Synthesis sources

[CureCancerNow]

I am trying to synthesize a chemical, but haven't found an appropriate procedure after surfing the web, looked at the online organic chemistry databases, looked in the encyclopedia of chemical technology etc. . Aldrich and a few others apparently know how to do this, but there does not seem to be any public information that I can find. Tried to figure it out for my aliphatic molecule myself by modifying a procedure for a similar aromatic without results. Asked on another forum for specific help with the procedure, but was told medical research is too risky.

 

 

If you can answer any of these questions to help me make progress on my synthesis, please do:

 

Procedure for synthesis of azoxymethane.

Where do the big boys like Aldrich keep their notes on synthesis?

Where can I get help from an organic chemistry synthesis expert?

[siva]

http://www.chemicalbook.com/ProductChemicalPropertiesCB9487512_EN.htm

try this pro..!

[Horza2002]

Have you tried doing a Scifinder search? Thats looks very simpe to make, you just need the diamine and an oxidant.

 

There are a number of people on this site that are synthetic chemists. While I wouldn't consider myself an expert, I can certainly give you some good ideas about things.

[hypervalent_iodine]

I have to ask a question. You say that people on other forums wouldn't help on the basis that they felt that 'medical research is too risky', so it follows that you intend to use your compound for some sort of medical purpose, yes? This is all well and good, but if you are a 'garage' chemist, then I'm afraid I will be telling you much the same thing. I have no problem with people who do back yard chemistry for the sake of their own interest, but I refuse to help such a person who then also intends to perform medical research with the products of their labor. It is reckless and daft. But, if that is not what this is, then welcome to SFN and you'll be pleased to note that we have a pretty good bank of synthetic chemists who float around here and who would love to assist.

 

In regards to your question about Sigma Aldrich - being a huge company, I don't think they would store publically available synthetic routes for their compounds. It is too large of an ask I would think. Most synthetic chemists get their protocols from scientific literature and sometimes patents, though I personally loathe patent protocols. Unfortunately, if you don't have access to the necessary sites through a University, etc. you will find it impossible to get the papers you want without having to buy them at about $30 a pop - and I can tell you from experience that you will very rarely find the paper you want on first go. For synthetic protocol, SciFinder is a great starter to get the paper(s) you want. Again though, you need to purchase a license to access it if you aren't affiliated with a university, etc.

 

And on another note, I just looked up the MSDS of azoxymethane to see what you were up against, safety wise. You do realise that if this compound so much as senses displeasure in you, it will give you cancer and you will die? An over exaggeration that I credit to uncyclopedia but you get my point.

 

Edit to add: forget the first question, I got the answer from the other thread you posted in Chemical forums. So now I would really like to know if you are a backyard chemist? And another question (only answer if the previous answer is yes): specifically what kind of cancer research? What are you planning to administer the azoxymethane to? Sorry to berate you, but I tend to err on the side of caution when people ask for synthetic routes to particularly nasty chemicals like these.

Edited April 23, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[CureCancerNow]

If you must know, I am an MD/PHD. I have NEVER had a lab accident. Not ONE. Furthermore, I have strict protocols that insure that my life is the only human life I risk.

 

I am appalled at the pace of medical advancement. $4Billion spent on cancer research, and what do we have to show for it? There is something so seriously wrong, that spending $12Billion more won't show any more real progress on curing cancer. After studying this, I understand what this problem is, but the problem is too big for me to fix. I am writing a book. Maybe then someone will listen.

 

Right now the U.S. is in desperate need of innovation. It sounds like you put your faith in the big government infrastructure. I can tell you from first-hand experience that despite all of governments efforts, their contribution to innovation in electronics was insignificant. So much so, that DoD now largely relies on off-the-shelf consumer/industrial components, and similarly what little solid-state electronics industry the USSR itself had was largely a copy from U.S.

 

Cancer is the #2 killer in the U.S. after 50. Curing cancer is not difficult. Nor does it take Gigabucks. But it does take the right approach, a fact I hope to drive home to some people in a few years.

