I've been reading about IAP (IndanylAminoPropane/IndanylAmphetamine), for a couple of weeks, and it sounds, well, intresting . Soooooo, I want to try and find out if I'll get into trouble if I get caught with it (I'm not too bothered about whether it's legal, I just want to know if I should run when I see a policeman). I know hardly anything about chemistry though, so can anyone help me?

I think that, if it is illegal, this is the bit of the Misuse of Drugs act that'll say so, but i'm not sure...

quote:(d) any compound (not being methoxyphenamine or a compound for the time being specified in sub-paragraph (a) above) structurally derived from phenethylamine, an N-alkylphenethylamine, alpha-methylphenethylamine, an N-alkyl-alpha-methylphenethylamine, alpha-ethylphenethylamine, or an N-alkyl-alpha-ethylphenethylamine by substitution in the ring to any extent with alkyl, alkoxy, alkylenedioxy or halide substitutents, whether or not further substituted in the ring by one or more other univalent substituents;

bump?

you would need to see if first,

indanylamphetamine was an optical isomer or a salt of an optical isomer of amphetamine,

then see if indanylamphetamine is an derivitive of MMA,MDMA,MDA or optical isomer of these. Indanylamphetamine seems to be

(according to Rhodium.ws) neither an amphetamine salt/derivitive or an MMA salt/derivitive. Under th US CODE I came up with,findings that closely relate to IAP

Schedule I, (c) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another

schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation, which

contains any quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances,

or which contains any of their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers

whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers

is possible within the specific chemical designation:

(1) 3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.

(2) 5-methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.

(3) 3,4,5-trimethoxy amphetamine.

*HAllucinogen's* then,

IAP most likely is not going to get you time

in lock down, but sometimes a prosecuting

attorney can fool the fuck out of anyone they meet from confusion or from sheer ignorance. Fuck it eat the shit if you see a cop but look into optical isomers and salts of optical isomers for MMA,MDA,MDMA,amphetamine,and iodo compound for these also to see if they are listed for

no pharmecutical use. Chances are that if you've got a good lawyer, and know chemistry

doesn't seem to fit any categories of said salts thogh, cause clearly IAP is not MMA.

have you seen a field test for MMA done with IAP compound?

I can guess theres two grounds, field test,

and molecular gas chromatography whatever for determining if you should run or not or eat the shit quick.

hope this gives you some Ideas.

The statement, 1-(5-Indanyl)-2-aminopropane

or 5-(2-aminopropyl)indane or IAP, is an anologue of MDA , BUT both oxygens in the

methylenedioxy bridge are not present.

They are methylene (CH2) units in the methylenedioxy bridge, therefore not exclusively relating IAP to MMA or MDA, or amphetamine.

*This statement from Rhodium.ws(copied)*

This statement clearly expresses IAP

cannot be considered an optical isomer or salt of isomer blah dada bla of either MMA,MDA,MDMA,Amphetamine, or a iodo-compound

or otherwise halogenic derivitive/isomer of

any illegal substance.

Maybe this could clear your mind of paranoi

if street to trial came to your mind.



[This message has been edited by tReePHrOg (edited 09-04-2003).]

The oxygens in the methylenedioxy bridge

not being present,according to the text,

voids the IAP of being a MDA isomer/salt.

furtermore voiding it obviously of a MMA anologue or whatever.

A feild test(reagent test) would either

react positive or negative to the bridge replacement, this is what you are probably going to need to see if it reacts positive or not, but even then if say you didnt, run,

and it did test positive for MDA or MDMA or MMA in a field test, the prosecuitor would be blowin a fuckin goat at trial.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) any compound (not being methoxyphenamine or a compound for the time being specified in sub-paragraph (a) above) structurally derived from phenethylamine, an N-alkylphenethylamine, alpha-methylphenethylamine, an N-alkyl-alpha-methylphenethylamine, alpha-ethylphenethylamine, or an N-alkyl-alpha-ethylphenethylamine by substitution in the ring to any extent with alkyl, alkoxy, alkylenedioxy or halide substitutents, whether or not further substituted in the ring by one or more other univalent substituents;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the fuck is this ^

does this even have to do with IAP?

the univalent equivalent shit doesnt seem to relate to IAP.

no obviously for it to be illegal the methylenedioxy bridge would need to be fully

structured. And that only succeeds an MDA

anologue.