Forensic Science Update: Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate (GHB)

[ghostcorps]

For anyone interested I have been mailed a Bunch of Docs from a chemist involved in a hearing regarding GHB overdoses. They are quite exaustive as would be expected.

Cross examinations, witness interviews, lab data etc.

The urinary levels are in excess of 1 g/liter. The blood levels are lower approx 200 mg/liter. But thats mostly BDO itself. After all it piles up in front of the metabolic path if you overdose. Those are very impressive levels however. PM me your emails and I can forward it on.

 

[Dvah]

I have to point out here, that in Melb especially (I cannot answer for any other states) the people that have most been at danger from 1,4b overdose, have been perhaps younger (once again Im not sure of ages) people, going to dance parties/events/clubs with very little knowledge on 1,4b.
These people may not really be interested so much in the technical chemical information that is available to them, they would not have read up and studied the effects of this drug before buying an unknown dilution, in a club, from someone that they don't know.
All they want, is something to make them feel good. They may have heard of 1,4b before from someone they know, they may have heard that it will make you have a good time, they may not have heard that it shouldn't be mixed with alcohol, or that it is very dose sensitive.

For these people, the best way to reach them, is to start a campaign, lead by peers to educate that it is not cool to take 1,4b at all.
I would have to agree with Stacyrox in saying that it has definitely made a difference in Melbourne. it became very uncool to take 1,4b, and alot of clubs were infact taking a stance of banning people for life if they were caught dealing or doing 1,4b on their premises.

I can understand that there is alot of incorrect info that has been put out in regards to 1,4b, but at the end of the day what we really needed to be getting across to the dance community was "this stuff can hurt you if you aren't careful" and I think that these message is now coming across loud and clear.
I even went to a party a few weekends ago, and the next day my first thought was "hey, there were no G overdoses last night"

so..thats saying something.

 

[ghostcorps]

dvah: first of all 1,4-B and GHB are as potent as each other. The information that should be put out must be informative not exclusive. It needs to encourage and include research/truth. We must look at the bigger picture.. if we only try to say GHB is dangerous and ignore the rest.. the implicit message we are sending to the young ones is that MDMA, MEth, Coke and all the other party drugs are safe... fact is we know they are not.. we know they are worse. The current SAY "NO" campaign is not telling the whole story. Whats worse.. GHB OD's where they wake up fine.. Or MDMA od's where they wake up braindamaged or worse?

 

[Dvah]

We do not get GHB here any longer, so I refer to 1,4b.
As I said, most people are going to go into shutdown when they are given pages of statistics, numbers and chemical equations.
Give them simple cold hard facts that they can understand and I believe that it can make an impact, and In Melbourne, it clearly has

 

[ghostcorps]

Dvah: the statistics and info I post are for the digestion of people who have a clue. this information can be simplified with accuracy without having to revert to missinformation.

eg: "test your G, take 1ml at a time", "G and Drugs dont mix", "Alchohol and G can kill, "Its not cool if you dont KNOW whats in it", "If you take G, Write it on your hand". "G is better left at home", "G, it doesnt take much".. "Its a fine line between pleasure and pain" (the last one should sate even the most staunch anti-G'ists)

 

[peaked]

I really dont think its justified to say that MDMA is worse than GHB, simply because of the LD50 in labrats. There are many other factors that need to be considered. Firstly, theres the issue of dosage. With MDMA, its not very difficult to tell one pill from two (for the records lets say these are 100mg clean pills) and for someone of around 70kg, you'd still need to take over 30 pills to reach LD50. With G, its (usually) in liquid form, and without an eye dropper (or similar measuring equipment) I would imagine it to be quite difficult to guestimate 1 or 2ml of liquid, which could also be at unknown concentration, and hence I dont see it as being too unlikely for accidental ingestion of 2 or more times the intended dose. Which could leave you unconscious. This is far from the LD50, but is falling unconscious really that 'safe'? If you fell awkwardly when you passed out, its possible you could break your arm, leg or even your neck (depending on how u land) or if your airways became blocked while your unconscious (maybe from your own vomit) its also possible u could suffocate. Not to mention its synergy with alcohol, which if im not mistaken increases the chances of death occuring.


