Opium, Empire, and India(pointsadhsblog.wordpress.com)
pointsadhsblog.wordpress.com
Opium, Empire, and India
https://pointsadhsblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/04/opium-empire-and-india-part-i/
43 comments
Having never tried any hard drugs or the mentioned concoctions, pardon my basic question -- what effects does consuming opium have? Is it like consuming modern day heroin? Does it imitate what people feel after smoking pot? Just trying to understand why people consumed it -- the article mentions pain relieving uses as well as 'taking the edge off' uses.
I was an opiate addict for 10 years, and still use a bit. Never bought off the street; always got pharma connects, except for opium which I got some a local guy with some flowers. During the whole time I've been a software engineer, and done some cool stuff. I'm also bipolar, and opiates have been my treatment. Opiates don't make you dumb like pot. I'm totally functional, indeed, more functional (as evaluated by third parties inc medical professionals) when using opiates.
Opiates are amazing. They take away a lot of depression. I got up to 50mg of oxy a day, which is quite modest and very inexpensive. It made me happy. Melted away worries. At one of my startups, we got crossed by a partner, almost had to fire everyone. The stress was paralysing - business partner attempted suicide. Me? Start the day with oxy and feel ready to take on things.
Even now, it can change that morning lethargic everything-sucks-why-don't-I-binge-Star-Trek-or-kill-myself into "hey I'm gonna write some software".
The other comments describe it alright - a warm happy dream. It's quite pleasurable even if you're by yourself; you can spend hours just "nodding" off, in and out of consciousness. It's quite sublime. The peace is so powerful, that a few times when I was being self destructive and got to the edge of OD, I noticed but simply didn't care. I'm more careful nowadays, though oral opiates are quite safe if you don't act reckless.
IV opiates step it up a bit. Users talk of a rush. It's similar to an oncoming amazing orgasm x10, then the warmness floods your body and everything's perfect and you might even gasp for breath it's that good. I think part of that is just the IV, and having a huge shift so quickly. For instance, there's a rush when IV'ing midazolam (dangerous, do not use without medical supervision), right before you pass out.
I've gone off opiates a few times. It wasn't as an enjoyable life. The only downsides are constipation (eh, saves time) and possibly lower testosterone (as someone often manic, lower libido is great - but it's easy to get TRT anyways.) I've not seen much as far as long-term damage from use.
Opiates are amazing. They take away a lot of depression. I got up to 50mg of oxy a day, which is quite modest and very inexpensive. It made me happy. Melted away worries. At one of my startups, we got crossed by a partner, almost had to fire everyone. The stress was paralysing - business partner attempted suicide. Me? Start the day with oxy and feel ready to take on things.
Even now, it can change that morning lethargic everything-sucks-why-don't-I-binge-Star-Trek-or-kill-myself into "hey I'm gonna write some software".
The other comments describe it alright - a warm happy dream. It's quite pleasurable even if you're by yourself; you can spend hours just "nodding" off, in and out of consciousness. It's quite sublime. The peace is so powerful, that a few times when I was being self destructive and got to the edge of OD, I noticed but simply didn't care. I'm more careful nowadays, though oral opiates are quite safe if you don't act reckless.
IV opiates step it up a bit. Users talk of a rush. It's similar to an oncoming amazing orgasm x10, then the warmness floods your body and everything's perfect and you might even gasp for breath it's that good. I think part of that is just the IV, and having a huge shift so quickly. For instance, there's a rush when IV'ing midazolam (dangerous, do not use without medical supervision), right before you pass out.
I've gone off opiates a few times. It wasn't as an enjoyable life. The only downsides are constipation (eh, saves time) and possibly lower testosterone (as someone often manic, lower libido is great - but it's easy to get TRT anyways.) I've not seen much as far as long-term damage from use.
> I've not seen much as far as long-term damage from use
Isn't addiction the biggest problem, requiring increasingly higher doses to achieve the same effect?
Isn't addiction the biggest problem, requiring increasingly higher doses to achieve the same effect?
It's an analgesic. All opiates feel pretty similar; heroin and codeine are really not too different. When you take a lot of either, it feels like being wrapped in a warm blanket.
Opium IIRC is a natural mixture of morphine and codeine among some other alkaloids, but primarily those two.
You can buy opium in the US in the form of "unwashed" poppy seeds (The seeds are from the pod and are coated in opium, which is typically washed off), which I don't particularly recommend due to safety and legal reasons, but that's up to you ofcourse.
