Methiopropamine

Methiopropamine (MPA) is a research chemical stimulant. Though it was synthesized in the 1940s, it only entered the drug market in the 2010s.

It primarily offers functional effects and isn’t known for being a euphoric substance.

Methiopropamine = MPA; 1-(Thiophen-2-yl)-2-methylaminopropane; 2-MPA

PubChem: 436156

Molecular formula: C8H13NS

Molecular weight: 155.259 g/mol

IUPAC: N-methyl-1-thiophen-2-ylpropan-2-amine

Dose

Oral

Light: 20 – 30 mg

Common: 30 – 50 mg

Strong: 50 – 60 mg

Intranasal

Light: 5 – 15 mg

Common: 15 – 35 mg

Strong: 35 – 45 mg

Inhalation

Light: 5 – 10 mg

Common: 10 – 30 mg

Strong: 30+ mg

Rectal

Light: 15 – 30 mg

Common: 30 – 50 mg

Strong: 50 – 60 mg

Some users end up using it in a much heavier way even though it’s not particularly recreational. It’s not uncommon to see people report taking hundreds of milligrams over the course of a few hours. That isn’t a good idea due to safety concerns, insomnia, and the potential for a harsher comedown.

Timeline

Oral

Total: 4 – 6 hours

Onset: 00:20 – 00:45

Intranasal

Total: 2 – 4 hours

Onset: 00:05 – 00:15

Inhalation

Total: 2 – 4 hours

Onset: Under 5 minutes

Rectal

Total: 3 – 5 hours

Onset: 00:15 – 00:30

With all routes of administration there are some users who report wakefulness and insomnia for 10+ hours after their last dose. This is more common with large doses and redosing, but it can occur with a single administration.

Experience Reports

Erowid

Effects

Positive

• Stimulation
• Mood enhancement
• Increased productivity
• Increased talkativeness
• Physical euphoria

Negative

• Anxiety
• Jitteriness
• Increased heart rate
• Increased blood pressure
• Sweating
• Jaw clenching
• Difficulty urinating
• Vasoconstriction
• Muscle tension
• Dry mouth

Mental

Those who report being disappointed are often trying to find an alternative to a more easily recreational drug like methamphetamine or the entactogens. That’s not what MPA is best at providing. It’s largely a functional stimulant with a near absence of euphoria. Your mood can improve and it can offer a sense of well being, but it’s not notably recreational on its own.

Like other stimulants, it increases your energy level, mental and physical work capacity, and it can make tasks more enjoyable. It can moderately boost motivation, making it easier to start tasks you’d otherwise put off.

Because there can be a sensation of well-being and of being productive regardless of what you’re working on, it’s possible to feel like you’re being more productive than you really are.  If you want to get the most out of it, you still need to exert self-control and utilize the energy for important tasks. Otherwise you might get distracted by less useful activities.

The stimulation itself usually isn’t as strong as amphetamine or methamphetamine, but it’s effective for overcoming tiredness and providing hours of wakefulness.

Because it’s pretty clearheaded, you tend to feel like you’re functioning as well or better than usual. Though there are people who find it’s actually harder to focus.  They might have more motivation to start tasks, but they can’t stick with them long enough, especially if they’re doing cognitively demanding work. But overall it’s going to be neutral or positive for cognitive and work performance.

There are some exceptions to this description. Taking very high doses or using it rectally or via inhalation can sometimes produce a more recreational experience. Very rarely there are descriptions that make it sound a bit entactogenic or capable of rivaling classically euphoric stimulants. But because those responses are atypical and tend to come from riskier forms of use, I don’t recommend chasing euphoria. It’s more common to end up redosing and taking large amounts only to find you’ve received a lackluster experience and now have to deal with insomnia and a harsh comedown.

Despite not being recreational, it can still make you more talkative and promote socialization. For a minority of users it’ll do the opposite, however, by making them more prone to irritability during social interactions, so they’re better off engaging in solitary tasks.

There are many reports of sexual effects like increased libido and orgasm enhancement.  It’s more common if you’re using strong doses, but it can happen with common amounts. Though this is seen with a lot of stimulants, it might be somewhat more common than with amphetamine or methylphenidate.

Compulsive redosing isn’t usually an issue so long as you stick to taking it for functional purposes. And the chance is usually lowest when using it orally instead of through a faster route of administration.  Because some people do take it through those routes and chase after euphoria, redosing can become problematic.  Despite not being very pleasurable, a lot of users still encounter an urge to take more. Yet especially for the mood effects, the first dose is usually the best it’ll get, with every subsequent dose becoming less enjoyable.

