attempted purchase of laboratory equipment and/or chemicals of any type can be considered "suspicious" unless through an established, legitimate company or educational institution. Sorry kids, trying to buy chemicals with cash or a money order, or using a fake letterhead just doesn't cut it anymore. It hasn't for years. As a result, the manufacture of controlled substances within the U.S. is almost exclusively controlled by organized professional gangs. The days of the basement cowboy chemist are long gone. Between 1977 and 1984, over a dozen papers -- mostly originating in Europe -- appeared in the literature (J.For.Sci. 22(1):40-52 (1971), Arch.Krim. 162(5-6):171-175 (1978), J.For.Sci 23(4): 693-700 (1978), Bull on Narc. 36(1):47-57 (1984)) on the impurities found in clandestine speed labs. Focussing mainly on the Leuckart reaction, which is easy to find in the literature, and thus popular as a synthetic route, this research sought to "fingerprint" the output of these labs. A forensic technique first applied to illicit heroin, the idea is to quantitatively analyze impurities with a view to determining the source of the drugs. It was determined that the Leuckart reaction in particular was a veritable witch's brew of incomplete and side reactions, comprising up to 25% of the reaction mixture: amphetamine dimers, pyridones, pyrimidines, pyridines, polycylcic compounds, and N-formyl derivatives. Unfortunately, the same legal pressure that seeks to root out clandestine production makes the solvents necessary for purification harder and more dangerous to get, and forces the use of unsafe procedures, or short cuts that make drug use even more medically dangerous than it should be. LSD Manufacturing ----------------- "Revolution is the opium of the intellectuals." -- graffito The clandestine manufacture of LSD is logistically complex, requiring a variety of difficult to obtain "watched" chemicals, and a comparatively sophisticated lab setup. Notwithstanding the previous statement, like any of the illicit syntheses I have examined, the reaction, if done in a typical organic chem laboratory, would be considered routine. The LSD trade is unique within the drug world, in that those who are involved seem to be motivated by genuine, if misguided, altruism. As such, there seems to be no violence associated with any level of the LSD trade, and acid chemists and dealers (and many users) typically have a semi-mystical, proselytising reverence for the substance (cf. PIHKAL). As a result, laboratory busts are rare, and consumption has remained more or less steady (in the tens of millions of hits per year), since the late 60s. Augustus Owsley Stanley III was the first major "acid chemist", and he is considered a legendary figure from that era by some. His story is chronicled in "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" by Tom Wolfe (Bantam, 1981). Other articles on Owsley worth checking out are "The Creator" ("Newsweek", 680108), and, more recently, "Owsley & Me" ("Rolling Stone", 821125). Owsley, who first burst onto the public stage when his name was splashed across the front-page of the "New York Times", was put out of business by his 1967 arrest at his suburban Orinda, California lab site with a quarter of million hits of LSD and a quarter kilo of STP ("Owsley Guilty: 67.5 Righteous Grams", "Rolling Stone", 691115, p. 14). Owsley passed the torch to associates Nicholas Sand and Tim Scully, of "Orange Sunshine" [ALD-52] fame, along with the mysterious Ronald Stark. Sand and Scully were involved with supplying psychedelics to the Brotherhood of Eternal Love, a California hash smuggling and LSD distribution ring. ALD-52, N-acetyl-LSD, was actually the first "designer drug", though it being technically legal did not save Scully and Sand from 20 and 15 year federal prison terms respectively, in 1969. (See Burton Hersh, "The Mellon Family". N.Y.: William Morrow (1978), p.480-495, for the story of Sand, Scully, Billy Hitchcock, and the Millbrook estate). The only detailed discussion I have found on LSD pharmacology from an illicit chemistry perspective, is "LSD Purity", an entirely speculative January 1977 "High Times" piece by Bruce Eisner (mindtoo755@aol.com), whose major flaw is its lack of hard data. I know of only two books devoted to the nether-world of illicit LSD manufacturing: "The Brotherhood of Eternal Love", Stewart Tendler & David May. London: Panther Books (1984). Out of Print. (I haven't been able to get my hand on this book [and would love to hear from anyone who has a copy], but see "Acid Dreams" by Lee & Shlain. NY: Grove Press (1985) and "Storming Heaven", by Jay Stevens. N.Y.: Harper & Row (1987)). "Operation Julie", Dick Lee & Colin Pratt. London: W.H.Allen (1978). Out of Print. Covers the tracking and 1977 take-down of the U.K. organization led by Richard Kemp that formed from the regrouping of the post-indictment remnants of the BEL. The Kemp ring allegedly manufactured 60% of the world's LSD at the time, amounting to tens of millions of hits over a several year period. The motive of the ring's leadership was the expectation that widespread use of LSD among Britain's youth would catalyze leftist Revolution, leading to the overthrow of the aging and morally bankrupt _ancien regime_. For the temerity of admitting this to police, sentences totalled 170 years in prison. Their bust was immortalized in the delightful electric guitar/piano medley, "Julie's in the