DEA/OD/ODE page 1 of 40 January 2014

Quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole-3-carboxylate (PB-22; QUPIC),

quinolin-8-yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxylate (5-fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22), N-

(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide

(AB-FUBINACA) and N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole3-carboxamide (ADB-PINACA)

Background Information and Evaluation of ‘Three Factor Analysis’ (Factors 4, 5, and 6)

for Temporary Scheduling

Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Washington, DC 20537

January 2014

Introduction

Since 2009, there has been a marked increase in law enforcement encounters of

synthetic cannabinoids in the United States (U.S.). These substances are being 

encountered on the designer drug market, laced on plant material and being abused for 

their psychoactive properties. Both law enforcement and public health reports 

demonstrate a sustained abuse of synthetic cannabinoids and this abuse is having a 

negative impact on communities. Clinical reports demonstrate that the abuse of 

synthetic cannabinoid designer drug products can result in toxicity (Gunderson et al., 

2012; Hermanns-Clausen et al., 2013; Fantegrossi et al., 2013; Konstrand et al., 2013). 

Synthetic cannabinoids are a large family of compounds that are functionally 

(biologically) similar to THC, the main active ingredient in marijuana. Synthetic 

cannabinoids, however, are not organic but are chemicals created in a laboratory. Two 

of the synthetic cannabinoids currently controlled (CP-47,497 and cannabicyclohexanol) 

were first synthesized in the early 1980’s for research purposes in the investigation of 

the cannabinoid system. JWH-018, JWH-073, and JWH-200 (all controlled under the 

Synthetic Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 2012) were synthesized in the mid-1990s and 

studied to further advance the understanding of drug-receptor interactions regarding 

the cannabinoid system. Synthesized as research tools, no other known legitimate uses 

have been identified for these five synthetic cannabinoids.
DEA/OD/ODE page 2 of 40 January 2014

According to forensic laboratory reports, the initial appearance of synthetic 

cannabinoids in herbal incense products in the U.S. occurred in November 2008 when 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) first encountered products using brand 

names such as “Spice.” Prior to appearing on the U.S. market, synthetic cannabinoids 

were marketed in herbal incense products in several European countries. After 

experiencing numerous health-related incidents, some European countries banned 

these products/chemicals. According to CBP, a number of the synthetic cannabinoids 

appeared to originate from foreign sources.

Detailed chemical analyses by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and 

other agencies have found synthetic cannabinoids applied on plant material in herbal 

incense products marketed to the general public. Product analyses have found 

variations in both the type of synthetic cannabinoid and the amount of the substance 

found on the plant material.

The vast majority of cannabinoids are manufactured in Asia by foreign chemists 

who are not bound by any manufacturing requirements or quality control standards. 

The bulk products are smuggled into the United States typically as misbranded imports. 

These chemicals are generally found in powder form or are dissolved in solvents, such as 

acetone, before being applied to the plant material comprising the “herbal incense” 

products. After local distributors apply the drug to the leafy material, they package it 

for retail distribution, ignoring any control mechanisms to prevent contamination or to 

ensure a consistent, uniform concentration of drug in each package. According to 

Internet discussion boards and law enforcement encounters, spraying or mixing the 

synthetic cannabinoids on plant material provides a vehicle for the most common route 

of administration-smoking (using a pipe, a water pipe, or rolling the drug-spiked plant 

material in cigarette papers). They are sold under hundreds of different brand names, 

including “Spice,” “K2,” “Blaze,” “Red X Dawn,” “Paradise,” “Demon,” “Black Magic,” 

“Spike,” “Mr. Nice Guy,” “Ninja,” “Zohai,” “Dream,” “Genie,” “Sence,” “Smoke,” 

“Skunk,” “Serenity,” “Yucatan,” “Fire,” and “Crazy Clown.”

Law enforcement personnel have encountered dosage form and packaging 

operations in residential neighborhoods, garages, and warehouses. Throughout this 

process, there is no concern for preventing contamination of the product, consistent 

dosage, or the adverse health consequences that may occur from ingesting the drug. As 

proposed in scientific literature, the risk of adverse health effects is further increased by 

the fact that similar products vary in the composition and concentration of synthetic 

cannabinoids applied on the plant material. 
DEA/OD/ODE page 3 of 40 January 2014

The designer drug products laced with synthetic cannabinoids are often being 

sold under the guise of ‘herbal incense’, ‘potpourri’, etc. under various product names 

and routinely labeled ‘not for human consumption’. Additionally, these products are 

marketed as a ‘legal high’ or ‘legal alternative to marijuana’ and are readily available 

over the Internet, in head shops, or sold in convenience stores. There is an incorrect 

assumption that these products are safe (Fattore and Fratta, 2011; McGuinness and 

Newell, 2012) and further, that mislabeling of these products as ‘not for human 

consumption’ is a legal defense against prosecution. Research has shown that even 

after various synthetic cannabinoids are subjected to control measures, producers of 

these products attempt to circumvent the law, thus making intervention measures 

particularly challenging (Cottencin et al., 2013).

These substances have no accepted medical use in the U.S. and have been 

reported to produce adverse health effects in humans while having a negative effect on 

communities. Acute and chronic abuse of synthetic cannabinoids in general have been 

linked to adverse health effects including signs of addiction and withdrawal 

(Zimmermann et al., 2009; Muller et al., 2010), numerous reports of emergency room 

admissions resulting from their abuse (Forrester et al., 2011; Hermanns-Clausen et al., 

2013, SAMHSA, 2012) and death (Patton et al., 2013; Law Enforcement/Toxicology 

correspondence). Psychiatric case reports have been reported in the scientific literature 

detailing the harms of synthetic cannabinoid abuse and psychoses (Oluwabusi et 

al.,2012; Peglow et al., 2012: Thomas et al., 2012).

The European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) 

published 84 reports regarding synthetic cannabinoids from January through May 2013, 

up from 30 reports in 2012 and 9 in 2009 (Cottencin et al., 2013; EMCDDA, 2013). In 

2011 and again in 2013, the DEA emergency scheduled a variety of synthetic 

cannabinoids including JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 

(temporarily scheduled on March 1, 2011 at 76 FR 11075, and later placed in schedule I 

by Section 1152 of Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), 

Pub. L. 112-144, on July 9, 2012) and UR-144, XLR11 and AKB-48 (temporarily scheduled 

on May 16, 2013 at 78 FR 28735) to protect the public health and safety. Section 

1152 of the FDASIA amended the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) by placing 

cannabimimetic agents and 26 specific substances (including 15 synthetic cannabinoids, 

2 synthetic cathinones, and 9 phenethylamines of the 2C-series) in schedule I. UR-144, 

XLR11, and AKB48 were not included among the 15 specific named synthetic 

cannabinoids, did not fall under the definition of cannabimimetic agents under FDASIA, 
DEA/OD/ODE page 4 of 40 January 2014

and were emergency scheduled on May 16, 2013. Although seizures of JWH-018, JWH073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 showed a decline shortly after these 

drugs were scheduled, new synthetic cannabinoids began to emerge on the designer 

drug market. This new generation of synthetic cannabinoids, including UR-144, XLR11,

and AKB48 quickly became the new drugs of choice in the synthetic marketplace, 

reaching total seizure levels higher than JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and 

CP-47,497 C8 combined. More recently law enforcement has been encountering 

another generation of synthetic cannabinoids including quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole3-carboxylate (PB-22; QUPIC), quinolin-8-yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxylate 

(5-Fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22), N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-

1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-FUBINACA) and N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-

yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (ADB-PINACA). 

PB-22 and 5F-PB-22 are synthetic cannabinoids (Figure 1) that have 

pharmacological effects similar to the schedule I hallucinogen delta-9-

tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). PB-22 and 5F-PB-22 were not reported in the scientific 

literature prior to their appearance on the illicit drug market. A report from March 2013 

identified PB-22 as a component of dried plant material obtained via the Internet 

between July 2012 and January 2013 in Japan (Uchiyama et al., 2013). According to the 

System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE1) data, there are 211

reports for PB-22 and 168 reports for 5F-PB-22 from January 1 through 

December 31, 2013 (Query date: January 22, 2014). During the same time period, the 

National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS2) registered 2,612 reports 

containing these synthetic cannabinoids (PB-22 –1,318 reports; 5F-PB-22 –1,294

reports) in 29 states (Query date: January 22, 2014). In addition, five deaths have been 

reported involving the use of 5F-PB-22 (see factor 6).

AB-FUBINACA is also a synthetic cannabinoid (Figure 1) that has pharmacological 

effects similar to the schedule I hallucinogen delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). 

First appearing in a 2009 patent filed by the pharmaceutical manufacturer Pfizer 

(Buchler et al., 2009), AB-FUBINACA was most recently reported in the scientific 

literature as a component of so-called “herbal products” purchased via the Internet in 

July 2012 (Uchiyama et al., 2012). There are 74 reports involving AB-FUBINACA in 

STRIDE and 822 reports in NFLIS from January 1 through December 31, 2013 (Query 

date: January 22, 2014).

 

1

STRIDE is a database of drug exhibits sent to DEA laboratories for analysis. Exhibits from the database 

are from the DEA, other federal agencies, and low enforcement agencies. 

2 NFLIS is a national drug forensic laboratory reporting system that systematically collects results from 

drug chemistry analyses conducted by state and local forensic laboratories across the country.
DEA/OD/ODE page 5 of 40 January 2014

ADB-PINACA was first encountered in the United States following reports of 

serious adverse events in Georgia on August 23, 2013. Reports of ADB-PINACA were not 

found in the scientific literature prior to its emergence on the designer drug market. 

