antheads said:
wow you people are really into cutting your own throats..
this forum is obv meant for people who are into mantaining the status quo.
No, it's a harm reduction forum, which you seem to have forgotten. swilow's response to this statement said it all, and in fewer words than I could.
antheads said:
the proffesionals who send things to forensic labratories where the information is shared with LE
And just what "professionals" were you thinking of? In relation to the topic you allude to, 4 people directly involved in initiating the analysis were BLers, and one a chemical analyst. For me, the decision to get the wheels in motion was done purely on a personal level, no work-payment involvement whatsoever. This topic has been addressed previously, and you know well my position and views on what sparked the subsequent investigation. In reflection, I'd do it again without hesitation.
antheads said:
, the moderators that believe that people who deal illegal drugs should be shot, the people who condem attempts to provide alternatives as illegal before a legal precedent has been set, and the users, who due to certain individuals on this site accept the concept of drug prohibition and just ask questions about whats the best pill instead of actually fighting for alternatives Wake up, under the current laws everything is illegal.
I think I can speak for the moderators in saying your first statement is ridiculous and doesn't at all reflect the views of mods on this forum. I could be wrong, but I've never seen any such views indicated publicly on the board or privately via PM email etc.
I personally believe in reform, where drugs are regulated but available via pharmacists or similar outlets and the crimimal aspect of drugs is reserved only for serious (big money, etc) offences. You should know how I stand on this, as I've stated it often enough on and off this board.
I have no problems with the concept of suppliers of herbal or synthetic products. It's simply about labeling, and thereby enabling users who care about their health or possible legal ramifications, to make an informed decision.
I support full labeling on everything, from garden products, to food, to health supplements to drugs, so don't think I'm singling out such suppliers. I've previously written letters to companies and the FSANZ recommending we do away with the approved additive number system currently used in this country. I want to know before I buy what colourings preservatives etc, are in a product. I want to see sodium benzoate listed, not preservative 211. And while I, like many, have memorised some of these codes, new preservatives and other additives are constantly being introduced.
Still these industries at least usually still have to provide some true indication of what's in their products - coca cola perhaps being an exception. So, if you're a concerned consumer, in most cases you can always look the number up.
Which is more than I can say about some current suppliers of herbal and 'alternative' drugs. At present there seems to be an effort to completely mislead customers by listing ingredients which aren't present, and claiming it's an accurate description of contents. Anyone who can't see the wrong in that obviously doesn't care too much for people who do, but from a HR perspective, that sort of notion is totally unacceptable. So perhaps those who disagree on the importance of disclosure should limit themselves to websites which operate with a viel of secrecy, or who encourage or promote the unethical, potentially dangerous exploitation of the profit maker's customers.
antheads said:
Can you back up your statement?
I personally spoke with the shop attendant in Brisbane. Without me initially mentioning anything to do with cathinones or Israel or Neos, he said "we had some great caps around xmas...the stuff came from Israel....it really worked and was very popular..." From his description of the effects, there was no doubt in my mind what these substances most likely were. Now you can believe what you want. My two non-bluelighters friends who were also present will not be asked to back up my comments here.
antheads said:
and as the moderator of drugs-forum pointed out, perhaps if you are into harm reduction you should be examining the secret addictive ingredient in coca cola...
Mr Blonde said:
^ The secret addictive ingredient in Coca-Cola would be?
Merchandise 7X
It's has long been rumoured to be a coca derived flavouring, but without the cocaine of course. This notion was given some credence around 3 years ago in a story that appeared on the BL front page;
Does Coke Make It Real?
In January 2005, Nils Ericsson, president of the National Commission for Life and Development Without Drugs (DEVIDA), issued a 10-point statement intended to clarify the country’s position on the commercialization and industrialization of the coca leaf—a contentious issue in a country where more than a million farmers make their living off the plant. In point No. 5, Ericsson wrote: “Coca-Cola, the globally recognized soft drink manufacturer, buys 115 tonnes of coca leaf from Peru and 105 tonnes from Bolivia per year, with which it produces, without alkaloids, 500 million bottles of soda per day.”
