• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Benzos Analog Act

A

Abewoods88

Greenlighter
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
16
Would the recent ban and scheduling of designer benzos on the 23rd of January 2023 make Blam susceptiple to being covered by the federal analog act? Or is it only in the case of them used for human consumption? Licensed researchers could technically still obtain and use this substance for research on rats and mice, yes?
 
If "Blam" is bromazolam then yes it is covered by this act now.
Best of luck and be safe.
Welcome to BL.
<3
 
OK.
I have sifted through every substance they have listed.
Bromazepam is listed but not bromazolam.
I was under the impression that if a substance quacks like a duck... must be a duck mentality. Like aprazolam.and bromazolam are simmilar but they both do basically (not really ime) the same because of stucture likeness.
Been reading on this a bit and dont wanna put out fake news.
Whatever I got mine in a elderberry tincture bottle sold at RA so not too worried about at the time of this posting.
My bad for any confusion I am still confused with "law" and who it is supposed to protect and serve.
Will update with any clear info maybe others can do the same.
Peace
 
Last edited:
Lil'LinaptkSix said:
OK.
I have sifted through every substance they have listed.
Bromazepam is listed but not bromazolam.
I was under the impression that if a substance quacks like a duck... must be a duck mentality. Like aprazolam.and bromazolam are simmilar but they both do basically (not really ime) the same because of stucture likeness.
Been reading on this a bit and dont wanna put out fake news.
Whatever I got mine in a elderberry tincture bottle sold at RA so not too worried about at the time of this posting.
My bad for any confusion I am still confused with "law" and who it is supposed to protect and serve.
Will update with any clear info maybe others can do the same.
Peace
Click to expand...
Well.... this used to not be an issue at all because none of the benzos were considered schedule 1. All benzos were schedule 4 (well all prescription ones still are schedule 4).... and the analog act only applies to schedule 1 and 2 substances wherein the analog's chemical structure of said schedule 1 or 2 substance is "substantially similar" it would be regarded as, itself, a schedule 1 (or possibly 2) substance. From what I've gathered when I first started looking unto this, it can be a REALLY small detail that can determine a judges ruling as to whether the chemical in question's structure is "substantially similar".

In US vs Forbes

AET was thrown into question about whether it was to be considered "substantially similar" to DMT and DET (currently scheduled chemicals).
In this case, the court decided that NO... AET was not similar. It is apparently a primary amine while DMT and DET are tertiary amines. That AET cannot be synthesized from either DMT or DET. Also, that the hallucinogenic or stimulant effects of AET are not substantially similar to the effects of DMT or DET.

Even more interesting is that the court in this case stated that the "Federal Analogue Act" was unconstitutionally vague, in that

"Because the definition of 'analogue' as applied here provides neither fair warning nor effective safeguards against arbitrary enforcement, it is  void for vagueness"

-I like the way this court thinks :)

Apparently, not everyone agreed with me, because the federal analog act was not changed and is still vague to this day... AET ended up specifically being scheduled (1 of all things) so that any who synth, possess, or distribute are instantly criminals. What a sad state of affairs.

US vs Washam ruled that an analog of the drug GHB was substantially similar, however... so there really is no telling whether the law will be on your side or not... making this whole thing rather worrisome.

I suppose, my search for designer benzos are over now that many of them are schedule 1 and therefore their analogs can now be covered under the analog act... however.... I believe and am hoping that I can obtain 2f-dck.... it is my next quest.... onward towards this lofty goal. Wish me luck.
 
Lil'LinaptkSix said:
Still not finding anything worthwhile but here is a link to PDF of controlled or temporarily listed substances as of Feb 2023:
U.S. Department of Justice
Drug Enforcement Administration
Diversion Control Division
Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section
Lists of:Scheduling ActionsControlled SubstancesRegulated Chemicals
Click to expand...

Flubromazolam and the others are still not scheduled as of 15Feb23, unless I'm missing something.

That said, if they do place flubromazolam in schedule 1, bromazolam is an analogue because it's NOT scheduled. The federal analog act specifically excludes scheduled drugs from being considered analogues.
 
Maybe the RC vendors might do some work and find alternatives.
 
Fertile said:
Maybe the RC vendors might do some work and find alternatives.
Click to expand...
The ones likely being scheduled are dangerous benzos. High potency and short elimination half-life.

The counterfeit pills that contain a grab bag of fluorinated triazolobenzodiazepines are very dangerous in the same way that fentanyl adulteration in counterfeit opiate pills is dangerous.

It's a repeat of the vasoconstriction related deaths caused by highly potent phenethylamine hallucinogens (DOx, 25x-NBOMe) that are active in the same mid to high microgram to very low single milligram dose range.
 
I am going to be 100 on this; The law is not completely clear.

Now say I order bromazolam for 'non human' consumption. This is clearly illegal.

The question becomes is bromazolam a schedule 1 analogue as it is clearly a flubromazolam analogue?

Or is it a schedule 4 benzodiazipene analogue.

