• 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

What is the opiate downfall?

quale

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
1,064
So it seems from things I have read and posts on this board most individuals who keep up daily opiate habits eventually get fucked. Their life becomes unfun miserable etc.. etc.. my question is this a consequence of the opiate use itself, or the monetary and time constraints on scoring enough dope.
So if you had easy access to an indefinte supply of pure opiates along with a relatively safe administration system (say duragesic patches...or one of those semi-permanent shunts into your vein) would this still be a problem?
Secondly even if this would prevent you from engaging in "normal life activities" like job etc.. etc.. if you were not required to engage in these things (maybe your bill gates and can afford to just sit on your ass while flunkies shoot you up) would you still enjoy yourself? I have heard it claimed (tho how true it is I am unsure) that after some point using opiates becomes purely maintence and not pleasurable. Of course this might merely be because they don't have access to enough to really enjoy them.
I am just sorta curious about how programs which would just provide people unlimited opiates would work out (if the government endeavored to produce bulk amounts of etorphine or carfentanil this would certainly be possible)
 
The government doesn't believe in people being dependent on drugs. Just SSRIs and other legal drugs. Oh shit, I just said it, those are drugs too I guess. Guess there are good drugs and bad drugs to be addicted to! Anyways...Yes it does just become maintanance with tolerence. Like any other drug the more you use the more you have to use to get high. Of course, if you use it but don't get high on it your tolerence will rise slower and probably be a lot more effective. Provided they're used that way yes it would be very easy to hold down a normal life and job. Would people still use them if we didn't need jobs? Of course. I use opiates to enjoy myself. They are enjoyable with or without a job.
 
I know you CAN do maintence. Could you however just keep shooting up more and more so you are still getting euphoric effects? In such a situation, where you keep using enough to get high not just methadone maitence type shit, can you still hold down a job?
The swiss government for awhile handed out as much opiates to addicts as they wanted.
Essentially what I am asking is whether it is theoretically possible to use opiates to keep someone continously euphoric.
 
I would imagine after time the tolerence would become less chemical and more psycological. It just wouldn't do it for you anymore.
 
So what is the longest period of time anyone on this board had access to as many opiates as they wanted? Did you in fact notice this...or is this the sort of thing that just requires such an absurd amount of drugs no one here is going to know.
 
Quale, to your original question.. while if money/supply was not an issue, you could easily get by on a habit, probably better than a sober person.. the fact remains that by the time you need a maintenance dose, you really aren't getting a rush out of it anymore. Sure, it feels good for 15-30 mins.. then it goes away, you can't sustain the high. It's all about feeling normal, not feeling great. To get there you have to shoot a shitload. Just not worth it.
And when you decide to come to reduce your tolerance, lord almighty, I will testify that withdrawal is one of the most horrible experiences on earth. You will consider robbing your own parents in a delusional craving. The cravings are probably worse than the physical symptoms. It's almost impossible to do anything for a few days because that's all you can think about.
 
The game ends when the lethal dose crosses the path of a tolerant user's threshold for fun....... Or when she scores shit that is way stronger than the stuff she has been getting. Opiates are pretty straight forward.
Some say most junkies will quit or die after about 10 years.
 
Quack-
Does this happen? It's a well-known fact that opioid analgesia has no ceiling, eg you can continually increase the dose and still have analgesia. I've heard it stated as "opioid tolerance is always treatable, by simply increasing the dose." Also tolerance to the respiratory depression typically develops faster than to the euphoria.
Whether the euphoria similarly has no ceiling I don't know, but I would guess so.
 
