Drug users use a lot of drugs(astralcodexten.substack.com)
astralcodexten.substack.com
Drug users use a lot of drugs
https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/drug-users-use-a-lot-of-drugs
197 comments
> I like this article overall but I get irritated when I read stuff about drug users that is clearly written by somebody who hasn’t done a lot of drugs.
To be fair, though, medical doctors with personal experience using meth are probably a very small group, and it's unlikely they're in a big hurry to write an article talking about their experience. But who knows...
To be fair, though, medical doctors with personal experience using meth are probably a very small group, and it's unlikely they're in a big hurry to write an article talking about their experience. But who knows...
Unless this is a regional thing I wonder where the doctor even got that idea, I wasn't even aware people snort meth until now. Meanwhile I walked past two people lighting up after leaving a job interview in soma last week. Any doctor who's worked in the ER or psych ward in SF would be familiar with how its used, meth induced psychosis is very common around here.
[deleted]
No such thing as meth-induced psychosis. Yes, people might appear psychotic while under the influence, but that is not psychosis in the clinical sense.
The few that do lose their rationality lose it because they don’t sleep for weeks. They likely also live in an unsafe environment which keeps them in a perpetual state of survival stress.
Survival stress + not sleeping + stimulants —> psychosis. Very rarely any of these alone, unless the individual is predisposed.
The few that do lose their rationality lose it because they don’t sleep for weeks. They likely also live in an unsafe environment which keeps them in a perpetual state of survival stress.
Survival stress + not sleeping + stimulants —> psychosis. Very rarely any of these alone, unless the individual is predisposed.
I’m not going to say you been in SF but you clearly haven’t walked through the tenderloin and probably not spent a lot of time around people that partake in harder drugs on regular basis. Yes it doesn’t match the clinical description, but that’s because the clinical description wasn’t written by someone who works in the heavily drug ridden areas. More likely by someone who probably only dealt with hard drug users once or twice on their ED rotation during residency
Would you consider the people living in those areas to be living under constant survival stress?
Asking because THAT fucks up people and makes them use drugs to escape their situation.
Asking because THAT fucks up people and makes them use drugs to escape their situation.
Possibly, but I've also seen white color workers with steady jobs and nice houses have a psychotic breaks because of heavy meth use. So perhaps it not all survival stress and the drugs have some affect as well.
I don’t know exactly how to respond to this. You’ve clearly got some strong opinions on this and maybe for good reasons.
I suppose I agree that environmental stress, survival stress, and PTSD are all common in the addict community. That’s true.
In my experience though, meth-induced psychosis is a thing. For example, if you understand the following sentence you either have seen or done it!
I once snapped/ghosted 3 points in one draw in order to scare off some gangsters, then the shadow people came.
After that I thought I could talk to programming libraries out loud. Not in a fun way. Meth induced psychosis is absolutely a thing.
I suppose I agree that environmental stress, survival stress, and PTSD are all common in the addict community. That’s true.
In my experience though, meth-induced psychosis is a thing. For example, if you understand the following sentence you either have seen or done it!
I once snapped/ghosted 3 points in one draw in order to scare off some gangsters, then the shadow people came.
After that I thought I could talk to programming libraries out loud. Not in a fun way. Meth induced psychosis is absolutely a thing.
We have differing definitions of ”meth-induced psychosis”. The clinical definition of psychosis excludes psychiatric symptoms of intoxication, so your experiences are simply psychiatric effects of meth overdose, not psychosis in the clinical sense.
Now, if those symptoms persist after you (would) pass a piss test, then we are talking about meth-induced psychosis.
Now, if those symptoms persist after you (would) pass a piss test, then we are talking about meth-induced psychosis.
I'm not a medical professional, maybe my terms are off but that's what I've seen it called in the media. In any case people are admitted with what appears to be schizophrenia only to end up perfectly lucid a bit later once the drugs have worn off.
The clinical diagnosis of psychosis can only be established if the symptoms REMAIN after the drugs have worn off.
It is meth induced because the meth keeps the person awake. You sound like someone who has not experienced it first hand.
Could just call it "meth induced paranoia hangover". How often is it persistent to be considered psychosis though?
Because it seems to cause cortical thinning https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3135731/ which is correlated with psychosis https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/952628 and so has been associated as partly causal?
These studies are meaningless, as they cannot distinguish between the effects of the drug and the effects of the illegality of the drug: constant survival stress, negative outlook on self imposed by others, social exclusion, paranoia.
Survival stress, as in PTSD, causes cortical thinning, and explains everything in the scenario without the need to arbitrarily assign blame to methamphetamine.
Survival stress, as in PTSD, causes cortical thinning, and explains everything in the scenario without the need to arbitrarily assign blame to methamphetamine.
Survival stress also impacts liver function leading to poor lipid metabolism which in turn can impact cholesterol absorption and lead to cortical thinning. Which is also an effect that we see from methamphetamine use in various animal models, which by it's nature of being controlled trail seems to exclude the stress factor.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28689763/
I would agree with you in general, but there are situations where prescribed methamphetamines also lead to cortical thinning when not used as recreationally. This seems to suggest that stress may not be the entire player here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3870784/
It was likely decided because of the dose of meth found in the persons systems that correlates with various findings on dose-dependence https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/...
If you would like to read more about PTSD findings as it relates to stress and liver function, I would be happy to expound upon the way that corticosteroids impact gut bacteria that directly affect FXR metabolism and bile acids and further lead to cortical thinning. https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/30/2/575/5521088
Its really fascinating how a drug like methamphetamine impact neuroactive steroids that impact the same pathways tha stress does. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6862925/ We've been able to reverse it in rats https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131007093739.h...
I would agree with you in general, but there are situations where prescribed methamphetamines also lead to cortical thinning when not used as recreationally. This seems to suggest that stress may not be the entire player here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3870784/
It was likely decided because of the dose of meth found in the persons systems that correlates with various findings on dose-dependence https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/...
If you would like to read more about PTSD findings as it relates to stress and liver function, I would be happy to expound upon the way that corticosteroids impact gut bacteria that directly affect FXR metabolism and bile acids and further lead to cortical thinning. https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/30/2/575/5521088
Its really fascinating how a drug like methamphetamine impact neuroactive steroids that impact the same pathways tha stress does. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6862925/ We've been able to reverse it in rats https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131007093739.h...
[deleted]
I felt some of this to be naive. And I think the author may be a psychiatrist, which makes the comments about inexperience with drugs particularly interesting.
Must admit the specifics of doing drugs is not that interesting to me, it's more interesting to ask the question:
How does someone stop doing drugs?
How does someone stop doing drugs?
I was incredibly lucky. I got to a point where I felt like I wanted to stop (which happens often to a lot of addicts), which coincided with an opportunity to move far away from my hometown, and then also coincidentally found myself surrounded by a fantastic support system. It’s the addict equivalent of flipping a quarter 50 times and having them all come up head.
As for a general answer to your question, there isn’t one that I’m aware of. Everyone I know that’s gotten clean has wildly different stories.
As for a general answer to your question, there isn’t one that I’m aware of. Everyone I know that’s gotten clean has wildly different stories.
Can you provide more details on what the "fantastic support system" consists of?
I found myself in a very accepting friend group of people that didn’t use drugs and (for my situation this was key) didn’t know where to get them.
Aside from that, there was no shaming and very little drama. Essentially, my previous situation was that I was surrounded by extremely abusive family and dangerously messed up friends. I more or less made friends with “normal” people, got away from a really bad situation and it all just sort of… worked out.
There’s absolutely no secret sauce or trick in my getting clean. I can’t count the number of my old friends that tried stuff like I did and it didn’t work out.
It was literally just luck.
Aside from that, there was no shaming and very little drama. Essentially, my previous situation was that I was surrounded by extremely abusive family and dangerously messed up friends. I more or less made friends with “normal” people, got away from a really bad situation and it all just sort of… worked out.
There’s absolutely no secret sauce or trick in my getting clean. I can’t count the number of my old friends that tried stuff like I did and it didn’t work out.
It was literally just luck.
How long did it take for the change in environment to make a long term difference to stop using drugs? A month? A year?
I don’t know exactly because I managed 0 possible access for a long time, so temptation was low.
About a year after I quit, I made a new friend. He was a nice guy, seemed normal, but one day he casually mentioned that he occasionally used stimulants including amphetamines. I cut off all contact with him immediately (as did all of my close friends. It’s a good example of support in this case.)
I guess I was able to recognize and decisively take action to avoid temptation about a year in. This was likely also luck. I was in a pretty good place with my life in general, had that occurred six months earlier or six months later it could have had a different outcome.
So the answer is either a day or a year or never. It’s been ten years and I’ve only known where to get meth for about one day of it. I still get cravings to this day, I’m just no longer in the habit of indulging them.
About a year after I quit, I made a new friend. He was a nice guy, seemed normal, but one day he casually mentioned that he occasionally used stimulants including amphetamines. I cut off all contact with him immediately (as did all of my close friends. It’s a good example of support in this case.)
I guess I was able to recognize and decisively take action to avoid temptation about a year in. This was likely also luck. I was in a pretty good place with my life in general, had that occurred six months earlier or six months later it could have had a different outcome.
So the answer is either a day or a year or never. It’s been ten years and I’ve only known where to get meth for about one day of it. I still get cravings to this day, I’m just no longer in the habit of indulging them.
I feel bad for the guy who got ostracized by you and your entire friend group because he occasionally did speed and admitted to it. I understand your situation but I also think at some point you need to be able to stand on your own two feet without taking such drastic measures. Strength is both being able to walk away and then to say no in the face of temptation.
I say this as someone who abused drugs when I was younger and came from an extremely abusive family environment.
I say this as someone who abused drugs when I was younger and came from an extremely abusive family environment.
I think people need to do what they need to do to survive, and if that means not being friends with someone, that other person will have to get by with other friends.
That’s a great point of view and in retrospect, so do I. It wasn’t a great thing to do and I’d probably had a more humane way of eliminating a friend. I just did what I could at the time.
I understand perfectly well why you did what you did, as others here point out you have to take care of yourself before you can help others.
And thanks for sharing and giving some great answers.
And thanks for sharing and giving some great answers.
Cutting out toxic influences is generally a good thing for most people. In OP's case, temptation of drug use and the risk of backsliding was too much, so yes, important and excellent that they cut out that person.
I think the main criticism in GP was that the friend's group also cut ties, not just the person being put "at risk" by such a friendship.
Also, "toxic influence" makes it seem like the friend was, by themself, toxic, while it looks rather than this was a "dangerous relation" (big difference imo).
I don't feel bad for the guy. The last thing a recovering addict needs is a source for drugs and that's what he is.
Addicts can't just stop and never do drugs again like a normal person. If it's there, they'll take it. It's not about strength and being able to walk away. It never goes away for an addict and the best they can do is avoid situations where drugs will be presented. Isolation from users is the best course of action.