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) reported on September 12, 2013 that ADBPINACA, was detected in “herbal incense” products sold under the brand name “Crazy 

Clown.” It was later confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 

as the substance responsible for severe adverse events in at least 22 persons who 

consumed the product (CDC, 2013b). In addition, on August 30, 2013, the Colorado 

Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) was notified by several hospitals 

of an increase in the number of patients visiting their emergency departments (EDs) 

with altered mental status after using synthetic marijuana (Appendix 2). On September 

8, 2013, CDPHE, with the assistance of CDC, began an epidemiologic investigation 

whereby 221 cases of severe illness due to ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid were 

identified (CDC, 2013c). Those that presented at emergency rooms in the Denver, 

Colorado area around September 1, 2013 had symptoms similar to those found in the 

August 2013 Georgia incident. Laboratory analysis of samples from the Colorado 

incident confirmed that the substance abused in the “herbal incense” products was 

ADB-PINACA. There are 40 reports involving ADB-PINACA in NFLIS from January 1 

through December 31, 2013 (Query date: January 22, 2014). No STRIDE results involving 

ADB-PINACA were identified.

With no legitimate medical use and limited safety or toxicological information, 

these substances (PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA) have emerged on 

the designer drug market and are being abused for their psychoactive properties. 

PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA were also not included among the 15 

specific named synthetic cannabinoids under FDASIA, and do not fall under the 

definition of cannabimimetic agents as provided under FDASIA. To protect the public 

health and safety, the DEA intends to temporarily place PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA,

and ADB-PINACA in schedule I of the CSA. With respect to finding an imminent hazard 

to the public safety, the DEA has considered the factors required under the CSA for the

temporary scheduling of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA. 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(3) and 811(c)(4)-(6).
DEA/OD/ODE page 6 of 40 January 2014

Figure 1. Chemical Structures

PB-22 and 5F-PB-22 belong to the aminoalkylindole structural class where 

previous studies have focused primarily on varying the indole nitrogen (1-position) and 

3-position substituents. PB-22 and 5F-PB-22, similar to JWH-018 and AM-2201

respectively, are substances representative of the aminoalkylindole structural class. 

Aminoalkylindoles are known to exhibit typical cannabinoid pharmacology in vivo

(D’Ambra et al., 1992; Compton et al., 1992). For example, 5F-PB-22 is structurally 

related to AM-2201 and it differs by having 8-quinolinyloxyl replacing the naphthalene 

group of AM-2201. The indole core became a framework for continued investigations 

with the early work by Sterling-Winthrop that led to pravadoline and WIN-55212-2 

(D’Ambra et al., 1992). Several other research groups expanded this investigation of 

structure activity relationships pertaining to this structural class, most notably the 

laboratories of Huffman and co-workers and Makriyannis and co-workers (Huffman, 

2009; Makriyannis and Liu, 2003). The scientific and patent literature details the further 

modification of the aminoalkylindole structural class with specific substitutions at the 

3-position of the indole core structure to incorporate aromatic and non-aromatic ring 

systems. 

AB-FUBINACA is classified as a pentyl indazole and has been reported in the 

literature as a cannabinoid agonist (Buchler et al., 2009; Uchiyama et al., 2013). 

AB-FUBINACA shares structural features with the schedule I substance AKB48. Both ABFUBINACA and AKB48 are based on the same indazole core structure where the 1- and 

3-positions of the indazole ring system are substituted. The 1-position of AB-FUBINACA 

is substituted with a para-fluorobenzyl group. The 3-position of AB-FUBINACA, like 

AKB48, is substituted with an amide linker. In AB-FUBINACA the nitrogen atom (N) of 
DEA/OD/ODE page 7 of 40 January 2014

this linker is further substituted with an acyclic alkyl amide, named 1-amino-3-methyl-1-

oxobutan-2-yl.

ADB-PINACA is classified as a pentyl indazole and was first reported online by the 

GBI following analysis of an herbal incense product called “Crazy Clown” in September 

of 2013. Consumption of ADB-PINACA resulted in multiple emergency room visits in 

Georgia and Colorado. ADB-PINACA shares structural features with the schedule I 

substance AKB48 (schedule I). There have been no published reports regarding its 

pharmacological properties.

Synthetic Cannabinoids

Quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole-3-carboxylate (PB-22; QUPIC)

Studies evaluating the pharmacological effects of PB-22 in humans and laboratory 

animals have not been reported in the scientific literature. A study conducted by contract 

researchers of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and indicated that PB-22 binds 

to and acts as an agonist at the CB1 receptor (NIDA, 2013a; NIDA, 2013b). PB-22, and 

JWH-018, a schedule I substance, are both based on the same indole core structure where 

the 1-position of the indole ring system is substituted with an alkyl group in both structures. 

This alkyl group for both PB-22 and JWH-018 is a five carbon unit chain, known as a pentyl 

group. Both PB-22 and JWH-018 are substituted at the 3-position with a carbonyl linker to a 

fused aromatic ring system. In PB-22 there is an additional oxygen atom between the 

carbonyl group and the fused ring system. In both substances, the fused aromatic ring 

systems are based on ten atoms connected to each other in the same manner. In PB-22,

one of these ten atoms is a nitrogen atom whereas in JWH-018, the ring system is carbonbased. Both fused rings in PB-22 and JWH-018 are aromatic, being of the same chemical 

classification.

Quinolin-8-yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxylate (5F-PB-22)

Studies evaluating the pharmacological effects of 5F-PB-22 in humans and 

laboratory animals have not been reported in the scientific literature. A study 

conducted by contract researchers of NIDA indicated that 5F-PB-22 binds to and acts as

an agonist at the CB1 receptor (NIDA, 2013c; NIDA, 2013d). 5F-PB-22 is structurally 

similar to the schedule I substance AM2201. Both 5F-PB-22 and AM-2201 are based on 

the same indole core structure where the 1-position of the indole ring system is 

substituted with the same fluoroalkyl group in both structures. This fluoroalkyl group 
DEA/OD/ODE page 8 of 40 January 2014

for both 5F-PB-22 and AM-2201 is a five carbon unit chain, known as a pentyl group with 

a fluorine atom present on the terminal carbon atom. Both 5F-PB-22 and AM-2201 are 

substituted at the 3-position with a carbonyl linker to a fused aromatic ring system. 

In 5F-PB-22 there is an additional oxygen atom between the carbonyl group and the 

fused ring system. In both substances, the fused aromatic ring systems are based on ten 

atoms connected to each other in the same manner. In 5F-PB-22, one of these ten 

atoms is a nitrogen atom whereas in AM-2201, the ring system is carbon-based. Both 

fused rings in 5F-PB-22 and AM-2201 are aromatic, being of the same chemical 

classification.

N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide

(AB-FUBINACA).

AB-FUBINACA shares structural features with schedule I substances such as 

AKB48. Both AB-FUBINACA and AKB48 are based on the same indazole core structure 

where the 1- and 3-positions of the indazole ring system are substituted. The 1-position 

of AB-FUBINACA is substituted with a para-fluorobenzyl group. The 3-position of ABFUBINACA, like AKB48, is substituted with an amide linker. In AB-FUBINACA the 

nitrogen atom (N) of this linker is further substituted with an acyclic alkyl amide, named 

1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl. A patent submitted by Pfizer in 2009 demonstrates 

that AB-FUBINACA has a high affinity and functions as an agonist to the CB1 receptor

(Buchler et al., 2009). A study conducted by contract researchers NIDA indicated that 

AB-FUBINACA also binds to and is an agonist at the CB1 receptor (NIDA, 2013e; NIDA, 

2013f).

N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (ADBPINACA)

ADB-PINACA shares structural features with the schedule I substance AKB48.

ADB-PINACA and AKB48 are based on the indazole core structure and are substituted on 

the 1- and 3-positions of their core indazole ring system. Structurally, ABD-PINACA and 

AKB48 are the same with one exception. AKB48 has an adamantly group attached 

through an amide linkage to its indazole core. The only difference between AKB48 and 

ADP-PINACA is that the adamantly group is replaced with a 1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-

oxobutan-2-yl group (ADB) to form ADP-PINACA.
DEA/OD/ODE page 9 of 40 January 2014

In vitro

Binding at CB1 Function at CB1

PB-22 Ki – 0.73 nMaEC50 – 2.47 nMb

5F-PB-22 Ki – 0.27 nMcEC50 – 0.95 nMd

AB-FUBINACA Ki – 0.9 nMe

Ki – 0.79 nMf

EC50 – 23.2 nMe

EC50 – 3.0 nMg

ADB-PINACA n/a n/a

a

NIDA, 2013a

b

NIDA, 2013b

c

NIDA, 2013c

d

NIDA, 2013d

e

Buchler et al., 2009

f

NIDA, 2013e

g

NIDA, 2013f

n/a – not available

Table 1. In vitro binding data for PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA

Factor 4. Its history and current pattern of abuse 

Synthetic cannabinoids were first reported in the U.S. in a November 2008 

encounter, where a shipment of ‘Spice’ was seized and analyzed by CBP in Dayton, Ohio. 

Around the same time, in December 2008, JWH-018 and cannabicyclohexanol were 

identified by German forensic laboratories (EMCDDA, 2009). It has been stated that there is 

a belief that these substances existed and were abused some time prior to their 

identification (Psychonaut Web Mapping Research Group, 2009).

