DEA/OD/ODE page 1 of 39 December 2014

N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-

carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA), N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1Hindazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA) and [1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-

yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone (THJ-2201)

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

December 2014

Introduction

Recently, several synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) namely N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-

oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA), N-(1-

amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA) and

[1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone (THJ-2201) emerged in 

the illicit drug market. In light of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

reviewed the available scientific, medical, law enforcement and other data on these 

substances. The data presented in this document support the determination by the DEA 

to control these substances under the temporary scheduling provision of the Controlled 

Substances Act (CSA). 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). 

SCs are substances synthesized in laboratories that mimic the biological effects

of THC, the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. These chemicals, such as CP47,497 and cannabicyclohexanol (designed in the 1980s and currently controlled), were 

initially used as research tools to investigate the biological mechanisms in the 

cannabinoid system and to develop novel therapies for various clinical conditions. Other 

SCs including JWH-018, JWH-073, and JWH-200 (all permanently controlled pursuant to

the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act. (FDASIA), Pub. L. 112-144) 

were synthesized in the mid-1990s and studied to further advance the understanding of 

drug-receptor interactions regarding the cannabinoid system.

SCs were first marketed in several European countries as herbal incense before 

the initial encounter in the United States by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in 

November 2008. In 2009, their use began increasing in the United States with law 
DEA/OD/ODE page 2 of 39 December 2014

enforcement encounters describing SCs laced on plant material and being abused for 

their psychoactive properties. In addition, forensic analyses by the DEA and other 

Federal, State, and local laboratories have identified multiple variations in both the type 

and the amount of SC applied to the plant material.

As observed by the DEA and CBP, SCs originate from foreign sources, including 

China and other countries in Southeast Asia. Bulk powder substances are smuggled via 

common carrier into the United States and find their way to clandestine designer drug 

product manufacturing operations located in residential neighborhoods, garages, 

warehouses, and other similar destinations throughout the country. The powder form of 

SCs are typically dissolved in solvents (e.g., acetone) before being applied to a green 

plant material or dissolved in a propellant intended for use in e-cigarette devices. Law 

enforcement personnel have encountered various application methods including, 

buckets or cement mixers in which green plant material and one or more SCs are mixed 

together, as well as large areas where the green plant material is spread out so that a 

dissolved SC mixture can be applied directly. According to online discussion boards and 

law enforcement encounters, spraying or mixing the SCs 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). Once mixed, the 

SC/green plant material is then allowed to dry before illicit manufacturers package the 

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

to ensure a consistent, uniform concentration of the substance in each package. 

Adverse health consequences may also occur from directly ingesting the drug during the 

manufacturing process.

SCs are marketed under hundreds of different brand names, including “Spice,” 

“K2,” “Blaze,” “Red X Dawn,” “Paradise,” “Demon,” “Black Magic,” “Spike,” “Mr. Nice 

Guy,” “Ninja,” “Zohai,” “Yucatan,” “Fire,” “Crazy Clown,” “Mojo,” “Black Mamba,” “Black 

Voodoo,” “Scooby Snax,” “Bizzaro,” and many others. In addition, various “new 

generations” of SCs reflect the same or similar product labels while yielding a higher 

intensity and longer lasting highs, but with the user still being deprived of knowledge as 

to exactly what is contained inside the packaging. 

The designer drug products laced with SCs are often sold under the guise of 

“herbal incense,” “potpourri,” etc., use various product names, and are 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 
DEA/OD/ODE page 3 of 39 December 2014

that these products are safe (Fattore and Fratta, 2011; McGuinness and Newell, 2012) 

and further, that mislabeling these products as “not for human consumption” is a legal 

defense to criminal prosecution. 

These substances have no accepted medical use in the United States and have 

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

effect on communities. Acute and chronic abuse of SCs in general have been linked to 

adverse health effects including signs of addiction and withdrawal (Zimmermann et al., 

2009; Muller et al., 2010; Nacca et al., 2013; Rominger et al., 2013), numerous reports 

of emergency room admissions resulting from their abuse (Forrester et al., 2011; 

Hermanns-Clausen et al., 2013; SAMHSA, 2012; Buser et al., 2014; Takematsu et al., 

2014), overall toxicity (Gunderson et al., 2012; Hermanns-Clausen et al., 2013; 

Fantegrossi et al., 2014; Konstrand et al., 2013), and death (Behonick et al., 2014; Patton 

et al., 2013; Law Enforcement/Toxicology correspondence). Psychiatric case reports 

have been reported in the scientific literature detailing the harms of SC abuse and 

psychoses (Oluwabusi et al., 2012; Peglow et al., 2012; Thomas et al., 2012; Castellanos 

and Thorton, 2012; Papanti et al, 2013; Spaderna et al., 2013; Castaneto et al., 2014).

The risk of adverse health effects is further increased by the fact that similar products 

vary in the composition and concentration of SCs applied on the plant material. 

In March 2011, May 2013, and February 2014, the DEA emergency-scheduled 

multiple SCs to protect the public health and safety. They included 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 FDASIA on July 9, 2012); UR144, XLR11 and AKB48 (temporarily scheduled on May 16, 2013, at 78 FR 28735); and 

PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA and ADB-PINACA (temporarily scheduled on February 

10, 2014, at 79 FR 7577). Section 1152 of the FDASIA amended the Controlled 

Substances Act (CSA) by placing cannabimimetic agents and 26 specific substances 

(including 15 SCs, 2 synthetic cathinones, and 9 phenethylamines of the 2C-series) in 

schedule I. Although seizures of JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 

C8 homologue showed a decline shortly after these drugs were scheduled, new SCs

began to emerge on the designer drug market. A new generation of SCs, including UR144, XLR11, and AKB48 quickly became the new drugs of choice in the synthetic 

marketplace. Following the temporary scheduling of UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48, the next 

generation of SCs quickly began emerging, which included PB-22, 5F-PB-22, ABFUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA. More recently, law enforcement has been encountering 

yet another generation of SCs including N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-

(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA), N-(1-amino-3-methyl-
DEA/OD/ODE page 4 of 39 December 2014

1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA) and [1-(5-

fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone (THJ-2201).

AB-CHMINACA is a synthetic cannabinoid (figure 1) that has pharmacological 

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

(RTI, 2014) and other temporarily and permanently controlled schedule I substances. 

AB-CHMINACA was not reported in the scientific literature prior to its appearance on 

the illicit drug market. According to the System to Retrieve Information from Drug 

Evidence (STRIDE1) data, there are 21 records for AB-CHMINACA from January 1, 2010,

through September 30, 2014 (Query date: October 1, 2014). The National Forensic 

Laboratory Information System (NFLIS2) registered 586 reports containing ABCHMINACA in 19 states from January 1, 2010, through November 25, 2014 (Query date: 

November 25, 2014). In addition, at least four deaths and multiple overdoses requiring 

emergency medical intervention have been reported involving the use of AB-CHMINACA

(see Factor 6).