Also, many people abuse drugs and even become addicted, but are not addicts. An addict is wired differently.
Addicts can't just stop and never do drugs again like a normal person. If it's there, they'll take it. It's not about strength and being able to walk away. It never goes away for an addict and the best they can do is avoid situations where drugs will be presented. Isolation from users is the best course of action.
Also, many people abuse drugs and even become addicted, but are not addicts. An addict is wired differently.
Wholesome, well adjusted peers to talk and engage in enjoyable activities with.
A safe, clean, and comfortable living environment.
Enough food.
The confidence in oneself, or their support network, to truly believe without fear, that they won’t end up back out on the streets.
A well paying job that isn’t dehumanizing, traumatizing, exploitative, or abusive.
A safe, clean, and comfortable living environment.
Enough food.
The confidence in oneself, or their support network, to truly believe without fear, that they won’t end up back out on the streets.
A well paying job that isn’t dehumanizing, traumatizing, exploitative, or abusive.
There are two methods I know of. Either you stop doing the thing, or you do other things instead.
The first requires a presence of mind to enter the void left behind by the thing, that people doing drugs probably lack, since they are, in essence, stimulation addicts. Drugs fill a void they avoid facing. Stopping doing drugs would cause them to face that void.
The second is more amenable, because you can taper off with replacement therapy. Switch to using less bad drugs, or indeed anything stimulating. Continuously replace the thing you're getting stimulation from with another, slightly less stimulating thing, until the thing that is left is sufficiently nonstimulating that stopping and accepting the void feels manageable.
I went from putting speed in my morning coffee to eating a pound of chocolate a day.
The first requires a presence of mind to enter the void left behind by the thing, that people doing drugs probably lack, since they are, in essence, stimulation addicts. Drugs fill a void they avoid facing. Stopping doing drugs would cause them to face that void.
The second is more amenable, because you can taper off with replacement therapy. Switch to using less bad drugs, or indeed anything stimulating. Continuously replace the thing you're getting stimulation from with another, slightly less stimulating thing, until the thing that is left is sufficiently nonstimulating that stopping and accepting the void feels manageable.
I went from putting speed in my morning coffee to eating a pound of chocolate a day.
Chocolate has a lot of PEA which activates the TAAR1 receptor just like amphetamines.
In fact, all amphetamines contain a PEA base - they are substitutes phenylethylamines, for example Alpha-MethylPHenEThylAMINE.
In fact, all amphetamines contain a PEA base - they are substitutes phenylethylamines, for example Alpha-MethylPHenEThylAMINE.
The primary effect of amphetamines (that matters) is VMAT inhibition. While lots of drugs hit lots of receptors, and there are lots of overlap because of this, this does not make different compounds equivalent.
For example, off the top of my head, mescaline is also in the phenylethylamine family but is a wildly different drug with different receptor bonding affinity and subjective effects. I doubt anyone would want to mix up the two.
For example, off the top of my head, mescaline is also in the phenylethylamine family but is a wildly different drug with different receptor bonding affinity and subjective effects. I doubt anyone would want to mix up the two.
You are correct. However, PEA alone does have a stimulant effect through TAAR1, and in chocolate it is coupled with other xanthine stimulants.
A strong desire to quit and a big support network (family, friends, recovery centers, etc). We tend to look down on addicts, when in fact, we probably should be looking to help. And the more help there is, the better chance someone will have quitting/recovery. Support also means real support, not a parent there because they have to and so they have disgust on their face, nope nope nope, that can make things worse.
I have a friend who's an addict and he's becoming impossible to talk to. Not about drugs, just about anything. He doesn't want any help, and he starts to live in his own reality. When we meet in a group of friends he doesn't listen to anyone. He can talk non-stop for hours until everybody around is tired from his gibberish. But he doesn't listen to anyone in a sense that feels very selfish. For example, when someone is telling an interesting story, he won't listen and he would make dumb offending jokes.
It feels like drugs made him dumb and also he is living in some kind of parallel reality. It's becoming harder and harder to connect.
Also, in his reality it's perfectly ok to consume drugs, he's also constantly offering to share the experience with all people he meets.
It's sad situation and looks desperate because he's aggressively against any help, he consider himself better than others because of the drugs (he is sure they allow him to "see" more than we see), and he doesn't listen to anyone.
It feels like drugs made him dumb and also he is living in some kind of parallel reality. It's becoming harder and harder to connect.
Also, in his reality it's perfectly ok to consume drugs, he's also constantly offering to share the experience with all people he meets.
It's sad situation and looks desperate because he's aggressively against any help, he consider himself better than others because of the drugs (he is sure they allow him to "see" more than we see), and he doesn't listen to anyone.
That fucking sucks. I don’t really have much to say about that other than if you’ve got a contact email, let me know.
Have you considered he may be right?
I know he's not right. From experience and from looking at him.
Also, he's unable to function in the society. He's becoming obnoxious, so all his friends and even relatives are starting to avoid him.
He doesn't look healthy, he doesn't look happy, and I know he is unable to achieve any of his goals (the goals I've heard from him that he wants to achieve).
Also, he's unable to function in the society. He's becoming obnoxious, so all his friends and even relatives are starting to avoid him.
He doesn't look healthy, he doesn't look happy, and I know he is unable to achieve any of his goals (the goals I've heard from him that he wants to achieve).
Tough call. Everything you described matches 1:1 with a friend who couldn’t deal with the stress of college and started to flare out with schizophrenia. Drugs came soon after, but the verbosity, obnoxiousness and grandiose ideas came first, coupled with execution incoherent enough to look nonexistent.
Yes!
I had friends, housing, food, a stable day to day routine and _nobody_ looked down on me for my problems. I was able to talk openly about what I was going through and the circumstances that led to my addiction in the first place.
Normally (at least as Americans) we think of addicts as getting all of those things in rehab facilities and getting “fixed” by that few weeks or months. I’ve been in rehabs and mental hospitals and genuinely gotten some necessary help from them, but in my case I only started getting really better after I found myself in a situation where I had all of that support without feeling like it had an expiration date.
I had friends, housing, food, a stable day to day routine and _nobody_ looked down on me for my problems. I was able to talk openly about what I was going through and the circumstances that led to my addiction in the first place.
Normally (at least as Americans) we think of addicts as getting all of those things in rehab facilities and getting “fixed” by that few weeks or months. I’ve been in rehabs and mental hospitals and genuinely gotten some necessary help from them, but in my case I only started getting really better after I found myself in a situation where I had all of that support without feeling like it had an expiration date.
Not only that, I always have time to listen to recovered addicts - they know more about persistence and will-power than just about anyone else.
Psychological drug addiction feels a lot like food addiction - if you've ever dieted then thought about how amazing it would be to order pizza, you've experienced the same thing (though ofc to a far lesser magnitude)
You stop doing drugs the same way you stop eating badly, by trying to find substitutes, and by putting distance between you and it (i.e. if I don't want to eat snacks, I avoid buying it at the store, so it's more work for me to eat poorly)
You stop doing drugs the same way you stop eating badly, by trying to find substitutes, and by putting distance between you and it (i.e. if I don't want to eat snacks, I avoid buying it at the store, so it's more work for me to eat poorly)
You may get the best answer to that question from people who have stopped rather than never started.
Thanks for sharing.
A lot of people on this board have experience with prescription stimulants. How would you say the experience of "doing meth" differs from taking amphetamine orally? Was a typical experience for you "smoke meth, study or write code all night"?
I like prescription stimulants, but it's hard for me to imagine anyone wanting to take overdose-levels of stimulants for fun, so I'm probably missing something. If I take too much (~40mg), I feel pretty terrible, physically and mentally. I can't imagine how 500mg/day could produce any desirable effects.
If the supply chain for meth wasn't so poor, I'd probably try it once to see what all the hype is about.
A lot of people on this board have experience with prescription stimulants. How would you say the experience of "doing meth" differs from taking amphetamine orally? Was a typical experience for you "smoke meth, study or write code all night"?
I like prescription stimulants, but it's hard for me to imagine anyone wanting to take overdose-levels of stimulants for fun, so I'm probably missing something. If I take too much (~40mg), I feel pretty terrible, physically and mentally. I can't imagine how 500mg/day could produce any desirable effects.
If the supply chain for meth wasn't so poor, I'd probably try it once to see what all the hype is about.
Meth taken orally at an equivalent dose is probably indistinguishable from racemic amphetamine subjectively. At least until you come down, anyway. Meth has a longer half-life.
Amphetamine smoked would be the same too, nearly. Maybe slightly slower onset. Negligible difference compared to that provided by smoking versus oral. It's the speed of the come up. The most euphoric part when one takes stimulants orally is usually the first few hours. When rapidly administered, that hits instantly and with full effect and then fades pretty quickly. (So you are very inclined to take another dose an hour or two later.)
My advice? You probably don't want to experience it. I've missed it since the first and second and only times I smoked. Realizing I was strongly craving a drug I had used twice is why I got out of that game. Some experiences cannot be unexperienced. There's nothing much interesting about that state, psychologically or intellectually. It's about what you think it might be if you have some experience with stimulants. Just all at once and very hard and you will be awake for two days after.
Meth is simply dirty. More neurotoxic than amphetamine and lasts too long. In a perfect world, we'd probably move all the meth addicts onto a supply of Dexedrine. Even if they're high as kites at least their brains will rot more slowly.
Amphetamine smoked would be the same too, nearly. Maybe slightly slower onset. Negligible difference compared to that provided by smoking versus oral. It's the speed of the come up. The most euphoric part when one takes stimulants orally is usually the first few hours. When rapidly administered, that hits instantly and with full effect and then fades pretty quickly. (So you are very inclined to take another dose an hour or two later.)
My advice? You probably don't want to experience it. I've missed it since the first and second and only times I smoked. Realizing I was strongly craving a drug I had used twice is why I got out of that game. Some experiences cannot be unexperienced. There's nothing much interesting about that state, psychologically or intellectually. It's about what you think it might be if you have some experience with stimulants. Just all at once and very hard and you will be awake for two days after.
Meth is simply dirty. More neurotoxic than amphetamine and lasts too long. In a perfect world, we'd probably move all the meth addicts onto a supply of Dexedrine. Even if they're high as kites at least their brains will rot more slowly.
> If the supply chain for meth wasn't so poor, I'd probably try it once to see what all the hype is about.
As a former smoker and user of various drugs (mostly legal at the time), I highly recommend against usage of highly addictive drugs such as tobacco, heroin, cocaine, and also (meth)amphetamine (there's a difference between physically and mentally addiction here, and there's a good comparison of about 20 different drugs and their differences in dependency).
I recommend against recreational drug usage, too, but that's because I have come to the understanding they're not necessary, and it being dangerous not using drugs without supervision. You don't want those ups and downs (such as 'taking too much', or 'forgetting a dose'), you want stability. Seek help instead, get a diagnosis, and get prescription under supervision.
