Out-of-date drug laws are hurting people

[Legba]

Man dies after chilli-eating contest

It's obvious some, not all, but some people are not responsible enuf to be allowed to have chilli's. My right to use chillis shouldnt be denied by some man-made law for my protection, surely?

[t st tantra]

peanuts can kill....get them covered too!

and parcetamol and penicilin and asprin and morphine ,could all kill!

if someone stuffed a tv set up there ass i expect they would be killed ,so tv can go too!

it all so fucking illogically stupid.....looking for solutions in minefield haystacks of crazyness....even just watching you guys go at it i need some relief!

t s t .

[FancyPants]

Once again it's the abuse of substances that ruin them for everyone else. Well, abuse and greedy corporations trying to keep certain plants like cannabis being used medicinally and industrially as a cheaper alternative...

ABUSE not USE is the issue. Unfortunately there are always going to be selfish and reckless people who just don't give a flying fuck about the consequences of their actions. It's hard to remind anti-drug campaigners that no matter what is illegalised, these people are always going to find something to abuse and it's THEMSELVES that cause the problem, not the drug. A drug is an inanimate object, it has no will to destroy you, only YOU have to will to destroy YOURSELF.

(Sorry about the caps, I'm too used to typing where I can't use italics)

[MindExpansion]

only YOU have to will to destroy YOURSELF

What about once your addicted? You might start using speed or meth because its fun, then you get hooked and can't control your use... thus you certainly didn't start with the 'will' to destroy yourself, nor did you develop a 'will' to destroy yourself, but rather lost the ABILITY to prevent harm to yourself.

Peace

[FancyPants]

I mean knowing you shouldn't have that extra hit of ice, use that third day in a row; the point before which you become addicted. Of course we don't know the precise point but everyone should have at least a vague idea about what's going to be pushing it. If you've got no care at all about the possibility of addiction, it's my POV that you simply have no care for your life. It's very simplistic but I'm not quite in a good enough frame of mind to further elaborate :?

[mark80]

you've all heard of the needle swap program right?

What about a drug swap program.

Where people who score drugs take them into a swap centre, where tehy are givern a pure sample of say heroin. They came in with 100g bag of 60% heroin and they leave with 60grams of pure heroin.

This way drugs are not leaglised, so addictive substances like meth can't just be gottern, which would increase the risk of pople trying it and getting addicted, but also allow drug users to get pure substances. Cause i am guessing alot more dmage is done by impure iodoamphetamine (which iirc is the inetemrdiate? in poorly converted meth) than meth alone.

[MindExpansion]

Interesting suggestion Mark, do you think they could then take the swapped drugs and clean them, purify them, and bag them up to be put back into the program?

Peace

[mark80]

Interesting suggestion Mark, do you think they could then take the swapped drugs and clean them, purify them, and bag them up to be put back into the program?

Peace

I am guessing that would be alot more work than just getting pharamecutical grade stuff.

[MindExpansion]

Yeh you may well be right.

[baphomet]

"from '95 to '05 i never knew ov a drought in Melbourne where there was absolutely nothing around for months on end."

You never even knew about the black market trade of pharmaceutical grade opiates either so I can't say that I'm all that surprised (page 1).

Were you in Melbourne for the entire duration of time? Did you regularly use heroin over that entire period?? Could this be yet another one of those things that went on right under your nose without your knowledge?

"There was always something around, it just took longer to find it."

So called 'heroin' (if you could get it) was being sold at $11,000+ per ounce and it was more like someone was trying to make homeopathic medicine out of whatever heroin was left in circulation before the drought. If I could find a syringe big enough I could have probably injected the whole fucking lot without even feeling the slightest itch.

On the street there was pieces of pills being sold as heroin as well as just plain sugar, lactose, etc mixed with bonding agent and maybe something bitter. Being ripped off was the norm and if you got something with even a trace amount of heroin it was a miracle and forget about getting stoned, even for first timers this was an unreal expectation.

" http://www.theage.com.au/news/Letters/Hero...4028481087.html

i'm not denying that there was a scarcity ov heroin in the early 2000's, but it was certainly still available. Maybe it just seemed like a drought after the flood that came in in the late 90's where you couldn't walk through Footscray without a dozen guys asking if you were "chasing".

The drought that I refer to earlier was well before 2005 and may have been around 2000 I can't say exactly when. It's all a bit of a blur really but I can say for sure that it was much worse than 2005.

The article you posted was not reliable evidence of anything, it is a letter to the editor of the age by some guy who calls himself 'Dr Ian Warren'. First of all.. who the fuck is 'Dr Ian Warren'? If you were quoting people like Dr Kozminsky, Dr Aufgang, Dr Stagg or other well known substance abuse specialists in Melbourne then that might mean something but to me this article doesn't mean shit. It's just the first thing that comes up when you google 'heroin drought in Melbourne'.

He admits that the streets are 'incredibly dry' sometimes and could have been writing this just after the drought was over. There was plenty of people still trying to sell rocks when it was dry too and just cause there is balloons and needles in the street doesn't mean there's no drought.

"Anyway, i'm more interested to know what evidence you have for this leading many people to stop using as opposed to turning to temazepam or ice."

