• 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

Opioids **The Oxycontin Mega Thread.** - Can't find your thread? Its in here.

Status
Not open for further replies.
You could have looked up oxycodones bioavailability.

Plus, its a bad idea to IV pills, as Im sure youre aware of.

I say chew them up. If you dont want to do that, then plug. If you dont want to do either, then snort them. If you dont want that, then IV them.

You could have asked this in the Oxycontin Mega thread, found in the Mega Thread sticky at the top of the page. Ill merge it in for you though.
 
Last edited:
I can never get away from snorting them. So I would have to say snort them or eat them.
I would not recomend Iving them%)
 
Opiocorpus said:
This is correct. If you go to the Purdue website, you can see pics of all of the currently produced Oxycontin pills. 40s and 80s aren't going anywhere. Just made a few new dosages for people who required something in between. The 60s are bright ass red and look delicious, heh.

If you look there, you'll also see that theres still a picture of the 160mg pills, which they no longer produce. The 160's were discontinued because there are just not enough patients requiring that strength to warrant producing them. The jump from 80mg to 160mg is just too high. Patients would need extra pain relief and, being used to 80's, pop another one or two when the extra 160 or 320mg might be too much for them. Sucks that OxyContin themselves aren't scored which doesn't allow a normal patient, who doesn't want to abuse their meds, the ability to halve a pill.

enoughorangejuice? said:
i work at a pharmacy and read a letter to the owner talking about the new oxycontin dosages... they are 15, 30 and 60mg, so no more 40's or 80's or not for long at least.... but still OC's have been non-existant for the past 6-8 months where i live.... all that's around is endocet and roxicodone...

I think you are somewhat confused. The owner was talking about the NEW dosage pills that are coming out (the 15, 30 and 60). They old ones aren't going anywhere. There are far too many long-term pain management patients that are on them, due to the excellent combination of strength and time-release (when used PROPERLY). The 80mg OxyContin is a perfect pill for patients with a decent tolerance to lower dosage units that need round-the-clock pain management (when used PROPERLY). Of course tolerance does start to take hold at some point and taking 3 80mg OxyContin at a time isn't very practical. At this point though, the patient would probably be moved to some sort of fentanyl patch or something similar, and off of oxycodone.
 
Last edited:
Purdue producing abuse proof OC?

A friend told me she read on the net that they are making a thicker and harder coating and maybe even injectable resistant. I know the shitty generics gel but thats easy to get past same with mscontin, avenza and kadian. Has anyone heard anything like this?
 
The idea of abuse proof oxycontin has been discussed and debated for years. I dont think they (Purdue Pharma and the FDA) are any closer to actually releasing one then they were 5 years ago. This newest idea, if its what I think it is, I already have an idea on how to bypass the "abuse-proofness", if thats even a word. The FDA even admitted in that article that there will always be a way to abuse a drug, this is just going to make it harder (read: it may take an extra 5 minutes to have it ready for illicit use.)
 
FDA Panel Nixes 'Abuse-Proof' OxyContin
Experts Say Special Coating May Not Stop Abuse of Pain Relief Drug

By Todd Zwillich
WebMD Medical News

Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD

May 6, 2008 — A panel of expert advisors to the FDA took a dim view Monday of efforts by OxyContin's manufacturer to market a new form of the prescription painkiller designed to cut down on tampering and abuse.

The deliberations were a setback for the firm, Purdue Pharma. It was stung a year ago when the company and three of its executives pleaded guilty to illegally hiding the addictive potential of the drug, which is a narcotic.

The company now wants to sell a new form of the drug coated in a plastic-like polymer that prevents potential drug abusers from easily grinding tablets into a fine powder. That makes it hard to snort the drug or "cook" it for intravenous injection.

When it is "cooked," it forms a gelatin ball that is difficult to draw into a syringe. But the coating does not affect how the tablets dissolve in the gut, so patients would still be able to use the drug for pain relief, the company said.

Sales and Abuse Up
Sales of oxycodone, including several generic forms as well as Purdue Pharma's brand name OxyContin, have shot up since its extended-release form was approved in 1996. According to the FDA, sales peaked at 42.2 million prescriptions last year, and with them abuse rates have also gone up.