FWIW, I used amphetamine once, and have been prescribed on Ritalin. That one time I used amphetamine I felt like the biggest asshole in the world. I could finally understand macho men because I felt like one. However, unlike my first time MDMA, I can't say I missed out on it (and that is with only the first time MDMA). Whereas Ritalin, while spikey (no SR such as Concerta, sadly) provides stability if administered on regular intervals. Which can be solved nowadays with alarms on smartphone and such (back when I used it, smartphones were not yet widely in use).
As a former smoker and user of various drugs (mostly legal at the time), I highly recommend against usage of highly addictive drugs such as tobacco, heroin, cocaine, and also (meth)amphetamine (there's a difference between physically and mentally addiction here, and there's a good comparison of about 20 different drugs and their differences in dependency).
I recommend against recreational drug usage, too, but that's because I have come to the understanding they're not necessary, and it being dangerous not using drugs without supervision. You don't want those ups and downs (such as 'taking too much', or 'forgetting a dose'), you want stability. Seek help instead, get a diagnosis, and get prescription under supervision.
FWIW, I used amphetamine once, and have been prescribed on Ritalin. That one time I used amphetamine I felt like the biggest asshole in the world. I could finally understand macho men because I felt like one. However, unlike my first time MDMA, I can't say I missed out on it (and that is with only the first time MDMA). Whereas Ritalin, while spikey (no SR such as Concerta, sadly) provides stability if administered on regular intervals. Which can be solved nowadays with alarms on smartphone and such (back when I used it, smartphones were not yet widely in use).
> FWIW, I used amphetamine once, and have been prescribed on Ritalin. That one time I used amphetamine I felt like the biggest asshole in the world.
This made me laugh! I don’t remember where I heard it but a phrase I’m a fan of is “amphetamines cause intense feelings of competency.”
This made me laugh! I don’t remember where I heard it but a phrase I’m a fan of is “amphetamines cause intense feelings of competency.”
retrac’s response to this is spot on so I’ll only add one thing.
In my experience, there were two factors that got me up to 500mg+/day: tolerance and price breaks.
When I first started meth it was incredibly affordable. I could get high all day off 1/10th of my $10-20 bag. Then it became 1/8th of my bag and then 1/4 etc. At some point it became (in my mind) uneconomical to buy little amounts because the $/dose got lower when I went from buying .1g to 1g, and then steeply went down again when I went from buying 1g to 3.5g. (As an aside I never really figured out the economics of meth at scale but the margins must be astronomical considering how big of discounts that street dealers are able to give for relatively small purchases and still make money)
I thought I was being smart, saving money! It turns out that when I had more, I used more. Tolerance built up rapidly and I found that I had to smoke 50-100mg to feel anything.
I also agree that it’s really not worth trying. Your concerns about the supply chain are valid. The difference between “good shit” and “bad shit” is enormous and can be the difference between having a nice day trying (pointlessly) to teach yourself Ruby and a day in the ER.
In my experience, there were two factors that got me up to 500mg+/day: tolerance and price breaks.
When I first started meth it was incredibly affordable. I could get high all day off 1/10th of my $10-20 bag. Then it became 1/8th of my bag and then 1/4 etc. At some point it became (in my mind) uneconomical to buy little amounts because the $/dose got lower when I went from buying .1g to 1g, and then steeply went down again when I went from buying 1g to 3.5g. (As an aside I never really figured out the economics of meth at scale but the margins must be astronomical considering how big of discounts that street dealers are able to give for relatively small purchases and still make money)
I thought I was being smart, saving money! It turns out that when I had more, I used more. Tolerance built up rapidly and I found that I had to smoke 50-100mg to feel anything.
I also agree that it’s really not worth trying. Your concerns about the supply chain are valid. The difference between “good shit” and “bad shit” is enormous and can be the difference between having a nice day trying (pointlessly) to teach yourself Ruby and a day in the ER.
How long does a high last?
How many uses during a normal day? e.g. 125 mg 4x daily or all at once or something else?
Does it keep you from sleeping?
How many uses during a normal day? e.g. 125 mg 4x daily or all at once or something else?
Does it keep you from sleeping?
The “this feels good” part of the high typically lasts maybe 1-3 hours, after which you smoke more. The actual stimulant effect lasts much, much longer, maybe 12ish hours. That part very heavily depends on the dose size and quality, tolerance and your individual response to it.
Yes, it keeps you from sleeping. At my peak I didn’t really have much use for the concept of separate days since I was normally awake for ~72hrs at a time.
Yes, it keeps you from sleeping. At my peak I didn’t really have much use for the concept of separate days since I was normally awake for ~72hrs at a time.
Thanks, that's interesting.
I wonder how much the lack of sleep is what causes the problems, versus other effects of the drug.
I wonder how much the lack of sleep is what causes the problems, versus other effects of the drug.
Not eating and not sleeping absolutely wrecks your body. Pair that with a general increase in risky behavior (for example, sexually) and you’ve got a recipe for a bad time, eventually.
I’m not aware of meth (or its metabolites) being particularly toxic to the cells in the human body (as opposed to cocaine for example, which is directly cardiotoxic if I remember correctly), my understanding is that the bad stuff tends to be the result of behavior that it induces.
I’m not aware of meth (or its metabolites) being particularly toxic to the cells in the human body (as opposed to cocaine for example, which is directly cardiotoxic if I remember correctly), my understanding is that the bad stuff tends to be the result of behavior that it induces.
Methamphetamine HCl can be vaporized by itself. What is true for cocaine is not true for other drugs. Freebase methamphetamine is an oily liquid at normal temperatures. Almost all methamphetamine is the hydrochoride salt. It is what gives it the crystalline structure.
Holy shit, I think you’re right.
In my defense I haven’t really been involved with any of this in a decade and it’s entirely possible I mixed up cocaine and meth and their respective likelihoods of pyrolyzation in this case.
For some reason I remember a DEA Microgram bulletin showing crystalline dextromethamphetamine base in brick form, but it’s not available anymore and I can’t find it at the moment. I have had very few conversations with meth chemists over the years but I do distinctly remember the mention of the oily liquid in the latter stages when talking to them.
That being said, snorting meth (even HCl) is incredibly excruciating compared to other drugs and as a result most users that I’ve been around prefer to use it in a different manner.
Thank you!
In my defense I haven’t really been involved with any of this in a decade and it’s entirely possible I mixed up cocaine and meth and their respective likelihoods of pyrolyzation in this case.
For some reason I remember a DEA Microgram bulletin showing crystalline dextromethamphetamine base in brick form, but it’s not available anymore and I can’t find it at the moment. I have had very few conversations with meth chemists over the years but I do distinctly remember the mention of the oily liquid in the latter stages when talking to them.
That being said, snorting meth (even HCl) is incredibly excruciating compared to other drugs and as a result most users that I’ve been around prefer to use it in a different manner.
Thank you!
Congrats on your sobriety. Any advice or insights on how you quit that you’d like to share for anyone struggling with addiction here?
Don’t believe that sober people are good people or that addicts are bad people. That shame is a trap that will keep you there and it’s not even based in reality. If you’re struggling with addiction and you’re worried about yourself, that feeling is a reminder that you’re categorically worth saving.
Not everyone has to do the 12 step thing. My experience with NA was very limited but I quickly figured out that I didn’t fit in there. If you’re feeling out of options, it’s probably worth checking out because it does seem to work for a lot of people. However if it doesn’t work for you, you don’t have to give up. At the end of the day the goal is to not do a thing, whatever way you get there is fine.
Not everyone has to do the 12 step thing. My experience with NA was very limited but I quickly figured out that I didn’t fit in there. If you’re feeling out of options, it’s probably worth checking out because it does seem to work for a lot of people. However if it doesn’t work for you, you don’t have to give up. At the end of the day the goal is to not do a thing, whatever way you get there is fine.
I think another major factor that this article didn't point out is drug purity - and what those specific impurities are.
Particularly with drugs like meth, which can be manufactured clandestinely by people who don't understand chemistry well, there are a lot of intermediates or potential reaction byproducts which are orders of magnitude more cardiotoxic or otherwise more harmful than pure methamphetamine. And that's before you get into the potential toxicity of any intentionally-added cutting agents.
I think ketamine synthesis is more involved, so it's likely that illegally manufactured ketamine is comparatively cleaner than illegally manufactured meth, but illicit ketamine is still probably harder on your body than pharmaceutical grade for the same reasons.
Illegal drug manufacturers have a moderate economic pressure to increase purity, but - short of not immediately killing users and losing your customer base - they have little economic incentive to ensure that the impurities that remain in the final product are safe or inert.
Yes, 500mgs of meth a day is almost certainly not good for your health. But these studies are usually not able to control for purity of the meth that is consumed, so I expect for these studies finding adverse effects of chronic use - at least some portion of this effect size is a result of purity issues rather than purely based on dosage.
Particularly with drugs like meth, which can be manufactured clandestinely by people who don't understand chemistry well, there are a lot of intermediates or potential reaction byproducts which are orders of magnitude more cardiotoxic or otherwise more harmful than pure methamphetamine. And that's before you get into the potential toxicity of any intentionally-added cutting agents.
I think ketamine synthesis is more involved, so it's likely that illegally manufactured ketamine is comparatively cleaner than illegally manufactured meth, but illicit ketamine is still probably harder on your body than pharmaceutical grade for the same reasons.
Illegal drug manufacturers have a moderate economic pressure to increase purity, but - short of not immediately killing users and losing your customer base - they have little economic incentive to ensure that the impurities that remain in the final product are safe or inert.
Yes, 500mgs of meth a day is almost certainly not good for your health. But these studies are usually not able to control for purity of the meth that is consumed, so I expect for these studies finding adverse effects of chronic use - at least some portion of this effect size is a result of purity issues rather than purely based on dosage.
AFAIK almost all street ketamine is just diverted medical supply. Might be cut with something, but other than that it is pharmaceutical grade.
[deleted]
> Illegal drug manufacturers have a moderate economic pressure to increase purity, but - short of not immediately killing users and losing your customer base - they have little economic incentive to ensure that the impurities that remain in the final product are safe or inert.
From the time of alcohol prohibition, it was the government that was introducing contaminated batches that killed people. It was done for propaganda, to solidify the message "drugs are bad".
When I read articles about another teenager died of bad Ecstasy batch, this always comes to my mind. It always accompanies PSA saying that bad batches are circulating in the area etc. but somehow nobody else dies. Then when you read article almost always it turns out the drug wasn't actually Ecstasy, but that information is hidden deep in the article. It's disgusting how such tragedies are used for propaganda purposes and it is never investigated if it was actually government involvement in the killings.
From the time of alcohol prohibition, it was the government that was introducing contaminated batches that killed people. It was done for propaganda, to solidify the message "drugs are bad".
