Ehh, I really didnt enjoy this. I dont have no use for information about the way heroin is cut in the UK. the game over there is completely differnt. Not only does their heroin come from a different continent than the dope that we get out here on the east coast of the US, but its a different formula, not used for smoking, dont need to be cooked at all, no need to use any kind of acid to break it down, etc.
Also, I understand that they used national averages, but the part where they said that "purity levels in the united states stayed at a constant 35% between 2003 and 2007" is misleading and not even clear. Its a vague statement, they didnt even say "averaged" percent, or nothing like that. The purity levels of the dope on the east coast, not just jersey but NYC, philly, and to a less extent but also baltimore, is higher than that, and its representing the dope quality wrong when they say some shit like they did. Which pretty much made it sound like they were sayin "in the US, heroin is 35% pure." Thats just about exactly wat they said, and that aint right. Maybe since the UK is so small its easier to make estimates like that, but look--for the UK, they did RANGES. Even for australia, they did RANGES, xx% to xx%. And the US, which is bigger than either one of them, and got such a huuge , incredible difference in the heroin markets, origins, and cuts based on the different regions u find it in, only gets ONE blanket percentage number? wat the fuck kind of shitty journalism is that?
Anyways , it aint about the purities bein better or worse but just in general that it seems like this information is only focused on UK drugs and becuz their drug sources and cultures and the access they got to shit is totally different over there, i really cant see it as a accurate picture of drug cuttin in america. Here and there they would have a little bit of info but it was almost all completely about UK drugs. I didnt even bother to read the rest past heroin becuz it was obvious that it was a half ass kind of paper/story/or watever it was supposed to be.
Tchort , i didnt read ur post til mine was done, but i agree with u 100%. The ppl that wrote this seemed to really not have any kind of actual experience with it and just put together research they got second hand from reports from police, etc. I could be wrong but the way i understood it was they just looked up information and put it in one place. if they didnt even do their own research how is that even really worth all that much? We all know that the facts and information that the government releases about this shit aint always that accurate, and usually always behind the times even if it is only a small amount, but sometimes its more than a little outdated. They didnt do nothing to find out the shit thats really happenin on the streets which is where they would get the most accurate information. Goverment data can be good for info about high level bulk weight drug seizing facts but it takes a long time for them to get the data together and process it and by the time it gets released its 2 years later and the cartels and packagers and manufactureres and shippers and all them is already onto something new. This article didnt impress me at all.
]
