Anyone smoke OC?

[AntonioMontana]

Theodore...get a life bro

 

[TheodoreRoosevelt]

I'm not saying it's unheard of or impossible. I'm sure plenty of people pay $80/pill, and I'm not saying I have great connects for it either. I've come across OC80's at about $60 a pill many times so that's not a far cry from 80.

But my point, is that no one is going to regularly smoke OC80's if they are paying $80 a pill. If you have to pay that much per pill that you smoke, you are either going to find a better connect, or find a more effective way to do it.

If OC80s were $10 a pill to someone, I wouldn't doubt it if they said they smoked them. But if you pay $80 a pill, $80 a high via smoked, you are going to quit smoking and take them in a more effective manner. Even at $80 a pill, injecting 20mg would do you fine and that wouldn't be bad. Or eating, or sniffing them, since they have such high bioavailabilities form those administration. But given how ineffective smoking Oxycodone HCl is, no one would regularly smoke them if they were paying $80 a pill.

i've never seen an OC80 go for anything close to 25. and so what if weed, alcohol, MDMA, even cocaine is cheaper.. if people want OC then they'll get OC. why would an OC addict get MDMA just because it's cheaper... they don't want MDMA, they want OC?

I understand people will want OC will want OC. However, there is a cross-price elasticity correlation between opiates of all natures and practically all illicit drugs that runs negatively.

I am not having a drug price discussion here, but rather an Economics discussion based on the theory of Economic theory of Substitute Goods.

In economics, one kind of good (or service) is said to be a substitute good for another kind insofar as the two kinds of goods can be consumed or used in place of one another in at least some of their possible uses. Classic examples of substitute goods include margarine and butter, or petroleum and natural gas (used for heating or electricity). The fact that one good is substitutable for another has immediate economic consequences: insofar as one good can be substituted for another, the demand for the two kinds of good will be bound together by the fact that customers can trade off one good for the other if it becomes advantageous to do so. Thus, an increase in price for one kind of good (ceteris paribus) will result in an increase in demand for its substitute goods, and a decrease in price (ceteris paribus, again) will result in a decrease in demand for its substitutes.

Granted, the cross-price elasticity (a standardized way to value how strong of a substitute good one is to another) of opiates among opiate users is weaker than drugs of all sorts among other kinds of drug/polydrug users, but the relationship is still there.

And given the extreme price of $80/pill, or essentially $80 a dose, there are very viable substitute goods that become open.

The substitute goods of smoking an entire OC80 for one dose @ $80, is injecting/eating/sniffing a dose of Oxycodone @ $20 (1/4th a pill), heroin, and other opiates. When prices are that high, even the $5 high of a bag of marijuana can be seen as a strong substitute good for the $80 high of smoking an OC80.

why would an OC addict get MDMA just because it's cheaper...

Because when the margin of price is over 400%, the consumer will seriously consider other goods, ie substitute goods, that he would not have considered previously.

Think of it this way: You would never consider riding a bike to work, no? But if suddenly the cheapest car became 10x more expensive, you would suddenly look at bikes differently. In fact, this has actually became the case given the rising cost of oil - now while there are studies to show that people actually do not give a shit about the price of oil and that $4/gallon actually has very little impact on most people, there still has been a slight, but statistically significant nonetheless number of people who now carpool, take mass transit, and ride bikes to work instead of drive as they used.

and even if it sounds foreign to you that people smoke OC's it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

I didn't say that. I am arguing my point from an economics standpoint, and economics is a big picture argument. Of course some people have such a strong demand inelasticity that would still smoke OCs if it were $300 a dose. But the number is small, and gets smaller and smaller as the price rises.

At $80 a single dose smoked, only a very small number of people, an extremely small number, would continue to smoke OC80s regularly when faced with the large number of market alternatives.

From this theory, the theory of substitute goods, I can conclude that no, there are not "thousands of people who smoke OCs" or that "it is an epidemic" any farther than bullshit sensationalist stories made up by the newspaper using weasal words.

i don't understand it anymore than you do but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen and you can't prove it false just because you've never seen it.

Actually, I have proven it false using Economic theory that is widely accepted.

I am not refuting that people smoke OC's or that you can get high from it, but rather that any large number of people do it regularly, as claimed by some in this thread.

maybe they don't know any better and like the quick onset. not to sound rude... i just think you're being a tad judgmental on the whole thing.

