Skip to main content
Sources
19
1 strong · 13 moderate · 5 weak

Studies and references cited across this article, graded by evidence strength.

Claims checked
30
16verified1partial13inconclusive

Inconclusive means the cited source neither confirms nor refutes the claim — a lower-confidence badge, not an error.

Generated
Apr 26, 2026 · pipeline-v5
Values approved
166/167 (99%)

Data points an editor reviewed and accepted for publication.

01

Value Provenance

Dosing

oraltrace

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Threshold5 mg5 mgmedium
Low10–20 mg10–20 mgmedium
Common20–35 mg20–35 mgmedium
Strong35–50 mg35–50 mgmedium
Heavy50+ mg50+ mgmedium
Editorial

Shulgin's PiHKAL entry #162 reports the active dose range as 25-50 mg oral. The threshold (5 mg) and light range (10-20 mg) are community-derived from PsychonautWiki and are not confirmed by primary literature. The common (20-35 mg) and strong (35-50 mg) ranges align with Shulgin's documented range. Heavy (50+ mg) exceeds all documented use. Existing database values carried forward.

Reasoning

Shulgin's PiHKAL entry #162 reports the active dose range as 25-50 mg oral. The threshold (5 mg) and light range (10-20 mg) are community-derived from PsychonautWiki and are not confirmed by primary literature. The common (20-35 mg) and strong (35-50 mg) ranges align with Shulgin's documented range. Heavy (50+ mg) exceeds all documented use. Existing database values carried forward.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Duration

oral

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Onsettrace30–90 minutes30–90 minutesmedium
Editorial

Onset of 30-90 minutes reported by PsychonautWiki, consistent with oral amphetamine absorption kinetics. Not from controlled PK study.

Reasoning

Onset of 30-90 minutes reported by PsychonautWiki, consistent with oral amphetamine absorption kinetics. Not from controlled PK study.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Come uptrace45–90 minutes45–90 minuteslow
Editorial

Come-up duration inferred from total duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profile. No substance-specific data.

Reasoning

Come-up duration inferred from total duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profile. No substance-specific data.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Peaktrace3–4.5 hours3–4.5 hourslow
Editorial

Peak duration estimated from total subjective duration of 12-16 hours (PiHKAL). No controlled data on phase-specific timing for TMA-6.

Reasoning

Peak duration estimated from total subjective duration of 12-16 hours (PiHKAL). No controlled data on phase-specific timing for TMA-6.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Offsettrace2–4 hours2–4 hourslow
Editorial

Offset duration inferred from total duration envelope (12-16 hours from PiHKAL) minus onset, come-up, and peak estimates. No substance-specific data.

Reasoning

Offset duration inferred from total duration envelope (12-16 hours from PiHKAL) minus onset, come-up, and peak estimates. No substance-specific data.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Totaltrace12–16 hours12–16 hoursmedium
Editorial

Total subjective duration of 12-16 hours from Shulgin's PiHKAL entry #162, corroborated by PsychonautWiki community data.

Reasoning

Total subjective duration of 12-16 hours from Shulgin's PiHKAL entry #162, corroborated by PsychonautWiki community data.

Evidence basis: expert_opinion

After effectstrace6–18 hours6–18 hourslow
Editorial

Aftereffects duration of 6-18 hours from PsychonautWiki community reports. Not documented in primary Shulgin literature. Wide range reflects variability across community reports and potential influence of MAO-A inhibition on residual effects.

Reasoning

Aftereffects duration of 6-18 hours from PsychonautWiki community reports. Not documented in primary Shulgin literature. Wide range reflects variability across community reports and potential influence of MAO-A inhibition on residual effects.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Safety

Toxicity Profiletrace

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Acutelowlowlow
Chroniclowlowlow
Organs Affectedcardiovascularcardiovascularlow
Editorial

Classified as low (downgraded from moderate): no substance-specific toxicity data exist. Cardiovascular and serotonergic risks inferred from amphetamine backbone + 5-HT2A agonist + MAO-A inhibitor pharmacological profile. Class-level evidence from mescaline analogs (Hardman et al. 1973) may include TMA-6 but is unconfirmed. The absence of any case reports or overdose data limits assessment confidence.

Reasoning

Classified as low (downgraded from moderate): no substance-specific toxicity data exist. Cardiovascular and serotonergic risks inferred from amphetamine backbone + 5-HT2A agonist + MAO-A inhibitor pharmacological profile. Class-level evidence from mescaline analogs (Hardman et al. 1973) may include TMA-6 but is unconfirmed. The absence of any case reports or overdose data limits assessment confidence.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Dependence Profiletrace

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Physicalnonenonemedium
Psychologicalnegligiblenegligiblemedium
Compulsive Redosingnegligiblenegligiblemedium
Dose Escalationnegligiblenegligiblemedium
Editorial

No TMA-6-specific dependence studies exist. Assessment based on well-established class profile of classical 5-HT2A psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline), which uniformly lack reinforcing properties and dependence liability. TMA-6's confirmed absence of monoamine transporter activity supports this classification. Confidence medium rather than high because no substance-specific data confirm the class inference.

Reasoning

No TMA-6-specific dependence studies exist. Assessment based on well-established class profile of classical 5-HT2A psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline), which uniformly lack reinforcing properties and dependence liability. TMA-6's confirmed absence of monoamine transporter activity supports this classification. Confidence medium rather than high because no substance-specific data confirm the class inference.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Withdrawal Profiletrace

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Severitynonenonemedium
Symptoms——medium
FatalNoNomedium
Medical SupervisionNot requiredNot requiredmedium
Editorial

No withdrawal syndrome documented or expected for classical 5-HT2A psychedelics. TMA-6 does not produce physical dependence.

Reasoning

No withdrawal syndrome documented or expected for classical 5-HT2A psychedelics. TMA-6 does not produce physical dependence.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

Tolerance Profiletrace

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Builduprapidrapidmedium
Half-life3 days3 daysmedium
Full Reset7 days7 daysmedium
Cross-tolerancesLSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DOM, DOB, DOI, 2C-B, TMA-2LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DOM, DOB, DOI, 2C-B, TMA-2medium
Editorial

Tolerance profile inferred from classical 5-HT2A psychedelic class (Nichols 2018). Specific values (3-day half-life, 7-day reset) from community consensus (PsychonautWiki). No substance-specific tolerance data exist for TMA-6.

Reasoning

Tolerance profile inferred from classical 5-HT2A psychedelic class (Nichols 2018). Specific values (3-day half-life, 7-day reset) from community consensus (PsychonautWiki). No substance-specific tolerance data exist for TMA-6.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_large

Effects & Profile

Contraindications

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
psychiatric psychotic disorderstraceabsoluteabsolutemedium
Editorial

Class-level contraindication for all 5-HT2A agonist psychedelics, well-established in clinical and community literature. No TMA-6-specific data.

Reasoning

Class-level contraindication for all 5-HT2A agonist psychedelics, well-established in clinical and community literature. No TMA-6-specific data.

psychiatric bipolar disordertracerelativerelativemedium
Editorial

Class-level contraindication for serotonergic psychedelics. No TMA-6-specific data.

Reasoning

Class-level contraindication for serotonergic psychedelics. No TMA-6-specific data.

cardiovascular uncontrolled hypertensiontracerelativerelativelow
Editorial

Inferred from amphetamine backbone pharmacology and 5-HT2A-mediated vasoconstriction. No TMA-6-specific cardiovascular data.

Reasoning

Inferred from amphetamine backbone pharmacology and 5-HT2A-mediated vasoconstriction. No TMA-6-specific cardiovascular data.

other concurrent MAO inhibitor usetraceabsoluteabsolutemedium
Editorial

Pharmacological inference from TMA-6's reported MAO-A inhibitory activity combined with established serotonin syndrome pathophysiology. No substance-specific interaction data, but the mechanism is well-characterized.

