On the Demonisation of Methamphetamine on Bluelight

[deficiT]

Yeah maybe you’re right, @deficiT and I come off as a total prick. I don’t know.

Dude, don't worry. I get it, tone is hard to convey over the internet and sometimes the things we say come off harsher than intended. Moderators certainly aren't infallible, I just think when we're talking about something like losing children we should probably take people at their word. If you think Bluelight has a Nancy Reagan "just say NO" approach towards drugs, then I believe you're mistaken.

Meth has a reputation because it's dangerous. That doesn't mean people can't use it responsibly, but again we have to be realistic about things. Speaking of bias, using your own personal experience with meth to color how you view it is just as flawed as what you've accused Mr Peabody of doing. Bias is inevitable. Anecdotal experience shapes our worldviews, so I wouldn't be so quick to accuse people of solely expressing bias in their views.

 

[negrogesic]

You should check your facts. Just a cursory search of the internet says there are some 16,000 scripts per year written for Desoxyn. Also, they don't face any real scrutiny like that unless there are complaints and/or malpractice suits filed against them. This, coupled with rising prices on malpractice insurance, unfortunately has the effect of making doctors afraid of prescribing particular hot button items like Desoxyn, and now pretty much any opioid drug or morphine derivative. They're all terrified to prescribe to patients who often legitimately need it.

I had a 10mg QID (40mg) desoxyn prescription once but stopped as i paid outrageous sums for it as my insurance refused to cover it. They thought, "oh no, we know this negrogesic asshole and all the shit he's been through, no meth for him". I had to buy it myself. Wasn't worth it.

A psychiatrists who thinks they are clever can prescribe it easily, they report to no one. At least if they are being genuine. Desoxyn is rarely abused due to its cost. 40mg of meth just sort of made me loopy and sedated anyhow. Its no fun at all.

 

[Kaden_Nite]

Every few years in Australia, the government goes on this taxpayer-funded rampage against methamphetamine. Primetime commercials at every ad-break, on every station. Full page ads in every newspaper and website. There are billboards on the highways and signage up at the train stations.

The lame ice-related puns and analogies are endless; "Euphoria and motivation? That's just the tip of the iceberg" and there's an image of an actual iceberg, largely submerged, with a lengthy list of negative effects lurking beneath the surface of the water. When the media joins in on this attack, it works people into a real frenzy.

Even though statistics show usage rates haven't changed and the burden posed by meth on the medical and welfare systems are still greatly outweighed by a myriad of other factors far too ingrained in our society to change. So the blame is shifted onto drug users who quite likely, have problems enough as it is.

I don't believe meth-use to be a non-issue, but the demonization is real and seems to be an easy target that takes focus away from much more threatening issues.

 

[SteeleyJ]

Meth isn't THAT bad but you really have to watch how much you are taking and when because the doses from 6 hours ago are still present. It will creep up on you. You also need to sleep ( catnap/ few hours maybe ) and force yourself to eat something healthy. Some people will chase it every hour like it's cocaine and that is a recipe for getting buggy...psychosis and doing odd shit like yard work at 3am.

There are also some people who love the productivity on it and can stay disciplined and hold down jobs / family etc for years. I will occasionally use a speeder for work or to push when sleep isn't an option.

 

[Nurse Ratched]

I lost 3 of my children to meth.

Please keep posting your " pamphlets' Mr. Peabody. I know some BL'ers that may not throw a like on them, but they are being read nonetheless. Posters don't have to read them. We all read what we choose to. The articles make much more sense because they have facts in them that some users may not know. And there are many families in my area that are losing their children to meth. Some are in jail and some are dead. They either got caught with it or engaged in violence because of it. Firearms were involved in two of the incidences. But it isn't just meth. It's fentanyl and xanax as well. Your " pamphlets" just aren't about meth either. They include all drugs. And if that's not HR I don't know what is. I commend you for posting the articles. Maybe, just maybe, one of them will stick with someone and they can turn their life around.

 

[bongdong]

Well, looks like there are several aspects here, @negrogesic pointed to a possible demonization of meth users; discrimination basically. I think (or hope) this is not that controversal? Then there is the perception of meth itself (here, in the media, etc.) that folks seem to care about.

