Posted by Ame Sans Vie on September 21, 2003, at 2:20:45
In reply to You're taking way more than you think » Chawner, posted by utopizen on September 20, 2003, at 1:25:57
Chawner did say it was *crystal* meth he was using. Crystal meth from the streets has continuously been analyzed and found to contain between 97-99% methamphetamine HCl. Less than that and the meth wouldn't crystallize -- that's why crystal (or "ice", "glass", "crank", whatever you want to call it) is so much more expensive than powdered meth HCl. One hit off a pipe delivers a fairly large amount of pure drug to your brain all at once, and due to methamphetamine's finite rate of excretion, the effects of crystal meth can last (by some accounts) 24+ hours, though 8-16 hours seems more common. With crystal meth, provided that you *do* have an accurate scale, you *can* gauge the amount of drug you're taking in pretty accurately. And, if you'll reread his post, Chawner never did use the word 'euphoria', nor did he describe the effects as anything that I would personally equate with a full-on meth euphoria.
All of this taken into consideration, I think he knows what he's doing and I have no reason to believe, from that post, that he's using anything above the therapeutic dose (which you have to remember is approximately twice as high for racemic methamphetamine as it is for Desoxyn, since the levo isomer is, for all intents and purposes, psychologically inactive).
Be it clear, though, that I'm certainly not advocating the use of street drugs, especially not smoking meth. It's just that as a former polysubstance addict who knows many current and former junkies, crackheads, alcoholics etc etc, I really feel that feeding the anti-hard drug rhetoric to a speed freak is essentially preaching to the converted. Most of them aren't stupid, and many are actually quite well-versed in all aspects regarding their drug of choice. If that drug is cocaine, powder meth, ecstasy, heroin, PCP, ketamine, etc, they're normally quite aware that the product they're purchasing is probably cut at least 50%, or often 100%. A good number of them could probably even give you a good approximation of the drug:adulterant ratio in the material just by sampling it once. And true meth addicts can certainly tell if their junk contains anything other than meth, even if meth is present as well. It's like wine-tasting in a way, as utterly ridiculous as that sounds, lol... most of them could easily tell you if the product they have contains 4-methyl-aminorex, d-meth, l-meth, dl-meth, d-amp, l-amp, dl-amp, methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, ephedrine, caffeine, phenylephrine, or pseudoephedrine and even estimate the relative amounts of each. Most of us would have incredible difficulty discerning between phenylephrine and l-amp after just a single dose, lol.
If anything, I have to commend the guy for passing over the cheaper, more adulterated, more dangerous forms of meth available and sticking to the relatively pure stuff, lol.
poster:Ame Sans Vie
thread:261110
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030917/msgs/262104.html