快猫短视频

David Nichols describes his shock at discovering his research had been exploited to make 鈥渓egal highs鈥� 鈥� with potentially lethal consequences

You work on psychoactive compounds. What are you trying to discover?

Initially I was seeking to understand how psychedelic agents like LSD and mescaline interact with the brain. They target a brain receptor that plays a key role in perception and cognition, and we wanted to find the molecular features that give rise to these substances鈥� effects. My work was at a fundamental level, but always with the idea that it could lead to drugs to treat schizophrenia or possibly improve memory.

You have created compounds that resemble MDMA (ecstasy). Why?

I did some early work on MDMA, but because it looked as if it was going to become a controlled substance we began studying MDMA analogues to see if we could make something that could legitimately be used by psychiatrists.

How did your work end up being used to manufacture new 鈥�legal highs鈥�?

One of the MDMA analogues we created was 4-methylthioamphetamine (MTA), which both releases serotonin and inhibits the enzyme that breaks it down. In the late 1990s I heard that people in the Netherlands were putting MTA into tablets called flatliners, because we had published work saying that it acted like MDMA in rats. By 2002 there had been at least five MTA-related deaths. I鈥檓 aware of about half a dozen other compounds originating in my lab that have been used in legal highs.

In an article in Nature last week you wrote that you had never considered your research to be dangerous, so what was your reaction to those deaths?

It was a mixture of sadness, shock and disbelief. Alfred Nobel invented dynamite to improve safety in the mining and construction industries, but then it was used for military purposes. People have said to me that my intentions were good and I can鈥檛 control the actions of others, so I shouldn鈥檛 feel bad about it. I am trying to maintain that perspective.

What do you think of the people who copy your compounds?

It is completely irresponsible. These substances have only been tested in rats in a few doses. In the long term they might cause cancers, or liver or cardiovascular damage. We just have no idea.

What role has the internet played?

It has made it much easier for entrepreneurs to search the literature and then market their legal highs. They have molecules in their back pockets, so when one is made illegal they have others ready to go out.

Has this led you to self-censor your work?

There was one case in which I decided not to work on a molecule: I thought it looked potentially interesting, but probably also very toxic, and cheap and easy to make. In most cases you can鈥檛 assess whether the risks will outweigh the benefits. I might publish results that give someone else an idea that ultimately improves human health. So in general I still think you should publish what you find.