More than 12% of 18- to 25-year-olds reported using the drug for nonmedical reasons in 2006, according to federal figures. Those figures also estimate that 500,000 Americans try oxycodone recreationally for the first time each year.

Purdue Pharma officials tried to show that the polymer cut down on the amount of active drug that an addict could extract from a tablet.

"We can argue that we have met some degree of tamper resistance. But the abuse resistance is yet to be determined," said J. David Haddox, MD, Purdue Pharma's vice president of risk management and health policy.

Data Criticized
But while experts supported the idea of tablets that are hard to misuse while keeping OxyContin available for pain patients, they said the company failed to show that the new form would cut down on abuse in the real world.

The company did not show, for instance, whether motivated addicts with some facility in chemistry would be able to find ways around the polymer coating, experts said.

Panelist Lewis Nelson, MD, said the product could present doctors and regulators with a "false sense of security" that oxycodone is now safe, despite the fact that most overdoses follow the drug being swallowed orally.

"This new product doesn't bring any solution to the vast majority of deaths that occur with this product," said Nelson, director of the medical toxicology program at New York University School of Medicine.

At some points the criticism crossed over into ridicule. Jeffrey R. Kirsch, MD, a member of the panel, said he was "fascinated" with the "poor scientific rigor" or Purdue Pharma's claims that the new OxyContin was truly tamper-resistant.

"Almost to the point of being insulting," added Kirsch, a professor of anesthesiology from Oregon Health and Science University.

"The data presentation I would not allow in an honors undergraduate thesis to go forward," added Ruth S. Day, PhD, a panelist from Duke University.

The panel did not take any formal votes. But it was nearly unanimous that Purdue Pharma should not be allowed to proceed with a plan to sell lower OxyContin doses in the coated form while still selling higher, 60- and 80-milligram doses in the original form.

Doing so would confuse physicians and drive addicts to seek out the old forms of the drug, experts said.

In a statement, the company said it "will continue to work with the FDA on our New Drug Application (NDA) for a new formulation of OxyContin (oxycodone HCl controlled-release) Tablets."

"Untreated and undertreated pain is a serious public health issue in the United States," the statement said.

Three Purdue Pharma executives and the company agreed to pay a combined $634.5 million in fines after pleading guilty to illegally promoting OxyContin to doctors and withholding data on its abuse potential.

SOURCES: National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. J. David Haddox, MD, vice president, risk management and health policy, Purdue Pharma. Lewis Nelson, director, medical toxicology program, New York University School of Medicine; member, FDA panel. Jeffrey R. Kirsch, professor of anesthesiology, Oregon Health and Science University; member, FDA panel. Ruth S. Day, PhD, Duke University; member, FDA panel. Statement, Purdue Pharma.

© 2008 WebMD Inc. All rights reserved.
 
I like this bit:

"Untreated and undertreated pain is a serious public health issue in the United States," the statement said.

At least the FDA is taking pain serously.
 
Hmmm, i just found 2 empty bottles in my dads room, they were both filled with 80mg tablets. One says OxyCodone for Oxycottin, and the other one says Oxycottin for Oxycodone. Which one is better?
 
RorerQuaalude714 said:
^Just because snorting it didn't work on one occasion doesn't mean you should jump right to IVing it. Maybe the dose you snorted wasn't large enough, or you prepped the pills wrong (i.e. not properly removing the film coating). Going straight to IV is really foolhardy, especially considering that you want to inject pills. As many posters on this thread and on Bluelight as a whole will tell you, injecting pills is really not a safe thing to do, period.

Completely agree. One failed attempt at snorting something should not drive you to IV use. Thats silly. Just try again with snorting, or just crush it up and swallow it.
 
hahaha! not the answer i was looking for =[

cause i heard certain types of oxy contain some other shit thats not too healthy
 
mmmCHRISx said:
hahaha! not the answer i was looking for =[

cause i heard certain types of oxy contain some other shit thats not too healthy

Any brand of OC's that do not say either "OC" or "ABG" on one side contain materials inside them that cause them to gel up when they are wet. The only real way to use the OC's that gel are to crush them up and swallow them, but sometimes that doesnt even do much more then taking them whole. You can snort them, but it wont be pleasant. If you must snort them, snort small lines to keep it from gelling up real bad inside your nose. Do NOT under any circumstances to try to shoot them.

