Drug Stigma in Australia

Recently, alot more so than ever; I've noticed certain chemicals being stigmatised by know nothing fucking idiots.

Personally, it pains me to see people referring to this and that as "draino" or "floor cleaner", when in the end its another chemical (not that any of us are actually ingesting Sodium Hydroxide anyway).

I'd like to battle out awareness that chemicals are just that - and nothing more. If one chemical used for something is used in the production of another chemical, it's no longer that chemical.

The main chemicals that spring to mind would be GHB (and it's analogues) and Meth.

Many rotten chemicals that you wouldn't go around ingesting normally are used in the production of meth, but people ignore that entirely. Then you hear about G. GHB when all is said and done, when created is usually made only from Ethanol/Water, sodium hydroxide and y-butyrolactone(GBL). Yet people still go around saying its floor cleaner? Would you clean your floor with it??

GBL on the other hand has its uses as a solvent, then is useful for many more things - but if used as a narcotic drug, it's just a narcotic drug.

This rant comes to me purely because of a mate recently, one who knows better - all coz of crap his girlfriend drilled into him. And these guys do alot of meth, but that doesn't matter even if drain cleaner is in it - but put drain cleaner in my g and its DRAINO!!!...

8)

sorry for the rant... perhaps you guys can shed some light on issues regarding awareness like this.

um i was under the impression that the stigma around ghb was due to it being a shitty drug that causes alot of overdoses

i get bagged on all the time for alot of the drugs i do i have bin called junkie probably half a million times by my mates but thats what mates do they bag each other out cuz im not really a junkie and you dont really drink draino

get things in perspective mate if i was you i wudnt giv two shits about the opinion of sum ice head bitch

Hater said:

um i was under the impression that the stigma around ghb was due to it being a shitty drug that causes alot of overdoses

Click to expand...

GHB is very far from a "shitty drug", in-fact, it's probably one of the most euphoric depressants (aside Heroin) that I have ever had the pleasure of taking.

You're right though, if you don't know what you're doing and dose a couple ml's too high, it's pretty easy to overdose. But, it's as simple as setting yourself limits and knowing your dosage. I found it pretty hard to limit myself when it came to GHB and/or it's related anologues though. But, I'm sure most people have no problem with this...

Yeah I've faced this kind of flack from friends who know nothing more about G, than it being "Greivious Boddily Harm", and alloy wheel cleaner, and who the fuck drinks alloy wheel cleaner!?
The power of the media is undeniable, before I tried G just the snipits I had hered were enough for me to classify it as a dirty, "junkie" drug. But like any drug after reasearching it my opinions were changed considerably.

Stigmas are hard to escape from, I would never tell half my lesser friends (one's who do pills all the time 8) ) that I take G, they just have no clue and the overdose aspect scares the shit out of people! G taken safely is probably less harmful than smoking pot several times a week, it doesn't have a comedown, I've heard that pure gbh is motabalised into water and carbon? and isin't it a good muscle rejuvinator or something?

Don't listen to em man, your've done your own reasearch, most heavy drug takers have no fucking idea about the real dangers of drugs, except what "there mates told them, and they've been on drugs for years! ". Bl's excluded of course

GHB in its purest form is a white powder, after it's cooked from GBL by home methods, i find it it's more of an offwhite-yellowish colour - and smells somewhat like popcorn.

I'm not so fussed as to what this stupid bitch thinks, i'm more so interested in other peoples opinions on such matters - from an EDUCATED, or at least somewhat researched perspective.

Hater: I never said i think i drink draino, nor do i think that - i'm not that stupid...

ilikeacid: GHB and it's analogues cause a massive release of HGH (human growth hormone) this is why it's such a good muscle builder/fat reducer.

Also, i'd like - if apollo by chance reads this thread, point out that 1,4-Butanediol and it's freezing points when diluted with water are quite different to what he states... see here: http://www.basf.com/diols/pdfs/bdo_brochure.pdf

Its easy to make one substance look terrible when you put the right spin on it.

For instance, did you know how many drugs are made using Dihydrogen monoxide? It too is found in many dangerous household cleaners, its used in many industrial processes (including when making nuclear weapons!!) and its even used in sewage treatment plants.

That shit will fuck you up if you're not careful with it.

Dihydrogen monoxide

Click to expand...

hahahahaha

At the risk of sounding insensitive that shit was responsible for the death of Anna Woods.