I'm not being judgemental, I'm using evidence, and application of sound economic theory, to disprove the argument that "thousands of people smoke OCs".

how do you know it's extremely ineffective?

Given that salts generally have a small margin between vaporization and burning points, given that recreational drug users are not using a hot plate to inhale these drugs so that they could make sure they are reaching perfectly in between this margin, and given the extremely high bioavailability of oral and injected routes of administration of oxycodone, which are 85%+ and 99%+ respectively, as already cited in this thread.

 

[AntonioMontana]

I'm not saying it's unheard of or impossible. I'm sure plenty of people pay $80/pill, and I'm not saying I have great connects for it either. I've come across OC80's at about $60 a pill many times so that's not a far cry from 80.

But my point, is that no one is going to regularly smoke OC80's if they are paying $80 a pill. If you have to pay that much per pill that you smoke, you are either going to find a better connect, or find a more effective way to do it.

If OC80s were $10 a pill to someone, I wouldn't doubt it if they said they smoked them. But if you pay $80 a pill, $80 a high via smoked, you are going to quit smoking and take them in a more effective manner. Even at $80 a pill, injecting 20mg would do you fine and that wouldn't be bad. Or eating, or sniffing them, since they have such high bioavailabilities form those administration. But given how ineffective smoking Oxycodone HCl is, no one would regularly smoke them if they were paying $80 a pill.



I understand people will want OC will want OC. However, there is a cross-price elasticity correlation between opiates of all natures and practically all illicit drugs that runs negatively.

I am not having a drug price discussion here, but rather an Economics discussion based on the theory of Economic theory of Substitute Goods.



Granted, the cross-price elasticity (a standardized way to value how strong of a substitute good one is to another) of opiates among opiate users is weaker than drugs of all sorts among other kinds of drug/polydrug users, but the relationship is still there.

And given the extreme price of $80/pill, or essentially $80 a dose, there are very viable substitute goods that become open.

The substitute goods of smoking an entire OC80 for one dose @ $80, is injecting/eating/sniffing a dose of Oxycodone @ $20 (1/4th a pill), heroin, and other opiates. When prices are that high, even the $5 high of a bag of marijuana can be seen as a strong substitute good for the $80 high of smoking an OC80.



Because when the margin of price is over 400%, the consumer will seriously consider other goods, ie substitute goods, that he would not have considered previously.

Think of it this way: You would never consider riding a bike to work, no? But if suddenly the cheapest car became 10x more expensive, you would suddenly look at bikes differently. In fact, this has actually became the case given the rising cost of oil - now while there are studies to show that people actually do not give a shit about the price of oil and that $4/gallon actually has very little impact on most people, there still has been a slight, but statistically significant nonetheless number of people who now carpool, take mass transit, and ride bikes to work instead of drive as they used.




I didn't say that. I am arguing my point from an economics standpoint, and economics is a big picture argument. Of course some people have such a strong demand inelasticity that would still smoke OCs if it were $300 a dose. But the number is small, and gets smaller and smaller as the price rises.

At $80 a single dose smoked, only a very small number of people, an extremely small number, would continue to smoke OC80s regularly when faced with the large number of market alternatives.

From this theory, the theory of substitute goods, I can conclude that no, there are not "thousands of people who smoke OCs" or that "it is an epidemic" any farther than bullshit sensationalist stories made up by the newspaper using weasal words.



Actually, I have proven it false using Economic theory that is widely accepted.

I am not refuting that people smoke OC's or that you can get high from it, but rather that any large number of people do it regularly, as claimed by some in this thread.




I'm not being judgemental, I'm using evidence, and application of sound economic theory, to disprove the argument that "thousands of people smoke OCs".



Given that salts generally have a small margin between vaporization and burning points, given that recreational drug users are not using a hot plate to inhale these drugs so that they could make sure they are reaching perfectly in between this margin, and given the extremely high bioavailability of oral and injected routes of administration of oxycodone, which are 85%+ and 99%+ respectively, as already cited in this thread.

Teddy must be on some really good meth....you need to get out more often...open that closet door and go out for a bit

 

[AntonioMontana]

Tweakers named Teddy suck!!!

 

[TheodoreRoosevelt]

^ Please read the above post, as I have sufficiently disproven you're unfounded claim that thousands of people smoke oxycodone. You have presented a claim with no evidence, and I have used economic theory to disprove it.