AB-PINACA is a synthetic cannabinoid (figure 1) that has pharmacological effects 

similar to the schedule I hallucinogen delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) (RTI, 2014)

and other temporarily and permanently controlled schedule I substances. AB-PINACA 

first appeared in the scientific literature as a designer drug found in illegal products 

(Uchiyama et al., 2012). There are 245 records involving AB-PINACA in STRIDE from 

January 1, 2010, through September 30, 2014 (Query date: October 1, 2014). There are 

3,783 reports in NFLIS from January 1, 2010, through November 25, 2014 (Query date: 

November 25, 2014) in 39 states. At least three deaths and multiple overdoses requiring 

emergency medical intervention have been reported involving the use of AB-PINACA 

(see Factor 6).

THJ-2201 is a synthetic cannabinoid (figure 1) that has pharmacological effects 

similar to the schedule I hallucinogen delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) (Janowsky, 

2014) and other temporarily and permanently controlled schedule I substances. THJ2201 was not reported in the scientific literature prior to its appearance on the illicit 

drug market. According to STRIDE data, there are 65 records for THJ-2201 from January 

1, 2010, through September 30, 2014 (Query date: October 1, 2014). The National 

Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS) registered 220 reports containing THJ-

 

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 law enforcement agencies. 

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

chemistry analyses conducted by state and local forensic laboratories in the United States.
DEA/OD/ODE page 5 of 39 December 2014

2201 in 13 states from January 1, 2010, through September 30, 2014 (Query date: 

October 1, 2014). 

With no approved medical use and with limited or no safety or toxicological

information, these substances (AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201) have emerged 

on the designer drug market and are being abused for their psychoactive properties. ABCHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201 were not included among the 15 SCs that are 

specifically named under FDASIA, and do not fall under the legal definition of 

cannabimimetic agents as provided under FDASIA. To protect the public health and 

safety, the DEA intends to temporarily place AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201 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 AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3) and 

811(c)(4)-(6).

Figure 1. Chemical Structures

AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA, and THJ-2201 are classified as pentyl indazoles and

share structural features with the schedule I substances AKB48 and AB-FUBINACA. ABCHMINACA was not reported in the scientific literature prior to its emergence on the 

illicit drug market. AB-PINACA was first reported in the scientific literature following an 

extraction from “Fragrance Powder” purchased via the Internet in July 2012 (Uchiyama 

et al., 2013). Additionally, THJ-2201’s emergence on the illicit drug market preceded any 

report in the scientific literature.
DEA/OD/ODE page 6 of 39 December 2014

Synthetic Cannabinoids

N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-

carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA)

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

AB-FUBINACA and AKB48. AB-CHMINACA, AB-FUBINACA, and AKB48 have the same

core structure where the 1- and 3-positions of the indazole ring system are 

substituted. All three substances are substituted at the 3-position with a carbonyl linker 

and an additional nitrogen atom collectively known as an amide. AB-CHMINACA and ABFUBINACA are further substituted at the amide nitrogen atom with the 1-amino-3-

methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl group. The 1-position of the core indazole ring system is 

substituted in both AB-CHMINACA and AB-FUBINACA. In AB-CHMINACA, the 1-position 

is substituted with a cyclohexylmethyl group, and in AB-FUBINACA, the 1-position of the 

indazole ring is substituted with a 4-fluorobenzyl group. A study conducted by contract 

researchers at RTI International indicated that AB-CHMINACA binds to the CB1 receptor 

(RTI, 2014).

3

N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (ABPINACA)

 AB-PINACA is also based on the same indazole core structure as AB-CHMINACA, 

AB-FUBINACA, and AKB48, where the 1- and 3-positions of the indazole ring system are 

substituted. All four of these substances are substituted at the 3-position with an amide. 

Like AB-CHMINACA and AB-FUBINACA, AB-PINACA is substituted at the amide nitrogen 

atom with the same 1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl group. AB-PINACA, like AKB48, 

contains a pentyl group on the indazole 1-position. Research has demonstrated that ABPINACA binds to the CB1 receptor (RTI, 20144

; Prather, 2014) and is an agonist at the 

CB1 receptor.

[1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone (THJ-2201)

 THJ-2201 is also based on the same indazole core structure as AB-PINACA, ABCHMINACA, AB-FUBINACA, and AKB48 where the 1- and 3-positions of the indazole ring 

system are substituted. These substitutions for THJ-2201 are the same substitutions as 

are found in AM-2201, where the core is indole. This single atom substitution from 

indole to indazole is the only difference between AM-2201 and THJ-2201. AM-2201 and 

 

3

Personal communication from RTI International to DEA, 09/08/2014.

4

Personal communication from RTI International to ODEC, DEA, 09/08/2014.
DEA/OD/ODE page 7 of 39 December 2014

THJ-2201 are both substituted at the 3-position with a carbonyl group known as a 

ketone. The ketone groups of both substances are further substituted with a naphthyl 

group. The 1-position of core structures of THJ-2201 and AM-2201 are substituted with 

a fluorinated alkyl group, known as a 5-fluoropentyl group (Huffman et al., 1994; Wiley 

et al., 1998; Aung et al., 2000; Manera et al., 2008; Huffman, 2009). 

In vitro

CB1 Binding Affinity (Ki) CB1 Functional Activity (EC50)

AB-CHMINACA 0.74 nMaTBD

AB-PINACA 2.64 nMa; 0.93 nMc14.3 nMc

THJ-2201 10.3 nMb1.05 nMb

a

Correspondence from RTI International to DEA, 9/08/2014

b

Janowsky, 2014

c

Prather, 2014

TBD – to be determined

Table 1. In vitro data for AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201

Factor 4. History and current pattern of abuse 

SCs 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). 

Synthetic cannabinoids intended for illicit use were first reported in the United States in a 

November 2008 encounter, where a shipment of "Spice" was seized and analyzed by CBP 

in Dayton, Ohio. Additionally at approximately the same time, in December 2008, JWH-018 

and cannabicyclohexanol (CP-47,497 C8 homologue) were identified by German forensic 

laboratories. Since the initial identification of JWH-018 (November 2008), many other SCs 

have been found applied on plant material and encountered as designer drug products 

(Auwarter et al., 2009; DEA, 2009; DEA, 2012; DEA, 2013; DEA, 2014). The popularity of 

these cannabinoids and their associated products appears to have increased since January 

2010 in the United States based on seizure evidence and public health and media reports. 