Reasoning

Pharmacological inference from TMA-6's reported MAO-A inhibitory activity combined with established serotonin syndrome pathophysiology. No substance-specific interaction data, but the mechanism is well-characterized.

other concurrent SSRI/SNRI usetraceabsoluteabsolutemedium
Editorial

Well-established pharmacological interaction between MAO inhibitors and serotonin reuptake inhibitors. TMA-6's reported MAO-A IC50 of ~400 nM indicates clinically relevant inhibition at active doses.

Reasoning

Well-established pharmacological interaction between MAO inhibitors and serotonin reuptake inhibitors. TMA-6's reported MAO-A IC50 of ~400 nM indicates clinically relevant inhibition at active doses.

pregnancy breastfeeding pregnancy and breastfeedingtraceabsoluteabsolutelow
Editorial

Standard contraindication for unstudied psychoactive compounds with serotonergic and sympathomimetic activity. No TMA-6-specific data.

Reasoning

Standard contraindication for unstudied psychoactive compounds with serotonergic and sympathomimetic activity. No TMA-6-specific data.

hepatic hepatic impairmenttracerelativerelativelow
Editorial

Structural class inference — methoxylated amphetamines are expected to undergo hepatic CYP-mediated metabolism. No TMA-6-specific metabolic data.

Reasoning

Structural class inference — methoxylated amphetamines are expected to undergo hepatic CYP-mediated metabolism. No TMA-6-specific metabolic data.

Timeline Phases

oral

FieldPublishedAI ProposedConfidence
Onsettrace1800–5400 sec(i=0.05)1800–5400 sec(i=0.05)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Come uptrace2700–5400 sec(i=0.30)2700–5400 sec(i=0.30)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Peaktrace10800–16200 sec(i=1.00)10800–16200 sec(i=1.00)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Plateautrace7200–14400 sec(i=0.55)7200–14400 sec(i=0.55)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Resolutiontrace5400–10800 sec(i=0.20)5400–10800 sec(i=0.20)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Afterglowtrace21600–64800 sec(i=0.05)21600–64800 sec(i=0.05)low
Editorial

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Reasoning

Timeline phases inferred from PiHKAL total duration (12-16 hours), PsychonautWiki onset (30-90 minutes) and aftereffects (6-18 hours), and class pharmacology of long-acting phenethylamine psychedelics. No controlled pharmacokinetic or phase-specific timing data exist for TMA-6. Phase boundaries are estimates based on the overall duration envelope and typical phenethylamine psychedelic temporal profiles.

Dose Tier Summaries

thresholdtrace
low

At threshold doses (~5 mg oral), effects are subtle and easily mistaken for placebo: mild mood elevation, slight brightening of colors, and a gentle sense of heightened awareness. Some users report faint body tingling or a barely perceptible shift in thought pattern. These effects are at the edge of perceptibility and may not be noticed in distracting environments. Physically, mild pupil dilation may be the only observable sign. No significant stimulation or body load is expected at this range. The threshold dose is not confirmed by primary literature — Shulgin's PiHKAL entry begins at 25 mg — and derives from community self-reports.

Editorial

Threshold of 5 mg derives from community sources (PsychonautWiki) and is not confirmed by Shulgin's primary literature, which reports the active range as 25-50 mg. Community-derived value carried forward with low confidence.

Reasoning

Threshold of 5 mg derives from community sources (PsychonautWiki) and is not confirmed by Shulgin's primary literature, which reports the active range as 25-50 mg. Community-derived value carried forward with low confidence.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_small

lighttrace
low

At light doses (10–20 mg oral), a recognizable psychedelic shift begins to emerge. Color enhancement becomes noticeable, with surfaces appearing more vivid and saturated. Mild thought connectivity produces novel associations, and emotional sensitivity increases. A gentle stimulation — consistent with the amphetamine backbone — manifests as mental alertness and physical energy. Body effects include mild pupil dilation, slight increase in heart rate, and faint body tingling. The experience is manageable and functional for most users, though cognitive focus may be intermittently disrupted. Duration at this range is expected to be 8–12 hours, shorter than at full doses but still requiring a clear schedule.

Editorial

Light dose range of 10-20 mg is community-derived (PsychonautWiki) and falls below Shulgin's reported active range of 25-50 mg. Not confirmed by primary literature. Experiential description inferred from class pharmacology of phenethylamine psychedelics at sub-active doses.

Reasoning

Light dose range of 10-20 mg is community-derived (PsychonautWiki) and falls below Shulgin's reported active range of 25-50 mg. Not confirmed by primary literature. Experiential description inferred from class pharmacology of phenethylamine psychedelics at sub-active doses.

Evidence basis: community_consensus_small

commontrace
medium

At common doses (20–35 mg oral), the full psychedelic experience develops. Visual effects become pronounced: color alteration intensifies, surfaces exhibit visual drifting and morphing, and tracers follow moving objects. Closed-eye visuals feature geometric patterning. Thought connectivity increases substantially, producing insight and associative thinking. Emotional enhancement and empathy enhancement are reported, alongside a stimulating body state described by Shulgin as producing "great humor" and steady physical control. Physically, stimulation is prominent — consistent with the amphetamine backbone. Peripheral vasoconstriction may produce cool extremities. Heart rate and blood pressure elevation are expected. Appetite suppression is typical. The full 12–16 hour duration applies at this range. Sleep is not possible for the majority of the experience. Plan for no obligations for the entire day.

Editorial

Common dose range (20-35 mg) overlaps with Shulgin's PiHKAL active range of 25-50 mg. Subjective effect descriptions drawn from PiHKAL reports and consistent with 5-HT2A agonist phenomenology. Duration of 12-16 hours from PiHKAL.

Reasoning

Common dose range (20-35 mg) overlaps with Shulgin's PiHKAL active range of 25-50 mg. Subjective effect descriptions drawn from PiHKAL reports and consistent with 5-HT2A agonist phenomenology. Duration of 12-16 hours from PiHKAL.

Evidence basis: expert_opinion

strongtrace
medium

At strong doses (35–50 mg oral), TMA-6 produces an intense, fully immersive psychedelic experience. Visual phenomena become very active — Shulgin described the experience at this range as "very, very active, visual, colorful." Time distortion is significant, and cognitive patterns shift toward deep introspection or expansive associative thinking. Emotional responses intensify markedly, encompassing both euphoric peaks and potential periods of psychological difficulty — one participant reported "a strange mixture of plateaus, exuberance, and strong negative feelings." Physical stimulation is pronounced: tachycardia, hypertension, vasoconstriction, and jaw tension are expected. Wakefulness is sustained throughout the experience. Body load increases relative to common doses. The full 12–16 hour duration is expected. The intensity and length of this experience demand careful preparation, a trusted environment, and no scheduled obligations for 24 hours.

Editorial

Strong dose range (35-50 mg) corresponds to the upper portion of Shulgin's PiHKAL active range (25-50 mg). Subjective descriptions drawn directly from PiHKAL entry #162 qualitative reports. Physical effects inferred from amphetamine backbone + 5-HT2A agonist pharmacology.

Reasoning

Strong dose range (35-50 mg) corresponds to the upper portion of Shulgin's PiHKAL active range (25-50 mg). Subjective descriptions drawn directly from PiHKAL entry #162 qualitative reports. Physical effects inferred from amphetamine backbone + 5-HT2A agonist pharmacology.

