Stimulants Occasional basis, which is worse: meth or coke?

[soneal97]

I don't do either of these drugs very often, and while I know meth messes people up worse in the long run, perhaps, I've also heard that it's more difficult to OD and have a heart attack on speed. I don't binge on either one of these drugs, but I'm sort of wondering. Let's say I do each of these drugs once a month. Do a gram of coke or snort a couple lines of meth. Which drug would do more damage to my body on say.. just that basis? When I'm doing good meth, I actually feel pretty clean most of the time. Then again, good coke actually feels about the same. I mean, I get tired, of course. And if I do enough, I get depressed. Naturally. But I'm usually doing good stuff that doesn't make me feel like shit. If anything, it's cut with pretty harmless stuff. I come down pretty easy. Just a question I've been very curious about for a while. I'm no addict, and I know that doing both of these long term, it wouldn't really matter. Both would take you down. But on a sort of recreational, once in a while basis, which is worse? Meth is subscribed for ADD, and I know it's a lower dose. But can one good strong line of street meth really be that much worse for you than taking a small amount of meth in Adderal or Ritalin every day. I would think it would be much better, or less harmful in the short term. But maybe not? I heard coke gets more direct access to the heart, so wouldn't occasional usage of coke weaken my heart faster? I don't really do a lot of meth, but it seems to have even a worse reputation than cocaine. And I know cocaine can do horrible stuff to you. I just sort of want to know what's up, minus the reputation. I want to know the truth about what I'm doing. So if anyone can more or less clear this up for me, I would GREATLY appreciate it. I much prefer coke, byt he way. The best coke has gotten me higher than any meth I've ever done. *Shrugs* And yet some people prefer meth. I don't get nearly as much euphoria. It's not like crack, you know. Maybe I'm doing the wrong stuff? Anyway, I'm just curious, because I want to seek it out a little more. But I want to know first.

And just for a little rant here: I really wish the government and media would be more honest about substances. I've learned what substances will kill me, but I've learned it only through experience. If the government would just be honest about stuff, we would actually be safer because we would know what we are getting into. Isn't the idea to protect the people? Apparently not, because they want to publish bogus reports about everything. So you can't trust them. Truth works better than scare tactics when you realize the scare tactics are simply that and you have no info whatsoever. Dang, man. Really. I'm careful, regardless, but I can bet you that's not helping a lot of people out. If the government lies about weed, then how do we know they're not fabricating everything else? They tell a little truth, sure, but also a lot of lies. If the drug policies were run by this forum, I swear we'd be a lot better off. That's just pathetic. I appreciate you guys, though. Really are lifesavers. More so than the government, for sure.

Thanks

 

[im3rdworld]

meth or coke? one will wreak havoc on your heart and the other on your brain. its actually not as much about safety as it is about the good time. its quite clear from your post that you are not quite familiar with meth.
getting to the point coke can kill you instantly and bankrupt you quickly whereas meth is more potent longer lasting and comparitivley cheaper has no OD but yet in no way safer.

in an ideal situation assuming the drugs are pharmaceutical grade; meth is safer than coke well at least in the short run

 

[BritishLad]

meth or coke? one will wreak havoc on your heart and the other on your brain. its actually not as much about safety as it is about the good time. its quite clear from your post that you are not quite familiar with meth.
getting to the point coke can kill you instantly and bankrupt you quickly whereas meth is more potent longer lasting and comparitivley cheaper has no OD but yet in no way safer.

in an ideal situation assuming the drugs are pharmaceutical grade; meth is safer than coke well at least in the short run

Meth has no OD? I probaly misread, if not I'm pretty sure you can overdose on it.

 

[im3rdworld]

meth does have an OD only if you really want to OD on it

 

[BritishLad]

Well, you can easily accidently OD on stimulents especially amphetamines, if you're chasing that first high. And are desperate to do so you can easily OD yourself, even if you just want a bit more of a buzz. The effect that (in my experiance) stimulants/amphetamines bring can some often trick you into doing or wanting more. Because if just feels "right".

EDIT: "Meth is subscribed for ADD" My mistake, didn't see that bit. It would be hard to fatally OD accidently on Methylphenidate unless you were extremely careless.

 

[Tryptamino]

meth can give you strokes, or so i'm told, and damages your brain and your mouth really badly (although neurotoxicity can be avoided - not eliminated - by using antioxidants, l-tyrosine, and l-tryptophan/5-htp). That being said, it's a lot of fun, sometimes, TOO fun, and that's when you get stuck, and then you get all the negative effects X 1,000,000,000 except it's all day every day. then comes amphetamine psychosis, which isn't too fun either. however, the actual rec value of meth far exceeds that of coke IMO. meth is sort of like a cross between MDMA and coke when used in moderation, probably due to it's serotonergic properties. when not used in moderation, it basically starts feeling like adderall unless you have enough money to buy multiple grams every day.

coke damages your heart and makes you feel a lot more happy than meth, but has a worse crash. however, coke doesn't damage your brain as much (it still does, but not all that much) as meth, and i think coke is safer.
as far as habit forming properties, i'd say that coke gets you faster, but meth gets you worse. if i was to make a choice between the two as far as health-wise, i'd pick coke. but, i'm broke, and meth is much cheaper, stronger, and longer lasting (although that can also be a bad thing, more than just sometimes), so naturally, it seems like the obvious choice.

