At the beginning of the week, the US Drug Enforcement Administration officially informed the public that the agency had abandoned its earlier decision to list the substances DOI (2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodamphetamine) and DOC (2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloramphetamine), which are phenethylamines, on the list substances strictly prohibited for production and distribution. For now, the substances will remain on a less restrictive list, allowing scientists and medical professionals to formally use the substances in their research. Note that at the beginning of the month, the agency already informed the public about the refusal to impose such restrictions on a number of other exotic psychoactive substances currently being investigated by scientists as potential drugs (To be more precise, then the agency refused to impose a ban on 4-OH-DiPT, 5-MeO-AMT, 5-MeO-MiPT, 5-MeO-DET, and DiPT).
Initially, the agency announced its readiness to consider the possibility of a strict ban on these drugs back in April of this year, arguing that information about their use for recreational purposes, gleaned from indirect sources, in particular, Internet resources discussing the acquisition and use of substances, speaks in favor of the ban. However, after a detailed study of the available information about the substances, the experts of the DEA, in the end, came to the conclusion that, despite the presence of psychoactive effects behind them, they do not pose a serious threat to the physical or psychological health of a person. Moreover, the experts ruled that they could not find reliable information that DOI and DOC can be addictive, thus refuting the main factor for the inclusion of substances in the most stringent of the prohibited lists.
In addition to the agency's investigation, it appears that the agency's decision was also influenced by opposition from the scientific community, which had already begun organizing a possible lawsuit against the agency after hearing about the possibility of a ban. In particular, Emory University and research firm Panacea Plant Sciences were behind the now-delayed lawsuit. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that a federal agency simply cannot completely ban the production and use of a certain substance without relying on evidence to support its real danger to human life and health.
It is worth noting that both substances became widely known in psychedelic circles as early as 1991, with the publication of a book by the notorious chemist, Alexander Shulgin, PiHKAL, in which he described the preparation and characteristic effects of using DOI and DOC, in addition to other similar DO-group phenethylamines. As noted in the book and elsewhere, DOI generally has an effect similar in strength and duration to LSD. DOC, in turn, has a similar psychoactive effect, which, nevertheless, affects the user much longer than other similar substances (according to available sources, the substance has an active phase of action lasting about a day).
As with other psychedelic drugs such as LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DMT, and MDMA, medical professionals believe that DO-group drugs can also be used as very effective, innovative treatments for persistent mental illness, in particular depressive and stress disorders including various forms of PTSD.
“This is certainly a great victory not only for the entire scientific community, but for the whole of humanity!” says the head of Panacea Plant Sciences, David Heldreth, about the decision. “In particular, DOI and DOC are very interesting experimental drugs with unique psychoactive properties. Their strength and depth of effect can be extremely useful properties in terms of developing long-term drugs that stabilize the condition of people suffering from various serious and chronic mental illnesses.”
Comments 0