• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Harm Reduction Injecting roxicodone...safer than injecting heroin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
80mg

80mg

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
722
Location
Strong Island, NY
READ BEFORE SCROLLING DOWN AND POSTING PLEASE

So...most of you (including myself) have stated in the past that shooting heroin is a little safer than roxys because of the fillers in roxys. BUT...I was reading on here how the A215's are 100mg meaning that it's 30% pure oxy and 70% filler. So...if most street heroin is most of the time LUCKY to see 10% (I say most street heorin because I got a dope connect who supplys street guys and his shit is off the hook. Like I had 2 friends OD from it. Both ok now.) wouldn't this mean that roxy's are safer to inject infact? I know of the talc in some roxys but heroin can have ANYTHING.

any thought or input?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you're not following proper HR procedures, neither is safe to inject. You are correct, heroin could be cut with anything...which makes injecting it that much more dangerous. But, IVing talc is extremely dangerous as well.

Your best bet is to get a micron filter..
 
I appreciate the fact you got a job to do and this is a HR site but I think your missing the point. It's actually almost comical how someone can ask a question like this and not even 5 mins later the firs thing they get told is "get a micron"

I'm saying...if I don't have access to one or am to ignorant or whatever the case may be...and am cotton filtering...wish is the greater evil?
 
^Just doing my job man ;)

And as far as which is the greater evil well....I honestly don't know (I'm sure somebody can give you a better answer than this)...they both have their positive points (Roxicodone is a known amount of drugs per dose and a known amount of filler per dose) and their negatives (heroin is always of questionable purity and questionable cuts/fillers). If your heroin is of decent quality, it may actually be safer than IVing all those fillers from the Roxicodone. That's a big "if" though. AFAIK, many heroin cuts are filtered out via cotton filtering, but some aren't.

Let's see what other people say...
 
Ya I'm thinking the same thing. I definitely think this is going to be an interesting topic. I should also add in the theroitcal point of it being street heroin. Just a regular stamped bag. I guess we can talk about tar as well although I have a better chance talking about quantum physics than tar.
 
u r right, that h can have anything, so that makes it difficult to answer ur question.

in terms of roxies, if u research all the fillers and find out which ones are water soluble and large enough to pass through whatever filter u are using, u will know exactly what shit u are putting in ur veins.
 
I can't say for tar dope (such as the guy who had plastic in his a week ago or so who posted here) but powder dope is sold by drug sets. Powder dope isn't like tar, in the aspect that a ton of different chemicals can fck it up, REAL bad. So that limits what can and can't be used for cutting.

Example: Powder dope used to be heavily cut with strychnine and quinine (both of which are no longer available commercially, though probably thru the black market maybe) but street dealers often cut dope with dilaudid, vitamins, glucose, powdered milk, starch, and I've personally seen a non-toxic chalk used (and helped cut bags with it) which I was told is sodium bicarbonate by another member on BL here but I highly highly doubt it. It was explained to me as a non-toxic chalk that most of the NJ/Camden street dealers use since it doesn't fck with the dope. I guess one dealer found it and turned them all onto it. Sodium bicarbonate will damage veins and it thickens the liquid, the chalk we used definitely did not do that. I seen these 2 girls buy hundreds if not thousands of bags with this chalk stuff and never a single problem reported.

You can't say "well roxy is better since it's only the fillers" or "Heroin is better since it doesn't have the fillers" I know for a fact that the fillers damage your veins and can be a problem for your heart as well. Same goes to heroin with some of the nasty shit its cut with (you guys who get tar obviously get nastier stuff then we do, since it's harder to hide it in powder) I suspect that each has it's pro's and con's, but outright I would say heroin is usually slightly filtered with cotton and most cutting agents have to be somewhat safe since a dealer who sells a shit product will lose customers quicker than you can say "dope"

Remember a dealer can only go by 2 things - Quality of product, and customer service. If either one is shitty they instantly run the risk of having customers move elsewhere.

Be safe, get a micron filter, and quit making these hypothetical threads. I understand the slight HR in it, but not really much.
 
I think theoritical threads like this is the HEART of bluelinght and makes us think, be safer, and question.

And I think "it can't be answered" is the easy way out. If we want to do this right...let's compare it to the STRONGEST stamp bag ever tested. Like the strongest bag any junkie has been blessed to get off the street. And it always confused me when I heard heroin cut with roxys and dillys...like...in my town... <NO PRICE DISCUSSION>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
80mg said:
I think theoritical threads like this is the HEART of bluelinght and makes us think, be safer, and question.
Click to expand...

While I understand that, there is no clear cut answer since everyones dope will vary from bag to bag, dealer to dealer, city to city, and tar to powder. No 2 answers will ever be the same. And since 99% of the time you have no idea what is in dope, it is impossible to assess the quality control of a product you have no idea what it actually is.

Again I understand the reasoning behind it, but there is no direct answer.
 
Like i said. Let's compare it to the strongest stamp bag ever tested. Although there is ofc a high chance there has been higher % heroin than that never recorded...it's a good place to start.
 
