• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS: SMH - 25/02/2006 'Saturday night's all right for nitwits'

hoptis

hoptis

Bluelight Crew
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
11,083
Saturday night's all right for nitwits
Author: Lisa Pryor

I HAVE seen the best minds of my generation turn into nitwits and old wives when it comes to party drugs. Intelligent people who lose the power of rational thought come Saturday night. Who sweep aside everything they know about the dangers of mixing drugs. Who conduct their evenings according to the faulty folklore passed down from druggie to druggie.

In druggie folklore there is no danger to be found in combining stimulants and depressants. An evening should ideally begin with beers and vodka followed by ecstasy or cocaine at a nightclub. Then it is virtually mandatory to head back to someone's house at 4am to smoke cones, drink more beer and eat corn chips until the sun comes up. It takes the edge off the comedown, the mythology states.

In druggie folklore, dosage is based on rumour rather than science. You know that, say, snorting a certain number of lines of speed is "safe" if you hear a story about a friend's brother who once had three times that amount plus a couple of pills and didn't die. He just convulsed a bit.

You know that drug users have become totally immersed in druggie folklore when they start sounding like a wine critic, comparing the merits of the 2006 vintage with the 2002 vintage as if it were shiraz rather than ecstasy.

The people taking these risks are more likely to be twentysomethings than teenagers. When the National Drug Strategy Household Survey was conducted in 2004, one in eight twentysomethings admitted to having taken ecstasy in the previous year. Only one in 20 teenagers said the same, even though drugs are so often treated as a primarily teenage issue in television shows and drug campaigns, thick with scary images of teenage prostitutes and potheads.

It is a strange paradox that otherwise upstanding adults with jobs and hobbies and sporting fixtures don't conduct their drug taking in the same sensible fashion they conduct the rest of their lives. For some reason, people who carefully research which car they should buy or which mobile phone plan they should sign up for do not conduct the same due diligence when it comes to taking drugs. Which is kind of ironic given that drug taking carries a risk of getting arrested, falling ill or doing something really stupid like trying to fly.

Of course, one of the reasons for the woolly thinking that goes with drug taking is that rules set in sobriety can dissolve once the effect of a drug takes hold. Promises to only take one pill and be home by midnight are forgotten. Suddenly and inexplicably, it is 4am and the drug takers realise they are eating a cheeseburger under fluorescent lights at McDonald's with some strangers.

It is also possible that recreational drug users deliberately remain ignorant, even before the effects of the drug have taken hold. It would, like, totally ruin the whole vibe if you acknowledged that your big night out could end in cardiac arrest, kidney failure or a police cell.

For those who choose not to remain ignorant, it can be hard to find factual, impartial information, no matter how many times you search Google. The erratic make-up of drugs, which vary in quality and concentration with every batch, can thwart attempts to understand what it is you're taking. There is little value knowing the effects of ecstasy if the "ecstasy" you buy is actually a mixture of speed, horse tranquilliser and icing sugar.

As the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre explains on its website, it is not possible to judge the quality of a pill by the brand name stamped across it. Once a brand has a good reputation, fakes are produced to cash in. The reputation of the brand is then ruined and new brands are produced, in a cycle lasting about six months.

As for official information, it is much easier to find warnings about the importance of abstaining from drugs than it is to find information on how to take them safely. There is plenty of information about the importance of not driving after you have taken drugs, for example. But how soon after taking drugs is it safe to drive? Eight hours? Two days? A week? Does it depend on whether you've taken ecstasy or marijuana? Does it depend on an individual's metabolism? Who knows?

The scary thing is that thousands of people answer questions like this for themselves every weekend based on nothing more than a hunch.
Click to expand...

From Sydney Morning Herald, 25/02/2006. News and Features, Page 40.

Not Online

EDIT:

Contact details
Lisa Pryor @ SMH
(02) 9282 2059
[email protected]
 
Last edited:
The scary thing is that thousands of people answer questions like this for themselves every weekend based on nothing more than a hunch.
Click to expand...

Almost as scary as journalists who produce pieces like this based on little more research than goes into a primary school essay. Had Lisa Pryor bothered to look further than the NDARC website she might have discovered information about pill testing, harm minimisation, groups like Enlighten and websites like this one.

Instead, to push her point that all young people doing recreational drugs are clueless "nitwits", her research for this piece didn't bother to progress beyond Google and anecdotes from her friends.

I'm sure while her friends can't be bothered learning about the drugs they're putting into their bodies, it's pretty unfair to taint all users of these drugs with the same brush.

A quick search of the SMH website shows the only other recent article by Lisa was on the launch of a new fashion range by the Olsen twins. :\
 
Yawn.....

hoptis said:
Suddenly and inexplicably, it is 4am and the drug takers realise they are eating a cheeseburger under fluorescent lights at McDonald's with some strangers.
Click to expand...

Anybody who claims to have seen people eating hamburgers under fluourescent lights at 4am can not be taken seriously.

