Lol, Roflcopter (for high-grade Pharmaceutical Stuff)
Somebody still in need for a discussion?
Morphine may Encourage Cancer Growth
Although morphine has been the goldstandard treatment for postoperative and chronic cancer pain for two centuries, a growing body of evidence is showing that opiate-based painkillers can stimulate the growth and spread of cancer cells. Two new studies advance that argument and demonstrate how shielding lung cancer cells from opiates reduces cell proliferation, invasion, and migration in both cellculture and mouse models.
The reports-presented Nov. 18, 2009, at "Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics," a joint meeting in Boston of the American Association for Cancer Research, the National Cancer Institute, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-highlight the mu opiate receptor, where morphine works, as a potential therapeutic target.
"If confirmed clinically, this could change how we do surgical anesthesia for our cancer patients," said Patrick Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center and principal author of both studies. "It also suggests potential new applications for this novel class of drugs which should be explored."
The proposition that opiates influence cancer recurrence, prompted by several unrelated clinical and laboratory studies, has gradually gained support. It started with a 2002 palliative-care trial in which patients who received spinal rather than systemic pain relief survived longer. Soon after that, Singleton's colleague, anesthesiologist Jonathan Moss, noticed that several cancer patients receiving a selective opiate blocker in a compassionate-use protocol lived longer than expected. Two recent retrospective studies found that breast and prostate cancer patients who received regional rather than general anesthesia had fewer recurrences. In February 2009, the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation highlighted the issue.
There is certainly something in the argument: SWIM has certainly read drug literature saying that it is possible for a person to live their entire lives addicted to or at least taking opiates and suffer few ill-consequences. They are usually, I gather, referring to the possibility of a person taking 'pure' opiates, so methadone would certainly count, or possibly other prescription opiates such as morphine, oxycodone, etc ...
The problem with heroin of course is that it is rarely pured and the user never knows what other crap they are putting in their body.
Of course the risk of sudden death is an issue with heroin too: tell the grieving mother of a son/daughter found dead with a needle sticking out of their arm that heroin is safer that alcohol and/or cannabis or cocaine or any other drug for that matter and I think they will have something to say!
Then again of course the risks of overdose and disease and many other health complications associated with heroin can be reduced simply depending on the route of administration. SWIM has regularly used heroin for three years: at first she smoked the heroin on foil and then switched to snorting the drug. She has rarely felt to have put herself in danger of overdose when using the drug because she is not injecting the drug straight into her veins and by snorting tends to use a smaller amount of the drug (than she would if injecting it) in one go: she just uses more often ...
SWIM is also a recreational user of morphine and has often said despite her desire to stop using heroin and crack-cocaine (her main addictions), she could never imagine a life where she never used morphine again. She often argues that this would be acceptable if she could manage a little more self-control/restraint and limit herself to occasional use of the drug. The pro's of only using morphine recreationally are undoubtedly that she would know for certain what she is putting in her body and could therefore monitor and know the exact amount of the drug she was using.
However, she also knows not to be too taken in by the idea of lifelong use of morphine with no physical consequences: in theory it is true that a person could perhaps use 60mg a day of a prescription painkiller or take 50mg or more of methadone a day and suffer no or few negative effects but SWIM's use although occasional would consist of quite large quantities of the drug (between 450mg and 600mg is her preferred optimum dose for recreational purposes), taken with or after alcohol (it boosts the high for SWIM). Whenever alcohol is combined with a drug there seems to be the potential for organ damage and also high levels of a drug increases the chance of damage, even if use is 'occasional'.
So basically an addict who uses opiates/opioids for maintenance practises can quite possibly use over their lifetime without damaging themselves and if this is a criterion for calling opiates a 'safer' drug then possibly it could be argued.
If we're talking about a heavy-user of heroin or opiates taking high doses of the drug and possibly using unsafe methods to administer the drug or even a part-time user but one who uses high doses for recreational means (possibly in conjunction with alcohol or other drugs) then the relative 'safeness' of the drug is much less ... In theory heroin as an opiate could easily be argued to be a 'safe' drug but in practise there are so many other factors to be taken into consideration (ie overdose, impurity including the risk of the product being cut with a dangerous substance, damage done by the choice of 'route of administration' including damage done from needles such as veins collapsing, ulceration of injection points, infection, missing veins, etc, risk of diseases spread through shared use of needles/paraphanalia, health problems from smoking heroin on foil: lung problems, lifestyle choices and situations such as poor housing or homelessness, other addictions or use of substances, etc).
Academic research which forms the basis for theories to be constructed is often based on statistical and purely scientific evidence which can be analysed whereas practical/empirical evidence often paints a different picture with outcomes varying greatly on a case by case basis ....
a straightforward example SWIM could use would be a comparison of her and 3 of her friends/fellow users:
SWIM has used crack-cocaine since the age of 21, smoking it on a home-made pipe, she has also used prescription painkillers in the form of morphine regularly over a 3 year period, taking these orally, she has used heroin regularly for 3 years also, snorting the drug. She uses most days and would estimate her use at anywhere between £100 and £200 a day on crack-cocaine and between £40 and £80 a day on heroin. She does though have stable and good quality accomodation, including electricity and gas central heating and is in a stable relationship.