I have taken the time to read your articles, I would appreciate you read my response before you post another response to me. I will only copy and paste the above comment if you choose to ignore it, as all the answers to any questions you can come up with are outlined above.

And lastly, quit flaming me it is annoying. You tell me "get a life"? Sorry, I go to school, beginning to start up a business, and recently engaged in writing an economic literature review at a prestigious university. I don't have a life at the moment because I am busy forging one for the future. What are you doing with your life? I'm sure you're doing much better than me and live independently.

I have gone through great lengths to disprove what you said using sound theory and evidence to support my argument. All you have done is post flames at me and ridiculous articles that anyone can see as vague and unsound.

Why can't you just engage me in an honest discussion using evidence to support your position?

 

[AntonioMontana]

Im smokin OCs while you do your thing Theo...Can you get me that hook up on those wall lighters? I apologize for the name calling....I guess your just a square

 

[AntonioMontana]

I smoke(chase dragon) purdue oc 40 and 80. I was wondering if the Teva ones are smokable or if oxycodone is smokable.
It seems like the prefered method of using OCs in seattle area is smoking.

Hey Theo...known of your Diarreah of the mouth answers the original questions I started this thread with

 

[TheodoreRoosevelt]

Already stated they are all as smokeable as any other. Generics and Teva and all brands smoke just the same as all the others, and the idea that generics aren't smokeable is just as ridiculous that brand names are any more able to be smokeable.

Oxycodone is oxycodone is oxycodone

Please respond to my post which disproves your unbased claims:

I'm not saying it's unheard of or impossible. I'm sure plenty of people pay $80/pill, and I'm not saying I have great connects for it either. I've come across OC80's at about $60 a pill many times so that's not a far cry from 80.

But my point, is that no one is going to regularly smoke OC80's if they are paying $80 a pill. If you have to pay that much per pill that you smoke, you are either going to find a better connect, or find a more effective way to do it.

If OC80s were $10 a pill to someone, I wouldn't doubt it if they said they smoked them. But if you pay $80 a pill, $80 a high via smoked, you are going to quit smoking and take them in a more effective manner. Even at $80 a pill, injecting 20mg would do you fine and that wouldn't be bad. Or eating, or sniffing them, since they have such high bioavailabilities form those administration. But given how ineffective smoking Oxycodone HCl is, no one would regularly smoke them if they were paying $80 a pill.

i've never seen an OC80 go for anything close to 25. and so what if weed, alcohol, MDMA, even cocaine is cheaper.. if people want OC then they'll get OC. why would an OC addict get MDMA just because it's cheaper... they don't want MDMA, they want OC?

I understand people will want OC will want OC. However, there is a cross-price elasticity correlation between opiates of all natures and practically all illicit drugs that runs negatively.

I am not having a drug price discussion here, but rather an Economics discussion based on the theory of Economic theory of Substitute Goods.

In economics, one kind of good (or service) is said to be a substitute good for another kind insofar as the two kinds of goods can be consumed or used in place of one another in at least some of their possible uses. Classic examples of substitute goods include margarine and butter, or petroleum and natural gas (used for heating or electricity). The fact that one good is substitutable for another has immediate economic consequences: insofar as one good can be substituted for another, the demand for the two kinds of good will be bound together by the fact that customers can trade off one good for the other if it becomes advantageous to do so. Thus, an increase in price for one kind of good (ceteris paribus) will result in an increase in demand for its substitute goods, and a decrease in price (ceteris paribus, again) will result in a decrease in demand for its substitutes.

Granted, the cross-price elasticity (a standardized way to value how strong of a substitute good one is to another) of opiates among opiate users is weaker than drugs of all sorts among other kinds of drug/polydrug users, but the relationship is still there.

And given the extreme price of $80/pill, or essentially $80 a dose, there are very viable substitute goods that become open.

The substitute goods of smoking an entire OC80 for one dose @ $80, is injecting/eating/sniffing a dose of Oxycodone @ $20 (1/4th a pill), heroin, and other opiates. When prices are that high, even the $5 high of a bag of marijuana can be seen as a strong substitute good for the $80 high of smoking an OC80.

why would an OC addict get MDMA just because it's cheaper...

Because when the margin of price is over 400%, the consumer will seriously consider other goods, ie substitute goods, that he would not have considered previously.