On a side note: NIDA recently published a follow-up study on 581 heroin addicts, who were caught in a criminal offense and sent to a mandatory treatment program (CAP) from 1962-1965. Of those, in 1997:
50% were dead, 10% could not be found.
56% were abstinent, 14% were in jail, 21% were still using, the other 10% refused to be tested.
Based on their original ages, the natural (general populations') death rate should have been around 1%. Keep in mind that these people were arrested, so they were probably drawn from the lower socioeconomic rungs of addicts.
Before someone points it out, the abstinent/jail/etc figures are of the LIVING addicts that could be dound. :)
[ 14 December 2001: Message edited by: zorn ]
 
That is a good question! http://opioids.com/tolerance/ I guess the results are still not in.
It is so hard to ask a dead person if they were trying to kill themselves or get off these days. That said, any addict will tell you that there is more than one form of death..... I will have to look into it a bit more I suppose.
[ 14 December 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Quack ]
 
Well, the molecular mechanisms of tolerance are getting closer to being understood. There's been a TON of work on this in the past few years, it's amazing. A particularly interesting recent result was that mice lacking the gene for the protein beta-arrestin-2 showed no behavioural abnormalities, yet developed no tolerance, acute or chronic, to morphine analgesia, suggesting that analgesic tolerance is mediated entirely at a cellular level. They did become addicted and go through withdrawal, however. Of course no one can tell if a mouse is "euphoric" and you can't make human knockouts. If you want to read about some of this stuff I recommend starting with the following:
Williams JT, Christie MJ, Manzoni O.
Physiological Reviews, 81(1):299 (2001)
Alvarez V, Arttamangkul S, Williams JT. A RAVE about Opioid Withdrawal.
Neuron 32:761-763 (2001)
Bohn LM et al. Mu-opiod receptor desenstization by beta-arrestin-2 determines morphine tolerance but not dependence.
Nature 408:720-723 (2000)
Also Peptides regularly reviews the state of opioid research.
I am amused that RAVE has become a common term in the field now, stands for "relative activity versus endocytosis." Wonder if that was intentional. :)
Incidentally I have heard that the average length of a heroin addiction is about three years... not sure of the accuracy. If you find out anything more, lemme know, it would be interesting.
Care,
Zorn
[ 14 December 2001: Message edited by: zorn ]
 
Not only could you function, but life would be wonderfull.. of course tollerance is an issue, and you would have to increase the dose to get lots of euphoria - but thats if you're looking to get STONED every day.. a lot of others, and myself, use it as more of an anti-depressant.. I don't use enough to get that fall back on the floor and lay there for 30 minutes, I do a little, my problems disolve, I get a mild warmth, a burst of energy, and this can last for awhile - you space it out, for instance, I might dose before I go to work, and that sets my mood for the better part of the day.. then at home I would do a little more to make my evening fun..
I think the downfall for most people is money management - they don't respect the tollerance factor, do more and more until they are needing to spend a weeks paycheck for an evening of enjoyment.. it can be difficult to manage a habit at first, but after awhile you get used to the in's and out's of it .. when I first started on narcotics I would kill my script in a few nights, but I soon learned to ration it and take breaks frequently to keep tollerance and the dependance factor in check ..
But everyone is differn't, and some people simply can NOT handle opiates - having a pill or line that can disolve all your problems is more then some can take, and they allow themselves to be consumed by the drugs ..
Of course thats only my opinion, I am sure there are plenty of people that have stories about family members or friends that ALLOWED themselves to lose control with the drugs - well, I can tell you as many stories of people that did drugs and never let those drugs do them...
 
Heroin is the devil and you are the devil's advocate, Phreex! Your blatant PROMOTION of these demon opiates probably makes you PERSONALLY responsible for hundreds even thousands of deaths every year! The only people that allow themselves to be addicted have been pulled from God's hands by your poisonous persuasions!
Someone should really compile a Best of Bluelight - Other Drugs and organize it into a quirky drug science humor book.
 
Hehe there is always a heated debate when it comes to the glorious 'boy' heroin. Myself I worked in an ordinary job for more than eleven years, the whole time shooting heroin. The first years it was christmas time every shot, but soon it became a question of not being sick...And of course being an emotional zombie. Still I want it legalized, or at least as in Switzerland. But it's not a plaything.
 
