Oh wow. I saw the title and was ready to explain how the cartels had perfected p2p synths such that they yield almost exclusively pure d-methamphetamine, but before explaining that I was going to need to explain the general concept of chirality and enantiomers, and the fact that for amphetamines (especially meth) the d-entantiomer is always the "one you want" and the l-entantiomer is always the less desirable, less powerful form that causes peripheral stimulation but no cerebral effects, and as an anecdote I was going to mention that vics vapo inhaler (commonly used at raves, although people don't actually know what they're inhaling) is levomethamphetamine, and I was even going to mention the humorous fact that they label it "levmetamfetamine" to make the spelling as distinct as possible.
Then imagine my surprise when I open the article and it literally covers every one of those points, section by section. Brilliant.
I guess the only minor thing I'd add is that the way the cartels (and others) are getting pure d-meth is by bubbling through d-tartaric acid or the like at the end of the process, which separates the racemic meth into its l and d enantiomers respectively.
I'm glad this article debunked the fallacious "new meth" article that cropped up here the other day.
---
EDIT:
Oh and one more thing. There's a common myth among tweakers about "n-iso", which is structurally very similar to methamphetamine - similar enough that it will join the crystal lattice - but it is at best inert, but might actually cause undesirable side effects. The fact that n-iso exists is real, but if you look online you'll see tons of tweakers convinced that they've been smoking n-iso and that it's why they smoke meth and just get a headache and other bad physical side effects but don't get the stimulation or the pleasurable rush. What's actually happening is that they've spiked their tolerance so high that they're getting almost exclusively the bad effects. It's analogous to how if someone takes MDMA for 4 days straight, by the end of it they're not going to "roll" at all because they've acutely downregulated their serotonin (and dopamine) receptors, and furthermore that they've literally (almost) exhausted their current pool of neurotransmitters, which need to be re-synthesized by the body.
When looking at the DEA seizure data it's clear that meth is one of the most pure and potent (wrt methamphetamine, the dea defines purity as what % of the compound is meth, meaning either levo or dextro methamphetamine, whereas potency only factors in the d-meth content, since d-meth is the enantiomer that actually gets you cerebrally high) street drugs out there. By comparison, cocaine is one of the most disgusting, cut at the source level with stuff like levamisole (which is thought to be disastrous to health, ie it's not just inert), and then further cut every step down the chain, albeit usually with inert cuts (baby powder, baking soda, glucose, creatine, that kinda stuff) the lower down the chain you get. Seriously kids, don't do cocaine. It's overhyped and a waste of money.
So anyway, as I said two paragraphs above, n-iso is real but the idea that there's tons of n-iso crystal floating around is just an urban legend promulgated by tweakers who spiked their tolerance the moon and refuse to see that fact.
Sorry for the confusing terminology. "Peripheral stimulation" means unwanted stimulation of the body itself, such as suppressed appetite, general jitteriness, and the like. Whereas the cerebral effects are the actual cognitive effects of improved attention/focus/alertness/scanning behavior, euphoria, and that kind of thing.
In general when taking amphetamines for ADHD-type symptoms, you want to maximize the cerebral stimulation while minimizing the peripheral stimulation, because the latter causes [most of] the unpleasant side effects like inability to eat/sleep. Note that some degree of peripheral stimulation is unavoidable regardless of whether one is taking pure d-methamphetamine or not, and also probably some amount of peripheral stimulation is desirable because ADHD is not just difficulty in maintaining focus/attention but also getting the kick in the ass to start tasks in the first place. But in my experience relying on the peripheral stimulation (which, for example, Adderall produces more of than Vyvanse) simply doesn't work long-term, and just makes appetite regulation and the like get totally out of whack.
If some of the illicit processing has reached a level of sufficient sophistication to enable removal of the l-enantiomer then I wonder how they go about it. Anyone know?
As this article shows, there's any number of ways of making MA but separating out it's racemic mixtures has always been considered hard for backyard-ers.
If this is now commonplace then it does seem to represent a somewhat of a seismic shift in the illicit drugs business model.
I don't know precisely but I remember it's something like bubbling d-tartaric acid through the racemic methamphetamine mixture to separate out the d-methamphetamine.
The overwhelming majority of US meth is cartel-sourced. They have massive superlabs and then transport kilos upon kilos across the border. That's how they have the sophistication to synthesize their own p2p, separate out the enantiomer, etc.
It's the inevitable result of the war on drugs. You make it near impossible to be a small time cook - due to the difficulty in acquiring precursors, acquiring space to work in where you won't get asked questions, etc - and soon the whole market is ran by mega cartels that operate as de-facto states.
