Posted by Iago Camboa on May 7, 2002, at 6:52:03
In reply to Re: Ambien and other chimera » Iago Camboa, posted by Elizabeth on May 6, 2002, at 19:42:05
Hi Elizabeth,
So happy with your response. I really mean it. :-)
Please don't take too literally all statements I make in these 'all-important' chats: I just happen to indulge myself sometimes in being 'teasing' (or even 'annoying') to people I really like...Just let me first speak about the (chemical) designation I chose for 'dexedrine' or 'd-amphetamine'. The designation I used, though not the most common, is indeed the best designation one can find, namely '1-phenyl-2-aminopropane' is much better than '1-methylphenethylamine' (I omit the d- for 'dextro' as we both agree on prefixing it to both designations).
Let us take the first and just write the formula for 'propane' which I took as the basis: CH3-CH2-CH3; let the left carbon atom be called number 1, the one carbon in the middle will of course then be number 2 and the right carbon number 3. Things cannot be more clear. Now substitute one of the H bond to C(1)(so to speak) by the radical phenyl (-C6H5) - we have now C6H5-CH2-CH2-CH3 or 1-phenylpropane - and now substitute one of the H bond to C(2) by the 'group' amine (-NH2): you get 1-phenyl-2-aminopropane. This is transparent even to high-school children.
Now let us take the second ('1-methylphenethylamine'). You took as the basis the 'complicated and involved' group 'phenethylamine': let us write it down C6H5-CH2-CH2-NH2. Now tell me: where is position 1 where you are going to attach the methyl radical?: it seems to be in position 2(?!) beginning from the right: the formula seems not to fit to the former compound.
Of course an expert could argue that the CH3 cannot be bond to the N because in that case the compound would have been named N-methylphenethylamine so it has to be the next C the number 1. This is why people would by far prefer 'alpha-methylphenethylamine' over the 'erroneous' or at least 'very confusing' 1-methylphenethylamine you seem to prefer. But the
most simple would be by far the one I chose. I have to leave now because work calls.
Next time I will defend my point of view that it is an '(American) phantasy' the statement that benzos are addictive(??!). No they are not.
I'm (we all Europeans are) most grateful to America to have created two 'great' drugs, namely 'Prozac' and 'Viagra' but that does not mean you should now 'bedevil' the banal 'Xanax', which all the world know is almost as harmful as ... plain H2O.
And a friend of mine has drawn my attention a few weeks ago to a certain off-shore pharmacy which did 'offer' its costumers 'Ambien' and at least another hypnotic while stating at the same time they should NOT dispense 'harmful' drugs like morphine or 'Xanax'. Let me laugh...Kind regards,
Iago
poster:Iago Camboa
thread:104454
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020503/msgs/105409.html