Heroin Why I.V. heroin is less risky (for ME) than other methods

[burn out]

So we hear a lot about heroin overdose and why you shouldn't inject heroin because it increases the chances you will overdose.

I just wanted to say that in my personal life, the opposite is true. Why? Because I find that if I inject too much heroin at once, I get an extremely intense, painful, very itchy rush. Because of this, there is a limit to how much I can inject and the limit is well below overdose territory. In fact, the limit is even below getting pretty high territory, meaning I have to perform multiple injections if I want to get high.

Now back when I used to sniff heroin, I had no such problem like this, no painful rush. So I would just sniff huge amounts all at once, because that would give me the best feeling as it kicked in. Basically, I can sum it like this:

Snorting: the more the merrier
Shooting: small amount is better than large amount


So am I the only one like this? I asked a friend about it and he told me he doesn't have a problem with painful rushes and he doesn't mind the itching all over feeling you get from a large shot, so obviously for him shooting does not add safety. But I cannot stand that itching feeling, so ironically, IV use drastically reduces my risk of overdosing.

 

[ErgicMergic]

Wouldn't smoking be even more pronounced in this regard? It hits you faster than IV use, so it is easier to titrate to dosage to a proper amount and harder to OD if you are titrating upwards until you feel high enough.

 

[i against i]

if u have a badass tolerance mayb, but for me i'd just keep banging shit til i woke up on the floor 2 hrs later

 

[cj]

Ive never seen anyone go out from sniffing dope but ive seen quite a few go out from Iving and its always quick.

 

[pbuilder]

Until your heroin is super pure or sloppily cut with fent, then you just die.

 

[burn out]

Wouldn't smoking be even more pronounced in this regard? It hits you faster than IV use, so it is easier to titrate to dosage to a proper amount and harder to OD if you are titrating upwards until you feel high enough.

the heroin i get isnt meant for smoking and i think the problem with smoking is you cant take in enough in one hit to get a good rush. i want to feel the rush, just not have it too intense.

 

[Swimmingdancer]

Wouldn't smoking be even more pronounced in this regard? It hits you faster than IV use, so it is easier to titrate to dosage to a proper amount and harder to OD if you are titrating upwards until you feel high enough.

Smoking heroin does not make it hit you faster than IV. Intravenous is the fastest route of administration. Onset of peak effects is felt within 7-8 seconds, whereas with smoking it takes about 10-15 minutes.

 

[oxyaddict05]

Smoking heroin does not make it hit you faster than IV. Intravenous is the fastest route of administration. Onset of peak effects is felt within 7-8 seconds, whereas with smoking it takes about 10-15 minutes.

I believe this is incorrect. From what I have learned, inhalation is the fastest ROA. I believe the confusion comes from the subjective definition of 'faster.'

While an inhaled drug will reach the brain quicker than with IV, the injected dose will hit you harder and will raise your peak concentrations faster than via inhalation. So while there is a slight delay in IV (must pass through the heart before the lungs), the onset is much faster in terms of plasma levels.

 

[Swimmingdancer]

Where did you hear that? All the literature I've ever read says that IV is the fastest ROA (regardless of how you define it). And it makes sense to me - you are putting it directly in your bloodstream.

 

[oxyaddict05]

If you want I can find some journals. Most recently, we were taught this in my Biological Basis of Behavior course on recreation drugs I took this past semester.

It does sound unintuitive, but it makes sense if you consider the path to the brain.

An injection into the vein will travel and pass through the right heart valve, where it is pumped to the lungs. After reaching the lungs, the drug then continues on to the left heart valve before being pumped to the brain. Smoking bypasses the first heart-lung loop and heads directly from the lungs to the heart and then on to the brain. Smoking also is putting the drug directly into the blood steam (father up in the stream). However, the IV shot will hit you all at once, even if it takes slightly longer. This definitely makes it feel way faster.

That's one reason you can 'taste' the shot. Part of it is actually exhaled when if passes through the lungs. I have heard that it also does this because of passing through the tongue, but that was from an unscientific source haha.

 

[Tommyboy]

Where did you hear that? All the literature I've ever read says that IV is the fastest ROA (regardless of how you define it). And it makes sense to me - you are putting it directly in your bloodstream.

Post some of that literature then. I'm not saying it's incorrect, I'm just saying that it's best to back up any claims in an argument.
Edit: The same goes to the person above me. It's best to provide some evidence for an argument.

Until your heroin is super pure or sloppily cut with fent, then you just die.

