• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

High Stakes - Synthetic Drugs - 60 Minutes, 11/13/11 - 7:30pm

Mr Blonde

Mr Blonde

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
13,813
High Stakes
Friday, November 11, 2011
Share

Reporter: Liz Hayes
Producer: Stephen Rice


Everyone knows it - even the police admit they're fighting a losing battle against the illegal drug industry.

But the war just got even harder.

Right now, in Australia, you can get the potent effects of ecstasy, cocaine or cannabis straight over the counter and completely legally - thanks to the booming synthetic drug industry.

By mimicking their illicit counterparts with clever chemistry, the drug makers can stay one step ahead of the law.

And while our police and politicians play catch-up, the men behind these crafty alternatives have become a new breed of drug lord - untouchable, unstoppable and very, very rich.

Full transcript and video available Monday
Click to expand...

Link.

I don't know how about how close to 'mimicking' these substances are... in fact, a lot of them are utter crap. Will be interesting to see how this story and the fall-out turns out though.
 
I would expect them to be tightening up regulations on legal highs for a while after this. Must be a real slow news week for them to run this crap, especially when they are still including synthetic cannabis products, how long can they beat that fucking same drum for?
 
Seen this ad on the TV a few times.. always brings my mind to BL.
We can already see how much they're going to put these drugs in a bad light.

"Mimmicks the same effects AS THE REAL THING." - not really.
close chemical structure perhaps... overall I can tell it's going to be shit.

I'll watch it tonight.
 
^ It is definately going to be shit and biased as fuck, you never hear anyone point out that if mainstream drugs which we actually know a lot about weren't restricted then you wouldn't see the proliferation of garbage chemicals like most of these RC's tend to be.
 
I have to give credit to drug_mentor for bringing my attention to this. I'm sure it's going to be a fair and balanced review of legal highs, of course. ;)
 
I find it interesting they're running a scare campaign on research chemicals, but hey what do you think they know about long term effects concerning high doses of Taurine they're giving to kids over the counter in Red Bull, next to nothing if anything at all. And what does everyone think the legal highs are made up of? Random research chemicals we know nothing about.
Why didn't anyone listen to Professor David Nutt, who was the Head of the drug advisory board in England. The only person in Government anywhere, other than maybe Ron Paul who has just sucked it up, grown a pair and said "Hey, maybe the Government doesn't know everything about everything, maybe we're wrong about drugs and just maybe we should stop pretending we're not and hoping it will all go away and we'll win an obviously useless war."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...tasy-no-more-dangerous-than-horse-riding.html

There's a link of the article, unfortunately things didn't turn out too well for this crusader, he was fired from his job and publicly disgraced for telling the truth. I'm with Nutt I'd rather take a nice clean MDMA pill than some random RC made at some random chemicals lab in China, in fact I'd rather take a low dose of Molly than drink a Red Bull. I'm pretty well convinced on which one is going to have a more overall impact on my mental and physical health.
 
Tonight 7:30 on channel 9 - 60 Minutes

hey all, just letting you know in 15minutes 60minutes is on, and I saw the adds they said they were doing a bit on Ecstasy, Marijuana, Cocaine and Legal highs.
I think it's gonna be focused on legal highs.

I don't really know what to expect, if it's gonna be sensationalised crap or a really balanced viewing.
I'll be watching it, prob report back after if it was any good and worth other people watching.

peace team.
 
Hey dude, I am closing this because Mr Blonde posted a thread about this earlier. :)
 
I honestly was expecting to be worse than it was, obviously the tone towards these drugs on the whole was negative but a few of the people in the Legal Highs industry made a couple good points that surprisingly weren't edited out. Jeez that Matt Bowden fella is a nut though!

I was kinda surprised how much air time was spent purely on synthetic cannabanoids when thats the part of the story that has been done to death already. Also, I dunno what the hell was with the constant cutting to the same shots of raiding hydro set ups, like they constantly had to remind us that these products are similar to illicit drugs or something.
 
It's currently on in SE QLD.. but I don't have a TV near me..
Someone tell me how it goes?

Okay I got to a TV, but don't have time to watch it all.
I see it representing them as having the EXACT same effects as normal marijuana.
Though that's never given anyone heart attacks (like those 3 boys)

Overall, it's putting the real drugs in a bad light, and putting synthetics in an even worser light (though they are worse than the real thing in most cases)

"outwitted by clever chemist"
"a simple change to the chemical structure"
"ex meth-addict has been producing syntheics for 10 years"
"we don't know just how dangerous they may be" <-- true, but prohibition will not work
(actually I don't see why any one would want to buy synthetic if it were illegal.(weed > synthetic)
"We're against the war on drugs, not the drugs themselves." - at least they didn't silence the whole argument..


Everything they say has been manipulated in a way that puts these drugs in a bad light, as we all know the media and especially 60 minutes is ohh, soo good at doing this.

