1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

Methcathinone (“cat”): An enantiomeric potency comparison

Methcathinone (“cat”): An enantiomeric potency comparison

  1. ThirdEyeFloond
    Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
    Volume 50, Issue 4, April 1995, Pages 601-606

    Richard A. Glennon, Richard Young, Billy R. Martin and Terry A. Dal Cason

    Abstract

    With regard to its chemical structure, methcathinone is to cathinone what methamphetamine is to amphetamine. Although it is a drug of abuse outside the United States, methcathinone is only recently making an appearance on the clandestine market in this country and has just been classified a Schedule I substance under the Emergency Scheduling Act. We have previously demonstrated that racemic methcathinone produces locomotor stimulation in mice, and substitutes for cocaine and (+)amphetamine in rats trained to discriminate either cocaine or (+)amphetamine, respectively, from saline in tests of stimulus generalization. Because an enantiomeric potency comparison has never been reported for the optical isomers of methcathinone, in the present investigation we synthesized samples of S(−)- and R(+)methcathinone and compared them for their ability: a) to produce locomotor stimulation in mice, b) to elicit cocaine-like responding in rats trained to discriminate 8.0 mg/kg of cocaine from saline vehicle, and c) to elicit (+)-amphetamine-appropriate responding in rats trained to discriminate 1.0 mg/kg of (+)amphetamine from saline vehicle. S(−)Methcathinone was about twice as potent as S(+)amphetamine and three to five times more potent than R(+)methcathinone in the three pharmacologic assays. We conclude that both optical isomers possess central stimulant character, but that S(−)methcathinone is somewhat more potent than R(+)methcathinone.