News The Many Health Benefits of Meth

acklac7

acklac7

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
1,861
Location
Michigan

The Many Health Benefits of Meth​

Troy Farah
Pacific Standard
15 May 2019

Ask your doctor about methamphetamine. It's not a phrase you'll ever hear on TV or the radio, but here's a secret: Meth is an incredible medicine. Even the Drug Enforcement Administration admits it, and doctors are known to prescribe it for narcolepsy, obesity, and ADHD. Historically, meth has been used to reverse barbiturate overdoses and even raise blood pressure during surgery. Some preliminary research suggests that meth can be neuroprotective against stroke and traumatic brain injury, even stimulating the growth of brain cells.
Click to expand...

Read the full story here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Burnt Offerings said:
Psychostimulants have the paradoxical effect of calming a person with ADHD
Click to expand...
It depends on the dose. I can assure you through both personal experience and research that amphetamines do in fact amp up someone with ADHD as well. I've met one person with ADHD who claimed otherwise in person and I don't believe him. Some mental relief isn't equivocal to physically stimulated, and whatever case points which do point this direction doesn't describe every single persons neurology, ADHD or not. It's an umbrella term as these diagnoses usually are. Not gospel.

Street meth will twack out just about anyone at recreational or high doses. Pharmaceutical dose, in US (not prescribed in Canada where I live) is 5mg or 10mg. As a last line of defense for ADHD. That's equivalent to about 15mg or 30mg dexamphetamine, with more of the blood brain barrier crossed for an extra kick as the methyl chain in methamphetamine hits a broader surface. Meth can be extremely neurotoxic at higher doses too, with any regularity. I get high, trust me.
 
Joey said:
I get high, trust me.
Click to expand...
It's weird, right? And I don't mean to belittle you or anyone else who uses Meth to "get high" - but I never found myself using Meth to "get high". I hear that term used quite a bit in regards to Meth use, and for me? I just can't relate. I use Meth to concentrate, to get things done, to further my mind. But getting high? When I think "Getting High" I don't think Meth, as Meth is a medication for me.
 
Burnt Offerings said:
Psychostimulants have the paradoxical effect of calming a person with ADHD
Click to expand...
Joey said:
It depends on the dose. I can assure you through both personal experience and research that amphetamines do in fact amp up someone with ADHD as well. I've met one person with ADHD who claimed otherwise in person and I don't believe him. Some mental relief isn't equivocal to physically stimulated, and whatever case points which do point this direction doesn't describe every single persons neurology, ADHD or not. It's an umbrella term as these diagnoses usually are. Not gospel.

Street meth will twack out just about anyone at recreational or high doses. Pharmaceutical dose, in US (not prescribed in Canada where I live) is 5mg or 10mg. As a last line of defense for ADHD. That's equivalent to about 15mg or 30mg dexamphetamine, with more of the blood brain barrier crossed for an extra kick as the methyl chain in methamphetamine hits a broader surface. Meth can be extremely neurotoxic at higher doses too, with any regularity. I get high, trust me.
Click to expand...
I would have to agree with @Joey here, I'm ADHD (Heavily ADHD): While (Meth)Amphetamines do calm me down, they definitely keep me amped-up and focused at the same time. It's a weird dichotomy.
 
Mr. Krinkle said:
thats how they get an adhd kid to focus...tweek the kid out with ritalin :caffeine:
Click to expand...
I have been saying that for years. Hmmm let's see, speed helps a person study? You don't say? College kids have known that for a century if not more.

I have my own opinions on ADHD that I will pass over explaining. Let's just say I think most of us would benefit our study habits if we occassionally added speed for focus.
 
hey @acklac7

the DitM posting guidelines dictate that "Articles should be recent unless particularly important in retrospect"... given that it is not recent, can you elaborate on why this article is particularly important in retrospect?
 
thegreenhand said:
hey @acklac7

the DitM posting guidelines dictate that "Articles should be recent unless particularly important in retrospect"... given that it is not recent, can you elaborate on why this article is particularly important in retrospect?
Click to expand...
Hmmm, I missed that aspect. But isn't two years recent-ish? I don't know, it's a good read, is it not? Do whatever you want with it, up to you...
 
acklac7 said:
Hmmm, I missed that aspect. But isn't two years recent-ish? I don't know, it's a good read, is it not? Do whatever you want with it, up to you...
Click to expand...
yes 'recent' is an admittedly vague term.

i did find it interesting read. i think i'm gonna edit the format a lil to match the DitM standards just fyi.

i'll be completely honest, your new signature + this post just got me thinking you were trying to advocate for the benefits of low dose methamphetamine. which i'm open for discussion of, but not by posting an old(ish) article to advance any given narrative you might have.

i just ask that you try to maintain the standards of the subforum you're in - which (for now) is a place to collect current media coverage of drugs. fair enough?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top