When I read articles about another teenager died of bad Ecstasy batch, this always comes to my mind. It always accompanies PSA saying that bad batches are circulating in the area etc. but somehow nobody else dies. Then when you read article almost always it turns out the drug wasn't actually Ecstasy, but that information is hidden deep in the article. It's disgusting how such tragedies are used for propaganda purposes and it is never investigated if it was actually government involvement in the killings.
I totally believe that there have been instances where governmental actors have intentionally poisoned drug supplies, but I don't think that's the majority of cases.
Watching Vice documentaries about clandestine manufacturing and the conditions they work in, it is not hard for me to believe that the most frequent cause is just lack of will and chemistry talent in order to purify a substance.
Cleaning inert cutting agents out of drugs is fairly easy because the molecules are often dissimilar. But when manufacturing drugs, there are often steps that have probabilistic products that are very similar.
Hypothetical example: you end up with 99% MDMA but 1% something that is very structurally similar but has no recreational value and is cardiotoxic. These molecules are so similar that the only way to separate them are challenging and expensive: such as multiple rounds of recrystalization and chromatography. Only a tiny portion drug buyers will notice the 1% cardiotoxic byproduct (access to GCMS testing?), so there is no economic incentive to do these final expensive cleaning steps.
Watching Vice documentaries about clandestine manufacturing and the conditions they work in, it is not hard for me to believe that the most frequent cause is just lack of will and chemistry talent in order to purify a substance.
Cleaning inert cutting agents out of drugs is fairly easy because the molecules are often dissimilar. But when manufacturing drugs, there are often steps that have probabilistic products that are very similar.
Hypothetical example: you end up with 99% MDMA but 1% something that is very structurally similar but has no recreational value and is cardiotoxic. These molecules are so similar that the only way to separate them are challenging and expensive: such as multiple rounds of recrystalization and chromatography. Only a tiny portion drug buyers will notice the 1% cardiotoxic byproduct (access to GCMS testing?), so there is no economic incentive to do these final expensive cleaning steps.
Drug processing in the body can sometimes be surprising. I learned recently about first pass effect which means the drug heads first to the liver and only what passes through is available to the body. So if one ups the dose and the liver processing is saturated a double dose can deliver much more punch than two single ones. The body has many non-linear features and extrapolating several orders of magnitude is often not possible.
Yep, this is why "boofing" (intrarectal) dosing has found rising popularity in the 'research chemical' scene over the past couple decades.
The liver's effects on drugs is really fascinating. Grapefruit has a chemical that can inactive liver enzymes, so some drug addicts regularly drink grapefruit juice to 'get more bang for their buck'. Plain old black pepper (in large doses) inactivates a different enzyme IIRC.
There are also some interesting anecdotal cases of people who claim to have found regimens of essential oils, which when consumed at the right schedule saturate liver enzymes to the extent that otherwise inert substances can produce recreationally psychoactive effects.
Source: i have a morbid fascination with the 'frontier non-medical drug use' communities and follow their subreddits (/r/researchchemicals and /r/peptides being among the most interesting). There a lot of people who choose to make themselves guinea pigs quite recklessly and, thankfully for scientific advancement and future harm reduction, post in-depth reports of how these novel chemicals or preparations effected them. Recently, broad cheap availability of novel benzos have led many posters to deep addictions of such great magnitude that they struggle to convince doctors assisting with detox that they've actually been consuming equivalents of 1000x typical prescribed doses... until the doctor gives them massive doses of valium to detox and they still have severe seizures.
The liver's effects on drugs is really fascinating. Grapefruit has a chemical that can inactive liver enzymes, so some drug addicts regularly drink grapefruit juice to 'get more bang for their buck'. Plain old black pepper (in large doses) inactivates a different enzyme IIRC.
There are also some interesting anecdotal cases of people who claim to have found regimens of essential oils, which when consumed at the right schedule saturate liver enzymes to the extent that otherwise inert substances can produce recreationally psychoactive effects.
Source: i have a morbid fascination with the 'frontier non-medical drug use' communities and follow their subreddits (/r/researchchemicals and /r/peptides being among the most interesting). There a lot of people who choose to make themselves guinea pigs quite recklessly and, thankfully for scientific advancement and future harm reduction, post in-depth reports of how these novel chemicals or preparations effected them. Recently, broad cheap availability of novel benzos have led many posters to deep addictions of such great magnitude that they struggle to convince doctors assisting with detox that they've actually been consuming equivalents of 1000x typical prescribed doses... until the doctor gives them massive doses of valium to detox and they still have severe seizures.
> i have a morbid fascination with the 'frontier non-medical drug use' communities
I share this interest. I've very little interest in using drugs recreationally myself, but find reading about it oddly fascinating, particularly the novel agents. Taking a chemical when you only have the vaguest idea of what it _may_ do crosses a line I would never want to, but I sympathise with the feeling of wanting to know the effects and being willing to take that risk.
> broad cheap availability of novel benzos
The RC benzos have always concerned me. I'm prescribed a benzodiazepine (20mg temazepam), and it usually induces a mild feeling of wanting more, even though there are no noticeable recreational effects at that dose (at least for me). None of the opiates I've ever been prescribed have done the same, for comparison. It felt obvious to me that using the novel benzos without medical oversight could easily lead to a rapidly escalating problem. A while ago I saw a poster seeking a synthesis for a benzo they claimed did not cause tolerance, and my first thought was this can only end poorly. I don't believe there was ever a follow-up post, but I sincerely hope they avoided any problems.
I share this interest. I've very little interest in using drugs recreationally myself, but find reading about it oddly fascinating, particularly the novel agents. Taking a chemical when you only have the vaguest idea of what it _may_ do crosses a line I would never want to, but I sympathise with the feeling of wanting to know the effects and being willing to take that risk.
> broad cheap availability of novel benzos
The RC benzos have always concerned me. I'm prescribed a benzodiazepine (20mg temazepam), and it usually induces a mild feeling of wanting more, even though there are no noticeable recreational effects at that dose (at least for me). None of the opiates I've ever been prescribed have done the same, for comparison. It felt obvious to me that using the novel benzos without medical oversight could easily lead to a rapidly escalating problem. A while ago I saw a poster seeking a synthesis for a benzo they claimed did not cause tolerance, and my first thought was this can only end poorly. I don't believe there was ever a follow-up post, but I sincerely hope they avoided any problems.
Well, to share some of my favorite morbid findings:
---
Melanotan is a peptide that increases skin pigmentation. Some people have tested it to the extreme, and the pictures are some combination of funny, terrifying and "at what point is this racially offensive blackface?". Also supposedly causes erections similarly to sildenafil .
https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/3gxjem/before_and_afte...
---
The etizolam not wokrign meme https://www.google.com/search?q=etizolam+not+working+reddit
Unfortunately can't find the original post, but when this benzo was easy to buy, there were frequent threads for a while from different users who were complaining that they weren't feeling the effects... often with many spelling errors that led many commenters to be pretty sure that it was working just fine and the posters are just not aware of how intoxicated they are. Became a bit of a meme.
Kind of like the 'roofie circle' Gob story arc from arrested development, it seems very common that people will take some, forget they took it once it kicks in, take more, forget, and so on. When you can order 1000 doses for the price of a paycheck, it leads to very bad outcomes. Often these stories end up with people blacking out for weeks or months at a time, destroying personal relationships, property and their careers, and only regain awareness after weeks in jail or a hospital. Pretty scary stuff.
Also, several stories from people buying time locked safes so they don't redose, blacking out, and finding their timelocked safe destroyed and empty.
---
Cops arrest guy with RCs, etizolam and a mescaline derivative. Cop "accidentally" gets some on his lips (probably thought it was heroin and had a dip?) and gets sent to the infirmary tripping. Suspect is released when the substances turn out to be legal (but not for long - possibly in part because of this incident)
https://www.reddit.com/r/researchchemicals/comments/fpery3/c...
---
The stories about "bath salts" pyrovalerones like aPVP and MDPV are quite insane. Extremely potent and addictive. These are like the fentanyls of the stimulant class and propel users into psychosis with relative ease. Like, compressing the effects of a 2-week meth binge into a single weekend, with all of the negatives that come along with that. I believe the report of the florida man who ate someone's face off was under the influence of one of these.
https://erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=101129
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2011/05/man-high-on-bath-salt...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_cannibal_attack
---
Melanotan is a peptide that increases skin pigmentation. Some people have tested it to the extreme, and the pictures are some combination of funny, terrifying and "at what point is this racially offensive blackface?". Also supposedly causes erections similarly to sildenafil .
https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/3gxjem/before_and_afte...
---
The etizolam not wokrign meme https://www.google.com/search?q=etizolam+not+working+reddit
Unfortunately can't find the original post, but when this benzo was easy to buy, there were frequent threads for a while from different users who were complaining that they weren't feeling the effects... often with many spelling errors that led many commenters to be pretty sure that it was working just fine and the posters are just not aware of how intoxicated they are. Became a bit of a meme.
Kind of like the 'roofie circle' Gob story arc from arrested development, it seems very common that people will take some, forget they took it once it kicks in, take more, forget, and so on. When you can order 1000 doses for the price of a paycheck, it leads to very bad outcomes. Often these stories end up with people blacking out for weeks or months at a time, destroying personal relationships, property and their careers, and only regain awareness after weeks in jail or a hospital. Pretty scary stuff.
Also, several stories from people buying time locked safes so they don't redose, blacking out, and finding their timelocked safe destroyed and empty.
---
Cops arrest guy with RCs, etizolam and a mescaline derivative. Cop "accidentally" gets some on his lips (probably thought it was heroin and had a dip?) and gets sent to the infirmary tripping. Suspect is released when the substances turn out to be legal (but not for long - possibly in part because of this incident)
https://www.reddit.com/r/researchchemicals/comments/fpery3/c...
---
The stories about "bath salts" pyrovalerones like aPVP and MDPV are quite insane. Extremely potent and addictive. These are like the fentanyls of the stimulant class and propel users into psychosis with relative ease. Like, compressing the effects of a 2-week meth binge into a single weekend, with all of the negatives that come along with that. I believe the report of the florida man who ate someone's face off was under the influence of one of these.
https://erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=101129
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2011/05/man-high-on-bath-salt...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_cannibal_attack
> often with many spelling errors that led many commenters to be pretty sure that it was working just fine
"i'm not high, i can do perfecly things functionally" pretty much sums that up - https://www.reddit.com/r/researchchemicals/comments/67g4a7/e... ("my memory is semi crystal clear" is also a great claim)
"i'm not high, i can do perfecly things functionally" pretty much sums that up - https://www.reddit.com/r/researchchemicals/comments/67g4a7/e... ("my memory is semi crystal clear" is also a great claim)
When MDPV made rounds in my friends circle, and someone found interest in the substance it always ended in some kind of increasingly paranoid flash until some dramatic breakup 2-3 weeks later. Like one that took a train driving for hours out of the country getting increasingly paranoid until he found himself, phone and money somehow lost, on the trains toilet to flush down a lot of MDPV (literally thousands of doses) and then took weeks to recover from the substance. And even a few days until they found a way to get home.