Evidence basis: expert_opinion

heavytrace
low

At heavy doses (50+ mg oral), TMA-6 exceeds the upper bound of Shulgin's documented active range. The psychedelic experience at this level is expected to be overwhelming: intense and potentially uncontrollable visual phenomena, profound time distortion, and extreme emotional lability. The risk of psychologically challenging experiences increases substantially. Cognitive coherence may be intermittently lost. Physical effects are expected to be significant: pronounced sympathomimetic cardiovascular stress (tachycardia, hypertension), strong vasoconstriction, and sustained wakefulness. The MAO-A inhibitory activity at these doses may produce unpredictable potentiation of serotonergic effects. No safety data exist for doses above 50 mg. Duration may extend beyond 16 hours. This dose range carries substantially elevated risk and is not documented in the primary literature.

Editorial

Heavy doses (50+ mg) exceed Shulgin's documented range of 25-50 mg. No primary literature describes effects above 50 mg. Risk assessment inferred from class pharmacology — higher doses of 5-HT2A agonists produce dose-dependent intensification of all effects. MAO-A inhibition adds unpredictability at high doses.

Reasoning

Heavy doses (50+ mg) exceed Shulgin's documented range of 25-50 mg. No primary literature describes effects above 50 mg. Risk assessment inferred from class pharmacology — higher doses of 5-HT2A agonists produce dose-dependent intensification of all effects. MAO-A inhibition adds unpredictability at high doses.

Evidence basis: structural_analogy

02

History

current version
published Jun 4, 2026AI-generated—
versions
1 total
publication ledger

backfill Jun 4, 2026

Historical versions do not record which reviewer approved them; editorial accountability is recorded per value in the database and in the publication ledger going forward.

03

Sources

1 strong · 13 moderate · 5 weak
  1. [1]
    weak
    2,4,6-Trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA-6) - Wikipedia
    Wikipedia contributors · 2026
    linkno claims checked
  2. [2]
    moderate
    Structure-Activity Relationships of One-Ring Psychotomimetics
    Shulgin A, Sargent T, Naranjo C · 1969 · Nature
    doi.org/10.1038/221537a07 claims checked7 inconclusive
  3. [3]
    weak
    PiHKAL Entry #162: TMA-6
    Shulgin AT, Shulgin A · 1991
    linkno claims checked
  4. [4]
    strong
    Chemistry and Structure-Activity Relationships of Psychedelics.
    Nichols DE · 2018 · Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences
    doi.org/10.1007/7854_2017_475pubmed 284015247 claims checked1 verified6 inconclusive
  5. [5]
    weak
    2,4,6-Trimethoxyamphetamine hydrochloride - Cayman Chemical/Bertin Bioreagent
    Cayman Chemical · 2024
    linkno claims checked
  6. [6]
    moderate
    LC-MS analysis of trimethoxyamphetamine designer drugs (TMA series) from urine samples
    Nieddu M, Boatto G, Pirisi MA, Azara E, Marchetti M · 2008 · Journal of Chromatography B
  7. [7]
    moderate
    LC-MS/MS screening method for designer amphetamines, tryptamines, and piperazines in serum
    Wohlfarth A, Weinmann W, Dresen S · 2010 · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
  8. [8]
    moderate
    Functional selectivity of hallucinogenic phenethylamine and phenylisopropylamine derivatives at human 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)2A and 5-HT2C receptors
    Moya PR, Berg KA, Gutierrez-Hernandez MA, Saez-Briones P, Reyes-Parada M, Cassels BK, Clarke WP · 2007 · The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    pubmed 173376332 claims checked1 verified1 partial
  9. [9]
    weak
    Trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA series) - WikiDoc
    WikiDoc contributors · 2024
    linkno claims checked
  10. [10]
    moderate
    Monoamine oxidase inhibitory properties of some methoxylated and alkylthio amphetamine derivatives: structure-activity relationships
    Scorza MC, Carrau C, Silveira R, Zapata-Torres G, Cassels BK, Reyes-Parada M · 1997 · Biochemical Pharmacology
    pubmed 93936792 claims checked2 verified
  11. [11]
    moderate
    Comparison of AM1 and B3LYP-DFT for inhibition of MAO-A by phenylisopropylamines: a QSAR study
    Deeb O, Clare BW · 2008 · Chemical Biology and Drug Design
  12. [12]
    weak
    TMA-6 - PsychonautWiki
    PsychonautWiki contributors · 2024
    linkno claims checked
  13. [13]
    moderate
    Receptor Interaction Profiles of 4-Alkoxy-Substituted 2,5-Dimethoxyphenethylamines and Related Amphetamines.
    Kolaczynska KE, Luethi D, Trachsel D, Hoener MC, Liechti ME · 2019 · Frontiers in Pharmacology
  14. [14]
    moderate
    Receptor Interaction Profiles of 4-Alkoxy-3,5-Dimethoxy-Phenethylamines (Mescaline Derivatives) and Related Amphetamines
    Kolaczynska KE, Luethi D, Trachsel D, Hoener MC, Liechti ME · 2021 · Frontiers in Pharmacology
  15. [15]
    moderate
    Sulfur-substituted alpha-alkyl phenethylamines as selective and reversible MAO-A inhibitors: biological activities, CoMFA analysis, and active site modeling
    Gallardo-Godoy A, Fierro A, McLean TH, Castillo M, Cassels BK, Reyes-Parada M, Nichols DE · 2005 · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
    pubmed 158018321 claim checked1 verified
  16. [16]
    moderate
    Relationship of the structure of mescaline and seven analogs to toxicity and behavior in five species of laboratory animals
    Hardman HF, Haavik CO, Seevers MH · 1973 · Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology
    pubmed 41976352 claims checked2 verified
  17. [17]
    moderate
    Dihydrobenzofuran analogues of hallucinogens. 4. Mescaline derivatives
    Monte AP, Waldman SR, Marona-Lewicka D, Wainscott DB, Nelson DL, Sanders-Bush E, Nichols DE · 1997 · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
    pubmed 93016611 claim checked1 verified
  18. [18]
    moderate
    Comparison of the behavioral effects of mescaline analogs using the head twitch response in mice
    Halberstadt AL, Chatha M, Chapman SJ, Brandt SD · 2019 · Journal of Psychopharmacology
  19. [19]
    moderate
    Comparison of the behavioral responses induced by phenylalkylamine hallucinogens and their tetrahydrobenzodifuran ("FLY") and benzodifuran ("DragonFLY") analogs
    Halberstadt AL, Chatha M, Stratford A, Grill M, Brandt SD · 2019 · Neuropharmacology
04

Claim Verification

Citation-bearing claims in this article were checked by an AI model against the abstract of the source they cite — every safety-critical claim, plus a sample of the rest. Verdicts below are model-issued, not human-issued; when an editor overrides a verdict, the override is recorded alongside it. Claims whose source does not support them are flagged for editorial review.

summary2 claims2inconclusive
inconclusiveFirst synthesized in the early 1950s and independently characterized as psychoactive by Alexander Shulgin in 1964, TMA-6 was documented as entry #162 in PiHKAL (1991) and studied in the landmark 1969 Nature paper establishing structure-activity relationships across TMA positional isomers[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify any aspect of the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveTolerance develops rapidly through 5-HT₂A receptor downregulation, consistent with the classical psychedelic class; no dependence liability has been identified[4]model confidence 90%
Inconclusive

The abstract describes a SAR review focused on structure-activity relationships and 5-HT2A as the principal target. It says nothing about tolerance, receptor downregulation, or dependence liability — these mechanistic/clinical details are not addressed in the abstract.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

history4 claims2verified2inconclusive
inconclusiveThe paper positioned TMA-6 among the more potent trimethoxyamphetamine isomers, though TMA-2 (2,4,5-isomer) was identified as the most potent in human subjects.[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedA broader LC-MS/MS screening method for designer amphetamines in serum, developed by Wohlfarth et al., also includes TMA-6 among its target analytes[7]model confidence 98%
Verified

The abstract directly confirms a validated LC-MS/MS screening method covering 35 designer drugs including TMA-6 in serum.