The game ends when the lethal dose crosses the path of a tolerant user's threshold for fun....... Or when she scores shit that is way stronger than the stuff she has been getting. Opiates are pretty straight forward.
Some say most junkies will quit or die after about 10 years.
I love when political correctness comes back to fuck women in the ass.
 
Whether or not drug use is a valid pursuit is a long discussion that would take thousands and thousands of messages to really have to any level of integrity. That being said--
PhreeX- You know as well as I do that every now and then you pause and think of whether or not drug use, overall, was a good idea. It may be when you are stoned, when you are coming down, as you get ready to go to sleep, or perhaps while you are driving to work. Or maybe it is when you have a frustrating moment of Brain Damage Realization, where you can't do something that you used to be able to do, and you know it isn't just old age. (And it is a well established fact that drug use (opiates included) causes brain damage over time and in quantities which are not unrealistic when we consider addict behavior.).
PhreeX, we can't have a talk about you. Because, frankly, I don't know you. For all I know, you may be a multimillionaire with a stunningly attractive, intelligent, kind, and loving wife, 3 grown kids who are all college graduates or in college, and a nice little white haired lap-dog named Sissy. For all I know you may never have used drugs before.
Beyond that, it wouldn't be nice. It would hurt you and it wouldn't do you any good.
That being said--
1) Psychoactive drug use of causes brain damage. The more you use, the more damage. Granted, it's nominal damage for the vast majority of users, but this is because they A) Don't use too much at any given time (in order to avoid bad come-downs; they understand the law of diminishing returns; they don't want to spend all their money; they have to go to work tomorrow). and B) Quit within a couple years.
2) Drugs cost money. If you are using drugs in any significant quantity, you are paying for them.
And you'd be surprised how much you spend over time. The worst part is that unless you approach them from an intellectual perspective and try to learn something from what is happening, you don't really gain anything but some pleasure. Most every other usage of money gains you pleasure, some increase in social standing, some opportunity for meeting new people, some interaction, and some need fullfillment. Let's say I buy a nice watch for $1,000. It's going to make me feel REALLY good. Both at the time, and while I'm wearing it. People are going to think of me as a better person because of my watch (hey, it's true). I'm going to get to talk to people about my watch. People are going to say "I like your watch". I'm going to get up, go down to the shop, and talk to the shopkeep about the watch for 30 minutes before I buy it. I am going to further establish my identity (that identity vs. autonomy game we played in adolescence, and most ongoing drug users LOST...). I GAIN THINGS. And ultimately, the watch will probably bring me, over the next few years, more pleasure than an 30 grams of methamphetamince would have for the same price. Ultimately I'll end up selling the watch and gaining back a nominal amount of money, or giving it to a friend or relative of lower social class than I am, who will derive some pleasure from even a three year old watch! Isn't that a pleasent story?
3) Drug use leads to addiction. Addiction is not a dichotomy. It is a process, it is... a force which acts on a person. It varies in strength. You can't "fight" an addiction. IF you are addicted, you are addicted, it's that simple. If you use 1 gram of meth a week, you are just as addicted to meth as anyone else who uses 1 gram of meth a week. Sure, maybe you can quit and she can't, but that has nothing to do with your meth use, you are both equally addicted (you are using at the same rate), it has to do with the circumstances in the rest of your life.
4) Being a drug user DECREASES your social standing in the vast majority of social circles. Depends on your usage patterns, of course, but, assuming you have done cocaine, meth, heroin, mdma, marijuana, and lsd, you have alienated yourself from the vast majority of people. And people CAN tell from looking at you... maybe not always, but you kind of get inklings. And then there is a subconscious awareness of something.
Of course, social standing is a vital part of success in this society. Succes is the attainment of dreams, the pursuit of attractive members of the opposite sex (ultimately terminating in a long lasting marriage under which children are raised), the achievement of goals, and ending up in a higher SES than your parents were. That's societies definition, and frnakly it ain't bad. You are a genetic pattern, your purpose is to find out if you are good enough to keep on. To keep on is to succeed. To have kids that are given a head-start. Etc.
PhreeX-- We can pursue to learn about and study drugs without fucking up our own existance in the process. We can learn amazing things about our own minds, about minds in general, and about substances in general, by studying drugs and by using them. However, we can study the drugs through limited usage over a short period of time in our lives... (age 15-25 for most people), come to terms with reality and accept ourselves... and then move on from that. That is what 60+% of people do. The ones that don't missed a vital part of life, and are narrow minded and naive for the rest of it as a result. The ones that do, and move on, eventually meet with success. Watch them. The ones that do, and don't move on, settle for whatever pleasures they can receive in this cruel. cold. world.
The first enemy of the human is the cold.
The last enemy of the human is the cold.
Why do you think that "warmth" you always feel registers as pleasure... that pleasure you always feel registers as warmth?
There is no pleasure, it's a fallacy to keep you on track, if it malfunctions abandon it. Won't you? Look towards continuation of your line.
And kind of realize, that the pleasure which comes from drugs, really is only amazing to you... impressive... because you lack pleasure in other areas of your life (probably because of your drug use... who knows, maybe the lap-dog scenario I wrote above is what would have happened had you never used drugs... spent the money on a four year degree in business.. become a shopkeep... who the hell knows?). Shoot up a happy man with heroin, if his life is truly going well... I don't know, have him be right in the middle of a passionate love or something... and he will feel the pleasure, but he won't trade his life for it. His life is better.
[ 16 December 2001: Message edited by: Timerare2 ]
 