I took it a few times and honestly enjoyed it, my world started to glitter basically, however I dosed carefully and never took a second hit.
I took it a few times and honestly enjoyed it, my world started to glitter basically, however I dosed carefully and never took a second hit.
Glad you were able to keep it moderate.
I think it would be a very interesting (and horribly unethical) hypothetical test to lock individuals in a their own rooms with sustenance, entertainment, and a baggies of moreish substances, force them to dose a few times, and then leave them for several days and see how much remains at a the end. Maybe offer a cash prize based on weight remaining.
I think this could likely measure executive control, long-term thinking and willpower pretty effectively. That you were able to dabble without sliding down the slippery slope probably indicates something positive about your mental fortitude.
I think it would be a very interesting (and horribly unethical) hypothetical test to lock individuals in a their own rooms with sustenance, entertainment, and a baggies of moreish substances, force them to dose a few times, and then leave them for several days and see how much remains at a the end. Maybe offer a cash prize based on weight remaining.
I think this could likely measure executive control, long-term thinking and willpower pretty effectively. That you were able to dabble without sliding down the slippery slope probably indicates something positive about your mental fortitude.
I used to take a more active interest in that scene, some years ago. I had dabbled with well known substances over the years but had always been fascinated by the reports of novel or unusual substances on erowid, and resources like Tihkal and Pihkal.
So to me the sudden easy availability of (say) variations on the MDMA molecule to skirt past the UK misuse of drugs act (at the time) that resulted in the aminopropylbenzofuran family were an amazing thing, a little because of the legal status but mainly because it was appealing in itself. I wouldn't know where to find MDA, or MDEA or such things, but suddenly APB, MAPB, EAPB and other variants were there. I was able to try some of the novel tryptamines that came out of that without having the in-depth illicit-chemist hookups usually needed to source these things, even a novel lysergamide or two.
You're right to be concerned about the novel benzos, and also the novel cannabinoids, IMHO.
So to me the sudden easy availability of (say) variations on the MDMA molecule to skirt past the UK misuse of drugs act (at the time) that resulted in the aminopropylbenzofuran family were an amazing thing, a little because of the legal status but mainly because it was appealing in itself. I wouldn't know where to find MDA, or MDEA or such things, but suddenly APB, MAPB, EAPB and other variants were there. I was able to try some of the novel tryptamines that came out of that without having the in-depth illicit-chemist hookups usually needed to source these things, even a novel lysergamide or two.
You're right to be concerned about the novel benzos, and also the novel cannabinoids, IMHO.
>There are also some interesting anecdotal cases of people who claim to have found regimens of essential oils, which when consumed at the right schedule saturate liver enzymes to the extent that otherwise inert substances can produce recreationally psychoactive effects.
Are essential oils literally oils? Because I doubt they can have a metabolic effect due to their size and lipophilicity. My main concern is adsorption. But if they're small and greasy, then they may be promiscuous binders.
Or do the essential oils carry other molecules along?
Edit: I see now that individual oils carry many diverse constituents, including some small-to-medium sized lads. That's a pretty interesting shotgun strategy for controlling your metabolism, lol.
Are essential oils literally oils? Because I doubt they can have a metabolic effect due to their size and lipophilicity. My main concern is adsorption. But if they're small and greasy, then they may be promiscuous binders.
Or do the essential oils carry other molecules along?
Edit: I see now that individual oils carry many diverse constituents, including some small-to-medium sized lads. That's a pretty interesting shotgun strategy for controlling your metabolism, lol.
I'm not sure what "literally oils" means in a chemical sense, but all of the essential oils I've ever interacted with are hydrophobic and form a distinct layer on top of water. I'm not sure but that might be definitional to what an essential oil is.
I've actually steam-distilled essential oils before: essentially you push a bunch of steam through plant material and condense it into a funnel that drains from the bottom, so water can flow out and be discarded while the oil remains in the funnel. (It's a pretty fun process IMO, and about as safe as boiling a pot of water).
I don't think the human body can process most essential oils for caloric energy: molecularly they look much more like drugs - no long carbon chains.
I've actually steam-distilled essential oils before: essentially you push a bunch of steam through plant material and condense it into a funnel that drains from the bottom, so water can flow out and be discarded while the oil remains in the funnel. (It's a pretty fun process IMO, and about as safe as boiling a pot of water).
I don't think the human body can process most essential oils for caloric energy: molecularly they look much more like drugs - no long carbon chains.
> Plain old black pepper (in large doses) inactivates a different enzyme IIRC.
It's actually surprisingly effective as long as you don't mind just eating peppercorns. It definitely reduces the high from THC in edibles (and it's the only thing I know of that does besides CBD), and it promotes the health effects of turmeric.
It's actually surprisingly effective as long as you don't mind just eating peppercorns. It definitely reduces the high from THC in edibles (and it's the only thing I know of that does besides CBD), and it promotes the health effects of turmeric.
> So if one ups the dose and the liver processing is saturated a double dose can deliver much more punch than two single ones. The body has many non-linear features and extrapolating several orders of magnitude is often not possible.
Since we're talking about amphetamine here, this is actually the way Vyvanse works (it's bound to L-lysine and the liver splits it apart) and those nonlinearities are the reason it has such a longer effect life than Dexedrine/Adderall IR.
As an unfortunate side effect, you have to watch the pH of the meal you take it with, eg taking it with orange juice completely inactivates it.
Since we're talking about amphetamine here, this is actually the way Vyvanse works (it's bound to L-lysine and the liver splits it apart) and those nonlinearities are the reason it has such a longer effect life than Dexedrine/Adderall IR.
As an unfortunate side effect, you have to watch the pH of the meal you take it with, eg taking it with orange juice completely inactivates it.
"The most important reason meth makes your teeth fall out and ruins your life but Adderall just makes you study a little harder is that the meth users are taking 50x higher doses"
The reason meth addicts have bad teeth isn't because of the dosage of the drug. It's because stimulants make you want to eat candy and drink sugar water, because meth addicts lose track of oral hygiene in favor of doing meth or something else more interesting, and because they're smoking it (along with other drugs).
The reason meth addicts have bad teeth isn't because of the dosage of the drug. It's because stimulants make you want to eat candy and drink sugar water, because meth addicts lose track of oral hygiene in favor of doing meth or something else more interesting, and because they're smoking it (along with other drugs).
Also: dehydration and dry-mouth secondary to stimulant use, classic accelerators of bacterial overgrowth and consequent tooth decay.
Truth. It's highly variable but even Adderall will accelerate tooth decay. It's quite necessary to drink water very frequently.
The reason there's confusion in this thread about dosage is that the author didn't use precise terminology (the author is technically correct, but there's ambiguity). I'm pretty sure he means that the recreational dose is relatively larger compared to the effective dose (ED) with meth than with Adderall.
Stimulants suppress your appetite but they also make you clench you jaw and grind your teeth involuntarily.
You mean amphetamines, not stimulants in general. I've seen people do much worse when they mix this shit with alcohol, the worst offender that is still perfectly legal
What non-amphetemine stimulants are people doing recreationally?
2C-B. Cathinones and other pyrovalerones.
Some people even seem to enjoy absorbing Coffee through their nose.
Some people even seem to enjoy absorbing Coffee through their nose.
Cathinones are amphetamines.
Sure, cathinones are a sub-category of amphetamines, but only in the same way that amphetamines are technically phenetylamines.
But cathinones differ from "pure" substituted amphetamines by a ketone group at the Beta-position, which is what I mean here.
And regardless, the point stands for substituted phenethylamines like the 2C family, which are clearly not amphetamines.
But cathinones differ from "pure" substituted amphetamines by a ketone group at the Beta-position, which is what I mean here.
And regardless, the point stands for substituted phenethylamines like the 2C family, which are clearly not amphetamines.
How do you do coffee through your nose lol
I would imagine snorting really fine grounds, similar to how people use tobacco snuff.
Cocaine? MDMA?
MDMA is an amphetamine, short for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
I don’t know how I forgot cocaine, but it has the same jaw clenching problem
I don’t know how I forgot cocaine, but it has the same jaw clenching problem
It's purely due to a dry mouth. People that get radiation therapy for head and neck cancers get severe dry mouth as well (salivary glands affected) and severe tooth decay is common unless you use artificial saliva.
Street meth also has a lot of adulterants, contaminants, or byproducts that can accelerate the damage.
Adderall is also a stimulant(?) The authors suggestion is it would cause the same effect if taken in the same dosage.
They are both amphetamines.
I was on Adderall 10mg a day. Worked as advertised. ADHD under control. Chronic fatigue fixed.
Every portion of my body felt like it was being burned from the inside. I had to start tramadol to counter act the pain.
It also upped cranial pressure. Causing a lot of secondary problems.
This was made much worse as dosage went up.
I had to stop it before downward spiral completely destroyed me.
Vyvanse was a mild version of all this.
Can’t imagine anything more intense.
Every portion of my body felt like it was being burned from the inside. I had to start tramadol to counter act the pain.
It also upped cranial pressure. Causing a lot of secondary problems.
This was made much worse as dosage went up.
I had to stop it before downward spiral completely destroyed me.
Vyvanse was a mild version of all this.
Can’t imagine anything more intense.
I think doctors in general start stimulant doses way too high. I’m about 200 lbs, but reacted badly to 15, 10, even 5 mg. However at, 2.5 mg, I couldn’t even tell I was taking anything - but for the next semester my GPA was up 2 points, from C’s to A’s.
I've never heard of this symptom! Maybe you were allergic? It does sound like SJS, in which case you should definitely quit it, but I thought that could only happen with modafinil.
I am hypersensitive to most medications. Runs in the family.
Benadryl will cause me and my kids to go completely nuts. Like climbing the ceiling of the hospital level.
Was describing that to one nurse and she almost started crying. Apparently she had same reaction and no one would believe her.
Benadryl will cause me and my kids to go completely nuts. Like climbing the ceiling of the hospital level.
Was describing that to one nurse and she almost started crying. Apparently she had same reaction and no one would believe her.
I've never heard of anything like that before. I wonder if you'd get the same reaction from ritalin.
Meth does not make you crave any type of food. If that were the case Desoxyn would not be FDA approved for weight loss.
“Meth mouth” is caused by the fact that it dries your mouth out, you grind your teeth a LOT, and is often observed in people that have used drugs long/hard enough to find themselves no longer taking care of their health in general, let alone oral hygiene. This often is coupled with financial ruin and utter alienation from society. Somehow, mysteriously, all of the rich house wives and Silicon Valley coders that use it develop meth mouth at a lower rate.
“Meth mouth” is caused by the fact that it dries your mouth out, you grind your teeth a LOT, and is often observed in people that have used drugs long/hard enough to find themselves no longer taking care of their health in general, let alone oral hygiene. This often is coupled with financial ruin and utter alienation from society. Somehow, mysteriously, all of the rich house wives and Silicon Valley coders that use it develop meth mouth at a lower rate.