Since the initial identification of JWH-018 (November 2008), many additional 

synthetic cannabinoids have been found applied on plant material and encountered as 

designer drug products (Auwarter et al., 2009; DEA, 2009). The popularity of these 

cannabinoids and their associated products appears to have increased since January 2010 in 

the U.S. based on seizure exhibits and media reports. This trend appears to mirror those 

experienced in Europe since 2008 (EMCDDA, 2009). Synthetic cannabinoids are being 

encountered in most regions of the U.S. with the substances found as adulterants on plant 

material or being abused alone as self-reported on Internet discussion boards (Atwood et 

al., 2010). 

Data gathered from published studies, supplemented by discussions on Internet 

discussion websites and personal communications demonstrate that these products are 

being abused mainly by smoking for their psychoactive properties. The adulterated 

products are marketed as ‘legal’ alternatives to marijuana. This characterization and their 
DEA/OD/ODE page 10 of 40 January 2014

reputation as potent herbal intoxicants has been suggested to contribute to their 

popularity (Lindigkeit et al., 2009). These substances alone or laced on plant material have 

the potential to be more harmful than cannabis due to their method of manufacture and 

the potency of the substances. Several synthetic cannabinoids have been shown to display 

higher potency in vitro and in vivo when compared to Δ9-THC (Compton et al., 1992; Wiley 

et al., 1998; Weibelhaus et al., 2012). Smoking mixtures of these substances abused for 

the purpose of achieving intoxication have resulted in numerous emergency room visits 

and calls to poison control centers. Abuse of these synthetic cannabinoids and their 

products has been characterized with both acute and long term public health and safety 

issues. Distinct pharmacological properties and metabolism of synthetic cannabinoids 

have been suggested to contribute to the observed toxicity associated with the abuse of 

synthetic cannabinoids (Fantegrossi et al., 2013). Numerous states, local jurisdictions, and 

the international community have also controlled these substances.

Synthetic cannabinoids have been developed over the last 30 years as tools for

investigating the cannabinoid system (Weissman et al., 1982; Huffman et al., 1996; 

Huffman et al., 1999). The majority of the substances encountered on the illicit market 

have not been tested beyond preliminary pre-clinical laboratory screens before clandestine 

operators applied them on plant material (Lewin et al., 2013). It is extremely concerning 

that these substances have been identified as adulterants in numerous retail products 

(Auwarter et al., 2009, EMCDDA, 2009, Lindigkeit et al., 2009, Dresen et al., 2010, Hudson 

et al., 2010, Uchiyama et al., 2010, Uchiyama, 2012a, Uchiyama et al., 2012b) and are 

marketed directly to adolescents (ONDCP, 2011). JWH-018 was the first synthetic 

cannabinoid to be identified as a product adulterant in Germany in 2008. This substance 

was initially synthesized as a research tool to investigate the cannabinoid system (Huffman, 

1994; Wiley et al., 1998). Since then, numerous other synthetic cannabinoids have been 

identified as product adulterants and law enforcement has seized bulk amounts of these 

substances. The first synthetic cannabinoids identified as being abused included JWH-018, 

JWH-200, JWH-073, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 homologue, followed shortly thereafter 

by new generations of synthetic cannabinoids including drugs such as AM2201 and 

JWH-200, and eventually UR-144, XLR11, and AKB48. Since the emergence of PB-22, 

5F-PB-22, and AB-FUBINACA, NFLIS has detailed 2,612 reports from forensic laboratories 

identifying PB-22 and 5F-PB-22, 822 reports involving AB-FUBINACA and 40 reports 

involving ADB-PINACA in drug related reports for a period from January 1 through 

December 31, 2013. In addition, STRIDE has 211 reports involving PB-22, 168 reports 

involving 5F-PB-22 and 74 reports involving AB-FUBINACA during the same time period.
DEA/OD/ODE page 11 of 40 January 2014

These synthetic cannabinoid products are marketed directly to adolescents and 

youth which appear to be the primary abusers of synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic 

cannabinoid-containing products. This is supported by law enforcement encounters and 

reports from emergency rooms (SAMHSA, 20123; Fattore and Fratta, 2011; Vandrey et al., 

2012); however, all age groups have been reported by media as abusing these substances 

and related products. For patients between the ages of 12-29, 75% of emergency 

department visits in 2010 involved synthetic cannabinoids. In addition, the majority (59%) 

of emergency department visits of patients aged 12 to 29 did not involve any other 

substance. Of the remaining 41% of individuals, the most frequently abused substance in 

combination with synthetic cannabinoids was marijuana (17%), pharmaceuticals (17%) and 

alcohol (13%) (SAMHSA, 2012). Individuals, including minors, are purchasing synthetic 

cannabinoids from Internet websites, gas stations, convenience stores, and head shops. 

These substances and laced products are commonly marketed as ‘legal highs’ with a 

disclaimer of ‘not for human consumption’. As detailed in reports, law enforcement and 

public health officials are encountering the abuse of these substances (CDC, 2013a, 2013b, 

2013c; NFLIS, 2013; STRIDE, 2013).

Numerous herbal incense products have been found to contain one or more 

synthetic cannabinoid(s) (PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and/or ADB-PINACA) laced on 

plant material (Appendix 2). There is no known explanation for the addition of these 

synthetic cannabinoids to plant material being marketed as herbal incense, other than 

for their psychoactive properties (Lindigkeit et al., 2009). The psychoactive properties 

are directly linked to the synthetic cannabinoids laced on the plant material sold as 

retail products (Auwarter et al., 2009, EMCDDA, 2009, Atwood et al., 2010). To lace the 

plant material, the synthetic cannabinoids are generally dissolved in a solvent and 

sprayed on the plant material or the plant material is soaked in a solution of the 

dissolved substance (Vardakou et al., 2010, Wells and Ott, 2011). Two research articles 

propose that the packaging is professional and inconspicuous (unlabeled), targeting 

young people, possibly eager to use cannabis, but who are afraid of the judicial 

consequences and/or association with illicit drugs (Lindigkeit et al., 2009, Schifano, 

2009). The appeal of these highly dangerous substances to adolescents and young 

adults is particularly concerning (Oluwabasi et al., 2012; Durand et al., 2013).

Dresen and colleagues (Dresen et al., 2010) found that synthetic cannabinoids

are being abused by individuals in drug treatment centers with a positive rate of 63.3% 

 

3

SAMHSA (the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) is a branch of the 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is charged with improving the quality and availability 

of prevention, treatment, and rehabilitative services in order to reduce illness, death, disability, and cost to 

society resulting from substance abuse and mental illnesses.
DEA/OD/ODE page 12 of 40 January 2014

in forensic psychiatric centers based on their sampling. U.S. Drug Courts4have 

communicated concerns related to the abuse of synthetic cannabinoids and a response 

rate of greater than 30% by juveniles subject to routine drug screens from a sampling 

(information communicated to the DEA). According to recent testimony given by the 

Deputy Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to the U.S. Senate 

Caucus on International Narcotics Control (September 25, 2013), current drug testing 

misses significant populations of synthetic cannabinoid users. In an example described 

in his testimony, a study found that in a sample of men 30 years old or younger within 

the District of Columbia parole and probation system, 39 percent of those who cleanly 

passed a traditional drug screen tested positive for synthetic cannabinoids5. The study 

continued that between one-quarter and one-third of young men who were tested in 

the Washington, D.C. criminal justice system had positive test results for synthetic 

cannabinoids, regardless of whether they had failed or passed a traditional drug screen6. 

In addition to the characterized psychoses, drivers with driving impairment have been 

encountered with confirmed presence of synthetic cannabinoid in their systems (Yeakel 

and Logan, 2013).

The Monitoring the Future (MTF)7Report for 2012 detailed that while synthetic 

cannabinoid use has remained level in 12th graders at 11.3%, “the fact that its 

prevalence rate has remained high despite federal and state efforts to reduce its use is 

troublesome” (Johnston et al., 2013). For the first time, synthetic cannabinoid use in 8th

and 10th graders was measured, with annual prevalence rates being 4.4% and 8.8% 

respectively. The Monitoring the Future Report for 2013 detailed that there has been a 

recent decline in the use of synthetic cannabinoids, decreasing from 11.3% in 2012 to 

7.9% in 2013 (Johnston et al., 2014).

Summary

Recently, law enforcement has been encountering PB-22, 5F-PB-22, and 

AB-FUBINACA in increasing numbers. There have also been reports of abuse of 

 

4 Drug courts were developed to achieve a reduction in recidivism and substance abuse among nonviolent, 

substance abusing offenders by increasing their likelihood for successful rehabilitation through early, 

continuous, and intense judicially supervised treatment, mandatory periodic drug testing, and the use of 

appropriate sanctions and other rehabilitation services. Drug courts analyze specimens from participants 

for new and existing drugs of abuse.

5 Office of National Drug Control Policy. Community Drug Early Warning System: The CDEWS Pilot 

Project, 13.September 13, 2013.

6

Id. p. vi.

7 MTF is a national survey conducted by the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan 

under a grant from the NIDA that tracks drug use trends among American adolescents in the 8th, 10th, and 

12th grades.
DEA/OD/ODE page 13 of 40 January 2014

ADB-PINACA in Georgia and Colorado. Synthetic cannabinoids and their associated 

products are available over the Internet or found to be sold in gas stations, convenience 

stores, and tobacco and head shops. PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA, 

similar to the previously scheduled synthetic cannabinoids (DEA, 2012; DEA, 2013), have 

been seized alone and/or spiked on products that are marketed as herbal incense and 

promoted as legal alternatives to marijuana. 

