Harm Reduction ⫸Should I Try HEROIN?⫷

[Ismene2]

yes. opiates are known to be bad for a number of bodily systems- obviously you can't run ethical trials to find out the long term effects. but autopsies of long term heroin addicts have revealed significant differences, apparently their brains go mushy. a big concern for me is the impact on bone health, as i had osteopenia before getting addicted to heroin. so its not harmless.

I'm talking pure heroin chinup - not street heroin. Pure heroin has no negatives health wise apart from you eventually get dependent on it and constipation. There's a million long term studies on people who are prescribed heroin - they arn't dying with collapsed livers like alcoholics would. The woman I know had terrible back pain and she asked the doctor "Will morphine damage me" and the doctor said "No, morphine has no negative health effects".

Being emotionally available is something you have to work at - she's very emotionally available and I've known her pre-morphine and post-morphine and shes the same person. Perhaps her moods go up and down a bit but she's got a lot of other health problems as well.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I'm talking pure heroin chinup - not street heroin.

study on patients prescribed opiates and their higher risk of osteoporosis - many other negative effects also mentioned. her doctor is wrong.

this has been known for at least a decade, when i first looked up the science on the health effects of long term opiate dependence.

 

[Ismene2]

Here's another take on it:

Start with the allegation that heroin damages the minds and bodies of those who use it, and consider the biggest study of opiate use ever conducted, on 861 patients at Philadelphia General hospital in the 20s. It concluded that they suffered no physical harm of any kind. Their weight, skin condition and dental health were all unaffected. "There is no evidence of change in the circulatory, hepatic, renal or endocrine functions. When it is considered that some of these subjects had been addicted for at least five years, some of them for as long as 20 years, these negative observations are highly significant."

Check with Martindale, the standard medical reference book, which records that heroin is used for the control of severe pain in children and adults, including the frail, the elderly and women in labour. It is even injected into premature babies who are recovering from operations. Martindale records no sign of these patients being damaged or morally degraded or becoming criminally deviant or simply insane. It records instead that, so far as harm is concerned, there can be problems with nausea and constipation.

Or go back to the history of "therapeutic addicts" who became addicted to morphine after operations and who were given a clean supply for as long as their addiction lasted. Enid Bagnold, for example, who wrote the delightful children's novel, National Velvet, was what our politicians now would call "a junkie", who was prescribed morphine after a hip operation and then spent 12 years injecting up to 350mg a day. Enid never - as far as history records - mugged a single person or lost her "herd instinct", but died quietly in bed at the age of 91. Opiate addiction was once so common among soldiers in Europe and the United States who had undergone battlefield surgery that it was known as "the soldiers' disease". They spent years on a legal supply of the drug - and it did them no damage.

We cannot find any medical research from any source which will support the international governmental contention that heroin harms the body or mind of its users. Nor can we find any trace of our government or the American government or any other ever presenting or referring to any credible version of any such research. On the contrary, all of the available research agrees that, so far as harm is concerned, heroin is likely to cause some nausea and possibly severe constipation and that is all. In the words of a 1965 New York study by Dr Richard Brotman: "Medical knowledge has long since laid to rest the myth that opiates observably harm the body." Peanut butter, cream and sugar, for example, are all far more likely to damage the health of their users.

Make heroin legal | Politics | The Guardian

 

[Jabberwocky]

that article is from 2001!!! and references an article from 1965! fuck me, opioid induced osteoporosis is widely reported just look it up. your article does not mention bone density, neurological changes, or emotional development so is not relevant to any of my claims.

anyone can write a study/article that shows what they want if they don't look for the things that will prove the opposite.

 

[Ismene2]

study on patients prescribed opiates and their higher risk of osteoporosis - many other negative effects also mentioned. her doctor is wrong.

this has been known for at least a decade, when i first looked up the science on the health effects of long term opiate dependence.

One thing chinup - he talks about "prescription opioids" - in the states I'm guessing that isn't heroin - it will be stuff like percocets, oxycontin etc. Are they exactly the same as heroin?

 

[Ismene2]

that article is from 2001!!! and references an article from 1965! fuck me, opioid induced osteoporosis is widely reported just look it up. your article does not mention bone density, neurological changes, or emotional development so is not relevant to any of my claims.

anyone can write a study/article that shows what they want if they don't look for the things that will prove the opposite.

Well they say there were no health negatives whatsoever so I imagine that would include everything you suggest. Not sure if "emotional development" can be related to drug use.

And at least they were studying heroin not "prescription opioids" which are something else entirely.

As for it being 1965 - that was about the last period when you could conduct genuine research pre-war on drugs. Prescribing heroin where it's been tried has been shown to be of tremendous benefit to stabilising peoples lives and making them happier more emotionally balanced people that scoring on the streets.

