Meth and Transformation

[rocketqueen]

Hi guys. I am only a layperson, and I do not present myself to be anything other than this. However, I have a curious mind. I have posted this in Other Drugs, but no one seems to know. Then it occurred to me that I might be posting in the wrong area all together. I need someone with chemistry experience that has a flair for explaining things to the layperson to answer the two following questions:


So we all know that the process of cooking meth is bad for the surrounding environment. But what about for the smokers (the ones that do not cook)? When a smoker blows out the hit, are they making their home environment toxic with methamp. "residue?" Or do the lungs "purify" or "detoxify" the active ingredients in the methamp., which means one is blowing out..just smoke/vapor? This is important as I do not wish to expose my kitties to bad stuff. I keep the house well aired to avoid "contaminating" them with my exhalations. Is this necessary? I have erred on the side of caution thus far.

This second question, read carefully, the answer is not so obvious. At least to me and everyone I have asked.

Second question (to kill two birds with one stone): when a person bakes a cake it is generally comprised of sugar, flour, and eggs. Then you put prolonged heat on those ingredients and you have cake. However, when the cake is eaten it is still recognized and digested by the body as eggs, sugar and flour. So, can we apply this to the production of meth? When one does meth, is the user consuming kerosene, ephedrine, phosphorous, and drain cleaner (assuming that is the ingredients the cook used) OR are they consuming something that has undergone such profound changes at the molecular level that the body recognizes only... methamphetamine? Instead of the harsh chemicals used to make it?

Thank you kindly for reading and/or posting.

 

[iameatingjam]

not sure if I qualify to answer your question as thoroughly as you may want, but as far as I know:

1. Only to the point where secondhand meth could be inhaled by other people (or kittens) in the area, in no way to the extent that the chemicals that meth is synthesized with would contaminate a meth lab.

2. Meth is created in part of a chemical synthesis, in becomes a new chemical when it is made. There is no ephedrine, red phosphorus, etc in the pure chemical methamphetamine. However, since most street meth is made in clandestine labs, I'm sure there is at least trace leftovers. For the most part, your meth (if good quality) is meth.

 

[endotropic]

So to the first part of your question, your lungs will absorb most, but not all of the meth. This means that yes, you are exhaling a small amount of methamphetamine into the air in your home. Now if you were to blow the smoke right at their face, or if you and your kitties were trapped in a closet while you were smoking I’d say there was a chance that the exposure could harm them, but I honestly can’t see any harm being done in normal circumstances.
If your question was regarding young children on the other hand, my answer would be entirely different. Even very small amounts of such a powerful drug could cause profound (and possibly permanent) changes to a developing brain, so I’m hoping your kitties are actually of the feline variety.

Now on to your second question, the answer depends entirely on the skill of the chemist who supplies you. It is possible to purify the finished product (methamphetamine) so that none of the starting materials are present. In that situation your body would recognize only the meth, and none of the negative health effects of the ephedrine, phosphorous, etc. will effect you (although by weight methamphetamine is likely more dangerous than many of these precursors!!).
On the other hand if your cook takes some shortcuts, or generally has little chemical knowledge, THESE PRECURSORS WILL VERY LIKELY STILL BE PRESENT IN THE FINISHED PRODUCT. In that case what you’re smoking is actually a mixture of meth, phosphorous, drain cleaner and all the rest, and all of the health effects of consuming these chemicals will apply.

 

[SNR]

Remember that methamphetamine isn't the only thing in the smoke you are blowing out. All the usual dangers of smoke remain. As long as there are no persons there to inhale it however, they should be fine.

 

[Aetherius Rimor]

However, when the cake is eaten it is still recognized and digested by the body as eggs, sugar and flour. So, can we apply this to the production of meth? When one does meth, is the user consuming kerosene, ephedrine, phosphorous, and drain cleaner (assuming that is the ingredients the cook used) OR are they consuming something that has undergone such profound changes at the molecular level that the body recognizes only... methamphetamine? Instead of the harsh chemicals used to make it?.

Methamphetamine is a completely different molecule than all the precursors.

And no, the body does not recognize all the original ingredients as such. You are changing the molecular structure of the eggs/sugar/flour when you make a cake as well.

Chemical reactions change the molecule, not just create a mixture of molecules.

 

[rocketqueen]

Thank you all for the thoughtful and useful answers.

So it is an accurate statement to say, "depending on the skill of the cook, sometimes I might do pure meth, and then other times I might do meth with trace amounts of the precursors"?

Lol, no, I have kitties, not children. Even so, they are my babies and they deserve to breathe clean air as much as a human child. They are innocent, too. I have been in a heavy meth smokers apartment, and there was a shaft of sunlight coming through one of the curtains. The amount of smoke drifting around was stunning. Moreover, blowing dope smoke in an animal's face is abusive in my mind, and not something I would find entertaining in the least.