Factor 5. The scope, duration, and significance of abuse

Recently, increased exposure incidents have been documented by poison control 

centers in the U.S. as the abuse of synthetic cannabinoids has been associated with both 

acute and long-term public health and safety concerns. From January through 

December 2013, according to STRIDE there were 211 reports involving PB-22; 168 

reports involving 5F-PB-22; and 74 reports involving AB-FUBINACA (Query date: 

January 22, 2014). From January through December 2013, NFLIS registered 1,318 

reports containing PB-22 in 29 states (Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, 

Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, 

North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, 

Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming); 

1,294 reports containing 5F-PB-22 in 29 states (Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, 

Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, 

Missouri, North Dakota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, 

Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and 

Wyoming); 822 reports containing AB-FUBINACA in 21 states (Arizona, Colorado, 

Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, 

North Dakota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, 

South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin); and 40 reports containing ADB-PINACA in three 

states (Colorado, Georgia, and Wisconsin) (Query date: January 22, 2014). No reports in 

NFLIS or STRIDE were identified for PB-22 or 5F-PB-22 prior to January 2013. No reports 

in NFLIS or STRIDE were identified for AB-FUBINACA prior to June 2013 or for 

ADB-PINACA prior to August 2013. 

ADB-PINACA was first encountered in the U.S. following reports of serious 

adverse events in Georgia and Colorado on August 23, 2013. Reports of ADB-PINACA 

were not found in the scientific literature prior to its emergence on the designer drug 

market. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) reported on September 12, 2013 that 

ADB-PINACA, was detected in “herbal incense” products sold under the brand name 

“Crazy Clown.” It was later confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

(CDC) as the substance responsible for severe adverse events in at least 22 persons who 
DEA/OD/ODE page 14 of 40 January 2014

consumed the product (CDC, 2013b). In addition, On August 30, 2013, the Colorado 

Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) was notified by several hospitals 

of an increase in the number of patients visiting their emergency departments (EDs) 

with altered mental status after using synthetic marijuana (Appendix 2). On 

September 8, 2013, CDPHE, with the assistance of CDC, began an epidemiologic 

investigation whereby 221 cases of severe illness due to ingestion of a synthetic 

cannabinoid were identified (CDC, 2013c). Those that presented at emergency rooms in 

the Denver, Colorado area around September 1, 2013 had symptoms similar to those 

found in the August 2013 Georgia incident. Laboratory analysis of samples from the 

Colorado incident confirmed that the substance abused in the “herbal incense” products 

was ADB-PINACA. 

The American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) reported receiving 

in excess of 5,200 exposure calls in 2012 corresponding to products purportedly applied

with synthetic cannabinoids, although the data provided does not generally include

biological sample testing that would confirm which cannabinoids the user was exposed 

to.

8

 In addition, the AAPCC has reported over 2,639 calls regarding synthetic 

cannabinoids from January to December of 2013. A majority of exposure incidents in 

both 2012 and 2013 resulted in individuals seeking medical attention at health care 

facilities. Chronic abuse of synthetic cannabinoids has been linked to signs of addiction 

and withdrawal similar to that experienced with cannabis abuse (Zimmermann et al., 

2009, Muller et al., 2010, Vardakou et al., 2010). Additionally, tolerance to these drugs 

may develop fairly rapidly with larger doses being required to achieve the desired effect 

(EMCDDA, 2009). In 2010, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA) reported 11,406 emergency department visits involving a 

synthetic cannabinoid product. In 2011, SAMHSA reported the number of emergency 

department visits involving a synthetic cannabinoid product had increased 2.5 times to 

28,531 (SAMHSA, 2013) (Figure 2).

 

8 The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the opinions or conclusions of the American 

Association of Poison Control Centers. The American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC; 

http://www.aapcc.org) maintains the national database of information logged by the country’s 57 Poison 

Control Centers (PCCs). Case records in this database are from self-reported calls: they reflect only 

information provided when the public or healthcare professionals report an actual or potential exposure to a 

substance (e.g. an ingestion, inhalation, or topical exposure, etc.) or request information/educational 

materials. Exposures do not necessarily represent a poisoning or overdose. The AAPCC is not able to 

completely verify the accuracy of every report made to member centers. Additional exposures may go 

unreported to PCCs and data referenced from the AAPCC should not be construed to represent the 

complete incidence of national exposures to any substance(s).
DEA/OD/ODE page 15 of 40 January 2014

Synthetic cannabinoids and the associated products are sold over the Internet and 

found to be abused by diverse populations. Since synthetic cannabinoids were never 

intended for human consumption, minimal information exists as to the health implications 

resulting from exposure to these substances (Griffiths et al., 2010, Vardakou et al., 2010). 

The scientific literature and reports received by DEA suggest that tolerance and 

dependence to synthetic cannabinoids may develop (Zimmermann et al., 2009). In 

addition, the chronic abuse of products laced with synthetic cannabinoids has been linked 

to addiction and withdrawal (Vardakou et al., 2010).

The increased abuse of these synthetic cannabinoids in the U.S. is supported by an 

increasing number of encounters by law enforcement. There has been a significant increase 

in availability, trafficking and abuse of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA 

throughout the U.S. since January 2013, evident from the increasing number of encounters 

reported by forensic laboratories (NFLIS data). In addition, laboratory confirmations of 

novel cannabinoids such as ADB-PINACA have resulted in serious illness and adverse effects 

following consumption in Georgia and Colorado. Due to the previous scheduling actions of 

various synthetic cannabinoids (emergency scheduling of JWH-018, JWH-200, JWH-073, CP47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 homologue, March 1, 2011; permanent scheduling of JWH-018, 

JWH-200, JWH-073, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 homologue in addition to others under 

FDASIA, July 9, 2012; emergency scheduling of UR-144, XLR11, and AKB48, May 16, 2013), 

law enforcement has been encountering new synthetic cannabinoids including PB-22, 5FPB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2010 2011

Emergency Department Visits Involving 

Synthetic Cannabinoids*
DEA/OD/ODE page 16 of 40 January 2014

Figure 2. Emergency department visits involving synthetic cannabinoids (SAMHSA, 

2013). Synthetic cannabinoid data were not collected prior to 2010.

*Estimates of ED visits are based on a representative sample of non-Federal, general, short-stay hospitals 

with 24-hour EDs in the U.S.

Summary

The abuse of synthetic cannabinoids is characterized in the scientific literature 

and by law enforcement encounters with reported adverse health effects. Numerous 

calls have been received by poison control centers regarding the abuse of products 

potentially laced with synthetic cannabinoids that have resulted in visits to emergency 

departments. Following legislative control of JWH-018, JWH-200, JWH-073, CP-47,497,

and CP-47,497 C8, by FDASIA in July of 2012 and the emergency scheduling of UR-144, 

XLR11, and AKB48 in May 2013, law enforcement has begun encountering novel 

synthetic cannabinoids including PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA.

Factor 6. What, if any, risk there is to the public health

Law enforcement, military, and public health officials have reported exposure 

incidents that demonstrate the dangers associated with abuse of synthetic cannabinoids 

to both the individual abusers and other affected individuals since these substances 

were never intended for human use. Warnings regarding the dangers associated with 

abuse of synthetic cannabinoids and their products have been issued by numerous state 

public health departments and poison control centers and private organizations. 

Detailed product analyses describe variations in the amount and synthetic cannabinoid 

laced on the plant material even within samplings of the same product 

(Hudson et al., 2010). These unknowns present a significant risk or danger to the 

abusing individuals (Auwarter et al., 2009, Hudson et al., 2010). Wells and Ott stated 

concern regarding the possibility of serotonin syndrome related to synthetic 

cannabinoids of the indole structural class due to the similarity to serotonin (Wells and 

Ott, 2011). Some of the common clinical effects reported in emergency rooms in 

response to the abuse of synthetic cannabinoids include vomiting, anxiety, agitation, 

irritability, seizures, hallucinations, tachycardia, elevated blood pressure, and loss of 

consciousness (Forrester et al., 2011; Cohen et al., 2012; Harris and Brown, 2013; 

Hermanns-Clausen et al., 2013; Zawilska and Wojcieszak, 2013) (see reports from state 

health departments and poison centers including AAPCC, Appendix 1). A 12-month 

study conducted in 2012 demonstrated that out of 950 self-reported users, 2.4% 

reported having a medical emergency requiring treatment resulting from a combination 

of panic, anxiety, paranoia, and breathing difficulties (Winstock and Barratt, 2013). Data 
DEA/OD/ODE page 17 of 40 January 2014

from this study also demonstrated that recent users who reported seeking emergency 

treatment were significantly younger than those who did not report seeking treatment

(Winstock and Barratt, 2013). These data correspond to figures reported by SAMSHA, 

which demonstrates that youth, specifically those aged 12 to 17 years old, comprise a 

large percentage of users requiring emergency medical attention (Figure 3.)

Figure 3. Age-related emergency department visits involving synthetic cannabinoids and 

marijuana (SAMHSA, 2012). 

By sharing pharmacological similarities with the schedule I substances (Δ

9

-THC and 

JWH-018), synthetic cannabinoids pose a risk to the abuser (Weissman et al., 1982, 

Compton et al., 1992; Wiley et al., 1998), and the chronic abuse of products laced with 

synthetic cannabinoids has been linked to addiction and withdrawal (Vardakou et al., 

2010). Similar products have been found to vary in the amount and type of synthetic 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Aged 12-17 Aged 18-20 Aged 21-24 Aged 25-29

Synthetic Cannabinoids

Marrijuana

Age Related Synthetic Cannabinoid and 

Marijuana -Related Emergency Department (ED) 

Visits - 2010
DEA/OD/ODE page 18 of 40 January 2014

cannabinoid laced on the plant material, which could be one explanation for the numerous 

emergency department admissions that have been connected to these substances 

(Vardakou et al., 2010; Vearrier and Osterhoudt, 2010; Schneir et al., 2011; Fattore and 

Fratta, 2011). Health warnings have been issued by numerous state public health 

departments (Appendix 1) and poison control centers describing adverse health effects 

associated with smoking (inhaling) these products including agitation, vomiting, 

tachycardia, elevated blood pressure, seizures, hallucinations, and non-responsiveness.