Numerous SCs have been identified as product adulterants, and law enforcement 

has seized bulk powder of these substances. The first SCs identified as being abused 

included JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 homologue, followed 

shortly thereafter by new generations of SCs including drugs such as UR-144, XLR11, 

AKB48, PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, ADB-PINACA and numerous other SCs varying only 

by slight modifications to their chemical structure. JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP47,497, and CP-47,497 C8 homologue were temporarily scheduled on March 1, 2011 (76 FR 

11075), and later permanently placed in schedule I by section 1152 of FDASIA on July 9, 
DEA/OD/ODE page 8 of 39 December 2014

2012. Section 1152 of FDASIA amended the CSA by placing cannabimimetic agents and 26 

specific substances (including 15 synthetic cannabinoids, 2 synthetic cathinones, and 9 

synthetic phenethylamines of the 2C- series) into schedule I. UR-144, XLR11, and AKB48 

were temporarily scheduled on May 16, 2013 (78 FR 28735). PB-22, 5F-PB-22, ABFUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA were temporarily scheduled on February 10, 2014 (79 FR 

7577). Another generation of SCs including AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201 has 

recently been encountered. 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, 2014; STRIDE, 2014).

Numerous herbal incense products have been found to contain one or more SC(s) 

laced on plant material (Appendix 2). Research and clinical reports have demonstrated that 

SCs are applied onto plant material so that the material may be smoked as users attempt 

to obtain a euphoric and psychoactive “high,” similar to marijuana (McKeever et al., 2014; 

Bonar et al., 2014). 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. 

To lace the plant material, the SCs 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). 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., 2014). The psychoactive properties are directly linked to the SCs laced on the plant 

material sold as retail products (Auwarter et al., 2009; EMCDDA, 2009; Atwood et al., 

2010). This was reconfirmed in a recent publication analyzing various herbal products 

reporting that the green plant material found in SC products was devoid of psychoactive 

effects (Ogata et al., 2013) demonstrating that the effects observed following ingestion of 

a SC product originates from the actual SC, and not the plant material. 

A major concern as reiterated by public health officials and medical professionals,

remains the targeting and direct marketing of SCs and SC-containing products to 

adolescents and youth (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; Oluwabasi et al., 2012; Durand et al., 2013; ONDCP, 2014). This is 

supported by law enforcement encounters and reports from emergency rooms (SAMHSA, 
DEA/OD/ODE page 9 of 39 December 2014

2012; Fattore and Fratta, 2011; Vandrey et al., 2012); however, all age groups have been 

reported by media as abusing these substances and related products. In 2010, an 

estimated 11,406 emergency department (ED) visits involved a synthetic cannabinoid 

product (SAMHSA, 2012). Three-fourths of these visits (75%) involved patients between 

the ages of 12-29. In addition, the majority (59%) of these 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 SCs was marijuana 

(17%), pharmaceuticals (17%) and alcohol (13%) (SAMHSA, 2012). Individuals, including 

minors, are purchasing SCs from Internet websites, gas stations, convenience stores, and 

head shops. Reports from clinicians and law enforcement personnel have documented 

overdoses in juveniles as low as 13 and 14 years old (see Factor 6). In addition, an infant 

with confirmed exposure to SC was admitted to the intensive care unit following ingestion 

of a SC-containing product (see Factor 6).

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). In addition, a recent survey directed at patients seeking substance abuse 

disorder treatment reported multiple motives for use with the most commonly endorsed 

including curiosity (91%), feeling good/getting high (89%), relaxation (71%), and getting 

high without having a positive drug test (71%). Demographically, those with lifetime SC use 

were significantly younger than respondents who abused drugs other than SCs (Bonar et 

al., 2014). This data coincides with U.S. Drug Courts5that have communicated concerns 

related to the abuse of SCs and a response rate of greater than 30% by juveniles subject to 

routine drug screens from a sampling (information communicated to the DEA). 

The Monitoring the Future (MTF)6Report for 2012 detailed that while synthetic 

cannabinoid use, compared to 2011, 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). Synthetic cannabinoid use in 8th and 10th

graders was measured for the first time in 2012, with annual prevalence rates of 4.4% and 

 

5 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.

6 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 10 of 39 December 2014

8.8%, respectively. The MTF Report for 2013 detailed that there was a significant decline in 

the use of SCs among 12th graders, decreasing from 11.3% in 2012 to 7.9% in 2013. 

Synthetic marijuana use decreased in the past year from 8.8% in 2012 to 7.4% in 2013 

among 10th graders and from 4.4% to 4.0% among 8th graders (Johnston et al., 2014).

Dresen and colleagues (Dresen et al., 2010) found that SCs are being abused by 

individuals in drug treatment centers with a positive rate of 63.3% in forensic psychiatric 

centers based on their sampling. 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 Board (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 SCs.

7

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 SCs, regardless of whether they 

had failed or passed a traditional drug screen.

8

In addition to the characterized 

psychoses, drivers with driving impairment have been encountered with confirmed 

presence of a synthetic cannabinoid in their systems (Yeakel and Logan, 2013). In 

October 2013, a 40 year old male was killed following an automobile accident in Tulsa, 

Oklahoma. Toxicology results of the opposing driver detected AB-FUBINACA and ABPINACA in biological samples (see Factor 6).

Several SCs 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 SCs and their products has been characterized with both acute and long term 

public health and safety issues. Distinct pharmacological properties and metabolism of SCs 

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

SCs (Fantegrossi et al., 2014). 

As discussed previously, most users of SCs or SC-related products abuse these 

substances by smoking the product following application to plant material. Recently, law 

 

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

Project, 13.September 13, 2013.

8

Id. p. vi.
DEA/OD/ODE page 11 of 39 December 2014

enforcement has also been encountering new variations of SCs in liquid form. The liquids 

contain one or more SC(s), including examples such as AB-FUBINACA, AB-CHMINACA, ABPINACA, and XLR11. Users have been identified applying the liquid to hookahs (an 

instrument for vaporizing and smoking a given material whereby the smoke or vapor 

passes through a water basin prior to inhalation), vaporizers (also known as “vaping” or an 

“e-cigarette,” which allows the user to administer a liquid to be aerosolized and then 

inhaled), and hookah pens (a type of vaporizer, often much smaller and intended for 

increased discretion while smoking). 

As reported by users, specifically adolescents, this method of ingesting a SC is 

viewed as being safer than traditional smoking (blunt, pipe, cigarette, etc.). In the study 

conducted by Bonar et al. (2014), while 91% of SC users reported ingesting the product via 

a cigarette or blunt, 27% of the respondents also reported using methods that included 

vaporization, water pipe, bong, or hookah as a delivery method. Similar to conventional 

illicit manufacturing of SC products, liquid preparations of these substances do not adhere 

to any manufacturing standards with regard to dosage, the substance(s) included, purity,

or contamination. It is important to note that following manufacturing principles or 

standards would not eliminate the adverse effects observed with SC products and SCs

would still be considered a threat to public safety.