Person no. 2 - SWIM's friend - is just 23 years old but has also used drugs for 10 years, since 13 years of age. She began using heroin though and 3 years ago began using crack-cocaine. She injects heroin and smokes crack on a Martell bottle. She uses about £30 of crack a day and between £40 and £60 of heroin a day. She injects in her arm (her veins are all intact so far), sometimes speedballs (ie takes crack and heroin together intravenously), but likes a pipe of crack too sometimes. She has stable accomodation but has no heating or hot water in her flat. In the past this friend has turned to prostitution to fund her habit but at time of writing is in a stable relationship with partner funding her habit.
Person 3 - SWIM's friend is the male partner of person 2. He has used heroin for 20 years and crack for about 10. He injects heroin and has started injecting in his groin due to ease of administration and lack of other places to inject caused by collapsed veins. He uses about £30 or £40 worth of crack a day and between £40 and £70 worth of heroin a day. He speedballs every time he injects (crack and heroin together). He currently has stable accomodation and is in a stable relationship but he has lived on the streets for prolonged periods in the past.
Person 4 - SWIM's friend is a regular heroin and crack-user, using both drugs for about 8 years. This person used to inject but now smokes heroin on the foil. He uses between £50 and £70 worth of heroin a day and between £20 and £50 of crack a day (crack smoked on a Martell bottle). He is also an alcoholic and drinks between 4 and 8 cans of strong cider every day. He has no permanent accomodation and although usually crashes at friends' houses he has spent prolonged periods homeless on the streets.
If you take these 4 people their health risks of using heroin vary greatly: one chases on foil, one snorts, and two inject (one speedballing everytime and one occasionally speedballing) heroin ... the chances of o/d'ing are supposed to be least for the one who smokes/chases, snorting is the 2nd least harmful and injecting carries the most risk, with speedballing carrying an even greater risk. So straight off the implications for these 4 people vary as a result of their preferred route of administration ... then again the one who smokes on the foil has a very nasty, permanent cough as a result of his use of the foil ... and also to consider is the amounts used: although injecting the drug, the two friends that do happen to use less of the drug on a daily basis: so this must be taken into account, right??
And of course they all use other drugs, which makes a difference: all use crack-cocaine but in differing amounts (SWIM uses 2 or 3 times as much as the others) and taken in different ways ... person 4 is an alcoholic too and regular drink will have additional risks/health implications ... lifestyle again is an important factor: periods of homelessness must surely take their toll ... and means of funding an addiction is yet another concern (prostitution carries further risks of contracting disease for example) ...
Basically, SWIM's point is that there are so many factors to consider in any one case ... it's easy to say heroin is less risky than alcohol for example but you have to take into account the amount the person is using, what other substances they may also be using, purity of substance and route of administration ...
Although there are certainly ways of comparing and contrasting different drugs that will enable one to conclude which is most/least harmful, SWIM would argue the subject matter requires qualitative and empirical evidence to get a realistic outcome: only a person who has used a specific substance can say to what extent it has damaged or improved their lifestyle/health and different people will have totally different ideas and experiences of the same drugs. A drug that totally takes over and wrecks one person's life might be a brilliant recreational drug for another user, who has only positives to report. Who is right? Nobody can say.
This is partly true. The real truth is that the side effect of addiction IN A SOCIETY WHERE HEROIN IS ILLEGAL AND THEREFOR COSTS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN OTHER DRUGS WHICH ARE MUCH MORE DEADLY (alcohol and tobacco). A 'heavy' alcohol or cigarette user needs $10 per day to support their habit (and since alcohol and cigs are both legal, and therefore MUCH less expensive than they otherwise would be if they were illegal and people had to worry about getting felony possession charges on them for possessing a nip or a cig but) since they are cheap, because they are legal, people even share these drugs with each other for FREE!!!!
If a heavily addicted heroin addict only needed to spend $10/day to support their heavy addiction, "the side effect of addiction alone causes more enough damage to give heroin the bad rep it receives." would NOT EXIST. The side effect from addiction is because it is a side effect of being addicted in a society where it is prohibited, it's not the drug itself. It's running ragged to try to sustain a habit that costs more than you can afford. If a gram of dope cost $5.00 people wouldn't be missing meals to get dope, they wouldn't be using dirty needles (heck, they could trade $1.00 worth of heroin for a several of them lol, or even trade a gram for them, I sure as heck would have plenty of needles, I already do and I rarely boot it. People wouldn't rob or prostitute themselves to get it anymore than alcohol or cigarette addicts rob or prostitute to get THOSE drugs.
Do be fooled by the man. It's not Heroin that is dangerous, it's PROHIBITION. Prohibition puts H on the street that is impure and of different %'s of purity, subjecting users to a higher instance of injecting sludge in their veins, or subjecting them to varying purity, increasing the chance of an OD.
It's not Heroin that makes people rob, it's PROHIBITION. After all, if it were free people wouldn't 'rob' because 'heroin makes them'. They rob because Prohibition makes the cost unreasonably high. They prostitute and spread aids because of prohibition too. They abandon their kids to hook all night because of prohibition, heroin doesn't make them do that. If it were free they certainly wouldn't, and if it were 10 bucks a day they sure as hell wouldn't either!
