Talk:Ibogaine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Copyright

Same text as this. Does anyone know origin/copyright status? Or did that site copy from here?

According to archive.org, that site's text predates the Wikipedia article by over a year. That, combined with the fact that the first cut at this article on Wikipedia was an unwikified blob of text from an anonymous user, suggests that someone copy/pasted it here. Therefore, tagged as a copyvio. --Delirium 03:00, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

clinical trials, fda

I did a minor correction regarding ibogaine research. The phase 1 clinical trials have been re-started in 2005 at the U of M. They were halted due to lack of funds, not due to a fatality that took place in another country.

Trials restarted, Patrick K. Kroupa, University of Miami School of Medicine, "Ibogaine: Phase I Clinical Trials Restarted in 2005." discussing it at NYC ibogaine conference:

http://www.ibogaine.org/nyc2005.html http://ibogaine.mindvox.com/News/2005COSM.html

Dr. Mash stating private funding arrived to media:

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0508,hunter1,61311,6.html

Government approved research into ibogaine is alive and well in 2005.

The FDA doesn't fund clinical trials for anything, they are a regulatory agency that approves protocols.

Everything in the second to last paragraph following "The United States FDA briefly tested this drug in the early 1990's" is wrong. The FDA never tested or funded the drug, NIDA not the FDA, had interest in the drug's potential and then backed off. The FDA approved Dr. Mash's protocol which is still approved.

Ibogaine is a beta-carboline.

Please expand this information and put it in the article, if you are confident in its accuracy. 211.128.87.99 3 July 2005 23:41 (UTC)

Reverted last edits from anonymous, aside from creative spelling, Dr. Mash is not a "nuerobiologist" and the into contained was hearsay not fact, there have in fact been no new ibogaine publications from Mash for years and she is quoted as saying she will not publish for fear of being sued.

Requests for a written statement from Dr. Mash or the University of Miami confirming clinical studies requsted to be presented during the NY 2006 Ibogaine conference were not forthcoming. On their part, researchers at Albany Medical College deny that 18-MC is in clinical studies. Therefore corrections to both of these assertions have been made to the text. (--Mbolo)

tryptamine??

is ibogaine a tryptamine? i always thought they were in there own indole class, "iboganes". i dont think that they are tryptamines, as they don't have "tryptamine" in the chemical name . . . --Heah 22:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

yes, ibogaine is a tryptamine.

"Chemically, ibogaine is classified as a tryptamine, being a rigid analog of melatonin, and is structurally similar to harmaline, another natural alkaloid and psychedelic (Xu et al, 2000)."

from: Freedlander, J. M. (2003). Ibogaine: a novel anti-addictive compound – a comprehensive literature review (revised). Journal of Drug Education and Awareness, 1, 79–98. http://userpages.umbc.edu/~jfreed1/Ibogaine.html

--j0n 11:24, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

hi jon! literature usually classifies ibogaine as tryptamine. however, strictly speaking, that may be incorrect. in tryptamines the R alpha group may not just bind back to the 2nd nitrogen ring, as ibogain does (as User:Zinnmann told me, if i understood him correctly).--ekki 20:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

It is falsely classified as a tryptamine! Correct classifications are: indole alkaloid, iboga alkaloid and indolo[2,3-d]azepine. It is also far from being a (tetrahydro)betacarboline. Melatonin is a tryptamide. Tryptamines possess an open (non-cyclized) side chain, at least this chain is not rebound at the indole nucleus.--Wg0867 17:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

neurostuff

should be added that recent research suggests both rising of GDNF and channel-blocking of nicotinic receptors alpha3beta4 play major role in anti-addiction effects.--ekki 20:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

twgburst-It should also be noted that the anti-addictive properties of Ibogaine only work on less than 1/3 of the people that try it.

http://www.heroinhelper.com/sick/detox_nightmares_part_2.shtml

I would not be prone to believe everything I read. Ibogaine when treating opioid withdrawal can be counted on for 90% efficacy overall.

http://ibogaine.org/alperetal.html

Are links from Buprenophine and Methadone relevant?

I listed ibogaine under the See Also section for Buprenorphine and Methadone on the Norwegian ('no') Wikipedia only to have the links promptly thrown out for being irrelevant to those two articles. As far as biochemistry is concerned, I agree, it is irrelevant, however, as an alternative substance-based treatment of opiod addiction I find it hard to understand the reasoning that rules ibogaine off-topic. I *do* understand why the pharmaceutical industry would rather not have their customers hear about ibogaine treatment, but can legitimate concerns prevent ibogaine from being mentioned as an alternative treatment on these pages? I'd like some feedback from users familiar with ibogaine about this, and of course also, about whether ibogaine should be mentioned on those pages here on the English WP? And I have not yet raised the issue on those or any other pages here. __meco 08:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Buprenorphine, methadone and ibogaine are core treatments for opioid dependence, each with benefits and deficits. Ibogaine is used in the treatment of methadone and buprenorphine withdrawal or dose adjustment so it would appear that buprenorphine and methadone are certainly appropriate for the ibogaine article. You might want to take a look at the powerpoint presentaton concerning ibogaine development, science, politics, stigma and policy and includes comparative development sections of ibogaine, methadone and buprenorphine

http://www.ibogaine.desk.nl/ibogaine_politics_science_nyc2006.ppt 05 May 2006