Meth: maybe just once (or a few times, most often)

[Tiny Mids Blunt]

I think my biggest issue with this article is the fact that, while yes, Dr. Carl Hart and associate work to dispel the falsehoods surrounding methamphetamine, he may go a little too far when he makes some of his claims. For example, “the drug didn’t keep people up for consecutive days, it didn’t dangerously elevate their vital signs, nor did it impair their judgment.” This is probably because he didn't dose them the way most addicts dose themselves. I completely agree with his assessment that this drug is not the scourge that it's made out to be, and that it has applications as medicine, but he just went to the opposite end of the spectrum from most media outlets without addressing the real issue: the combination of dose and RoA are two seriously important factors that have huge implications on the effects of a substance. 20 mg orally in a tablet that looks like medication has actions on the brain extremely different from 250mg smoked (I don't know smoking doses since meth isn't my drug, but I've heard of people smoking half gram rocks at a time... or is that crack?).

As Paracelsus said, "all things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous."

 

[ro4eva]

Nah, have you ever seen that done with any other drug?

Other than hearing others refer to families of drugs like "benzodiazepines, barbiturates, opioids," and so forth; nay, I don't believe I have.

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

his is probably because he didn't dose them the way most addicts dose themselves.

True, but not everyone stays up vaping it for days on end, it's like assuming all heroin users are IVing with reused needles that they share with their friends. I think that was his point, that contemporary folklore thinks of egregious cases as normative, when they are in fact a minority.

 

[Lightning-Nl]

Nah, have you ever seen that done with any other drug? It's just a colloquialism that's become ubiquitous for some reason. Nobody's talking about "ketamines" and "mescalines."

I don't think you understand chemistry. Dextro and Levo refer to the different isomers of a chiral molecule. Any drug can have Dextro or Levo in front of it. It's just done so often with meth, because they two different isomers of Methamphetamine have such different effects.

Also, you never hear terms like "Ketamines" or "Mescalines" because those names refer to one specific substance only. Amphetamines are a very wide variety of different drugs however. All of which employ the same molecular skeleton. That's why they're referred to as Amphetamines. Because, while they have different side chains, they all have the same basic skeleton underneath.

 

[S.J.B.]

I don't think you understand chemistry. Dextro and Levo refer to the different isomers of a chiral molecule. Any drug can have Dextro or Levo in front of it.

I know what dextro- and levo- mean, but thanks for the description.

It's just done so often with meth, because they two different isomers of Methamphetamine have such different effects.

You just made this up. Nobody pluralizes a drug's name because it has stereoisomers with different effects. "Methamphetamines" is a colloquialism, plain and simple.

Also, you never hear terms like "Ketamines" or "Mescalines" because those names refer to one specific substance only. Amphetamines are a very wide variety of different drugs however. All of which employ the same molecular skeleton. That's why they're referred to as Amphetamines. Because, while they have different side chains, they all have the same basic skeleton underneath.

I agree, pluralizing "amphetamine" makes perfect sense when referring to the family of compounds with an alpha-methylphenethylamine skeleton. However, "methamphetamine" is used to refer specifically to alpha,N-dimethylphenethylamine, not a family of methylated amphetamines.

 

[.:Holy::Toast:.]

I can agree sooo much with this article.
I have tried meth maybe 5 times in my life, and for the 2nd 3rd and 4th times were from the same half gram and it made it last me probably 6 months, then another probably 5 month break then I tried it for my 5th time.
However compared to if I had a quarter of ketamine I would have that gone in 2 days.

 

[ebola?]

re: debate over "methamphetamines": SJB has it correct--we never pluralize the compound name just because we're talking about the racemate.

ebola

 

[Lightning-Nl]

I know what dextro- and levo- mean, but thanks for the description.

Really? I couldn't tell from your post.

You just made this up. Nobody pluralizes a drug's name because it has stereoisomers with different effects. "Methamphetamines" is a colloquialism, plain and simple.

Now I'm really questioning your first statement. Yes they do. Quite often in fact. Dextromethamphetamine is a potent psychostimulant while Levomethamphetamine (Levmetamfetamine) is primarily a noradrenergic agonist (at comparative dosages).

Another good example is Eszopiclone, the Dextrorotatory stereo isomer of Zopiclone. It has quite dissimilar effects from Levozopiclone (Dextrozopiclone is primarily a GABA PAM, and Levozopiclone is primarily a ganglionic blocker). Anyways, my point is - yes they do, quite often. You should know this.

I agree, pluralizing "amphetamine" makes perfect sense when referring to the family of compounds with an alpha-methylphenethylamine skeleton. However, "methamphetamine" is used to refer specifically to alpha,N-dimethylphenethylamine, not a family of methylated amphetamines.

Yes it does. However, methamphetamine is chiral. Methamphetamine, when not pluralized, refers to a 50/50 mixture of its two stereo isomers. Levomethamphetamine means that it's a 100% mixture of the levorotatory isomer of methamphetamine, while dextromethamphetamine refers to a 100% mixture of the dextrorotatory isomer of methamphetamine.

They're referred to separately because their medical indications are quite different.

 

[S.J.B.]

Really? I couldn't tell from your post.



Now I'm really questioning your first statement. Yes they do. Quite often in fact. Dextromethamphetamine is a potent psychostimulant while Levomethamphetamine (Levmetamfetamine) is primarily a noradrenergic agonist (at comparative dosages).

Another good example is Eszopiclone, the Dextrorotatory stereo isomer of Zopiclone. It has quite dissimilar effects from Levozopiclone (Dextrozopiclone is primarily a GABA PAM, and Levozopiclone is primarily a ganglionic blocker). Anyways, my point is - yes they do, quite often. You should know this, which is why I question whether or not you're a chemistry major.



Yes it does. However, methamphetamine is chiral. Methamphetamine, when not pluralized, refers to a 50/50 mixture of its two stereo isomers. Levomethamphetamine means that it's a 100% mixture of the levorotatory isomer of methamphetamine, while dextromethamphetamine refers to a 100% mixture of the dextrorotatory isomer of methamphetamine.

They're referred to separately because their medical indications are quite different.

I'm sorry, but you are pulling all of this completely out of your ass. Please, show me a research paper (and not one written in India or China) that refers to "zopiclones."

 

[Lightning-Nl]

I'm sorry, but you are pulling all of this completely out of your ass. Please, show me a research paper (and not one written in India or China) that refers to "zopiclones."

What?

We're talking about stereo isomers here, not any derivatives of it. "Zopiclones" would refer to derivatives of Zopiclone, not enantiomers.

 

[S.J.B.]

What?

We're talking about stereo isomers here, not any derivatives of it. "Zopiclones" would refer to derivatives of Zopiclone, not enantiomers.

Therefore, "methamphetamines" would not be a proper way to refer to enantiomers of methamphetamine, right?

I think something got lost in translation here. What exactly did I say that you disagree with?