I need to say something about the price of "legal Heroin",
even when it come very cheap, like mentioned above 5 USD/Euro a gram.
some People will miss their daily Food,
this is something everyone who worked with Alcohol Addicts will confirm!
Look, we know the Prices from the daily Heroin Program:
Quote:
- High cost – IOT is considerably more expensive than oral methadone treatment. The main additional costs are medication-related (e.g. approximate medication costs alone (without VAT) for oral methadone (100 mg/day) are less than £500 per year, £1500 per year for injectable methadone (100 mg/day), and £6500 per year using injectable diamorphine (400 mg/day) licensed in the UK [18]; with additional costs involved in dispensing and supervision. In a London trial comparing supervised injectable to oral methadone treatment, injectable treatment was found to be 4 to 5 times more expensive to deliver [19]. Given the increasing resource pressures placed upon health services, and without evidence of its cost-effectiveness over conventional treatment, IOT may be seen by many funding bodies as an unaffordable 'luxury'.
I really doubt the the majority of the People "outside" can spend this amount without saving/ cutting away
something they normally need in their daily Life!
I need to say something about the price of "legal Heroin",
even when it come very cheap, like mentioned above 5 USD/Euro a gram.
some People will miss their daily Food,
this is something everyone who worked with Alcohol Addicts will confirm!
A small minority. When it comes to numbers, an insignificant minority. A child in the usa will sniff glue if it is not immediately removed from the earth... so we better remove it from the earth?
My assertion remains: The vast majority of 'problems' associated with heroin addiction are in fact the result of prohibition.
There are probably a few chicks who have prostituted themselves for 1/2 pint of vodka too.... but to associate vodka addiction leading to prostitution is ridiculous... just like it would be ridiculous to associate heroin addiction as leading to prostitution if a days use were the price of a pack of smokes.
Titus added 7 Minutes and 15 Seconds later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spucky
Lol, Roflcopter (for high-grade Pharmaceutical Stuff)
Somebody still in need for a discussion?
Morphine may Encourage Cancer Growth
Somebody need discussion about what? I'm avoiding the which is worse for you pot or dope but am asserting dope is not bad for you.
I wonder how long the list is of things that MAY encourage cancer growth lmao
What are you trying to say, that many widely accepted as safe treatments have potential negative consequences? Something else?
Heroin is not dangerous to the human body. It's just not. And if it were legal and therefore affordable people wouldn't run the streets like maniacs in search of funds to get it or to do crazy shit to get it. They would just use it and go on with their lives like coffee users do or ho ho users do or dorito users or exercise addicts, etc, etc, etc.
Will some people use it irresponsibly? Let's avoid debating the obvious but lets not forget millions use alcohol irresponsibly and we don't blame alcohol for that. Some people probably use maple syrup irresponsibly. Doesn't mean it's any of my or your business so long as they are not hurting us.
Last edited by Titus; 31-01-2011 at 23:27.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Heroin is not dangerous to the human body. It's just not.
This is not true, your Statement is absolute wrong and you should face the Reality like many others
I know your form of Argumentation very, very well,
i used it for more than 20 Years.
(not facing the reality of the prohibition)
The Prohibition is bad and very damaging but it is a Law, a locked-in Law,
so we need to fight this Law and should not dance around of the hot Pot
(the argumentation about what is bad or more bad or damaging [Heroin] and apocalyptical [alcohol])
The whole Problem in this type of Discussion is that we really need to scratch ethical matters and questions of the moral,
i don't know if you followed the yearlong Discussions about the Opioid-Replacement Therapy aka MMT or even the Heroin-Program,
they are not so easy to combine with ethics and morals of the western Medicine!
Anything that is abused has the potential to be harmful,case by case is idiocy as i have a friend that ended up in a mental hospital for abusing skunk and another friend who lives a normal productive life with no probs but his heroin addiction.
As a society is the only objective way to look at it and if you check up the figures alcohol and tobacco have the most deaths and detrimental effects on society as a whole,last time i looked there was only 1200 deaths a year from heroin abuse(uk) whereas alcohol was attributed between 50-100,000,the knock on effect from that amount of deaths a year filtering through to families etc is a massive amount of damage to society regardless of the alcoholism...smoking has similar issues and similar attributed deaths.
Not trying to diminish the damage opiate abuse does but it is not in the same league as alcohol or indeed tobacco.
When someone says TLDR 'too long, didn't read' it's usually meant in a condecending way.
Let's see you refute the many points made in the numerous postings I made. After all, I took the time to dig up all that info, if your position is as strong as you claim, you should be willing to refute them and ground my arguments into meaningless dust......
Unless of course.... I'm.....RIGHT!
Titus added 4 Minutes and 23 Seconds later...
The FACT remains, Heroin is NOT dangerous to the human body. Acetaminophen is more dangerous to the human body than heroin is. Heroin is a VERY benign substance to the human body, one can use for decades and decades on a daily basis and not cause damage to their organs, etc. This is FACT. Medical Fact.
In fact I forget if I linked it or not but the medical establishment tesstified some such info in front of congress and congress went ahead and made it illegal anyway..... just like they did with marijuana several decades later after hearing from the AMA that it should not be illegal.