I just have a general beef against anyone who is evangelical about anything with no room for nuance. Especially when they are prolific about it.

I don't want to sidetrack into philosophy, but if you hold that as a principle, you're just as evangelical as the people you want to critique. You have probably noticed, I'm all for nuances! But with the right mind, one can drown every discussion with nuances and ever more nuaunces. It can also be used as a means to an end, is what I'm saying. Do do know that it's possible to actually come to a conclusion about something. It's also possible to come to a consens regarding a rather complex topic for pragmatic reasons (without giving up ones intellectual integrity), e.g. to move together in a certain direction; policy making, harm reduction, whatever.

Now, given your history with meth you so honestly shared (thanks..) and your own recommendation about it (if you can, don't fuck with it!), I'm curious, why are you so adamant in supporting every more or less well-spoken opinion (which you obviously do) that aims at marginalizing methamphetamine (and demand nuaunces otherwise)? What's in it for you? What's your motivation? Have you asked yourself that question?

Not that I think that this thread will change anything, and I also don't have a personal investment in this, but perhaps I'm missing out on some piece of logic here. Of course there are forces that aren't logical, or obvious, personal, ..whatever, I would be interested in that too, of course.

 

[Bran the Crow]

Also, if you want my advice. Don't Fuck with Meth. Or Opiates. Or Coke. Or Benzos. Or Alchohol. None of them ever did me any good. But you're not me. Which is lucky for you.

Stigmatization among drug users and on online forums is inevitable. People will have their opinions, and so long as they're not hurting anyone, let them. Out in my neck of the woods, there isn't a whole lot of meth use (although I'm way out of the 'scene' nowadays), but one drug I know causes a lot of stigmatization is crack / freebase cocaine. I've spoken to hundreds of drug users over the years—junkies, tweakers, club kids, rich coke-and-booze snobs, pill poppers, beer-and-pot party kids, etc.—and the two drugs with the most controversy, stigma, and hatred surrounding them are methamphetamine and crack cocaine.

I've met plenty of die-hard I.V. heroin users who will clear out of anywhere—probably even a free suite in the Ritz-Carlton—if even one tweaker shows up with a crack pipe. It's a weird thing, and it has roots in both reality and misconceptions. Of course, there are folks living on the street who've dealt with tweakers who've become violent, so I guess some of them are justified in being weary of crack and meth, but in general it doesn't make any sense why there's so much stigma.

Concerning meth, a big part of its stigma comes from government-funded propaganda and sensationalist TV shows that were in heavy rotation during the late 90s and early 00s which portrayed it as this demonic drug that wrecked everything in its path, caused houses to blow up and/or catch fire, tore families apart, and all that. For many 'average' people, meth conjures up images of emaciated addicts covered in scabs with their teeth rotting out of their heads—essentially looking like zombies—so I think that's a big part of where the stigma comes from. That, and the crazy violent rampages that many tweakers have gone on.


===================
BTW, I'm new here. Hello everyone! I was a BlueLight-er many moons ago when I was a teenager—probably active from like 2003-2006. I didn't log in for years, so per your rules, my account was deleted, which is fine. Anyways, I'm back, and boy-oh-boy do I have plenty to share.

 

[Nurse Ratched]

Stigmatization among drug users and on online forums is inevitable. People will have their opinions, and so long as they're not hurting anyone, let them. Out in my neck of the woods, there isn't a whole lot of meth use (although I'm way out of the 'scene' nowadays), but one drug I know causes a lot of stigmatization is crack / freebase cocaine. I've spoken to hundreds of drug users over the years—junkies, tweakers, club kids, rich coke-and-booze snobs, pill poppers, beer-and-pot party kids, etc.—and the two drugs with the most controversy, stigma, and hatred surrounding them are methamphetamine and crack cocaine.

I've met plenty of die-hard I.V. heroin users who will clear out of anywhere—probably even a free suite in the Ritz-Carlton—if even one tweaker shows up with a crack pipe. It's a weird thing, and it has roots in both reality and misconceptions. Of course, there are folks living on the street who've dealt with tweakers who've become violent, so I guess some of them are justified in being weary of crack and meth, but in general it doesn't make any sense why there's so much stigma.