 

My final word is: If you eventually die from cancer, don't blame me. I for one am trying to do something about it. But please, if you are not going to be part of the solution, don't be part of the problem.

 

 

I wish to thank those who help me in this.

Edited April 23, 2011 by CureCancerNow

[mississippichem]

If you must know, I am an MD/PHD. I have NEVER had a lab accident. Not ONE. Furthermore, I have strict protocols that insure that my life is the only human life I risk.

 

I am appalled at the pace of medical advancement. $4Billion spent on cancer research, and what do we have to show for it? There is something so seriously wrong, that spending $12Billion more won't show any more real progress on curing cancer. After studying this, I understand what this problem is, but the problem is too big for me to fix. I am writing a book. Maybe then someone will listen.

 

Then what is your proposed mechanism of treatment? Are you trying to make a guanine methylating agent? Surely azoxymethane is just part of your synth for an anticancer drug, right? If you're an MD/PhD, then you have access to azoxymethane from Sigma Aldrich even though its evidently $200 mg from Sigma [get out your grant writing pen].

 

Use SciFinder, Pub Chem, or the ACS journals website.

[hypervalent_iodine]

If you must know, I am an MD/PHD. I have NEVER had a lab accident. Not ONE. Furthermore, I have strict protocols that insure that my life is the only human life I

 

My final word is: If you eventually die from cancer, don't blame me. I for one am trying to do something about it. But please, if you are not going to be part of the solution, don't be part of the problem.

 

I wish to thank those who help me in this.

 

That's all I needed. There is no need to get on your proverbial high horse though. I only expressed concern because you gave no details of why you wanted to make it or what level of education you have/what lab access you have. As I said, I'm skeptical of people who just join and post a thread wanted synthetic routes to dangerous compounds like that. We've had backyard chemists in here before wanting to blindly make chemicals to test ontheir friends - not something I agree with helping.

 

Anyway, as I said, there are a lot of smart people in here who will help you. You should have access to Scifinder of you're with a university, so start there. Also, if you're doing this in the lab, why can't you just buy it? I can understand if it's an issue of price, Sigma has it listed as over $300/25mg. That's crazy.

 

Mississippi, they use azoxymethane to induce cancer. It does a pretty bang up job of it too.

Edited April 24, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[mississippichem]

Mississippi, they use azoxymethane to induce cancer. It does a pretty bang up job of it too.

 

N-alkyl nucleotides, confusing your RNA transcriptases one base pair at a time

[CureCancerNow]

...There is no need to get on your proverbial high horse though...We've had backyard chemists in here before wanting to blindly make chemicals to test on their friends...

...I can understand if it's an issue of price, Sigma has it listed as over $300/25mg. That's crazy.

 

...Yikes!... I see. OK, now we're on the same page.

 

One thing. I myself am a proud former backyard chemist, and am a DIYer if given the excuse of price as in this case.

 

azoxymethane is a simple molecule and should be relatively easy to synthesize. Seems that azoxy chemistry is relatively new, with much of the current understanding dating back to as recent as the 70's & 80's.

 

I am looking at retrosynthetic analysis software such as synchem to aid. Any information as to which ones are better, or which have aliphatic Azoxys included their rule-set databases?

[hypervalent_iodine]

I normally do retrosynthesis manually, so I wouldn't know what to recommend to you. You should have access to Scifinder, being a PhD, so use that to find a synthesis.

 

Also, out of curiosity, what's your PhD project on?

[mississippichem]

Cancer is the #2 killer in the U.S. after 50. Curing cancer is not difficult. Nor does it take Gigabucks.

 

Please elaborate further on this statement. I want to hear your "easy" solution. I know of a few major pharma companies spend over 50% of their R&D budgets on combinatorial synthesis for anti-cancer. What do you know that the rest of us chemistry people don't?

[hypervalent_iodine]

Must be a pretty awesome PhD project. You're curing cancer AND doing it on a tight budget.

 

I was going to ask why no one else has thought of whatever it is you're doing before, but then I realised it was obvious - it's a government conspiracy and of course, the majority of scientists are too busy riding the 'government gravy train' to notice.