The American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) reported a 219% 

increase from 2012 to 2013 in e-cigarette and liquid nicotine exposures (AAPCC, October 

2014). Through October 31, 2014, the AAPCC has received 3,353 e-cigarette device and

liquid nicotine exposures (table 2). As per the AAPCC, the term “exposure” means 

someone has had contact with the substance in some way; for example, ingested, inhaled, 

absorbed by the skin or eyes, etc. Not all exposures are poisonings or overdoses.

YEAR # of Exposures

2011 271

2012 460

2013 1,542

2014* 3,353

Table 2. E-cigarette Device and Liquid Nicotine Reported Exposures to Poison Control 

Centers‡

‡ AAPCC, 2014

*Through October 31, 2014

Summary
DEA/OD/ODE page 12 of 39 December 2014

Recently, law enforcement has been encountering AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA

and THJ-2201 in increasing numbers. SCs and their associated products are available 

over the Internet or found to be sold in gas stations, convenience stores, and tobacco 

and head shops. AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201, similar to the previously 

scheduled SCs (DEA, 2012; DEA, 2013; DEA, 2014), 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

Following multiple scheduling actions in an attempt to safeguard the public from the 

adverse effects and safety issues associated with SCs, continued encounters by law 

enforcement and health care professionals are directly related to the increasing abuse of 

these substances and their associated products. With the passing of each Federal action, 

drug manufacturers and suppliers are adapting at an alarmingly quick pace to switch the 

ingredients to new, non-controlled variations of SCs. Emergency control of UR-144, XLR11,

and AKB48 on May 16, 2013, resulted in an increase in the availability, trafficking and abuse 

of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA. Emergency control of PB-22, 5F-PB-22, 

AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA on February 10, 2014, resulted in a similar pattern, with 

the emergence of AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201.

Exposure incidents involving SCs continue to be documented by poison control 

centers in the United States as the abuse of these substances remains a threat to both 

the short- and long-term public health and safety. Exposures to SCs were first reported

to the AAPCC in 2011 (table 3). Recently, AAPCC exposure reports are beginning to 

increase. The number of exposures reported demonstrates the dangerous health effects 

observed involving these chemicals. Exposures for August 2014 (442) were the highest 

received in a monthly period by the AAPCC since July 2012 (459) (AAPCC, October 2014). 

In addition, a majority of exposure incidents from 2012 to the present resulted in 

individuals seeking medical attention at health care facilities.9

 

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

Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC). 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, 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 13 of 39 December 2014

YEAR # OF CASES

2011 6,968

2012 5,230

2013 2,666

2014 (through October 31, 2014) 2,996

Table 3. Exposure cases of synthetic cannabinoids as reported to poison centers*

* AAPCC, October 31, 2014

Chronic abuse of SCs 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). 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 an 

estimated 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 significantly to an estimated 

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

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

2013). Synthetic cannabinoid data were not reported 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 United States.

11,406

28,531

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2010 2011

Number of ED visits

Emergency Department Visits Involving 

Synthetic Cannabinoids*
DEA/OD/ODE page 14 of 39 December 2014

The following tables (table 4; table 5) represent exhibits/reports obtained 

through both STRIDE and NFLIS that correspond to the specific drug listed. Additional 

information can be located in Appendix 1.

System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE)*

DRUG EXHIBITS‡ DATES QUERIED

AB-CHMINACA 21 (March 2014) 01/01/2010 – 09/30/2014

AB-PINACA 245 (June 2013) 01/01/2010 – 09/30/2014

THJ-2201 65 (September 2013) 01/01/2010 – 09/30/2014

Table 4. Reports obtained through the STRIDE database

* Query date: October 1, 2014

‡ The month in parenthesis (e.g., (March)) corresponds to the month the substance was first encountered

NFLIS* §

DRUG 2013 REPORTS‡2014 REPORTS‡STATES

AB-CHMINACA 0 586

(February)

Arkansas, Arizona, California, 

Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, 

Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Missouri, North 

Dakota, New Jersey, Ohio, 

Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, 

Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin

AB-PINACA 963

(March)

2,820 Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, 

California, Colorado, 

Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, 

Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, 

Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Massachusetts, Michigan, 

Minnesota, Missouri, 

Mississippi, North Dakota, 

Nebraska, New Hampshire, 

New Jersey, Nevada, New York, 

Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 
DEA/OD/ODE page 15 of 39 December 2014

Tennessee, Texas, Utah, 

Virginia, Washington, 

Wisconsin, West Virginia, 

Wyoming

THJ-2201 0 220

(January)

Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, 

Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, 

Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, 

Missouri, North Dakota, 

Nebraska, New Hampshire, 

New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 

Tennessee, Wisconsin

Table 5. Reports obtained through the NFLIS database§

* Query date: November 25, 2014

‡ The month in parenthesis (e.g., (March)) corresponds to the month the substance was first encountered

§ Laboratories reporting to NFLIS include state, local and other federal laboratories (not including DEA)

Summary

The abuse of SCs 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 SCs that have resulted in visits to emergency departments. Following 

legislative control of JWH-018, JWH-200, JWH-073, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol, 

by FDASIA in July of 2012 and temporary control of UR-144, XLR11, and AKB48 in May 

2013 and PB-22, 5F-PB-22, AB-FUBINACA, and ADB-PINACA in February 2014, law 

enforcement has once again begun encountering novel SCs including AB-CHMINACA, 

AB-PINACA and THJ-2201.

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

THJ-2201 was first observed in September 2013 while AB-CHMINACA was first 

observed in February of 2014. AB-PINACA has been for sale on the illicit drug market as 

early as March 2013. From December 2013 through September 2014, CBP reported select 

encounters of these substances with most shipments originating in China and intended for 

destinations within the United States: AB-CHMINACA–17 seizures involving 15.825 kg; ABPINACA–4 seizures involving 6 kg; THJ-2201–6 seizures involving 5.5 kg (Appendix 2).

10 The 

 

10 Correspondence from CBP to DEA, (December 2013 – September 2014).
DEA/OD/ODE page 16 of 39 December 2014

DEA has reported multiple encounters of large quantities of AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA

and THJ-2201 that have been confirmed by forensic laboratories (STRIDE and/or NFLIS). 

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 October 2013 through the present, multiple deaths and severe 

overdoses have occurred involving AB-CHMINACA and AB-PINACA. Details of these events 

are summarized below.

 In October 2013, a 40 year old male was killed in Tulsa, Oklahoma, following a head 

on motor vehicle collision. Toxicology results of the opposing driver detected ABPINACA and AB-FUBINACA in biological samples.

11

 In early 2014, two deaths were reported (19 year old male, Angola, Indiana; 37 year 

old male, Omaha, Nebraska) involving AB-PINACA. Cause of death in both cases 

were deemed synthetic cannabinoid-related.

12

 In April 2014, a 21 year old female in Lafayette, Louisiana, died with the cause of 

death determined to be drowning with contribution of poly-drug toxicity. Laboratory

results detected AB-CHMINACA in both drug evidence and biological samples.