Think of it this way: You would never consider riding a bike to work, no? But if suddenly the cheapest car became 10x more expensive, you would suddenly look at bikes differently. In fact, this has actually became the case given the rising cost of oil - now while there are studies to show that people actually do not give a shit about the price of oil and that $4/gallon actually has very little impact on most people, there still has been a slight, but statistically significant nonetheless number of people who now carpool, take mass transit, and ride bikes to work instead of drive as they used.

and even if it sounds foreign to you that people smoke OC's it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

I didn't say that. I am arguing my point from an economics standpoint, and economics is a big picture argument. Of course some people have such a strong demand inelasticity that would still smoke OCs if it were $300 a dose. But the number is small, and gets smaller and smaller as the price rises.

At $80 a single dose smoked, only a very small number of people, an extremely small number, would continue to smoke OC80s regularly when faced with the large number of market alternatives.

From this theory, the theory of substitute goods, I can conclude that no, there are not "thousands of people who smoke OCs" or that "it is an epidemic" any farther than bullshit sensationalist stories made up by the newspaper using weasal words.

i don't understand it anymore than you do but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen and you can't prove it false just because you've never seen it.

Actually, I have proven it false using Economic theory that is widely accepted.

I am not refuting that people smoke OC's or that you can get high from it, but rather that any large number of people do it regularly, as claimed by some in this thread.

maybe they don't know any better and like the quick onset. not to sound rude... i just think you're being a tad judgmental on the whole thing.

I'm not being judgemental, I'm using evidence, and application of sound economic theory, to disprove the argument that "thousands of people smoke OCs".

how do you know it's extremely ineffective?

Given that salts generally have a small margin between vaporization and burning points, given that recreational drug users are not using a hot plate to inhale these drugs so that they could make sure they are reaching perfectly in between this margin, and given the extremely high bioavailability of oral and injected routes of administration of oxycodone, which are 85%+ and 99%+ respectively, as already cited in this thread.

 

[AntonioMontana]

Wow...get a life bro...for real, its not that serious...I was just asking a question

 

[AntonioMontana]

And Theo, stop PM ing me. Im not hear for dating( and its kind of creepy with those nasty messages you keep sendin. I want to forward the PM to admin but I dont know how.

 

[McShroom]

Theo, what kind of evidence would you need? Theres not much scientific data that could support this, I figured the MEDIA would be an outlet that reports on current events. While your economics theories are valid, heroin and OxyContin produce noticeably different highs. Heroin is much more sedating and euphoric, yes. However, OxyCodone is more stimulating. The slight stimulating nature of the chemical make it more enjoyable in a group setting. And I completely understand where your coming from with you saying that the HCl salt shouldn't vaporize. I minored in chemistry in college, and when people first told me they were smoking OxyContin I thought the same thing. I'm not sure of the Bioavailabilty of smoking, and no one is because experiments have not been done on this rather new method. However, I can tell you that I met one person in rehab that shot his OC's and had smoked them. He told me that the high lasted longer from shooting them and provided a similar rush. Most likely this means that a lower percentage of the drug is being introduced into the bloodstream and as a result is metabolized faster. And AntonioMontana, name calling never got anyone anywhere when trying to prove a point..just makes you look more foolish and discredible.

Edit: Theodore, heres a link to the webpage for the Dr. that article talked about.

http://www.seanohara.com/

Send him an e-mail about the subject. I'm sure hearing it from a licensed professional might change your beliefs.

 

[TheodoreRoosevelt]

Theo, what kind of evidence would you need?

Any article that gave facts...

It's pretty easy to figure out what is credible or not, and newspapers/articles are obviously not credible at all.

There's no much scientific data about users smoking oxy because it doesn't exist buddy. There is a ton of evidence about many people using oxy, but not of smoking it.

I minored in chemistry in college, and when people first told me they were smoking OxyContin I thought the same thing. I'm not sure of the Bioavailabilty of smoking, and no one is because experiments have not been done on this rather new method.

Well I am telling you buddy, it's very low. Regardless what the exact number is, it does not compare to the 99% of IV administration, or the 85+% of oral. Smoking doesn't work and is extremely ineffective because you burn, rather than vaporize, the oxycodone.

Seriously. Stop trolling, this is common sense. People are going to either IV or eat their oxycodone for a $10 high, or do heroin instead, rather than spend $80 for a single dose from smoking.