Wait, are you saying that meth is popular among Silicon Valley coders and rich house wives? This is news to me.
Adderall. I can't find a Wiki cite for the specific use among coders, but it's stereotypically widespread as a nootropic.
Adderall is not meth. It does promote jaw clenching some, but it's not nearly as bad for you (as the article says, mostly because prescribed doses are smaller) and in fact is neuroprotective.
I don't think housewives would enjoy abusing it, unless they're studying for the GRE.
I don't think housewives would enjoy abusing it, unless they're studying for the GRE.
Right, Adderall is near-racemic amphetamine, not methamphetamine. Amphetamine and methamphetamine are very similar in their effects, as discussed here, and both can easily be used at neurotoxic levels. Among their effects in therapeutic doses are weight loss and, yes, being good at memorizing things, like if you're studying for the GRE.
I'm not a big fan of any of the drug family.
I'm not a big fan of any of the drug family.
That’s true! Prescription Desoxyn is though.
Absolutely, yes.
Meth has a reputation for being a “poor people drug” which is not really accurate.
While a lot of poorer communities have been very publicly hit by it, that wasn’t at the exclusion of more affluent communities. It’s literally everywhere to some degree or another, and there are dealers that cater to pretty much everybody. (For example, I knew a meth dealer that owned a prominent local legitimate business, lived in one of the richest zip codes in the US, drove a black Mercedes and always showed up in a full suit and tie, sober.)
Anecdotally, in my head the image of a meth user is just… a person. They’re not rich or poor, young or old, skinny or fat, and they’re not necessarily acting weird. I suppose the only difference is the pupil dilation. My mental image of a meth addict is pretty much identical but maybe (but not always) a bit skinnier and maybe (but not always) acting weird.
It’s an incredibly shameful and stigmatized addiction and people sometimes go to extreme lengths to hide it.
At the end of the day it is a ubiquitous stimulant that people really seem to like.
Meth has a reputation for being a “poor people drug” which is not really accurate.
While a lot of poorer communities have been very publicly hit by it, that wasn’t at the exclusion of more affluent communities. It’s literally everywhere to some degree or another, and there are dealers that cater to pretty much everybody. (For example, I knew a meth dealer that owned a prominent local legitimate business, lived in one of the richest zip codes in the US, drove a black Mercedes and always showed up in a full suit and tie, sober.)
Anecdotally, in my head the image of a meth user is just… a person. They’re not rich or poor, young or old, skinny or fat, and they’re not necessarily acting weird. I suppose the only difference is the pupil dilation. My mental image of a meth addict is pretty much identical but maybe (but not always) a bit skinnier and maybe (but not always) acting weird.
It’s an incredibly shameful and stigmatized addiction and people sometimes go to extreme lengths to hide it.
At the end of the day it is a ubiquitous stimulant that people really seem to like.
By and large I think wealthier people have more incentives to limit their drug use. They have hobbies, jobs, etc, that they probably enjoy and don't want to ruin via drug use. On the other hand when everything in your life sucks because you're completely broke there's very little reason to not use more drugs, if they are the only thing you get to enjoy.
So the mental image of meth as a poor person drug exists possibly because poor people bear a greater burden of the damage it causes.
So the mental image of meth as a poor person drug exists possibly because poor people bear a greater burden of the damage it causes.
I take the opposite view.
I think it's more that when wealthy people use/abuse drugs, they have a way bigger financial, social, and medical safety net, so that their drug use ends up having a far smaller (and less publicly noticeable) impact on their lives and future opportunities.
Yes, people with less access to financial security have more statistical drug use, but the statistics might also be skewed by
1. the fact that non-wealthy people have more interaction with State-funded services (police, rehab, therapy, prisons), which track and report drug use more systematically & robustly than the obscenely-expensive, private, and very discreet rehab facilities the wealthy have access to
2. because of the aforementioned safety net, there's simply less likelihood of a wealthy person being 'caught' using drugs by an entity that would report those statistics (police, schools, etc).
The higher one's poverty rate, the more vulnerable one is to having their actions scrutinized, catalogued, and punished by the State.
I think it's more that when wealthy people use/abuse drugs, they have a way bigger financial, social, and medical safety net, so that their drug use ends up having a far smaller (and less publicly noticeable) impact on their lives and future opportunities.
Yes, people with less access to financial security have more statistical drug use, but the statistics might also be skewed by
1. the fact that non-wealthy people have more interaction with State-funded services (police, rehab, therapy, prisons), which track and report drug use more systematically & robustly than the obscenely-expensive, private, and very discreet rehab facilities the wealthy have access to
2. because of the aforementioned safety net, there's simply less likelihood of a wealthy person being 'caught' using drugs by an entity that would report those statistics (police, schools, etc).
The higher one's poverty rate, the more vulnerable one is to having their actions scrutinized, catalogued, and punished by the State.
This is a good breakdown and I agree 100%. No one ever reports using meth or heroin for 5 years with no legal consequence and then just moving on. There are a couple studies that show that there is a type of drug user that may be massively uncounted for. They take a turn into substance abuse/dependance after a trauma. Loss of a loved one, a breakup, loss of a job, serious injury, etc. The main study I read on the issue said the average arc of the people they could find to self report was about 5 years.
Almost all of our drug statistics are based on interactions with police which produce legal consequences for a medical issue. All that said, I'm not saying "drugs are more safe than previously thought!" just that most of our public knowledge and legislation is about incarceration and leaves out an invisible population. The study was a few years old, I believe it was done just as the opiate epidemic came into view and well before anyone knew what carfentanyl was. Opiates affected rich white people's children has widened out the understanding a bit and migrogram opiates put a lot more people in front of police and medical. Also microgram opiates pop up in a lot of drugs that aren't supposed to contain them so I think that changes some things too.
A quick google has not produced this study or related, but if I find it, I'll tag it back in an edit.
Almost all of our drug statistics are based on interactions with police which produce legal consequences for a medical issue. All that said, I'm not saying "drugs are more safe than previously thought!" just that most of our public knowledge and legislation is about incarceration and leaves out an invisible population. The study was a few years old, I believe it was done just as the opiate epidemic came into view and well before anyone knew what carfentanyl was. Opiates affected rich white people's children has widened out the understanding a bit and migrogram opiates put a lot more people in front of police and medical. Also microgram opiates pop up in a lot of drugs that aren't supposed to contain them so I think that changes some things too.
A quick google has not produced this study or related, but if I find it, I'll tag it back in an edit.
Incredibly well put!
I can see your reasoning there, but from what I’ve seen that’s simply not the case in a really meaningful way.
Drugs as a whole are incredibly expensive as a lifestyle. Often times you’ll hear about poor people committing crime to support their habits and it’s understandable to think that they use drugs at a higher rate.
However more affluent people can simply afford the drugs, so when you hear about the mistakes they make while intoxicated it’s framed in a different narrative. Instead of some random poor person doing a robbery for meth, you read a story about a Hollywood actor getting into a car accident or a popular sports player committing sexual assault, or a singer going to a “retreat for exhaustion.”
This group has much more ability to control the story.
Humans are humans. The value proposition of “awake, alert, focused, euphoric, horny” appeals to people equally regardless of one’s bank balance.
Rich people aren’t noticeably smarter about avoiding these pitfalls as far as I can tell. They have bad days, make bad decisions, and develop bad habits just like everybody else.
Drugs as a whole are incredibly expensive as a lifestyle. Often times you’ll hear about poor people committing crime to support their habits and it’s understandable to think that they use drugs at a higher rate.
However more affluent people can simply afford the drugs, so when you hear about the mistakes they make while intoxicated it’s framed in a different narrative. Instead of some random poor person doing a robbery for meth, you read a story about a Hollywood actor getting into a car accident or a popular sports player committing sexual assault, or a singer going to a “retreat for exhaustion.”
This group has much more ability to control the story.
Humans are humans. The value proposition of “awake, alert, focused, euphoric, horny” appeals to people equally regardless of one’s bank balance.
Rich people aren’t noticeably smarter about avoiding these pitfalls as far as I can tell. They have bad days, make bad decisions, and develop bad habits just like everybody else.
[deleted]
Regardless, I think the author's point is that the massive dose is more responsible for that negative outcome than the chemical is itself.
...because they're taking 50x the dose?
This isn’t correct. Meth, when smoked, is incredibly toxic. The toxic smoke that causes “meth mouth”
While I am certainly willing to believe that illicit meth is...bad for you/toxic and the smoke is as well, I'm not finding much to support the idea of it being the primary cause of (or major contributor to) "meth mouth" in a quick search.
In contrast, every source I find cites the things the prior poster mentioned as the causes.
For example:
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/meth...
> The dental problems may be caused by a combination of poor nutrition and dental hygiene as well as dry mouth and teeth grinding caused by the drug.
I would think they would be mentioning that the toxic smoke is a cause or contributor if there was evidence to support it.
In contrast, every source I find cites the things the prior poster mentioned as the causes.
For example:
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/meth...
> The dental problems may be caused by a combination of poor nutrition and dental hygiene as well as dry mouth and teeth grinding caused by the drug.
I would think they would be mentioning that the toxic smoke is a cause or contributor if there was evidence to support it.
People get meth mouth even if they don't take it orally (or smoking) i.e. your thesis is wrong AFAIK.
The point is valid but I am not so sure the line between recreation and use is so clear cut. Take pain patients for example. If they are not getting enough pills from their doctor they’ll get them on the street. Is that person a patient or an addict? At what specific dosage does one crossover? Obviously everyone in the medical profession has a huge stake in dividing the world into two groups, patients and druggies, and so most will set the cutpoint low. The incentives all reinforce such behaviour; you could go to jail for being too liberal in handing out pain meds. So, despite the appearance of there being two groups, heavy use addicts and low use patients, I don’t think reality is so simply bifurcated. I think the appearance of two groups is largely an artifact of the system. Doctors restrict dosages artificially and if someone claims to need more pain pills and maybe seeks another doctors to proscribe them, that person will be reclassified by his doctor from being a legitimate patient to being a drug addict. Scott implies there are no edge cases but that’s because the system starts with that assumption. Definitions are everything.
Somehow he managed to ignore the data showing that a non-trivial percentage of people with KLUTS get it after only doing doses comparable to the psychiatric dose, and sometimes after only doing it once or a handful of times.
https://erowid.org/chemicals/ketamine/ketamine_article2.shtm...
https://erowid.org/chemicals/ketamine/ketamine_article2.shtm...
I'll add my anecdote to the pile. I don't use ketamine a lot (it is not very good for headaches, pretty good for dulling a mosquito bite until it fades away naturally, excellent for dancing).
I've taken about 1000mg over the course of several months, at irregular intervals. While it is somewhat higher than Scott's 280mg/month, it's not an order of magnitude higher. Certainly nowhere near 90,000mg/month.