Sorry, just the accounts of people I spoke to, surely not good enough to be relied upon as evidence.. Unless maybe I write it in a letter to the editor of a newspaper and call myself 'Dr Quack'?.. Then someone can google it later and rely on it as evidence.

All I can tell you is that I spoke to people in the waiting room of Genesis Medical Centre in Brighton as well as other places who told me that they were giving up cause there was no dope around anyway and they didn't want to get on methadone. They were given catapress, doloxine, valium, etc by the doctor to do a home detox and others just went cold turkey cause they were practically clean now even though they had been trying to get stoned every day.

I can say for certain that two of those people stayed clean ever since however one recently committed suicide.

You seem to have the idea that if people don't get heroin they are going to use speed instead which I do not believe to be true in most cases, and it is quite an illogical argument. They are two totally different drugs and many heroin addicts consider speed to be a shit drug that causes far to much damage to the brain and I agree.

The article you quoted about heroin addicts using ice cause heroin is hard to find in Perth is rubbish, lets look at what else is written in 'The West Australian' on that page:

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/200.../chronology.htm

"Ice - a cocktail of heroin, speed and other substances - is the latest drug scourge to hit Perth streets, selling for between $100 and $300 a tablet"

It seems that you think that the best way to make a point is to post some bullshit article as if that is supposed to add weight to your argument. I am quite capable of using google to find misinformation for myself if I so choose. The start of this thread consisted mainly of people repeatedly posting bullshit articles cause they had no fucking idea about the subject matter and I had hoped that we had moved away from that but sadly it seems not to be the case. If this is going to be the level of discussion here then I just can't be bothered anymore, I've got better things to do.

Mind Expansion

You have not answered this question so I will ask again.

"I also never suggested a permanently fixed dose, that is dumb."

Then what are you suggesting? And are you sure it's less dumb??

Nor do I believe that with any drug, a drought will lead to people quitting, it may lead to them craving hard for months until they can get on,

I know people who have quit cigarettes after a flu or other illness cause they had already stopped for so long it just seemed silly to start smoking again. People have quit heroin cause they were dry for 5 days and starting to come out of withdrawal let alone months.

"there are many States and places in Australia where heroin is virtually non existant"

"is that a fact?"

Yes!!

"I think that if you tried hard enough you could get it anywhere, you ask your dealer, he asks his supplier he asks whoever, I think eventually you will get your mits on it. So yes, legalise it everywhere, because truth is it doesn't matter where you are, if you really want to try it you can get it anyway, and if your already using then you can obviously get it regardless

I've already said, I'd like to hear why you think use would go up. To my mind, people who want to get into it can find that first hit anyway, this way they will just know what they are getting, how much, how much to pay, and can have that medical and the advice the doc can give to them about the drug and use, so they can make a more informed decision, and then if they do choose to use, they can use it in a safer manner.

"

What your saying is not true, there are many places where heroin is all but impossible to get and to have an addiction to it would be highly unlikely, There are Aboriginal communities (with no heroin) where they can't even have normal petrol for fear that people will abuse it and they will sniff glue, drink metho or whatever else they can get their hands on. You want them to be able to get heroin legally and think that heroin use won't go up in those communities? Come on man..

If you check the stats on crack cocaine addiction between Australia and the US you will see that crack is virtually non existant in Australia (but it is available), likewise cocaine addiction in Melbourne is not as likely as parts of the US or even Sydney cause the coke here is harder to get, FAR more expensive, and just plain shit, often just novacaine, etc. What you are suggesting in all your wisdom is equivalent to flooding Australia with legal crack and saying that use wont go up!

You may have a willfully ignorant and receptive audience on this forum who are prepared to overlook the glaring truth of the matter but the fact still remains that heroin use would sky rocket under what you are proposing and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work it out. I'm confident that most people reading this will realise that even if they are not willing to admit it, it's just common sense, use can ONLY go up!!

Please do not imply that what you are suggesting would lead to people using heroin in a "safe manner". Your theory about saving peoples lives by giving them 6 month repeat prescriptions for heroin is misguided, your excuse was to save them from 'impure heroin' but as you recently admitted, deaths from impure heroin are a rarity. Giving them heroin to take home and inject at will however is going to cause a whole lot of overdoses, the funeral industry would be booming under your laws.

"The improvement comes from the fact that they are given some safety info, a clean needle (and I already went through why it would be better that they can get their needle and their hit in the same place so some people don't rush past the clinic to get to their use a bit quicker), and a clean, and known dose. To me, though that might not involve using in supervised conditions, it does mean you are using clean shit (needles and gear) and you are not gambling on dose purity. How do you think that isn't an improvement?"

You ridicule people who say that clinical administration of heroin is the best way but what do you know about heroin.. really?? Some of these people are doctors who have treated heroin addicted patients for years and have far more knowledge about the matter than you.

There is at least one hurdle with clinical administration that could most likely be overcome but IMO it is the only way to do it. First of all go back to page one to read how even in the current situation pharmaceutical opiates are being sold in large numbers on the black market and you don't have to be a genius to realise what would happen if people could just walk into a doctor and get a 6 month script of heroin to take home, its hard enough now for chemists to stop people smuggling bupe out under their tongue and selling it.

