Do NOT inject

[Raving Loony]

Whether you think it's in inappropriate for someone to inject is irrelevant. This is not the place to preach that sort of didactic dogma. The truth is that you can administer medication/drugs safely, that is a fact. Nothing more to be said on the matter. I personally could never perform IV on myself because when I look down on my arm I don't want to do it, in fact I crawl into a little anxiety ball because of it. But hell on countless, countless times I've plugged, smoked and snorted despite them being more harmful administration methods than a proper IV administration.

 

[MazDan]

Dear Runner,

Firstly allow me to say that I applaud your efforts and the fact that you have a hobby horse and are prepared to get on it and have a go.

It is important to understand however that different people respond to different methods of being provided with information.

A large majority I feel do not like to be told what to do or to be told that they are morons or stupid etc.

hence if you are serious about getting your message across then it might be an idea to look at the different methods of getting it home.

On page one an alternative method of saying "If you IV street drugs then you are stupid" (Or words to that effect) was put and it did not flame the person who was considering doing the IVing which in many cases is more likely to get the message accross.

It should however be noted that in many cases it is necessary to create a scene in order to get someone thinking about something and in this case flaming can be of assistance.

For example if you had simply made your statements about IVing being dangerous etc without the flaming then it is quite likely that not many would have taken to much interest hence the thread would have lasted a short period and gained less readers.

I for one am only here now because it has been getting attention and I wanted to see what the who har was about.

The bottom line is that you need to understand the different ways that people respond to things and try to use all of the tools available in order to get the message home to the maximum number of people.

Hope this all makes sense.

 

[Runner]

The truth is that you can administer medication/drugs safely, that is a fact. Nothing more to be said on the matter.

Raving Looney: please take the time to read the whole thread. I think you missed the point completelly. To reiterate, IV method of administration creates the greatest physiological effect on the body out of all other other methods. The quality of street drugs can be very low. Combine those 2, and you have a recipe for a possible disaster. One must be stupid to inject something into their blood stream that they don't know anything about. Equally, someone must be stupid to pick up a bag of powder from the floor in the toilets and empty the powder down their throat. The effect of the impurity in the injectable drug on the system when injected can be equated to the effect a bag of a possibly toxic substance can have on the system when injested. This is a hypothetical analogy to give people some kind of a frame of reference to view IV in.

To give a couple of examples in relation to the specific drugs, street speed is usually between 10% and 20% pure. The rest is often poisonous impurities from the *cooking* process. A lot of the time, the cutting agent, which can be harmful also, is only 10% or so. Heroin is often made in home labs also. Its called "home bake". I don't know how wide spread this is, but seeing that the process involved in making home bake is quite simple, I see these "chemists" being even less competent than the meth cooks.

MazDan: You right in most things you said.

 

[SteveElektro]

Home bake is far more common in Perth than it is in Melbourne (at least when I lived there), in New Zealand it's pretty much all you can get, although that doesn't necessarily point to bad quality if the process is done well.
The stuff on Melbourne streets is by and large imported, most Australian gear is.

 

[Runner]

although that doesn't necessarily point to bad quality if the process is done well.

"IF" being the operative word here. A while back I read a post on some news group from some smack "cook" that was bragging about his skill in making home bake... I took the time to look up the actual process involved in the many resources available on the net, and it didn't take me long to realise that all the "skillful" shortcuts that this cook was taking could possibly lead to a formation of some very nasty things. In fact he'd be lucky to get 10% of what he was after.

 

[SteveElektro]

^^True, I don't for a second think that home bake cooks always use methods that come close to what one would consider 'good'
A neighbour of mine when I lived in Perth died from home bake, though that was a suicide. IUt was the first I'd heard of the practice though, which I later found wasn't that uncommon out west.

 

[shrredda]

Unfortunatelly, many have failed to see that the best advice in fact IS not to inject AT ALL and concentrated on giving the many advices.

Which we have all now done.

 

[SteveElektro]

Don't want venereal diseases? Abstain!
8)

 

[Runner]

Which we have all now done.

I am not sure if I was clear enough in the sentence you quote... What I was meant to say, is that many have concentrated on giving advices about "safe" injection practices and not enough on discouraging injecting all together.

I don't however discourage freedom of information. The more *responsible* information, the better. However, since this discussion keeps going, let me just quote BT:

Drink, Drive, Bloody Idiot.
IV Street Drugs, Fucking Moron.
Both of these messages mean well, but IMHO fall well short of making people reconsider their actions.

Perhaps the "Drink, Drive, Bloody Idiot" may not sway some, but I doubt the government would spend all the money if the campaign was 100% ineffective. In fact I would not be surprised if it is the MOST effective way, because there simply is no other way.

Now to the main point.... You don't see the government providing safety tips on driving pissed do you? And as much as I hate the system in oh so many ways, it would be ludicrous to expect the government to hand out "How to drive when really hammered" panphlets. If one was to really challenge the drink driving campaign, the idea of rasing the legal blood alcohol level would sound more reasonable then the mentioned idea. Just something to think about.