At common doses, a fair portion of users claim it produces less of a comedown than amphetamine. And it’s at least typically not worse than other stimulants. MPA tends to gradually wear off after the peak, rather than abruptly ending. Once the core effects have gone away, you mostly return to a state of sobriety.

But those who are susceptible to comedowns or who take large amounts can still experience hours and occasionally more than a day of negative after effects. Those include things like anxiety, restlessness, depression, irritability, and unpleasant persistent stimulation.

Physical/Other

Physical euphoria is more common than cognitive euphoria. There can be pleasurable warm, and sometimes cold sensations around the body. A true rush of physical euphoria is more common with non-oral routes of administration. It’s not clear if the majority of users report these kinds of feelings.

Cardiovascular stimulation and muscle tension are two fairly common properties that can make the drug uncomfortable. There might be a higher than usual incidence of chest pain, vasoconstriction, and palpitations. You should avoid high doses and intense exercise for the sake of reducing the occurrence of these issues.

Difficulty urinating is also reported by a lot of users, more so with high doses, at which point it can become uncomfortable.

The same goes for nausea, which seems to happen more often than with amphetamine. Often the nausea begins a couple hours after administration or during the comedown. Vomiting has been known to occur in a minority of users.

Routes Of Administration

The preferred routes of administration seem to be oral and rectal. Oral is probably best for functional purposes, since it’s less likely to induce compulsive redosing and it has a better duration for productivity. Rectal might be the most enjoyable route in terms of maximizing whatever mood boosting and physically euphoric potential it has.

Intranasal is a pretty ineffective route for many users and inhalation, though effective, has a short duration and a higher chance of pushing people to redose.

Chemistry

MPA isn’t a phenethylamine or amphetamine, distinguishing it from most of the common stimulants.

Its ring structure is a thienyl group rather than a phenyl.

Though this is a significant change, phenyl and thienyl moieties are bioisosteres, meaning one can often be used in place of the other without it fully altering a compound’s biological activity, and that’s true with MPA.

(Bouso, 2014) – Analyzing the pyrolysis products of MPA

• Background
  • Methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin are all known to produce toxic pyrolysis products. Those can bring additional health issues and can also be used as biomarkers of use.
• Results
  • 13 products were formed during pyrolysis, with 10 being confirmed. Most of the MPA volatilized unchanged, leading to an intense broad GC peak relative to the pyrolysis products.
  • The pyrolysis reactions were largely consistent with those of methamphetamine and mephedrone. Volatile compounds resulting from carbon-carbon bond cleavage were seen, along with N-modified compounds and oxidative products.
  • Unlike methamphetamine, MPA is susceptible to oxidation at the beta carbon, forming beta-keto products.
  • At least two of the products have been minimally characterized. Des-N-methyl-methiopropamine is reportedly psychoactive (Vallejos, 2005) and 2-methylthiophene is reportedly toxic (Uzhdavini, 1972 – Unavailable).
  • A bicyclic tetrahydropyridine was formed that’s structurally similar to the antiplatelet drug clopidogrel.

Pharmacology

It at least functions as a reuptake inhibitor for dopamine and norepinephrine. It has effectively no impact on serotonin, based on the available data. MPA may also be a releasing agent.

(Iversen, 2012) – Studying its in vitro pharmacology. Shown to at least impact NET and DAT.

• MPA’s pharmacology was studied using the protocols of the Psychoactive Drug Screening Program. It was screened against 49 molecular targets, initially at 10 μM and then at lower concentrations if activity was seen.
• Results
  • MPA (Ki values)
    • NET: 313 nM
    • DAT: 577 nM
    • SERT: Over 10,000 uM
  • Comparisons
    • Dextroamphetamine
      • NET: 101 nM
      • DAT: 109 nM
      • SERT: 5728 nM
    • S-MDMA
      • NET: 398 nM
      • DAT: 897 nM
      • SERT: 948 nM

Pharmacokinetics

(Welter, 2013) – PK study using rat and human urine as well as in vitro techniques

• In the human urine sample, only MPA and its nor metabolite could be detected after a 200 mg dose.
• The primary metabolic transformations in vitro with CYPs were N-demethylation and hydroxylation at the side chain or thiophene ring.
  • This was somewhat similar to methamphetamine, including the implicated CYPs for N-demethylation. But methamphetamine’s ring hydroxylation differed somewhat and no side chain hydroxylation was seen.