And that article isn't trying to prove a point - that is about the only article you will ever find calling for the legalisation of heroin from 2001 so it's pretty damn good and the guy who wrote it is one of the most legendary, trustworthy journalists there has ever been. He doesn't write bullshit for the sake of it - he was the same guy who brought down the news of the world by investigating Murdoch when every other journalist turned their heads. The guy is a fucking legend and anything he writes is worth some serious consideration.

 

[Jabberwocky]

One thing chinup - he talks about "prescription opioids" - in the states I'm guessing that isn't heroin - it will be stuff like percocets, oxycontin etc. Are they exactly the same as heroin?

no but this is clutching at straws- it has been observed in street heroin users, and the molecular causes are reasonably well understood from what i can see, so i think its fair to infer that heroin has an analogous effect.

Well they say there were no health negatives whatsoever so I imagine that would include everything you suggest. Not sure if "emotional development" can be related to drug use.

dexa scan was invented in 1987, mri 1977, ct scan 1972, PET 1974. they didn't have the means to investigate at the time.

the impact of drug use on emotional development was rammed down my throat in rehab, as it was most of my friends who've been to rehab, so its pretty widely accepted and is independent of which drug you take. its hard to explain unless you have gone through a backlog of over a decade of shit in a matter of months because you were too high to process that shit when it happened.

 

[Ismene2]

Street heroin ain't heroin. Street heroin causes a tremendous number of health problems. Pure heroin doesn't.

And saying synthetic opiods are analogous to heroin is crap science - all steroids are analogous to testosterone but testosterone doesn't destroy your liver while other steroids do.

Well if someones getting to 91 in perfect health after many decades on heroin plus all the soldiers in perfect health - that suggests it ain't too bad. If bone density bothers you try lifting weights and eating a little more protein.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Street heroin ain't heroin. Street heroin causes a tremendous number of health problems. Pure heroin doesn't.

you don't have any recent evidence of that and when people make absolute claims outside of pure maths they are almost always wrong.

i doubt you'd debate that pure heroin causes respiratory depression, which can lead to brain damage, coma, and death. i'd call those a health problem.

based on studies of opiate side effects in addicts and patients, i am confident that were a trial given ethical approval today, and the slew of new diagnostic tools we have used to assess the impact, we would find that long term heroin use does have negative effects on health.

And saying synthetic opiods are analogous to heroin is crap science - all steroids are analogous to testosterone but testosterone doesn't destroy your liver while other steroids do.

i didn't claim they are analogous every way, i stated that as the same side effect is observed in heroin addicts and prescription opioid users, and the associated molecular pathway is reasonably well characterised, it is fair to assume that the cause of that one specific side effect is the same.

Well if someones getting to 91 in perfect health after many decades on heroin plus all the soldiers in perfect health - that suggests it ain't too bad.

ohhhhh i know a hundred year old smoker who drinks a bottle of whiskey a day. i don't. but i could, they exist. anecdotes aren't evidence.

If bone density bothers you try lifting weights and eating a little more protein.

bone density peaks in your mid 20s, many miss the boat and though weights and diet help, they can't make up for that loss.

 

[dalpat077]

Well for what it's worth: neither of your efforts are going unnoticed and I'm reading with keen interest.

Just one or two observations if I may (and I'm not taking sides here) (but neither has my stance changed on any of this either) (just to be clear).

Of late there does seem to be a lot of books and publications and whatever else that are used to make an argument for decriminalization or full legalization (of any or all drugs). Caveat being that those that I've seen of late (barring one and which I still don't agree with) were all written decades ago. I do believe that makes a difference and should be taken into account. No matter the qualifications or credibility of the author. Medical science (and thus testing) has indeed advanced rapidly in a +15 year period. And published statistics, such as those of the DEA or UNODC as but two examples, do show a steady rise in drug related issues. Alright: I realize the argument could be made that they didn't have the resources and therefore the statistical data that they have today. So said statistics could be skewed when it comes to historical data. And there's the argument that research into all of these drugs has been hampered due to the fact that they have indeed been banned (certainly true in the case of E.Coca and its many alkaloids as but one fine example). Given enough time I could probably come up with a few more thoughts on this type of thing. But I think you get the picture.

Moving on from the above though: I'm not going argue as to whether or not pharmaceutical Heroin is healthy or unhealthy because I don't know that facts. But in the context of this thread: does that mean anything really? Put another way: harmful or not I don't recall in my years (and oddly enough I was born in 1965) ever hearing of somebody who lost their job or ended up homeless because they ate cream or that sold their couch for a jar of peanut butter. And maybe therein lies the key to the argument (as basic and dumb as an example as it may be).