I did not understand your point about people rushing past the clinic but other than that the safety info and clean needle will do fuck all cause clean needles are currently available right next to loads of safety info pamphlets, etc but no one really gives a shit, for you to suggest that a known dose would be a saving grace in a 6 month supply of heroin is laughable.. Your talking about people who doctor shop and self medicate on a regular basis, many inject temezepam even though the doctor advises against it and they're not even deturred by images of peoples balls rotting off which confront them when they go to get needles and you think they are going to stick to the dose that the doctor recommends? Let me tell you what will happen, they will use however much they want and be in a permanent semi conscious/unconscious state and it probably wont take long till they're dead. THEY will decide how much is enough and with heroin you can never really get enough. You need a loaded fit next to your bed and as soon as you sober up enough to have another taste you will.

Edited September 30, 2008 by baphomet

[nabraxas]

The article you posted was not reliable evidence of anything,

it wasn't meant to be evidence ov anything except that other people living in Melbourne & not on the moon didn't see a drought.

You seem to have the idea that if people don't get heroin they are going to use speed instead which I do not believe to be true in most cases, and it is quite an illogical argument. They are two totally different drugs and many heroin addicts consider speed to be a shit drug that causes far to much damage to the brain and I agree.

personally i agree that they are different drugs & apart from the rush don't see the attraction ov ice for a heroin user, however i've heard reports surely not good enough to be relied upon as evidence, so i went googling for some articles.

It seems that you think that the best way to make a point is to post some bullshit article as if that is supposed to add weight to your argument. I am quite capable of using google to find misinformation for myself if I so choose.

i guess it's only "misinformation" & "bullshit" when it doesn't agree with your point ov view.

the

"Ice - a cocktail of heroin, speed and other substances - is the latest drug scourge to hit Perth streets, selling for between $100 and $300 a tablet"

was from a different article to the one i quoted.

Anyhow, have you seen the 4 Corners documentary?

In that documentary a number ov former heroin users explain why they now use ice.

Edited September 30, 2008 by nabraxas

[MindExpansion]

Quote:{"I also never suggested a permanently fixed dose, that is dumb."

Then what are you suggesting? And are you sure it's less dumb??}

Im going to let you re-read what I wrote, where I detail my suggestion in depth, then ask again if you still dont get it. And yes, I am fairly certain that my suggestion isn't dumb.

Quote:

I know people who have quit cigarettes after a flu or other illness cause they had already stopped for so long it just seemed silly to start smoking again. People have quit heroin cause they were dry for 5 days and starting to come out of withdrawal let alone months.

One of the criteria of the fagerstrom test to asses addiction is whether you smoke when you are sickly bed ridden.

And Bapho, I never suggested that YOU don't know anyone, I'm sure you know people who have tried heroin and not become addicted, does that mean its not addictive? Also, in order to quit you need to be WILLING to quit, there is an assessment of willingness to quit a substance that grades you as contemplative, pre-contemplative, in preparation, or in action, these grades are used during cessation planning. People who don't want to quit are in the pre-contemplative stage. So simply not being able to get it does not directly relate to willingness to quit, it might make you think about quitting, and thus decide to change into the contemplative stage, or even the preparation or action stage, but this still relies on the individual, so while you say that inability to access the drug may mean quitting, I say that it is at least equally as likely NOT to lead to quitting. Addiction is a psychological (which is biochemically regulated but lets not get into it at that depth) issue, as much as biochemical (e.g mesolimbic pathway, VTA, NA and dopamine), simply not having access is in no way inherently likely to address the psychological issues associated with addiction, while it MAY do SOMETHING to address the truly biochemical issues of addiction.

"there are many States and places in Australia where heroin is virtually non existant"

"is that a fact?"

Yes!!

How do you know that? You are ripping on others for quoting Dr Warren, when he is not an expert as far as you know, then you say, with no evidence but your personal experience only (I'm assuming, but if you have something to back it up feel free to say).

There are Aboriginal communities (with no heroin) where they can't even have normal petrol for fear that people will abuse it and they will sniff glue, drink metho or whatever else they can get their hands on. You want them to be able to get heroin legally and think that heroin use won't go up in those communities?

Man, the problems in some Aboriginal communities are numerous, and we have banned alcohol there, but does that mean drinking isn't still a problem? No, it is smuggled in, or consumed just outside of town where the ban doesn't apply. I would also love to know where you discovered that there is no heroin in these communities...

What you are suggesting in all your wisdom is equivalent to flooding Australia with legal crack and saying that use wont go up!

Its a choice to be made, I have to make that choice to use it the first time. And I can make an informed one based on proper info from a doc. And no, I still don't buy the argument that more access necessarily = more use.

Why do you think we don't have crack here so much? Is it because we can't get it in? Well we get coke, so they can make crack no worries, so why isn't it done, it'd make them more $ because that is why they did it in the US, so could it not be the case that the reason we don't have it around is because demand isn't high enough. People would rather have cocaine HCl. Not saying that is the reason, but just putting something out there for pondering since you brought up the example.

You may have a willfully ignorant and receptive audience on this forum who are prepared to overlook the glaring truth of the matter but the fact still remains that heroin use would sky rocket under what you are proposing and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work it out. I'm confident that most people reading this will realise that even if they are not willing to admit it, it's just common sense, use can ONLY go up!!