Pharmacology Studies

(Yoon, 2016) – It leads to locomotor sensitization. Expression of that sensitization requires D2 receptors.

• Background
  • Stimulants like amphetamine are known to produce locomotor sensitization with repeat exposure, meaning subsequent doses, even well after the initial use, produce greater locomotor activity.
• Rats
  • General study design involved multiple doses of MPA (0.2, 1.0, and 5.0 mg/kg IP) given for four injections 2-3 days apart. Sensitization testing was 2 weeks after the last pre-exposure injection.
• Results
  • MPA produces locomotor sensitization dose-dependently
    • 5.0 mg/kg, but not 0.2 or 1.0 mg/kg, produced significant locomotor effects during the pre-exposure period or during the sensitization testing.
  • Pre-injection of a D2 receptor antagonist, but not a D1 antagonist, blocks the expression of sensitization
    • If rats were given eticlopride (D2 antagonist) before the sensitization testing, sensitization was not seen. This difference wasn’t seen with SCH23390 (D2 antagonist) pre-injected rats.
• Discussion
  • Noteworthy that the effective dose of MPA was about five times that of amphetamine (1.0 mg/kg) in this assay. Fitting with this, in vitro research indicates MPA is five times less potent at DAT vs. amphetamine.

(Yoon, 2017) – Chronic administration produces riskier decision making in rats.

• Rats were exposed to MPA to test its effect on the rat gambling task (rGT).
  • They learned the relationships between 4 different light signals and accompanied reward outcomes/punishments. After the animals showed a stabilized pattern of responding, they received 5 IP injections (1 injection per day, every other day) of saline or MPA, followed by 2 weeks of withdrawal.
• Results
  • Rats were separated into risk-averse and risk-seeking groups based on their preferred manner of response.
  • If they were preexposed and challenged with MPA, rats in the risk-averse group became more disadvantageous/risky with their choices. This change was not seen if they were only challenged (didn’t receive pre-exposure doses) with MPA.
• Discussion
  • MPA appears to negatively impact decision making after repeate exposure.

History

Early 1940s

Its synthesis was reported in (Blicke, 1942). The work in that paper was primarily conducted at the University of Michigan, though it also included a limited pharmacological evaluation that was carried out at Parke Davis.

The pharmacology research showed it had substantial pressor (blood pressure-increasing) activity.

Late 2010 – 2011

MPA was first advertised online and experience reports began to show up. Initially, some vendors and users noted its structural similarity to methamphetamine. That comparison led to people expecting greater recreational properties than the drug was able to deliver.

The EU’s EMCDDA first reported its presence in Europe in January 2011, when it received a report from Finland.

2012

The UK issued alerts about the substance in January and September 2012. Those were due to three fatalities involving the substance coadministered with other drugs. In the January alert, the fatalities involved a branded product called “Blow.”

(Archer, 2012) – It was detected in portable urinals in the UK. 12 urinal systems were set up in central London during a 12-hour period in March 2012. A total of 109 parent drugs or their metabolites were detected. MPA was found in 2/12 urinals. For comparison, 10/12 or more urinals were positive for cannabis, cocaine, MDMA, and amphetamine.

(Archer, 2014) – MPA’s presence in portable urinals was studied monthly from July to December 2012. The urinals were available for a 12-hour period. MPA was detected in 1/12 urinals in July, 2/12 in August, 1/12 in September, 1/12 in October, 0/12 in November, and 2/12 in December.

2010s

(Cunningham, 2013) – The EMCDDA mentioned the drug had been detected in various legal high products, sometimes alongside other drugs like MDAI (a serotonergic substance).

Reports in Europe, particularly in the UK, said MPA was detected in products with names like “blow,” “slush eric,” and “synthacaine.” Selling it as “synthacaine” contributed to some people believing it would offer cocaine-like effects. (Note: Synthacaine products were also known to contain drugs besides MPA.)

2013

(Kinyua, 2015) – Sewage analysis based on 24-hour composite samples from six urban centers (five in Belgium in December 2013 and one in Switzerland in August 2013) showed no presence of MPA. Whereas methoxetamine was found in most samples and methylone was found in a couple.

July 2013

Germany scheduled MPA.

2014

(Tuv, 2015) – Detailing its presence in intoxicated driving cases in Norway.