I dont mean to sound like a troll, but to me its seems that there is too much potential for G to cause harm to inexperienced users, whereas with pills and some of the other mainstream drugs there is less potential (thats not to say these drugs cant be dangerous, but thats in their own respects) so as such, I think if your an uneducated user, then you should be saying NO to G!

To an experienced user, GHB shouldnt really be a problem at all. Like many have said on here, education is the key. 'Know' G.

 

[ghostcorps]

peaked:the facts speak for themselves the LD50 in rats has been the standard indicator of mortality from a substance for a long time now neither myself.. nor I suspect you can qualify to change it. It is an undisputed fact also thet GHB has a much much sharper dose/response curvewhich is the factor that makes is so notorious.

But consider 1g of GHB is a threshold dose compared to 30mg for MD .. so immediatly we know it is a more potent substance.. though that is not enough to consider it more dangerous.. consider LSD (threshold=20ug). Other factors must be considered, such as the likleyhood of braindamage and death to name the most obvious considerations.

Braindamage: longterm regular and moderate use of MDMA unarguably will cause brain damage. G will not.

accute poisoning with MDMA will almost certainly cause braindamage.. GHB will not.

death: LD50s speak for themselves, ignore the fact that they are determined in rats and look at the numbers considering our 50KG girl or a 50 KG rat if you would preffer. 2.45g's (81X the threshold dose)
of MDMA gives her/it a 50/50 chance of survival. 82g's (82x the threshold dose) of GHB gives her/it the same chance. This is the first time ive done this calculation.. I like the fact that they both have the same number of threshold doses. It allows us to cancel the death factor out. or at least shows us that the theraputic indicies are approximatly equal. Remembering that the LD50 is the point at which 50% of subjects die.. does not say that subject will not die at a lowed dose nor does it give us any indication of how lethal other drugs will be when taken with these drugs

which leaves us with brain damage. MDMA wins hands down
.

Edited for the sake of grammatical and factual clarity.

 

[Biscuit]

Thats my point.

No one is disputing that MDMA has greater neurotoxicity than GHB.

What you seemed to be saying is that you had a greater chance of DYING from MDMA than GHB due to the LD50 results.

Forget the relative amount of the LD50's - LSD's dose is miniscule, yet that does not mean LSD is more LETHAL than GHB or heroin or cocaine - its simply means it is more potent.

A drug can be potent without being lethal.

In terms of "chances of dying per number of doses" GHB wins absolutely hands down over MDMA. GHB is a depressent and appears to kill quickly when too much is taken. MDMA will almost never kill when too much is taken - unless you are talking an extremely large amount or extraneous factors like limited fluids and a hot external environment is thrown into the mix.

Lethal (possibility of death due to acute overdose - my definition) does not equal potency does not equal neurotoxcity does not equal the most harmful.

 

[ghostcorps]

I like the fact that they both have the same number of threshold doses. It allows us to cancel the death factor out.

which leaves us with brain damage. MDMA wins hands down
.

Thats my point.

No one is disputing that MDMA has greater neurotoxicity than GHB.

What you seemed to be saying is that you had a greater chance of DYING from MDMA than GHB due to the LD50 results.

reffer to my above quote.. that is NOT what i said.

Forget the relative amount of the LD50's - LSD's dose is miniscule, yet that does not mean LSD is more LETHAL than GHB or heroin or cocaine - its simply means it is more potent.

A drug can be potent without being lethal.

Do you know what the LD50 means? If so ..... continue.

But consider 1g of GHB is a threshold dose compared to 30mg for MD .. so immediatly we know it is a stronger substance.. though that is not enough to consider it more dangerous.. consider LSD (threshold=20ug).

notice how I discount the effective potency as an indicator of a drugs lethal nature?

which leaves us with brain damage. MDMA wins hands down.

 

[BigTrancer]

In my opinion, Sllip nailed it. It is definitely pertinent to mention that when dosing GHB there is no margin for error. The reason for this is that usual 'single' dose people aim for with GHB is quite close to a dose that would make them fall asleep, almost a 'nod' if you will. The closer they get to that pass-out point, the more intense the positive feelings they get from the drug.... this leads to problems.