Yup. If you are sniffing big doses without testing a few bumps first then you can OD too obviously, but if you do a few bumps of strong stuff and someone else IVs a small amount of some strong stuff, the person IVing would be in more dangerous territory. IVing 8x a day can cause its own problems if the person is not practicing safe IV technique, since each shot runs the risk of abscesses and other complications. These risks are minimized by using micron filters, a new needle each time, sterile saline solution for each shot, disinfecting the area before and after IV, etc....

 

[Swimmingdancer]

The physical distance of the pathways taken does not prove to me that the actual amount of time taken is shorter. Regardless, "onset" is defined as when peak effects are achieved. Even IF it were true that the first heroin molecules were to reach the brain slightly faster when taken intranasally as opposed to intravenously, intravenously would still provide perceivable effects earlier and have a higher bioavailabilty. What ErgicManic said was: "Wouldn't smoking be even more pronounced in this regard? It hits you faster than IV use, so it is easier to titrate to dosage to a proper amount and harder to OD if you are titrating upwards until you feel high enough." Which, even if what you say is correct, is still totally untrue. Smoking does not make the effects of heroin more pronounced, does not make heroin "hit" you faster, and does not make it easier or safer to titrate your dosage. It is not in the interest of harm reduction for people to think that that is true.

As for Tommyboy's suggestion that I post some literature, pretty much everywhere you look says that "Intravenous injection provides the greatest intensity and most rapid onset of effects (7 to 8 seconds), while intra-muscular injection produces a relatively slow onset (5 to 8 minutes). When heroin is snorted or smoked, peak effects are usually felt within 10 to 25 minutes." I think what oxyaddict05 is saying is not actually that this is untrue but that the actual molecules begin entering the brain slightly sooner when heroin is taken through the nose. I didn't fully understand what oxyaddict05 was saying at first. It is a separate issue that doesn't really matter in the context that ErgicManic was describing, and I honestly don't know whether or not it's true; I was not able to easily find any papers on that subject. It is still interesting to me from an intellectual standpoint though. But I just think it's important to point out that in practice for heroin users this would not mean that the onset of effects is correlated with the time it takes for that first molecule to enter the brain.

 

[oxyaddict05]

Swimmingdancer, I'm with you 100% as far as practicality is concerned. The intensity of the high is directly related to the quantity of drug reaching and activating the receptors in the brain over a given time. So in the case of IV, the drug's onset will be much more rapid than if smoked. Technically, the time from administration to brain is faster with smoking. You are correct, however, that the actual onset once the drug reaches the brain is far more intense and rapid with IV. This is because the entire dose will reach the brain all at once. With smoking, it would be difficult if not impossible to absorb an equal dose simultaneously. Because of this, it takes much longer with smoking for the full, intended dose to reach the brain. And with the time differences being on the magnitude of seconds, the longer travel time (slower to reach the brain) of IV has no practical meaning or implication other than intellectual curiosity and accuracy.

If one could diffuse an entire dose into the bloodstream via the lungs at the same moment, then smoking would result in a rush more intense than with IV.

But you did say that you are interested just out of curiosity, so I'll find some sources to link you. Too bad I can't link my textbook which I have in my room right now haha.

I found some links. Unfortunately I couldn't link many of them unless you have a jstor account. You may be able to search yourself at http://www.jstor.org/

http://psych.fullerton.edu/mwhite/475pdf/475ROUTESOFDRUGADMINISTRATION.pdf

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_gGENH/is_20050229/ai_2699003421/

http://pharmaonline.netne.net/routesofdrugsadmin.html

http://books.google.com/books?id=F0mUte90ATUC&pg=PA288&lpg=PA288&dq=which+route+of+drug+administration+is+the+fastest&source=bl&ots=f5Myt4CyHA&sig=qkECAHD-gDxMN8zsoKaf_02BkQo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9_OyT824MM2N6QGEh_DECQ&ved=0CGAQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=which%20route%20of%20drug%20administration%20is%20the%20fastest&f=false

The figures are typically listed as:
7-10 seconds for inhalation.
15-30 seconds for injection.

Although from personal experience I would deduct 3-5 seconds from both of those figures. I can't argue with science though.

P.S. I linked the first four that I found and did not make any 'selective' choices. If one listed IV as the fastest, I would have linked that as well.

 

[Tommyboy]

Regardless, "onset" is defined as when peak effects are achieved.

This is incorrect. The tail end of the range in time for the onset of a drug may be the same as the beginning range of time needed for peak plasma levels to be achieved. Take diazepam for example. The onset for IM diazepam is 15-30 minutes (source), but peak levels are achieved between 30-60 minutes after IM administartion (source).