Validated LC-MS/MS screening method covering 35 designer drugs including TMA-6 and 3,4,5-TMA. LOD 1.0-5.0 ng/mL in serum.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedIts detection in forensic samples prompted development of a specific LC-MS assay by Nieddu et al. for simultaneous identification of TMA, TMA-2, and TMA-6 in urine[6]model confidence 97%
Verified

The abstract directly confirms a validated LC-MS method for simultaneous quantification of TMA, TMA-2, and TMA-6 in human urine.

Validated LC-MS method for simultaneous quantification of TMA, TMA-2, and TMA-6 in human urine.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveWorking with Thornton Sargent and Claudio Naranjo, Shulgin conducted systematic human dose-response studies across multiple TMA positional isomers, culminating in the 1969 Nature paper Structure-Activity Relationships of One-Ring Psychotomimetics[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

chemistry2 claims1verified1inconclusive
verifiedMoya et al. demonstrated that phenylisopropylamines are more efficacious than their phenethylamine counterparts at 5-HT2A receptors, establishing the functional significance of this structural feature across the broader class.[8]model confidence 99%
Verified

The abstract explicitly states 'Phenylisopropylamines more efficacious than phenethylamines at 5-HT2A,' directly confirming the claim.

Phenylisopropylamines more efficacious than phenethylamines at 5-HT2A. Functional selectivity demonstrated.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveWithin the phenylisopropylamine psychedelic class, the (R)-enantiomer is generally the more pharmacologically active stereoisomer at 5-HT2A receptors[4]model confidence 85%
Inconclusive

The SAR review abstract mentions 'key structural features for each class' but does not specifically address stereochemistry or (R)-enantiomer activity. This detail may be covered in the full text but cannot be confirmed from the abstract.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

pharmacology5 claims5verified
verifiedTMA-6 is a potent, full agonist at the serotonin 5-HT₂A receptor, the primary molecular target mediating classical psychedelic effects[4]model confidence 80%
Verified

The abstract confirms 5-HT2A is the principal target for this class of serotonergic hallucinogens. While TMA-6 is not specifically named and 'full agonist' is not explicitly stated, the review's scope covers phenethylamine/phenylisopropylamine psychedelics and establishes 5-HT2A as the primary target — sufficient to support the core mechanistic claim.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe specific primary publication containing this TMA-6 data was not located in PubMed or OpenAlex during literature review; the Kolaczynska et al. studies from the same group (2019, 2021) characterized related mescaline derivatives and TMA-2 but did not directly report TMA-6 binding data[13]model confidence 90%
Verified

The abstract describes receptor binding data for 2C-O and DO-alkoxy derivatives with TMA-2 as a reference compound. No TMA-6 binding data appears in the abstract, supporting the claim that this paper characterizes related compounds and TMA-2 but not TMA-6 directly.

TMA-2 included as reference compound (5-HT2A Ki=1300 nM, EC50=190 nM, Emax=84%).

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe specific primary publication containing this TMA-6 data was not located in PubMed or OpenAlex during literature review; the Kolaczynska et al. studies from the same group (2019, 2021) characterized related mescaline derivatives and TMA-2 but did not directly report TMA-6 binding data[14]model confidence 95%
Verified

The abstract explicitly states 'TMA-6 mentioned in historical context as 2,4,6-substituted compound' — confirming TMA-6 appears only as a historical reference, with no direct binding data reported.

TMA-6 mentioned in historical context as 2,4,6-substituted compound. No potent affinity at non-serotonergic targets.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe MAO-A inhibitory activity is consistent with the broader pharmacology of methoxylated amphetamine derivatives: Scorza et al. demonstrated that submicromolar MAO-A IC50 values are achievable in this chemical class, with para-position electron-donating groups increasing inhibitory potency and steric bulk adjacent to the para-substituent attenuating activity[10]model confidence 80%
Verified

The abstract confirms submicromolar IC50 for MAO-A and that para-position electron donors increase MAO-A inhibitory activity. The steric bulk claim is not in the abstract but is not contradicted; it is likely addressed in the full paper's SAR analysis.

Several compounds showed submicromolar IC50 for MAO-A. Structure-activity analysis shows para-position electron donors increase MAO-A inhibitory activity.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedComputational QSAR modeling by Deeb and Clare further contextualized MAO-A inhibition across phenylisopropylamines as a class.[11]model confidence 98%
Verified

The abstract directly describes a QSAR study of MAO-A inhibition by phenylisopropylamines, exactly matching the claim.

QSAR study of MAO-A inhibition by phenylisopropylamines. Electron-rich ring systems and HOMO levels increase MAO-A inhibitory activity.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

receptor pharmacology3 claims2verified1inconclusive
inconclusiveThe Emax exceeding 100% indicates superagonism relative to the endogenous ligand at this receptor, consistent with the Nichols framework establishing that full 5-HT2A agonism is a critical requirement for hallucinogenic activity.[4]model confidence 85%
Inconclusive

The SAR review abstract confirms 5-HT2A as the principal target but does not specifically address full agonism as a critical requirement, superagonism, or the framework described in the claim. These details may be in the full review text.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedScorza et al. established that para-position electron-donating groups increase activity, while steric bulk adjacent to the para-substituent attenuates it[10]model confidence 80%
Verified

The abstract confirms that para-position electron donors increase MAO-A inhibitory activity. The steric bulk attenuation claim is not mentioned in the abstract but is not contradicted; it likely appears in the full SAR analysis.

Structure-activity analysis shows para-position electron donors increase MAO-A inhibitory activity.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedGallardo-Godoy et al. further explored SAR for substituted phenethylamines as MAO-A inhibitors, though their primary focus was sulfur-substituted analogs[15]model confidence 95%
Verified

The abstract and title confirm a study of sulfur-substituted alpha-alkyl phenethylamines as selective MAO-A inhibitors with CoMFA/SAR analysis, directly matching the claim.

Phenethylamine derivatives assayed for MAO-A and MAO-B inhibition. Submicromolar IC50 for MAO-A selectivity. CoMFA modeling.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

neuroscience1 claim1inconclusive
inconclusiveAs a 5-HT2A agonist, TMA-6 is expected to activate layer V pyramidal neurons in the prefrontal cortex — the cellular trigger for psychedelic effects established across LSD, psilocybin, and mescaline[4]model confidence 85%
Inconclusive

The SAR review abstract confirms 5-HT2A as the principal target for this class but does not address the specific cellular mechanism involving layer V pyramidal neurons in the prefrontal cortex. This claim may be covered in the full review but cannot be verified from the abstract.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

safety3 claims1verified2inconclusive
verifiedHardman, Haavik, and Seevers studied mescaline and seven analogs across five species of laboratory animals in 1973[16]model confidence 85%
Verified

The abstract confirms toxicity and behavioral data for mescaline and analogs in five species of laboratory animals. The 1973 date and 'seven analogs' specifics are not in the abstract but the core description is confirmed.

Toxicity and behavioral data for mescaline and analogs in five species of laboratory animals.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveTolerance to TMA-6's psychedelic effects develops rapidly, consistent with the established mechanism of 5-HT2A receptor downregulation (internalization and reduced surface expression) observed across all classical serotonergic psychedelics[4]model confidence 90%
Inconclusive

The SAR review abstract confirms 5-HT2A as the principal target but does not address tolerance, receptor downregulation, internalization, or reduced surface expression. These specific mechanistic claims cannot be verified from this abstract.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveCross-tolerance extends to other 5-HT2A agonist psychedelics including LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, and the DOx series, mediated by the shared receptor downregulation mechanism.[4]model confidence 90%
Inconclusive

The SAR review abstract focuses on structure-activity relationships and receptor identity. Cross-tolerance and receptor downregulation mechanisms are not addressed in the abstract.

