I think this is the last derailment I'll stomach, so if you've an argument PM it, oth
I hardly ever snort roxys. (And I stand by what I said snorting them is a stupid thing to do, I never said I was perfect!)
Stupid by your standards, not mine. Not the wisest way to ingest a drug, but again your using an inferior word to define something you don't agree with.
Plus you're admitting to have done it, regardless of how you'd criticize YOUR behavior, we aren't so quick to make sweeping generalizations as they aren't helpful and don't explain much.
But anyway, based on this quote, by the logic you've been using, it was stupid and dangerous and anyone attempting it could POSSIBLY be considered either of these things, or both even though it's something you "hardly do." Depends on how narrow-minded you are. I personally don't find terms like "stupid" to fit into objective medical critique's on the personal habits of others. It's just that it's a weak word with what's commonly misconstrued as an emotional and mostly negative connotation attached to it, leading down the endless path of ego arguments when leaving the ego out of the debate is the only real way of having what I'd consider an informative, useful and productive open forum on the subject. I don't think I'm alone in this reasoning.
And I COMPLETELY DISAGREE with you about drugs not being more addictive if you snort/shoot. It doesnt have to be scientific, it is simple to understand I have seen the proof myself.
You're free to disagree, same as I.
Why doesn't it have to by scientific? I don't care that you don't perceive it as such, it clearly is and I'd certainly hope it to be from a harm reduction standpoint. It already is, first off, and not only that, you're going to need some sources before I consider anything you say to have any validity outside your own limited experience with drugs. I doubt your making any of this up unless you're deliberately trolling, which we won't consider at this time and I don't really believe, but without concrete sources backing up your claim, we can't be sure can we?
That said, Thus the science/medical part comes in. You posit that You've "seen the proof yourself." No doubt you have, In isolated cases pertaining to whom? Just you? A friend? Ten Friends? I doubt they have experience with IV 2c's or other newer compounds, but they could I suppose, but I'll remind you that that's what this thread is about, and unless you want to make a thread in Drug Culture, which I encourage you to do mind you You're insistence in claiming your viewpoint as the undeniable holy word on the subject is derailing this thread for no reason other than for the fact that you'd seemingly rather not be proved wrong, a stance I've never thought to be quite productive. If I had an idea, especially one where I'm using hearsay and a weak argument to voice my case, I'd love to be proved wrong or right with a well thought out and researched argument. This way I can experience a broader and perhaps more researched viewpoint and thereby broaden my own knowledge to in turn bring back to our community and help maintain harm reduction with. That's why we're here, of course, at least in core principles. Everything else on the site is just data that comes from assuming that core principle.
I think "stupid" also to be an inferior descriptive term when used here, or anywhere else I can think for that matter, unless pertaining to something so obviously dumb that the word would fit unequivocally without debate. Even then, we're talking commonly accepted stupidity which while not only being albeit lets say, mildly subjective (if a consensus were reached), will seldom come up in any scientific/medical discussion worth its salt.
Where I came from everyone snorted/smoked/shot the roxy's etc. They were all hopeless addicts
One isolated body of users, one class of drugs, one viewpoint among these 'friends' who will serve us as your test subjects, for the moment. First off, this thread isn't about opiates, so this account regardless of the fact of it being completely unverifiable, mentioning only opiates, one class of drugs that are notorious for causing addictive behavior, so your point is moot.
But fuck it, I'll play: what about opiates like dilaudid with very poor oral bioavailability. What about other routes of administration? Many find they get more of a rush with plugged opiates than IV, almost as high a bioavailability, increased duration, instantaneous "rush" or whatever, and no risk in spreading BBP's or ruining ones veins. Now I'm not an IV user as of yet and probably never will be (and certainly not for the opiate class), but even if I were, I see this as MY CHOICE and hardly think my own personal preference would relate to anyone other than me. I don't care for opiates and have done them on and off for ten years, never had a habit. I find them boring and unless I am in bad pain I'll not pay for them and seldom run into them. I've done each one at least once, via Oral, Sublingual, Rectally, Insufflated, but never smoked. Personally it doesn't concern me on what anyone's opinion on my private personal behavior, it's mine and I trust myself in these matters.
Also, I am habituated to clonazepam which can't even be injected, smoked, snorted, or otherwise misused leading to a result more favorable than the prescribed dose as it's medically recommended ROA: Sublingual, or oral. I find this drug to be far more "addictive" than any opiate I've done, in that its harder to quit and I find the WD symptoms to be quite bad and long lasting, I can't imagine an opiate being harder to quit, and I KNOW that the withdrawal lasts quite a bit longer. This isn't relevant when determining overall detrimental effects and is useless information pertaining to what we are discussing, as its one isolated case and thus I can't determine that ORAL is way worse because all my friends who snorted klonopin never got hooked, probably because its not water soluble and absorption orally is close to 100 percent whereas snorting would be less, therefore not worth it and by your logic "safer," equating to what you describe as "hopeless addict" behavior. This is inaccurate, your friends may very well have just gotten more bang for their buck, and may have had yearlong addictions you were unaware of, thus resorting to IV use as it provides 100 percent bioavailability and if they had a high tolerance they'd resort to this route purely from an economic standpoint. We don't know them, so we can't assume this is true, but its a likely situation a popular one among heroin users. Perhaps not applicable in your isolated case, but surely with countless others I've known, many among us even now.
I only ate the drug (snorted once in a blue moon just to try it, and I assure you it doesnt get you as high, doesnt last as long, etc...which leads to the compulsive redosing)
Maybe you perhaps but individually neither of us can get any facts based on one (or two if I'm to be lumped in, may as well) isolated cases whereby we both have differing genetic characteristics determining these tendencies you're arguing are self-evident and common among a majority of the dope using population.
