2010QJMOpen access

Purchasing 'legal highs' on the Internet--is there consistency in what you get?

S. Davies, David M. Wood, G. Stevenson Smith, Jenny Button, J. Michael Ramsey, Roland Archer, David W. Holt, Paul I. Dargan

Open full text 215 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The supply of recreational drugs has changed and users increasingly buy 'legal highs' over the Internet. Use of these is common and there is a potential for significant toxicity associated with their use. AIM: To determine the content of legal highs available for purchase in the UK and whether the content of these remains consistent. METHODS: Twenty-six legal highs were purchased monthly from five different Internet sites over 6 months. These were analysed to determine the drugs in the products and whether there were any changes in their content over this time period. RESULTS: All products were supplied initially, but there was a decline in supply of products month by month. The following drug classes were detected: piperazines, cathinones, caffeine/ephedrine or products in which no psychoactive drugs were detected. Of the products supplied on more than one occasion, 15 (75%) contained the same compounds on each occasion. In three products there was a change in the piperazine detected, with 1-benzylpiperazine being substituted for 1-methyl-4-benzylpiperazine or vice versa. In two other products there was a cathinone [4-fluorophenylpiperazine (pFPP) or 3-fluromethcathinone (3FMC)] detected in products purchased in Month 1 that was not present in the products purchased in subsequent months. CONCLUSION: Whilst there was no variation in the composition of most legal highs supplied over 6 month, there was significant variation in the piperazine or cathinone content of one quarter of the products. This variation could be of clinical significance as the cathinone and piperazine products can be associated with significant toxicity.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: The supply of recreational drugs has changed and users increasingly buy 'legal highs' over the Internet. Use of these is common and there is a potential for significant toxicity associated with their use. AIM: To determine the content of legal highs available for purchase in the UK and whether the content of these remains consistent. METHODS: Twenty-six legal highs were purchased monthly from five different Internet sites over 6 months. These were analysed to determine the drugs in the products and whether there were any changes in their content over this time period. RESULTS: All products were supplied initially, but there was a decline in supply of products month by month. The following drug classes were detected: piperazines, cathinones, caffeine/ephedrine or products in which no psychoactive drugs were detected. Of the products supplied on more than one occasion, 15 (75%) contained the same compounds on each occasion. In three products there was a change in the piperazine detected, with 1-benzylpiperazine being substituted for 1-methyl-4-benzylpiperazine or vice versa. In two other products there was a cathinone [4-fluorophenylpiperazine (pFPP) or 3-fluromethcathinone (3FMC)] detected in products purchased in Month 1 that was not present in the products purchased in subsequent months. CONCLUSION: Whilst there was no variation in the composition of most legal highs supplied over 6 month, there was significant variation in the piperazine or cathinone content of one quarter of the products. This variation could be of clinical significance as the cathinone and piperazine products can be associated with significant toxicity.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 215 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: The supply of recreational drugs has changed and users increasingly buy 'legal highs' over the Internet. Use of these is common and there is a potential for significant toxicity associated with their use. AIM: To determine the content of legal highs available for purchase in the UK and whether the content of these remains consistent. METHODS: Twenty-six legal highs were purchased monthly from five different Internet sites over 6 months. These were analysed to determine the drugs in the products and whether there were any changes in their content over this time period. RESULTS: All products were supplied initially, but there was a decline in supply of products month by month. The following drug classes were detected: piperazines, cathinones, caffeine/ephedrine or products in which no psychoactive drugs were detected. Of the products supplied on more than one occasion, 15 (75%) contained the same compounds on each occasion. In three products there was a change in the piperazine detected, with 1-benzylpiperazine being substituted for 1-methyl-4-benzylpiperazine or vice versa. In two other products there was a cathinone [4-fluorophenylpiperazine (pFPP) or 3-fluromethcathinone (3FMC)] detected in products purchased in Month 1 that was not present in the products purchased in subsequent months. CONCLUSION: Whilst there was no variation in the composition of most legal highs supplied over 6 month, there was significant variation in the piperazine or cathinone content of one quarter of the products. This variation could be of clinical significance as the cathinone and piperazine products can be associated with significant toxicity.

Key concepts: Piperazine, Cathinone, Mephedrone, Psychoactive substance, Business, Advertising, Toxicology, Drug

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Purchasing 'legal highs' on the Internet--is there consistency in what you get? — Research Paper | ScholarLens