• 12-week period from July 2014 to September 2014
• Total of 1,231 intoxicated driving cases analyzed. MPA was detected in 10 (0.8%).
• Polydrug use was common.
  • 9/10 showed amphetameine. Other present drugs included clonazepam, alprazolam, THC, nitrazepam, methamphetamine, GHB, buprenorphine, and/or diazepam.
  • Average number of psychoactive substances proven per case was 4.8.
• Concentrations (whole blood)
  • Range: 0.0019 to 0.054 mg/L
  • Mean: 0.018 mg/L
  • Median: 0.0085 mg/L

(Archer, 2015) – Showing a slightly greater presence in portable urinals in the UK.

• Portable male urinals placed in nine UK cities (Birmingham, Brighton, Bristol, Edinburgh, Leeds, Liverpool, London Manchester, and Newcastle) for a 12-hour period overnight on April 26, 2014.
• The urinals were in close proximity to night-time economy venues like bars and night clubs. All use was voluntary and anonymous. No data collected on the number of uses for the urinals.
• Results
  • Methiopropamine was present in 3/9 urinal setups.
  • Compared to 9/9 for cocaine, 8/9 for MDMA, 5/9 for amphetamine, 3/9 for ketamine, and 5/9 for mephedrone.

2015

(Hill, 2015) – Analyzing samples from people admitted to two hospitals in the UK (one in Newcastle and one in London).

• Analyzed samples from 21 patients between March and October 2015.
• 3/21 involved methiopropamine.

November 2015

The UK’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) recommended MPA be placed under a temporary class drugs order (TCDO). That TCDO was implemented on November 27, 2015.

This recommendation was based on reports of “abuse” and some fatalities and instances of toxicity. The ACMD noted the existence of 7 fatalities in 2014 that involved MPA along with other drugs.

It also used these facts as evidence:

• April to June 2015 – National Crime Agency reported 45 seizures of MPA
• 2013-2015 – UK’s Forensic Early Warning System’s collection plans detected 86 occurrences of MPA in 2013/2014, and 65 occurrences in 2014/2015, mostly from headshop collection plans.
• In Scotland, MPA injecting reportedly replaced ethylphenidate as a drug of choice after the TCDO on methylphenidate-based NPS.
• MPA has been sold under brand names including Ivory Dove Ultra, China White, Walter White, Quick Silver Ultra, Bullet, Mind Melt, Pink Panthers, Poke, Rush, Snow White.
  • Branded combos include Charley Sheen (MPA and 2-AI) and Go Gain (MPA and ethylphenidate).
• The National Programme of Substance Abuse Deaths reported 30 case where MPA was found in postmortem toxicology from 2012 to 2015. Of those, 22 listed MPA as implicated in the death.

September 2016

The ACMD reviewed the status of MPA in the lead up to the original TCDO’s expiration date (November 26, 2016). It found the TCDO was associated with these effects:

• Police Scotland reported reduced instances of MPA injecting.
• The number of phone calls and database enquiries to Toxbase regarding MPA declined.
• There’s been a drop in the availability of MPA on online markets.

Based on those apparent effects, the ACMD said the TCDO was effective. But it couldn’t substantiate a recommendation for MPA to be permanently controlled given a lack of evidence showing MPA misuse was a social problem. It recommended the substance be placed under a TCDO for another 12 months.

November 27, 2017

MPA was added to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 in the UK as a Class B drug.

Legality

US

It’s uncontrolled, but it could be an illicit analog.

Other (as of March 2018)

Australia: Uncontrolled

Canada: May be an illicit analog.

UK: Class B

Safety

Since no research on its safety is available, it’s not possible to say how safe it is, especially with chronic use. It should be used at common doses, infrequently, and without combinations.

It’s almost certainly capable of producing classic stimulant toxicity and stimulant psychosis. The risk of both can be greatly reduced by taking common amounts and avoiding sleep deprivation.

An overdose can produce tachycardia, hypertension, hyperthermia, hallucinations, paranoia, anxiety, and other problems.

Risky Combos (list may be incomplete)

• Stimulants
• Psychedelics
• Tramadol
• MAOIs

Fatality Reports

(Anne, 2015)

• Background
  • Noted three other fatalities had been reported in Europe, but with polydrug use. 2/3 were in the UK and involved other drugs like methoxetamine, 5,6-methylenedioxy-2-aminoindane, and lignocaine.
    • Another fatality in Sweden involved methiopropamine (1.3 μg/g in femoral blood) along with flubromazepam.
• Australia
• 29-year-old male found dead. He had been gaming and fell off his chair onto the floor.
• Autopsy performed 3 days postmortem. Toxicological analysis showed a peripheral blood level of 38 mg/L three days after death.
• Cause of death listed as methiopropamine toxicity given the negative autopsy findings and toxicology. Believed to be the first MPA-only death.