[CureCancerNow]

While I appreciate the interest, this is a chemistry forum, and my posting here relates to that, and that is what I prefer to discuss HERE. For discussions not directly related to chemistry I invite you to email me at: user17625@gmail.com

 

I am almost finished with the retrosynthesis, however I am no expert at predicting yield, relevance of potential side reactions, etc. I am also almost finished construction of my in-process IR spectrometer which I hope to use to track the reactions in real-time. Hypervalent_iodine would you be interested in seeing the proposed reaction pathway, and comment? Files are too big to post.

[hypervalent_iodine]

I think it would be more beneficial if you walked us through your protocol here. You should also be able to post a simple reaction scheme easy enough. The files aren't that big. Also, I'm confused as to why you, a PhD student, would need to build your own IR for monitoring a reaction. TLC is your friend.

 

 

It would be nice if you could post somewhere what your thesis is about and elaborate on how you think cancer is so easy to cure with limited funding. Im sure many here would love to hear your ideas, myself included. By all means, feel free to use the biology forum if you don't think that this thread is an appropriate place.

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[CureCancerNow]

As a scientist at any level, I hope one can understand the need to avoid making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. I never said I was still a student, that I was working on a thesis, that I had a "tight" budget, that this was easy, that no one else ever thought it, or that this was to be part of a combinatorial synthesis for anti-cancer.

 

Before we again embark on an exercise of digression into irrelevancies, could you clarify how an organic chemistry forum or organic chemists might be more beneficial to discuss preclinical research protocols than organic synthesis?

 

Please, let's stay focused. What I would really like to see is what other suggestions there are for AOM synthesis which involves reasonable reagents/solvents/catalysts or better yet, a verified procedure.

Edited April 26, 2011 by CureCancerNow

[hypervalent_iodine]

And so now we are back to the same question: are you doing this as a backyard job or are you not? Although you are correct in stating that an assumption is dangerous thing to be making, I think it is a safe bet to make that you are not doing this in a proper laboratory environment. If you were, you wouldn't need our help. PhD or not, you are clearly not a chemist and you don't appear to be doing this research via the appropriate medium. As such, I at least will not be assisting you.

 

It's a matter of responsibility. I won't advise on a synthesis for illicit substances in a forum environment in the same way that I won't advise on a synthetic route to a particularly nasty carcinogen like azoxymethane.

 

If you want to do this research, I suggest you get a job in a lab that is willing to supervise it.

 

ETA: I don't advise on syntheses to illicit substances to anyone in most any environments... in case you were wondering

Edited April 26, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[mississippichem]

. PhD or not, you are clearly not a chemist and you don't appear to be doing this research via the appropriate medium. As such, I at least will not be assisting you.

 

It's a matter of responsibility. I won't advise on a synthesis for illicit substances in a forum environment in the same way that I won't advise on a synthetic route to a particularly nasty carcinogen like azoxymethane.

 

I'm with hypervalent_iodine here. The signals you are giving us are not reminiscent of what a trained chemist would be giving us. I don't think you are a chemist either. If you really are, then I am sorry. If you would like to defend your honor, please start a thread in the speculations forum and pitch us your idea about anti-cancer drugs. If we find that your proposed mode of action appears to be legitimate, then I will personally private message you an azoxymethane prep that I've already drawn in ChemDraw and have cited from the literature.

 

If you decide to pitch us your proposal, I will expect to see professionally rendered structures drawn, some cited sources, and any relevant quantitative data/derivations. All this is par for the course in the professional chemistry world. Yes, we are more hard nose than the physicists. This should be normal, and easily done for a PhD chemist.

Edited April 26, 2011 by mississippichem

[CureCancerNow]

And so now we are back to the same question: are you doing this as a backyard job or are you not? Although you are correct in stating that an assumption is dangerous thing to be making, I think it is a safe bet to make that you are not doing this in a proper laboratory environment. If you were, you wouldn't need our help. PhD or not, you are clearly not a chemist and you don't appear to be doing this research via the appropriate medium. As such, I at least will not be assisting you.