Not great, I'll watch it online later this week.
I wonder if we'll see any legal action from this, as it's really popular around Australia.
 
Last edited:
Damn it, sorry D_M I merged the threads even though you had already closed the other one. ":\

I didn't get a chance to watch it but doesn't sound like it was anything amazing.
 
Nah it was pretty shit, but I have definately seen worse journalism on drugs too. I took some time to ask Matt Bowden a couple question on the 60 minutes website afterwards, wasn't too impressed with his responses to a lot of it to be honest. Guy was talking some shit about how its more important the "medical professionals" who distribute the product (who arent actually medical professionals) know what it contains than the end user.

I didn't like the 60 minutes moderator too much either, I had to ask why these companies don't feel its in the consumers best interest to label ingredients like ten times before they would ask it, and give the "moderator" of the interview shit on the open chat for their unwillingness to ask the prick any hard questions. Even when they did ask it they condensed what I said down a fair bit, I mean I know they have other questions coming in but questions like that seem a lot more legit than where do I get this stuff. Matt also claimed they did a study of people driving on pipes, under the influence of alcohol and sober and said the sober drivers did worst of all, ofcourse he didn't provide any further information on this study. 8)

He also seemed pretty unwilling to respond to the fact that while he claims he is a big supporter of drug law reform as well as greater scrutiny of legal highs before they reach the market, he appears to be using very little or none of his astronomical profit margins to work towards this.
 
^ Isn't that always the way though.

People will "support" anything if it helps them make enormous profits. I just wish more people that have real influence in media and society in general were like the people here on bluelight.
Concerned more for the consumer, and the greater good than their own wallets.
 
Matt Bowden was once a poster around here,

I speak to him on facebook occasionally.

Originally he was responsible for the EASE product that contained methylone that was launched in NZ in 2007.
 
drug_mentor said:
Nah it was pretty shit, but I have definately seen worse journalism on drugs too. I took some time to ask Matt Bowden a couple question on the 60 minutes website afterwards, wasn't too impressed with his responses to a lot of it to be honest. Guy was talking some shit about how its more important the "medical professionals" who distribute the product (who arent actually medical professionals) know what it contains than the end user.

I didn't like the 60 minutes moderator too much either, I had to ask why these companies don't feel its in the consumers best interest to label ingredients like ten times before they would ask it, and give the "moderator" of the interview shit on the open chat for their unwillingness to ask the prick any hard questions. Even when they did ask it they condensed what I said down a fair bit, I mean I know they have other questions coming in but questions like that seem a lot more legit than where do I get this stuff. Matt also claimed they did a study of people driving on pipes, under the influence of alcohol and sober and said the sober drivers did worst of all, ofcourse he didn't provide any further information on this study. 8)

He also seemed pretty unwilling to respond to the fact that while he claims he is a big supporter of drug law reform as well as greater scrutiny of legal highs before they reach the market, he appears to be using very little or none of his astronomical profit margins to work towards this.
Click to expand...
The NZ Transport authority did a study that showed improvement (slight) after 6.5 hrs with pipes. The impairment initially was nearly identical to alchohol 40% Etoh and 43% pipes and 0 point something % for placebo. So after 6.5 hrs the improvement was due to the piped drivers being less tired due to the stimulatory effects of BZP and the improvement was marginal (can't remember the figure.) So really the guy (Matt Bowden) is full of shit.
 
Professor David Nutt was forced to resign after making that statement. What a hypocritical world we live in.
 
^ Thanks for clearing that up.

He also said on the show when asked if he would want his daughters using his products, that he only reccomended these products be used by current drug addicts, if theres such a reccomendation coming with these products I am yet to see it. Although I admit I haven't got a great deal of exposure to these legal highs.
 
Pipes like BZP are quite shit and most e's a few years ago were BZP/TFMPP and still are. Mild visual and perceptual changes, slight mood elevation and stimulation like a small amout of speed. This is followed by nausea, headache, malaise and it lasts for a while! No problem re: Matt Bowdens half assed statement of misinformation. EP is a pipe derivative (One of the better ones) so I guess you have had some experience with them now. There is a whole heap of psych meds that are derived from piperazine especially 2nd gen or non-traditional antipsychotic meds ie Zyprexa (olanzapine.)
 
^ EP is a piperazine derivative? As in ethylphenidate? I believe you'll find that by looking at the chemical structure there is the lack of the characteristic para positioned nitrogens on the six member ring; you could say it is a piperidine derivative but even that might be a stretch.
 
60 Minutes is utter bottom feeder shite for shit-for-brains sheeple.

Even the name is bogus, its more like '42 Minutes' of shite with the remainder being sponsored shite from Advertisers.

Why give this 60 Inches of shite even MORE airtime than it deserves by reposting on BL?

Gonzo Porn looks like high culture next to what these overpaid narcissist muppets dole out as 'journalism'. Sheesh!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top