13

 In April 2014, a male presented at a local emergency department in Mobile, 

Alabama with excited delirium following ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid. 

Laboratory results on drug evidence detected AB-CHMINACA.

14

 In April 2014, a 38 year old male in Bay Minette, Alabama, died following ingestion 

of a synthetic cannabinoid product. Laboratory results detected AB-CHMINACA in 

biological samples.

15

 In April 2014, a 52 year old male in Lafayette, Louisiana, suffered severe injuries 

after jumping through a window due to excited delirium following ingestion of a 

synthetic cannabinoid product “Mojo.” Laboratory results on drug evidence 

detected AB-CHMINACA.

16

 In May 2014, an 18 year old male in Seattle, Washington, suffered adverse effects

following ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid product “Black Voodoo.” Laboratory 

results on drug evidence and biological samples detected AB-CHMINACA.

17

 

11 Correspondence from US Postal Inspection Service to DEA, 3/28/2014.

12 Correspondence from AIT Laboratories to DEA, 06/03/2014.

13 Correspondence from Lafayette, Parish Coroner’s Office to DEA, 05/29/2014.

14 STRIDE, DEA.

15 Correspondence from AIT Laboratories to DEA, 08/07/2014.

16 Correspondence from LA State Crime Lab to DEA, 05/01/2014.

17 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 07/24/2014.
DEA/OD/ODE page 17 of 39 December 2014

 In May 2014, a 32 year old male in Corvallis, Oregon, died following ingestion of a 

synthetic cannabinoid product “Scooby Snax.” Laboratory results on drug evidence 

and biological samples detected AB-CHMINACA. The cause of death as determined 

by the medical examiner was toxic effects of synthetic cannabinoids: ABCHMINACA.

18

 In May/June 2014, over 29 individuals in Gainesville, Florida, presented at local 

emergency departments while experiencing seizures and comas following ingestion 

of a synthetic cannabinoid. Laboratory analysis conducted on biological samples 

from 13 of the patients identified AB-CHMINACA as the drug responsible for the 

effects listed previously.

19

 In June 2014, a 14 year old male in New Orleans, Louisiana, experienced convulsions 

and severe shaking after ingesting a synthetic cannabinoid product “Mojo.”

Laboratory results on drug evidence and biological samples detected ABCHMINACA.

20 21

 In June 2014, a 13 year old female in Irving, Texas, experienced convulsions after 

ingesting a synthetic cannabinoid product. Laboratory results on biological samples 

detected AB-CHMINACA.

22

 In June 2014, a 16 year old male and 17 year old female in Atlantic City, New Jersey, 

both experienced delirium after ingesting a liquid synthetic cannabinoid ingested 

through a hookah pen. Laboratory results on drug evidence detected AB-PINACA.

23

 In June 2014, a 39 year old male in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, was transported by EMS 

to a local emergency department after experiencing severe agitation following 

ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid product. Laboratory results on biological 

samples detected AB-CHMINACA.

24

 In July 2014, a 19 year old male in Newport Beach, California, died following 

ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid product. Laboratory analysis of drug evidence 

and biological samples detected AB-CHMINACA.

25 The cause of death as determined 

by the medical examiner was toxic effects of synthetic cannabinoid AB-CHMINACA.

26

 In July 2014, a 10 month old infant in Shreveport, Louisiana, was admitted to the 

prenatal intensive care unit (PICU) following ingesting of a synthetic cannabinoid 

 

18 Report from the Office of the State Medical Examiner (OR) to DEA, 08/07/2014.

19 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 07/24/2014.

20 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 07/24/2014.

21 Correspondence from Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office to DEA, 07/10/2014.

22 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 07/24/2014.

23 Correspondence from Atlantic City PD to DEA, 07/02/2014.

24 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 07/24/2014.

25 Correspondence from Orange County Crime Laboratory to DEA, 08/07/2014.

26 Correspondence from Orange County Sheriff’s Office to ODEC, DEA, 11/21/2014.
DEA/OD/ODE page 18 of 39 December 2014

product. Laboratory analysis of drug evidence and biological samples detected ABCHMINACA.

27

 In August 2014, three juvenile females (14, 15 and 17 years old) in St. Louis, 

Missouri, suffered a loss of consciousness and seizures following ingestion of a 

synthetic cannabinoid product. Laboratory results of evidence detected AB-PINACA 

and AB-CHMINACA.

28

 In August 2014, over 44 individuals in Manchester, New Hampshire, presented at 

local emergency departments suffering seizures and serious medical reactions 

following the ingestion of synthetic cannabinoid products. Laboratory analysis of 

evidence collected detected multiple SCs including AB-CHMINACA.

29

 In September 2014, four juveniles were taken to local emergency departments 

following ingestion of a synthetic cannabinoid e-liquid identified as “Cloud 9.”

Laboratory results of the product detected AB-PINACA.

30

Throughout 2013 and 2014, descriptions of overdoses, hospitalizations, severe 

outbreaks (CDC, 2013a,b,c) and deaths (Behonek et al., 2014) involving different SCs

have been reported in both scientific publications and in the news media. Human 

studies intended to investigate the health implications resulting from exposure to these 

substances are not safe due to the severe adverse effects associated with ingestion of 

illicit SCs. However, clinical effects following ingestion of SCs have been reported by

physicians and emergency medical personnel (Griffiths et al., 2010; Vardakou et al., 

2010). Common clinical effects observed in emergency rooms requiring medical 

intervention and reported by numerous state public health departments, poison control 

centers, and private organizations include: vomiting, anxiety, agitation, irritability, 

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

non-responsiveness (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). Specifically, 

clinical symptoms as reported from overdoses with AB-CHMINACA and AB-PINACA in 

particular have included excited delirium, seizure, coma, agitation, myocardial 

infarction, convulsions, difficulty breathing, and an altered state of consciousness 

(correspondence from law enforcement/laboratory/clinical personnel, see Factor 6 list 

of OD/Death reports). A 12-month study conducted in 2012 demonstrated that out of 

950 self-reported users, 2.4% reported having a medical emergency requiring treatment 

 

27 Correspondence from Shreveport, Louisiana PD to DEA, 10/07/2014.

28 Correspondence from Franklin County Missouri Sheriff’s Office to DEA, 08/26/2014.

29 Correspondence from Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (UCSF) to DEA, 08/26/2014.

30 Correspondence from Michigan State Police to DEA, 09/16/2014.
DEA/OD/ODE page 19 of 39 December 2014

resulting from a combination of panic, anxiety, paranoia, and breathing difficulties 

(Winstock and Barratt, 2013). Data 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) (SAMSHA, 2012).

