Authorities: Same drug, different colour

[apothecary]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/08/02/1994645.htm

Authorities have played down fears that a new designer drug has hit the streets of Perth

Yesterday, police in Perth made their first seizure of Black Ice during raids on homes in Ballajura and Alexander Heights.

Three senior members of street gangs have been charged over the haul.

Terry Murphy from the Drug and Alcohol Office says Black Ice is simply a combination of methamphetamine and black food dye.

Mr Murphy says it shows drug manufacturers are only interested in making profits.

"We haven't encountered Black Ice before but other jurisdictions have," he said.

"Essentially we understand it as something of a marketing ploy, simply adding colouring to the manufacture of the drug to create the appearance of a new product but in fact it's amphetamine.

"I think this approach to marketing an illicit drug reminds us that the people who produce these products are simply out for profit and they'll use any means to fool people that there's something new and exciting out there.

"Certain myths will be associated with different appearances of drugs such as they're more potent or more effective. People need to remember that a drug is a drug and if it's illegal, it's bound to be dangerous."

[shruman]

"a drug is a drug and if it's illegal, it's bound to be dangerous"

A danger to ur freedom.

[Legba]

so if i have some little green pills, i need to get a script before i take them so they wont be dangerous?

[gerbil]

it's probably being picky, but at the same time chemistry has set rules and specific molecules are specific molecules.

'meth@mphetamine' is mentioned on the picture and in the article and then they go on to say

'"Essentially we understand it as something of a marketing ploy, simply adding colouring to the manufacture of the drug to create the appearance of a new product but in fact it's amphetamine."

I'm no chemist, but with my understanding or at least thought process, @mphetamine refers to the specific @mphetamine molecule, if it goes on to talk about derivatives of amphetamine then my perception tells me it should be referred to as '@mphetamines, or at least specifically make it clear that they are referring to the class of compound derivatives and not the @mphetamine molecule.

Sure it's anal, though if it's being preached to the public who don't have chemistry knowledge, in newspapers etc, I think specific delineations should be made, education can potentially do wonders for substance hysteria in the mass populations imo. It sure beats a confused mass public who react to hot words and are also highly manipulated by, even if they don't know it.

Vague memory tells me i've seen '@mphetamine' used in chemistry literature to refer to the class of derivative compounds, but in these situations it's all relative, the article is aimed at trained chemists and given the context would be (or potentially) be able to know what the writer is talking about...but when it's directed at the public I think it's a whole different story and we are doing ourselves as a society as massive disfavour with all these words being thrown around so erratically.

I've really got no interest in the substances specifically, but I find the media portrayal and communication to the public interesting and highly confusing/manipulative...potentially what a lot of authorities want, but I can't see any positive benefit coming out of these times for any parties involved.

"a drug is a drug and if it's illegal, it's bound to be dangerous" LOL that's pretty funny, screws the whole pharmaceutical world at the same time...if a drug is a drug then the sentence basically stops there and the rest of the writing just makes for red faces.

Edited August 5, 2007 by gerbil

[simon_marklar]

if you want to get really nit picky, it should be called a phenethylamine. amphetamine is Alpha methyl phenetylamine