But it is a true statement then, that my cats are exposed to trace/minute amounts of meth? I do leave the door open to keep the place aired out when I smoke, and I hope that mitigates the harm...and no, I do not get paranoid...

 

[Aetherius Rimor]

So it is an accurate statement to say, "depending on the skill of the cook, sometimes I might do pure meth, and then other times I might do meth with trace amounts of the precursors"?

Don't know anything about the process, but it is very likely true that you will never be smoking pure meth.

Speculation also since I don't know about the process, but the impurities could be a mixture of precursors or new elements altogether due to mistakes made in synthesis/purification/crystallization.

 

[Nagelfar]

Remember that methamphetamine isn't the only thing in the smoke you are blowing out. All the usual dangers of smoke remain.

To my knowledge there is less actual 'smoke', as in volatile tar aerosol, than cannabis or cigarette "smoke" proper, because the method of smoking the crystalline methamphetamine chemical is mostly a vaporization product of the chemical, or chemical mixed with solely *chemical* impurities that themselves vaporize.

I must say, that due to the stability of the methamphetamine molecule in the face of metabolizing, and the concentrated form of it when smoked, there is more of a 'contact high' being in a closed area among meth-smoke than with most other forms of widely used psychoactive-smoke products. (Smoking crack, since it readily breaks down in heated vapor to by-products; smoking marijuana or black tar heroin, are all less likely to get animals or other people in the closed off area with the smoker high with said 'contact high' than with methamphetamine. It travels very unmolested as an aerosol.)

 

[rocketqueen]

When one smokes ice, it is 100% true that one blows out COPIOUS amounts of smoke, and I do mean HUGE & GINORMOUS amounts of smoke (if the hit is a proper hit and the shit is proper shit).

@Nagelfar, your second paragraph contradicts your first one, unless I misread it. In the first paragraph you are saying that ice is vaporized, so once I blow it out there is less volatile aerosol in exhalations of ice than in exhalations of fags or pot? But in second paragraph you say that ice smoke is much more "alive" than fag or pot smoke...?

Wouldn't you say that smoking cocaine and smoking ice are roughly the same thing? You heat both, they both break down in the heat to vapor, then to by-product. Except I consider the by-product of meth toxic that I will *not* smoke, where the by-product of rock is that residue that you can bust a huge hit from...

 

[skillet]

Do you not hold the hits? I used to hold it for like 20 seconds or so and only a little smoke would come out.

Meth doesn't 'break down' to vapour on heating, it evaporates. When it mixes with cool air the vapour condenses as tiny droplets which give the appearance of smoke. Some of this sticks to the neck of the pipe, the rest goes into your lungs. From there, some of it is absorbed and the rest gets exhaled. It stays as meth the entire time, I don't think there's any significant decomposition.

I bet if you blew out lots of hits into a balloon, keeping it closed for a few minutes before deflating it each time, you could wash out some pretty pure meth from the balloon.

 

[Nagelfar]

@Nagelfar, your second paragraph contradicts your first one, unless I misread it. In the first paragraph you are saying that ice is vaporized, so once I blow it out there is less volatile aerosol in exhalations of ice than in exhalations of fags or pot? But in second paragraph you say that ice smoke is much more "alive" than fag or pot smoke...?

Not at all. "Smoke" itself is not active, it is a disintegration product. When people say "smoke" for a psychoactive substance, they mean a vaporized aerosol of a chemical; which is what methamphetamine is, not a pyrolyzed 'true smoke' product as with cannabis or cigarettes.

 

[ebola?]

Wouldn't you say that smoking cocaine and smoking ice are roughly the same thing?

No. Please read Naglfar's post about differences between vaporization of the two.

When one smokes ice, it is 100% true that one blows out COPIOUS amounts of smoke, and I do mean HUGE & GINORMOUS amounts of smoke (if the hit is a proper hit and the shit is proper shit).

It is likely that your lungs absorb far more vapor than you exhale, but I base this primarily on lore, albeit from scientifically savvy individuals, but not from proper scientific study.
...
It is likely that the exhaled pyrolysis products and impurities (and burnt impurities) from exhaling meth smoke are less dangerous than second hand smoke from pot or tobacco; the products of burning plants are pretty nasty.
...
I dunno. Smoke in a different room from where your cats are? Meth is not exactly a long-acting compound, so you hardly need to smoke it at length. Also, please consider avoiding smoking cigarettes or pot around your pets.

ebola

 

[rocketqueen]

Thank you for your time and your answers, guys. Your ability to understand even at the crudest level makes me envious as hell. I find chemistry, physics, mathematics and such to be very difficult topics of inquiry.

@Ebola, I do not smoke cigs or marijuana, so no worries there. But meth smoke isn't exactly a healthy environmental uplift, either. :-( I do not want to inadvertently poison my furbabies, thus my question about the smoke.

@Skillet, you bring up something I find rather fascinating. What do you mean I don't hold my hits??? Of course I blow out IMMEDIATELY after I am done sucking in. This way was taught to me by my first ice dealer, and everyone I see smoke does the exact same thing i.e. suck than blow immediately.