Since abusers obtain these drugs through unknown sources, the identity, purity, 

and quantity of these substances is uncertain and inconsistent, thus posing significant 

adverse health risks to users. The SCs encountered on the illicit drug market have no 

accepted medical use within the United States. Regardless, SC products continue to be 

easily available and abused by diverse populations. Unknown factors including detailed 

product analysis and dosage variations between various packages and batches present a 

significant danger to an abusing individual (Auwarter et al., 2009; Hudson et al., 2010). 

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

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). 

By sharing pharmacological similarities with schedule I substances (Δ9-THC,JWH018 and other temporarily and permanently controlled schedule I substances), SCs 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 SCs has been linked to addiction and 

withdrawal (Vardakou et al., 2010). 
DEA/OD/ODE page 20 of 39 December 2014

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

marijuana (SAMHSA, 2014). 

The CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4)) requires the Attorney General 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.31 The Deputy Administrator transmitted notice of his 

intent to place AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201 in schedule I on a temporary basis 

to the Assistant Secretary by letter dated September 17, 2014. The Assistant Secretary 

responded to this notice by letter dated September 30, 2014, and advised that based on 

review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there are currently no approved new 

 

31 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 the 

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

scheduling responsibilities under the CSA, with the concurrence of NIDA. 50 FR 9518.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

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

Percent of ED Visits

Age Group

Chart Title

Synthetic Cannabinoids

Marrijuana

Age Related Synthetic Cannabinoid and 

Marijuana-Related Emergency Department (ED) 

Visits - 2011
DEA/OD/ODE page 21 of 39 December 2014

drug applications or investigational new drug applications for AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA, or

THJ-2201. The Assistant Secretary also stated that HHS has no objection to the temporary 

placement of AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA, and THJ-2201 into schedule I of the CSA. The DEA 

has taken into consideration the Assistant Secretary’s comments. In accordance with 21 

USC 811(h)(1), AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA, and THJ-2201 are not currently listed in any 

schedule under the CSA, and no exemptions or approvals are in effect for these substances

under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355). The DEA 

finds that the scheduling of AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA and THJ-2201 in schedule I on a 

temporary basis is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to public safety and therefore 

intends to issue a temporary scheduling order. 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 ABCHMINACA, AB-PINACA, and THJ-2201 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 AB-CHMINACA, AB-PINACA,

and THJ-2201 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 United States, and lack 

accepted safety for use under medical supervision.
DEA/OD/ODE page 22 of 39 December 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.

AAPCC (American Association of Poison Control Centers) 2014. Synthetic Marijuana. 

www.aapcc.org/alerts/synthetic-marijuana/

Aung MM, Griffin G, Huffman JW, Wu M-J, Keel C, Yang B, Showalter VM, Abood ME, 

and Martin BR (2000). Influence of the N-1 alkyl chain length of cannabimimetic 

indoles upon CB1 and CB2 receptor binding. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 

60:133-140.

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.

Behonick G, Shanks KG, Firchau DJ, Mathur G, Lynch CF, Nashelsky M, Jaskuierny DJ, 

Meroueh C (2014). Four postmortem case reports with quantitative detection of 

the synthetic cannabinoid 5F-PB-22. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 38(8):559-

62.

Bonar EE, Ashrafioun L, Ilgen MA (2014). Synthetic cannabinoid use among patients in 

residential substance use disorder treatment: Prevalence, motives, and 

coorelates. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 143:268-271.

Busar GL, Gerona RR, Horowitz BZ, Vian KP, Troxell ML, Hendrickson RG, Houghton DC, 

Rozansky D, Su SW, Leman RF (2014). Acute kidney injury associated with 

smoking synthetic cannabinoid. Clinical Toxicology 52:664-673.

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

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

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

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

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

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

CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (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 .
DEA/OD/ODE page 23 of 39 December 2014

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.

Castaneto MS, Gorelick DA, Desrosiers NA, Hartman RL, Pirard S, Huestis MA (2014). 

Synthetic cannabinoids: Epidemiology, pharmacodynamics, and clinical 

implications. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 144:12-41.

Castellanos D, Thornton G (2012). Synthetic cannabinoid use: recognition and 

management. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 18(2):86-93.

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

synthetic cathinones): Review of literature. Current Pharmaceutical Design

20(25):4106-11.

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

mimicking compounds. In: Microgram Bulletin, vol. 42, pp 23-24.

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.

DEA (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-PB22), 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): Background Information and 

Evaluation of ‘Three Factor Analysis’ (Factors 4, 5 and 6) for Temporary 

Scheduling. 79 FR 7577.
DEA/OD/ODE page 24 of 39 December 2014

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 21:1-13.

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

Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Lisbon, Portugal.

Fantegrossi WE, Moran JH, Radominska-Pandya A, Prather PL (2014). Distinct 

pharmacology and metabolism of K2 synthetic cannabinoids compared to delta9-

THC: Mechanism underlying greater toxicity. Life Sciences 97(1):45-54.

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.

Gunderson EW, Haughey HM, Ait-Daoud N, Joshi AS, 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.
DEA/OD/ODE page 25 of 39 December 2014

Huffman JW, Dong D, Martin BR, Compton DR (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.

Janowsky A (2014). THJ-2201: Binding and Functional Activity at Cannabinoid CB1 

Receptors. DEA-VA Interagency Agreement. October 28, 2014.

Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE (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 LD, O'Malley PM, Miech RA, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE (2014). Monitoring 

the Future national survey results on drug use: 1975-2013: Overview, key 

findings on adolescent drug use. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The 

University of Michigan, 84pp.

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 (2014). Minireview. 

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

perspective. Life Science 97(1):9-19.

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

ligands (patent). WO 03/035005 A2.
DEA/OD/ODE page 26 of 39 December 2014

Manera C, Tuccinardi T, Martinelli A (2008). Indoles and related compounds as 

cannabinoid ligands. Mini-Reviews in Medicinal Chemistry 8:370-387.

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

dangerous effects. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services 

50(8): 16-18.

McKeever RG, Vearrier D, Jacobs D, LaSala G, Okaneku J, Greenberg MI (2014). K2-Not 

the spice of life; Synthetic cannabinoids and ST elevation myocardial infarction: A 

case report. Journal of Medical Toxicology, epub August 26.

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.

Nacca N, Vatti D, Sullivan R, Sud P, Su M, Marraffa J (2013). The synthetic cannabinoid 

withdrawal syndrome. Journal of Addiction Medicine 7:296–298.

NFLIS (2014). National Forensice Laboratory Information System. Drug Enforcement 

Administration.

Ogata J, Uchiyama N, Kikura-Hanajiri R, Goda Y (2013). DNA sequence analyses of 

blended herbal products including synthetic cannabinoids as designer drugs. 

Forensic Science International 227:33-41.

Oluwabusi OO, Lobach L, Akhtar U, Youngman B, Ambrosini PJ (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), 2014. Synthetic Marijuana. 