Yeah, perhaps I should have thought about that solution before I asked the question it's sort of obvious when you think about it. Anyway, from yours and various comments from others, the consensus is that the d-tartaric acid method is the most likely approach. (That got me thinking, I've some supermarket tartaric in my kitchen with the herb containers. Until now I've not given much thought to its stereochemistry, but this story has almost got me enthusiastic enough to check whether it's chiral or meso. Polarizing filters off my camera ought to do the trick.)
Until this article, I suppose I'd had a rather naive view about such matters which I gleaned years ago (can't remember from where), that was that with any drug (or any other chemical for that matter) that had 100% 'd' or 'l' enantiomers then it had to be manufactured in (come from) a controlled industrial process due to the complexities of separation.
The trouble is I've only had a peripheral interest in the matter so I'm not up to date. Until this story I've been stuck with the old orthodoxy, which was that if law enforcement found 50/50% racemic mixtures then they had to come from illegal sources. Clearly, that's no longer the case, and it seems that it's been so for sometime, especially so with drugs made from pharmacy-grade precursors, pseudoephedrine, etc. - the pharmaceutical industry having done the hard work.
It also hadn't really dawned on me that mega cartels were employing professional chemists but it actually makes much sense given the mega dollars involved
(I'd always assumed there were maverick and eccentric chemists around but never envisioned an illicit lab with a corporate structure run like a normal commercial chemical company).
Also, one could be forgiven for having missed the fact because for decades, news reports have painted a constant image about the dangers of street drugs due to their variable nature (not to mention their adulteration - being mixed and cut with dangerous substances in the midstream distribution chain). Coupled with the all-too-frequent TV images of makeshift labs in jungles with buckets of chemicals littered about everywhere one wonders how they produced drugs with any reasonable degree of purity at all. The last thing on my mind would have been that they'd have had the expertise or facilities to separate racemic mixtures. Clearly this preconceived notion is now outdated.
HN comments here have updated my thinking, they're very helpful and informative at times.
The short answer is "yes". The long answer is "that's a philosophical question".
Downregulation is a natural homeostatic mechanism that happens with almost everything. Any time a certain receptor gets stimulated above baseline, over the long-term it's going to get downregulated. The actual neurobiology of how this works is enormously complicated and beyond my (and probably almost anyone's) understanding. I do recall that NMDA receptors have a critical role to play, given that NMDA receptor antagonists can attenuate some (presumably not all) of the down or up regulation
Then imagine my surprise when I open the article and it literally covers every one of those points, section by section. Brilliant.
I guess the only minor thing I'd add is that the way the cartels (and others) are getting pure d-meth is by bubbling through d-tartaric acid or the like at the end of the process, which separates the racemic meth into its l and d enantiomers respectively.
I'm glad this article debunked the fallacious "new meth" article that cropped up here the other day.
---
EDIT:
Oh and one more thing. There's a common myth among tweakers about "n-iso", which is structurally very similar to methamphetamine - similar enough that it will join the crystal lattice - but it is at best inert, but might actually cause undesirable side effects. The fact that n-iso exists is real, but if you look online you'll see tons of tweakers convinced that they've been smoking n-iso and that it's why they smoke meth and just get a headache and other bad physical side effects but don't get the stimulation or the pleasurable rush. What's actually happening is that they've spiked their tolerance so high that they're getting almost exclusively the bad effects. It's analogous to how if someone takes MDMA for 4 days straight, by the end of it they're not going to "roll" at all because they've acutely downregulated their serotonin (and dopamine) receptors, and furthermore that they've literally (almost) exhausted their current pool of neurotransmitters, which need to be re-synthesized by the body.
When looking at the DEA seizure data it's clear that meth is one of the most pure and potent (wrt methamphetamine, the dea defines purity as what % of the compound is meth, meaning either levo or dextro methamphetamine, whereas potency only factors in the d-meth content, since d-meth is the enantiomer that actually gets you cerebrally high) street drugs out there. By comparison, cocaine is one of the most disgusting, cut at the source level with stuff like levamisole (which is thought to be disastrous to health, ie it's not just inert), and then further cut every step down the chain, albeit usually with inert cuts (baby powder, baking soda, glucose, creatine, that kinda stuff) the lower down the chain you get. Seriously kids, don't do cocaine. It's overhyped and a waste of money.
So anyway, as I said two paragraphs above, n-iso is real but the idea that there's tons of n-iso crystal floating around is just an urban legend promulgated by tweakers who spiked their tolerance the moon and refuse to see that fact.