I also reasd somewhere that coca cola attempted to produce the brown drink without the coca flavouring. That was supposidly in the seventies, when they lost a massive market share to Pepsi.
While the above claims don't prove coca extract is used, the fact that a particular company happens to make the mysterious ingredient adds a bit of weight
From Wiki:
To this day, Coca-Cola uses as an ingredient a coca leaf extract prepared by a
Stepan Company plant in Maywood, New Jersey, using a process monitored by the Drug Enforcement Administration.[2][3] Because cocaine is naturally present in coca leaves, today's Coca-Cola uses "spent", or treated, coca leaves, those that have been through a cocaine extraction process, to flavor the beverage. Some contend that this process cannot extract all of the cocaine alkaloids at a molecular level, and so the drink still contains trace amounts of the stimulant.[4][5] The Coca-Cola Company currently refuses to comment on the continued presence of coca leaf in Coca-Cola.[6] [7]
Click on the link above and you'll see Stepan Company also have a plant in Brazil. Coincidence? Quite possibly, but as this production facility produces sulphates and sulponates, it's likely all required chems for initial processing of coca would be part of it's standard inventory.
antheads said:
and as the moderator of drugs-forum pointed out, perhaps if you are into harm reduction you should be examining......the thousands of adverse reactions of legal perscription medicince as well????
What can I say? I'd like to be able to spend more time for nothing exposing such companies, but I'm already involved in HR and have been for nearly 10 years, with much of that time given for nothing. In fact, many of these adverse reactions you speak of
are documented or at least are as they emerge. However, if you know of some available funding for doing independent research in this area, let me know and I'll consider another career change.
antheads, your present comments, like many of those in your past posts, indicate you have a serious problem with providing fundamental HR information. You seem to think a better world would be one where hospital admissions increased, long term illness resulted, or death by OD became more common, just so long as formula X isn't revealed. Well buddy, I work on the front line, dealing with adverse reactions to drugs, so from my perspective knowing what's been taken is paramount.
It is sad to hear shops are being raided, but whether or not things are discussed here and elsewhere, with our present laws, these things are going to happen regardless. How often are HHH products picked up by cops during drug raids or searches? IMO it wouldn't take long for some drug department to inquire further into what's in these products, particularly as these are being sold at a retail level. We seem to forget the vast resources and money thrown at investigating drug related crime. Once upon a time maybe one or two officers would look at this site occasionally. Today it's more likely people are assigned specifically to wade through internet chat rooms and forums looking for clues on changing trends. I know of other departments that have used and quoted from this site on many occasions. I've also been informed that customs and related departments have little to no idea what drugs are coming in apart from the common coke, H, meth and E related stuff. So it makes perfect sense that these departments would search for any anything that might get them up to speed.
The future will get worse IMO, and as swillow mentioned, HR related info is about all we are really permitted to disseminate or discuss today. What also needs to be emphasised is that without HR related discussion, authorities and statisticians would be largely in the dark, and emergency personnel equally so.
Up until recently, this monitoring of BL has had fairly benign outcomes for Bluelighters, but at some point in all this it must be seen that there's a fine line between authorities accepting such discussions but not increasing consequential outcomes, and abusing this resource, which would eventually see it move underground. What I'm saying is, if forums like BL were to disappear or become secretive, authorities would be largely ignorant of any local new trend, but then again, from a HR perspective, so would those users most in need. Those who wouldn't hear of, or be accepted by these secretive forums. BL is a resource to most who come here, the value of which may be only really fully appreciated by authorities if it were to vanish into the clandestine sea of web whispers.
nabollocks said:
The lady at the shop was very cautious about mixing different herbs, and even suggested that I should not try any of her caffeine based stimulants due to the fact that I am a nervous person.
That is harm reduction right there.
That's a very responsible approach, and may now be standard sales practice with this company. But it's not always been the case. Our HR group has seen a potentially dangerous incident with someone who had previously had an allergic response to caffeine. The person was sold the product with no warnings and wasn't aware it contained a high level of caffeine, and she suffered a rather concerning reaction. Interestingly, her said reason for taking the HHH product over an illicit drug was she thought it would be the safer option. Another reason why good labeling and conscientious salespeople are a must.