The earliest reported detection of PB-22 was via Finnish Customs (Tulli) in Helsinki 

who intercepted a consignment of 54 kilograms en route from China to Russia on 

October 27, 2012. Finland notified the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug 

Addiction (EMCDDA) on November 20, 20129. From January through November 2013, CBP 

reported the following seizures with most shipments originating in China and intended for 

destinations within the U.S.: PB-22–25 seizures involving 69.6 kg; 5F-PB-22–23 seizures 

involving 32.9 kg; and AB-FUBINACA–9 seizures involving 16.1 kg (Appendix 2)10. The DEA 

has reported multiple encounters of large quantities of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, and/or 

AB-FUBINACA that have been confirmed by forensic laboratories (STRIDE). In addition, a 

report sent to the DEA from the Mansfield Division of Police Forensic Science Laboratory in 

Mansfield, Ohio has confirmed the presence of PB-22 (17 cases) or 5F-PB-22 (6 cases) from 

January through May of 201311. This report included incident/investigative public 

narratives that included physical symptoms and observations of users. Excerpts from these 

reports with laboratory confirmation of either PB-22 or 5F-PB-22 are detailed below.

PB-22

1) Subject was unable to stand, and when trying to stand, he kept falling down.

Subject was lethargic and could not speak clearly. Subject transported to medical 

facility. 

5F-PB-22

1) After smoking “spice” all day, subject began vomiting and having convulsions. 

Subject was unconscious when law enforcement arrived, was not responding, but 

was breathing. Subject would be comatose one minute and then would become 

violent the next. Medics restrained the subject’s legs and were working on 

 

9 Correspondence from EMCDDA to the Drug and Chemical Control (ODEC) Unit of the DEA 

02/01/2013.

10 Correspondence from CBP to ODEC, DEA.

11 Correspondence from Mansfield Division of Police Forensic Science Laboratory to ODEC, DEA 

06/13/2013.
DEA/OD/ODE page 19 of 40 January 2014

restraining the subject’s arms when the subject appeared to start hallucinating. 

The subject began screaming and tried to get off of the stretcher several times. The 

subject began to scream that “he had to shoot him to save his cousin”. The subject 

appeared to be looking into the corner of the ceiling. Subject referred to medical 

facility.

Since abusers obtain these drugs through unknown sources, purity of these drugs is 

uncertain, thus posing significant adverse health risk to these users (EMCDDA, 2009, Dresen 

et al., 2010). From July through November 2013, five deaths have been reported involving 

5F-PB-22. A 17 year old male’s cause of death was listed by the medical examiner as “5FPB-22 intoxication12

.” Autopsy findings of an 18 year old male reported as a fatal cardiac 

arrhythmia and/or fatal seizure in association with 5F-PB-22 use13. In addition, a toxicology 

laboratory is currently gathering additional information for three separate postmortem 

toxicological investigations in which 5F-PB-22 has been identified in blood and 

quantitatively measured14. As mentioned above, there are reported instances of 

emergency department admissions in association with the abuse of PB-22 and 5F-PB-22. 

There is no accepted medical use of these substances in the U.S.

In late August 2013, local law enforcement in Brunswick, Georgia reported that 22

users presented to emergency departments with severe adverse reactions after the 

consumption of a synthetic product called “Crazy Clown”. Adverse effects included the 

inability to stand, foaming at the mouth, violence towards police and paramedics, and 

memory lapse. The substance responsible for these effects was later identified by the GBI 

as ADB-PINACA. Days later in early September 2013, over 200 patients presented to 

emergency departments in Colorado after have adverse reactions to a synthetic product 

labeled as “Black Mamba” (Appendix 2). Adverse effects included having no gag reflex, 

inability to breathe on their own, hallucinations, and psychotic episodes as described by 

nurses and attending physicians. The substance in these episodes was also identified as 

ADB-PINACA. 

The CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4) requires the Deputy Administrator to notify the 

Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of his intention to 

temporarily place a substance into Schedule I of the CSA.15 The Deputy Administrator 

 

12 Correspondence from Law Enforcement to ODEC, DEA , 09/10/2013

13 Correspondence from Law Enforcement to ODEC, DEA, 11/12/2013

14 Correspondence from Private Toxicology Laboratory to ODEC, DEA, 11/18/2013

15 The Secretary of HHS has delegated to the Assistant Secretary for HHS the authority to make domestic 

drug scheduling recommendations. As set forth in a memorandum of understanding entered into by HHS, 

the FDA, and NIDA, FDA acts as the lead agency within HHS in carrying out the Secretary’s scheduling 

responsibilities under the CSA, with the concurrence of NIDA. 50 FR 9518.
DEA/OD/ODE page 20 of 40 January 2014

transmitted notice of his intent to place PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA in 

schedule I on a temporary basis to the Assistant Secretary by letter dated 

November 7, 2013. The Assistant Secretary responded to this notice by letter dated 

January 27, 2014, and advised that based on review by the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA), there are currently no investigational new drug applications or approved new drug 

applications for PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA. The Assistant Secretary 

also stated that HHS has no objection to the temporary placement of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, 

AB-FUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA into schedule I of the CSA. The DEA has taken into 

consideration the Assistant Secretary’s comments. As PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, or 

ADB-PINACA are not currently listed in any schedule under the CSA, and as no exemptions 

or approvals are in effect for PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA under Section 

505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355), the DEA believes that the 

conditions of 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1) have been satisfied. Any additional comments submitted 

by the Assistant Secretary in response to this notification shall also be taken into 

consideration before a final order is published. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4).

Conclusion of 3-Factor Analysis

After a careful review of the scientific literature, Factors 4, 5, and 6, NFLIS, STRIDE, 

and other law enforcement data and sources of information, it is evident that PB-22, 

5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA are trafficked and abused and pose an imminent 

hazard to public safety. 

The DEA has considered the three criteria for placing a substance into schedule I of 

the CSA (21 U.S.C. 812). The data available and reviewed for PB-22, 5F-PB-22, 

AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA indicated that these substances, including their salts, 

isomers, and salts of isomers, pose an imminent hazard to public safety and health, have 

high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S., 

and lack accepted safety for use under medical supervision.
DEA/OD/ODE page 21 of 40 January 2014

References

Atwood BK, Huffman J, Straiker A, Mackie K (2010). JWH018, a common constituent of 

'Spice' herbal blends, is a potent and efficacious cannabinoid CB receptor 

agonist. British Journal of Pharmacology 160:585-593.

Auwarter V, Dresen S, Weinmann W, Muller M, Putz M, Ferreiros N (2009). 'Spice' and 

other herbal blends: harmless incense or cannabinoid designer drugs? Journal of 

Mass Spectrometry 44:832-837.

Buchler IP, Hayes MJ, Hegde SG, Hockerman SL, Jones DE, Kortum SW, Rico JG, Tenbrink 

RE, Wu KK (2009). Indazole Derivatives (patent). WO/2009/106982

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2013a) Acute kidney injury 

associated with synthetic cannabinoid use--multiple states, 2012. MMWR 

Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report 62(6):93-8.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2013b) Notes from the Field: Severe 

Illness Associated with Synthetic Cannabinoid Use — Brunswick, Georgia, 2013. 

MMWR Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report 62(46):939.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2013c) Notes from the Field: Severe 

Illness Associated with Reported Use of Synthetic Marijuana — Colorado, 

August–September 2013. MMWR Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report 

62(49):1016-17 .

Cohen J, Morrison S, Greenberg J, Saidinejad M. (2012). Clinical presentation of 

intoxication due to synthetic cannabinoids. Pediatrics. 129(4):e1064-1067.

Compton DR, Gold LH, Ward SJ, Balster RL, Martin BR (1992). Aminoalkylindole analogs: 

cannabimimetic activity of a class of compounds structurally distinct from delta 

9-tetrahydrocannabinol. The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental 

Therapeutics 263:1118-1126.

Cottencin O, Rolland B, Karila L. (2013). New designer drugs (Synthetic cannabinoids and 

synthetic cathinones): Review of literature. Current Pharmaceutical Design, 20.

D'Ambra TE, Estep KG, Bell MR, Eissenstat MA, Josef KA, Ward SJ, Haycock DA, Baizman 

ER, Casiano FM, Beglin NC, et al. (1992). Conformationally restrained analogues 

of pravadoline: nanomolar potent, enantioselective, (aminoalkyl)indole agonists 

of the cannabinoid receptor. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 35:124-135.

DEA (2009) "Spice" - Plant material(s) laced with synthetic cannabinoids or cannabinoid 

mimicking compounds. In: Microgram Bulletin, vol. 42, pp 23-24.
DEA/OD/ODE page 22 of 40 January 2014

DEA (2012) Schedules of Controlled Substances: Placement of 1-Butyl-3-(1-

naphthoyl)indole (JWH-073), 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphtoyl)indole (JWH-018), 1-[2-(4-

morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-200), 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-

(3-hydroxycyclohexyl)-phenol (CP-47,497), and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2-(3-

hydroxycyclohexyl)-phenol (cannabicyclohexanol and CP-47,497 C8 homologue) 

into Schedule I: Background, Data, and Analysis: Eight Factors Determinative of 

Control and Findings Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 812(b).

