by Erowid & JH
Because LSA is Schedule III, analogs of LSA are not covered under
the Federal Analogue Act.
By Donald A. Cooper while working for the DEA:
"Because of previously noted pharmacodynamics and the imposing nature of a total synthesis, the immediate precursor of a LSD derivative synthesis will most certainly be a controlled substance, namely lysergic acid, therefore, much of the impetus for producing noncontrolled LSD derivatives is lost. However, if the CsA (Controlled Substances Act) amendment were not a consideration there would be a clear first choice via substitution of the indole nitrogen to create either 1-alkyl or 1-acyl derivatives. Derivatives of this type most probably fall under the purview of the CsA amendment. The N,N-methylpropyl isomer Of LSD has been the only derivative of LSD examined by the author. Derivatives of this type might seem to be an unlikely choice for a Ca due to a high probability of significant loss in hallucinogenic activity.
However, a reduction in hallucinogenic activity may become acceptable to the U.S. clandestine chemist when he notes that lysergic acid amide is listed as a Schedule III substance in the CFR; therefore, structuarly similar substances of this compound are exempted from the CsA amendment. A lucid argument can then be made that lysergic acid N,N-dimethylamide is derived from lysergic acid amide rather than LSD. Carrying this theme to the next logical step one would then assume that the 1-alkyl and 1-acyl derivatives of the N,N-dimethyl isomer would also not be controlled by the CsA amendment. At present, no known CsA of LSD has ever been encountered by the DEA."
By Donald A. Cooper while working for the DEA:
"Because of previously noted pharmacodynamics and the imposing nature of a total synthesis, the immediate precursor of a LSD derivative synthesis will most certainly be a controlled substance, namely lysergic acid, therefore, much of the impetus for producing noncontrolled LSD derivatives is lost. However, if the CsA (Controlled Substances Act) amendment were not a consideration there would be a clear first choice via substitution of the indole nitrogen to create either 1-alkyl or 1-acyl derivatives. Derivatives of this type most probably fall under the purview of the CsA amendment. The N,N-methylpropyl isomer Of LSD has been the only derivative of LSD examined by the author. Derivatives of this type might seem to be an unlikely choice for a Ca due to a high probability of significant loss in hallucinogenic activity.
However, a reduction in hallucinogenic activity may become acceptable to the U.S. clandestine chemist when he notes that lysergic acid amide is listed as a Schedule III substance in the CFR; therefore, structuarly similar substances of this compound are exempted from the CsA amendment. A lucid argument can then be made that lysergic acid N,N-dimethylamide is derived from lysergic acid amide rather than LSD. Carrying this theme to the next logical step one would then assume that the 1-alkyl and 1-acyl derivatives of the N,N-dimethyl isomer would also not be controlled by the CsA amendment. At present, no known CsA of LSD has ever been encountered by the DEA."