I mean who eats on pills? , let alone puts on a night and then sells fucking hamburgers to pilled up clients! I can almost imagine the long line of customers and lucrative trade that they might have at 4am with a queue of starving customers to feed. What a great business opportunity ;) And whats so right meeting randoms at 4am outside a kebab shop after a load of beers? Does the flourescent light really make it unnacceptable?

As for the strangers bit - My god - what the hell is wrong with meeting a few more people? Its been going on in pubs and bars for hundreds of years now. And gods knows what they put in 'beer' these days in temrs of preservatives and other chemcials!

Why people like this get column space is beyond me and it goes to show just how poor the SMH is at researching and reporting on this real issues.

Being a pommie in Oz has made me realsie the two totally different attitudes the Governments both have. In England, ecstasy has generally died off in the media (with the exception of the 50p E's articles recently).

Over here, the media and Government seem hell bent on continually bombarding people that its dangerous and will kill you and that they all contain horse tranquilizer, heroin or other such bollocks.

I would like these so-called news agencies to actually report that it is still used in hospitals and I have had several reports of people being given Ket- though I am unsure whether it was in the UK or here in Oz.

Dont worry though, Aus seems to be about 10 years behind the UK in accepting pills. Once people who had died in the UK got less media attention people generally became more accepting and it was swept out of the current arena once they realise that the market is too big to stop.

Once the shock tactics fail (Leah Betts pics), they begin the spread of misinformation. Once that fails they run out of ideas as the public realise that 1 pill probably wont kill them and that you can take pills AND have a job then other issues will rear there heads and it will slip off the radar.
 
that article seems to just skim around the surface of not really explaining what it is this person is trying to say. I think she's probably got the right idea of what she wants to say, but as hoptis said, a bit more research, a slightly different slant (instead of the "oh no, look at you, you took drugs and now you're eating Maccas with the people you met on the dance floor, shame on you!" its almost as if the maccas and strangers part is the shock point!), then it could have been a good article indeed to highlight pill testing and so on.

I don't believe she searched google at all. The very first time I searched google to look up the same things she is saying she was looking for, I found this site, amongst many others.

I have to wonder if those above her gave her limits in what she wrote. That article felt like I was watching an episode of Home and Away or Neighbours or something.
 
Sounds like she's just peeved her "nitwit" mates don't invite her out anymore.
 
There is an element or two in this article that I can personally relate to. I agree parts do not seem well presented, or have only been partly researched, but I would hazard a guess that the plethora of online sites offering advice would have simply been too much for an unfamiliar journalist to wade through.

However, from working in harm reduction, I've found it's not just the twenty somethings either. I meet a higher number of young drug users (aged 18-30) who are aware of the dangers of consuming drugs, than I do users aged 35 up. This is particularly relevant for people who discover the e-scene later in life, and especially if they previously had a staunch antidrugs view. For many of these people, their first pill has them reverse their lifelong, hardline approach to drugs, and things are seen in a completely different light. I guess it's like a feeling of enlightenment - a kind of "WoW! I was so wrong about drugs being all bad..."

It's easy to see what can follow.

While the "honeymoon" period for teenagers and young adults is often accompanied by a desire to learn about aspects of the culture - including health issues relating to drugs - more often than not, the older discoverers become totally enraptured by the emotional outpourings of their experiences. They tend to focus more on the awakening aspects of E. Perhaps this is because older people often carry more emotional baggage and any release is therefore much more profound [?]

Within this discovery, often the most sensible of older users abandon any thoughts concerning health, which is extremely worrying, and has in the past lead to deaths. Just how many have died from complications relating to MDMA i is anyone's guess, but I know of at least one who died from a heart attack while on E. At any age - and older people are no different - E can be a doorway to discovery, whereby previously important things then (for awhile at least) take an easy second place to indulgence.

I wouldn't say for a minute that any drug is directly responsible for leading a user to other drugs, but the mere admission that ones previous thoughts on drugs were all wrong often gives rise to a want for further discovery, and with that, polydrug use often seems inevitable. In fact, from past observations, a large portion of older first time users often consume their first E after drinking alcohol - perhaps for the "dutch courage" needed to cross that line ?

We all know someone older who simply doesn't want to learn anything that is either completely new, or potentially difficult to grasp. I'm not saying everyone is like this when they get older, but it certainly applies to a good percentage. I couldn't count how many people remarked to me just how crazy they thought it was for a guy aged nearly 40 to go back to Uni, particularly as I chose a relatively new discipline to study. That attitude is to be expected in some ways, as a persons retention ability is usually somewhat diminished at 40 compared to what it was at 18. Yet, as the article points out, many older drug taking people do place a far greater importance in fathoming the details surrounding a new car or phone plan, than to learn about the health risks of taking drugs like MDMA.


