Talk:Ephedrine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

"Overdose can lead to death, although the approved dose is not likely to cause severe reactions when used as directed.

Ephedrine can also lead to damage of the brain receptors over a period of high usage; this is because of its constant action on the neurochemicals. It also leads to high increase in blood pressure which over time can lead to damage in the blood vessels."

"Overdose can lead to death" needs to be revised; the LD50 via oral route is 600 mg/kg. This is several hundred times greater than the 150 mg dosage suggested. The statement is redundant and adds nothing to the article anymore than "Caffeine overdose may cause death" belongs in the caffeine article.

"Ephedrine can also lead to damage of the brain receptors over a period of high usage; this is because of its constant action on the neurochemicals."

Ephedrine does not act upon neurotransmitters. Nor does it damage "brain receptors"; Rather it may cause down regulation of the receptors it acts upon. There is no evidence that ephedrine "damages" "brain receptors".

Much of this article is unscientific and many of the claims made are unsupported speculation. The article even admits as much

"formication (may be possible, but lacks documented evidence)"

The article lists a side effect which it admits "lacks documented evidence"; Wikipedia is not a place to post original research about theoretical undocumented effects that may possible occur in some people.


Also the article seems biased by superfluous commenting that adds nothing to the article. For example "Ephedrine (EPH) is a sympathomimetic amine similar in structure to the synthetic derivatives amphetamine and methamphetamine" Why were amphetamine and methamphetamine mentioned and not another substituted amphetamine?

"As with other phenylethylamines, it is also somewhat chemically similar to methamphetamine, although the amphetamines are more potent and have additional biological effects."

Ephedrine is a substituted amphetamine; this sentence seems to imply that ephedrine is not in fact an amphetamine. "it is also somewhat chemically similar to methamphetamine" The chemical difference between ephedrine is a single oxygen atom; "somewhat" and "similar" are very vague descriptions of an unvague chemical structure.

"In mice, stereotypical behaviour was both easily induced by administration of ephedrine and it's primary alkaloids and reversed when serotonin antagonists were administered." WTF does this mean?

"Promethazine manages nausea and ephedrine fights the ensuing drowsiness. Commonly referred to as the Coast Guard cocktail, ephedrine may still be available for prescription for this purpose." ephedrine *is* available without prescription; this sentence seems to suggest that ephedrine "may" be availible by prescription and/or is a prescription drug.

Also please note that citation 4 is referenced in the following sentence "ADRs associated with ephedrine therapy include:[4]" However that citation does not support most of the listed side effects; The side effects listed should each have their individual citations as the article now misleadingly implies that the list of side effects presented is supported by the work cited.

"Wellbutrin is an example of an antidepressant with an amphetamine-like structure similar to ephedrine. It has a similar action but also releases serotonin from presynaptic clefts." Why is this random statement nested in the second paragraph of the "Contraindications" section?

"Ephedrine should NOT be used at any time during pregnancy unless specifically indicated by a qualified physician and ONLY when other options are unavailable.[7]" The capital "NOT" and "ONLY" are unprofessional. The citation given is also incorrectly formatted and most likely not appropriate as a reference.

Except for "Legality in USA" and possibly some of the "Chemistry" section, this article needs to be completely re-written with factual --- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agalmic (talk • contribs) 19:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC) "Furthermore, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine (which are found in various legal over-the-counter drugs) can be manufactured into methamphetamine, a dangerous illicit drug that is growing in popularity due in part to the availability of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine".

This contribution seems very anti drugs. Saying that its dangerous is subjective, and growing due to the availability does not make sense either. Demand for drugs is there, and availabilty of illegal drugs is there. It has nothing to do with drug stores.

Now that ephedrine is banned in OTC supplements and will probably soon be a controlled substance, lets all switch to synephrine.

Ephedrine was never banned in OTC supplements. Ephedrine alkaloids were. Ephedrine HCL has always been legal and is sold in many OTC supplements. Check your local Wal-Greens. Ephedrine HCL will never be banned because it is controlled by super power drug industries. :) Once the Ephedra ban went into effect, many "bodybuilding" supplement companies just started making Ephedrine HCL products like the big drug companies have been doing for years. Volksgeist 19:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What's the difference between ephedrine and "ephederine HCL"?