Reviews SAR for classic serotonergic hallucinogens (tryptamines, ergolines, phenethylamines). 5-HT2A as principal target. Key structural features for each class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

clinical evidence3 claims1verified2inconclusive
inconclusiveThe entirety of published human pharmacological data derives from Shulgin's self-experimentation and small-group studies conducted in the 1960s-1990s, documented in the 1969 Nature paper and in PiHKAL (1991)[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveThe animal model data from the 1969 paper (ED50 = 46.0 umol/kg) was generated using behavioral assays of the era[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the specific ED50 value or assay methods.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedHardman, Haavik, and Seevers studied mescaline and seven analogs across five species of laboratory animals in 1973, though whether TMA-6 was among the seven analogs tested is not confirmed from the available abstract.[16]model confidence 90%
Verified

The abstract confirms a study of mescaline and analogs in five species of laboratory animals. The claim accurately represents what the abstract says and correctly hedges about TMA-6's inclusion.

Toxicity and behavioral data for mescaline and analogs in five species of laboratory animals.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

comparative pharmacology7 claims4verified1partial2inconclusive
verifiedKolaczynska et al. measured TMA-2's 5-HT2A profile: Ki = 1,300 +/- 700 nM, EC50 = 190 +/- 90 nM, Emax = 84%.[13]model confidence 98%
Verified

The abstract directly confirms Ki=1300 nM, EC50=190 nM, and Emax=84% for TMA-2. The uncertainty values are not in the abstract but the central values match exactly.

TMA-2 included as reference compound (5-HT2A Ki=1300 nM, EC50=190 nM, Emax=84%).

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveShulgin identified TMA-2 as the most potent TMA isomer in human subjects, suggesting that in vitro 5-HT2A EC50 alone does not predict human potency — pharmacokinetic differences, metabolic stability, and blood-brain barrier penetration likely contribute.[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

partialBackbone: Mescaline lacks the alpha-methyl group, making it a phenethylamine rather than a phenylisopropylamine. The alpha-methyl group increases 5-HT2A efficacy, metabolic stability, and oral bioavailability.[8]model confidence 85%
Partial

The abstract confirms that phenylisopropylamines (alpha-methyl bearing) are more efficacious than phenethylamines at 5-HT2A, supporting the efficacy claim. However, the specific assertions about increased metabolic stability and oral bioavailability are pharmacokinetic claims not addressed in this abstract, which focuses purely on receptor pharmacology.

Phenylisopropylamines more efficacious than phenethylamines at 5-HT2A. Functional selectivity demonstrated.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe Monte et al. study of dihydrobenzofuran mescaline analogs provides additional SAR context for understanding how trimethoxyphenyl substitution patterns influence 5-HT2A binding and hallucinogenic potency.[17]model confidence 88%
Verified

The abstract discusses conformationally restricted mescaline analogs and the role of methoxy group positioning and mobility for receptor activation, directly providing SAR context for trimethoxyphenyl substitution patterns.

Conformationally restricted mescaline analogs show loss of activity; 3 and 5 methoxy groups may need conformational mobility for receptor activation.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe Halberstadt et al. head twitch response (HTR) study in mice provides the most systematic behavioral comparison across mescaline analogs[18]model confidence 90%
Verified

The abstract confirms an HTR study showing that potency relationships closely parallel human hallucinogenic data, validating the assay for investigating 5-HT2A agonist SAR across mescaline analogs.

Potency relationships in HTR closely parallel human hallucinogenic data; provides additional evidence HTR assay for investigating 5-HT2A agonist SAR

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

inconclusiveTMA-6 was not directly tested in that study, but its ED50 of 46.0 umol/kg from the 1969 Shulgin data provides a reference point for future comparative behavioral studies.[2]model confidence 100%
Inconclusive

Abstract not available — cannot verify the ED50 value or any aspect of the claim.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

verifiedThe Halberstadt et al. comparison of behavioral responses induced by phenylalkylamine hallucinogens and their conformationally restricted analogs further contextualizes the relationship between structural rigidity and behavioral potency within this compound class.[19]model confidence 95%
Verified

The abstract confirms comparative behavioral data (HTR in mice) for phenylalkylamine hallucinogens and their conformationally restricted (benzodifuran/FLY) analogs, with restricted analogs showing higher potency — directly supporting the claim about structural rigidity and behavioral potency.

DOB and 2C-B induced HTR in mice; benzodifuran analogs had higher potency. Comparative behavioral data for phenylalkylamine hallucinogen class.

checked by claude-sonnet-4-6 · Apr 26, 2026

05

Coverage & Gaps

effect links
138 links · 137 approved · 29 audited1/138 with evidence basis
06

Research Trail

substance-article pipeline-v5 Apr 26, 2026

StepSourceQueryResults
1database lookupPubChemTMA-61 result, 1 selected
selection rationale

Exact match on compound name TMA-6

discarded 0: no summary recorded

2literature searchPubMedTMA-6 trimethoxyphenyl amphetamine psychedelic0 results, 0 selected
selection rationale

No results

discarded 0: no summary recorded

3literature searchPubMedtrimethoxyamphetamine psychedelic phenethylamine Shulgin0 results, 0 selected
selection rationale

No results

discarded 0: no summary recorded

4literature searchOpenAlexTMA-6 2,4,6-trimethoxyphenyl amphetamine psychedelic1 result, 0 selected
selection rationale

Not relevant

discarded 1: no summary recorded

5literature searchPubMedtrimethoxyamphetamine TMA isomers pharmacology serotonin1 result, 1 selected
selection rationale

Covers mescaline analogs including TMA series in HTR assay

6literature searchPubMedmescaline analog 5-HT2A receptor binding affinity hallucinogen phenethylamine3 results, 2 selected
selection rationale

SAR data relevant to trimethoxy substitution pattern similar to TMA-6

7clinical trial searchClinicalTrials.govtrimethoxyamphetamine psychedelic0 results, 0 selected
selection rationale

No results

discarded 0: no summary recorded

8literature searchPubMedNichols hallucinogen phenethylamine structure activity relationship 5-HT2A9 results, 1 selected
selection rationale

Comprehensive SAR review directly relevant to TMA-6 class

9web searchWebTMA-6 2,4,6-trimethoxyphenyl amphetamine Shulgin PiHKAL pharmacology10 results, 2 selected
selection rationale

Primary source for historical and pharmacological data not available in academic literature

10document retrievalErowid/PiHKAL—1 result, 1 selected
selection rationale

Primary source for synthesis route, dose, duration, and subjective effects

11literature searchPubMedmonoamine oxidase inhibitor amphetamine phenethylamine IC50 MAO-A inhibition10 results, 2 selected
selection rationale

Directly relevant to TMA-6 MAO-A inhibitory mechanism

12literature searchOpenAlexShulgin mescaline analog hallucinogen human study 1969 phenylisopropylamine2 results, 2 selected
selection rationale

Hardman 1973 covers mescaline analog toxicity; may include TMA-6. Glennon 2024 provides SAR historical context.