Drug Squad" by the Clash. The most recent LSD bust of note occurred in Bolinas, California in July 1993, and was the largest seizure of LSD in U.S. history. A Brief Bibilography on Synthetic Heroin ---------------------------------------- "It's my wife, It's my life, Cuz a needle to my vein, Leads to a center in my head, Then I'm better off than dead" "Heroin" Lou Reed The "original" China White fentanyl analog was alpha- methylfentanyl, which the DEA initially thought was 3-methylfentanyl. Refs: "Control Recommendation for a-MethylFentanyl", DEA (1981) "Federal Register" 46:46799 (1981) [Notice of Scheduling] "Science 85" (March) "Anal. Chem" (Oct. 1981) "Behind the Identification of China White" "Fentanyl Program", GFR1-81-4044, DEA (1981), unpublished. "Chem.Eng.News" 59:71 (1981) [before they realized it was alpha and not 3-methyl] "Science" 224:1083 (1984) References on 3-methylfentanyl, which appeared separately and much later, and also caused some O.Ds: Monastero in "America's Habit" President's Commission on Organized Crime (1986) "New York Times", 25 December 1988. Literature cites on MPPP, of Parkinson fame: "Psych. Res." 1:249 (1979) [the original paper, rejected by JAMA & NEJM] "Science" 219:979 (1983) "The Sciences", Langston (date unknown) "The Case of the Tainted Heroin" [by the guy who tracked it down] "The Case of the Frozen Addict", PBS "Nova", (1986), transcipt of show There are lots of other papers available, but these are some of the main ones of interest. ******************************************************************** 5. "You Have Greatly Misunderstood the Purpose of the Net" ******************************************************************** "Don't get me wrong, Don Juan," I protested, "...but I also want to know everything I can. You yourself have said that knowledge is power." "No!" he said emphatically. "Power rests on the kind of knowledge one holds. What is the sense of knowing things that are useless?" -- "The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge" Carlos Castaneda UseNet at its best is a network of some of the brightest minds in the civilized world, getting together to discuss whatever strikes their collective fancy. Professors and academics, engineers and scientists, polymaths, and intelligent people everywhere, getting together to kick ideas, information, and scurrilous personal attacks back and forth. A synthesis of great minds and intellects, altruistically donating their time and effort in glorious cosmic synergy. However, it's sad to say that, as more and more people go online, the Net is beginning to reflect the tawdry conglomeration that is society at large. One mammoth, lowest common denominator, vainglorious, pseudo-intellectual whore-house. To put it simply, UseNet may already have peaked. Alas. Trade Secrets, Or "Where Can I get Oil of Sassafras?", "How Do I ------------- Extract Codeine From Tylenol #1's?", "Can You Isomerize Dextromethorphan to the Narcotic Levo- Form?" Just because you ask a question on the Net, does not mean anyone's going to answer it. Or in particular on alt.drugs -- a newsgroup dominated by drug burn-outs, poseurs, and wannabes -- answer it correctly. You may get an answer to your question, but you can't realistically expect it when it amounts to a trade secret. Someone who poses such a question obviously has a recipe for making MDMA, aka E. The recipe requires oil of sassafras, or another source of safrole. Needless to say, the government is aware of this too, and it's somewhat difficult, though not impossible, to get. Broadcasting to the world, via UseNet, where to get it, is a good way to get the government to clamp down on that source of supply. Why on earth would you expect anyone to tell you how to get rich (illegally) anyway? Figure it out yourself, idiot! The codeine extraction question is another good one, commonly asked on alt.drugs. Tylenol #1's are OTC in Canada and elsewhere. Someone was selling such a recipe for thousands of dollars in New Zealand a few years back. So why would someone give it to you for free? Your grasp of philanthropy is deeply flawed, pal. More importantly, to do that brings us the issue Number 2: Killing the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg ------------------------------------------ I guarantee that if a simple recipe was posted for something such as extracting codeine from OTC medications, within the year, codeine would be prescription-only everywhere. But then dopers -- being the narcissistic morons that they are -- have never been particularly known for foresight. Ditto for isomerizing dextromethorphan, the OTC cough medicine. Out of chemical interest, I've wondered that myself in the past. But I don't know the answer, never having been interested enough to explore the matter. The fact of the matter, however, is that widely publicizing certain things -- and the Net is as wide as it gets -- inevitably results in their negation through government action. I don't say this to stifle people from posting information, but there is such a thing as discretion, ya know. Coming in a close second, are those individuals who request "simple high-yield recipes requiring a minimum of trouble". Get serious, dudes! TANSTAAFL. More importantly, why would anyone tell it to you for free? "Please e-mail me the Answer to my [Stupid] Question" ---------------------------------------------------- ...Because I'm such a lazy putz that I can't be bothered