Concerning meth, a big part of its stigma comes from government-funded propaganda and sensationalist TV shows that were in heavy rotation during the late 90s and early 00s which portrayed it as this demonic drug that wrecked everything in its path, caused houses to blow up and/or catch fire, tore families apart, and all that. For many 'average' people, meth conjures up images of emaciated addicts covered in scabs with their teeth rotting out of their heads—essentially looking like zombies—so I think that's a big part of where the stigma comes from. That, and the crazy violent rampages that many tweakers have gone on.


===================
BTW, I'm new here. Hello everyone! I was a BlueLight-er many moons ago when I was a teenager—probably active from like 2003-2006. I didn't log in for years, so per your rules, my account was deleted, which is fine. Anyways, I'm back, and boy-oh-boy do I have plenty to share.

Welcome back. I agree that it isn't the crack and meth per se that is the issue. It is the behavior of the users while under the influence. Most users ( and non users ) would rather be in a room with opioid addicts than stim addicts. Weed and opioids have more of a chill factor. Alcohol and stims have a more erratic factor. Although we never really know how a user will behave on any given drug I think most people would prefer to be around a heroin user than a meth user only because the behavior of each one is so different. The heroin users clear out of the room when the crack users come into play because they know what's going to happen. They see it everyday and it is in contrast to how they want the mood to go. A chill and laid back mood will turn on a dime when a stim user gets amped up. I've seen it happen.

 

[unodelacosa]

Speaking of bias, using your own personal experience with meth to color how you view it is just as flawed as what you've accused Mr Peabody of doing. Bias is inevitable. Anecdotal experience shapes our worldviews, so I wouldn't be so quick to accuse people of solely expressing bias in their views.

Firstly, you're not telling me things I don't already know and say myself. I'm fully aware of how it's impossible to be entirely objective and to be free of all bias. However, the loss of three children and the emotional pain this no doubt renders is something I would consider to be much more likely to put a person through serious PTSD as compared to my experiences regarding this particular topic. Therefore, secondly, in my mind it's akin to how during jury selection on a meth-related case, I feel fairly certain @mr peabody would be removed from serving on that jury whereas a person admitting to occasionally recreational drug use would have a more likely chance of remaining on said jury.

Look, I appreciate you sticking up for @mr peabody and it was never my intention to be a jerk to anyone, so I'm sorry if I came across wrong, again. I don't advocate reckless wanton drug abuse. I take a measured and even approach wherein I am aware of the dangers, not just for myself but in terms of other people using the drug. I'm not saying it's a harmless, soft drug hardly capable of getting you high or harming anyone. It's not that at all. It's powerful and no one can argue people haven't destroyed their lives and at times even paid with their life from letting compulsive meth use take them over. It happens too frequently with alcohol, as well as with heroin/fent/opioids, benzos and convulsions, crack cocaine, GHB and/or Ketamine and other dissos… I lost a close friend to an accidental heroin/fent overdose this past April and it affected me deeply. And I'm not trying to compare one loss to another (or three in the tragic case of our forum-mate's story), but let's not paint me as being this heartless monster dropping dickish comments while accusing the entirety of BlueLight of being little Harry Anslinger sock puppets and stuffed animal Nancy Reagan velociraptors with ripcords on their backs that you pull and they croak out: “RAW! Just Say No To Dergs, kids…” before breaking the fourth wall and sheepishly admitting to the camera / audience: “SQUAWK! It's as living!”

Fuck I'm too high to continue much longer with this… My point was that I'm consider both angles. Unless I'm mistaken, @mr peabody seems to take an approach of "there is nothing safe about meth", period, full stop, no if, ands, or buts. So seldom is anything in life that black and white. And so to conclude, this view seems like the view of a drug war extremist, but again, to be fair, I don't know our story's protagonist here whatsoever, our belabored and Job-esquely hobbled good-sport with—seriously, no bullshit—a kickass avatar.

I just think when we're talking about something like losing children we should probably take people at their word.