The OC and ABG brands can be snorted or crushed and swallowed (parchuted) just fine. They can also be IVed, but you shouldnt be IVing pills anyways.

EDIT - Check the first few posts in this thread to find more info on what you are asking about.

Now that I think about it, this could have gone into the Oxycontin Mega Thread. Im moving all relevant posts over to it.

Try posting stuff where it belongs from now on. That means searching for existing threads before posting new ones (that was directed to the OP.)
 
Kurrupt said:
^ Yes I know that. You didn't anwser my question. I want to know how sniffing isn't equal to eating because what you sniff drips down into your stomach and if it wasn't absorbed in your nose it should absorb in your stomach. So snorting THEORETICALLY should be equal to snorting. We all know it isn't. I want someone to tell me WHY NOT?

I"m bumping this thread because i've always been dying to know the answer to this one as well. I mean somebody said earlier "the part that does get absorbed in the nose membranes is less bioavailable and the part that drips down is more" but that makes little sense or requires clarification. Isn't the amount of oxycodone constant? I can think of oxyodone being *destroyed* in the stomach if anything, but I can't imagine it being destroyed in the *nose*. So what's the deal?
 
^That would be a name brand 80mg Oxycontin^
I don't think Purdue will be changing their formula for their OC. It would be to time consuming and expensive on their part. They would have to then get reapproved by the FDA and then be able to put them on the market.
They just got all the generics off the market, I know all of the pharmacies here now only have name brand, having filled the rest of their remaining Teva forms, which sucked.
I also know that a certain mail pharmacy now only has name brand so it seams that most people won't have to worry about the pesky generics with all their additives.
And I just don't think that the science/technology is there to make OCs completely tamper proof. The only thing they could do that would make them the most abuse proof would be to do a Kadian (morphine capsule) route. But that would also mean a re-formulation, which Purdue is trying to avoid.

I like to chew on half of my 80's then snort the other half a little while later so I can get that "rush" from snorting but the long action from swallowing. JMO
 
Well, some molecules just don't cross through into the bloodstream via the nasal cavity as well as others. Morphine's intranasal BA is around 10%, but oral is 25-35%. That's a pretty significant difference, as a lot of people are out there snorting morphine and saying "screw this shit, it doesn't even get me high". Oxycodone doesn't undergo extensive first-pass metabolism, so oral BA is around 80-85%. However, snorting bypasses first-pass metabolism. It's possible (I don't know for sure, but it sounds feasible) that oxycodone is actually more extensively metabolized on second or third pass metabolism. This would explain why snorting has a lower BA, because it is not immune to anything but the first-pass metabolism. It still is going to get broken down and sent out the body.
 
nleksan said:
Well, some molecules just don't cross through into the bloodstream via the nasal cavity as well as others. Morphine's intranasal BA is around 10%, but oral is 25-35%. That's a pretty significant difference, as a lot of people are out there snorting morphine and saying "screw this shit, it doesn't even get me high". Oxycodone doesn't undergo extensive first-pass metabolism, so oral BA is around 80-85%. However, snorting bypasses first-pass metabolism. It's possible (I don't know for sure, but it sounds feasible) that oxycodone is actually more extensively metabolized on second or third pass metabolism. This would explain why snorting has a lower BA, because it is not immune to anything but the first-pass metabolism. It still is going to get broken down and sent out the body.

This entire post is wrong. Morphine's Bioavailability is much higher intranasally than orally.

In response to this thread, I believe the reason has to do with reaching peak plasma levels via protein binding. Oxycodone does not avoid first pass metabolism anyway, its just that oral Oxycodone it is readily converted into its active metabolites before being transmitted throughout the blood. With insufflation you reach peak plasma levels faster, but protein binding is less efficient. Voila.
 
Because when you snort something not all of the substance that doesn't absorb through your mucus membranes drips down your throat and into your stomach, some stays inside your nose.
People like to snort for the rush
while others don't want to waste the bit that doesn't absorb or drip and they prefer to eat them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top