[morraa]

This could be my misunderstanding of the definition of "designer drugs" but I interpreted this as substances which mimic controlled substances but don't trigger drug classification or testing. Assuming this definition then this is something we wouldn't feel comfortable supporting regardless of the cash or demand. My understanding is that these substances are not tested in animal and human trials or approved by governing bodies like the FDA which are critical for the safety and efficacy of use.

Though please do correct me if I'm missing the use case you are referring to.

[1996]

No correction needed, it is mostly correct - however, a lot of these substances have been tested and do not even mimic controlled substances: MK667 is a good example.

I think you may be throwing the baby with the bathwater, as designing and improving designer drugs is an untapped market with far more potential upsides than downsides.