Titus added 2 Minutes and 58 Seconds later...
I"m more than happy to have a point by point debate with you (the last person I challenged backed out after the second time I spoke) on the topic of whether or not H is dangerous to the human body and/or what would the benefits and drawbacks be in decriminalizing it (i.e. ending H prohibition).
Let me know if your up for it. I'm willing to defend and assert my position.
Last edited by Titus; 06-02-2011 at 12:54.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Let me know if your up for it. I'm willing to defend and assert my position.
We can do it but before we start i want you to remember that i am strongly against the Prohibition and all related Problems
and i said this already many Times in countless Debates here!
All the Topics is your Post are Prohibitions-related
or not Provable
Do you realize that
But lets start with the real medical DAM aka Heroin
Quote:
4.8 Undesirable effects
The most serious hazard of therapy is respiratory depression although circulatory depression is also possible.
The most common side effects are sedation, nausea and vomiting, constipation and sweating. Other side effects include dizziness, miosis, confusion, urinary retention, biliary spasm, orthostatic hypotension, facial flushing, vertigo, palpitations, mood changes, dry mouth, dependence, urticaria, pruritus and raised intracranial pressure.
Use with caution in patients with toxic psychosis, CNS depression, myxoedema, prostatic hypertrophy or urethral stricture, kyphoscoliosis, acute alcoholism, delirium tremens, severe inflammatory or obstructive bowel disorders, adrenal insufficiency or severe diarrhoea. Care should be exercised in treating the elderly or debilitated patients and those with hepatic or renal impairment.
This sounds not really healthy to me
All the noted Side-Effects have a big Influence into our Wellbeing
and are Ill-Making in a Long-term (aka not Healthy!)
But my Point is that there is nearly No-One (No-ONE) who can explain what is happen inside of our Brain,
there are only a few speculations about the change of our Brain-Pathways,
no one can explain how and why the Hormonal Changes happen (also only Speculative)
Only Speculations about the Influence of Heroin into the endogenous Opioid and Pepdide Dynamic (Long-Term),
Why is the DAM Epileptogen (Cerebral Seizure Triggering)
There are only a few People who look into the Long-Time Memory
and related Problems, etc., etc.!
And please have a look into the typical Heroin-User om today and his Side-Consume,
the Mono-Drug User is death, now a Polytoxic Abuse the Norm!
So, in my humble Opinion it is much better to talk about this and not to discuss "again"
about the Word "When ..."
Lets speak about "How we can change the Law"!
Last edited by Spucky; 06-02-2011 at 14:54.
Reason: Spelling
The guy who said he bet those Knocking cannabis were heroin addicts was right as far as my own status. But I'm not here to knock cannabis-I love the stuff. However, I have read and heard that in under 18's there are definite dangers related to the development of the brain. Up til 18 the brain is still "immature", and use of cannabis in the young can arrest normal brain development (I wish I could quote sources, but sadly I can't.....actually I've forgotten them, which is another issue). So while I'm aware of the alleged physical health benefits eg. to MS sufferers, I think it would be good if some credence were given to the stories of the harmful effects of cannabis for under 18's. Also, tho once again not underplaying the very obvious and well documented dangers of heroin addiction, members in the UK will probably agree that our "Jeremy Kyle Show" evidences daily the ruin that cannabis habituation brings to many interpersonal and family relatioships. How many wives, girlfriends, partners live with insufferably paranoid, generally unemployed young men who bring nothing to the relationship but jealousy and apathy, whilst draining the household finances to fund their "harmless" habit? Before you bite back, remember that this Guinea Pig smokes both substances, but is 58, and speaks from some experience, having 2 failed marriages and a failed career behind her.
The worst thing about heroin is that it makes you a slave. It has a huge effect on the ability to interact with other people in a meaningful way, it saps motivation and interest in life, and it completely dulls and distorts emotions. It makes you stop caring about other things. It is usually incredibly easy to tell someone who is a regular opiate user. I don't mean shabby clothes, skinniness, etc., I mean something absent or distant in the eyes.
People on opiates seem often deeply and fundamentally dishonest or two dimensional. It is like words flickering across a flat screen and the person behind has no interest in their truth or otherwise. People on opiates tend to lie a lot, even when there is absolutely no need to. Again, there is a huge disconnect.
Inside the bubble, so my cat tells me, you feel normal and don't really notice, at least not often, how much of a parody of a life you are living. Only when the hour-glass of opiates starts to run down are you presented with the truth of the situation that is almost impossible to endure. This runs in parallel with the physical withdrawals.
Genuine friendship goes by the wayside, as does real laughter. You're not going to enjoy listening to or making music in the same way. Heroin is incredibly corrosive, and this has nothing to do with its legal status. Almost the most dangerous thing is that heroin users don't tend to see how screwed up they have become. It may take some time for these effects to manifest, and the initial "honeymoon period" may seem one of increased energy, sociability, creativity, etc., but this will not last.
To say it is harmless because it probably won't kill you if used in pure form is like saying chopping your arms off isn't harmful if done surgically since that won't kill you either. It will however affect your quality of life. There does seem to be evidence of certain health risks, although I think in terms of purely physical health, it is probably safer than cigarettes or alcohol, provided of course one doesn't overdose and the product is pure, one is administering in a safe way, etc.