 

[BigTrancer]

No, of course they don't specifically give out information about driving safely while drunk -- However, there is a legal limit beyond which the government has decided that it is unsafe to drive, and therefore has legislated against allowing people to drive drunk, rather than suggest safer ways to go about it. The analogy for injecting in the case of this argument is your own - however you redefine legal as non-stupid, and illegal as stupid - by your thought process it is a 'legal' (non-stupid) thing to inject pure injectible solutions and pure drugs, but it is 'illegal' (or stupid) to inject impure drugs (this definition should, in practice, be extended to include certain pure pharmaceutical products also which are hazardous to inject, such as crushed tablets, normison gel capsules, etc.).

Again, I reiterate that both of these approaches are helpful, but if someone wants to go to excess in the case of drinking before driving, or to excess in the case of injecting street drugs (regardless of the impurities) then neither of the above approaches helps to make that decision safer for the person, or the people around them. The message is obscured in the delivery, because the person switches off instantly, before even beginning to consider the reasons WHY the message was phrased in such a way. Since alcohol is legal, and there is a legal limit, the government can't be seen to show any leeway on that limit. Otherwise it's like saying "Don't break the law, but if you do, be careful not to hurt yourself". However, we don't enforce the non-stupidity part, because it's everyone's right to make their own mistakes or refuse to learn from the mistakes of others. What comes with exercising that right is a set of circumstances or outcomes, which aren't always apparent to the person when making their decision.

While it is legal, sensible, safer and non-stupid to avoid driving drunk and shooting up dirty street drugs, some people WILL still undertake these actions regardless of their stupidity or circumstances at the time. Quite often judgement can be impaired through existing drug use or withdrawal, mitigating circumstances, or simply lack of forethought or appreciation of the consequences. Impaired judgement doesn't necessarily imply stupid, however, and I think that taking the time to explain the consequences, and ways to circumvent them, helps people to get a better vantage point from which to make the decision, which is ultimately their own to make.

BigTrancer

 

[Runner]

Agreed!

...and I think that taking the time to explain the consequences, and ways to circumvent them, helps people to get a better vantage point from which to make the decision, which is ultimately their own to make.

I'm glad you have shifted the *emphasis* from "explian the ways to do it safely" to "explain the consequences" that many keep on the former. Both should be expressed perhaps, but the latter being the *main* highlight.

 

[Trillian]

That's a well constructed sentence Now how does it relate to what I have said thus far? I don't recall this debate being about "why people are motivated to act in this fashion". You've lost me somewhere.

You claim that people who IV 'street' drugs are stupid, no? And hence, are taking a stance on what motivates people to inject them -> stupidity.

To me, (although forgive me if my analytical skills are not on par with your own ) it appears you are arguing stupidity as the motivational force behind people IVing a substance that is inherently dangerous and potentially lethal. The conclusion you seem to draw from this assumption is that we should call them morons and generally yell at them until they stop. Gee, what a wonderfully pragmatic and revolutionary concept. Why on earth hasn't anyone thought of this before?

The arguements (sic) that I bring up in relation to the harm that is caused by the injection of street drugs should be so compelling that in my opinion only someone with half a brain OR someone that is desperatelly (sic) trying to justify themselves would argue against it.

Why exactly do you profess yourself an authority on why people IV street drugs? Are you a trained counsellor, psychologist, carer at a rehabilitation clinic? I guess i have a problem with the presumed pulpit of authority from which you preach your case.

Your basic argument: Hey, it's dangerous and potentially lethal, so let's try to discourage the practice, has had it's chance in the sun. It's often referred to by the name 'zero tolerance', and as far as i can tell, it hasn't ever worked in relation to recreational drug use.

And that friend of yours you began your post with... Do you think she is a little uncomfortable with coming in the open and saying, yes, I IV methamphetamine especially in this thread? Ask her that? And also why?

argh. I'm far too tired to attempt to convincingly convince you over the net that I'm not personally an IV user. Presume what you will. The reason i had logged on the other night to search for information is because i'm concerned about a friend of mine who has begun to IV methylamphetamine. I am deeply worried about the consequences of this practice, but have not been able to persuade him to desist.

I can't live with the idea that just because i judge his actions to be unsafe, i won't do my best to try and preserve him from at least a certain amount of harm. The way i can do that is by providing information about the practice, without jumping down his throat, or making stupid generalisations about his intellect.

 

[Runner]

You claim that people who IV 'street' drugs are stupid, no? And hence, are taking a stance on what motivates people to inject them -> stupidity.

The answer is yes, and then NO. Firstly, stupidity doesn't motivate anyone to do anything. Stupidity is an attribute which is aquired by a person through their actions. The motives for people injecting are many and complex. The motives are quite irrelevant to this discussion because none would justify IV of *dirty* street drugs. This discussion is about the harm caused by the IV of dirty street drugs. And yes, the concept of IVing dirty street drugs is fundamentally "stupid" as I've tried to point out before which is of course reflected on the person doing it.