^lol bwahahahaha... We should all keep well clear of dihydrogen monoxide - what a terrible chemical...



Yes, it proves yet again the stupidity of ignorance.

I don't think its that easy to OD on G. I mean I've made many mistakes and end up just passing out.
Not to say it isn't dangerous. But it's got to the point that if a mate blows out I just punch them and record them to show them not to take so much next time, and wait an hour or two so they get over the unconscious "jolties"

Jimity said:

Its easy to make one substance look terrible when you put the right spin on it.

Click to expand...

On the same token, it is just as easy to make a substance appear safe.

How much faith do you have in the cook's ability of post reaction workup to remove any undesirable substances that may have been left over after cooking up that base that you just bought?

Do you trust that the cook even knows what a dual solvent recrystallization is?

Placing that amount of trust and faith in someone that you most likely do not even know, is just as dumb/naive as those who believe the bullshit that the government spurts about the dangers of drugs.

True, scare tactics should not be used to deter people from ingesting drugs, but from the government's point of view, "drain cleaner" is going to make sense to more people than "sodium hydroxide".

So just say that chemist didn't use dual solvent recrystallization, how bad is it to boot that base unfiltered?

I'm no chemist, but I'd go as far as to say its a suckey idea to boot anything unfiltered.

I've always been under the impression that whenever you stick anything up your arm, you should use a micron filter.

But then, I dont inject, so I'm no expert on the issue.

True, scare tactics should not be used to deter people from ingesting drugs, but from the government's point of view, "drain cleaner" is going to make sense to more people than "sodium hydroxide".

Click to expand...

Too true. But I think you'll find, that in the majority of cases, its not the government who spreads this shit, its the media. The government says "sodium hydroxide" and the media jumps on it like a hooker to dick.

Splatt said:

So just say that chemist didn't use dual solvent recrystallization, how bad is it to boot that base unfiltered?

Click to expand...

Personally, I would *never* inject any drug before running it through a filter, and I'm pretty slap happy when it comes to whacking up.

I don't really think that question can be answered in terms of good/bad on a scale of one to ten, there are too many variables to take into account, the synthesis that the chemist is using, the cleanliness of the glassware that the reaction is carried out in, whether or not the cook had a nasty chest infection that he coughed into a beaker by accident, etc.

Presuming the drug was synthesized under ideal conditions, before performing a dual solvent crystallization, pseudoephedrine, xylene, acetone, iodine, red phosphorus, etc. could all remain as part of the final product.

I'm no expert, but shooting industrial grade solvents in any concentration sets off alarm bells in my head.

Jimity said:

Too true. But I think you'll find, that in the majority of cases, its not the government who spreads this shit, its the media. The government says "sodium hydroxide" and the media jumps on it like a hooker to dick.

Click to expand...

Good call.

can we get this back on topic - we're not talking bout injecting...

Just dose em and they'll love G.
Thats what I did to my anti-G friends.

zaineaol.nu said:

Personally, it pains me to see people referring to this and that as "draino" or "floor cleaner", when in the end its another chemical (not that any of us are actually ingesting Sodium Hydroxide anyway).

Click to expand...

I believe ingesting quite clearly covers ALL methods of administration and that some people are in fact ingesting sodium hydroxide and whatever else via means of injection and that this is likely harmful to the health of said people.

zaineaol.nu said:

If one chemical used for something is used in the production of another chemical, it's no longer that chemical.

Click to expand...

As shown through our discussion in this thread, this is clearly not the case. Taking into account synthesis byproducts, leftover solvents, impurities, etc. The street product that people are purchasing and ingesting often contains these things.

Ashley said:

As shown through our discussion in this thread, this is clearly not the case. Taking into account synthesis byproducts, leftover solvents, impurities, etc. The street product that people are purchasing and ingesting often contains these things.

Click to expand...

Yes, our favourite past times may very well contain sodium hydroxide, but they dont contain "draino" per se. Obviousily there is sodium hydroxide in draino, but there is other shit as well....

when i refer to ingestion, generally speaking - i'm talking oral administration... I'm not a needle user, thus i'm not prone to bringing up whacking of chems in my topics - alot of my friends are, and thats their deal.

If i were speaking of another route, be it sublingual, intravenous, intramuscular or insufflation i'd mention those.