Source: I have tried my share drugs and smoked opium in rural parts of Asia several times.
Opium IIRC is a natural mixture of morphine and codeine among some other alkaloids, but primarily those two.
You can buy opium in the US in the form of "unwashed" poppy seeds (The seeds are from the pod and are coated in opium, which is typically washed off), which I don't particularly recommend due to safety and legal reasons, but that's up to you ofcourse.
Source: I have tried my share drugs and smoked opium in rural parts of Asia several times.
I have never tried opium but given many painkillers are called "Opiates" I imagine they all share the same fundamental mechanism of opium and feel like different flavors of each other. Quite unlike marijuana then.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opiate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opiate
Many opiates produce a euphoric feeling, which in practice means a general 'warmness' in the body and pleasurable mental state. The senses are dulled, time dilation is common and the stresses and concerns of life are forgotten or at least reduced in importance.
For someone experiencing pain whether physical or emotional, the opportunity to escape that pain seems to me to be understandable if not well advised.
Opium -which I have tried once- was lovely. I don't like other opiates though, they provoke a minor allergic reaction consisting of itchiness and uncomfortable warmness I did not experience with opium. These were hydrocodone and other legally and appropriately prescribed medicines for a serious injury.
For someone experiencing pain whether physical or emotional, the opportunity to escape that pain seems to me to be understandable if not well advised.
Opium -which I have tried once- was lovely. I don't like other opiates though, they provoke a minor allergic reaction consisting of itchiness and uncomfortable warmness I did not experience with opium. These were hydrocodone and other legally and appropriately prescribed medicines for a serious injury.
Most depictions I've come across - and having been given opiates in medical situations - allude to it being like a dream-state. A bit of euphoria. Feeling so good you don't want to move. Hence the attraction for repeating the experience.
Physical pain melts away and there's a sense of "feeling really good". It's not mind altering like cannabis, more like relaxed taken to the next level.
Or so I've heard....
Or so I've heard....
Opium would be a cross between pot and morphine. Its primary usage has been painkiller. Even as a child in India I remember using opium based oil as painkiller for tooth pain.
[deleted]
"Narcotic" means numbing, and that's an accurate description IMO. Reports of euphoria are exaggerated. It feels good if you are feeling pain or malaise and it takes the pain or malaise away. Otherwise it doesn't feel like much.
> "Narcotic" means numbing
Just to be clear, for anyone else reading this, that's true in the etymological sense. But from a biological or pharmaceutical standpoint, 'narcotic' has a pretty narrower meaning, referring to a specific class of drugs (which tend to produce numbing effects, but not everything with numbing effects is a narcotic).
To make matters more confusing, law enforcement, on the other hand, uses 'narcotic' as synonymous with 'any illegal drug', whether or not it actually is a narcotic (in the biological sense) or has a narcotic effect (in the literal sense that you are referring to).
For example, the 'narcotics unit' will deal with cocaine, which is used as a topical anesthetic for numbing[0], but cocaine is very much not a narcotic from a medical standpoint.
[0] in theory, you could use cocaine for a root canal, but you're more likely to get Novocaine instead.
Just to be clear, for anyone else reading this, that's true in the etymological sense. But from a biological or pharmaceutical standpoint, 'narcotic' has a pretty narrower meaning, referring to a specific class of drugs (which tend to produce numbing effects, but not everything with numbing effects is a narcotic).
To make matters more confusing, law enforcement, on the other hand, uses 'narcotic' as synonymous with 'any illegal drug', whether or not it actually is a narcotic (in the biological sense) or has a narcotic effect (in the literal sense that you are referring to).
For example, the 'narcotics unit' will deal with cocaine, which is used as a topical anesthetic for numbing[0], but cocaine is very much not a narcotic from a medical standpoint.
[0] in theory, you could use cocaine for a root canal, but you're more likely to get Novocaine instead.
> Reports of euphoria are exaggerated.
No, they aren't. It depends a lot on the person, the specific narcotic, and the quantity taken. Some (most in my experience) people feel intense euphoria, others don't.
No, they aren't. It depends a lot on the person, the specific narcotic, and the quantity taken. Some (most in my experience) people feel intense euphoria, others don't.
The "euphoria" is situational. It's like alcohol. Drinking alone is usually not much fun.
Having experienced euphoria once or twice from codeine (>100mg) I would dispute that.