DEA (2013) 1-pentyl-3-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropoyl)indole (UR-144), 

1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-3-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropoyl)indole (5-fluoro-UR-144; 

XLR11) and N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (APINACA, 

AKB48): Background Information and Evaluation of ‘Three Factor Analysis’ 

(Factors 4, 5 and 6) for Temporary Scheduling. 78 FR 28735.

Dresen S, Ferreiros N, Putz M, Westphal F, Zimmermann R, Auwarter V (2010).

Monitoring of herbal mixtures potentially containing synthetic cannabinoids as 

psychoactive compounds. Journal of Mass Spectrometry 45:1186-1194.

Durand D, Delgado LL, de la Parra-Pellot DM, Nichols-Vinueza D (2013). Psychosis and 

severe rhabdomyolysis associated with synthetic cannabinoid use. Clinical 

Schizophrenia & Related Psychoses, epub ahead of print.

EMCDDA (2009) Understanding the 'Spice' Phenomenon. In: The European Monitoring 

Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Lisbon, Portugal.

EMCDDA (2013) Synthetic Cannabinoids in Europe. Available at 

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_212361_EN_EMCDDA_P

OD_2013_Synthetic%20cannabinoids.pdf

Fantegrossi WE, Moran JH, Radominska-Pandya A, Prather PL (2013). Distinct 

pharmacology and metabolism of K2 synthetic cannabinoids compared to delta9-

THC: Mechanism underlying greater toxicity. Life Sciences, epub ahead of print.

Fattore L, Fratta W (2011). Beyond THC: the new generation of cannabinoid designer 

drugs. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 5:1-12.

Forrester MB, Kleinschmidt K, Schwarz E, Young A. (2011). Synthetic cannabinoid 

exposures reported to Texas poison centers. Journal of Addiction Disorders

30(4):351-8.

Griffiths P, Sedefov R, Gallegos A, Lopez D (2010). How globalization and market 

innovation challenge how we think about and respond to drug use: 'Spice' a case 

study. Addiction 105:951-953.
DEA/OD/ODE page 23 of 40 January 2014

Gunderson EW, Haughey HM, Ait-Daoud N, Joshi AS, and Hart CL (2012). “Spice” and 

“K2” herbal highs: A case series and systematic review of the clinical effects and 

biophysical implications of synthetic cannabinoid use in humans. The American 

Journal of Addictions 21:320-326.

Harris CR, Brown A. (2013). Synthetic cannabinoid intoxication: a case series and review. 

Journal of Emergency Medicine 44(2):360-6. 

Hermanns-Clausen M, Kneisel S, Szabo B, Auwärter V. (2013). Acute toxicity due to the 

confirmed consumption of synthetic cannabinoids: clinical and laboratory 

findings. Addiction 108(3):534-44.

Hudson S, Ramsey J, King L, Timbers S, Maynard S, Dargan PI, Wood DM (2010). Use of 

high-resolution accurate mass spectrometry to detect reported and previously 

unreported cannabinomimetics in "herbal high" products. Journal of Analytical 

Toxicology 34:252-260.

Huffman JW, Dong, D., Martin, B.R., Compton, D.R. (1994). Design, synthesis and 

pharmacology of cannabimimetic indoles. Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry

Letters 4:563-566.

Huffman JW, Yu S, Showalter V, Abood ME, Wiley JL, Compton DR, Martin BR, Bramblett 

RD, Reggio PH. (1996). Synthesis and pharmacology of a very potent 

cannabinoid lacking a phenolic hydroxyl with high affinity for the CB2 receptor.

Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 39(20):3875-7.

Huffman JW, Liddle J, Yu S, Aung MM, Abood ME, Wiley JL, Martin BR. (1999). 3-(1',1'-

Dimethylbutyl)-1-deoxy-delta8-THC and related compounds: synthesis of 

selective ligands for the CB2 receptor. Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry

7(12):2905-14.

Huffman JW (2009). Cannabimimetic indoles, pyrroles, and indenes: Structure-activity 

relationships and receptor interactions. Cannabinoid Receptors, Reggio PH, Ed, 

Chapter 3, 49-98, Humana, New York.

Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2013). Monitoring 

the Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings, 

2012. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, 83pp.

Johnston, L. D.,O'Malley, P. M., Miech, R.A., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2014).

Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key 

findings, 2013. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, the University of 

Michigan.
DEA/OD/ODE page 24 of 40 January 2014

Konstrand R, Roman M, Andersson M, Eklund A (2013). Toxicological findings of 

synthetic cannabinoids in reacreational users. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 

37(8):534-541.

Lewin AH, Seltzman HH, Carroll FI, Mascarella SW, Reddy A (2013). Minireview. 

Emergence and properties of spice and bath salts: A medicinal chemistry 

perspective. Life Science, epub ahead of print.

Lindigkeit R, Boehme A, Eiserloh I, Luebbecke M, Wiggermann M, Ernst L, Beuerle T 

(2009). Spice: a never ending story? Forensic Science International 191:58-63.

Makriyannis A and Liu, Q. (2003). Heteroindanes: A new class of potent cannabimimetic 

ligands (patent). WO 03/035005 A2.

McGuinness TM, Newell D (2012). Risky recreation: synthetic cannabinoids have 

dangerous effects. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services 

50(8): 16-18.

Muller H, Sperling W, Kohrmann M, Huttner HB, Kornhuber J, Maler JM (2010). The 

synthetic cannabinoid Spice as a trigger for an acute exacerbation of cannabisinduced recurrent psychotic episodes. Schizophrenia Research 118:309-310.

NIDA (2013a). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Cannabanoid, CB1 (h) Testing Profile and IC50/Ki 

Determination. TDP# PB-22. NIDA Contract N01DA-8-8877: July 23, 2013.

NIDA (2013b). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Agonist Cellular/Functional Assay. TDP# PB-22. NIDA 

Contract N01DA-8-8877: August 1, 2013.

NIDA (2013c). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Cannabanoid, CB1 (h) Testing Profile and IC50/Ki 

Determination. TDP# 5F-PB-22. NIDA Contract N01DA-8-8877: July 23, 2013.

NIDA (2013d). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Agonist Cellular/Functional Assay. TDP# 5F-PB-22. 

NIDA Contract N01DA-8-8877: August 1, 2013.

NIDA (2013e). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Cannabanoid, CB1 (h) Testing Profile and IC50/Ki 

Determination. TDP# AB-FUBINACA. NIDA Contract N01DA-8-8877: September 9, 

2013.

NIDA (2013f). Cannabinoid, CB1 (h) Agonist Cellular/Functional Assay. TDP# ABFUBINACA. NIDA Contract N01DA-8-8877: September 25, 2013.

NFLIS (2013). National Forensice Laboratory Information System. Drug Enforcement 

Administration.
DEA/OD/ODE page 25 of 40 January 2014

Oluwabusi OO, Lobach L, Akhtar U, Youngman B, Ambrosini (2012). Synthetic 

cannabinoi-induced psychosis: two adolescent cases. Journal of Child and 

Adolescent Psychopharmacology 22(5):393-395.

ONDCP (Office of National Drug Control Policy), 2011. Synthetic Marijuana. 

Patton AL, Chimalakonda KC, Moran CL, McCain KR, Radominska-Pandya A, James LP, 

Kokes C, Moran JH (2013). K2 Toxicity: Fatal Case of Psychiatric Complications 

Following AM2201 Exposure. Jorunal of Forensic Science. 58(6):1676-80.

Peglow S, Buchner J, Briscoe G. (2012). Synthetic cannabinoid psychosis in previously 

nonpsychotic patient. American Journal of Addiction 21(3):287-288.

Psychonaut Web Mapping Research Group (2009) Spice Report. London, UK: Institue of 

Psychiatry, King's College.

SAMHSA (2012). The DAWN report: Drug-related emergency department visits involving 

synthetic cannabinoids (December 4, 2012), Rockville, MD.

SAMHSA (2013). Drug Abuse Warning Network, 2011: Selected Tables of National 

Estimates of Drug-Related Emergency Department Visits. Rockville, MD: Center 

for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality.

Schifano F, Corzazza, O., Deluca, P., Davey, Z., Di Furia, L., Farre, M., Flesland, L., 

Mannonen, M., Pagani, S., Peltoniemi, T., Pezzolesi, C., Scherbaum, N., Siemann, 

H., Skutle, A., Torrens, M., Van der Kreeft, P. (2009) Psychoactive drug or 

mystical incense? Overview of online available information on Spice products. 

International Journal of Culture and Mental Health 2:137-144.

Schneir AB, Cullen J, Ly BT (2011) "Spice" girls: synthetic cannabinoid intoxication. The 

Journal of Emergency Medicine 40:296-299.

Sharma SK, Jia G, Lown JW (2001) Novel cyclopropylindole conjugates and dimers: 

synthesis and anti-cancer evaluation. Current Medicinal Chemistry Anti-Cancer 

Agents 1:27-45.

Sobolevsky T, Prasolov I, Rodchenkov G (2012) Detection of urinary metabolites of AM2201 and UR-144, two novel synthetic cannabinoids. Drug Testing and Analysis

Epub ahead of print. 

STRIDE (2013) System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence. Drug Enforcement 

Administration.
DEA/OD/ODE page 26 of 40 January 2014

Thomas S, Bliss S, Malik M (2012). Suicidal ideation and self-harm following K2 use. 

Journal of Oklahoma State Medical Association 105(11):430-433.

