Great. Now I'm on a list.
(Honestly, I find it interesting that things mentioned in the article seem like plot points in the Vince Gilligan universe of Netflix shows.)
Not-such-better-living through chemistry
11–20 of 232 posts
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#12As a soon-to-be PhD graduate, I'm perversely curious as to how much these clandestine chemistry jobs actually pay . . .
A start-up offer from a loose acquaintance came my way 2006-ish and it was quite lucrative. But seeing what happened to the dude long-term proved to me the power and importance of "No"
Reminds me of the bit on Clerks about contractors passing on dangerous jobs with the second Death Star as an example.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#13It's interesting to note that as methamphetamine and amphetamine were more regulated in the 50s and 60s, it became more prevalent. Then in order to stamp out illegal production, the precursor chemicals were monitored. So what happens? Production becomes more dangerous.
Solution: Just make every kind of drug legal to produce, but regulate the purity. Be very explicit about the dangers. The only thing prohibition does is make drug consumption and production dangerous and needlessly expensive.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#14I'm surprised to read that there are recent innovations in illicit techniques of making methamphetamine that mirror legitimate pharmaceutical methods, but only because I thought methamphetamine was already a legitimate pharmaceutical to some extent.
https://www.goodrx.com/methamphetamine
Other amphetamines are quite well represented at the average pharmacy at least.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#15It's interesting to note that as methamphetamine and amphetamine were more regulated in the 50s and 60s, it became more prevalent. Then in order to stamp out illegal production, the precursor chemicals were monitored. So what happens? Production becomes more dangerous. Solution: Just make every kind of drug legal to produce, but regulate the purity. Be very explicit about the dangers. The only thing prohibition does…
Adderall anyone? There's a panoply of legal ways to obtain amphetamines, but the US medical system is far less competent at customer service than the black market due to regulatory capture.
I think it's critical to appreciate that Physician Regulations, the AMA, etc. are the main culprits here. How they avoid getting properly blamed for things like the opioid epidemic, I have no idea.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
the pay can be quite good; but don't go bringing any other concerns to the HR department.
I believe the severance packages also tend to be pretty bad
"Take whatever you want, I-I have money, I have a lot of money. I have... um... Please, don't do this. You don't- You... Y-You don't have to do this..."
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#17Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#18As a soon-to-be PhD graduate, I'm perversely curious as to how much these clandestine chemistry jobs actually pay . . .
Pay is great but the non-compete is a little aggressive. Don't bring up the NDA as it's even worse.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#19There used to be a very active forum on clandestine chemistry (The Hive) that eventually got shut down when Strike (who ran the forum) got busted. I cant remember the details (it’s been almost 20 years) but I think 60 Minutes did a report on it and he was anonymously interviewed? He also wrote a couple books on it.
The Rhodium archives were also a nice collection of scientific papers on synthesis routes combined with first hand reports on success/failure. It was a pretty comprehensive site.
I believe the archives are still hosted somewhere.
Re: Not-such-better-living through chemistry
#20I'm surprised to read that there are recent innovations in illicit techniques of making methamphetamine that mirror legitimate pharmaceutical methods, but only because I thought methamphetamine was already a legitimate pharmaceutical to some extent. https://www.goodrx.com/methamphetamine Other amphetamines are quite well represented at the average pharmacy at least.
I think it’s more that Eli Lilly and co don’t need to deal with the same supply issues/challenges that warrant the innovation. If they want to make Meth, they can probably just get a bunch of pseudoephedrine delivered.