Coke Based Pills

Hey guys....

Recently i have heard a few dealers throwing around the phase "these are coke based pills". They then go onto explain they cost alot more but they are also far better then mdma pills. Now i know they are talking shit, but it did get me thinking. Are there such pills? In pillreports i have never seen any one put "coke" as there pills suspected contents.


Now when i say coke pills i'm not talking in trace amounts. I mean pills with coke as there main active ingredient.

Im fairly sure the answer is no.


But i thought id ask any way.


Thanks Guys

It's a myth... They'd cost a fortune because you need a huge dose of cocaine for it to be orally active. Those "coke based" pill are almost certainly just plain old speed pills.

^ What he said. End of story. Spread the word - there's no such thing as heroin OR coke in pills. And sabator: good work on detecting the bullshit!

sabator_84 said:

i have heard a few dealers throwing around the phase "these are coke based pills".

Click to expand...

Get a new dealer ASAP...

Just curious, why is there no such thing as heroin pills? Well, what I mean is, heroin in ecstacy pills. I don't believe it myself but i've heard a few things about H in pills, eg. Beige A's. So does it have no effect taken orally or needs a greater dose(too much to fit in a pill)?

I realise there's no real point to putting heroin in pills due to the pricing of the two different drugs and if it gave effect the effect would be very noticably non-MDMA like and definetely not energetic.

I don't believe people put heroin in pills and certainly hope not!

i hear this all the time.. for yrs too... and really i cant answer it anymore cause i just go off my brain at ppl who ask if a pill is cokey or smacky...

Fact is if u dont know wat MDMA feels like then stop taking drugz or LEARN about the effects etc. I refer to ppl saying SMACKY , i assume they want the MDMA feeling as this could be mistaken for a down state when peaking.
Then theres COKEY omg , if they WANT speed bombs sure here ya go 35 bucks plz , thats all the dealers are doin , ripping the dumbasses off.
U cannot put COKE in pills for 1 they have to be binded to even stay together meaning u have to add other agents so the coke would only be miniscule, be that if any ever were EVER made. I also agree and know it just isnt Viable for dealers to put coke in a pill without a market of the drug in past or being that is just costs TO much to make.
Oh and Seef any1 would put heroin as a pill , WONT happen!!!! for starters u wont want a supplier to have a bad name for selling pills that could , have , do fuck ppl up , thats all heroin does. Not to mention the exact same reason as above why they dont put H in a round form and say this pill is smacky pill.

What i guess im sayin is DONT ASK STUPID QUESTIONS and ask constuctive things like "are these pills MDMA or similiar substance " or "I just want a speedbomb to keep me dancing around all night" .

Just remember its all about the benjamins!$$$
And as we all know dodgy pills dont go far these days and they wont make nothing but a bad rep.

Simply put, there's realistically speaking no heroin or coke intentionally put into pills because it is totally uneconomical to do so. Perhaps in some places of the world where these drugs are cheaper, such practices may go on, but it would be (and has been) very rare for H or C pills to be found in Australia.

And for those few older reports which have stated heroin or cocaine was found in pills, unless quantities are listed on the report, then it is quite probable these compounds are only present in trace amounts, possibly transferred by handling or placing in a bag previously containing H or C.

Some pills seem "smacky" because a strong dose of MDMA can sit you on your arse!!

I remember first hearing this coke based pills thing in Byron some years ago. Although everyone living around that area at the time might have consider themselves a drug expert, I tracked and traced where this had originated from and purposely gave shit big time to those who had spread (and believed) such bullshit. Many were the drug Guru's of their scenes. A couple of "big shots" despised me and the chemical revelations I brought as it ruined a few reputations.

Just when I thought it was all over, then came the "coke based acid" 8)
No wonder there's shit drugs around. If the name sounds right, uneducated users just seem to lap em up

This type of question has been raised here many times. Use the search engine.

I know there is never any Heroin in Pills sold as E.