Ok you're probably right about this. It does seem like the more polite and civilized response to that sort of statement is to set my default to granting the benefit of the doubt. I just have a hard time suppressing my skepticism sometimes, to the point of a flaw. Sorry about that, everybody, or rather anybody reading along, and sorry if I were impolite to you , @mr peabody. I don't realize it sometimes and I honestly probably have a touch of non-diagnosed ASD or something. Eh. They can't all be zingers…

 

[tweakerguy]

This forum has, in recent months, seen a huge increase in anti-meth comments, moderators popping in with some fear mongering PSA, and threads that seem like nothing but open invitations to rag on the drug started by greenlighters that inexplicably disappear afterward.
Feels almost like a calculated effort.

Nice topic @Perforated

 

[tweakerguy]

There is nothing safe about meth.

Well, not with that attitude

 

[Kaden_Nite]

This forum has, in recent months, seen a huge increase in anti-meth comments, moderators popping in with some fear mongering PSA, and threads that seem like nothing but open invitations to rag on the drug started by greenlighters that inexplicably disappear afterward.
Feels almost like a calculated effort.

I haven't seen that.

I have seen a few posters with zero credentials other than some narcissistic delusion that their "30 yrs tweakin" is somehow equivalent to a doctorate in every field of science, who claim that all meth everywhere is fake because they took a curling iron to their dopamine receptors some years back.

They get called wackjobs sometimes.

Other than that, most mods I see posting about meth are on it.

 

[JackARoe]

Stigmatization among drug users and on online forums is inevitable. People will have their opinions, and so long as they're not hurting anyone, let them.

Exactly. I have always been of the opinion the dose makes the poison. At least for me. I did meth once years ago whatever crystal meth was in 1988 in Long Beach Ca. Took a tiny bit with my heroin and was not for me.I remember the guy giving it to me saying no really you will be up for days. And my heroin addict ass said I don't want to be up for days. :D

We do need more understanding amongst each other. Ex. I have a friend who's mother died two days after her first shot of the vaccine. She was 93. And a month later son died of a stroke with meth and cocaine in his system. It is useless to convince him or his family that the vaccine is safe and meth is safe. That 's one example. Then there are very knowledgable people here that have used meth for years safetly and you are not going to tell them it is unsafe.

i just think we should go easy on each other. I totally get the angles from perforated to Mr Peabody. We all have our own experiences and opinions. And I think most drugs can be used wisely even if many people get off balance. Then comes fentanyl I can honestly say that is one dangerous mother f*cking drug and that is just not my opinion. Yet if someone uses the patches as directed by a doctor they are most likely safe. So even that can be used wisely. But tell that to the mother whose son died of street heroin.

If I had meth I could probably use a few miligrams ever so often for work projects and not get addicted. At least i had 100 ritalin pills once for a 6 years for work projects. I am not a stimulant guy but could probably find a use for very light doses.

 

[Xorkoth]

My guess is it doesn’t pay

You are correct, it most definitely does not. Not even admins and site owners have ever seen a dime, it's all volunteers.

@mr peabody Sorry I’m reluctant to believe your story, but in all sincerity and assuming your deeply, troublingly sad story is truthful (for the record I believe you about 95% of the way; but I don’t release skepticism easily), then my heart really does go out to you and any other surviving family members.

I did find your statement about disbelief of a terrible personal tragedy to be pretty tasteless, it's always best to keep that sort of sentiment to yourself because if it is true (it is), statements like that cause a lot of pain. Benefit of the doubt in this case is classy.

I think you have some good points in general though.

 

[izo]

methamphetamine can be a quite safe and an easy going psychostimulant. afaik normal amphetamine is even stronger but problem with meth is that its usually sold in a relatievly pure form whereas when you buy speed over here you usually get 5-15% amphetamine cut with coffeine or inert fillers. so that makes it easy to vape methamphetamine which leads to compulsive behaviour and frequent redosing. as someone put it in this thread, if youre using 5mg desoxyn daily and orally you wont get any problems with this compound.
another point to be made is that meth gets so demonized because it is so prevalent nowadays with cartels pushing huge amounts of it into the black market.