2nding this, I've been given IV narcotics a couple times in-hospital and it created a noticeable feeling within ten seconds or so. I would say the closet analog I can think of would be slipping into a warm bath, if slipping into a warm bath also made you feel a little drunk.
My only experience with numbing is the dental anesthetic they use in your mouth, which I don't recall producing much sensations but it does noticeably take sensation away.
My only experience with numbing is the dental anesthetic they use in your mouth, which I don't recall producing much sensations but it does noticeably take sensation away.
If you were given narcotics in the hospital, then there must have been a reason. I said that if you have pain, and the drug takes it away, it feels good.
I wasn't in hospital, or in any pain. The euphoria is very real.
For the benzodiazepine class of drugs it's a little less clear cut - people who take them recreationally may well be alleviating stress or anxiety and finding that pleasurable. Opiates.... nah.
For the benzodiazepine class of drugs it's a little less clear cut - people who take them recreationally may well be alleviating stress or anxiety and finding that pleasurable. Opiates.... nah.
Note that there are many reasons for why anecdotes don't count as evidence.
I thought that I felt euphoria the first time I took codeine (but I honestly wasn't sure). I have taken codeine since and was never able to replicate that euphoria.
IME with opioids, there will be times when they feel good (or seem to), but those good feelings are frustratingly hard to replicate. I've taken a skeptical look back at all my use and concluded that the drugs simply don't have the power to cause euphoria all by themselves. They can be sort of like a social lubricant, and they can be reliably good when I feel like complete shit. But I never figured out a way to conjure euphoria on command using just opioids.
I thought that I felt euphoria the first time I took codeine (but I honestly wasn't sure). I have taken codeine since and was never able to replicate that euphoria.
IME with opioids, there will be times when they feel good (or seem to), but those good feelings are frustratingly hard to replicate. I've taken a skeptical look back at all my use and concluded that the drugs simply don't have the power to cause euphoria all by themselves. They can be sort of like a social lubricant, and they can be reliably good when I feel like complete shit. But I never figured out a way to conjure euphoria on command using just opioids.
I've had codeine euphoria multiple times. I'm pretty sure the euphoric effects of opiates are quite well documented.
I'll throw it right back at you - your own personal experiences are worth about as much as mine when it comes to medical evidence, not a lot.
I'll throw it right back at you - your own personal experiences are worth about as much as mine when it comes to medical evidence, not a lot.
There is hard evidence here[1]. Less than 5% of people reported euphoria in clinical studies of OxyContin.
[1] http://www.rxlist.com/oxycontin-drug/side-effects-interactio...
[1] http://www.rxlist.com/oxycontin-drug/side-effects-interactio...
In once case it was prior to the pain being inflicted -- for a scheduled medical procedure.
I believe you. I don't think the buzz would happen consistently if you tried to replicate it over and over. It could have been your anxiety going away, or it could have been the placebo effect.
One could easily resolve the question of whether opioids cause euphoria by doing a double-blind clinical study. I would love to do that study, in fact.
One could easily resolve the question of whether opioids cause euphoria by doing a double-blind clinical study. I would love to do that study, in fact.
Actually, I remembered that there are relevant results from clinical studies that are available. Here are the side effects of OxyContin.[1] (Euphoria is considered a side effect.) The most commonly-reported side effects were constipation, nausea, and somnolence. If you look down further, you can see that both euphoria and dysphoria were reported rarely.
[1] http://www.rxlist.com/oxycontin-drug/side-effects-interactio...
[1] http://www.rxlist.com/oxycontin-drug/side-effects-interactio...
They already do these studies to test opiates vs other painkillers. Opiates kick ass.
Or maybe you're right: they just take away pain. But it turns out a lot of us have existential pain so it works all the time.
Or maybe you're right: they just take away pain. But it turns out a lot of us have existential pain so it works all the time.
The worse you feel, the more you will enjoy opiates.
> My only experience with numbing is the dental anesthetic they use in your mouth, which I don't recall producing much sensations but it does noticeably take sensation away.
Those aren't narcotics (most likely). It was probably Novocaine or Lidocaine. Those drugs end in -caine because they're all part of the same family as cocaine, which is not actually a narcotic (but does have euphoric effects at sufficient dosing levels!).
Topical use of any of those drugs, however, will likely not produce euphoria.