Actually I talked the issue over with a Dr who is certainly an expert in the field and he shared many of the view. Didn't have the chance to get into great detail, but he shared the legalise and regulate opinion...so maybe we aren't the ones being willfully ignorant?

"But the fact still remains that heroin use would sky rocket" --- is that a FACT, or is it your opinion? I'd say the latter, so far I still feel that you haven't presented any reasoning for why heroin use would rise, beyond your own opinion based on your own experience.

"it's just common sense, use can ONLY go up!!" Well tell that to the dutch gov when in holland rates of MJ use are lower than the surrounding countries despite the legality. And also, I might even suggest the possibility that use could even drop, because people being forced to go to a doc to get their fixes, means that if they are struggling with their use and want to stop, they can get assistance from someone qualified because they would be there anyway, where others, under the current laws, may not feel comfortable going to a doctor for that advice and thus just keep using or unsuccessfully trying to quit on their own. This is not however the goal of my proposal so I won't focus on it too much.

Please do not imply that what you are suggesting would lead to people using heroin in a "safe manner". Your theory about saving peoples lives by giving them 6 month repeat prescriptions for heroin is misguided, your excuse was to save them from 'impure heroin' but as you recently admitted, deaths from impure heroin are a rarity. Giving them heroin to take home and inject at will however is going to cause a whole lot of overdoses, the funeral industry would be booming under your laws.

I do believe it leads to safer conditions, and I've explained why many times in this thread alone. And please explain to me how my theory is "misguided", rather than just stating that it is. And yes I did say that impurities as in nasty cutting agents etc are not often the cause of problems, but I also then went on to explain that what I meant by impure, was the difference in the % of actual heroin found in the gear. And I see it to be the case that a lot of overdoses relate to this, where someone hits their usual dose, but it turns out to be twice as much as they're used to because their dealer has a new supplier, or the supplier upped their purity (i.e the % of heroin in the gear). So I think this statement:

Giving them heroin to take home and inject at will however is going to cause a whole lot of overdoses, the funeral industry would be booming under your laws.

Is really ridiculous. Suggest to me how people knowing exactly how much of the active ingredient they are going to using will lead to them OD'ing, and then please enlighten me as to how this is more likely to lead to an OD than people shooting up the same amount of a drug, which may contain more or less active ingredient than what they are used to. And the fact that they are taking it home to use is also irrelivant in the argument because that is what they are doing now!

There is at least one hurdle with clinical administration that could most likely be overcome but IMO it is the only way to do it. First of all go back to page one to read how even in the current situation pharmaceutical opiates are being sold in large numbers on the black market and you don't have to be a genius to realise what would happen if people could just walk into a doctor and get a 6 month script of heroin to take home, its hard enough now for chemists to stop people smuggling bupe out under their tongue and selling it.

Ok so lets look at your reasoning, for someone to make a profit they need to sell for more than they paid, BUT lets remember that whoever they are selling to, can go to the same place they went to, and pick up the same gear, for the same price... so where is the money to be made? Wait...I feel like I'm repeating myself...that might be because I am, read my last few posts again, I cover this, supply and demand and all that. Also, your comparison to the current situation is not relevant, because the reason those pharmaceutical opiates are being sold illegally is because they are only available to some people legally, thus some people are left wanting with no access, so enter the dealers with the diverted legal supplies... in your words, "you don't have to be a genius to realise what would happen if people could just walk into a doctor and get a 6 month script", no one would need diverted ligit stocks, because they can get the ligit stocks directly, thus the black market trade would take a massive hit, but again, I'm repeating what I've said in other posts.

Let me tell you what will happen, they will use however much they want and be in a permanent semi conscious/unconscious state and it probably wont take long till they're dead. THEY will decide how much is enough and with heroin you can never really get enough

Hows that any different to right now? Oh except for the fact that now when they want more they just call their dealer, under my proposal their dealer may well not be in the game anymore because of the REDUCED (not deceased) demand, and the pharmacy will only give them what is on the script.

the safety info and clean needle will do fuck all cause clean needles are currently available right next to loads of safety info pamphlets

Ahh exactly, some people don't bother going and getting the clean needle, those that do will often totally ignore that pamphlet, and even if they are given the pamphlet with the needle, they will probably toss it straight away anyway... Where as if I go to get my hit, and my doc sits me down and explains it all to me, it means more because of where its coming from, and I have to hear it (whether or not I actually take it in is up to me, but again, those who don't take it in from the doc aren't going to be reading those pamphlets either, so they are certainly no worse off, and something the doc says might stick with them even if they don't really intend to take it in.) where I can easily choose not to open the pamphlet at all.

and you think they are going to stick to the dose that the doctor recommends?

They know their dose, does a heroin addict shoot up 2 grams just because they have it? No, because they'll probably die, and they know that. So I don't see why they wouldn't stick to the dose, its not a weak dose, its a dose that is going to smash them as much as their normal hit, so they don't need more. You say that you need another fit next to the bed for the next hit, so your obviously not suggesting that a heroin user will ignore their own dose needs and shoot all they have in one go, or they wouldnt have anything left to save for that next fit, so I don't see why users wouldn't exercise the same restraint they currently do, to use as much as they know will work for them, but not too much to stop them getting that next fit. Explain if and how I'm wrong, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning for why they'd ignore the dose advice if they knew a dose was going to be equivalent to what they would normally be hitting.