Uchiyama N, Matsuda S, Kawamura M, Kikura-Hanajiri R, Goda Y (2013) Two new-type 

cannabimimetic quinolinyl carboxylates, QUPIC and QUCHIC, two new 

cannabimimetic carboxamide derivatives, ADB-FUBINACA and ADBICA, and five 

synthetic cannabinoids detected with a thiophene derivative a-PVT and an opioid

receptor agonist AH-7921 identified in illegal products. Forensic Toxicology, 

Published online: March 15.

Uchiyama N, Kawamura M, Kikura-Hanajiri R, Goda Y (2012b) URB-754: A new class of 

designer drug and 12 synthetic cannabinoids detected in illegal products. 

Forensic Science International 227(1-3):21-32.

Uchiyama N, Kawamura M., Kikura-Hanajiri, R., Goda, Y. (2012a) Identification of two 

new-type synthetic cannabinoids, N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-

carboxamide (APICA) and N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide 

(APINACA), and detection of five synthetic cannabinoids, AM-1220, AM-2233, 

AM-1241, CB-13 (CRA-13), and AM-1248, as designer drugs in illegal products. 

Forensic Toxicology 30:114-125.

Uchiyama N, Kikura-Hanajiri R, Ogata J, Goda Y (2010) Chemical analysis of synthetic 

cannabinoids as designer drugs in herbal products. Forensic Science International 

198:31-38.

Vandrey R, Dunn KE, Fry JA, Girling ER (2012). A survey to characterize use of spice 

products (synthetic cannabinoids). Drug and Alcohol Dependence 120:238-241.

Vardakou I, Pistos C, Spiliopoulou C (2010). Spice drugs as a new trend: mode of action, 

identification and legislation. Toxicology Letters 197:157-162.

Vearrier D, Osterhoudt KC (2010). A teenager with agitation: higher than she should 

have climbed. Pediatric Emergency Care 26:462-465.

Wiebelhaus JM, Poklis JL, Poklis A, Vann RE, Litchman AH, Wise LE (2012). Inhalation 

exposure to smoke from synthetic “marijuana” produces cannabimimetic effects 

in mice. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 126:316-323.

Weissman A, Milne GM, Melvin LS, Jr. (1982). Cannabimimetic activity from CP-47,497, a 

derivative of 3-phenylcyclohexanol. The Journal of Pharmacology and 

Experimental Therapeutics 223:516-523.

Wells DL, Ott CA (2011). The "new" marijuana. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 45:414-

417.
DEA/OD/ODE page 27 of 40 January 2014

Wiley JL, Compton DR, Dai D, Lainton JA, Phillips M, Huffman JW, Martin BR (1998). 

Structure-activity relationships of indole- and pyrrole-derived cannabinoids. The 

Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 285:995-1004.

Winnstock AR, Barratt MJ. (2013). The 12-month prevalence and natrue of adverse

experiences resulting in emergency medical prsentations associated with the use 

of synthetic cannabinoid products. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and

Experminetal 28:390-393.

Yeakel JK, Logan BK (2013). Blood synthetic cannabinoid concentrations in cases of 

suspected impaired driving. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 37(8):547-551.

Zawilska JB, Wojcieszak J (2013). Spice/K2 drugs – more than innocent subsitutes for 

marijuana. Internation Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, epub ahead of 

print.

Zimmermann US, Winkelmann PR, Pilhatsch M, Nees JA, Spanagel R, Schulz K (2009).

Withdrawal phenomena and dependence syndrome after the consumption of 

"spice gold". Deutsches Arzteblatt International 106:464-467.
DEA/OD/ODE page 28 of 40 January 2014

Appendix 1

Public Health

1. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) 

reported that in 2010, an estimated 11,406 emergency department visits 

involved a synthetic cannabinoid product.

2. SAMHSA reported that in 2011, an estimated 28,531 emergency department 

visits involved a synthetic cannabinoid product, a 2.5 times increase over the 

2010 estimated visits.

3. Monitoring the Future study results for 2012 (released 12/19/2012) state 

that for the second year of reporting, use of synthetic marijuana amongst 

12th graders held level at 11.3%. Study authors stated that while a leveling 

was encouraging, the high prevalence rate despite federal and state efforts 

to reduce its use was troublesome.

4. Monitoring the Future study results for 2013 (released 12/18/2013) state 

that use of synthetic marijuana amongst 12th graders fell from 11.3% in 2012 

to 7.9% in 2013.

5. Health effects from the drug can be life-threatening and can include:

a. Severe agitation and anxiety.

b. Fast, racing heartbeat and higher blood pressure.

c. Nausea and vomiting.

d. Muscle spasms, seizures, and tremors.

e. Intense hallucinations and psychotic episodes.

f. Suicidal and other harmful thoughts and/or actions.

g. http://www.aapcc.org/alerts/synthetic-marijuana/

6. ...these substances are among the worst they have ever seen. People high 

on these drugs can get very agitated and violent, exhibit psychosis and 

severe behavior changes, and have harmed themselves and others. Some 

have been admitted to psychiatric hospitals and have experience continued 

neurological and psychological effects (News Release–American Association 

of Poison Control Centers: AAPCC Issues Statement on the Synthetic Drug 

Abuse Prevention Act, July 11, 2012).

Poison Control Centers

1. March 24 AAPCC Press Release. As of March 24, 2010, 112 exposure calls 

had been received since 2009 regarding synthetic cannabinoids and 

associated products, including 59 exposure calls since March 1, 2010, 

according to the National Poison Data System (NPDS).

2. July 23, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of July 23, 2010, 761 exposure calls 

had been received regarding synthetic cannabinoids and associated products 

according to NPDS.
DEA/OD/ODE page 29 of 40 January 2014

3. August 20, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of August 20, 2010, 1,057 

exposure calls had been received regarding synthetic cannabinoids and 

associated products according to NPDS.

4. September 27, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of September 27, 2010, 1,503 

exposure calls had been received regarding synthetic cannabinoids and 

associated products according to NPDS.

5. November 3, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of November 3, 2010, 1,966 

exposure calls have been received by poison centers regarding products 

purported to contain synthetic cannabinoids according to NPDS. Calls have 

been received in 48 states and the District of Columbia.

6. November 22, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of November 22, 2010, poison 

centers have reported 2,304 exposure calls regarding products purported to 

contain synthetic cannabinoids according to NPDS. Poison centers have 

received exposure calls in 49 states and the District of Columbia.

7. December 21, 2010 AAPCC Press Release. As of December 21, 2010, U.S. 

poison centers have reported receiving more than 2,500 exposure calls this 

year alone. As of December 21, 2010, poison centers have reported 2,752 

exposure calls about the products according to NPDS.

8. January 18, 2011 AAPCC Press Release. As of January 18, 2011, U.S. poison 

centers have received more than 3,000 exposure calls regarding products 

purported to contain synthetic cannabinoids. In 2010, poison centers 

reported 2,867 exposure calls. As of January 18, 2011, U.S. poison centers 

have reported 217 exposure calls for 2011.

9. February 3, 2011, AAPCC Press Release. As of February 3, 2011, U.S. poison 

centers have reported 385 exposure calls for 2011.

10. February 10, 2011, AAPCC Press Release. Synthetic marijuana products have 

spurred more than 3,000 exposure calls to U.S. poison centers since 2010.

11. February 24, 2011, AAPCC Press Release. As of February 24, 2011, U.S. 

poison centers have reported 706 exposure calls for 2011. The total number 

of calls since 2010 is more than 3,500 exposure calls. 

12. April 20, 2011, AAPCC Press Release. Synthetic marijuana products have 

spurred more than 4,500 exposure calls to U.S. poison control centers since 

2010.

13. July 11, 2012, AAPCC Press Release. In 2010, poison centers nationwide 

responded to about 3,200 exposure calls related to synthetic marijuana and 

bath salts. In 2011, the number jumped to more than 13,000. Sixty percent 

of these cases involved patients 25 and younger.
DEA/OD/ODE page 30 of 40 January 2014

14. November 28, 2011, AAPCC Press Release. Poison center data provides vital 

information leading to the DEA ban of synthetic drugs.

15. February 16, 2012, AAPCC Press Release. American Association of Poison 

Control Centers joins the Office of National Drug Control Policy Working 

Group in addressing the dangers of synthetic drugs.

16. May 31, 2012, AAPCC Press Release. The AAPCC commends the U.S. Senate 

for passing a ban of synthetic drugs in SB 3187 and call on the U.S. House of 

Representatives to include the language in the final version of the bill.

17. July 11, 2012, AAPCC Press Release. AAPCC comment the nation’s policy 

makers on passage into the law the Synthetic Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 

2012.

18. From January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, poison centers 

nationwide have received 5,200 exposure calls regarding exposure to 

synthetic cannabinoids.

19. From January 1, 2013 through December, 2013, poison centers nationwide 

have received 2,639 exposure calls regarding exposure to synthetic 

cannabinoids.

Relevant Positions/Statements by Organizations

A. National Drug Court Institute, Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet, Spice, K2 and 

the Problem of Synthetic Cannabinoids, October 2010, vol. 5, no. 1. 