 

[LightTrailz]

theodore. i thought the price discussions were over? but just to end it... it's not as unheard of as you say for people to pay 80$ for an OC80. i actually think it's actually kinda common for people to pay a dollar per mg. it's expensive.. yes. and most of the time it's cheaper but not as cheap as you say. perhaps you have great connects and good for you but most people can't get an OC80 for 25 dollars. i've never seen an OC80 go for anything close to 25. and so what if weed, alcohol, MDMA, even cocaine is cheaper.. if people want OC then they'll get OC. why would an OC addict get MDMA just because it's cheaper... they don't want MDMA, they want OC? and a lot of times people who are getting OC are afraid to try heroin and so it doesn't matter if it's cheaper. not to mention that a lot of people that get OC might not have access to the heroin anyway.

and even if it sounds foreign to you that people smoke OC's it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. by the look of this board it seems more than ever it is possible that there are circles around the US that do smoke OCs, albeit not as commonly as eating, snorting or injecting. i don't understand it anymore than you do but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen and you can't prove it false just because you've never seen it. and have you ever tried it? how do you know it's extremely ineffective? AND even if it is that still doesn't mean that people don't do it. maybe they don't know any better and like the quick onset. not to sound rude... i just think you're being a tad judgmental on the whole thing.

You need to find better connects then and tell the one your paying 80 per pill to go fuck himself.

 

[enoughorangejuice?]

to the OP, and everyone else actually.

this thread is fucking ridiculous, i've made better threads than this that get closed on the first or second page, and this shit is gone on 7 pages? jesus, are all the mods smoking pills too? this is fucking ridiculous and its just gonna make more stupid kids go out and try it because some stupid assholes think its funny to say smoking a pill works.

 

[LivingOnValium]

wtf? Is this somekind of current trend in OD? People keep bumping a thread with no informational value from a week to another.

I guess i might just as well. Bu-bump! (seriously this thread's a joke).

 

[SWlM]

so what was the eventual verdict on this?

 

[CloudyHazeD]

World's most wasteful MOA?

:D

 

[Krypsmoka420]

actually where I'm from people smoke roxycotin all the time, and thats just a little stronger than oxycotin. But you don't smoke it you heat it up with a spoon or tin foil and catch the smoke with some kind of straw. and by the way I don't do this but like i said it is fairly common here

 

[rave23]

To end that, tonight im going to go pick up a pill and smoke it on camera for all of you.

and? where is the video?

Hey Theo...known of your Diarreah of the mouth answers the original questions I started this thread with

Would you leave Theo alone? He is a very knowledgeable person, and i take any word from him over yours any time. You know why? He has a backup for every claim and has proven that in the past many times. If you really are that much of an expert, i wanna see some fucking proof!

I have never heard or seen people smoke oxy. Only place i ever hear about that stuff is the internet on some message boards, and i have seen and talked to a lot of people in real life. Everybody at my needle exchange laughs at me when i mention smoking and oxy in the same sentence! If you say it works, then fine, it works for you (!!!), but stop fucking convincing us that it's smokeable without bringing a proof! Nobody here will get any effects from smoking OC just because you said so! I tried it myself and nothing happened. If i need to use another method then please educate me, but i don't believe a word you're saying unless i see some real-life backup of what you're saying!

So either post that video (what is that gonna proof anyway? Everybody can smoke pills lol) and make yourself look even more retarded, or just fuck off! There are reasons why nobody is smoking OC. I will not give a shit about what you say unless you prove to me that there are more people than you smoking OC and get more than a Placebo High! And now get some fucking proof or stop bullshitting us and insulting respectable users of this community!

And Theo, stop PM ing me. Im not hear for dating( and its kind of creepy with those nasty messages you keep sendin. I want to forward the PM to admin but I dont know how.

What the fuck is wrong with you? I'd date a nice guy like theo any time And your inability to forward PM's gives me some insight in your ability to make use of that 3lbs lump of neurons in your skull... There's a little button with "forward" on it, looking a bit like that:

.... what do you think that one will do?

 

[GenericMind]

Seeing as how this has become nothing more than a big argument about drug prices, which is why we don't allow pricing discussions outside of the price thread in the first place, I'm closing this.

Next time:

A) Follow the rules
B) Stay on topic
C) Keep the flame wars to PMs