Those aren't narcotics (most likely). It was probably Novocaine or Lidocaine. Those drugs end in -caine because they're all part of the same family as cocaine, which is not actually a narcotic (but does have euphoric effects at sufficient dosing levels!).
Topical use of any of those drugs, however, will likely not produce euphoria.
Surprised not to see a mention of the Tatas here.
Can you shed some more light on why the Tatas should be mentioned in the article?
As far as I can tell from Part 1 of the article which is posted, the discussion is more of society's use of Opium through the latter part of the millennia. It doesn't go into any specific purveyor of opium products except for the regulation and subsequent clandestine production after prohibition.
> By Regulation XIII of 1816, opium cultivation was legalised in Bengal under the supervision of the Commercial Resident of Rungpore. The control of the Opium Department went from the Board of Revenue in the Customs, Salt and the Opium Departments by the Regulation IV of 1819. In 1850, by Act XLIV, the Customs, Salt and Opium Board was merged in the Board of Revenue at Calcutta. In 1797, prohibition was imposed on the private cultivation of poppy in Bengal proper and in Behar division of the province. It was then that the attention of the Government proper was being met by ‘systematic smuggling and clandestine production’
I am really curious about the Tata family role in this that you allude to. Please elaborate.
As far as I can tell from Part 1 of the article which is posted, the discussion is more of society's use of Opium through the latter part of the millennia. It doesn't go into any specific purveyor of opium products except for the regulation and subsequent clandestine production after prohibition.
> By Regulation XIII of 1816, opium cultivation was legalised in Bengal under the supervision of the Commercial Resident of Rungpore. The control of the Opium Department went from the Board of Revenue in the Customs, Salt and the Opium Departments by the Regulation IV of 1819. In 1850, by Act XLIV, the Customs, Salt and Opium Board was merged in the Board of Revenue at Calcutta. In 1797, prohibition was imposed on the private cultivation of poppy in Bengal proper and in Behar division of the province. It was then that the attention of the Government proper was being met by ‘systematic smuggling and clandestine production’
I am really curious about the Tata family role in this that you allude to. Please elaborate.
From your tone, it sounds like this is a known controversy in India. Could you elaborate?
I know nothing about the Tatas' origin, although it's hard to miss the importance of the modern Tata Group. Wikipedia says that the family fortune was founded by Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, who had some wealth from his father Nusserwanji and parleyed it, through trade, into enough capital to recondition a cotton mill.
Are you saying that Jamsetji's trading company dealt in opium? That his father's business was involved in it? Or even both? If so, looking at things from a United States perspective, I'd find that a little heartening. I'd always seen the opium trade as a matter of pumping money from undeveloped China to already-rich London and Boston; if there was going to be an opium-for-silver trade regardless, at least some of the silver went to somewhere else in need of capital.
I know nothing about the Tatas' origin, although it's hard to miss the importance of the modern Tata Group. Wikipedia says that the family fortune was founded by Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, who had some wealth from his father Nusserwanji and parleyed it, through trade, into enough capital to recondition a cotton mill.
Are you saying that Jamsetji's trading company dealt in opium? That his father's business was involved in it? Or even both? If so, looking at things from a United States perspective, I'd find that a little heartening. I'd always seen the opium trade as a matter of pumping money from undeveloped China to already-rich London and Boston; if there was going to be an opium-for-silver trade regardless, at least some of the silver went to somewhere else in need of capital.
I assume your response was addressed to the parent post? I didn't think I was passing any judgement on the Tatas. I was asking why the Tata name was brought up in the first place.
I misread the tone of your post, then; "Can you shed some more light on why the Tatas should be mentioned in the article?" and "I am really curious about the Tata family role in this that you allude to. Please elaborate." made it sound like you knew what the answer would be, at least from my perspective.
Amazing. I wonder how many people have been offended at things I've written in the past due to misunderstanding of tone. From my perspective, and not saying you're wrong at all, that comment wasn't even close to how you describe (again not saying you're wrong).
[deleted]
> I'd always seen the opium trade as a matter of pumping money from undeveloped China to already-rich London and Boston;
Like most things, it's a little more complicated than the packaged narrative. Prior to the introduction of opium to the Canton trade, pretty much all of the goods that were imported from China by foreigners were paid for with silver - mostly from Mexico and Potosi or Japan - as there was very little that Europeans could find or produce that would sell in China's largely self-sufficient economy[1]. By the late 1700s, Britain, Portugal and the Netherlands were shipping millions of silver Dollars into Canton for silks and tea and such every year. China vacuumed up so much of the world's silver supply that it severely distorted the exchange rates in the Qing bimetallic currency system. Up until the opium trade got going, China had a massive, massive trade surplus. A lot of that wealth did get squandered - probably the poster child would be Heshen[2], a Manchu official that siphoned off a fortune estimated at fifteen times the annual tax revenue of the Qing Empire, or Wu Bingjian - one of the primary Chinese merchants in the Cohong system, who was so wealthy he personally contributed a third of the indemnity stipulated in the Treaty of Nanking[3].