All of the above notwithstanding, I tend to favour legalisation for all drugs (although I find this most problematic with something like crack which almost instantly can turn you into a lunatic, prepared, for example, to drive, when in no fit state to do so, etc. to get more. Again I speak from my cat's experience)
Be well and play nice, and please don't take it personally if you are a heroin user who is genuinely empathetic, honest, and fails to display the traits mentioned above. I am just describing my own experiences with opiate users. If you do feel affronted, take a deep breath and ask yourself if you are in denial. I'm not saying you are, but you might be.
I don't know about Japan but in UK only Suboxone is available on the NHS which is Buprenorphine plus Naloxone. Unfortunately Naloxone is known to induce depression and therefore not suitable in all cases. I would predict that this is contributing to the declining rate of success being observed amongs the addicts trying to give up using Suboxone.
I know a few people on a Subotex prescription in the UK. Not sure where that info came from? If that is what you mean by that statement, that only Suboxone is available here.
On the streets its Scunk thats out there swim doesn't hardly even remebers seeeing weed on the street when he was young(15 -16).
Scunk is scary its kind of dangerous to promote that cannabis is harmless when Scunk is the thing most people will be smoking not 'Weed'.
Heroin is harmful and stay on it long enough and you'll struggle to feel pleasure through anything else but that still doesn't get away from the fact that u can take it every day and remain relatively safe, but I apprecaitte the irony as i'm writing this that I could even suggest Heroin is 'relatively safe' (which i'm not).
But just because Heroin is hazordous no doubt, it doesn't mean that people should believe that street Cannabis (strong stuff) is absoloutley safe as the're both dangerous in their own way, especially to youngsters..
Please indulge me On the Nod by answering some of my questions about your comments in this post, OK?
You say "Heroin is harmful" where do u get this info?
You say ...."but I apprecaitte the irony as i'm writing this that I could even suggest Heroin is 'relatively safe' (which i'm not)." Are you not saying that because you don't believe it, or because of some other reason. If it's because you don't believe it's relatively safe, what has lead you to this conclusion? Is it isolated data (like you know someone who OD'ed so now consider it dangerous, or more general, wide-spread data that agencies and studies use to determine the relative safety or unsafeness of a drug?
You say "Heroin is hazordous no doubt," I find this statement wildly innaccurate and would love to read medical sources where this type of assertion is back up over and over again. When speaking of 'hazardous substances' such as toxic waste there is no shortage of data supporting this. Where is all the data supporting heroin being 'hazardous'? (I'm not talking about irresponsible people using heroin mixed with garbage (unknown garbage I should say) I'm talking about heroin (as it seems you were, although you might have meant 'that garbage that is sold on the streets called heroin that is like 20% heroin and 80% God knows what, mixed by God knows who, with God knows what kind of training.
I do assert that Heroin is relatively safe, although do recognize it is also highly addictive (that, in and of itself, does not make it 'unsafe' IMO however. If I have a lifetime supply of an addictive substance that is benign to the human body (doesn't cause brain damage, liver damage, etc..) then how is it's use 'unsafe'?
Titus added 26 Minutes and 2 Seconds later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by southern girl
Okay, so I have a question regarding this. Ive been kinda reading this and thinking about Layne Staley. For those of you who dont know who this is (shame on you) he was an amazing musician who was in the band Alice in Chains. Anyway. He died after injecting a speedball, a mix of heroin and cocaine. Now, it was pretty well known how much his addiction devastated him (which is another reminder of how addiction isnt just about money or it being illegal) but his health was literally failing him. I believe he was quoted saying that he didnt do heroin to get high anymore, it was way beyond that, he just tried to stay well but infact it was also the same thing that was killing him, he said his liver was fucked and it was making him puke and shit himself. He said this and any google search can find this information. I can post sources if necessary. Anyway, back to the question. If heroin is so good for you, or more like less damaging than other drugs, then why was Layne Staley so ill? Why was his health so poor?
Thanks in advance.
SG.xxx
First of all speedballs and heroin are two VERY different things. But here is one bit of info for you to examine from wiki answers: How does heroin effect the liver?
[Improve]
Heroin affects the liver of course...but damage that is done by heroin is relatively small (compare to alcohol). Heroin is very quickly and effectively metabolized and doesn't affect liver function in a big way. Heroin itself is also non-toxic to liver or any other internal organs (again compare to alcohol). However variety of additives and dilutants that street heroin is "cut"with can cause after prolonged use of IV heroin (decades at least) some damage to the liver.
Question: Do we know if he died of a heat attack (more likely the coke) or respiratory failure (more likely the dope)? Do we know if he was drinking (GREATLY increases the risk of heroin RELATED od's, or taking pills which also GREATLY increases the risk of heroin RELATED od's. That's not 'heroin od's, it's heroin related od's.
His health was failing him. What info do you have about his health as a child and growing up, what pre-existing conditions did he have, if any? Was he a tortured soul and therefore used heroin in a HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE manner in an effort to cope with his internal torture? If so, this is not 'heroins fault' any more than it's the rope's fault of the guy with one around his neck he put there after his internal torture lead him to do so.