The other thing that perplexes me is how come the various authorities (governments and their agencies) are slammed for their actions when making certain substances illegal. I mean to say: I cannot see a bunch of cabinet ministers sitting around a table one fine morning and deciding it was going to be a boring day and figured oh well let's make Heroin of Cocaine illegal today (for want of something better to do). Unfortunately this too comes with a caveat i.e. how come alcohol got the rub? There's no doubt at all that it's harmful. And also no doubt that it's also associated with violence and abhorrent behavior (and I'd even go so far as to say even more so than the usual suspects). In my experience, as a matter of fact and come to think of it, it's been the catalyst for the few that I know that have ended up using hard drugs i.e. person is a bit "on", feeling a little brave, and has their first line. Personally never seen it work the other way around (well me, for some savage reason, being the other way around of course i.e. was stone cold sober and chomping at the bit to try my first line but that's a whole other story).

And of course: we know Morphine is a God send for pain and for people in palliative care. Cannot argue with that. So is Fentanyl (just by the way). But all are prone to abuse and whatever may follow (speaking here of people without physical pain and not in palliative care). Matter of fact and if you look at the history of what are now illegal narcotics: most all started out as having medicinal properties or medical applications. Off the top of my head I cannot really think of anything that was developed or synthesized purely for recreational purposes (but again a caveat i.e. my fields of interest when it comes to narcotics are relatively narrow so I could be wrong of course).

I dunno. Complex issue(s). Good discussion though. Don't have the answers. Just some musings. Just some food for thought. Still wouldn't touch Heroin with a barge pole (for whatever my own personal reasons may be even if they be misguided). And still wouldn't advocate or encourage somebody giving it a bash.

For whatever our personal reasons may be: I think there's a very very small minority here that just got lucky and never went down this road. In my case: the fear of its use having being instilled in me ever since I can remember. And in one or two other cases: just wasn't their thing. But my advice to anybody seriously asking this question would be to do a search right here using the keyword "Heroin". And if after reading each and every single post you're still hell bent on giving it a bash? Well then go for it. Because if that is the way things go: nothing and nobody would stop you anyway let's be honest.

 

[Ismene2]

Chinup - your point seems to be "Is it possible to take heroin in such a way that it damages your health". I would say yes it is. It's also possible to take water in such a way that it damages your health. Does that mean drinking water is dangerous? I think we need to concentrate more on "Is it possible to take heroin safely". The answer is yes. Cigs and alcohol have direct negative effects on god knows how many organs in your body. Heroin doesn't.

Analogous drugs don't always have the safety profile of the original. Testosterone is the prime example - test has a whole host of health benefits that the analogues don't.

Come on chinup - don't compare the health effects of cigs and alcohol with heroin. If a theoretical drop in bone density from oxycontin is the only evidence we have of heroin causing a health problem then I ain't gonna panic just yet.

BTW, I remember Howard Marks on a legalisation debate years ago saying "I know lots of people who take heroin recreationally" and the presenter almost shit himself "Heroin? They are all addicts arn't they"? It's bollocks.

 

[dalpat077]

Last interruption for the day:

Good and interesting discussion on the health aspect. So carry on as it's valid and interesting debate.

Just a word of caution though: I'd bet my last cent that the health aspects were of little to no concern to the OP when asking "Should I Try Heroin". Not here anyway. On some or the other pain management forum: maybe that would have been the case. All I'm saying is that context matters.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Moving on from the above though: I'm not going argue as to whether or not pharmaceutical Heroin is healthy or unhealthy because I don't know that facts. But in the context of this thread: does that mean anything really? Put another way: harmful or not I don't recall in my years (and oddly enough I was born in 1965) ever hearing of somebody who lost their job or ended up homeless because they ate cream or that sold their couch for a jar of peanut butter. And maybe therein lies the key to the argument (as basic and dumb as an example as it may be).

great post and great point. thank you for your input.

yeah i don't know whether the drop off in arguments for legalisation is down to new advances in medical science or changes in political climate. i do think heroin should be legalised as it would remove a lot of dangers associated with the black market and prevent some of the health issues associated with street heroin by regulating supply.

Chinup - your point seems to be "Is it possible to take heroin in such a way that it damages your health".

my point is that your claim that heroin causes no harm is demonstrably false.

If a theoretical drop in bone density from oxycontin is the only evidence we have of heroin causing a health problem then I ain't gonna panic just yet.

good for you. i had osteoporosis in my spine (osteopenia everywhere else) before i got addicted to heroin so i'm fucking petrified. i missed my last chance to get my bone density up to a reasonable level by using heroin and potentially made the situation much worse. that's harm.

 

[Ismene2]

Could you demonstrate it then? Which body organs does heroin damage? Do we have anything apart from this article on oxycontin?

Is there any drug you feel is safe? LSD? Mushrooms?

 

[JessFR]

One thing Jess - if it wasn't illegal, if you were getting prescribed pure heroin from the doctor, would being dependent on it be a problem? You'd take your dose in the morning and go to work and live your life the same as everyone else. I know an elderly woman with health problems who has been prescribed morphine for years - she leads a totally normal life, maybe a bit of constipation. If she stops taking it suddently obviously she rattles but why would she stop taking it? Pure heroin isn't like alcohol that's slowly destroying your liver - heroin is totally benign on the body.