to stick around long enough to wade through the regular traffic. Along with "tell me everything about " because you have a homework assignment due tomorrow and are too dumb or lazy to use the library, this probably ranks as one of my biggest net.peeves. "Why Didn't Anyone Answer my [Stupid] Question?" ----------------------------------------------- No, we're not too lazy or too arrogant. Er, well, maybe we are, but dammit, we're not sitting here waiting around to respond to whatever minuscule thought percolates through your tiny, 1/4 watt cerebrum. That's Lamont's job. Ever hear of a library? It's an amazing place. Medicinal chemistry is around RM315 if you've graduated past the Dewey Decimal System. I started posting to the Net on the premise that I should put back in, for what I've gotten out of the Net. Inspired by the venerable Bill Nelson, who presides over in rec.pyrotechnics, I began posting to alt.drugs primarily safety information, and corrections to inaccurate posts. Other than that, if a post interests me, time-permitting, I *may* respond. If it doesn't, I don't. _C'est la vie_. You're a lot more likely to get a response if you show you've done your homework -- made some sort of preliminary effort to investigate the question yourself. I think I first got fed up with the intellectual parasites that infest alt.drugs (and much of the rest of the net) when during a lengthy thread on petroleum ether, some nitwit posted the very same question we had just finished discussing. Is the DEA on the Net? ---------------------- The Internet is what the government constructed and owned ARPANET has evolved into. Of course they're on the Net, fool! This was definitively confirmed in December 1994 by Lamont. No surprise here, except among the drug-addled. Of course, it is also the height of narcissism to think that the DEA gives a hoot whether you are a dope-smokin' degenerate. Believe me, they have more important things to worry about. State and local investigators might, however, be a different matter. More importantly, the fact that you posted a message to alt.drugs such as, "I'm really baked!" [You're such a clever lad, aren't you?] may not concern you now. However you may wish to consider the fact that it's quite probable that someone somewhere is archiving *all* net traffic, and that in ten or twenty years when you do care, it may come back to haunt you. Such is the price of a dissipated youth. Can I Rely on Net.answers to my Questions? ------------------------------------------ No. Next question, please. The Net is a whore that takes on all customers. This is its bane, as well as its beauty. The nature of alt.drugs makes it particularly vulnerable to inaccurate, incomplete, and downright erroneous answers from trollers, poseurs, wannabes, and pseudo-experts trying to pump up their flagging egos. After all, the one-eyed man is king in the Land of the Blind. Such misguided and/or maladapted individuals are most dangerous when they provide partially correct answers or answers lacking the appropriate caveats. Elevating irascibility to an art-form, I've made it a personal crusade to flame such net.idiots on general principles alone. On the other hand, past and present alt.drugs Hall-of-Famers such as J, [St.] Anthony Ankrom, and Lamont Granquist (with an honorable mention to Steve Dyer, Eric Snyder, Howard Black, Pierre St. Hilaire, Malcolm, and Eli Brandt), can usually be counted on to provide interesting, useful, and accurate chemical information. Their selfless dedication to, and pursuit of the Truth is truly the Net at its best, and should be an inspiration to all. Unfortunately, everyone but Lamont and Steve withdrew from posting, or post only infrequently. Make of that what you will. But the bottom line, after all, is that you get what you pay for. If you rely on net.information at face value without independent confirmation from a reliable source, you do so at your own peril. 'Nuf said. ******************************************************************* 6. The Law ******************************************************************* "Ain't got no picture postcards, Ain't got no souvenirs, My baby, she don't know me, When I'm thinkin' 'bout those years." -- "New Orleans is Sinking" The Tragically Hip (1989) Not surprisingly, it is against the law everywhere to make and distribute drugs. Even less surprisingly, this has failed to make a dent in the manufacture and trade in such substances. Since the U.S. is at the forefront of the War on Drugs, I will concentrate on U.S. statutes only. I no longer follow U.S. law particularly closely, so some of this information may be out of date. The U.S. Federal criminal statutes are found in the U.S. Code (U.S.C.), located in any North American law library. The USC may be found in a collection of volumes ("Titles") called the U.S. Code Annotated (U.S.C.A.). The drug statutes (possession, conspiracy, and sale), including Schedules I to V of the Controlled Substances Act (listing all banned and federally regulated drugs and precursors) are in Title 21, Sections 800-900 (21 USC 800-900). (Interestingly, first time drug possession is a misdemeanor in the U.S. under Federal law. Unfortunately, minor offenders are typically prosecuted under State Law, which usually makes drug possession a felony.) Other related laws are CCE (Continuing Criminal Enterprise, 21 USC 848), RICO (Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations, 18 USC 