If you simply eat the drugs, they last FAR longer, so you do not need to redose. This is why I never really got addicted to the roxys (But everyone else did) I was only taking 1 a day instead of 5 to 10 like the other people I knew.
Again, I often have to redose many drugs orally. Or say I didn't, I'd still be achieving less drug passing the BBB and would need to take more than my IVing friends, assuming our habits were the same at this time. They'd get fixed on far less than I would. Also, rectal administration would be in my opinion (depending on which drug) far superior to oral as theirs a subtle rush and longer effects generally, at least for me. Again, an isolated case but one that's been commonly espoused as being consistent.
I never had to go to rehab, I quit on my own with minimal withdrawl and I did them for over a year.
I've never had any habit and I've been using opiates on and off since age 16. Smoked, snorted, eaten, rectal, sublingual, various kinds including morphine, oxycodone, hyrdocodone, codiene, kratom, morphine, diacetylmorphine, methadone, buprenorphine, hyrdomorphone. Never IV'd as rectal was superior (for me), especially with low orally active ones like dilaudid. Over ten years experience, doesn't mean anything. I'm me, you can't make the kind of generalization you're trying to make gracefully based on such little data. My use doesn't tell me anything generally, only what applies to me. Everyone is different, this is why we make this a medical question. I'm toying with the idea of posting this in drug culture and show you a bit of what kind of data we would need and then some to postulate what you're trying to. These are your subjective observations/experiences, unless you get gung ho about this issue and really interview close to all IV only drug users as well as all strictly oral drug users, not only here but many other places spanning you at least 2 months research (not worth it imo), we're back to square one, with me and some others even more informed than myself affirming the obvious. You can't make these kinds of generalizations. You just can't (or you could but you'll be received in just the same or similar way, with dissidence.
NOT TO MENTION WE'RE TALKING PSYCHEDELICS HERE WITH LITTLE IF ANY (most entheogens/psychs have none and their use is self-limiting) HABIT FORMING BEHAVIOR ATTACHED TO THEM. So even if you were right about all these things pertaining to opiates, no opiates are being discussed in this thread. This thread is about 4mec, an addictive cathinone I'll grant you that, and 2ce which is absolutely non addictive. I can't even do it twice in two days, and many would agree to sharing a similar experience. Twice a week is pushing it. Once every 6 months and I'm good, even these psychonauts who do develop what we'll call a psychological habit will not suffer physical symptoms when the drug is out of their system.
With psychedelics, assuming they are pure and prepared right, some can lead to otherworldly experiences far different than when taken by other means, same goes for rectal or vaporization or IM or eaten. IV medical grade dmt strikes me as a very safe way to take it as its all absorbed, and you don't have to inhale harmful byproducts that combustion often causes making the very start of the experience a touch uncomfortable. IV ketamine has been revered as an ultimate experience, I've taken IM ketamine, the only needle I"ve ever taken into a muscle or anywhere else for that matter, from sealed med grade vials, although I found snorting superior, contrary to popular opinion on the matter. I don't like IV'ing/Im'ing these things unless absolutely necessary or conducive to a more enriched experience overall. MXE can be said to be vastly different experentially when the ROA is changed for a good example, SL is supposed to be unique to oral and oral unique to intranasal (the only route I've current experience with), etc and so forth. These are the variables we're concerned with primarily in this thread, and my apologies if you were offended by my taking time out of my day to debunk your claims, as stated previously its in no way personal I just can't have misinformation floating about the sight.
So can you see now my point? It's not making the "Drug" itself anymore addictive, what its doing is causing them to do much higher doses and get tolerance much faster, which is causing THE USERS to get far more addicted to the drug.
Saw point before your second post. I just don't agree and am backing up my contention, but I'll add one more to finalize:
Assuming we're back on opiates, (which we should never have wandered onto) typically most experienced IV users keep themselves in check with three shots a day, assuming it was heroin (and usually is statistically) which we'll use as our gold standard on this opiated tangent we're on.
Compulsive redosing is what I think of with IV stimulants, not opiates. Even what you're saying amongst these "friends" was true, they sound like they'd have problems with self control regardless of drug. Or maybe they learned to keep their habits to a minimum, and you never heard about it. Whatever the case, your "first-hand" experience is quite limited and hardly the standard for opiate users. The worst dope fiends I know are on Pain Management and eat percocets all day long, but that's just one isolated case; one that I have seen in the field. I'm just one person AND all drugs affect everyone quite differently at times, so I can't draw conclusions based on such isolated cases.
It's not making the "Drug" itself anymore addictive, what its doing is causing them to do much higher doses and get tolerance much faster, which is causing THE USERS to get far more addicted to the drug.
I'll admit it certainly happens, but so does a lot of shit. My final point is that you can't make that generalization as though it were tried and true science, and will happen more times than not in a field study, or several better yet. You don't need one though because a simple thread in DC will give you the answers and experience you desire, but its not as though its a scientific fact provable in all cases, nor even a sociological likelihood in double blind studies (randomized) or even through taking a survey here.
You may get interesting results, but results is all they'll be. A majority perhaps, although I'd wager a minority of users would reflect your concepts based on what I know of the community. Even with a majority its still not Absolute, which is what you were asserting.
That coupled with the fact that we weren't even TALKING ABOUT OPIATES WHATSOEVER before you brought them up in your rebuttal, after I edited out your verbal attack, so you were clutching at straws. I argued your premise anyhoo, just for the sake of it and to weed out any misconceptions people might draw from these missives.