I did hear one thing years ago and someone here maybe able to make it clear for me.
I think I heard this on the youth network radio of Australia, that if Heroin is taken orally that it will turn into morphine in the gut....

Any truth in this?

^ Yes, although some is destroyed some will also be metabolised to morphine.

When I was in london 8 years ago, they had these gelcaps which were called "Rhubarb and Custard" which was half speed + half heroin. Tried one and I was just speeding off my titties!? Just wonder if the name "Rhubarb and Custard" got mixed up with the word "smacky pills", just a thought!?...

There used to be a great FAQ about this called the bullshit myth about heroin and coke in pills, but some smart type thought we didnt need it anymore 8)

cocaine active oral dose?

This post discusses if it is possible for cocaine to be orally active in the weight available when in tablet form. I must stress that cocaine is never regularly used as an adulterant.

I am sure most of us have read on Bluelight before that cocaine is not orally active in sizes that would fit in a pill. According to Dance Safe test data pills are usually around 250mg - 300mg in weight, so with 50% in weight of binders needed that would leave 125mg - 150mg of available weight for active content unless the pill was made larger.

Disregarding the economic viability of cocaine in tablet form and used as an adulterant, is it possible that cocaine is orally active at the 150mg range? I cannot find a paper which lists a comparison in efficiency on cocaine administration routes, but is it possible if we are able to match the mg/L peak plasma levels of different routes with different dosage we will be able to find an equivalency? (drplatypus?)

Searching on this revealed this source which references a few papers. Here is an extract of the applicable information:

Following intranasal administration of 106 mg, peak plasma concentrations of cocaine averaged 0.22 mg/L at 30 minutes, while benzoylecgonine concentrations averaged 0.61 mg/L at 3 hours. Oral administration of 140 mg/70 kg cocaine resulted in peak plasma concentrations averaging 0.21 mg/L of cocaine at 1 hour. Single 32 mg intravenous doses of cocaine produced an average peak plasma concentration of 0.31 mg/L of cocaine within 5 minutes. Smoking 50 mg of cocaine base resulted in peak plasma cocaine concentrations averaging 0.23 mg/L at ~ 45 minutes and 0.15 mg/L of benzoylecgonine at 1.5 hours.

Click to expand...

I could be completely off here but my interpretation of this data is that a 106mg intranasal dose achieved a peak plasma level average of 0.22 mg/L over 30 minutes while a dose of 140mg achieved peak plasma level average of 0.21 mg/L after 1 hour. Does this suggest that it is possible for an oral dose of cocaine that could fit within a standard pill size has a similar affect as an intranasal dose that is 32% less? My conclusions seem incorrect as this paper abstract suggests:

Science. 1978 Apr 14;200(4338):211-3. Related Articles, Links

Oral cocaine: plasma concentrations and central effects.

Van Dyke C, Jatlow P, Ungerer J, Barash PG, Byck R.

Cocaine (2.0 milligrams per kilogram) given by the oral route is at least as effective as the same dose given intranasally. Cocaine is not detected in the plasma until 30 minutes after oral administration, but peak plasma concentrations are similar after both routes. The subjective "highs" in man are greater after oral than after intranasal administration.

PMID: 24895 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Click to expand...

Wow, the world isn't flat after all! It seems that is very possible that a pill could contain an active oral dose of cocaine, as long as it was 140mg or higher (2.0mg/kg). Without having a full copy of the paper the results are somewhat limited, but it also mentions that oral administration of cocaine at that dose is at least as active as intranasally!

Any further discussion of active levels of cocaine orally would be appreciated.

edit: reviewing further literature, it seems an orally active dose can be as low as 50mg, will post more later.

Hmmm... very interesting Cowbay Mac. Can't say I like the sound of that though, I don't want coke in my pills so it probably be a better thing if the manufacturers didn't know coke was active at such a low dose.