Papanti D, Schifano F, Botteon G, Bertossi F, Mannix J, Vidoni D, Impagnatiello M, 

Pascolo-Fabrici E, Bonavigo T (2013). "Spiceophrenia": a systematic overview of 

"spice"-related psychopathological issues and a case report. Human 

Psychopharmacology 28(4):379-89.

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.
DEA/OD/ODE page 27 of 39 December 2014

Prather P (2014). Affinity and activity of synthetic cannabinoid AB-PINACA at CB1 

receptors. Center for Drug Detection and Response, University of Arkansas for 

Medical Sciences. Nov. 5, 2014.

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

Psychiatry, King's College.

Rominger A, Cumming P, Xiong G, Koller G, Förster S, Zwergal A, Karamatskos E, 

Bartenstein P, La Fougère C, Pogarell O (2013). Effects of acute detoxifica-tion of 

the herbal blend ‘Spice Gold’ on dopamine D2/3 receptor availability: a

[18F]fallypride PET study. European Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology 23:

1606–1610.

RTI (2014). In vitro testing of N-[1-(aminocarbonyl)-2-methylpropyl]-1-

(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-CHMINACA), N-(1-amino-3-

methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA), (1-

(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-benzoimidazol-2-yl)(naphthalen-1-yl)methanone 

(FUBIMINA) and naphthalen-1-yl(9-pentyl-9H-carbazol-3-yl)methanone (EG-018). 

September 2014.

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.

SAMHSA (2014). The CBHSQ Report – Update: Drug-Related Emergency Department 

Visits Involving Synthetic Cannabinoids (October 16, 2014). Rockville, MD.

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.

Spaderna M, Addy PH, D'Souza DC (2013). Spicing things up: synthetic cannabinoids.

Psychopharmacology 228(4):525-40.

STRIDE (2014). System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence. Drug Enforcement 

Administration.
DEA/OD/ODE page 28 of 39 December 2014

Takematsu M, Hoffman RS, Nelson LS, Schechter JM, Moran JH, Wiener SW (2014). A 

case of acute cerbral ischemia following inhalation of a synthetic cannabinoid. 

Clinical Toxicology 52(9):973-975.

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.

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. Uchiyama N, KikuraHanajiri R, Ogata J, Goda Y (2010). Chemical analysis of synthetic cannabinoids as 

designer drugs in herbal products. Forensic Science International 198:31-38.

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, 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, Matsuda S, Kawamura M, Kikura-Hanajiri R, Goda Y (2013). Forensic 

Toxicology 31(2):223-240.

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.
DEA/OD/ODE page 29 of 39 December 2014

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

417.

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. International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology 17(3):509-25.

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 30 of 39 December 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 significant 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).

7. Synthetic cannabinoids, commonly known as “synthetic marijuana,” “K2,” or 

“Spice,” are often sold in legal retail outlets as “herbal incense” or 

“potpourri”. They are labeled “not for human consumption” to mask their 

intended purpose and avoid Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory 

oversight of the manufacturing process. (Office of National Drug Control 

Policy)

8. At least 43 states have taken action to control one or more synthetic 

cannabinoids. (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2014)

9. Spice users report experiences similar to those produced by marijuana—

elevated mood, relaxation, and altered perception—and in some cases the 

effects are even stronger than those of marijuana. Some users report 
DEA/OD/ODE page 31 of 39 December 2014

psychotic effects like extreme anxiety, paranoia, and hallucinations. (National 

Institute on Drug Abuse, 2014)

10. Spice abusers who have been taken to Poison Control Centers report 

symptoms that include rapid heart rate, vomiting, agitation, confusion, and 

hallucinations. Spice can also raise blood pressure and cause reduced blood 

supply to the heart (myocardial ischemia), and in a few cases it has been 

associated with heart attacks. Regular users may experience withdrawal and 

addiction symptoms. (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2014)

11. In order to protect public health and well-being, Governor Maggie Hassan 

today declared a State of Emergency in the State of New Hampshire as a 

result of recent overdoses in Manchester and Concord as a result of the use 

or misuse of the synthetic cannabinoid identified as "Smacked!”. (Press 

Release: Governor Hassan Declares State of Emergency as a Result of 

Overdoses from Synthetic Cannabinoid – August 14, 2014)

12. CESAR FAX, a publication from the Center for Substance Abuse Research at 

the University of Maryland (College Park), reported the results from Bonar et 

al. (2014) describing the results of the study of patients in a Midwestern 

residential treatment program. Results demonstrated that 71% of those 

reporting synthetic cannabinoid abuse used an SC-containing product to 

avoid a positive drug test. The two most common reasons for SC use was 

“curiosity” (91%) and “to feel good or get high” (89%). (September, 2014)

Poison Control Centers

1. March 24, 2010, 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.

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.
DEA/OD/ODE page 32 of 39 December 2014

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.

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.
DEA/OD/ODE page 33 of 39 December 2014

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

nationwide have received 5,230 exposure calls regarding exposure to 

synthetic cannabinoids.

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

have received 2,666 exposure calls regarding exposure to synthetic 

cannabinoids.

20. From January 1, 2014 through October, 2014, poison centers nationwide 

have received 2,996 exposure calls regarding exposure to synthetic 

cannabinoids.
DEA/OD/ODE page 34 of 39 December 2014

Table 3. NFLIS – State and Local and other Federal Laboratory (not DEA) Forensic Laboratory Reports (Query date: November 25, 

2014)

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3‡

JWH-018; JWH073;

JWH-200; CP47,497

CP-47,497 C8 

homologue

138 413 670 1,198 1,515 997 661 542 427 356 233 150 110 98 83 46 66 24 9 7,736

UR-144; XLR11;

AKB48 1* 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 571 3,376 6,361 5,279 6,695 6,664 3,945 2,844 3,607 2,852 1,644 43,889

PB-22; 5F-PB-22; 

AB-FUBINACA; 

ADB-PINACA

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 356 1,017 2,066 2,361 3,262 2,408 1,055 12,526

AB-CHMINACA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 205 347 586

AB-PINACA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 413 511 1,038 1,162 620 3,783

THJ-2201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 94 109 220

*Encounter confirmed in March 2012; ‡ = data are incomplete for third quarter 2014, still being reported.