I"m not trying to sound harsh, I'm just wanting to point out that it's easy to blame drugs for things they may not be responsible for.
Look at this sentence you wrote:
I believe he was quoted saying that he didnt do heroin to get high anymore, it was way beyond that, he just tried to stay well but infact it was also the same thing that was killing him, he said his liver was fucked and it was making him puke and shit himself.
Now, it's common knowledge that heroin addicts stop 'getting high' off heroin after a while since tolerance skyrockets. Hence the 'not getting high anymore'. But you have not demonstrated that heroin was killing him and I have pointed out that heroin is NOT liver toxic. Alcohol is, but not heroin.
For the record, I do not think "heroin is good for you'. I just think it's none of the government's business what free citizens put in their bodies. I don't think they should be kidnapped and put in the gulag for putting a powder up their nose. And I certainly don't think you and I should have to pay for it, especially since when that person gets out of the gulag it will be very, very hard for him to get a job with a living wage since he will have a felony record, but will still need food, clothes, and shelter. So guess what all those people do.... they turn to drug dealing.... purpetuating the cycle that keeps judges in judgeships, keeps prisons full of people so kids grow up without daddies, etc, etc, etc,
Titus added 23 Minutes and 24 Seconds later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by squeezix
My teeth have crumbled and I brush twice a day. 25 years of heroin use. Tooth decay leads to heart disease, debating getting all of them pulled.
Since I have been advocating a 'heroin is not dangerous' stance quite strongly, in fairness I would like to point out I have no knowledge that Heroin does not directly do this or decay teeth much more rapidly, or whatever.
p.s. With all the gov't propaganda out there my intent is to educate those in forums like this. After all, if WE do not know the actual truths and untruths about heroin, how in the heck can we expect for older/more conservative people to not buy into anti MJ propaganda/misinformation/distorted information/etc?
Titus added 0 Minutes and 57 Seconds later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by squeezix
My teeth have crumbled and I brush twice a day. 25 years of heroin use. Tooth decay leads to heart disease, debating getting all of them pulled.
Since I have been advocating a 'heroin is not dangerous' stance quite strongly, in fairness I would like to point out I have no knowledge that Heroin does not directly do this or decay teeth much more rapidly, or whatever.
p.s. With all the gov't propaganda out there my intent is to educate those in forums like this. After all, if WE do not know the actual truths and untruths about heroin, how in the heck can we expect for older/more conservative people to not buy into anti MJ propaganda/misinformation/distorted information/etc?
Titus added 38 Minutes and 52 Seconds later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by cra$h
yea, scientifically, with all the proper precautions, just about every opiate is just fine for you. But that's not the world we live in. There's a reason why dope is such a taboo subject.
Sounds like to me that the OP is in the prime of that honeymoon point. Come back in about 6 months of continuous use and let us know where you stand then.
As horrible as the drug really is, there's a draw towards it stronger than just about anything in the world. Probably tied with true love. And how far would you go to protect your wife/kids? You'll go just as far with dope.
Again, in all fairness given the stance I'm taking, I would not say this is a wild accusation. Many have proven it to be true.
BUT, keep in mind how many are related to the underlying issues like FINANCES. Case in point: If a man and woman are married or living together and the guy has a job that gets them by, or they both have jobs and get by. Add in a heroin addiction and if it is not stopped relatively quickly the bills don't get paid and the relationship goes down the toilet as a result of the bills not getting paid and the man getting addicted and choosing to buy drugs with the rent money.
Another case in point: Man and woman married or living together. They live next to a poppy field and their uncle owns the field. His workers work the field, get the goo, process and turn it into pure diamorphone in the factory. The son/son in law/husband is the supervisor and is allowed to take what he wants in product. He is heavily addicted but can bring home an ounce of PURE heroin every day if he so chooses. Now, so long as he's not on the nod and uses so that he's not dozing off (I work productively on heroin at a computer all day some days, other days in meetings, etc, no one knows or suspects). So as long as this guy uses enough to get high or get straight or whatever but not so much that it makes him a bumbling slob it's a VERY different scenario. Assuming the wife isn't morally opposed to him or others using dope, where is the problem? Again, assume he uses sterile techniques.
So the whole point I am really trying to drive home in this thread is that 'heroin' isn't the problem, heroin is an inanimate object. Some people will most certainly use waaayy too much, nodd their asses off and get hit by cars and whatnot... but that happens with drunks too.
And when weighing the negatives of heroin use one must also weigh the benefits of heroin being legalized. First of all we save a tillion dollars not enforcing drug laws. Cops can focus on CRIME (I consider crime violence against others or theft of the property of others, for the most part I think that covers it- although there may be additional ones not fitting into either of those categories, I haven't spent a lifetime analyzing this issue).
Dealers stop shooting at cops, cops stop shooting at dealers. Dealers stop shooting at dealers (as pharmacies or other established businesses would take over the market, Jackie 2 guns can't compete with CVS Pharmacy guys). Drug dealers stop shooting at customers who try to rob them (instead they call the cops and report the theft just like other businesses do and they collect the insurance money for what was stolen just like other businesses do). Drug manufacturing, selling, and transporting operations now LIKE having the cops around. They protect their businesses just like they protect other businesses. Having them around deters people from trying to rob the drug dealers, etc.