(www.ndci.org)

B. MetroKids, ‘Spice’ Health Warning Issued, April 2010 (www.metrokids.com)

C. Indiana Prevention Resource Center, Indiana University Bloomington, K2/Spice: A 

Fake Drug Carrying a Real Potential for Harm, undated, (www.drugs.indiana.edu)

D. Prevention First, Fake Marijuana Called Spice or K2 Can Cause Serious Harm to 

Teens, April 13, 2010 (www.prevention.org)

E. Saint Louis University, SLU Toxicologist Warning to Parents: Look for Signs of K2, 

March 3, 2010 (www.slu.edu/x35328.xml)

F. Community of Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, Researchers Warn About 

Dangers of Synthetic Marijuana, March 18, 2010 (www.cadca.org)
DEA/OD/ODE page 31 of 40 January 2014

Table 3. NFLIS – State and Local Forensic Laboratory Reports (Query date: January 22, 2014)

2010 2011 2012 2013 Total

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4†

 JWH-018; 

JWH-073;

 JWH-200; 

CP-47,497

 CP47,497 C8 

homologue

138 413 670 1,197 1,515 997 661 542 427 354 228 144 102 87 74 17 7,566

UR-144; 

XLR11;

AKB48

1* 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 569 3,308 6,238 4,957 6,079 5,955 3,119 1,002 31,278

PB-22

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 223 445 475 175 1,318

5F-PB-22

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 427 573 192 1,294

ABFUBINACA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 396 404 822

ADBPINACA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 2 40

*Encounter confirmed in March 2012; † = data are incomplete for fourth quarter 2013, still being reported.
DEA/OD/ODE page 32 of 40 January 2014

Table 4. STRIDE Records (January through November* (Query date: January 22, 2014):

NUMBER OF RECORDS

PB-22 211

5F-PB-22 168

AB-FUBINACA 74

ADB-PINACA 0

* No reports identified in STRIDE regarding PB-22 or 5F-PB-22 prior to February 2013. No 

reports of AB-FUBINACA prior to June 2013.
DEA/OD/ODE page 33 of 40 January 2014

Appendix 2

Table 5. Reports from ADB-PINACA overdoses (August – September 2013)*

Location Substance Identified Packet Label Remarks

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA

Crazy Clown 

Pineapple 

Express

None

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Crazy Clown

Two males passed 

out in a vehicle; both 

became extremely 

ill; driver placed on 

life support

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA

AM-HI-C; Atomic 

Bomb; Black 

Mamba

Single vehicle 

accident, driver 

passed out while 

driving and collided 

with a tree

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Dead Man 

Walking

User became ill after 

using substance and 

required 

hospitalization

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Unknown

User was found 

slumped over the 

wheel of a vehicle in 

the middle of an 

intersection

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Mamba

Male and female 

user found passed 

out in backyard; 

female vomited over 

herself; male 

became combative 

and required 

restraints

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Mamba

User had minimal 

vitals upon EMS 

arrival; required use 

of a respirator at 

hospital; user 

collapsed following 

single puff from a 

rolled cigarette of 

“Mamba”
DEA/OD/ODE page 34 of 40 January 2014

Denver, CO ADB-PINACA Mamba

Two juveniles 

required 

hospitalization after 

smoking mamba; 

one juvenile found 

stumbling down the 

street

* Communication from Aurora Police Department to the DEA (12/18/2013)

Table 6. Reports from Customs and Border Protection Laboratory (January –

November 2013)

Date of 

Detention

Identified 

Substance(s) Detained at

Originated 

from Destination

TOTAL 

WEIGHT

1/29/2013 PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China

Fort 

Lauderdale, FL 15 kg

1/29/2013 PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China

Fort 

Lauderdale, FL 15 kg

2/8/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Richardson, TX 2 kg

2/13/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China San Dimas, CA 2 kg

2/28/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Newman Lake, 

WA

300 

grams

2/28/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Newman Lake, 

WA

300 

grams

2/28/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Arlington, TX

100 

grams

3/6/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Tulsa, OK 2 kg

3/13/2013 PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China

South 

Charleston, 

WV 3.5 kg

3/22/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China Columbia, MO 3.5 kg

4/4/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Phoenix, AZ

200 

grams
DEA/OD/ODE page 35 of 40 January 2014

4/4/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Temecula, CA 2 kg

4/4/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Columbia, MO 2 kg

4/4/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Columbia, MO 2 kg

4/4/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Walnut, CA 2 kg

4/12/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Phoenix, AZ unknown

4/19/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Sprints, LA

100 

grams

5/6/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Decatur, IL

100 

grams

5/16/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Las Cruces, 

NM 1 gram

5/18/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail Hong Kong Las Vegas, NV

500 

grams

5/31/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China

Las Cruces, 

NM 1 kg

6/13/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Coeur D'Alene, 

ID

500 

grams

6/13/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Baytown, TX 1 kg

6/25/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail Hong Kong

Salt Lake City, 

UT 5 kg

6/25/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Houston, TX 2 kg

6/25/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Chatsworth, 

CA 1 kg

6/25/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Katy, TX 3 kg

6/27/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China Las Vegas, NV 3 kg

6/29/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China Puerto Rico 2.8 kg

7/5/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Pahrump, NV 1 kg
DEA/OD/ODE page 36 of 40 January 2014

7/5/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Tacoma, WA 3 kg

7/8/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Las Vegas, NV 2 kg

7/8/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Las Vegas, NV 2 kg

7/10/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Anchorage, AK 1 kg

7/17/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Las Cruces, 

NM

300 

grams

7/17/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Independence, 

LA

700 

grams

7/17/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Independence, 

LA

700 

grams

7/17/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Independence,

LA 2.5 kg

8/8/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Houston, TX 3 kg

8/15/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Ogden, UT

500 

grams

8/22/2013 PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Elizabeth, NJ 5.5 kg

9/4/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

FedEx 

Anchorage, AK China Tulsa, OK 2.3 kg

9/5/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Baton Rouge, 

LA 50 grams

10/3/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail unknown unknown 1.3 kg

10/9/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Bremerton, 

WA 2 kg

10/9/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Houston, TX 5 kg

10/24/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Casper, WY

800 

grams

10/24/2013 5-fluoro-PB-22

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Bremerton, 

WA 2 kg

10/24/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Houston, TX 4 kg
DEA/OD/ODE page 37 of 40 January 2014

10/24/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Anderson, SC 10 grams

10/31/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Austin, TX 5 grams

11/7/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Metairie, LA

100 

grams

11/7/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Canyon 

Country, CA 2 kg

11/7/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Canoga Park, 

CA 3 kg

11/7/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China

Canyon 

Country, CA 2 kg

11/7/2013 AB-FUBINACA

San Francisco 

Intl Mail China Mchenny, IL 5 grams

Table 7. DEA Sample Laboratory Results

Date Label Flavor/

Characteristic

Confirmed 

Substance

Lab Notes

5/2/2013 Dr. Feelgood Kush PB-22

South 

Central

2g packet, mad 

scientist holding 

green bottle

5/2/2013 Dr. Feelgood

Chronic 

Hypnotic PB-22

South 

Central

2g packet, mad 

scientist holding 

green bottle

6/6/2013

Scorpion 

King PB-22 Northeast

Plastic vial, 

picture of 

scorpion

6/6/2013

Newer 

Diesel PB-22 Northeast

Plastic vial, gold 

crown

6/6/2013 Black PB-22 Northeast

Plastic vial, 

scary eyes on 

label

6/6/2013 Dead Man PB-22 Northeast Plastic vial

6/6/2013 Aloha PB-22 Northeast Plastic vial

6/6/2013 El diablo PB-22 Northeast Plastic vial

6/10/2013 Caution PB-22 Northeast

3g, Orange 

packet, 

biohazard 

symbol

6/10/2013 California PB-22 Northeast Packet, green 
DEA/OD/ODE page 38 of 40 January 2014

Dreams and white 

marijuana leaf 

on front

6/10/2013 Kush PB-22, XLR11 Northeast

11g, green 

sparkle writing, 

black packet

6/14/2013 Demon Child Kush

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western2g packet, skull 

on front

6/14/2013 Red Eye Jack PB-22 Western

3g, Jack (from 

playing cards) 

on front with 

red eye

6/14/2013 Demon Child Blueberry Thrill

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western5g packet, skull 

on front

6/14/2013 Biohazard Original PB-22 Western

2g packet, 

brown 

background, 

biohazard 

symbol on front

6/14/2013

Game 

Master Original PB-22, XLR11 Western

1g packet, Man 

with numbers 

coming from 

head, blue 

background

6/17/2013 OMG Next Gen PB-22 Northeast

4g packet, 

dwarf, 

psychedelic 

colors

8/26/2013 Wonderland Kush

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western

2g packet, red 

mushrooms 

growing over a 

dock and pond

8/26/2013 Joker

Chronic 

Hypnotic 5F-PB-22 Western

5g black packet, 

evil clown face 

on front, 

aromatic 

therapy

8/26/2013 Vato Locos Melon Mamba

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western

2g black packet, 

three guys in 

suits (green, 

purple, red), 

also comes in 

larger packet

8/26/2013

Hysteria 

Black

Melon Mamba; 

Strawberry

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western

2g black packet, 

XXX, red 

triangle pattern

8/26/2013 WTF PB-22 Western 1.5 and 2.5 g 
DEA/OD/ODE page 39 of 40 January 2014

black packet, 

Fidel Castro 

w/no toilet 

paper on front

8/26/2013 El Diablo PB-22 Western

Small plastic 

vial, black lid, 

red and black 

label

8/26/2013 Fallen Angel

Kush; Chronic

Hypnotic

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western

5g black packet, 

woman on fire 

on front

8/26/2013

Devils 

Advocate Kush

PB-22, 5FPB-22 Western

5g black packet, 

skull with horns, 

fire behind

8/26/2013

Black 

Mamba PB-22 Western

Clear plastic 

vial with black 

lid, red sticker 

on top
DEA/OD/ODE page 40 of 40 January 2014