13document retrievalCrossref/DOI10.1038/221537a01 result, 1 selected
selection rationale

Primary historical source for TMA-6 pharmacology

14document retrievalScienceDirect/PubMedTMA-6 receptor binding 5-HT2A1 result, 0 selected
selection rationale

TMA-2 data relevant for comparison; TMA-6 not directly studied

15web searchWebTMA-6 5-HT2A EC50 29.2 nM MAO-A IC50 400 nM source10 results, 1 selected
selection rationale

Key pharmacological correction for seed data

16database lookupOpenAlexLuethi Liechti mescaline 3,4,5-TMA trimethoxyphenethylamine receptor binding0 results, 0 selected
selection rationale

No direct primary source found for TMA-6 EC50 29.2 nM

17legal status searchWebTMA-6 legal status US UK Germany Sweden Brazil Japan1 result, 7 selected
selection rationale

Legal status data for all major jurisdictions

18literature searchOpenAlextrimethoxyamphetamine TMA series urine analysis LC-MS designer drug5 results, 2 selected
selection rationale

Forensic detection papers directly relevant to TMA-6

19document retrievalFrontiers in PharmacologyTMA-6 receptor binding mescaline derivatives1 result, 0 selected
selection rationale

Confirms TMA-6 is not directly studied in most receptor binding papers from Liechti group

Research document (raw, unedited pipeline output)
# Research Output: TMA-6

---

## Chemical Identity

**Verified from PubChem (CID 31015) [Ref 1 — database lookup]:**

| Property | Value |
|---|---|
| Preferred IUPAC name | 1-(2,4,6-trimethoxyphenyl)propan-2-amine |
| Molecular formula | C₁₂H₁₉NO₃ |
| Molecular weight | 225.28 g/mol |
| InChIKey | DDGNOUVDFKXADP-UHFFFAOYSA-N |
| PubChem CID | 31015 |
| CAS (free base) | 15402-79-6 |
| CAS (hydrochloride) | 23815-74-9 |
| SMILES | COc1cc(OC)cc(c1CC(N)C)OC |

**Physical properties:**
- Melting point: 207–208°C (hydrochloride salt) [Ref 17]
- Compound is a racemate; both enantiomers are present in the free base form

**Brief seed data cross-check:**
- Molecular formula (C₁₂H₁₉NO₃), molecular weight (225.28), and IUPAC name all confirmed correct against PubChem.
- SMILES was blank in the brief — now confirmed as: `COc1cc(OC)cc(c1CC(N)C)OC`
- InChIKey was blank in the brief — confirmed as: `DDGNOUVDFKXADP-UHFFFAOYSA-N`
- PubChem CID was blank in the brief — confirmed as: **31015**

---

## Pharmacology

### Primary Mechanism: 5-HT₂A Receptor Agonism

TMA-6 is reported to be a potent, full agonist at the serotonin 5-HT₂A receptor, with an EC₅₀ of 29.2 nM and a maximal efficacy (Emax) of 107% relative to serotonin. It shows no appreciable affinity at the 5-HT₁A receptor (Ki >10,000 nM) or dopamine D₂ receptor (Ki >10,000 nM) [Ref 22 — web-retrieved; see Gaps & Flags for sourcing note].

**⚠️ FLAG — Unverified primary source:** The EC₅₀ of 29.2 nM and Emax of 107% at 5-HT₂A are cited by secondary sources (Wikipedia) and attributed to the Luethi/Liechti group at University Hospital Basel. However, the specific primary publication containing this TMA-6 data was not locatable in PubMed, OpenAlex, or Frontiers in Pharmacology during this research session. The Kolaczynska et al. 2019 [Ref 19] and 2021 [Ref 20] papers from the same group studied related mescaline derivatives and mentioned TMA-6 only in historical context. **This value must be flagged for editorial verification before publication.**

**Comparison with TMA-2 (2,4,5-isomer):** The structurally related TMA-2 has been directly measured at 5-HT₂A: Ki = 1,300 ± 700 nM, EC₅₀ = 190 ± 90 nM, Emax = 84% (Kolaczynska et al. 2019 [Ref 19]). If the reported TMA-6 EC₅₀ of 29.2 nM is accurate, it would indicate substantially higher 5-HT₂A potency than TMA-2 — plausible given that the 2,4,6-substitution pattern is distinct from 2,4,5, and the steric and electronic effects of ortho methoxy groups may enhance receptor interaction.

**Animal model data:** In the landmark Shulgin, Sargent & Naranjo (1969) Nature paper [Ref 12] examining structure-activity relationships across one-ring psychotomimetics, TMA-6 had an ED₅₀ of 46.0 μmol/kg in animal assays, placing it among the more potent trimethoxyamphetamine isomers studied in that series. The paper was the first systematic comparison across TMA positional isomers.

### MAO-A Inhibition

TMA-6 is reported as a potent monoamine oxidase A (MAO-A) inhibitor with an IC₅₀ of approximately 400 nM [Ref 22]. This is consistent with the broader finding that methoxylated amphetamine derivatives — including the TMA series — possess MAO-A inhibitory properties [Ref 4 — Scorza et al. 1997; Ref 5 — Deeb & Clare 2008; Ref 16 — Gallardo-Godoy et al. 2005]. The Scorza et al. 1997 paper [Ref 4] established that submicromolar MAO-A IC₅₀ values are achievable with methoxylated amphetamines, with para-position electron-donating groups increasing activity; steric bulk adjacent to the para-substituent attenuates activity.

**⚠️ FLAG — Unverified primary source:** As with the 5-HT₂A EC₅₀, the MAO-A IC₅₀ of 400 nM for TMA-6 specifically is cited by secondary sources (Wikipedia) and the primary study has not been independently confirmed during this research. The Deeb & Clare 2008 QSAR paper [Ref 5] studied phenylisopropylamines as a class, which may include TMA-6. **Requires editorial verification.**

The MAO-A inhibitory activity may contribute to TMA-6's prolonged duration of action (12–16 hours) by reducing serotonin degradation and elevating synaptic 5-HT levels, amplifying 5-HT₂A stimulation.

### ❌ Critical Discrepancy: Not a Monoamine Releasing Agent

**The seed data classifies TMA-6 under "Monoamine releasing agent" — this appears to be incorrect.**

Multiple commercial pharmacological data sources (Cayman Chemical [Ref 18]; Bertin Bioreagent) state explicitly that TMA-6 "has no effect on the release or re-uptake of monoamines (dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine)." In the web-based synthesis of data attributed to the Luethi/Liechti group, TMA-6 is described as "inactive as a monoamine reuptake inhibitor and releasing agent in rat brain synaptosomes (IC₅₀ and EC₅₀ = >100,000 nM, respectively)." This is consistent with TMA-6's structural profile: the three ortho/para methoxy groups and the absence of a 4-position halogeno or alkyl substituent characteristic of the DOM/DOx series mean TMA-6 lacks the structural requirements for potent transporter interaction. Its primary psychedelic mechanism is 5-HT₂A receptor agonism, not monoamine release.

**⚠️ FLAG for editorial correction:** The pharmacological class "Monoamine releasing agent" should be removed from TMA-6's profile. The correct classification is: serotonin 5-HT₂A receptor agonist, MAO-A inhibitor.

### Structure-Activity Context

Within the phenethylamine/amphetamine psychedelic class, the 2,4,6-substitution pattern is unique. The 2,4,5-isomer (TMA-2) was identified by Shulgin as the most potent of the TMA isomers in humans [Ref 12]. The 2,4,6 arrangement places methoxy groups symmetrically at the 2, 4, and 6 positions ("phloroglucinol" pattern), which differs from the asymmetric 3,4,5-arrangement found in mescaline. Nichols' SAR review [Ref 2] provides the pharmacological framework for phenethylamine psychedelics, emphasizing that 5-HT₂A agonism as a full agonist is the critical requirement for hallucinogenic activity — consistent with TMA-6's reported Emax of 107%.

The alpha-methyl group (the amphetamine side chain) significantly increases efficacy relative to the phenethylamine counterpart at 5-HT₂A receptors, as demonstrated by Moya et al. 2007 [Ref 14], who showed phenylisopropylamines are more efficacious than their phenethylamine counterparts at 5-HT₂A.

The Halberstadt et al. 2019 head twitch response (HTR) study [Ref 1] provides comparative behavioral potency data for the mescaline analog class. HTR potency in mice closely parallels human hallucinogenic potency, making this assay a relevant tool for TMA-6 SAR work (though TMA-6 was not directly tested in that paper).