"The arguements (sic) that I bring up in relation to the harm that is caused by the injection of street drugs should be so compelling that in my opinion only someone with half a brain OR someone that is desperatelly (sic) trying to justify themselves would argue against it."

Why exactly do you profess yourself an authority on why people IV street drugs? Are you a trained counsellor, psychologist, carer at a rehabilitation clinic? I guess i have a problem with the presumed pulpit of authority from which you preach your case.

Again, where in the quoted by you statement do I talk about "why people IV street drugs"? I'm not any of the people you have mentioned, but I am someone who is very well aware of the dangers involved in the IV administration of dirty street drugs. I have claimed many a danger in the past posts to back up my ideas. I haven't yet had ONE rebuttal on the validity of my claims so I assume everyone agrees.

Your basic argument: Hey, it's dangerous and potentially lethal, so let's try to discourage the practice, has had it's chance in the sun. It's often referred to by the name 'zero tolerance', and as far as i can tell, it hasn't ever worked in relation to recreational drug use.

Fuck yeh it has worked. I know a shitload of people that will NOT under any circumstances use IV. This is because the idea of the dangers associated has been instilled in them very early on.

argh. I'm far too tired to attempt to convincingly convince you over the net that I'm not personally an IV user. Presume what you will. The reason i had logged on the other night to search for information is because i'm concerned about a friend of mine who has begun to IV methylamphetamine. I am deeply worried about the consequences of this practice, but have not been able to persuade him to desist.

Convinced. I was only joking. I'm glad you are doing your bit to help a friend.

I can't live with the idea that just because i judge his actions to be unsafe, i won't do my best to try and preserve him from at least a certain amount of harm. The way i can do that is by providing information about the practice, without jumping down his throat, or making stupid generalisations about his intellect.

Why not jump down his throat, insult his intellect, insult whatever else you can, then slam a few doors and have a big yell, and THEN leave whatever information you have gathered for him on his table and storm out?

 

[SteveElektro]

Again, where in the quoted by you statement do I talk about "why people IV street drugs"? I'm not any of the people you have mentioned, but I am someone who is very well aware of the dangers involved in the IV administration of dirty street drugs. I have claimed many a danger in the past posts to back up my ideas. I haven't yet had ONE rebuttal on the validity of my claims so I assume everyone agrees.

Your claims show you are an absolutist, in that you can't see the relative nature of a term like "stupidity", also, while this in no way refutes your arguments, I assert again that people may know the dangers, yet choose to do so as a measured and balanced risk/reward exersize, myself included.
I know its risky, but I am a thrillseeker, and prefer to live a life of extremes, in spite of the risks associated with it.
I am prepared to deal with the consequences, and I know I have only myself to blame should anything go wrong.
This is my right, and I exersize it.
If you want to call me stupid, that's fine, but like I have said before, the way I and others choose to live is none of your business, and if you feel the need to call us stupid, then that's both your own perogative and your own obsession, and when it comes down to it, your own problem.
Elektro, signing off --

 

[Nice Tits]

Runner - I think that u need to understand there are many different ways to deal with the same situation. Often u need to choose some ways over others depending on who's involved.

For example - u say ur 'zero tolerance' idea would work on the methylamphetamine guy. Slaming doors and showing ur disproval might make him think twice about IVing that substance but equally he could just turn around and say well 'fuck you too' and not pay u any more attention.

I think that everyone here is trying to tell you that some ppl will alwayz choose to IV street drugz and some wont. All somone really needs before they make their decision is FACTS. The risks, the consequences etc etc. Then that person has the right to make their decision and the responcibilites for the consequences of that decision.

Through reading this intire thread i've never seen someone say - here are the risk etc etc. I've heard runner say 'Don't IV becasue I think its bad' To me this intire thread is pointless - it achieves nothing except endless flaming.

Why doesn't everyone stop arguing about how they are goin to tell everyone the risks and just tell ppl the FACTS? Let ppl make their own informed descisions.

Nice Tits

 

[Runner]

Through reading this intire thread i've never seen someone say - here are the risk etc etc. I've heard runner say 'Don't IV becasue I think its bad' To me this intire thread is pointless - it achieves nothing except endless flaming.

Nice Tits: as much as I admire you nickname and would love to say something nice to you, please have the courteousy to go back and read this thread properly. I have given plenty of information on why IV administration of street drugs is a BAD idea.


http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=591809#post591809

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=591831#post591831

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=1110044#post1110044

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=1210666#post1210666

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=1215604#post1215604

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?postid=1218236#post1218236

Edit: I personally think this thread has achieved a lot. I am also glad to see the *lack* of flaming, as would go on on many other forums, and a nice progression of an intelligent debate. Good on Bluelighters.