First of all you are facutally incorrect about the brain damage! While I can't find the source at the moment long term studies have not shown any brain damage from opiates. Yes even in users of extremely large amounts! The opiate question has been decscively settled with the answer of no brain damage.
Secondly there is no evidence that many hallucinagens do this either! In "Do hallucinogens cause residual neuropsychological toxicity?" By Halpern and Pope in Drug and Alcohol Dependence 53 the authors review the literature on hallucinagens and conclude "the literature tenatively suggests that there are few if any long term neuropsychological deficits attributable to hallucinogen use." Just because it feels like it fucks you up does not in fact mean it does.
In fact the only two common drugs which have significant research pointing towards brain damage are meth and ecstasy...which interestingly enough have somewher similar methods of action.
Yes drug use leads to addiction and yes it costs money. These are real concerns to consider. I can however tell you that everytime I have rolled I felt for months afterwards that $20 was very well spent...and I remembered it far longer than I would have any other use of that $20. Of course I admit that in addiction this may not be true anymore but never having experience it I can't judge.
The claim that
You are a genetic pattern, your purpose is to find out if you are good enough to keep on. is just utterly fallacious. This is the same line of reasoning which motivated social darwinism etc.. In fact if you took this to its reasonable conclusion you should murder possible genetic competitors if you can get away with it.
This is simply a basic logical flaw. We ARE a genetic pattern and our surivival WILL determine whether it gets passed on. This does not imply you SHOULD act in a way to maximize, or even avoid minimization, of your genetic survival. You can never derive ought from is.
In fact many drug addicts are quite good at perpetuating their genes. The fact that they are poor in no way stops them from having many children and I certainly would say they are achieving their purpose to a greater extent than celibrate priests are.
I agree the achievment of goals high SES etc.. are nice things. They are however not ends in and of themselves. We want to live in a nice house have a nice car etc.. not because we believe that the metaphysical existance of such a house is an essentially good thing. If the end of the world was upon us only a few psychotic individuals would go out trying to have a nice house and a big screen TV.
Rather TVs houses, and even children, are means to an end! This end is personally enjoyment. We want a house because it MAKES US FEEL GOOD to have a house. Even with children...most individuals have children because they WANT to have children not because they realize it will make them feel worse but do it anyway out of duty.
These are all means to an end...but they are inefficent means to this end. The amount of effort put into designing the newest electronic gadget is HUGE compared to the increase in people happiness from that gadget. Unfortunatly at the moment no short cuts are readily availible. Drug use at a high enough level to replace these sort of desieres almost always leads to more unhappiness in the end.
This does not mean it always has to be this way. At least with opiates it appears many of the problems are artificial. Opiates could be mass produced to be cheap as dirt and readily availible freely to anyone eliminating associated crime, withdrawal etc.. Whether this could really make individuals happier is what I was asking on this thread.
Of course if that doesn't work what we SHOULD do is take all that effort being put into designing the next cell phone or even alot of medical research and use it to develop drugs that will make everyone happy all the time without side effects.
 