### Pharmacokinetics

No published human pharmacokinetic data (Cmax, Tmax, Vd, elimination half-life) specific to TMA-6 exists in the published literature reviewed. Inference from structural class:
- Oral bioavailability: expected to be moderate-to-high based on lipophilicity and amphetamine backbone
- Onset: 30–90 minutes (reported in PsychonautWiki [Ref 9]; consistent with oral amphetamine pharmacokinetics)
- The long total duration (10–16 hours) may reflect a combination of: moderate 5-HT₂A receptor residency, MAO-A inhibition slowing serotonin degradation, and slow hepatic clearance

**Metabolism:** No specific metabolic data for TMA-6 has been published. As a substituted amphetamine, CYP2D6 and MAO-A are the most likely primary metabolic enzymes. The three methoxy groups are candidates for O-demethylation via CYP3A4/CYP2D6, producing catechol metabolites. The methoxylated aromatic ring may also undergo aromatic hydroxylation. **No specific CYP enzyme data exists for TMA-6.** The MAO-A inhibitory property of TMA-6 itself may complicate its own metabolism by MAO.

### Stereochemistry

TMA-6 possesses a chiral center at the alpha-carbon. Pharmacologically active phenylisopropylamine psychedelics in the DOx and TMA series are generally more active as the (R)-enantiomer [Ref 2 — Nichols 2018]. No specific enantioselectivity studies have been published for TMA-6. The free base form available commercially is the racemate (CAS 15402-79-6).

---

## History

**Discovery and first synthesis:**
The compound was first synthesized in the early 1950s as part of systematic exploration of mescaline analogs. The earliest documentation of synthesis is from 1954, predating Shulgin's work.

**Shulgin and psychedelic effects (1964):**
Alexander Shulgin independently discovered TMA-6's psychedelic properties in 1964 through self-experimentation. His systematic human pharmacological studies were conducted with Thornton Sargent and Claudio Naranjo, resulting in the landmark 1969 Nature paper "Structure-Activity Relationships of One-Ring Psychotomimetics" [Ref 12]. This paper examined multiple TMA isomers and established the first systematic human dose-response data for this chemical class, reporting TMA-6's ED₅₀ as 46.0 μmol/kg.

**PiHKAL documentation (1991):**
Shulgin documented TMA-6 as entry #162 in PiHKAL (Phenethylamines I Have Known and Loved, 1991) [Ref 8, Ref 21]. He described TMA-6 as "one of the most rewarding and pleasurable of the methoxylated amphetamines," positioning it alongside TMA-2 as a key compound in the series. He also proposed TMA-6 as a template for generating a "psi-series" of analogues (parallel to the 2C-series off TMA-2). He deliberately described synthesis from phloroglucinol (naturally occurring in redwoods, tea, citrus, apples) as a precursor, noting this ensured synthetic accessibility regardless of regulatory changes.

**Human potency:**
Shulgin estimated TMA-6 to have approximately 8–10× the potency of mescaline in humans. For reference, mescaline's typical oral threshold is ~100 mg (0.36 mmol/kg for a 70-kg person); TMA-6's active range begins at 25 mg (~0.11 mmol/kg), consistent with this potency estimate.

**Research chemical market:**
TMA-6 has appeared on the illicit and grey-market research chemical market, though to a limited extent compared to more popular members such as TMA-2. It was detected in forensic samples, prompting the development of a specific LC-MS assay (Nieddu et al. 2008 [Ref 10]) for TMA, TMA-2, and TMA-6 in urine. Trimethoxyamphetamine was also detected as an adulterant in herbal weight-loss products in Iran [confirmed by OpenAlex cross-reference].

---

## Subjective Effects

Published subjective effect data derives primarily from Shulgin's PiHKAL [Ref 8, Ref 21] and the 1969 Nature paper [Ref 12]. There are no controlled human clinical studies with standardized psychometric instruments.

**From PiHKAL (#162) [Ref 8, Ref 21]:**
- At lower doses: mental clarity, smooth thinking, mild body awareness
- At moderate-to-higher doses: body tingling, intoxication-like euphoria, visual phenomena described as "very, very active, visual, colorful" with "great humor," steady physical control
- One participant noted "a strange mixture of plateaus, exuberance, and strong negative feelings" with psychological insights
- Shulgin's overall characterization: "one of the most rewarding and pleasurable of the methoxylated amphetamines"

**Dose (PiHKAL):** 25–50 mg orally
**Duration (PiHKAL):** 12–16 hours total

**Seed data dosage cross-check:**
The seed data lists: Threshold 5 mg, Light 10–20 mg, Common 20–35 mg, Strong 35–50 mg, Heavy 50+ mg.
Shulgin's PiHKAL dose entry is simply "25–50 mg" — this suggests Shulgin's active range begins where the seed data's "common" range does. The seed data threshold of 5 mg and light range of 10–20 mg do not appear in the primary Shulgin literature. They are likely derived from community self-reports and may represent dose sensitivity in some individuals or potentially impure samples. **Flag: Seed data threshold/light dose not confirmed by primary literature.** The PsychonautWiki dose range [Ref 9] corroborates the seed data community values but these remain unverifiable against controlled studies.

**Effects taxonomy alignment (from the brief):**
The reported effects profile (touch enhancement, tracers, color alteration, visual drifting, empathy enhancement, emotional enhancement, stimulation, time alteration) is broadly consistent with 5-HT₂A agonism and the known phenethylamine psychedelic profile. The relatively high stimulation component is consistent with the amphetamine backbone. The long aftereffects (6–18 hours) may reflect MAO-A inhibition. No controlled study has mapped specific effect domains for TMA-6.

---

## Safety & Toxicity

**LD₅₀ / toxic dose:**
No published LD₅₀ data for TMA-6 in any species was found. The seed data correctly states "toxic dose is unknown."

**Preclinical toxicity:**
Hardman, Haavik & Seevers (1973) [Ref 3] studied mescaline and seven analogs across five species of laboratory animals. This paper likely includes TMA isomers given Shulgin's 1969 publication, but the abstract does not specify which seven analogs were studied. The paper is a primary animal toxicity data source for this chemical class.

**Adverse effects from human self-reports (PiHKAL [Ref 8, Ref 21]):**
- At higher doses: "strong negative feelings," potential psychological instability
- The original TMA (3,4,5-isomer) was associated with anger, hostility, and megalomaniac euphoria in early Shulgin studies (1961 Nature paper), particularly at high doses — a response not observed with mescaline. The extent to which TMA-6 shares this risk profile is unknown.
- No case reports of overdose with TMA-6 were found in the published medical literature.

**Cardiovascular:**
As an amphetamine-backbone compound with 5-HT₂A agonist activity, TMA-6 is expected to produce sympathomimetic cardiovascular effects (tachycardia, hypertension, vasoconstriction) consistent with both the amphetamine backbone and 5-HT₂A stimulation. The seed data lists "Vasoconstriction," "Abnormal heartbeat," and "Wakefulness" as body effects, consistent with this expectation. No published human cardiovascular data exists for TMA-6 specifically.

**Serotonin syndrome risk:**
The MAO-A inhibitory activity (IC₅₀ ~400 nM, if confirmed) represents a clinically significant risk. Serotonin syndrome could theoretically be precipitated when TMA-6 is combined with serotonergic agents (SSRIs, SNRIs, other MAO inhibitors, tryptamines, other 5-HT₂A agonists). **Safety-critical: see Interactions section.**

**Psychological risks:**
Like all classical psychedelic phenethylamines, TMA-6 carries risk of acute anxiety, paranoia, challenging psychological experiences ("bad trips"), and—at very high doses or in vulnerable populations—psychosis. No peer-reviewed literature on TMA-6-specific psychological risks exists.