From your whole last paragraph, I don't gather how you're showing that they would be worse off under what I have suggested.

Peace, loving the discussion

[planthelper]

i don't think those issues can be solved by argumenting ones facts, reports, references, or whatever over somebody's elses opinon. when it comes to our views about drug use, our personaleties seem to be very reluctant to take on board new thoughts, specialy if they oppose our own.

one one side of the spectrum might be some zero tolerance, law enforcers and some media (killer party drug, has struck again, the drug becomes the ultimate villan!!)

and on the other side, some users, who think cannabis should be put into the watersupply, and that drug taking is the best thing in the world.

i think, that both sides share something in common and that is denial!

i would go so far to say that it is predjudice on both sides, intocrinated, by the surroundings, is quite the same as, statments like, blacks rape white girls, homos attack young boy's on toilets and so on...

i guess the beer drenched, nicotin stained, proletarian, makes himselfe feel a bit better, by saying death penalty for drug dealers, as it gives him the ilusion that his habits are ok, worse even, alcohol abuse gets glamorised repeatedly.

maybe some people stop using because of a draught, and maybe some people and the communety would benefit from some pharma grade prescribed heroin, but apart from those different aims, i feel that the cultural aspects get totaly ignored, although that is the way change could happen.

if you want to "save the world" from pollution you have to educate the young and than they will carry the message to granddad. and we know this works because, young people these days are totaly different when it comes to those matters, than the baby boomers.

how you are brought up and how you have been educated, might make the big difference, when it comes to drug use,

i am not saying that, a certain cultural influence and education is a 100% save guard against drug dependancy, but statisticly by bet is on that, "teach your children well" would make a big difference.

maybe, "rubbish on the streets and everywhere" could be an indicator of those cultural differences, as i notice everytime, i travel from some european countries to some others.

if, drugs and rubbish are some indicators of different cultural aspects, than i say that litter bins and street cleaners are a good idea and are available in all of those countries, but still, one country is littered, and the other is tidy!!

you will not fix the drug problems, with laws about drugs, which are like what litter bins are for rubbish,

one has to give the right cultural stimuli to achive change, every thing else will not work.

[t st tantra]

somethings changing.........

5 years ago i'd see needles and paraphenalia every day lying on the ground,but seeing a needle a few months back made me realise it had been over a year since the previous one i had seen.

is it the same in other areas?

t s t .

[MindExpansion]

What do you think that is an indicator of tantra?

Peace

[notguilty]

THE AUSTRALIAN “HEROIN SHORTAGE”

SIX YEARS ON:

WHAT, IF ANY, ARE THE IMPLICATIONS

FOR DRUG POLICY?

http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/pdf/Beckl...Shortage_EN.pdf

[baphomet]

Entheofarm what are you trying to prove by posting that article?

[t st tantra]

What do you think that is an indicator of tantra?

Peace

really dont know.......thats part of my reason for asking........disengaged from such scenes years ago!

could be.......

less use of drugs[availability or choice]

change of drug being used

change of method of ingestion[meth pipe?]

needles going back for exchange

less paranoia about possession of implements

but there have been less needle packets and baggies lying around too?

t s t .

[notguilty]

Some more factual well researched reading

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00006896/

http://drjiggens.com/essays_articles.html

Mods and admin please let me know if I am posting anything I shouldn't, as it has come to my attention my posts may be upseting some who feel they can dictate what and why people post.

[baphomet]

Come on mate, you wonder why I call you a drama queen? I simply asked you what you were trying to prove? What point are you trying to make?? Are you even capable of putting forth an opinion of your own or speaking for yourself? Is this going to come down to who can google the most scholarly article to prove their point? If I can come up with more valid material than you and discredit yours does that mean I'm right? Shall I get started??

There is a separate thread for articles that will help with the fight against prohibition, maybe you would be better off posting there instead? Unless you are prepared to put forth an opinion of your own? This is supposed to be a discussion is it not? The articles you are posting could be interpreted to reinforce the point that I was trying to make so just what is it your trying to say??

Edited October 5, 2008 by baphomet

[Mr Stay Puft]

Probably not seeing needles coz the youth are on the crack pipes now days... It seems more fun to be running around 'tweaking' for several days than bumed out at home with constipation.

To be total honest i think ice is the new heroin, but its not as obvious as people aint just chucking their crack pipes in bushes!

[notguilty]

hic-up

Edited October 11, 2008 by entheofarm

[MindExpansion]

Still waiting to hear what you've got to say bout my last big post bapho, thought we were getting into a nice interesting convo.

Peace

[baphomet]

"it wasn't meant to be evidence ov anything except that other people living in Melbourne & not on the moon didn't see a drought."

Well it wasn't! It seems to me that he was writing in to say that the heroin drought was now over (not that he is an authority on anything anyway). The guy said that there are periods where the streets are "incredibly dry", posting that only served to reinforce my point and prove that what you are saying is bullshit.