In response to your edit.
First of all I don't know what you mean by pleasure is a fallacy. We are aware of pleasure through direct experience. What would it even mean for pleasure to be a fallacy? That I am somehow mistaken and what I thought was pleasure really isn't? That however simply can't happen because pleasure is, by definition, what I am feeling in those states which I call pleasure.
Now is it really only impressive and amazing because of what we lack in other areas of our lives? In the simplest sense no...succesfull powerful buisness men with friends money women etc.. all still use drugs and become addicted. As do rock stars etc.. etc.. If anything it appears success, in the way you want to define it, encourages rather than discourages drug use!
You might respond that these individuals, while outwardly succesfull, are somehow still lacking in pleasure..despite ready access to women sex etc. Yes, this may be true, and then in some sense I agree with your point. People would not in fact use drugs if they were perfectly content and happy without them.
This doesn't mean much however. People look for dates get jobs, play sports and do everything which they do because they are not at the moment perfectly pleasure full and content. As it seems wordly success does not necesserily bring the kind of pleasure you are talking about it is no longer an argument against drug use, i.e., you were arguing if you spent the time on your life you would be happier but this may not be the case.
Finally it is quite ironic that you bring up the example of sex. Theories have it that alot of the reason you feel good after sex is because of endrogenous opiate release. Feeling good after sex, or even during, is just as much a matter of nuerotransmitters as is shooting heroin. Though in this case your low level biological functions decide when you should get shot up rather than you.
 
It's simple - heroin doesn't cause brain damage...
I am 22, I have been a semi-heavy user for the last 3 years, I am able to keep it under control because I know when I am getting in to deep, it's then time to take a step back, take a break, then resume when it's safe... I am the same as any of you, I know respect the drug..
Heroin is adictive, thats simple - so, you must treat it like it's adictive .. when you stop doing it for the pleasure and do it to fight the sickiness, you need to take a break.. this my friends, it called WILLPOWER ...
The drug does not control you, for you control the drug - some people lose sight of that...
So take some fucking responsibility and known when to say when...
 
PhreeX-- Opiates cause brain damage. Any drug causes brain damage. It's that simple. Drugs are chemicals which don't belong in the brain in the quantities that they are introduced in. When you fuck around with the gears and levers, you fuck things up. Every time. That's a priori.
In any event, that's not the point. Brain damage from opiates is usually a result of an overdose. Subject's blood doesn't have enough oxygen, lack of oxygen causes brain cells to die. Any time you use heroin your breathing is somewhat suppressed, anytime your breathing is suppressed you are risking lack of oxygen in the brain...
This causes the problem that we can't look at users and decide if they have damage from use, or from overdose. Though, plenty of them have damage, and if you haven't seen the studies on that you haven't been looking. Selective attention? And what's the other phenomenon... we have a tendency to seek out information which confirms what we already believe... confirmation bias?
So, no, no studies can conclusively determine that all these heroin addicts with brain damage got their damage from overdose (temporary lack-of-oxygen), or from usage (making the brain work in ways it wasn't meant to work), but... I've made my prediction, you've made yours, the scientific community is smarter than both of us, says "Not yet determined...".
Now for a story. I used to derive a sick pleasure from holding my turn-signal lever at the point of no return so that it would go on and off rapidly. It broke. Moral of the story-- I knew why. It was a pain in the ass to fix, more tan just a fuse. If we operate things in ways they weren't intended to function, we risk damaging them. That's basic common sense we learned at age 5.
 
Top