Do you mean to say that you hold your hits like a marijuana hit? Really? Why? Are you telling me that I should be holding the smoke in? I thought that ice works differently than marijuana in the lungs. Anyone know?

 

[23536]

would meth have a paradoxical calming effect on kittens, just as Adderall calms human children?

 

[skillet]

^ lol!

Yeah I held them as long as possible, or until almost nothing came out. I figured that since the 'smoke' is almost entirely small particles of meth, blowing out smoke is blowing your meth out across the room, which would be stupid. Though not from a dealers point of view.

 

[Nagelfar]

blowing out smoke is blowing your meth out across the room, which would be stupid. Though not from a dealers point of view.

This is true. White smoke = vapor; i.e. the drug. Black smoke = "smoke" and tar & all the crude fiery slag that damages lung tissue. Methamphetamine "smoke" is white because it is, for the most part, just the drug.

Do you mean to say that you hold your hits like a marijuana hit? Really? Why? Are you telling me that I should be holding the smoke in? I thought that ice works differently than marijuana in the lungs. Anyone know?

Colloquially, I have come across street level users doing this as well. It is a fallacy. I have heard it said that meth "re-crystallizes in" or just "crystallizes" ... "your lungs". Which is just nonsense. People who "pick" while tweaking have other 'tweaker' fallacies like the 'crystals come out of your skin when cut', etc. when really it is just the wound from the scab healing (the first layers of tissue are clear/white when they re-heal on your body) this is simply the texture of new layers of skin that are trying to heal. Test this by dissolving crystal methamp in water like when it is prepared for IV use. Does it "re-crystalize" or evaporate with the water? It doesn't "re-crystalize" in your lungs, that is nonsense, it is carried through the membrane and diffused through the cell walls into your body via protonation.

The myth that it needs to be "blown out immediately" is likely spread among first timers so they don't get 'too high', and the myth carries into late stage use; when people could be saving a lot more of their product by that time because their tolerance is up by then.

Holding the hit in = more bioavailability.

 

[rocketqueen]

Well well well this is just FASCINATING. About holding it in like one would a hit of marijuana...are y'all in total agreement on this? So it makes no sense a'tall to think that once inhaled, the active meth molecules (or whatever) aren't immediately absorbed by the lungs, making holding the smoke unnecessary?

@Nagel: I am really not much on that dope fiend/junkie lore-type stuff. I want the science, not the junkie BS. I have had people tell me that my lungs are gonna crystallize. I say BULLSHIT. They point to the residue in the stem of the pipe for their "evidence." The pipe is cold hard glass. Human lungs are all together a different matter - they are not cold hard glass! I have also heard that ridiculous story about ice coming out of your pores and ppl putting it in their pipe and trying to resmoke it! This shows absolutely NO understanding of the most BASIC anatomy and physiology. Now, from my understanding, certain amounts of the by-product of meth is released through the pores. I intermittently get infected pores on my back from the poison (meth) struggling to expel through the pores. But what is expelled is so minute it is not visible to the naked eye.

I don't tweak. My brain bangs around up there a little bit, but I keep my intake relatively sane. It takes me about two days to go through two tenths of a gram. I know ppl that slam it put that much if not more in the spoon. If I banged two tenths of a gram all at one time (instead of smoking crumbs like I do) I would likely have a huge orgasm then fall down dead. And if I didn't die, I would likely wish I were as I would be chasing that XTC all around the world.

 

[Nagelfar]

@Nagel: They point to the residue in the stem of the pipe for their "evidence." The pipe is cold hard glass. Human lungs are all together a different matter - they are not cold hard glass!

Yes, this should be common sense. You could chew food up, and spit it down into a glass pipe, and show the 'evidence' that it must just sit there and rot in your stomach too. Such reasoning would be little more than superstition. The living body is a very dynamic vehicle, and made to cycle even substances that do not break down out of it. Every cell in the body has a life-cycle, so on the microscopic level, unless the body is replicating it from within (a virus or a tumor) it's going to be phased out from within.

 

[rocketqueen]

OK guys, as with most inquiries, one question leads to another.

The real reason I am so tuned in to possibly contaminating my cats is simply this: eye boogers.

WTF do eye boogers have to do with this discussion? Or have a just gone off the chain? Well, both. But let me put this to y'all. One of my cats has white fur with faint beige stripes and crystal blue eyes. When I smoke, he gets eye boogers. When I pull up, he doesn't. I can only speculate that the minute amount of meth molecules floating around in the air act as an extremely mild irritant to hie pretty eyes. I am considering purchasing an air cleaner to alleviate this problem.

Do you think the conclusion I am drawing is ridiculous?

@Nagel that is an excellent analogy. Wish I could think of a good analogy for taking chemicals to make a brand new chemical. The cake analogy sucks.