Perhaps whatever chem it may be, it probably will contain trace amounts, but it's not 'draino', it's not gunna clean your sink or give a shiny glow to your rims - it's a drug first and foremost - this is what i am tryin to point out. Being ignorant and shunning one chemical because they know it was made from a few solvents is fucking stupid, ignorant and arrogant.

But then it's okay to go some some crappy meth you bought on the street which is probably 100x worse for you? shit think of all the cutting agents and crap in that - hooray! i just paid an extra $xx for inactive poo. When i was talking GHB (powder) it's highly unlikely its cut, well its a known fact (my shit anyway).

Perhaps whatever chem it may be, it probably will contain trace amounts, but it's not 'draino', it's not gunna clean your sink or give a shiny glow to your rims - it's a drug first and foremost - this is what i am tryin to point out. Being ignorant and shunning one chemical because they know it was made from a few solvents is fucking stupid, ignorant and arrogant.

Click to expand...

I don't quite know what your point is here. Sure pharmaceuticals are often made with solvents, but in many if not most cases, the products of such companies and the products of "cooks" are not one in the same. Over the counter sources of NaOH and lab grade sodium hydroxide are often not the same product, and xylene paint solvent compared to AR grade m-xylene are typically a mile apart.

If GHB is made from a precursor & drain cleaner or other OTC NaOH, and the product contains sufficient unreacted draino, then you could quite easily both clean your porcelain and burn out your esophagus with it. All it would take is to add too much NaOH and not adjust the pH accordingly. If it's present unchanged in the final product, then it's still effectively the product it started out to be. From reading the countless inquiries on these matters it seems evident that many backyard/home chemists don't have any idea about molar quantities. So it's not surprising that illicit drugs often contain residual precursors and reactants. There are many reported presentations to emergency involving caustic soda in GHB.

Aside from such rudimentary knowledge, of course, if the chemists making illicit drugs always used appropriate quality chemicals as used in pharmaceutical manufacture, and had some form of mandatory QC, then perhaps your argument -as I see it - would hold water. But in the real world cooks use whatever is most available to them. While chemical diversion of pharm or analytical grade reagents undoubtedly occurs, for many cooks this would not always be the case, and at least some items would be sourced from OTC products.

To further prevent use in manufacturing illicit drugs, many OTC products are now produced so as to not contain a single chemical or solvent, but instead contain mixtures that are either difficult to separate, or cause the illicit process for which intended to fail. Solvents containing only toluene are not common these days and xylenes are often mixtures of isomers, often also containing a ketone and other hydrocarbons. The thing is, a solvent from the paint shop is no-where near the pure equivalent sourced from a chem supplier. One may be completely removable from the drug product, one may not.

So, I believe people are being completely sensible when they say, "yuk, that's probably been made with paint thinners, I don't want to touch it". The mere fact that the chems used are not pure, means that some is likely to remain in the final product - as with solvents present in the goo sold as base - and/or the impurities will result in additional reactions occurring, some of which will produce toxic byproducts.

One of the best things about the utopian model of a future where all drugs are legalised and regulated, is that the quality can be expected to be up to scratch. As it stands, the stigma often associated with unclean product is not only warranted, but should be encouraged. Safrole is a human carcinogen, yet so many people associate its smell with quality. IMO, what they should be saying is that any pill that smells like that should be avoided. And what if the safrole impurity is subjected to final reduction process? That will produce an even more toxic compound.

So, if any of what I've said is believable, one can see that OTC chemicals are generally nowhere near the same as chemicals sourced in pure form. Draino for example is often mixed with aluminium flakes - to prevent misuse - so when the stuff gets wet, the alkali (caustic) causes the aluminium to dissolve and the product is a mixture of Al hydroxides with sodium hydroxide. For some illicit purposes it won't behave or react like pure sodium hydroxide.

As for meth. In relation to how most speed in Australia has been made; let's say you're comparing a halo acid purchased off the shelf with one produced via the illicit method commonly employed in Australia. The main chemical used in the common method is not made with any intention of being used to produce something to be consumed. It is made for industry, where purity is often far less of an issue. Indeed, additional chemicals may be added to suit that intended application. Compare this product with that made from the pure chemicals and it's no surprise to find one contains fewer impurities than the other. Add to this the relative knowledge between a chemist and a box lab cook, and it's easy to see that beneath the surface, both products are likely to be considerably different in their overall chemical makeup.

Oils ain't Oils