 

It's a matter of responsibility. I won't advise on a synthesis for illicit substances in a forum environment in the same way that I won't advise on a synthetic route to a particularly nasty carcinogen like azoxymethane.

 

If you want to do this research, I suggest you get a job in a lab that is willing to supervise it.

 

ETA: I don't advise on syntheses to illicit substances to anyone in most any environments... in case you were wondering

 

 

I sense a great deal of undeserved arrogance on your part. Being a pHD student is the end-all, be-all for you. I'll tell you this: you are barking at the wrong person. I received my doctorate years ago. I haven't been a backyard chemist since high school. But unlike you, a have respect for backyard chemists. Most of them are probably far more resourceful than you. Almost all of the important innovations in last 30 years were done by people that at least started with that mentality. If it weren't for the garage efforts of inventors like apple we wouldn't have the modern computer. We would still be using expensive mainframes.

 

I have been doing research all my life. My first professional research involving chemistry was done under a Dr. Tamura in 1977. So much for your theory that I am not a chemist. Chemistry is not, however, the only thing I do.

 

You have no idea what resources I have at my disposal or what my past accomplishments are. I find it distasteful flaunting my credentials, but you wouldn't take the hint when I told you I am an MD/pHD, you kept at it. And no, I am not doing it in a standard chemical laboratory setup that you would use as a student . The entire processing is done in a gloved, sealed hood with magnehelic monitoring and a washdown. Pre and post process loading is done in airflows greater than 120 feet per minute. The process is electronically monitored and controlled remotely and data is logged via a PC based data acquisition system. I in fact do know what I am doing. I personally spec.ed out the lab I work in, and I was once the lead contractor in the construction of a corporate research lab!(not my first), so I find your assertions that this lab is somehow substandard to be absurd. For most things, this is overkill. And your assertions that I hire into a lab to be supervised to be equally absurd. Now-a-days, I supervise the labs I work in.

 

You go right ahead and "be responsible", running around criticizing people smarter and more experienced than you, informing them that they should cease in work that could save lives because you don't trust them to not get themselves hurt. People do much worse things than play the fool.

 

I in fact don't need your help. Posting to a forum is new for me. I thought I had an interesting topic, and I joined the forum mainly hoping for some inspiration and encouragement and maybe save some time. Boy, that went well.

 

Don't bother replying. I am leaving the forum.

 

I hope in the future, when you or someone you know has a medical issue that they have to live with or die from because there is no effective medical cure, you will remember the medical researchers you have known, what they were willing to sacrifice to find answers, and how you treated them.

Edited April 26, 2011 by CureCancerNow

[hypervalent_iodine]

I know you don't plan to come back here, but I feel it necessary to make a few points for in case you do:

 

1. I have respect for backyard chemists. I do not have respect for backyard medical researchers. We have a number of backyard chemists in these forums who I have helped upon occasion and who I would gladly help again in the future.

 

2. You can't expect to come into a forum and haze over the details of research involving dangerous chemicals you expect us to advise you on. As I said, we have a responsibility in this forum and that encompasses whether or not we should provide people the means to make things they shouldn't be. It doesn't matter how noble you think your reasons are, we here don't know you from a bar of soap and are obligated to treat such questions with suspicion - especially when you can't or won't give us details on what it is actually for.

 

3. Being a PhD is not the 'be-all-and-end-all' for me. It consumes a great deal of my life but is simply a means to an end.

 

4. You claim to be a chemist and yet you don't know what NaOH is for?

 

5. You're right, I don't know what your past credentials are. I have no idea who you are at all. That's part of the issue here.

 

6. I wasn't referring to a standard, undergraduate level lab. I meant an actual research laboratory. I also never said it was substandard - I didn't even know what it consisted of until your post just now. All this lack of details on your part is what contributed to our skepticism - and if you think mississippi and I were the only ones, you'd be wrong.