I can report one event of pain while peeing, a few days ago. So it looks like my body is not built to handle even moderate levels of ketamine use, and I'd have to stay closer to 100mg/month or lower to be on the safe side.
That said, let me reiterate, this is anecdote. I only think it's interesting because there is no other reasonable explanation for my recent urinary pain, and I didn't expect such low doses of Ketamine to have noticeable effects.
I've taken about 1000mg over the course of several months, at irregular intervals. While it is somewhat higher than Scott's 280mg/month, it's not an order of magnitude higher. Certainly nowhere near 90,000mg/month.
I can report one event of pain while peeing, a few days ago. So it looks like my body is not built to handle even moderate levels of ketamine use, and I'd have to stay closer to 100mg/month or lower to be on the safe side.
That said, let me reiterate, this is anecdote. I only think it's interesting because there is no other reasonable explanation for my recent urinary pain, and I didn't expect such low doses of Ketamine to have noticeable effects.
Yeah I think I gave myself some minor bladder damage just by drinking iced mint tea (since it's such a strong diuretic), so I can't imagine I'd react well to ketamine even in small doses.
Wow, how much did you drink?
Only one glass a day, so maybe 20oz. I was working out of a coffee shop, and would have an iced coffee or a latte in the morning but then wanted something non caffeinated in the early afternoon. I think the combination of the large coffee and the large iced tea was just too much diuretic for whatever reason. Fortunately the problem seems to have resolved itself after a couple years.
> pretty good for dulling a mosquito bite until it fades away naturally
Applied topically? Or in the sense that the anesthetic disassociative effects dull most sensations?
Applied topically? Or in the sense that the anesthetic disassociative effects dull most sensations?
I did try rubbing some crushed powder to the bite, but could not notice any effect before I got impatient. Ketamine on my tongue has an instant numbing effect, but to my knowledge nothing transdermaly.
I took it insufflated, the short duration of action and general anesthesia makes it decently practical.
(Of course it sounds pretty silly to recommend Ketamine for a small everyday itch. But that's what I had on hand, and I happen to dislike mosquitos with a very particular intensity =] )
I took it insufflated, the short duration of action and general anesthesia makes it decently practical.
(Of course it sounds pretty silly to recommend Ketamine for a small everyday itch. But that's what I had on hand, and I happen to dislike mosquitos with a very particular intensity =] )
Haha, I love that you tried that. Thanks for sharing and expanding the frontiers of pharmacology. New off-label uses for drugs are popping up every day! :D
This article isn't bad, but it's a very shallow, narrow view of things.
In general it seems to make no distinction with addicts using high doses to overcome tolerance levels with recreational drug users in general.
Methamphetamines and amphetamines are not the same chemical, despite being similar.
https://methoide.fcm.arizona.edu/infocenter/index.cfm?stid=1...
The small differences between the molecules allow it to penetrate the blood brain barrier more efficiently, has longer lasting toxic effects and acts more as a central nervous system stimulant and
>less peripheral nervous system and cardiovascular stimulation activity. Another difference between amphetamine and MA is that amphetamine stimulates the CNS indirectly by activating the release of catecholamines and inhibiting their breakdown and storage. In contrast, MA stimulates the postsynaptic catecholamine receptors directly.[2]
Increased dosage is only one part of the difference between Methamphetamine and Amphetamines. Street meth is also far more likely to have fillers, leftover solvents and a bunch of other things that are not good for you.
>In general, recreational drug users take their drugs at doses so much higher than psychiatric patients that they're basically two different chemicals
Recreational drug users come in a wide range. The first two sections of the article speak about addicts doing extremely large doses, then seems to lump 'recreational drug users' altogether with that.
In general it seems to make no distinction with addicts using high doses to overcome tolerance levels with recreational drug users in general.
Methamphetamines and amphetamines are not the same chemical, despite being similar.
https://methoide.fcm.arizona.edu/infocenter/index.cfm?stid=1...
The small differences between the molecules allow it to penetrate the blood brain barrier more efficiently, has longer lasting toxic effects and acts more as a central nervous system stimulant and
>less peripheral nervous system and cardiovascular stimulation activity. Another difference between amphetamine and MA is that amphetamine stimulates the CNS indirectly by activating the release of catecholamines and inhibiting their breakdown and storage. In contrast, MA stimulates the postsynaptic catecholamine receptors directly.[2]
Increased dosage is only one part of the difference between Methamphetamine and Amphetamines. Street meth is also far more likely to have fillers, leftover solvents and a bunch of other things that are not good for you.
>In general, recreational drug users take their drugs at doses so much higher than psychiatric patients that they're basically two different chemicals
Recreational drug users come in a wide range. The first two sections of the article speak about addicts doing extremely large doses, then seems to lump 'recreational drug users' altogether with that.
There's recreational drug users, and then there's recreational drug users. Turns out some people I know who microdosed amphetamine took doses exactly in the ballpark of what doctor would prescribe them.
There always are, for any drug.
There is the person that uses amphetamines to get high SAT scores, high college grades and stops after landing a FAANG job.
There is the person using alcohol as "social lube". Never drinks alone, never gets wasted.
There is the person using LSD and other party drugs few times per year or less in a controlled setting
And then there are the extremely addicted people. And everything in between. It's a sliding scale. People need to be educated to learn the risks and recognize harmful behavioral patterns.
Simply telling people "drugs are bad for you" might be the abridged version of the truth. But is as effective as the "war on drugs" in reducing drug abuse.
There is the person that uses amphetamines to get high SAT scores, high college grades and stops after landing a FAANG job.
There is the person using alcohol as "social lube". Never drinks alone, never gets wasted.
There is the person using LSD and other party drugs few times per year or less in a controlled setting
And then there are the extremely addicted people. And everything in between. It's a sliding scale. People need to be educated to learn the risks and recognize harmful behavioral patterns.
Simply telling people "drugs are bad for you" might be the abridged version of the truth. But is as effective as the "war on drugs" in reducing drug abuse.
If they're microdosing amphetamine at medicinal dosage levels are their intentions even recreation?
That's an interesting question. Sometimes I experiment with my meds into micro dosage levels if I have a long weekend. Sometimes I'll even keep a journal and sometimes I'll mix with other agents like microdosed psilocybe or LSD and run tests on neuroplacticity.
Some times on the weekends I'll take 2mg or less of my ADHD meds just to clear the noise out of my head so I can get a nap. It works a treat, I wake up feeling refreshed and I can tackle some chores or do nothing at all with only muted versions of my normal symptoms.
I wouldn't say this is not recreational. It's my body and am curious about how it works and also I think it's always good to experiment with making very low doses or even medication fasts (in relation to stims specifically THIS IS NOT MEDICAL ADVICE) part of any regimen. Testing out strategies on my free time and not at work is just responsible. My ADHD medication makes me employable and has helped tremendously with my ability to maintain valuable relationships, it's crucial for me to make my way in a world designed around shit that is nearly torture for me, but I really hope to not be on the stims one day and I think it's going to take some work to figure that out. I'm a long time psychonaut so what is recreation to you might not be the same thing it is to me but I consider the observations and experiments to be recreational.
Some times on the weekends I'll take 2mg or less of my ADHD meds just to clear the noise out of my head so I can get a nap. It works a treat, I wake up feeling refreshed and I can tackle some chores or do nothing at all with only muted versions of my normal symptoms.
I wouldn't say this is not recreational. It's my body and am curious about how it works and also I think it's always good to experiment with making very low doses or even medication fasts (in relation to stims specifically THIS IS NOT MEDICAL ADVICE) part of any regimen. Testing out strategies on my free time and not at work is just responsible. My ADHD medication makes me employable and has helped tremendously with my ability to maintain valuable relationships, it's crucial for me to make my way in a world designed around shit that is nearly torture for me, but I really hope to not be on the stims one day and I think it's going to take some work to figure that out. I'm a long time psychonaut so what is recreation to you might not be the same thing it is to me but I consider the observations and experiments to be recreational.
I watched a documentary about ketamine use by party people.
It profiled a young guy who had destroyed his bladder and needed to use a pump and hole in his belly to urinate.
Really disturbing.
It profiled a young guy who had destroyed his bladder and needed to use a pump and hole in his belly to urinate.
Really disturbing.
My problem with that, and this article, is that it doesn't say what dosage does that?
It just skips right on to meth, and dosages, and never mentions Ketamine again.
We get that 280mg a month mostly doesn't, and 90,000mg a month can.
But are these "party people" the same as the people doing that higher amount prorated to daily? More specifically, are the "party people" I've been around secretly having bladder problems and getting a hole in their belly and not really ubering home but ubering to the hospital?
Let me know when you, or anyone passing by, find that article
It just skips right on to meth, and dosages, and never mentions Ketamine again.
We get that 280mg a month mostly doesn't, and 90,000mg a month can.
But are these "party people" the same as the people doing that higher amount prorated to daily? More specifically, are the "party people" I've been around secretly having bladder problems and getting a hole in their belly and not really ubering home but ubering to the hospital?
Let me know when you, or anyone passing by, find that article
I've known many users over the years, many OD while others decay over a few years.
One customer in particular used ketamine heavily. Due to a string of poor decisions, he was on federal probation and subjected to random drug tests.
He determined two drugs were not detectible by the tests at that time: ketamine and GHB. And he frequently consumed them. I remember him stumbling around my store, sipping caps of G every so often... sniffling behind tall pallets to suck up another key bump.
Over a year or so, he developed severe problems with his bladder, but wouldn't / couldn't stop his drug use, even after I broke it down to him plainly; "Bro, you are killing yourself."
From what I can tell, users don't keep track of doses, or much of anything. Their objectives are short term in nature: get high asap.
I suspect any such article that provides hard numbers like what you want will provide guestimates at best.
One customer in particular used ketamine heavily. Due to a string of poor decisions, he was on federal probation and subjected to random drug tests.
He determined two drugs were not detectible by the tests at that time: ketamine and GHB. And he frequently consumed them. I remember him stumbling around my store, sipping caps of G every so often... sniffling behind tall pallets to suck up another key bump.
Over a year or so, he developed severe problems with his bladder, but wouldn't / couldn't stop his drug use, even after I broke it down to him plainly; "Bro, you are killing yourself."
From what I can tell, users don't keep track of doses, or much of anything. Their objectives are short term in nature: get high asap.
I suspect any such article that provides hard numbers like what you want will provide guestimates at best.
So we can improve the data by regulating the supply chain, serving sizes, and points of sale
Doesnt seem to support enforcing varying levels of prohibition
Doesnt seem to support enforcing varying levels of prohibition
Oh, that is just peritoneal-dialysis. Lots of people do that when there kidneys are shut and they want to continue a "normal" life without constant blood dialysis via machine.