You speak as though you were intimately aware of the availability of heroin in Melbourne over a 10 year period but made it quite clear earlier in this thread that you know fk all about the illicit trade of opiates so please, stop being contrary just for the sake of it, it's obvious (to me at least) that you have absolutely no idea what your talking about!!

I noticed you conveniently skipped these questions so I ask again:

"Were you in Melbourne for the entire duration of time? Did you regularly use heroin over that entire period?? Could this be yet another one of those things that went on right under your nose without your knowledge?"

"i agree that they are different drugs & apart from the rush don't see the attraction ov ice for a heroin user"

There was a massive increase in meth at a certain point in time, this was a worldwide phenomenon and not isolated to Australia (It also effected Asia, America, etc). This was due to certain people deciding to produce and sell more of it not due to a heroin drought in Aus.

Ice is no substitute for heroin, they are two very different drugs and legalisation of heroin is a separate issue.

I remember when Ice (shabbu) was mostly used by a few Indonesian students but with an increase in availability, use went up! Perhaps ME should take note of this.

"was from a different article to the one i quoted. Anyhow, have you seen the 4 Corners documentary?"

You posted a link to a chronology used by 4 corners. That chronology relied upon several different sources and articles from various news papers. The quote that you used as evidence was from 'The West Australian' and the quote that I used was from also from 'The West Australian' and was also part of that chronology.

The fact that 'The West Australian' printed this and 4 corners used it for their chronology discredits both of them.

"Ice - a cocktail of heroin, speed and other substances - is the latest drug scourge to hit Perth streets, selling for between $100 and $300 a tablet"

I think I have seen the documentary that you are referring to, is it the one with the bum who sleeps in a cardboard box and meets up with his friend who just got out of jail and they discuss their "icecapades"? And there is a guy with a pony tail who's girlfriend is heavily pregnant and they are still using ice?? Someone should shoot that bitch!

There's a good drug law for ya, women like that who are pregnant and still use drugs like meth should be fkn sterilized! If not shot!! Time to clean the slime from the bottom of the human gene pool I say.

Mind Expansion

Quote:{"I also never suggested a permanently fixed dose, that is dumb."

Then what are you suggesting? And are you sure it's less dumb??}

Im going to let you re-read what I wrote, where I detail my suggestion in depth, then ask again if you still dont get it. And yes, I am fairly certain that my suggestion isn't dumb.

I have re read what you wrote and I still can't see where you have gone into this in enough detail for me to "get it", so for the last time, what are you proposing in relation to dose? Please be specific. How do you intend to deal with tolerance? You say this would be factored into dose so does that mean you would have a permanently escalating dose? Will there be a cut off point? How do you expect to fulfill the ravenous drug lust of many heroin addicts who just can't get enough?

"One of the criteria of the fagerstrom test to asses addiction is whether you smoke when you are sickly bed ridden."

So if someone doesn't smoke when they are sickly bed ridden that means they are not addicted is that right? Addiction can be measured by a questionaire dreamed up by some guy named 'fagestrom' can it??

What you are trying to say is that if a serious illness like emphysema causes someone to stop smoking they were never seriously addicted in the first place, it's bullshit! Mr fagestrom can go and get fucked!!

"I'm sure you know people who have tried heroin and not become addicted, does that mean its not addictive? Also, in order to quit you need to be WILLING to quit"

If you are suggesting that the people I was referring to earlier were not addicted to heroin you're wrong. All though it may not be a common scenario, the lack of heroin during a drought has been enough motivation for people who wanted to quit, to quit for good and has greatly reduced overdoses, etc.

"there are many States and places in Australia where heroin is virtually non existant"

"is that a fact?"

Yes!!

How do you know that? You are ripping on others for quoting Dr Warren, when he is not an expert as far as you know, then you say, with no evidence but your personal experience only (I'm assuming, but if you have something to back it up feel free to say).

Since my own personal experience is not enough it seems I must resort to posting the results of surveys, now I'm speaking your language right?

http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/...e/db_oct00_.pdf

I know from my own personal experience and that of aquaintences who have been to Queensland that there is fuck all heroin there, (at least there wasn't last time I heard) from what I was told from several people, if you could get it (which was a small miracle), it sold for approx $500 a gram and was not worth a knob of goat shit because it had been jumped (not stepped) on by bikers.

Occasionally these fat useless white trash pieces of shit come down to Melbourne or Sydney to buy heroin to take back up there and I know that they find it hard to get good gear and pay quite a bit for it, usually wanting to swap it for speed. Not many people want to deal with them, probably due to their body odour.

Therefore I was not surprised to read this in that article:

"Amphetamine injection was highest in Queensland, where the prevalence of amphetamine injection exceeded that of heroin"

I have also heard that there was very little heroin in Perth and people used pharmaceutical opiates instead if they could get their hands on them, nabraxas quoted an article before saying that (quote): "heroin is hard to find in Perth".

According to that article, the Northern Territory had the lowest reported use of heroin (12%) as opposed to Victoria (87%). They were mainly using morphine which is obviously due to the fact that they find it very difficult to get heroin up there.

