• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E

The legitimacy of diacetylmorphine and other strong opioids

Jktm

Bluelighter
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
1,920
So...anyone have an idea as to why diacetylmorphine (or heroin) is considered C-I with no recognized medical use in the US while other, much stronger opioids (that I presume have stronger highs as well) are considered C-II, like dilaudid and opana?

Sorry if this is legal discussion, but thought this thread might fit into DC...
 
Opanas are formulated in such a away they can't be injected easily, nor are they easily obtained. Diluadid gives a great rush but the high is short lived.

Heroin is cheap, easily available, gives a nice rush, and the high lasts for a good amount of time. Due to it's use in the past as an illicit narcotic, it gained a reputation and lost whatever medical legitimacy it held. It was mainly marketed as a substitute for morphine and was supposed to cure morphine addiction. People didn't really know how certain drugs functioned back then and when it was found it basically was a stronger form of morphine they stopped using it.
 
Yes, but I don't understand why they didn't resume use of it...is it just tabooed now like LSD and MJ?

I just don't understand how they can label cocaine as C-II, and make H be C-I...

does it not have as good of pain relieving qualities as other opioids...

and one thing I'm so fucking tired of (especially from psychiatrists that should know better) is that all Rx opioids are synthetic forms of heroin...when morphine is the natural one along with codeine...lol (yes, I've had a psych tell me that morphine vicodin and oxy are made from heroin.............)
 
I think your right. Heroin has just gained a really nasty rep in the united states since when it was legal it was such a fucking disaster. However, I do believe that diacetylmorphine is more psychologically addicting (IMO) than oxymorphone or hydromorphone. Both of those drugs are nice. Oxymorphone is about as close to really good heroin as it gets, killer rush (probably better than smack) and a nice, pretty long lasting high. Dilaudid is also known for having banging rush, but beyond that, not much else.

Basically, Heroin just has all the goods. Unlike oxycodone, it's got a fantastic rush. And when compared to oxymorphone and hydromorphone, while the rush may not be quite as intense, the euphoria from the actual high is a lot better IMO (and in many other people who I've talked to). In other countries, diacetylmorphine is still used as a painkiller (diamorphine), but I think heroin has just left too bad of a taste in America's mouth. There are certainly opiates that I imagine are more physically and psychologically addicting than smack (I imagine some of the stronger other morphine analogues), but those are highly controlled or straight up illegal as well.

As for having medical value, it certainly does. It's a great at killing pain. But in this instance I believe that the powers that be deem its addictive potential to be far to risky to use, when we have other narcotics that are just as effective at treating legitimate pain, that are not such a perfect storm or euphoria.
 
still used in the UK and all over the world medically. UK does not have anywhere near the same levels of painkiller pill abuse as US, despite most of the same drugs being used medically.
 
There are plenty of other powerful opioids that could be used medically (and are used medically in other various other countries) that are in Schedule I (C-I) in the U.S. The U.S. scheduling system doesn't make any sense. But yes, when it comes to heroin, its the stigma it acquired many years ago, before the scheduling system was even put into effect.
 
But guys, just to play devils advocate..
Who here really feels that there is any pharmaceutical available on the market currently or within the last ten years (this way we can include the OG OxyContin and Opana) that beats high quality smack. Before answering, take into consideration the rush, the euphoria of the high, and the duration of the high.

I would prefer to use pharmaceuticals at this point over heroin any day, due to the vass ammount of shit that is being sold as smack out there. However, when I compare the best heroin I've had to IV oxymorphone, or IV oxycodone, the quality smack wins. It's got the rush, it's got the euphoria, and it's got the legs. oxymorphone on the other hand has a super intense rush, and a pretty damn decent high. IMO though, it's still just not quite as euphoric. Oxycodone is just a waste to inject as its been pretty much established that it has no rush. Sadly, the only time I've taken the drug orally was when I had too high of a tolerance to feel the effects of a couple Percocet. I've heard that injecting oxy dirties the high, and I hope that's true, because when I first injected oxycodone I was incredibly let down. No rush, short high (which felt no different than any other typical opiate-in fact I prefer hydrocodone of my tolerance is low enough), and again, just lacking some warmth.