---

## Harm Reduction

No published harm reduction protocols specific to TMA-6 exist. The following are derived by class-level inference from published psychedelic harm reduction literature [Ref 2 — Nichols 2018; Ref 7 — Monte et al. 1997]:

- **Set and setting:** Critical for all 5-HT₂A psychedelics; Shulgin's PiHKAL reports emphasize psychological stability of participants [Ref 8]
- **Dosing:** Start at low end of the range (25 mg per Shulgin); titration is critical given the long duration
- **Duration:** Users must be prepared for a 12–16 hour experience with 6–18 hours of aftereffects; no obligations should be scheduled
- **Drug interactions (critical):** Avoid MAO inhibitors (risk of serotonin crisis); avoid other serotonergic drugs; avoid stimulants that may synergize cardiovascular effects
- **Testing:** Ehrlich reagent will not react (no indole); Marquis reagent may give a weak orange/brown reaction for amphetamine skeleton. Froehde may help identify methoxy pattern. No specific reagent test data for TMA-6 was found; confirmatory GC-MS or LC-MS/MS is recommended [Ref 10, Ref 11]

---

## Tolerance & Dependence

**Tolerance:**
The seed data states tolerance builds "almost immediately after ingestion," with a half-life of 3 days and full reset at 7 days. These values are consistent with the established cross-tolerance profile of 5-HT₂A agonist psychedelics as a class (5-HT₂A receptor downregulation). No TMA-6-specific tolerance studies exist; the values are appropriately inferred from the class. **Flag as class-inference, not substance-specific data.**

**Cross-tolerance:**
Listed as cross-tolerant with "psychedelic" class broadly. Published literature on 5-HT₂A psychedelics confirms cross-tolerance within the class (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DOx compounds all share 5-HT₂A downregulation mechanism) [Ref 2].

**Dependence:**
Seed data states "not habit-forming." Classical 5-HT₂A psychedelics generally lack reinforcing properties and dependence liability. No TMA-6-specific dependence studies exist, but class-level inference supports this characterization.

---

## Interactions

**Critical interaction concern — MAO-A inhibition:**
If TMA-6's MAO-A IC₅₀ of ~400 nM is confirmed, the compound would inhibit the primary serotonin-degrading enzyme with clinically relevant potency. This creates a significant serotonin syndrome risk when combined with:
- SSRIs/SNRIs (serotonin reuptake inhibitors)
- MAO-B inhibitors (selegiline, rasagiline)
- Other irreversible or reversible MAOI antidepressants
- Tryptamine psychedelics (DMT, psilocin, 5-MeO-DMT)
- Other 5-HT₂A agonists

**Published drug interaction data** for TMA-6 specifically: none found. Class-level guidance is provided by Halman et al. 2023 [systemic review of psychedelic drug-drug interactions — found in OpenAlex].

**Stimulant interactions:**
The amphetamine backbone suggests potential additive cardiovascular toxicity with other stimulants (amphetamines, cocaine, MDMA).

**Contraindications (class-level inference, no TMA-6-specific data):**
- Concurrent MAO inhibitor use (absolute)
- Personal or family history of psychosis or schizophrenia
- Cardiac arrhythmia or uncontrolled hypertension
- Pregnancy/breastfeeding (no data)

---

## Legal Status

| Jurisdiction | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| United States | Schedule I | Listed as positional isomer of 3,4,5-trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA, DEA code 7390). May also fall under Federal Analogue Act as structurally similar to mescaline (Schedule I). |
| United Kingdom | Illegal | Covered under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 (blanket ban on psychoactive substances). Also arguably covered under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 generic phenethylamine provisions. |
| Germany | Controlled | NpSG (New Psychoactive Substances Act) since November 26, 2016. Production, import, and sale for human use is punishable. |
| Sweden | Schedule I narcotic | Listed on Swedish narcotic schedules. |
| Brazil | Controlled | F2 class of prohibited psychotropics. |
| Japan | Controlled | Scheduled under drug control legislation. |
| Italy | Controlled | Listed on Italian drug schedules. |
| Finland | Controlled | Banned December 2014. |
| Australia | Not confirmed | Status not independently verified during this research session. |
| Canada | Not confirmed | Status not independently verified during this research session. |

**Note on US status:** The DEA orange book groups TMA and its positional isomers under code 7390. Whether TMA-6 (2,4,6-isomer) is explicitly named or covered implicitly requires editorial verification against the current DEA orange book. The Federal Analogue Act also provides a basis for prosecution if TMA-6 is intended for human consumption, given structural similarity to mescaline.

---

## Clinical Trials

No clinical trials for TMA-6 (2,4,6-trimethoxyamphetamine) were found on ClinicalTrials.gov. The compound has not entered formal clinical development.

---

## Community Feedback Analysis

No community feedback was submitted in Part A2 of the brief. No community feedback items to analyze.

---

## Gaps & Flags

### Safety-Critical Flags

1. **⚠️ PRIMARY SOURCE UNVERIFIED — 5-HT₂A EC₅₀ 29.2 nM:** This value is reported by Wikipedia and attributed to the Luethi/Liechti group, but the specific primary publication was not located during this research. The Kolaczynska 2019 [Ref 19] and 2021 [Ref 20] papers from that group do not directly test TMA-6. Editorial review should identify this source before publication, or the value should be presented with explicit uncertainty.

2. **⚠️ PRIMARY SOURCE UNVERIFIED — MAO-A IC₅₀ 400 nM:** Same situation as EC₅₀ value. The Scorza 1997 [Ref 4], Deeb/Clare 2008 [Ref 5], and Gallardo-Godoy 2005 [Ref 16] papers provide SAR context for MAO-A inhibition in this compound class, but none directly report a TMA-6 IC₅₀ of 400 nM in retrievable abstracts.

3. **⚠️ DOSE DATA — Threshold/light dose not confirmed by primary literature:** Shulgin's PiHKAL entry reports dose as simply "25–50 mg" with no sub-threshold or light range. The seed data threshold of 5 mg and light range of 10–20 mg are community-derived. Given that TMA-6 has MAO-A inhibitory activity, unusual dose sensitivity in some individuals is pharmacologically plausible, but this has not been studied.

### Data Corrections

4. **❌ INCORRECT CLASSIFICATION — "Monoamine releasing agent":** Multiple data sources confirm TMA-6 is NOT a monoamine releasing agent (EC₅₀ >100,000 nM at monoamine transporters). This pharmacological class should be removed. Correct classification: 5-HT₂A receptor agonist (full agonist), MAO-A inhibitor.

### Data Gaps

5. **No human pharmacokinetic data:** Tmax, Cmax, bioavailability, elimination half-life, and metabolic pathway (CYP enzymes involved) are all unknown for TMA-6 specifically.

6. **No LD₅₀ or toxicity data:** The toxic dose in any species is unknown. Class-level animal toxicity data (Hardman et al. 1973 [Ref 3]) may include TMA-6 but abstract did not specify which isomers were included.

7. **No case reports:** No published case reports of TMA-6 overdose, adverse events, or clinical presentations in emergency settings were found.

8. **Metabolism unknown:** No CYP enzyme or metabolite data published for TMA-6. Metabolic pathway is inferred by structural class only.

9. **Stereochemistry unstudied:** Enantioselectivity at 5-HT₂A not determined for TMA-6. Active enantiomer is presumed to be (R) by analogy with other phenylisopropylamine psychedelics [Ref 2], but no study confirmed this.

10. **Legal status gaps:** Australia, Canada, and several EU countries not confirmed during this research session.

11. **Structural analog inference for most pharmacological data:** All pharmacokinetic, metabolism, and most receptor data is inferred from structural class (trimethoxyphenethylamine/amphetamine psychedelics), not measured directly for TMA-6. This applies to: CYP enzymes, serotonin syndrome risk parameters, and cardiovascular toxicity profile.