More interestly; would you rather have a package of alprazolam cought at customs or lets say flubronitrazolam? (excuse me if hat isnt a compound, you still get the point)
 
There are potentially HUNDREDS of 1,4-benzodiazepine derivatives. I don't know how the law would deal with 1,5-benzodiazepines which bind to different GABA subunits.

The only example used medically is clobazam, but patents show the QSAR so it's quite possible to produce something as potent as the '2 halo triazolo benzodiazepines (chlorine and fluorine do EXACTLY the same thing - so do not get tied up with '2F being particularly toxic.
 
smokeymcpot42088 said:
I am going to be 100 on this; The law is not completely clear.

Now say I order bromazolam for 'non human' consumption. This is clearly illegal.

The question becomes is bromazolam a schedule 1 analogue as it is clearly a flubromazolam analogue?

Or is it a schedule 4 benzodiazipene analogue.

More interestly; would you rather have a package of alprazolam cought at customs or lets say flubronitrazolam? (excuse me if hat isnt a compound, you still get the point)
Click to expand...
The law is clear. Substantially similar structure and action.

Bromazolam is a textbook example of an analog with respect to flubromazolam. It is not currently scheduled, therefore it's an analog.

Bromazolam is only a fluorine atom different than flubromazolam.

However, if they made flubromazepam a schedule I drug, bromazepam would still be schedule IV.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
smokeymcpot42088 said:
I am going to be 100 on this; The law is not completely clear.

Now say I order bromazolam for 'non human' consumption. This is clearly illegal.

The question becomes is bromazolam a schedule 1 analogue as it is clearly a flubromazolam analogue?

Or is it a schedule 4 benzodiazipene analogue.

More interestly; would you rather have a package of alprazolam cought at customs or lets say flubronitrazolam? (excuse me if hat isnt a compound, you still get the point)
Click to expand...
Why would you care about alprazolam being caught at US customs?

And if you get a seizure notice from US Customs, throw the notice away and don't ever acknowledge it.

It's a schedule IV drug, they're not going to waste their time on that because you would hardly get anything with respect to punishment. And by definition of law it can't be an analog.
 
shugenja said:
Bromazolam is a textbook example of an analog with respect to flubromazolam.
Click to expand...
It is also an analog of a schedule 4 drug alprazolam. A good lawyer could really cause some arguing.

But is the analog law used much these days? The way stuff is sold it does not seem people or vendors are too worried. I mean I would not risk it but people seem to risk it.
 
JackARoe said:
It is also an analog of a schedule 4 drug alprazolam. A good lawyer could really cause some arguing.

But is the analog law used much these days? The way stuff is sold it does not seem people or vendors are too worried. I mean I would not risk it but people seem to risk it.
Click to expand...
No, that doesn't matter, legally.

What matters is that alprazolam is currently schedule IV.

If it wasn't it would be an analog too, based on the scheduling of flualprazolam.

That's how the analog law works, not the other way around.
 
JackARoe said:
It is also an analog of a schedule 4 drug alprazolam. A good lawyer could really cause some arguing.

But is the analog law used much these days? The way stuff is sold it does not seem people or vendors are too worried. I mean I would not risk it but people seem to risk it.
Click to expand...
The analog act does not care if something is an analog of a schedule III or schedule IV drug.

The law doesn't address it.

All that matters is whether a drug that is currently unscheduled (like bromazolam) is an analog of a schedule I or schedule II drug.
 
It is amazing that on the clear net these RC benzos have been sold over the years and lets face it, the analog law existed all this time. Makes me wonder if some vendors contacted some lawyers. Who knows. But the last decade all those benzos could probably be considered analog yet were sold.

I thought it was 1/23/2023 they became illegal. But all I have is Reddit for that and we all know how that goes.

Thanks for the clarity Shenuga.
 
In general there is less and less caring every day regarding drug laws.

If this were a decade ago when I was a teenager, we would live in constant fear of the police smelling our weed, finding us, interrogating us, making us name names and then existing with a criminal record.

Nowadays, at least here in New England, you have to go pretty far or do something pretty fucked up like blow your Meth smoke into a baby's face to be arrested for an isolated offense of recreational drug usage. It is totally different. People are advertising kits for how to grow Psychedelic Fungi advertised on Facebook. Psychedelic drugs have been legalized in a few jurisdictions, yes, but that's a far cry from an established enterprise selling kits on the internet. Hell, remember when Tommy Chong became a convicted felon for selling bongs over the internet?

I'm not sure if you're worried about something being seized or if you're worried about your freedom. At this stage in our country's politics, I would find it unlikely that they would do anything beyond destroying the Benzodiazepines if identified.

I was also of the understanding that the Federal Analog Act only applied to Schedules 1 and 2 and Benzodiazepines are typically in schedule 4.
 
^ I really do think since cannabis became legal in many states in the USA that it contributed to a more lax attitude towards all drugs. Even the clear net takes risks without too much worry. When I was growing up people we’re going to jail for having a quarter pound of weed for three years. I know someone that did one year for an ounce of weed. This type stuff happened all the way into the last decade. So I definitely think drug users have it much better these days since cannabis that became legal. Psychedelics are next, and then all drugs. Honestly, drugs should not be a legal thing. They should be in medical thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top