^ How do you know what the highest stamp bag contains? You can't! Even if there are bags that contain 60% or 70% or whatever, what does that matter if the cut might be horribly damaging? Plus if someone is used to getting the same dope all the time then gets a bag that is 3x as strong because the cuts weren't evenly mixed, they can OD from that. There are no certainties and trying to come up with them is futile

"It can't be answered" is not an 'easy way out' but the only rational response to this. Even if you confiscated 100% of the dope on the street, determined EVERY cut used, found a way to quantify the exact amount of damage and risk involved with each cut, averaged the overall risk out to come up with 1 number representing all dope it's still completely irrelevant on a practical level because I could still pick up a bag that is cut with something dangerous and totally fuck myself up.

All you are doing by trying to break this down to some simple equation claiming one is better or worse is giving people false impressions. There is no benefit to quantifying an average of which is better or worse when there is this degree of variability and so little consistency.

Speculating and trying to make determinations like this does not have any HR value. If you want to reduce harm, you treat everything like it's as dangerous as it potentially and practically could be and then take every precaution to minimize your risks.

No one 'doesn't have access' to microns. Everyone can choose the degree of risk they are willing to take. Some people choose NOT to take the risk of injecting without them and some don't. BL is not here to speculate but to spread as much factual information as possible (so people AREN'T ignorant) and beyond that it's in individuals' hands if they want to take precautions or not but BL will always encourage people to be informed and to stay safe.
 
Last edited:
Cane2theLeft said:
^ How do you know what the highest stamp bag contains? You can't!

"It can't be answered" is not an 'easy way out' but the only rational response to this. Even if you confiscated 100% of the dope on the street, determined EVERY cut used, found a way to quantify the exact amount of damage and risk involved with each cut, averaged this to risk out to come up with 1 number representing all dope it's still completely irrelevant on a practical level because I could still pick up a bag that is cut with something dangerous and totally fuck myself up.

All you are doing by trying to break this down to some simple equation claiming one is better or worse is giving people false impressions. There is no benefit to quantifying an average of which is better or worse when there is this degree of variability and so little consistency.

Speculating and trying to make determinations like this does not have any HR value. If you want to reduce harm, you treat everything like it's as dangerous as it potentially and practically could be and then take every precaution to minimize your risks.

No one 'doesn't have access' to one. Everyone can choose the degree of risk they are willing to take. Someone people are willing to risk not using one and some are not. BL is here to spread as much information as possible (so people AREN'T ignorant) and beyond that it's in individuals hands if they want to take precautions or not but BL will always encourage people to be informed and to stay safe.
Click to expand...


I'd LOVE to hear you explain that to a junkie in a third world country who is LUCKY to be able to find a syringe forget buy microns.

And it's sort of ironic that your referring to me being ignorant when you missed the part where I said "or is too ignorant to buy microns" and is jamming your opinion down my throat.

I'll agree to disagree but I personally think we can find something pretty close to a sure answer on this. Maybe not 100% with all the variables but pretty darn close.
 
If I spoke whatever language they did, I would be happy to. I apologize that you took something out of my post as calling YOU ignorant but that certainly wasn't my intent and I'm not sure where you feel I was calling YOU ignorant. I certainly did not miss the part where you mentioned people being too ignorant and I addressed that by explaining that the purpose of BL is to address that and spread information.

You completely missed the point of my post - everyone has the choice to take precautions or to not. There is no one alive who doesn't know that there are some risks to sticking shit in their veins even if they don't know the precise dangers. Some people choose to take every precaution they can such as NOT DOING IT if they can't get microns and some don't.

Everyone has a certain amount of resources and chooses what to do with them - one person might decide not to buy drugs if they have bills while another might decide to spend all their money on drugs. One person might decide to not shoot if they can't buy micron filters and another might choose to IM unfiltered tar because they ruined every vein and just don't care if they are risking serious infection.

People possess the ability to make their own decisions and it bothers me when addicts claim they COULDN'T afford microns while they are spending every dime they have on dope. They are choosing to do that, no one if forcing them.

Anyway, back to your original quesiton - if someone does claim a single answer as X is more dangerous, its irrelevant because there is no possible way to factor for every variable and inconsistency. I can understand that you want it to be that simple but the fact is that it isn't.
 
I guess I misread it. We can just agree to disagree. Let's see where the thread goes.

But I mean...you really think someone who dont have access to a computer or any money is really just being lazy by not having microns?

Fire&Water said:
Not even close...maybe 30%-50% depending on mg. size ?
Click to expand...

And when you shoot up your pretty much doing a small CWE.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really wish you'd stop putting words in my posts. Where did I say anything about laziness?

I'm saying people choose whether they are going to take risks with their actions or if they will not. Some will determine that using IV is too much of a risk and some will decide it is not.
 
Cane2theLeft said:
I really wish you'd stop putting words in my posts. Where did I say anything about laziness?

I'm saying people choose whether they are going to take risks with their actions or if they will not. Some will determine that using IV is too much of a risk and some will decide it is not.
Click to expand...

Well if by YOUR logic you think even in a third world country, where most people live in huts they build, with no internet, limited pharmacies (at best), and almost no resources...they still can somehow magically get microns...than the logical explanation is there lazy.

I really wish your posts made sense. It's like me going to Antartica...finding one of the few people who live there in there igloo and going "you don't have a smoke detector? your taking a great risk" lol...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top