It seems they couldn't even find enough injecting drug users in Tasmania to complete the survey properly and so results had to be omitted. And look at the number of people from The NT in the survey, this is a good indication that IV drug use is not as common there either.

The NT and Tasmania don't even have a methadone program.

"There are Aboriginal communities (with no heroin) where they can't even have normal petrol for fear that people will abuse it and they will sniff glue, drink metho or whatever else they can get their hands on. You want them to be able to get heroin legally and think that heroin use won't go up in those communities?"

"Man, the problems in some Aboriginal communities are numerous, and we have banned alcohol there, but does that mean drinking isn't still a problem? No, it is smuggled in, or consumed just outside of town where the ban doesn't apply. I would also love to know where you discovered that there is no heroin in these communities..."

Mate shouldn't it be up to you to do some research and find this shit out before claiming that you are campaigning for "sensible" drug laws? You have no idea what is going on in this country regarding heroin use, you admittedly have no personal experience with the drug or opiates in general for that matter, you certainly are not a doctor who specialises in heroin abuse and do not have enough credentials to advise the government on drug policy and IMO do not even have the right to speak about heroin or opiate abuse with any sort of authority at all!! Is it really any wonder that the government wont take people like you seriously???

"What you are suggesting in all your wisdom is equivalent to flooding Australia with legal crack and saying that use wont go up!"

"Its a choice to be made, I have to make that choice to use it the first time. And I can make an informed one based on proper info from a doc. And no, I still don't buy the argument that more access necessarily = more use."

Mate, I don't buy into the idea that you haven't figured out yet that making heroin legal and freely available would increase use, I think your a reasonably intelligent guy and IMO it would require the most severe mental impairment not to be able to see such an obvious fact, I'm putting it down to stubborn pride.

This is a quote from the article that entheofarm kindly posted outlining the effects of a heroin drought in NSW:

What was the impact on heroin-related harm?

"The most notable and the most important effect was an abrupt 67%

reduction in fatal and nonfatal opioid overdoses (in NSW in 2001)

(Degenhardt et al., 2005c). Deaths in Australia due to opioids among

those aged 15-54 years declined from 1116 in 1999, to 386 in 2001,

and have remained at this reduced level since (Degenhardt and

Roxburgh, 2007a)."

Listen, if there are such things as heroin droughts (which there are) that means that with the constant supply that you are advocating use would go up.

Likewise if there are states where heroin is difficult to obtain and you made it freely available, use can only go up, it's not fucking rocket science!!

"Giving them heroin to take home and inject at will however is going to cause a whole lot of overdoses, the funeral industry would be booming under your laws."

"Is really ridiculous. Suggest to me how people knowing exactly how much of the active ingredient they are going to using will lead to them OD'ing, and then please enlighten me as to how this is more likely to lead to an OD than people shooting up the same amount of a drug, which may contain more or less active ingredient than what they are used to."

Look at the above exert taken from the article about a heroin drought, see the decrease in heroin related deaths? Subtract the small number from the big number, that's the approximate number of people who would be dead if it wasn't for the fact that they couldn't get enough heroin. With your bright idea of giving them an unlimited supply of heroin and allowing them to take home a 6 month supply you could expect that big number to go through the fucking roof, this is simple mathematics based on common sense which seems to be a scarce commodity around here ATM.

You keep harping on about "knowing how much they are using" as if it somehow matters. I said it before and I'll say it again.. Heroin addicts don't give a shit how much a doctor tells them to use!! The vast majority of these people go doctor shopping and frequently exceed the recommended dose of countless different drugs and many inject temazepam when the doctor tells them not to, they can see leaflets featuring rotting body parts as a result of this practice which try to put them off doing it, these leaflets are right next to the needles that they use to do it with and are handed to them by their doctors but they just go ahead and do it anyway so please just so you know, when you talk about "education" being the key and saving lives just be aware that your not fooling everyone.

Heroin addicts will use as much heroin as they want! It doesn't matter what anyone tells them, they will use till they're stoned/dead, simple as that!!

"Ahh exactly, some people don't bother going and getting the clean needle, those that do will often totally ignore that pamphlet, and even if they are given the pamphlet with the needle, they will probably toss it straight away anyway... Where as if I go to get my hit, and my doc sits me down and explains it all to me, it means more because of where its coming from, and I have to hear it (whether or not I actually take it in is up to me, but again, those who don't take it in from the doc aren't going to be reading those pamphlets either, so they are certainly no worse off, and something the doc says might stick with them even if they don't really intend to take it in.) where I can easily choose not to open the pamphlet at all."

Mate everyone has to go and get a clean needle at some stage cause they go blunt. Just about everyone who uses has been to a needle exchange and gotten clean needles before and what makes you think that the doctor doesn't go through the dangers of temazepam, heroin, etc now?

You say that having a doc tell you these things means more than reading a pamphlet, maybe that's cause you haven't seen the pamphlet?

Here is the front cover of it, you don't want to see what's inside, they have them positioned to catch people's attention and I know for a fact that these pamphlets are a much talked about thing among injecting drug users, some of whom still inject temazepam anyway.

"And the fact that they are taking it home to use is also irrelivant in the argument because that is what they are doing now!"

No it's not irrelavant, it just suggests that the people advocating use in supervised clinics have a better idea than you!