Who would want to eat a pill every 20-30minutes

I think this is also a significant reason for not putting coke in pills

ive been hearing about these "coke" pills and the people taking them staying up for 3 days... also i was brown/beige tridents a couple of months ago and this chick was so positive that they where heroin.

Well....... coke only keeps you high for a VERY short time...
2ndly, the chick is an idiot...

Good stuff as usual Mac

I would suggest effects from oral absorption would be present to some degree whenever coke is insufflated. If several lines were had over a short time, it makes sense that some will be swallowed. Delay in the absorbsion of this mucous coated coke would mean it would take longer to enter the bloodstream, and probably accounts for the delayed peak described by some hardcore users.


When speaking of 140mg being an active amount orally, besides the metabolism occuring during this absorption, one also has to consider the period of absorption, possibly extended by various tablet formulations (compare come on time with powdered MDMA to a typical tablet). Due to this, I would suggest that 140mg of coke in a tablet may not equate to much of a peak at all for most users ( at least for what's expected with a typical pill) . Even if this is reduced to 50mg being an active amount, I doubt 140mg taken in one hit would entertain for long.

Therefore it comes back again to economics and market sense. If a dodgy pill costs up to 1/7 the price of a gram of pure coke - coke which would quickly sell in a market when sold under it's own description - and the pill was a short "speedy" effect only some noticed; it would seem to be a fruitless venture for all involved. However, as is stated frequently on this board; it's all about who you know. If the owners of such a product knew of nobody but a presser, then options may be that limited.

Realistically though, "gold" is never usually sold as silver.

Oh dont know if someone mentioned this but , You cannot feel Cocaine if u Swallow it whole ? nor H ? i think this is correct. so saying that eating a so called "Coke" pill is nothing more then a waste of time .. Unless of course u think ur smart and Snort it or use IV. anyway enough said, well done to the MODs again for their info ... Now we know why uz get mod stat cheeers

Just to add a human perspective. I have, on several occations, for medical reasons (My nose gives my hell at certain times of the year) and just for interests sake, taken cocaine orally. Australian cocaine is generally speaking "cut to shit", but I found myself consuming close to a half weight of it to produce a buzz, which is significantly more than I would ever snort in one line (I might take a point of powder in a line). The buzz I got was like a light intra-nasal dose, which lasted for somewhat longer than an intra nasal dose does. It would in my opinion be very difficult (impossible?) to notice this type of buzz if any other active substances were present in the pill. Or for that matter if any other substances had been consumed at all.

dEciPlE said:

Oh dont know if someone mentioned this but , You cannot feel Cocaine if u Swallow it whole ?

Click to expand...

From the studies it seems cocaine is orally active, and according to Van Dyke C, Jatlow P, Ungerer J, Barash PG, Byck R. "Oral cocaine: plasma concentrations and central effects" at 2.0mg/kg it is at least effective as the same dose administered intranasally.

An abstract from this paper suggests it may not be the case:

While most addicts take cocaine intranasally, a considerable number abuse cocaine by mouth. It has been assumed that after oral exposure cocaine is hydrolyzed in the stomach rendering it ineffective. This study investigated the effect of orally administered cocaine on liver function and integrity as well as its effect on liver and blood antioxidative enzymes.

Click to expand...

I will try to find the full text of this paper at a later date, because we need to review the conclusions of the study. If anyone has access to it please post it up.

Following on from the hydrolysation theory this source suggests:

Because cocaine is hydrolyzed (rendered inactive) in the acidic stomach, it is not readily absorbed. Only when mixed with a highly alkaline substance (such as lime) can it be absorbed into the bloodstream through the stomach. Wilkinson et al., supra note 24; Van Dyke et al., supra note 2. Absorption of orally administered cocaine is limited by two additional factors. First, the drug is partly metabolized in the liver. Second, capillaries in the mouth and esophagus constrict after contact with the drug, reducing the surface area over which the drug can be absorbed. Id.

Click to expand...