 

[Xorkoth]

Regular amphetamine is not stronger, it's less potent, lasts shorter, and does not release as much dopamine or serotonin. I think it releases more norepinephrine though so it can have a stronger physical response.

 

[izo]

Regular amphetamine is not stronger, it's less potent, lasts shorter, and does not release as much dopamine or serotonin. I think it releases more norepinephrine though so it can have a stronger physical response.

yeah seems to be right, i think i also read somewhere that amphetamine releases more noradrenaline, might have mixed that up. heres an image comparing the effects of N substitution on stimulant activity:

 

[simstim]

Stigmatization among drug users and on online forums is inevitable. People will have their opinions, and so long as they're not hurting anyone, let them. Out in my neck of the woods, there isn't a whole lot of meth use (although I'm way out of the 'scene' nowadays), but one drug I know causes a lot of stigmatization is crack / freebase cocaine. I've spoken to hundreds of drug users over the years—junkies, tweakers, club kids, rich coke-and-booze snobs, pill poppers, beer-and-pot party kids, etc.—and the two drugs with the most controversy, stigma, and hatred surrounding them are methamphetamine and crack cocaine.

I've met plenty of die-hard I.V. heroin users who will clear out of anywhere—probably even a free suite in the Ritz-Carlton—if even one tweaker shows up with a crack pipe. It's a weird thing, and it has roots in both reality and misconceptions. Of course, there are folks living on the street who've dealt with tweakers who've become violent, so I guess some of them are justified in being weary of crack and meth, but in general it doesn't make any sense why there's so much stigma.

Concerning meth, a big part of its stigma comes from government-funded propaganda and sensationalist TV shows that were in heavy rotation during the late 90s and early 00s which portrayed it as this demonic drug that wrecked everything in its path, caused houses to blow up and/or catch fire, tore families apart, and all that. For many 'average' people, meth conjures up images of emaciated addicts covered in scabs with their teeth rotting out of their heads—essentially looking like zombies—so I think that's a big part of where the stigma comes from. That, and the crazy violent rampages that many tweakers have gone on.


===================
BTW, I'm new here. Hello everyone! I was a BlueLight-er many moons ago when I was a teenager—probably active from like 2003-2006. I didn't log in for years, so per your rules, my account was deleted, which is fine. Anyways, I'm back, and boy-oh-boy do I have plenty to share.

I think crack is different. It's the only drug I've known people to claim things about like spending $700 in a day on their drug of choice. They're also far more likely to be liars, thieves, or prostitutes in my experience as well due to crack's high cost and short duration. It also causes paranoia and hallucinations faster than meth.

If any drugs deserve demonizing it's the one that turn people into lying, thieving, prostitutes....or cause serious issues like severe heart damage (like crack). I've seen people moaning due to chest pains and shit too from crack. Didn't stop them from continuing to smoke one bit.

 

[AlphaMethylPhenyl]

Sort of ironic. People with stimulant problems tend to be quite aggressive. I thought that the original post was decently balanced. Some of these replies, though, to me, come across as pretentious, childish, and quite hostile. No offense from my end, but I think we know who is doing the most of that.

 

[SinninThotsandBears]

The demonization of meth comes down pure and simply to class warfare. Meth and crack are treated differently bc they are "poor people drugs" even drug users part of the same socioeconomic class keep this up bc every human loves a hierarchy as long as they aren't on the perceived bottom.

That feeling of "at least I don't smoke meth" has enabled many an alcoholic, or pill popper or coke snorter to pat themselves on the back so convincingly they fall down the cliff between high functioning and high to function and finally functioning only to get high.

Yes there are some embarrassing tweakers but they only seem disproportionately represented to the total amount of users when you have no idea just how many meth users reside in my swanky neighborhood and then extrapolate that number out across the world and have to do the 2 things humans can't stand to do:

1.) Admit a deeply felt bias is incorrect and anecdotal at best

2.) That there are so many more people capable of drug use without fucking up their lives than they could have imagined. It's just not them.

A drug is a drug is a drug. This belief is what makes me remember that an object cannot do by itself what I do not give it agency to do but also that an object cannot be my friend, my confidante or my savior. We gotta be that for ourselves.

/rant