[1] I don't have a link, but it is hilarious reading some of the early official records of the English East India company, and their utter inability to find anyone who would buy the woolens they initially tried shipping as cargo.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heshen#Fall_of_Heshen
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howqua
Like most things, it's a little more complicated than the packaged narrative. Prior to the introduction of opium to the Canton trade, pretty much all of the goods that were imported from China by foreigners were paid for with silver - mostly from Mexico and Potosi or Japan - as there was very little that Europeans could find or produce that would sell in China's largely self-sufficient economy[1]. By the late 1700s, Britain, Portugal and the Netherlands were shipping millions of silver Dollars into Canton for silks and tea and such every year. China vacuumed up so much of the world's silver supply that it severely distorted the exchange rates in the Qing bimetallic currency system. Up until the opium trade got going, China had a massive, massive trade surplus. A lot of that wealth did get squandered - probably the poster child would be Heshen[2], a Manchu official that siphoned off a fortune estimated at fifteen times the annual tax revenue of the Qing Empire, or Wu Bingjian - one of the primary Chinese merchants in the Cohong system, who was so wealthy he personally contributed a third of the indemnity stipulated in the Treaty of Nanking[3].
[1] I don't have a link, but it is hilarious reading some of the early official records of the English East India company, and their utter inability to find anyone who would buy the woolens they initially tried shipping as cargo.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heshen#Fall_of_Heshen
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howqua
Yes...this is a pretty concise history of the situation, but I feel it needs at least a passing mention of one of the "evilest" government-sponsored wars in the history of mankind, the Opium Wars of the mid-nineteenth century.
What made these particular acts of aggression so odious was, as I discovered in shock several years ago, they were not fought for the obvious reasons you would think; that the Chinese has opium and the British sent some military to take it from them. The reality is much more hideous then that.
As the previous poster mentioned, the British had little the Chinese wanted to trade for, and the Brits wanted Chinese tea in huge quantities. What the British eventually settled on was Afghanistan opium, which the Chinese had a taste for. The problem started when the Chinese leaders, seeing the destruction that opium addiction was doing to their people, tried to stop the trade of opium and reign in the millions of ruined lives it was causing.
The British responded, rather poorly I'd say, by going to war with the Chinese to force them to continue to trade the opium for the tea and thusly keep their people enslaved to the drug. It's a rather unbelievable premise for going to war actually, but in 1839 that's what they did.
They won, thus insuring several more generations of totally ruined Chinese addicts. I always think that this pretty much represents government and big business working in tandem at its most evil worse.
What made these particular acts of aggression so odious was, as I discovered in shock several years ago, they were not fought for the obvious reasons you would think; that the Chinese has opium and the British sent some military to take it from them. The reality is much more hideous then that.
As the previous poster mentioned, the British had little the Chinese wanted to trade for, and the Brits wanted Chinese tea in huge quantities. What the British eventually settled on was Afghanistan opium, which the Chinese had a taste for. The problem started when the Chinese leaders, seeing the destruction that opium addiction was doing to their people, tried to stop the trade of opium and reign in the millions of ruined lives it was causing.
The British responded, rather poorly I'd say, by going to war with the Chinese to force them to continue to trade the opium for the tea and thusly keep their people enslaved to the drug. It's a rather unbelievable premise for going to war actually, but in 1839 that's what they did.
They won, thus insuring several more generations of totally ruined Chinese addicts. I always think that this pretty much represents government and big business working in tandem at its most evil worse.
I'm familiar with this; but by the 1840s-1850s, China was sending out more silver for opium than they were taking in for tea. That's the period I refer to when I'm talking about the opium trade as a wealth pump.
I understand opium going from India to China, then tea going from China to Britain... but what are the Indians buying? Don't the Brits have the same problem in India that they had in China?
Please elaborate. This sounds very interesting. Edit: I've found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratanji_Dadabhoy_Tata