Informatics Educational Institutions & Programs

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pharmacology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Amphetamine eventually became the dominant stimulant of abuse because of its easier availability once phenmetrazine had become illegal." But the sidebar claims it to be a Schedule II drug in the US, which suggests it is not illegal, merely off the market. Could this statement be modified, or a clarification of the legal history be included elsewhere in the article? -Verdatum 23:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The statement refered to the swedish situation only, but I clarified it a bit. I don't think it was ever a big drug of abuse in the US, but if someone wants to write something about it, please do. It's not completely illegal in Sweden either, only schedule II (see http://www.lakemedelsverket.se/upload/lvfs/LVFS_2000-7.pdf), but very unlikely to ever be sold as a medication again. I think amphetamine also became dominant because it is easier to make illegaly. KarlHallon 14:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, phenmetrazine (Preludin) was not rarely abused in the US in the late 1960's and early 1970's, as it was available as a Rx-drug; however, amphetamine dominated even then. In some other lands (e.g. Germany and particularly Czechoslovakia), phenmetrazine was one of the most abused Rx-drugs through the 1960's, 1970's and until early 1980's.--84.163.87.66 15:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be interesting if someone could find out exactly how much it was prescribed in it's day. I suspect that it would have been in the top100 atleast? 81.225.6.35 10:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buphedrone & Nocaine. These stimulants have a similar two dimensional appearance though are in completely different classes. Though however buphedrone has a dissimilar bridge and may not be up to the noted criteria of what I am writing here. Yet the difference in types maintain similarity in ligand shape which is of interest for what constitutes a ligand to the dopamine transporter. 4.242.174.226 (talk) 06:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a "closed ring Beta-O-alkylated norephedrine" of the amphetamine class, phenmetrazine purportedly display greater 'dopaminergicity' and shows superior activity in relation to crossing the BBB than other classes under the amphetamine umbrella. Removing the alpha methyl group from phenmetrazine would yield 2-phenylmorpholine, for instance, which is uncontrolled as is shown at that site with its molecule image. If it is active, it might be a good start for branching off into creating a series of articles for the phenmetrazine derived/related types of stimulant. Nagelfar (talk) 05:53, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a patent (US3018222) detailing a synthesis route for this compound, I think it would be nice to have a chemistry section with some detail about this in it.

That beta methyl group makes it a completely differnent animal; especially in terms of CNS activity for these two differnt classes of molecules. Even by nomenclature this would be something more like a "phenpropylamine," that is ignoring the rest of the (non-aromatic) ring. Yes you can ignore the beta methyl and "see" phenylamine within there. But I never read anything like that in the Shulgin Books? TO ME THIS IS JUST PLAIN SLOPPY USE OF CHEMICAL TERMINOLGY. Any expert in the field care to weigh in?

50.46.123.24 (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]