What this article does highlight IMO, is a need for harm reduction services to expand targeted groups to include those aged above 25. In many ways, the health problems are potentially far greater, and anyone with high BP or predisposed to heart problems, needs to be very careful if ever deciding to take stimulant drugs (including MDMA). At present, there's no awareness campaigns for older users, yet every weekend, thousands of older people turn a blind eye to these risks.

Part of the problems is due to the government not wanting to draw attention to the fact that older people do use drugs, and why.

People are supposed to be more responsible with age aren't they? Anyone who contemplates taking drugs for the first time at 40 or 50 must be mentally unstable to begin with. What sort of message would that send to the youth of Australia if kids realised that grownups love drugs too?

Ironically, any highlighting of the problem is likely to have a far greater deterrence effect than some would think. "Eew, we're not doing E, grandma takes E. She get's really sweaty and all she want's to do is kiss and hug you. And the pills makes her she smell even worse .... :p
 
Last edited:
I can't believe I just read all that crap. I want that 5 minutes of my life back :\


Thanks for the contact details :D
 
if ppl wanna do drugs then thats their choice. everybody has to make choices throughout life and just coz someone else doesnt agree with every choice u make, doesnt give them the right to abuse u for it. whos this bitch to call us nitwits. ur the nitwit for writing this piece of crap.
 
toerag said:
that article seems to just skim around the surface of not really explaining what it is this person is trying to say. I think she's probably got the right idea of what she wants to say, but as hoptis said, a bit more research, a slightly different slant (instead of the "oh no, look at you, you took drugs and now you're eating Maccas with the people you met on the dance floor, shame on you!" its almost as if the maccas and strangers part is the shock point!), then it could have been a good article indeed to highlight pill testing and so on.

I don't believe she searched google at all. The very first time I searched google to look up the same things she is saying she was looking for, I found this site, amongst many others.

I have to wonder if those above her gave her limits in what she wrote. That article felt like I was watching an episode of Home and Away or Neighbours or something.
Click to expand...


Took the words right out of my mouth mate................it was like half of it was left on the cutting room floor or something.

The story was desperately all over the place and seemed to be unable to be tied up at the end.

She sort of started by bagging everyone and then making excuses for them.

Poor girl hasnt much of a future if thats the best she can do.............specially if that was the entire article.
 
Pretty lame story, I think that she is just basing a lot of her info from personal biases and not looking at stuff like pill testing, pillreports and of course bluelight. I think it's a mistake to believe that drug users somehow don't care what is going into their bodies.
 
I think it's a mistake to believe that drug users somehow don't care what is going into their bodies
Click to expand...

It's not so much that they don't care what's going into their bodies, just that many can't be bothered learning what goes on inside their bodies.

I've got hundreds of examples of one-on-one intervention data to support this.
 
^^ and in the case of my friends, they are too scared to find out what happens because then they will KNOW of the dangers...they'd rather just turn a blind eye and keep abusing stuff every weekend.
 
why cant they just handoud the URL of this non-biased site to kids who want to experiment? at least theyll get the REAL info
"oh, this drug will do this, but it has a hardcore body load/comedown and you'll feel shit for days... be careful son"
u know what im talking about
 
I must say that while a tad bit trashy, it's better written and more realistic than some of the tripe about the dangers of drug use. At least it's a step forward from the articles preaching about how drugs will necessarily kill you.

TheWeedMan said:
if ppl wanna do drugs then thats their choice. everybody has to make choices throughout life and just coz someone else doesnt agree with every choice u make, doesnt give them the right to abuse u for it. whos this bitch to call us nitwits. ur the nitwit for writing this piece of crap.
Click to expand...

It's not us she's referring to as nitwits. It's the average club/rave punter who never thought these sites existed. The ignorance of some of them is incredible. They'd refuse to take a particular drug because they know someone who knows someone who died/became physically disabled/went crazy/etc on it, while taking five pills or whatever every weekend.
 
Misterwize2 said:
Anybody who claims to have seen people eating hamburgers under fluourescent lights at 4am can not be taken seriously.

I mean who eats on pills?
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, shit I've got to force feed myself the next day after a good sleep.

Plus who's even left the club at 4am if they're all pilled up? =D
 
The article seems to be aimed at the wowser brigade - in which case it's a canny piece of journalism - get em in with a rant about stupid drug users, then sucker punch em with a call for safer using education.

"Burgers at 4am" is a laugh - that's what alcohol is for :D Maybe she doesn't want to seem too well informed about drugs, for fear of alienating her target audience (see above).

I agree with p_d - it's older drug users who are likely to be less informed. This could be due to late uptake, or simply because good info on drug taking was much harder to find 20years ago. There wasn't any internet when I was a lad!! ;) So a lot of us oldies only had the unreliable grapevine of dodgy drug folklore to get us through the night.
 
"The article seems to be aimed at the wowser brigade - in which case it's a canny piece of journalism - get em in with a rant about stupid drug users, then sucker punch em with a call for safer using education."

I agree. I e-mailed her regarding this article and this was what i think she was aiming for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top