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

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: andyturbo

Methamphetimines story on Triple J

M

miss_c

Bluelighter
Joined
May 13, 2004
Messages
35
Location
Brisbane
Hey Everyone!!

Just letting you know that there will be a story on Methamphetimines on Triple J this afternoon at 5:30 if anyone is interested. I'm not exactly sure what it's about but could be quite interesting.

Cheers.
 
Interesting. The chicks story shows what can happen in the extreme i guess. I hope the public realises though that this is not the average meth user. The guy from NDARC seemed quite good and reasonable in what he had to say.
Was good of him to provide information on what the different terms mean ie speed, ice/crystal and base. I think this something most people have some degree of confusion over.



Beech out
 
Heh.... i dont know what to think of that story. wasnt very interesting, basically just talking bout how bad 'crystal' is. which i agree to a large extent, but it would have been a better story if they focused about the drug more, not peoples stories that could be highly ficticious and fabricated.

again i believe the media has left out highly important information for people to make a proper non-bias decision.
 
rm1x said:
So if it is a horror story it's 'fabricated' or 'fake'?
Click to expand...

notice the word 'Could' used in that sentence...think about it. im simply saying that the media has been known to do this in the past.
 
Sure, the media has hyped it up in the past but I think for a reason.
I have personally seen what methamphetamine addiction does to people and it's not a pretty sight.
And you know JJJ is normally unbiased about things like this.
 
yep it seemed pretty factual, although it did highlight what could go wrong they did imply that it obviously has reasons for its abuse.
Good story, with a little explaining about the basics
 
Interesting but I'm not happy with the way Paul confuses the definitions even more the way he desribes ice, base and speed. Simple explanations, but I don't see that clearing anything up.
 
His definition was something along the lines of Ice being the 90% pure methamphetamine that is imported from asia. Base is the methamphetamine that is made in Australia. Speed is the methamphetamine made from crushed sudafed. Ice is 90% pure, base is 40% pure and speed is 5-20% pure. You can tell them apart by looking at them because ice comes in big chunks, base comes in small rice size peices and speed comes in powder.

I mean come on .....8)
 
yeah sure his definitions weren't overly detailed, but you gotta remember he would have had a limmitted to in which to get across a number of points. What were you expecting? Him to go into specific detail about the chemistry and composition of the drug. I think his definitions were quite appropriate for what he was trying to explain - That basically methamphetimine comes in different forms and strengths.

Story could have been a lot worse. It could have been a typical "Drugs are bad, they will kill you" story. I think the dude from NDARC presented a pretty balanced story detailing risks and he also explained that the girl's story was an extreme and that not all users behave in that manner.



Beech out
 
Speed is the methamphetamine made from crushed sudafed
Click to expand...
That comment is completely misleading - most meth made in Australia is made from crushed sudafed (base certainly is) - the purity at the end of it depends on the cook's skills, conscience and the number of dealers' hands the drug has passed through.

He is pretty accurate on the purities though - "Ice" is definitely almost exclusively imported from Asia although is rarely 90% (Maybe when it arrives here) 80% is the highest it will get. Obviously if your Ice is cut or melted down and recrystallised with MSM it could be far lower.

5-20% is just cut down methamphetamine - calling it speed is unhelpful. This quantity could have started life out as "ice" - i.e ~80% meth or "base" - i.e. meth ~40% pure before being cut down. If it is still pretty strong and bone white it probably began as "ice".

Again you could have 80% "ice" cut 1:1 with glucose making it 40% - you certainly would not describe that as base however.

"Base" at 40% again is misleading. Paste methamphetamine is often around this amount - 30-50%. HOWEVER Paste can actually be anything - the cook may have completely BLOWN the synth - you might have 10% methamphetamine and 90% impurities (as in 10% pure at the end of the synth - just a sticky brown mess) and many of those would be rather toxic/harmful.


One of the best ways of testing methamphetamine (aka base/speed/ice/rock/goey etc etc etc) is to use the Extreme Tester. Simons will confirm it is methamphetamine (99% of the time it will be) and Marquis gives and excellent indication of purity. Generally crushed "ice" will smoke and fizzle to orange in an instant. (If this doesnt happend your tester is too old or someone has interfered with your ice - see MSM reference)

Other forms base/speed will change at varying rates depending on the purity and amount of cutting agents employed.

The other famous test is of course the taste test - generally for base/speed the more bitter the more stronger. The same holds true for "ice" however bitterness may be from cutting agents such as MSM. The point is though methamphetamine as a chemical IS ALWAYS BITTER. You cannot hide it, or change it. Therefore if it aint bitter it is not of high purity. (Just remember though if it is bitter it does not mean it IS of high purity)
 
^^ good post Biscuit, im sure Fry-d just didn't articulate himself as well as he could have, but well cleared up.
 
Aside from a few little things that didn't sit right, the whole article seems pretty informative, and unbiased.
I personally hate Ice (bad experiences, and seeing friends fall apart from it), but I'm happy with the general warning of its consequences with out the bias approach.

A few things made me laugh, but as far as media goes, kudos to JJJ.
 
Fry_d: Cheers but I was not trying to clarify what you said. I assumed what you said was what he said and therefore I thought I would explain it. When I quoted your text I was quoting him through you if you know what I mean. Even if those were not his exact words I'm sure you got it mostly right. I certainly was not implying in my quote that I thought you were being misleading.


And I wouldnt say clearer all the time! :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top