That's just one example (and I would never IM diazepam) but I've seen this with every drug I have researched, with onset not being synonymous with peak effects. There is a correlation between the two, but they are not one in the same.

 

[Swimmingdancer]

Ok well in that case "onset" would still be defined as the beginning of perceivable effects, right? Not the time that the first molecule of the substance to enter one's brain. Also I didn't mean peak plasma concentrations, I meant the peak of noticeable effects on the body/mind. Some drugs do weird things as far as the concentration of the drug detectable in blood not correlating to the actual effects.

 

[Tommyboy]

I think that onset may be the time needed for the minimum therapeutic dose to be achieved, which is certainly not the same as the time that the maximum therapeutic dose is needed to be achieved, but that may not be the same as the peak plasma concentrations.

 

[oxyaddict05]

The definition of onset will vary depending on context. For example, between 16 year old junkies and pharmaceutical scientists. I think we are all in agreement from the practical side of things.

Check my last post Swimmingdancer, I posted some links.

Wow this thread has been hijacked haha

 

[adder]

I believe this is incorrect. From what I have learned, inhalation is the fastest ROA. I believe the confusion comes from the subjective definition of 'faster.'

While an inhaled drug will reach the brain quicker than with IV, the injected dose will hit you harder and will raise your peak concentrations faster than via inhalation. So while there is a slight delay in IV (must pass through the heart before the lungs), the onset is much faster in terms of plasma levels.

Looking at how circulatory system is built and works, this is true but on one condition - the vein you inject into carries the blood into the heart. If one injects into median cubital vein, then the blood is carried to the heart:

1) enters right atrium of heart via superior and inferior vena cavas
2) right atrium -> right ventricle (via right atrioventricular valve*)
3) right ventricle -> pulmonary arteries (via pulmonary valve)
4) -> pulmonary circulation to get oxygen from lungs -> ... -> pulmonary veins
5) -> left atrium -> left ventricle (via right atrioventriculat valve*)
6) -> aorta -> ...

*Each has its own name, I don't remember them and it's in the middle of the night here so I'm too tired to look for it.

Aorta is the only way for the oxygenated blood to leave heart and be distributed throughout the body.

But if one injects into his/her jugular veins (it's located on the neck), substance taken goes first to brain with the blood flow and that's a way to bypass the heart during the first "surge" of blood with the substance.

I can't get to any articles on payable sites because I don't study chemistry any more and I don't have free access to any journals.

PS. Don't forget you don't always need the medication to reach the brain to take effect. What is discussed here applies to heroin and other drugs relying on its action in the brain (whatever the reason for intake is).

 

[Swimmingdancer]

The definition of onset will vary depending on context. For example, between 16 year old junkies and pharmaceutical scientists. I think we are all in agreement from the practical side of things.

Check my last post Swimmingdancer, I posted some links.

Wow this thread has been hijacked haha

Sorry, I didn't see your previous post before. Thanks for taking the time to post some links. The info in the links was still pretty vague though. Also, they are discussing generalizations about drugs and not heroin specifically. (Not saying you're not right, I just honestly still am not sure what to believe). Anyway, you, me and Tommyboy are all just arguing about very fine points and semantics, I think we can all agree that the noticeable effects of heroin are much more sudden and peak much more rapidly when taken by IV than by smoking or any other ROA. The reason I debated your assertion in the first place was because I thought you were agreeing with ErgicMergic and because you said my initial post in reply to him/her was "incorrect", when what I said was the timing of "onset of peak effects". Didn't mean to completely change the direction of the thread

 

[oxyaddict05]

Haha for sure man. I definitely agreed with the point you were making; should have made that more clear. If this wasn't Bluelight where many members have a deeper interest in substances than the more casual user, I would not have even commented.

Despite what I said, there is a reason I used to find crack boring in comparison to IV cocaine, and it has nothing to do with which initial drug molecules reach the target receptors/transporters the quickest

I'm bored so I'll make a diagram lol. (simplified)

d = one 'unit' of drugs. Total dose for both routes is 10 d's
I'll assume a BA of 50% for smoked heroin for simplicity sake.


Smoking:[Drug in blood stream]---------------------------------<d-------> d-------> d-------> [Drug in brain @ target receptor] dd (the drug gets here first, but only a few d's have made it so far. Half lost due to BA)

---------------{administration}{------Vein ------}{Right Heart}{ Lungs }{Left Heart}----{ BBB}-------------------------------{Target Receptors}

------IV:[Drug in blood stream]<dddddddddd ------------------------------------------------ > [Drug in brain @ target receptor] dddddddddd (the drug gets here later, but most d's arrive together)