Toxicity Reports

(Daveluy, 2016)

• 30-year-old male with untreated hypopituitarism. Found in an agitated state after oral ingestion of “synthacaine” and he had smoked cannabis the evening before.
  • After using cocaine but finding it too expensive, he began buying “synthacaine” online to help him study for academic exams. He reported occasional and irregular use.
• Admitted with BP 135/70, HR 78, GCS of 15, and unremarkable physical exam.
  • Confused, paranoid delusions, auditory and visual hallucinations, and incoherent speech. No vomiting or diarrhea.
• Lab analysis showed hyponatremia (119 mmol/L).
• Following morning: Conscious and oriented, but without memory of the events during his intoxication.
• Psychiatric consultation was clear and he was discharged.
• Toxicology
  • Initial immunassay – Only positive for cannabinoids.
  • Plasma and urine only positive for MPA.
    • 14 ng/mL in plasma and 8170 ng/mL in urine (13 hours post-admission).

(Lee, 2014) – Case of MPA use alongside Hawaiian baby woodrose seeds

• 27-year-old female. Presented to ED via ambulance 21 hours after taking eight Hawaiian baby woodrose seeds (oral) and 50 mg of Quicksilver powder (intranasal)
  • Both products purchased from a store in London.
• Reported having insomnia and experiencing intermittent palpitations and chest tightness.
• 9 hours after use: Developed nausea and vomited a total of 10 times. Also reported a general feeling of anxiety and euphoria with visual hallucinations (variations of her husband and other things coming out of the wall) lasting until 6 hours before admission.
• Arrival
  • Still experiencing nausea and dizziness. Other symptoms settled. 36.9°C temp, HR of 80, and BP of 109/77.
  • Agitated. Dilated pupils.
• Treated with a single dose of diazepam (5 mg) for agitation and IV fluid replacement due to the vomiting. By the following morning her symptoms were gone and she was discharged 16 hours after admission and 37 hours after use.
• Toxicology
  • MPA (urine): 400 ng/mL
    • Two methiopropamine metabolites (N-desmethyl and hydroxy N-desmethyl) were detected, but not quantified.
  • Only other substances were morphine (100 ng/mL), metabolites of JWH-018 and JWH-019 at under 5 ng/mL, and ergonovine at under 10 ng/mL.
• Though the cannabinoids could have contributed, they were at a much lower concentration.

(Deslandes, 2017)

• France
• 30-year-old male presented to the psychiatry department with an acute anxiety crisis including a sense of imminent danger, impending death, and an urge to escape. He was complaining of intense fatigue due to not sleeping for a week. Reported visual hallucinations and dysmorphophobia, leading to self-harming acts like repeated instances of burning himself.
• Reported taking a new drug named “synthacaine” bought on the dark web. He didn’t report the dose or use frequency, but said it was always taken nasally.
• He had no mental disorder, except for periods of paranoia associated with cocaine use.
• No biological samples were available, but the product in question was tested.
  • Shown to contain 2-amino-indane, n-methyl-2-amino-indane, methiopropamine, and lidocaine.

References

Angelov, D., O’Brien, J., & Kavanagh, P. (2013). The syntheses of 1-(2-thienyl)-2-(methylamino) propane (methiopropamine) and its 3-thienyl isomer for use as reference standards. Drug Testing and Analysis, 5(3), 145–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.298

Anne, S., Tse, R., & Cala, A. D. (2015). A fatal case of isolated methiopropamine (1-(Thiophen-2-yl)-2-methylaminopropane) toxicity: A case report. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 36(3), 205–206. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAF.0000000000000170

Archer, J. R. H., Dargan, P. I., Hudson, S., & Wood, D. M. (2013). Analysis of anonymous pooled urine from portable urinals in central london confirms the significant use of novel psychoactive substances. Qjm, 106(2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcs219

Archer, J. R. H., Dargan, P. I., Lee, H. M. D., Hudson, S., & Wood, D. M. (2014). Trend analysis of anonymised pooled urine from portable street urinals in central London identifies variation in the use of novel psychoactive substances. Clinical Toxicology, 52(3), 160–165. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563650.2014.885982

Archer, J. R. H., Hudson, S., Jackson, O., Yamamoto, T., Lovett, C., Lee, H. M., … Wood, D. M. (2015). Analysis of anonymized pooled urine in nine UK cities: Variation in classical recreational drug, novel psychoactive substance and anabolic steroid use. Qjm, 108(12), 929–933. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv058

Blicke, F. F. (1942). α-Thienylaminoalkanes. Journal of the American Chemical Society.