I could say a lot more. But the way it is now drug dealers must provide their own muscle because they can't go to the cops when robbed. And they can't not retaliate if robbed or everyone will rob them, they will be a punkass and be broke and probably have to move to another state to avoid a lifetime of humiliation.
They have to KILL people who try to rob them for the most part. Why? Because if they just beat them up then THEY might catch a bullet when the guy recovers from his beating.
And don't tell me you think that drug dealers are going to build their own secret, private prisons so when they luckily catch someone trying to rob them they put them in there (which they have to pay for 100% themselves- other businesses have jails built and paid for by all taxpayers). And they are gonna have to pay guards to guard the prisoners who robbed them, pay to feed them, and also remain open to kidnapping charges the whole time the dude is locked in their secret jail with the cops looking for the 'missing person'. And when they are finally let out, when their sentence is complete, what happens then? Does the dude just go on with his life, not tell anyone about his experiences or where the jail is? He's not gonna want to sell rights to a book? .... hence why there is such violence in the drug world.
Drug dealers MUST be their own muscle (or pay others to be their muscle) or they MUST get out of the drug business (I'm tnot talking small time stuff here like 10lbs of weed or whatever).
So anyone entering the drug dealing business must be willing to implement violence as an integral part of their business model or they will not be successful. If people are not afrad of being killed robbing them they are robbed and put out of business.
Why do you think that drug dealers are highly preferred as a target by professional armed robbers over banks and armored cars? With banks and cars within 2 minutes you have a dozen cop cars racing through the streets (with every citizen cooperating by getting out of the way) while they race to catch them. They also get pretty much everyone to help their investigation and pay detectives who specialize in detecting to investigate and hunt these guys down. They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's YOUR and MY dollars) to catch them.
When a drug dealer is robbed, not only are there not a plethora of vehicles racing through the streets to catch them,, not only are there not professional detectives investigating, but the DRUG DEALERS THEMSELVES MUST PAY THE FULL COST OF THE ENTIRE INVESTIGATION.
AND MORE THAN THAT, THE BANKS AND ARMORED CARS GET THEIR MONEY BACK FROM INSURANCE, THE DRUG DEALERS GET TO SUCK A FAT ONE.
That's why these crimes, that you don't hear about nearly as often as they happen, make drug dealers HIGH PROFILE TARGETS for robberies. This means they are hyper vigilant, always ready to get jacked. Always on edge.
Or maybe heroin (or coke, or whatever) is just 'bad' and makes people rob homes and kill people, it's not the need for the money due to the highly inflated cost since it's illegal... it's a secret ingredient in the heroin which makes people murderers and thieves.
That's why as soon as someone picks up heroin they start robbing. They don't first empty their bank acct, then run up their credit, then borrow from family, then borrow from friends, etc, etc.... nope. As soon as heroin is ingested it makes people BAD PEOPLE.
Last edited by Titus; 07-02-2011 at 02:01.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
I don't remember where I read that heroin and other opioids piggyback on calcium in the body and leaching some of it out.
What I do know is that even long time recovered(ing) junkies have a disproportionate amount of arthritic problems compared to other people I know in the same age group. I would not include active users in these observations as they tend to whine about every physical ailment.
I now have joint problems as well and have always been healthy except for my opioid abuse (oxycodone and heroin, clean 7 months!!!!!)
But lets start with the real medical DAM aka Heroin
4.8 Undesirable effects
The most serious hazard of therapy is respiratory depression although circulatory depression is also possible.
The most common side effects are sedation, nausea and vomiting, constipation and sweating. Other side effects include dizziness, miosis, confusion, urinary retention, biliary spasm, orthostatic hypotension, facial flushing, vertigo, palpitations, mood changes, dry mouth, dependence, urticaria, pruritus and raised intracranial pressure.
Use with caution in patients with toxic psychosis, CNS depression, myxoedema, prostatic hypertrophy or urethral stricture, kyphoscoliosis, acute alcoholism, delirium tremens, severe inflammatory or obstructive bowel disorders, adrenal insufficiency or severe diarrhoea. Care should be exercised in treating the elderly or debilitated patients and those with hepatic or renal impairment.
This sounds not really healthy to me
All the noted Side-Effects have a big Influence into our Wellbeing
Respiratory depression: This would be dose related (when talking about depression to the point of risking respiratory failure, no? Breathing slower than average is not a 'bad' thing. In fact people who meditate sometimes look to slow their breathing and consider this to be a relaxing and positive experience.
Sedation: It can be dangerous, but alcohol, benzo's, anti-depressants, psychotropic medications all cause sedation as well. So I would consider this to be a 'danger' to irresponsible people, or people who use heroin in an irresponsible manner. Being 'sedated' is not dangerous in and of itself, the 'danger' I think comes into play when someone makes the decision to drive on it or whatnot.
Nausea and Vomiting: Unpleasant for sure. Also side effects of TONS of different drugs, no? Isn't this only 'dangerous' if one does not stay properly hydrated? And even then, unless your talking about a feeble very old person it's not really 'dangerous' just less than ideally healthy. And as a side note I believe that a significant portion of society does not hydrate themselves properly, as a nutritionist or someone like that would advise. Most don't drink enough water basically.