 

It comes down to this: you came to this forum asking us to advise on a synthesis for azoxymethane, a dangerous and potent carcinogen. You gave us no details of why you would need it. Upon further investigation into your thread from chemical forums, you appeared to have some idea of what you were doing, but not too much in the way of chemistry, which can be dangerous to say the least. The only hints as to what this was for was 'to cure cancer'. How you think cancer is so easy to cure is beyond myself and some of the others here. Statements like this:

 

Curing cancer is not difficult. Nor does it take Gigabucks.

 

only make us further question your intelligence and ability to perform the task you are asking us to help you with.

 

The bottom line is that if you act suspicious, we will treat you as such.

Edited April 27, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[CureCancerNow]

This parade of idiocy is no longer amusing.

 

 

"4. You claim to be a chemist and yet you don't know what NaOH is for?"

Reread the post. Either you never passed the GRE with that reading skill or you've become more stupid since.

 

 

"...an actual research laboratory."

Give me a break student! They are neither rare nor inaccessible. And as a (PHD) boss of mine once said: "very little of any real use comes out of academia"

 

 

"...only hints as to what this was for... ...The bottom line is that if you act suspicious..."

It has only one commonly documented use, which is what I am also using it for. Duh!

In the real world, people have jobs, sign non-disclosure agreements, and don't divulge proprietary information to the first child that starts name-calling. You obviously know very little about any of that. Have you received counseling for your paranoia?

 

 

 

ARE YOU STILL TALKING?

[hypervalent_iodine]

I see very little use in the tennis match of insults that this is disintegrating into.

 

Good luck with your research.

Edited April 27, 2011 by hypervalent_iodine

[Horza2002]

Getting back to the topic....why do you think cancer is easy to cure and yet after all these billions of pounds/dollars the big pharams have not come up with it? I have some experience with workign with cancer drugs, the killing the cancer cells is not the problem with most new drugs, it is the side effects that are the problem. The high levels of cytotoxicity that are required for cancer treatments is what needs to be channelled so that it doesn't harm health cells.

 

There are a wide range of natural products that can do tis very well and in very interesting ways.

[hypervalent_iodine]

Getting back to the topic....why do you think cancer is easy to cure and yet after all these billions of pounds/dollars the big pharams have not come up with it? I have some experience with workign with cancer drugs, the killing the cancer cells is not the problem with most new drugs, it is the side effects that are the problem. The high levels of cytotoxicity that are required for cancer treatments is what needs to be channelled so that it doesn't harm health cells.

 

There are a wide range of natural products that can do tis very well and in very interesting ways.

 

Oh, you don't know? It's a conspiracy.

[CureCancerNow]

Getting back to the topic....why do you think cancer is easy to cure and yet after all these billions of pounds/dollars the big pharams have not come up with it? I have some experience with workign with cancer drugs, the killing the cancer cells is not the problem with most new drugs, it is the side effects that are the problem. The high levels of cytotoxicity that are required for cancer treatments is what needs to be channelled so that it doesn't harm health cells.

 

There are a wide range of natural products that can do tis very well and in very interesting ways.

 

Feel free to email me directly at the address given above. I have lost interest in forums, the reasons should be self-evident from the previous postings.

[mississippichem]

Feel free to email me directly at the address given above. I have lost interest in forums, the reasons should be self-evident from the previous postings.

 

Though evidently you haven't lost interest in reading them. I've lost interest in people trying to get free synthetic help from me while at the same time refusing to divulge their intent. I'm also tired o people claiming that curing cancer is easy.

 

I worked in an anti-cancer lab for a year. As an MD, you should know that curing cancer is not easy. If you think it is, then I believe we should make med-schools more difficult, because quite frankly that scares the hell out of me.

 

You are clearly ignorant of all things chemical. Next time you need synthetic help, consult a childrens' chemistry set because that seems to be about your level of chemical cognition.

 

The fact that you call yourself an MD/PhD is laughable. I'm an undergrad and found the azoxymethane prep in about five minutes. Your PhD must be in theater, because you are terrible at acting like a chemist.

 

Good day sir.

Edited May 2, 2011 by mississippichem