I believe that means Hydrochloride.
Is this form legal? I've seen it advertised. The article isn't very clear about the legality issue.
Yes, check out "Bronkaid" at your local WalGreens. They are numerous other OTC Ephedrine HCL products. On the internet, products such as VasoPro are popular as well. Volksgeist 19:39, 26

March 2006 (UTC)

By many drugs you need Hydrochloride for the preparation. It is a kind of carrier. More it is not. It does not change the effect of the drug. --Fackel 00:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the hydrochloride form is legal; just along with the freebase form, or whatever other forms there are. When drugs are illegal, it's the actual drug, not the form it comes in. --Ddhix 2002 20:32, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

but don't forget the analog law, which got all the research chemicals off the market despite their legality . . . --Heah 20:34, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What's the "analog law"? Techelf 10:16, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, the ephedrine ban has been struck down in the US. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/04/15/national/a013653D58.DTL

Further, there are two optical isomers of ephedrine with roughly the same effects; D-ephedrine and L-ephedrine. D-ephedrine is the only one that can be used to make meth, and it was NEVER sold in the US; most of the world's supply goes to meth production in Mexico.

L-ephedrine, the kind you buy here, cannot be made into meth.

Also, HCl means it's a salt / solid.

Actually, either kind can be made into meth.
To elaborate - The Levo-Ephedrine isomer can be structurally reduced into Levo-Methamphetamine (like that found in Vicks Vapor Inhalers), while Dextro-Ephedrine can be reduced into the Dextro isomer of Methamphetamine (the active, 'fun,' isomer). So, technically, yes; they can both be structurally reduced into methamphetamine (but the Levo isomer is inactive, so you can't get high from it). However, there is a trick called racemization. Assuming one has L-Ephedrine (otherwise useless in clandestine laboratories), it can easily be put through a racemization to obtain the racemic Dextro,Levo-Ephedrine (D,L-Ephedrine). This can be applied to both Ephedrine & Pseudoephedrine. Check it out for yourself: Chemical Abstracts, Volume 23, Pages 3452-4 (1929), or US Patent 2,214,034 for another racemization. D,L-Ephedrine (or D,L-Pseudoephedrine) can be structurally reduced into D,L-Methamphetamine - which is plenty active. So, yes, it can be made into meth. :) --Ddhix 2002 04:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Something I forgot. The D,L-Methamphetamine (racemic methamphetamine) is weaker, and produces a different 'high' than straight D-Methamphetamine. D-Methamphetamine is much more potent, and prefered among methamphetamine addicts above the racemic mixture. If one were to convert L-Ephedrine into D,L-Ephedrine, and then into D,L-Methamphetamine, then one could also separate the D-Methamphetamine from the L-Methamphetamine so that there is the pure optical isomer of D-Methamphetamine. Don't believe me? See: GB Patent 508,757 - Process for the Production of Optically Active Phenylisopropylamines by T.H. Temmler. Have fun:) --Ddhix 2002 12:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] ECA Stack

In 'indications,' ECA stack is reported as a compound. In the context of its desription here, and furthermore in the separate article, I have the impression that the stack is just a term for a packaging together of ephedra, caffeine, and aspirin, not a compound on its own. Dose anyone know for sure? Shaggorama 12:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC) ECA Stack based Ephedrine/Caffeine/Aspirin is still available in it's natural herbal form ephedra/sida cordifolia/ma huang at http://www.thatswholesale.com under the name Red Hotz.

[edit] New effects

  • User 155.245.123.4 decided to add a whole load of stuff to the sidebar which doesn't seem verifiable to me. Side effects of ephedrine apparently include:

"Increased thoughts tingling sensations (positive) plesurable goosebumps massive increase in music appreciation full stomach feeling (erradicates your appetite increase cognition [...] happiness intense euphoria increase cognition speed increase in creative ideas"

I've not ever heard of any of these side effects... "massive increase in music appreciation"? Sounds more like cannabis to me. Thoughts?

  • Update Well, nobody's commented on this so I'm going to revert the above changes to something sensible. --henryaj 17:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Whoever it was that added that information is obviously an ephedrine user (and a rather dumb one). Everything is verifiable, but it is not encyclopedic in the very least. It could be added in much better terms - but this is not erowid.org, so something a bit more scientific would be nice. Increased thoughts - yes, its a stimulant. Tingling sensations - yes (it's a entactogen - they tend to do that); pleasurable goosebumps are a part of it, along with hair being raised; it increases feeling and touch, simply put. Full stomach feeling - ephedrine is a stimulant, they tend to have an anorectic effect. Increased cognition - stimulants tend to (temporarily) make you think more clearly. Happiness - ephedrine increases dopamine levels. Intense euphoria - dopamine levels. Increase cognition speed - ephedrine is a stimulant. Increase in creative ideas - ephedrine is a stimulant. And for your last concern, the one about music, yes it does increase an appreciation for music. But it's not an actual 'music appreciation,' not like marijuana would cause. Music increases dopamine in rats (Brain Res. 2004 Aug 6; 1016(2): 255-62 from Sutoo D., Akiyama K) - anything that increases dopamine even more while you are already on something that increases dopamine is going to be pleasurable. Smoking a cigarette, having an orgasm, and listening to music would all increase the pleasure of ephedrine, as they all tend to up the dopamine in one's brain. 'music appreciation' is simply a bad descriptor, its more like 'more pleasure from music.' I hope these explanations help whatever decision is made about this. --Ddhix 2002 12:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Ddhix, thank you so much for your help - you evidently are far more knowledgeable than me! I've added your corrected (side-)effects to the drugbox on the page - do take a look and make whatever changes you see fit. Your comment about the compound effect of dopamine is very interesting - I wasn't aware of that. Thanks again for your insight. --henryaj 17:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)