EDIT: "Meth is subscribed for ADD" My mistake, didn't see that bit. It would be hard to fatally OD accidently on Methylphenidate unless you were extremely careless.

no i think they were talking about methamp, not methylphenidate. mph is garbage. d-methamp (desoxyn, prescribed rarely for obesity, narcolepsy and ADHD) is probably pretty difficult to OD on, however. when i took it, (30mgs oral) i felt like i was "too high' and that i was close to OD'ing. although that was my first methamp experience, so naturally it was gonna be pretty strong. whenever i smoke ice, i never get that kind of intense feeling that i got on desoxyn. actually, to add to my response to the OP, desoxyn would be safer than both coke and street meth, simply because it's pure, has fewer side effects, and you don't get the impulse to redose as much, if at all.

 

[sneakdiss]

Both drugs are horrible for you no matter how you slice it. I would say meth, if used sparsly, is better for you. Coke nowadays is just shit altogether. Not saying you can't find a good source, but that stuff has a horrible quality consistency these days.

 

[BritishLad]

Forgot it was prescribed for that, guess I forgot since it does sound mental. Giving kids something to help them "focus", then having all the anti-drug ads on about how it ruins lives..

 

[Renz Envy]

Cocaine's sodium channel cancelling effects (anesthetic) are cardiotoxic in that they mess with the electrical firing to your heart. That means that your chances of heart failure are much higher while using cocaine.

Methamphetamine is safer than dextroamphetamine in terms of cardiovascular damage. Meth stimulates more serotonin and less epinephrine which lowers your BP and heart rate at normal doses. While dextroamphetamine is less well-rounded as it stimulates more dopamine and epiniphrine.

Neurotoxicity of all amphetamines is very real. One can eat, keep their temperature down and sleep and still suffer some neurotoxic effects, however under those conditions they will be less severe than those of a person getting strung out for days.

Cocaine is not neurotoxic like amphetamine, it does not reduce the amount of dopamine receptors available, however it does down regulate them. As a former cocaine user, it does not take much time at all to heal compared to meth after a night of binging.

 

[DooMMooD]

From what I've read no drug is more neurologically destructive than methamphetamine.

Flip side: coke is very cardio toxic.

To boot: they have Medication assisted therapies for cocaine, or at least experimental ones (methylphenidate). No such drug for meth.

Guess the question is whether you want to be rougher on your heart or rougher on your brain. If you have a preexisting heart condition: coke is worse obviously. If you need your brain to work/live? Meth is worse.

This is obviously not factoring in the massive amounts of cut/impurities you will probably be getting in both.

I am not saying coke/meth are SOLELY those things. They are both cardio/neurologically toxic. One is just more so for one, and the other more so the latter.

 

[Dread calm]

I'd take a moderate dose of meth any day before coke. Coke in even small amounts just ruins me physically, i can actually feel the damage its doing. I dont touch coke anymore for exactly that reason, but I'll still do meth. I'm not saying coke is worse for you physically because i dont know, but i do know for me it certainly feels worse.

 

[Druidus]

Cocaine is not neurotoxic like amphetamine, it does not reduce the amount of dopamine receptors available, however it does down regulate them. As a former cocaine user, it does not take much time at all to heal compared to meth after a night of binging.

To those of you saying that cocaine does not cause that much, or as much, neurotoxicity, compared to meth, qualify your statements! It depends heavily on ROA! If you IV cocaine, it has SIGNIFICANT neurotoxic effects, and I think it's very debatable as to which would damage your brain more. Of course, methamphetamine is, in general, more neurotoxic, there are ways it can be used that are not terribly neurotoxic. Cocaine, IV'd, is ALWAYS very risky, neuronally, and highly neurocidal.

 

[Dread calm]

^good point

 

[donoharm]

Well, one of the reasons methamphetamine does so much damage are the chemicals involved in making it. While some of you may get ice that was made in a higher quality mexican factory or something, those who are getting shit that was shake n baked in a trailer are at a high risk of ingesting toxic chemicals and carcinogens that were used in the conversion process.

Cocaine certainly can be cut with dangerous chemicals as well, but I feel it's less physically destructive than methamphetamine. If you have a cardiac condition, you still can OD from too much meth, but an equal amount of coke will probably do it faster.

 

[g0to]

Talking about both drugs, pure (uncut with psychoactive adulterants), I'd say coke is better for the body & mind, if only because it lasts for shorter and doesn't have as much of an appetite-suppressing property (in my experience). It however may be much more addictive if one has a constant supply of it. Both are super euphoric the first few or dozen times, and become absolute shit when abused. The body has a very good way of achieving homeostasis with these compounds.

 

[Renz Envy]

I would vote cocaine.

Meth has legitimate medical uses and in moderation can be beneficial.

Cocaine's sodium channel cancelling effects make it a hell of a gamble on the heart.