• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • 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

Whats the real difference between METH & AMPH?

C

C@NDYMAN

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 19, 2001
Messages
275
Location
Netherlands
is it some harder type of amphetamine? or just one that works different?
look i don't know that much about meth coz we dont have it in Holland.
 
the main difference is euphoria.
as for it ont being available in europe my guess is thats its do densly populated, not everyone can go out in the country to gas their shit....i dunno ive never been to europe but thats my guess.
 
Hey,
A few questions :)
1. The extra precursors for meth, are they quite expensive?
2. Is it alot more work to make meth than amph?
Without knowing those answers, I figure the reason would be price.
Streetprice for a gram of amph here in denmark is 200 danish kroner ~24 US$. If I was to start selling meth, how would I get anyone to pay more, when people don't even know what meth is here?
Remember known drugs sell easier, people what what they are getting - else they fear getting ripped off.
Your argument might be "but meth is much better, and worth the extra money" - but the amph is still cut with other things, and people still buy it.
I need to try meth sometime, but trust me I have asked around for it - not to be found :(
 
You dont have to go out to the country to gas your product. LOtsa MD** drugs are produced in Europe. That shit has to crystalized also...either by gassing or an alternative.
Meth sells itself. All you have to do is turn somone onto it. They wont wanna go back to amphetamine if meth is an option. And it's well worth the extra money.
The precursors are practically free when you consider how much profit is actually made.
 
It is an absolute mystery to many why there is not more meth (or any, really) outside of the US. I wish I could tell you more, but I can't.
As for meth vs amph -- well, meth is significantly more euphoric/more like rolling, and also has fewer side effects. It is a step up on the spectrum:
caffeine -- ritalin -- coke -- adderall/dexedrine/amphetamine -- meth
 
It just boggles the mind... it really does... of course $2 for a gram of amphetamine is a good deal - in the states us Yank's sell a gram of methamphetamine for a minimum of $50 but usually for around $100 .. as for it's production - the precursors are no more difficult to get if you're a large scale lab - you simply reduce PPA instead of EPH..
 
Streetprice for a gram of amph here in denmark is 200 danish kroner ~24 US$. If I was to start selling meth, how would I get anyone to pay more, when people don't even know what meth is here?
You wouldn't have to get anyone to pay anymore. But instead of selling someone a gram of whizz for $24, you can sell them a quarter gram of meth mixed with 3/4 of a gram of inert substance for $24. And it'll still be better than the stuff they usually get.
Click to expand...
 
When a bunch of addicts in Sweden had legal stuff to choose from in the sixties, they almost always wanted phenmetrazine(Preludin) and methylphenidate (Ritalin) rather than meth (Methedrin). I am only talking about intravenous use now, as you really can't feel the true euphoria without that. Nothing can be compared to the Preludin buzz, people used to say. Of course meth is stronger but they solved that by taking bigger doses of the first two drugs.
Ordinary amphetamine sulphate (l + d) was considered far less euphoric than Preludin. People injected themselves with different sorts of speed (l-amphetamine, d-amphetamin, methylampetamine etc) from 1946 onwards but it wasn't until Preludin hit the market around 1957-58 than Sweden's amphetamine addiction really jumped up. But perhaps the methamphetamine that was available then (Methedrin)was inferior (as it wasn't pure dextro-methylamphetamine as I believe is the case in U.S nowadays).
I believe too, that people used to complain that Methedrin made the users more neurologically damaged, then the rest of the uppers. It had a reputation of driving people mad, while Preludin and Ritalin had the reputation of sex-drugs - but only intravenously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top