With MDMA there is a much larger margin for error with each single dose, and with redosing after the peak effects have passed. Sure, you have no idea precisely how much is in the (tested) pill, but if you take 2 pills at once, or one too soon after the peak effect has passed on the last one, it will be perhaps too strong for comfort, but you won't drop into an unrouseable sleep for a few hours as you would with even a tiny overestimation in GHB dosing.

In my opinion, the disparity doesn't arise from the toxicity of the substances, or have anything to do with the LD50 (nobody takes doses that high, ever), but with the difference between one recreational dose and losing control of one's body. When someone is taking GHB recreationally, if they redose too soon or make a tiny error in their single dose, they risk falling unconscious. In a comfortable safe location this may not present a problem per se, in fact it might be seen as 'harmless' by some because they don't suffer any ill effects after the fact. But in a public place this represents a HIGH RISK, because they aren't in control of their body for hours. Regardless of the minor health implications, this puts them in potential danger, and at the very least places a worrying burden on their friends.

Very few of the other recreational drugs are as cheap or have such a small margin for dosing error before problems arise, which makes GHB/1,4B a drug that needs to be given comparitively a LOT more respect. It's not a good 'club drug' as an adjunct to a social occasion, because it demands care and focus to use without problems. But, I agree that demonising a drug usually pushes people away from wanting to learn about it, whether they intend to take it or not. Consequent lack of education, coupled with inexperience can lead people to give the drug less respect than they should, creating potentially dangerous risks for themselves. Making this information accessible is why we all put so much time into this site, and is also why this thread is preaching to the converted. We're all on the same side, essentially.

BigTrancer

 

[ghostcorps]

When someone is taking GHB recreationally, if they redose too soon or make a tiny error in their single dose, they risk falling unconscious. In a comfortable safe location this may not present a problem per se, in fact it might be seen as 'harmless' by some because they don't suffer any ill effects after the fact. But in a public place this represents a HIGH RISK, because they aren't in control of their body for hours. Regardless of the minor health implications, this puts them in potential danger, and at the very least places a worrying burden on their friends.

most definatly... I would be the first to tell everyone to leave G at home.. it is not a party drug. its boring! But I am not here to deny the negative image of someone laying in an unrousable sleep (or whatever someone chooses to call it). I am trying to show the absurdity of the claims made that go beyond this danger.. Brain damage, Death at small doses.. evil.. only for losers.. all these things have been stated as fact by people who should know better than to use the same lies spread by hardline prohibitionists.

Originally posted by BigTrancer
Very few of the other recreational drugs are as cheap or have such a small margin for dosing error before problems arise, which makes GHB/1,4B a drug that needs to be given comparitively a LOT more respect. It's not a good 'club drug' as an adjunct to a social occasion, because it demands care and focus to use without problems. But, I agree that demonising a drug usually pushes people away from wanting to learn about it, whether they intend to take it or not. Consequent lack of education, coupled with inexperience can lead people to give the drug less respect than they should, creating potentially dangerous risks for themselves. Making this information accessible is why we all put so much time into this site, and is also why this thread is preaching to the converted. We're all on the same side, essentially.

BigTrancer

coudlnt have said it better myself. But as for preaching to the converted... think of it as stemming the tide of defectors. Even perhaps stiring it up a bit so people who know the truth will actually speak up when they see this misinformation rather than let it slip by and make matters worse.

 

[kryalkastleE]

*clap clap*

you guys have said it all

 

[Biscuit]

I think my original point was don't quote LD50s of various drugs to justify what was more likely to kill drug users. Perhaps you did not do that at first but I interpreted it that way.

BT said it better than I could have- leave LD50's out of it. They have little place in what was really being discussed here and for the uneducated are dangerously misleading.

That was the only reason I responded in the first place.

remembering that OD'ing on GHB does not cause brain damage, MDMA does.. and that MDMA's LD50 is 49 mg/kg in rats compared to GHB 1650-2000 mg/kg.

That was the quote I had problems with - you have since cleared that up.

I actually think you, me and BT are all pretty much on the same page to be honest. Obviously it is not made clear by this forum.