1961), and the Controlled Substance Analog Enforcement Act. RICO and CCE are the legal bludgeons the Feds use against drug rings that achieve any sort of success. They are quite draconian in both scope and harshness. The long-predicted rise of synthetic heroin analogs precipitated the passing in 1986 of the Analog Act. This closed what had become a major loophole in prior legislation, the so-called "designer" drugs (pharmacol- ogically similar, minor chemical variants of banned drugs). Analogs, however, were not a recent problem. The first open source mention was Gunn et al. (1970, supra.). Other legal manifestations of the politics of contraband include laws making money-laundering (18 USC 1956), and the transportation of dangerous chemicals on airplanes Federal felonies, as well as civil forfeiture, allowing for the summary confiscation of a suspected drug dealer's assets with or without any related criminal conviction. Failing to report large monetary transactions, income tax evasion, and using the phone (or the Net) to violate the drug laws are also Federal crimes. Additionally, the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights was gutted to allow for pre-trial detention on the basis of "being a danger to the community", against the previous legal standard of mandatory bail except when there was "risk of flight". The USC is net.available: http://www.pls.com:8001/his/usc.html http://thorplus.lib.purdue.edu/gpo/ or as gzip compressed files (by Title): ftp://etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Politics/Conspiracy/AJTeel/USC/ Additions to the list of contraband drugs are announced in the "Federal Register", a U.S. Government periodical also found in any U.S. or Canadian law library, as well as any U.S. "Federal depository" public library. http://thorplus.lib.purdue.edu/gpo/ Or via gopher: gopher counterpoint.com Ancillary regulations may be found in Title 21 of the CFR, the Code of Federal Regulations. A current list of proscribed drugs may be obtained by writing: Drug Enforcement Administration Attn: Drug Control Section 1405 "I" Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20537 ******************************************************************* 7. Morality & Ethics ******************************************************************* "And in between the moon and you, The angels get a better view, Of the crumbling difference, Between wrong and right." -- "Round Here" Counting Crows (1993) I've always been fascinated by the subject of outlaw chemistry. But radical chic aside, the more I've seen of things, the less and less happy I've become with the morality of it all. I've even begun to question the value of that relatively benign class of substances known as the psychedelics. (What was it that Ram Dass once said? "Psychedelics have a message to give, but once you get the message: hang up.") With the rest, however, -- narcotics, ups, and downs -- the answer is quite clear. And it ain't a good one. For no matter how delightful you find the chemistry, the fact of the matter is that the drug business is a sordid, tawdry and immoral one that is driven almost entirely by greed, and which leaves an awful lot of people dead, destroyed, addicted, imprisoned, or impoverished: a constellation of human suffering and misery which no decent man should ever want to add to. I'm not a particularly religious man, but to put it simply: can you imagine Jesus Christ giving his blessing to your crank lab? No matter how you rationalize it, there is no way to escape the cruel reality that drugs are about two things: money and power. Amassed through the corrupt exploitation of human weakness. And if they catch you -- and the odds are very much in favor of that -- you can expect no sympathy at all. They *will* crucify your sorry ass. It's a looking glass world, with the dealers and chemists on one side, and an array of shameless, moral cowards: the demagogic Republican slime politicians, crooked and brutal cops, sleazy parasite lawyers, and hypocritical judges on the other. And they *all* profit to the detriment of society. Don't get me wrong: criminal sanctions against drug *users* are clearly not just wrong-headed, but more importantly, counter-productive. It is fairly obvious, as the Dutch and Swiss governments, and the highly respected "Economist" magazine see it, that drug use is a social problem and public health issue that should be dealt with as such. Unfortunately, too many have too much invested in the status quo. Sound public policy is built not through the cynical manipulations of politicians and two dollar moralists, but through a careful balancing of harm minimization to the individual, as well as society at large. Until society comes to grips with that, the non-medical use of drugs will remain an intractable scourge that distorts entire economies, corrupts our institutions to the core, and frays the social fabric. However, the base hypocrisy of society cannot and does not provide moral justification for the manufacture and distribution of illicit drugs for personal profit. Sorry. ************************************************************************* "How much is enough, when your soul is empty? How much is enough, in the Land of Plenty? When you have all you want, And you still feel *nothing* at all, How much is enough? Is enough?" -- "How Much is Enough?" The Fixx (1991) *************************************************************************