Why the potent cardiovascular effect seen by this compound? There are a couple of points that might argue for some adrenolytic toxicity. This material is a β-ethanolamine and, with maybe one or two exceptions, clinically used beta-receptor blockers are β-ethanolamines. In fact, a few of these so-called beta-blockers actually have two methoxy groups on the aromatic rings, also a property of BOHD. The antidiabetic drug (BW 64–9 in the code of Burroughs Wellcome) is identical to BOHD except that the 4-methyl group is on the alpha-carbon instead, and there is a tertiary butyl group on the nitrogen atom. Another point involves the proximity of the β-hydroxy group and the methoxyl oxygen atom in the 2-position of the ring. There is going to be a strong hydrogen-bonding with this orientation, with the formation of a stable six-membered ring. This might help obscure the hydrophilic nature of the free hydroxyl group and allow the compound to pass into the brain easily. If this group is masked by an easily removed group such as an acetate ester, one gets the compound β-acetoxy-2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylphenethylamine () which is similar to BOHD as a hypotensive.

The code-naming procedure used here (and elsewhere here in Book II) is: (1) to use “BO” as the alert to there being an oxygen on the benzyl carbon of a phenethylamine (it is a benzyl alcohol); (2) if there is just one more letter (a third and last letter) it will identify the 2C-X parent from which it has been derived [“B” comes from , “D” comes from , “H” comes from () rather than from , “M” comes from , and in every case the β-substituent is a methoxy group]; and (3) if there are four letters, then the fourth letter is as above, and the third letter (the next to last letter) is the substituent on that benzylic oxygen. With a three letter code, the substituent is a methyl group, an “H” for a third letter of four makes it a hydroxyl group, and an “A” for the third letter is an acetyl group, and an “E” is for an ethyl group. A similar sort of cryptographic music was composed by Du Pont in their three-number codes for the Freons. The first number was one less than the number of carbons in the molecule, the second number was one more than the number of hydrogens in the molecule, the third number was the exact number of fluorines in the molecule, and the rest of the bonds were filled with chlorines, Thus Freon 11 (really Freon 011) was trichlorofluoromethane and Freon 116 was hexafluoroethane.

Complex, yes. But both systems are completely straightforward, and flexible for future creations. A few additional examples of similar β-ethanolamines are scattered throughout Book II and they have, in general, proved to be uninteresting, at least as potential psychedelic compounds.