 

[ghostcorps]

biscuit: sorry if i was unclear.. I was using the LD50 (clearly stating that it was determined on rats) to show the comparative lethal doses. Not to show the chances of death.. which are determined by a number of other factors also

 

[johnboy]

Exactly. The LD50 is irrelevant in the most common real world scenarios involving overdose of these drugs. For GHB what happens is what occured in Sydney on the weekend; someone takes a swig from a bottle of unknown concentration and dies. For MDMA someone may be slipped a pill or two extra in a drink and either get very very happy, or just a bit sick.

That is what happens in the real world that we all live in. What happens to rats is worse than irrelevant, it can be dangerously misleading.

 

[ghostcorps]

johnboy: the LD50 is not useful in showing exactly how much a person needs to die. What is does show is how much more lethal a chemical is by volume/body mass. (dont discount the use of rats in pharmacological research, if you trust any drugs sold legally I can assure you they were all tested on Rats) Can yoiu please provide a link to the story of this person in sydney.

Tell me.. what do you think is worse.. a GHB OD or an MDMA OD?

 

[wazza]

ghostcorps: http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?threadid=149450&r=2

 

[ghostcorps]

wazza: thanks

If people are going to be irresponsible with drugs.. what should they expect? My condolences to all involved... but this is exactly what im talking about. The person dies from drinking stupid amounts of alchohol.. and accidentally drinks stupid amounts of GHB (for whatever reason it boils down to stupidity) and instantly its labeled bythe press as "death by GHB". It was not death by GHB sure GHb was involved. But it was not the cause of death.

 

[johnboy]

I'm not really sure what you are trying to argue here. This whole issue comes down to this:

For the average user of illicit drugs, using GHB is riskier than using MDMA

That is all I am trying to say. We have to be realistic about the risks associated with drugs. That's how we here at BL are educating people at the moment. Talking about clinical studies doesn't help anyone really. We have to focus on real world situations and be honest about them.

I have no idea what you mean when you ask which I would prefer, an MDMA OD or a GHB OD. Of course I would prefer neither, of course, and aside from the health care professionals here I have probably seen more ODs than anyone here, but let's analyse your alternatives there.

MDMA ODs are incredibly rare. Why? Because we know that the vast majority of people can take a single pill with no ill effects. That pill can contain at most, if there is minimal binders and nothing else present and the pills is freakishly huge, 250mg of MDMA. By taking one or two pills you are still well within the safety margins.

Here is what erowid has to say:

"Downing notes that [the] oral doses administered in therapy [avg. 165mg] are less than 1 per cent of the LD50 (the dose that kills 50 per cent of rats or mice given the drug), implying a high margin of safety."

MDMA OD's are virtually impossible for the average user. But there are still severe atypical reactions. These are NOT ODs. I can only liken them to a person's "allergy" to MDMA. These are rare but do happen. I have seen a few myself and incredibly horrible, and sometimes fatal experiences. But again they are extremely rare. It seems to be less chance that you will have this reaction to MDMA than you will to many other legal OTC medicines (yes, all those ones that passed LD50 trials).

Let's apply the same scenario to the average user of illicit GHB. The maximum dosage you could get is... well there is the problem. Once you have bought your GHB illegally you have no idea of the dosage. From 2ml to 40ml could be "one dose". You have nothing to rely on but the word of your dealer. No limits of the pills size to save you, no test that can be done to even determine if it is GHB without tasting it. And, as we keep finding out, a single mouthful can kill.

This is what I mean when I stress that for the average user of illicit drugs GHB is riskier. When drugs are sold illegally we cannot rely on clinical data and LD50s and what rats do. The critical thing is the dosage and without knowing that within a safe margin of error we are taking a huge risk.

Of course we can do a few things to try and minimise the risk, ie being extremely cautious with dosage, trying to establish regular suppliers etc, but the risk we are at when using GHB will still always be higher than using a drug with a wider safety margin such as MDMA, alcohol etc.

This is not to say No to G. It is to simply stress the Know. Risky behaviour is what makes life fun, dammit. We just have to be realistic about the risk.

Blaming ignorant users is sadly as abhorrent a rhetoric as saying guns don't kill people, people kill people. You can't ignore the ignorance of people as a factor in all of this, and place the drug itself as being "innocent and misunderstood". To help reduce harm we have to be honest about every factor, the risk margins included.

 

[ld50 vs ssri]

Very well put johnboy