The real con here is that you must limit your intake of fluids drastically
The real con here is that you must limit your intake of fluids drastically
Google some youtube videos about kokodil, its a drug used in Russia, cheap and very nasty, basically makes skin fall off of people
3g ketamine, daily?? If that is recreational then drinking a bottle of vodka a day is also recreational.
This is a great article, and it could be also be expanded to include the 'whale' effect.
I'm not just talking about how a small percent of users spend the most on loot-box games, but also how the top 10% of drinkers consume 50% of all the alcohol sold in the USA.
I also believe it must apply to people who use cannabis, as a 'dab' setup allows a heavy user to inhale in one breath what would literally be 50 sessions worth of doses for an infrequent smoker.
This isn't necessarily the same topic as what the author wrote, but I'd like to see someone explore the connection.
I'm not just talking about how a small percent of users spend the most on loot-box games, but also how the top 10% of drinkers consume 50% of all the alcohol sold in the USA.
I also believe it must apply to people who use cannabis, as a 'dab' setup allows a heavy user to inhale in one breath what would literally be 50 sessions worth of doses for an infrequent smoker.
This isn't necessarily the same topic as what the author wrote, but I'd like to see someone explore the connection.
I mean, not literally 50. Like 3 times the potency, maybe 5 or 6 times the potency of whatever your state average black market, grey market, or illegally grown crop is.
It's important to clear up the FUD here because it has led to some backwards progress for legalization in states like Colorado recently.
It's important to clear up the FUD here because it has led to some backwards progress for legalization in states like Colorado recently.
Let's say you use a 0.5 g dab which has a THC content of 70% (most dabs are either 1-gram or 0.5 g). The wax has 0.35 g (350 mg of THC), but you could lose up to one-third of it when vaporizing. If this happens, you’ll end up with roughly 235 mg of THC per hit (if you can finish the whole dab in one hit).
Someone without a THC tolerance will be completely satisfied with a 5mg dose, total.
Thats 47 doses out of the 236mg the stoner _absorbed_
Someone without a THC tolerance will be completely satisfied with a 5mg dose, total.
Thats 47 doses out of the 236mg the stoner _absorbed_
I don’t know anyone who is doing half gram dabs lol. That’s like $25 in one hit. A gram of concentrate is supposed to last a while (20+ dabs) not a single hit or two.
A gram of wax lasts me probably 50+ hits. It seriously lasts a long time. A tiny little crumb you can pinch out of the jar is more than enough for a big hit
Just have to say, a half gram dab is a fat dab. I'm sure some people do vaporize all of that at once. However, even with complete inhalation and 'swishing' it in their lungs, they will be wasting a lot of it on the exhale.
Dude, one gram of wax does for a year. I can’t imagine how awful doing half in one go would be.
It’s true though that concentrated sources like this make it technically possible to ingest amounts that weren’t feasible before, I suppose.
It’s true though that concentrated sources like this make it technically possible to ingest amounts that weren’t feasible before, I suppose.
I bought and smoked a 'CBD' joint the other day. 0.47% THC, 15% CBD. I think the lady told me a typical joint is 15-25% THC. I was uncomfortably high.
Had you ever smoked marijuana prior to that?
FWIW, it's not like a cigarette, you don't need to smoke the whole thing in one go. You can get little storage tubes and take a couple puffs and you should be much better off. I've had J's last multiple days like this.
Thank you. While there is no data to back up some of these numbers, at least they are offered up. I have often wondered what amounts Meth addicts were using do cause their severe issues.
My neighbors teeth are falling out. Salesman, honestly pretty successful guy, making 6 figures. Apparently he takes 120mg if Adderall to wake up in the morning. At that dose, he’s basically just getting Walter White quality meth for his morning pick me up.
The max approved prescribed dose is 60mg per day, so at that point he's probably doing something illegal.
Oh for sure, the reason I found out about it is that he asked to buy mine, and I declined. I have too much to lose, a wife a kid and a good job, to be slinging Schedule 2 drugs for a couple hundred bucks a month. Plus I actually take my dose as prescribed. He moved away though, thank goodness.
Said like someone who has never dealt with clinical tolerance before. I've been up in that territory before. Even that was done under the regular visits to a therapist. I've dedicated myself to suffering through learning how to cope with a lower, highly tolerance dampened dose. I will say there are days I miss it terribly. It's a bit like having an overclocked capacity to process information and learn. The multi-month adaptation process to the decreased dose is quite literally like being brain-starved. You want to think, you know you could at one point but you just can't get things to fire as fast as they used to.
You dampen your ability to forge paths of understanding in novel contexts, but the trade off is you're cut off emotionally from anyone around you because no one else is holding onto or working with the context you can throw around. When the impedance mismatch is that high, misanthropy is a hazard one has to actively decultivate. The practical upshot of coming down from it after acquiring your context/understanding though is you tend to generalize what you learned and render it more communicable. The anhedonia is also a #$&-+.
Point being, the medical literature is based on averages. Not everybody lives in the hump of a Gaussian distribution.
You dampen your ability to forge paths of understanding in novel contexts, but the trade off is you're cut off emotionally from anyone around you because no one else is holding onto or working with the context you can throw around. When the impedance mismatch is that high, misanthropy is a hazard one has to actively decultivate. The practical upshot of coming down from it after acquiring your context/understanding though is you tend to generalize what you learned and render it more communicable. The anhedonia is also a #$&-+.
Point being, the medical literature is based on averages. Not everybody lives in the hump of a Gaussian distribution.
[deleted]
His teeth are far more likely to be falling out because of bad oral hygiene for a decade earlier in life than they are because of a low dose of Adderal or anything.
If 120mg of Adderal made your teeth fall out then tons more people would have their teeth falling out.
If 120mg of Adderal made your teeth fall out then tons more people would have their teeth falling out.
To be clear, 120mg is what he takes first thing in the morning. He takes more throughout the day. I’d guess he takes 500+ in a day.
That is impossible. There is no one someone's heart would be able to take that. I take 60 mg daily of Vyvanse and I'm pretty wired all day. I can't even fathom the effects of that on a human body.
Is he like 300 lbs?
Is he like 300 lbs?
500mg/day was the figure cited for heavy users in the OP article.
You're right that 500mg is far into overdose territory for novice users. But, he probably has been using for a long time and has a very high tolerance.
You're right that 500mg is far into overdose territory for novice users. But, he probably has been using for a long time and has a very high tolerance.
I've done 70mg Vyvanse followed by 50mg Adderall in the evening.
The Vyvanse way amplified aggressive and confrontational tendencies for me though. I miss having time for hobbies however.
Usually bounce between 240-270lbs.
The Vyvanse way amplified aggressive and confrontational tendencies for me though. I miss having time for hobbies however.
Usually bounce between 240-270lbs.
yeah same, Vyvanse is a wild drug. it has less euphoria which I prefer because I hate the cracked out feeling in combination with the euphoria, but it definitely makes you incredibly amped up. Glad you found a system that works for you (not doing it) haha.
Are there "tons of people" seriously taking 120mg of adderall?
No, that is far beyond the daily dosage threshold.
Even 90 is extremely high for XR, and would probably be broken into 2 45 doses throughout the day.
Even 90 is extremely high for XR, and would probably be broken into 2 45 doses throughout the day.
It happens. Trust me. I'd still be doing it if I weren't getting increasingly pissed how Schedule 2 turns you into a second class citizen effectively in the United States.
(You can't fill across State lines anymore, and insurance puts up astronomical red tape to dispensing more than a month at a time thanks to DEA quantity limits.)
(You can't fill across State lines anymore, and insurance puts up astronomical red tape to dispensing more than a month at a time thanks to DEA quantity limits.)
lol at 120 being a low dose. You start on 10-20.
This article is mostly weak opinion. There was one important takeaway, which is notable to anyone interested in ketamine:
> I hesitate to say the risk of bladder injury from a normal psychiatric dose of ketamine is literally zero
> I hesitate to say the risk of bladder injury from a normal psychiatric dose of ketamine is literally zero
>I hesitate to say the risk of bladder injury from a normal psychiatric dose of ketamine is literally zero.
The author's hesitation to make such a claim is very important to this quote.
The author's hesitation to make such a claim is very important to this quote.
Impassionata(3)
Holy shit the bias just reeks out of this paper.
[deleted]
hooray another article that focuses on the heavy tail of severe addiction and generalises it to the general public who uses drugs. humanity really needed this!
You know, I thought it was going that way when I started reading it - but by the end, I really didn't feel like you do.
But realistically, it compared dosages of drugs in heavy users compared to regular use at medical doses and the side effects of them. It never stated these were normal users, just stating the things that happen with a lot of use. I was surprised.
Sure, it could have went on to say that occasional recreational use probably won't hurt you, but that's difficult when it could be seen as promoting drugs and a lot of places have pretty draconian drug laws.
But realistically, it compared dosages of drugs in heavy users compared to regular use at medical doses and the side effects of them. It never stated these were normal users, just stating the things that happen with a lot of use. I was surprised.
Sure, it could have went on to say that occasional recreational use probably won't hurt you, but that's difficult when it could be seen as promoting drugs and a lot of places have pretty draconian drug laws.
the title says "drug users use a lot of drugs". either it's shamelessly clickbaiting or it's what the author thinks. we move to the ketamine section, again, "two studies on users". one clicks on the chinese one and the word "chronic" is in the title. the study focuses on them only. the english one is on "addiction research" but the study is more complex than this dude's summary. he says that "both find that they [the users] take about 90mg". this is, of course, not what the UK paper says, as one can check in the paper.
and to your point: some places have draconian laws about possession of MA in the same amounts that get prescribed in the US. if i were from thailand i would argue that this person is shamelessly drugging his patients.
there is nothing wrong with telling the truth about occasional recreational use, and yes, "drug addicts use a lot of drugs". that's a necessary condition for "addiction".
and to your point: some places have draconian laws about possession of MA in the same amounts that get prescribed in the US. if i were from thailand i would argue that this person is shamelessly drugging his patients.
there is nothing wrong with telling the truth about occasional recreational use, and yes, "drug addicts use a lot of drugs". that's a necessary condition for "addiction".
> The average crystal meth addict uses about 500 mg a day. And they snort it, which probably produces about double the peak plasma level as taking it orally. So they're getting the equivalent of 1000 mg oral amphetamine daily...
500mg sounds about right, but from my experience the most common route of administration (in the western United States at least) is smoking, not snorting.
Because so many people smoke meth rather than snort it, a lot of meth is sold as methamphetamine base rather than methamphetamine hydrochloride.
This means that it’s often not particularly water soluble, which makes it a poor choice for snorting since it doesn’t get through your nasal mucosa and actually kicks in after it drips down into your stomach. It’s not actually much different from eating it in many cases.
I like this article overall but I get irritated when I read stuff about drug users that is clearly written by somebody who hasn’t done a lot of drugs.
Edited for spelling. Also if anybody has any questions for me, I’m pretty knowledgeable on this topic (though no expert), so feel free to ask away!