  • Under "Adverse Effects", it lists "anorexia" as an Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR). I am going to delete that, as Anorexia Nervosa doesn't really qualify as a "drug reaction". If the original author was referring to the anorectic effect of the drug (as opposed to the disorder), the reference is redundant, as "appetite loss" is already listed as an ADR. Unless there is a reference somewhere indicating that use of the drug actually leads to Anorexia Nervosa, I think the use of the term "Anorexia" in this section of the article is misleading and confusing. -- Cat 12:05, 8 January 2007

[edit] Changed the Molecule Picture

The old one was ok, but I changed it for a differently designed molecule.

The current one in use (the one I just made): Image:Ephedrine.PNG

The old one: Image:Ephedrine2.png

They are the same molecule (obviously), but the old one looks much different. The old one would due just fine, but the one I just made (and used to replace the old one) is more visually related to other phenethylamine articles. See amphetamine, methamphetamine, cathinone, methcathinone, etc to see what I am talking about. This is the preferred way to look at these molecules, as it makes more visual sense when comparing them. I am going to go through some other articles that are similarly visually confusing, and create more molecule pictures that will make more visual sense when comparing certain chemicals (like say, comparing ephedrine to methcathinone), See?.--Ddhix 2002 19:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Effects

 Please help improve this article or section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007)

This article doesn't explain the effects of the substance on the body in plain language. Ephedra is described as stimulating the brain, increasing heart rate, causing nervousness, constricting blood vessels, and expanding bronchial tubes.[1] Are these effects attributable to ephedrine? -- Beland 17:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legality

While the article states that ephedrine is legal in the US, this publication from the DEA seems to suggest otherwise (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/2-chem.htm). The listed threshold for ephedrine and "salts, optical isomers, and salts of optical isomers" is 0kg for domestic use. The page has not been updated since 2001. Can anyone provide more info?--24.16.148.75 16:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC) Ephedrine HCL is sold over the counter under the names Vasopro, Bolt etc. Depending on the manufacturer. You can purchase ephedra based supplements that contain the ephedrine alkaloids at http://www.thatswholesale.com


Why just 'Legality in the US'? Wikipedia isn't a site just for Americans. Wilston 17:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unreferenced sources

The "Neurotoxicity of ephedrine" section of the article does not have any references at all. Take this sentence, for example:

Depletion of dopamine levels were roughly 25% with ephedrine, whereas dextroamphetamine reduced levels by nearly 75%.

That means absolutely nothing. It doesn't mention timescales, or permanance – nothing. In fact, the entire 'illicit use' section fails to cite sources. I'll put a notice up to this effect. --henryaj 18:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

There is definitely no such thing like neurotoxiticy of neither ephedrine nor amphetamine. Adderall has been prescribed 37 million times in 4 years as you can read in the Adderall article. So please help to stop this fudding. I therefore would suggest to remove the whole section "Neurotoxiticy" --134.155.99.41 23:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] pseudoephedrine?

The article states: "In traditional Chinese medicines, the herb ma huang (Ephedra sinica) contains ephedrine as its principal active constituent." I note that the site "Herbal Medicine Materia Medical" [[2]] says:

"When studies were done using the whole plant, only a slight blood pressure elevation was found. This led to the discovery that pseudoephedrine, another one of the alkaloids present, slightly reduces both heart rate and lowers blood pressure, thus avoiding the side-effects that often accompany the use of ephedrine."

It goes on to say that pseudoephedrine is just as effective as a bronchodilator. In that case, would it not be correct to say that pseudoephedrine is yet another "principal active constituent" (since the whole plant is used to prepare ma huang)? In that case, this sentence should perhaps be amended to include pseudoephedrine? As I am only checking sources myself, I have no ax to grind here, but I would like to know the facts, unbiased by either side of any sort of debate. (I do note that the Wiki article on pseudoephedrine does confirm that its source originally was indeed ma huang although it may be synthetically produced now.) NaySay 15:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)