Blackmarket heroin cut with shit is going to cause problems sure, but heroin itself isn't.

Would be a "problem"? Well that depends on how you define something to be a problem, but I would say it's still worse than just not being a heroin addict.

Here's the thing. The only way in which it might be better being a heroin addict vs not being one, is if you would have otherwise killed yourself.

Annnnnd that's a good point for heroin, because I think for many people that probably is actually the case. A lot of us probably loved heroin as much as we did cause it helped us cope.

But that doesn't make heroin a positive thing, just the less bad of two had options desperately needing a better third option.

 

[Ismene2]

Jess - are we talking "heroin addicts" using illegal heroin or legal heroin? If it's illegal heroin then it's no fun being an addict. If it's prescribed - what serious problems do you have? I've had to take naproxen for my shoulder - now that stuff absolutely fucking destroys your liver, increases your risk of heart attack and knocks fuck out of your stomach and kidneys. I'd rather take heroin than naproxen for sure.

I'd be interested in any heroin users thoughts on the quality of the high - is it really the best high you've ever had?

 

[Jabberwocky]

Do we have anything apart from this article on oxycontin?

look it up yourself - though as i say, due to ethical problems experimenting on heroin directly isn't possible.

a few: review of many papers on opioid substitution therapy- "Long-term opioid therapy is a risk factor for low bone mineral density"
impact of pain medication on brain structure - "We conclude that chronic treatment with OA is associated with altered brain structure and function within sensory limbic areas."
bone density comparison between opioid dependent women and healthy controls - "More than one-quarter (34%) of patients had osteopenia (n = 31) or osteoporosis (n = 4), compared to 16% of the healthy control group having osteopenia"
longitudinal cohort study - "The BMD decline over time was similar among the 3 groups. However, 5 years of continuous opioid use may be associated with a greater BMD decline than 5 years on other analgesics."

i'm done.

 

[JessFR]

Jess - are we talking "heroin addicts" using illegal heroin or legal heroin? If it's illegal heroin then it's no fun being an addict. If it's prescribed - what serious problems do you have? I've had to take naproxen for my shoulder - now that stuff absolutely fucking destroys your liver, increases your risk of heart attack and knocks fuck out of your stomach and kidneys. I'd rather take heroin than naproxen for sure.

I'd be interested in any heroin users thoughts on the quality of the high - is it really the best high you've ever had?

I'm talking pure prescribed heroin just as in your described hypothetical.

Heroin, and in many ways all opioids, have this very strong habit with an extremely large humber of people of completely taking over their lives.

I get methadone every day.. The closest thing to prescribed heroin in most places. It's always always pure it doesn't cost me much and it keeps me stable and functional.

But it STILL controls my thoughts. I'm always thinking about it, when I can have more, how much I can get.

In short, I'm still addicted, unsurprisingly.

And that in itself isn't a desirable state to be in. Yes nssaids and cox inhibitors have their side effects too, but they aren't addictive.

And addiction IS NOT desirable even when you can control all the negative consequences. It is not a good thing to live as a slave even if your master is very good to you.

I get it... I don't wanna stop using opioids, ever, I'd love to keep using it every day forever. And if I had that option I probably would. I get why someone would want there to be a way go always have it and have there be no issues.

But there are issues and it'd be better for most people if they never got involved in this shit at all.

To answer your second question, is it the best high I've ever had. Yes. I haven't used psychedelics so I can't compare with that but I've weed, benzos, meth, and lots of other shit, and to ME it's the best by far.

But that doesn't mean it'll be everyone's best high. I'm clearly vulnerable to opioid addiction. I don't get out of meth what other people do. Some people likewise aren't a fan of opioids.

Additionally just because heroin is the best high I've had doesn't mean heroin has always been that good. Like most people id say it was best early on when I started using and has never been that good again.

Still good, I still love it, and I've had really good times with it since, but never THAT good again.

That's my honest answer, yet I still can't recommend anyone fuck around with it, or with opioids generally unless your life is already nonstop pain.

Some people should have opioids in their life, as the less bad of multiple bad options. But unless you are living in constant pain before them and honestly can say you feel like you have little to lose (and you will still be wrong), stay the fuck away from them.

 

[Ismene2]

I dunno chinup - "chronic use of an analogue drug might affect bone density in later life" wouldn't put me off occasionally using the drug. If you said it caused lung cancer and liver damage I might think again. But if bone density is something you're worried about then I get your point.

 

[Ismene2]

That's interesting jess - I started drugs with mushrooms so for me heroin was always a big step down from the mushroom high. Perhaps if I'd started with heroin I would've been more impressed.