 Corresponds to the date substances were placed under temporary control 
DEA/OD/ODE page 35 of 39 December 2014

Table 4. STRIDE Records (January 1, 2010 through September 30, 2014) (Query date:

October 1, 2014):

NUMBER OF RECORDS

AB-CHMINACA 21

AB-PINACA 245

THJ-2201 65
DEA/OD/ODE page 36 of 39 December 2014

Appendix 2

Table 5. Selected Reports from Customs and Border Protection Laboratory (December 

2013 – September 2014)

Date of 

Detention

Identified 

Substance(s) Detained at

Originated 

from Destination

TOTAL 

WEIGHT

12/27/2013 THJ-2201 San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China West Valley 

City, UT

500 gm

01/03/2014 THJ-2201 San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China El Paso, TX 1 kg

02/28/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Houston, TX 1 kg

03/10/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Texarkana, 

AR

1 kg

03/22/2014 THJ-2201 FedEx 

Anchorage, AK

China Las Vegas, 

NV

1 kg

04/29/2014 AB-PINACA FedEx 

Anchorage, AK

China Dothan, AL 1kg

05/09/2014 THJ-2201 San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Las Vegas, 

NV

500 gm

05/21/2014 THJ-2201 San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Las Vegas, 

NV

500 gm

05/21/2014 AB-PINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Spokane, WA 1 kg

05/28/2014 THJ-2201 San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Brooklyn, NY 2 kg

06/26/2014 AB-PINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Canoga Park, 

CA

3 kg

07/03/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Metairie, LA 100 gm

07/15/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Baton Rouge, 

LA

25 gm

07/16/2014 AB-PINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Baytown, TX 1 kg

07/31/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Baton Rouge, 

LA

1 kg

07/31/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Houston, TX 2 kg
DEA/OD/ODE page 37 of 39 December 2014

07/31/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Machesney 

Park, IL

100 

grams

07/31/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Machesney 

Park, IL

100 

grams

08/6/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Houston, TX 1 kg

08/6/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Hatillo, PR 1.3 kg

08/13/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Las Cruces, 

NM

1.2 kg

08/13/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Las Vegas, 

NV

1 kg

08/19/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Las Vegas, 

NV

2 kg

09/2/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Baytown, TX 1 kg

09/9/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Cypress, TX 1 kg

09/16/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Fort Worth, 

TX

1 kg

09/30/2014 AB-CHMINACA San Francisco 

Intl Mail

China Baytown, TX 1 kg

Table 6. STRIDE Sample Laboratory Results

Date Label Flavor/

Characteristic

Confirmed 

Substance

6/26/2013 Diablo AB-PINACA

6/26/2013 Dead Man Walking AB-PINACA

6/26/2013 Joker AB-PINACA

6/26/2013 Bizzaro AB-PINACA

6/26/2013 Bling Monkey AB-PINACA

7/15/2013 Funky Green Stuff AB-PINACA

7/15/2013 LOL AB-PINACA

7/15/2013 Out World AB-PINACA

7/22/2013 3 AB-PINACA

7/22/2013 4-D AB-PINACA

8/21/2013 Diablo AB-PINACA

8/21/2013 Platinum AB-PINACA

8/29/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma AB-PINACA

9/13/2013 Scooby Snax AB-PINACA

10/25/2013 Bizzarro AB-PINACA
DEA/OD/ODE page 38 of 39 December 2014

10/25/2013 Ripped AB-PINACA

11/7/2013 Scuby Snax AB-PINACA

11/14/2013 The Hedgehog Blueberry AB-PINACA

11/15/2013 El Diablo AB-PINACA

11/15/2013 Diesel AB-PINACA

11/15/2013 Blackout AB-PINACA

11/19/2013 Cloud XXX Car Freshener* Coconut AB-PINACA

11/21/2013 Mega Buzz AB-PINACA

12/7/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma AB-PINACA

12/7/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma Coconut Twist AB-PINACA

12/7/2013 Super Nova AB-PINACA

12/10/2013 Super Nova AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Blackout AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 El Diablo AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Red Bull AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Hawaiian Bliss AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Fist Pump AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Deadman AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma Sexy Strawberry AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma Coconut Twist AB-PINACA

12/11/2013 Buddha Exotic Aroma AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 Scooby Snax Sour Apple AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 XXX Booty Licious Blue 

Barry

AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 Scooby Snax XXX 

Potpourri

Blueberry AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 Scooby Snax Herbal Kush 

Potpourri

Pomegranate AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 Scooby Snax Herbal Kush 

Potpourri

Strawberry AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 Scooby Snax Herbal Kush 

Potpourri

Yum Yum AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 XXX Rated Pussy Cat Pomegranate AB-PINACA

12/13/2013 XXX Rated Sexy Strawberry AB-PINACA

12/19/2013 Spice Gold AB-PINACA

12/19/2013 Bizarro Original AB-PINACA

12/19/2013 Black Mamba Blueberry AB-PINACA

1/9/2014 Histeria Black AB-PINACA

1/9/2014 Game Over Potpourri AB-PINACA

1/9/2014 Dr. Feelgood AB-PINACA

1/14/2014 The Hedgehog Blueberry AB-PINACA

1/15/2014 Primo AB-PINACA
DEA/OD/ODE page 39 of 39 December 2014

1/15/2014 Platinum XXX AB-PINACA

1/22/2014 Ocean Mist Scented Oil* AB-PINACA

1/22/2014 Gypsy Moon* AB-PINACA

1/31/2014 Original Potpourri Knockout AB-PINACA

1/31/2014 Scooby Snax Kush AB-PINACA

2/6/2014 Scooby Snax Cherry AB-PINACA

2/6/2014 Scooby Snax AB-PINACA

2/6/2014 Knockout AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 Scooby Snax AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 Platinum XXX AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 Black Diamond AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 Black Diamond AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 Get Real AB-PINACA

2/12/2014 XXX Platinum AB-PINACA

2/19/2014 Good Times* AB-PINACA

2/19/2014 Tropical Rush* AB-PINACA

3/6/2014 WTF Watermelon AB-PINACA

3/6/2014 Mad Hatter Blueberry AB-PINACA

3/7/2014 Autumn Air THJ-2201

3/18/2014 Purefire AB-PINACA

3/18/2014 King Kong AB-PINACA

3/18/2014 California Dreams THJ-2201

3/20/2014 Hulk’d Out Kitty AB-CHMINACA

3/27/2014 Fragile: 

Feeling Easily Hurt

AB-PINACA

4/3/2014 Hookah Blast THJ-2201

4/3/2014 Super Nova THJ-2201

4/24/2014 Diablo AB-CHMINACA

4/26/2014 Caution AB-PINACA

4/29/2014 AK-47 24 Karat Gold AB-PINACA

4/29/2014 Green Giant AB-PINACA

4/29/2014 Smacked Pineapple AB-PINACA

4/29/2014 Smacked Lemon Lime AB-PINACA

4/30/2014 AK-47 24 Karat Gold AB-PINACA

5/7/2014 Bomb! Marley Blueberry AB-CHMINACA

5/7/2014 OMG THJ-2201

5/7/2014 AK-47 24 Karat Gold THJ-2201

5/12/2014 7H AB-PINACA

5/20/2014 Black Voodoo AB-CHMINACA

5/27/2014 Scooby Snax Strawberry AB-CHMINACA

* Substance was identified in a liquid rather than being identified in a powder or applied to plant 

material.