This conflicts with other papers which have results suggesting cocaine is orally active:

Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2000 Jul;150(4):361-73. Related Articles, Links

Modulation of intravenous cocaine effects by chronic oral cocaine in humans.

Walsh SL, Haberny KA, Bigelow GE.

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21224-6823, USA.

RATIONALE: Agonist therapies have proven effective for the treatment of substance dependence disorders; limited data is available on their feasibility for treating cocaine dependence. OBJECTIVES: This laboratory study was designed to test the safety and utility of employing an agonist substitution therapy for the treatment of cocaine dependence in humans. METHODS: Oral cocaine served as the agonist treatment and was administered chronically over a range of doses to volunteers with cocaine abuse histories (n=8). Oral capsules were administered daily under blind conditions (q.i.d.) during this 5-week inpatient study using a dose-rising sequence (0 mg 10 days: 25 mg 3 days, 50 mg 4 days, 100 mg 10 days, 0 mg 7 days). During each of these oral dosing periods, an i.v. cocaine challenge (0, 25, and 50 mg, 1 h apart) was administered at least once. Physiological, subjective and pharmacokinetic measures were collected before and after i.v. drug administration; additional measures were collected daily. RESULTS: Oral cocaine produced no subjective effects or signs of toxicity but produced dose-related physiological effects*. Significant interactions between oral and i.v. cocaine were observed; cocaine (100 mg, p.o.) significantly decreased responses to the 25-mg but not the 50-mg dose of i.v. cocaine for heart rate, mydriasis, and some subjective measures. There was no evidence of significant additive effects, although heart rate responses to i.v. cocaine were exaggerated during the final wash-out period. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that treatment with a cocaine "agonist" - in this case oral cocaine - can modestly attenuate the subjective and physiological responses to cocaine in humans under conditions that are safely tolerated.

Publication Types:

Clinical Trial

PMID: 10958077 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
*emphasis added myself

Click to expand...

This study attempted to train participants to discriminate between a placebo and a 50mg oral cocaine dose. From the results it seems a 50mg oral does is threashold, and so low that many would not be able to discern any difference.

Behav Pharmacol. 1999 Sep;10(5):531-42. Related Articles, Links

Low-dose oral cocaine in humans: acquisition of discrimination and time-course of effects.

Epstein DH, Silverman K, Henningfield JE, Preston KL.

NIH, NIDA Intramural Research Program, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Seven cocaine-abusing volunteers were trained to discriminate 50 mg oral cocaine vs placebo across 50 2-h sessions. Discriminative, subjective and autonomic effects were assessed with a procedure developed for precise characterization of their acute time-course. Subjective effects of oral cocaine began 10-15 min post-drug, peaked at 40-50 min and took up to 100 min post-drug to return nearly to baseline. Autonomic effects also began 10-15 min post-drug, peaked at 40-50 min and typically returned to baseline by 120 min post-drug; for most participants, peak heart rate and blood pressure remained within the range seen with placebo. Six out of seven participants acquired the discrimination (although this typically required 15-30 sessions, and there were some intriguing dissociations between the ability to discriminate oral cocaine from placebo and the ability to identify it as a stimulant). In most participants, oral cocaine produced increases in ratings of 'liking', 'alertness' and 'good effects', and in motor performance. Overall, the results support the sensitivity of the behavioral-testing procedure used, and show that 50 mg oral cocaine can serve as a discriminative stimulus in adult humans.

Publication Types:

Clinical Trial

PMID: 10780259 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Click to expand...

Further investigation of the literature detailing cocaine pharmacokinetics via oral administration in humans is required.

Here are some other papers which contain more information:

Elimination of cocaine and metabolites in plasma, saliva, and urine following repeated oral administration to human volunteers.
Cocaine pharmacodynamics after intravenous and oral administration in rats: relation to pharmacokinetics.
Cocaine and metabolite concentrations in plasma during repeated oral administration: development of a human laboratory model of chronic cocaine use.