They know their dose, does a heroin addict shoot up 2 grams just because they have it? No, because they'll probably die, and they know that.

like I said I know a vietnamese girl who used over 1/2 oz a day NP, she used a 3ml syringe and had more than 2g in each taste. 2g is nothing!

That's part of my point, for your average thieving junky maybe this would be a little too much but when people are involved in trafficking and have access to large quantities, tolerance goes up dramatically, imagine how much use would go up if everyone was given as much as they wanted.

"I don't see why they wouldn't stick to the dose"

That's exactly why you shouldn't be making policy decisions like this. Cause your extremely naive, misguided, misinformed, ideologically driven and everything else that you accused the government of being in relation to this issue.

"its not a weak dose, its a dose that is going to smash them as much as their normal hit, so they don't need more. You say that you need another fit next to the bed for the next hit, so your obviously not suggesting that a heroin user will ignore their own dose needs and shoot all they have in one go, or they wouldnt have anything left to save for that next fit"

Hey, you said you were going to send them home with a 6 month supply and your going to give them as much as they want anyway right? So how can they possibly run out? If you say no to this then your point about the black market becomes obsolete, your whole argument is falling to pieces.

If you give them less than what they want and they're still alive in 2 months they will be saying uh.. doc.. I ran out, like they do with valium. That's why doctors often make them go to the chemist to pick up their daily dose of valium because they can't be trusted with a whole script What makes you think it's going to be different with a 6 month supply of heroin? (lmfao)

"Why do you think we don't have crack here so much? Is it because we can't get it in? Well we get coke, so they can make crack no worries, so why isn't it done, it'd make them more $ because that is why they did it in the US, so could it not be the case that the reason we don't have it around is because demand isn't high enough. People would rather have cocaine HCl. Not saying that is the reason, but just putting something out there for pondering since you brought up the example."

We do have crack here, I have been offered it before but it is extremely rare.

The reason we don't have much crack in this country is because we have very little cocaine here, it's much different to the US where cocaine is abundant.

In the US there is a different market for people who want cocaine and crack cocaine. If cocaine became legal and freely available or was even cheaper and more easily available here use would definitely go up! I know that for a fact cause I would use it myself!!

Likewise if crack became legal and freely available here there would no doubt be thousands more crack addicts here in no time.. as opposed to how many there are here now which is.. what... none?

You could have said the same about ice, that the reason there was not much of it around was because demand wasn't high enough but look what happened when they decided to flood the place with it, USE WENT UP!!!

Actually I talked the issue over with a Dr who is certainly an expert in the field and he shared many of the view.

I guess I'll just have to take your word on that but was he a just a GP or a specialist licensed to prescribe drugs like methadone and subutex?

"Well tell that to the dutch gov when in holland rates of MJ use are lower than the surrounding countries despite the legality"

We've already been through this and you still have no valid reply to this article (add hominem attacks won't do):

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/bldea050426_3.htm

"Consider the experience of the Netherlands, where the government reconsidered its legalization measures in light of that country's experience.

After marijuana use became legal, consumption nearly tripled among 18- to 20-year-olds. As awareness of the harm of marijuana grew, the number of cannabis coffeehouses in the Netherlands decreased 36 percent in six years.

Almost all Dutch towns have a cannabis policy, and 73 percent of them have a no-tolerance policy toward the coffeehouses."

"Let me tell you what will happen, they will use however much they want and be in a permanent semi conscious/unconscious state and it probably wont take long till they're dead. THEY will decide how much is enough and with heroin you can never really get enough"

"Hows that any different to right now? Oh except for the fact that now when they want more they just call their dealer, under my proposal their dealer may well not be in the game anymore because of the REDUCED (not deceased) demand, and the pharmacy will only give them what is on the script."

Now people can only get as much as they can afford and at certain times and places they can't get it at all. You are proposing that we give them as much as they want but then say that the pharmacy will only give them what is on the script, that is contradictory and invalidates this next point that you tried to make:

"no one would need diverted ligit stocks, because they can get the ligit stocks directly, thus the black market trade would take a massive hit"

I made it quite clear that my statement about heroin going onto the black market was made under the assumption that you were not going to just give people as much heroin as they wanted and not have a max dose, if you are going to do this then resale on the black market in Australia would be far less of an issue, the issue then would be the massive death toll here and the sale of our legal heroin overseas.

"Still waiting to hear what you've got to say bout my last big post bapho, thought we were getting into a nice interesting convo."

Man this is exhausting, it's 3:00am and I'm fucked, (just when I thought I'd gotten my sleeping pattern back in order). I have enjoyed discussing this with you though.

I have been flat out and will be busy for the next week or so, please take this into account if I take a while to reply.

Edited October 12, 2008 by baphomet

[Tree Sloth]

Forgive my naivete, but what's so bad about opiate addiction?

I've seen benzo addiction first hand - there's no question about it, it makes you insane; Angry, violent and confused. And the withdrawal is terrifying to see - delirium, convulsions, etc. I've learned the hard way not to put my hand in someone's mouth when they're fitting.

But opiates? I know they're addictive but what actual harm do they do?

If addicts could get a fix at the chemist every day, what would prevent them being functional members of society?