Bouso, E. D., Gardner, E. A., O’Brien, J. E., Talbot, B., & Kavanagh, P. V. (2014). Characterization of the pyrolysis products of methiopropamine. Drug Testing and Analysis, 6(7–8), 676–683. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.1571

Casale, J. F., & Hays, P. a. (2017). Methiopropamine : An Analytical Profile. Microgram Journal, 8(2), 58–61.

Cunningham, A. (2013). Introduction to the topic of new drugs. EMCDDA, (May).

DANGEROUS DRUGS The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 ( Temporary Class Drug ) ( No . 2 ) Order 2016. (2016), 2011(10), 1–4.

Daniela, A., & D, A. R. (2016). 36th International Congress of the European Association of Poisons Centres and Clinical Toxicologists (EAPCCT) 24-27 May, 2016, Madrid, Spain. Clinical Toxicology, 54(4), 344–519. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563650.2016.1165952

Daveluy, A., Castaing, N., Cherifi, H., Richeval, C., Humbert, L., Faure, I., … Titier, K. (2016). Acute methiopropamine intoxication after “synthacaine” consumption. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 40(9), 758–760. https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bkw073

Deslandes, G., Monteil-Ganière, C., Grégoire, M., Allard, S., Marion, M., & Bouquié, R. (2017). “Synthacaines”: A mosaic of substances for a wide range of effects, from a case. Toxicologie Analytique et Clinique, 29(1), 134–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxac.2017.01.003

Iversen, L., Gibbons, S., Treble, R., Setola, V., Huang, X. P., & Roth, B. L. (2013). Neurochemical profiles of some novel psychoactive substances. European Journal of Pharmacology, 700(1–3), 147–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2012.12.006

Kinyua, J., Covaci, A., Maho, W., McCall, A.-K., Neels, H., & van Nuijs, A. L. N. (2015). Sewage-based epidemiology in monitoring the use of new psychoactive substances: Validation and application of an analytical method using LC-MS/MS. Drug Testing and Analysis, 7(9), 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.1777

Lee, H. M. i. D., Wood, D. M., Hudson, S., Archer, J. R. H., & Dargan, P. I. (2014). Acute toxicity associated with analytically confirmed recreational use of methiopropamine (1-(thiophen-2-yl)-2-methylaminopropane). Journal of Medical Toxicology : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology, 10(3), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-014-0399-y

Tuv, S. S., Bergh, M. S. S., Vindenes, V., & Karinen, R. (2016). Methiopropamine in blood samples from drivers suspected of being under the influence of drugs. Traffic Injury Prevention, 17(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2015.1036157

Vermette-Marcotte, A. E., Dargan, P. I., Archer, J. R. H., Gosselin, S., & Wood, D. M. (2014). An Internet snapshot study to compare the international availability of the novel psychoactive substance methiopropamine. Clinical Toxicology, 52(7), 678–681. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563650.2014.933346

Welter-Luedeke, J., & Maurer, H. H. (2016). New Psychoactive Substances: Chemistry, Pharmacology, Metabolism, and Detectability of Amphetamine Derivatives with Modified Ring Systems. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, 38(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/FTD.0000000000000240

Welter, J., Meyer, M. R., Wolf, E., Weinmann, W., Kavanagh, P., & Maurer, H. H. (2013). 2-Methiopropamine, a thiophene analogue of methamphetamine: Studies on its metabolism and detectability in the rat and human using GC-MS and LC-(HR)-MS techniques. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 405(10), 3125–3135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-013-6741-4

WHO. (2016). Methiopropamine ( MPA ) Critical Review Report, (November), 14–18.

Yoon, H. S., Cai, W. T., Lee, Y. H., Park, K. T., Lee, Y. S., & Kim, J. H. (2016). The expression of methiopropamine-induced locomotor sensitization requires dopamine D2, but not D1, receptor activation in the rat. Behavioural Brain Research, 311, 403–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.05.060

Yoon, H. S., Kim, W. Y., Ku, M. J., Cho, B. R., Kwak, M. J., & Kim, J. H. (2017). Chronic methiopropamine modifies preference of choice in rat gambling task. European Psychiatry, 41, S866–S867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.01.1736