Heroin (or good heroin) leaves me with feelings of compassion, empathy, basically just full of love. None of the other narcotics that I've tried (though I'd be curious to try morphine) have really given me those feelings. With these Thebaine derived opiates I always felt more like I was on some super euphoric, mellowed out stimulant. The euphoria is great, but it's just lacking something dirty and loving. Real good smack will deliver that.

In the end I guess it's all what your into, as well as what ROA you use. If your a sniffer, I doubt that heroin would feel much different from any other opiate. But when you inject these drugs, IMO, it seems clear that heroin at its best tops the cake.
 
In all honesty if I could get pure oxycodone powder or pure diamorphine I'd choose oxy, even if it cost more. I just like the more stimulating high. Better would be a 2:1 mixture of oxycodone to heroin, get the best of both worlds.

I think it has to do with it being AFAIK the first synthetic opioid. It was new, people got hooked on it, addiction was poorly understood. It probably scared a lot of people that they'd make something even more addictive and it was just going to get worse. Also with heroin you can smoke, snort, and shoot it, and H can make very concentrated shots due to greater water solubility. It's the only semi-synthetic opiate made clandestinely and strongly associated with gangsters.

Till the 60's, a lot of the street heroin was legit pharms diverted and smuggled. This pissed off the US so they began pressuring countries with pharmaceutical diamorphine to ban it.

Strangely, if my memory is correct reading through old UNODC bulletin on narcotics, the Soviet Union was the biggest producer of opiates for some years, including diamorphine. The red scare may have also played a role.

Also it might have it's roots in racism. Before drug prohibition, the profile of an opiate addict was white women, Asian men, and medical professionals. The idea of white women smoking O with "Chinamen" must have driven them nuts! Afterward the typical profile of an opiate addict were black men, many of whom switched to heroin when cocaine almost disappeared. I think up until the 70's to 90's. This kind of puts it into perspective why the USA secretly aided heroin traffickers all in the name of fighting Communism. It was sold to people they did not give a fuck about anyway. Reminds me of that scene in the Godfather where that one guy said to just sell heroin to blacks, calling them animals who should just kill themselves.

For awhile there would be bills in congress that would legalize medical diamorphine, proposed every year. It'd usually die in committee. Don't know who it was or if someone's still trying. Might have kind of became a non-issue with other strong opioids becoming common. Which is too bad, because diamorphine maintenance therapy could help a lot of addicts, and diamorphine might be more effective than other shit for some other patients.
jktm said:
and one thing I'm so fucking tired of (especially from psychiatrists that should know better) is that all Rx opioids are synthetic forms of heroin...when morphine is the natural one along with codeine...lol (yes, I've had a psych tell me that morphine vicodin and oxy are made from heroin.............)
That whole "Oxycontin is a synthetic form of heroin" thing pisses me off. There is no diamorphine in nature, it's as synthetic as oxycodone is. Using that logic amphetamines, methaqualone, and even PCP would be natural.
 
Last edited:
Oh Jesus Christ. I went to a psych a while back who went on some tirade about hydrocodone and oxycodone being synthetic versions of heroin haha. I hate it when you got to just sit there and bite your tongue, all the while thinking 'well this is a big fucking waste of money.."

I agree, it's mostly due to stigma. I just think at this point there is probably little need for pharmaceutical heroin when we have drugs like oxymorphone, hydromorphone, fentanyl etc... I'm not a chronic pain patient, so I'm not sure about this, but I can't imagine that diacetylmorphine would be that much more effective at killing pain than the drugs mentioned (or morphine for that matter), it seems the only benifit is the increased euphoria (which is objective) and its super fast penetration of the BBB (which oxymorphone and hydromorphone are capable of when injected as well).

That being said, would I like to try some pharm grade dope? hell yeah.
 
Top