So if someone routinely becomes nauseous and vomits off heroin they have the option of quitting to avoid the unpleasantness but I don't consider this dangerous and would only consider it unhealthy if the vomiting was chronic, frequent over a long period of time.
Constipation: Unpleasant and also a very common side effect of TONS of medications. Also easily treated. Rarely 'dangerous' (I know a paranoid schizophrenic who believed he was being poisoned and lost 40 pounds over a period of a few months because he was so constipated that he was vomiting anything he ingested. He believed he was being poisoned so kept this secret from his care providers. He fled the hospital when finally convinced to go to the ER but was not pink papered by his psychiatrist despite having impacted bowels, having lost 40 lbs because he was vomitting anything he ingested, including his medications. Eventually he was given and enema and prescribed meds to treat the constipation and it was a non-issue after that (well, unless you want to pull up every negative side effect of colace, and the 4-5 other meds he was prescribed as either standing orders or as PRN's)
Sweating: dangerous?
I could go on but my point is that basically every single medication, aspirin, cough syrup, etc, etc has a list of 'side-effects' that go along with them. Many, many medications also have the potential to kill people one way or another, but if prescribed by a doctor and monitored medically, for the most part people do OK on medications I think. Most suffer a minor side effect here or there but for the most part the serious or dangerous side effects are rare.
I think it's the same for heroin. I'm not saying it's good for you. I"m simply saying it's not 'dangerous' if used responsibly. Just like water. It's not dangerous if used responsibly, but for a small minority of people who have the condition of polydipsia it potentially deadly. Everything comes with a risk, including heroin. I'm not saying it's risk free. I'm not advocating it's use. But I think that I'm correct in assuming that one could dig up a list similar-ish to yours about the side-effects of marijuana, couldn't they?
I respect your posts and what your saying, I don't think are views are too far apart at all actually. I just want people to get the misinformation pumped into their heads about ALL so called illicit or illegal drugs out of their heads. And as you said, to view them without attaching morality to them.
@Titus, you still try to relativize the core of the problem,
you still compare one bad thing with a more bad thing,
this is imo not a very smart style of discussion
One major Problem in this discussion is that we not have real sources
because our Society "should" (they do, but they should not!) not use Humans for medical Testings (in a long-Term Testing),
so we know only a very rough direction from Animal Studies or from old People.
We have no Data from average young Persons,
who done Heroin for a few years and was living in a healthy Environment
with a good Diet and normal Life-Style!
but just a few Month later the discover also that Opioid support the grow of Cancer!
(see the first Posting at this Page Morphine may Encourage Cancer Growth)
We have the Data and Statistics about the normal Drug Addicts but they are not really relevant for medical Studies because the Study is not scientifical because the Clients always use other Stuff like Benzos, Alcohol and/or Cocaine, etc!
They also smoke and have a "strange Diet"!
So, what do we know?
Imo not enough to say that Heroin is harmless, a good - ,
or even Gods own Medicine!
@Titus, you still try to relativize the core of the problem,
you still compare one bad thing with a more bad thing,
this is imo not a very smart style of discussion
One major Problem in this discussion is that we not have real sources
because our Society "should" (they do, but they should not!) not use Humans for medical Testings (in a long-Term Testing),
so we know only a very rough direction from Animal Studies or from old People.
We have no Data from average young Persons,
who done Heroin for a few years and was living in a healthy Environment
with a good Diet and normal Life-Style!
but just a few Month later the discover also that Opioid support the grow of Cancer!
(see the first Posting at this Page Morphine may Encourage Cancer Growth)
We have the Data and Statistics about the normal Drug Addicts but they are not really relevant for medical Studies because the Study is not scientifical because the Clients always use other Stuff like Benzos, Alcohol and/or Cocaine, etc!
They also smoke and have a "strange Diet"!
So, what do we know?
Imo not enough to say that Heroin is harmless, a good - ,
or even Gods own Medicine!
I"m not really sure what to take from this post. Someone made a post of a lot of specific problems or side effects or dangers from heroin use and I refuted that post, basically pointing out that every drug has a variety of unpleasant and potentially dangerous side effects, including MJ I am fairly certain if one were to google looking for such info.
Heroin used to be legal. It's my understanding that the medical establishment concludes that heroin, in and of itself, is not dangerous to the human body. But data and information supporting this is buried by the government, just like they bury information about how pot is relatively harmless and has the effects of improving the quality of life for many (I got into supporting drug legalization over 2 decades ago when I was 17 yrs old and my grandmother was dying from cancer. My family is a bunch of f'ups so her daughter (my mother) and the rest of her children did not take her to her weekly chemo appointments, I was the one who took days off of school to take her. Her doctor encouraged her to smoke marijuana to treat the nausea from the chemo. This was back in the early/mid 80's when I believe there were like less than 10 people legally being treated with marijuana for medical reasons. I was faced with the reality that her doctor was telling her to smoke pot and the government telling her, me, you, the world that it is a very bad idea and should not happen. I choose to believe her doctor. Swim became a criminal because he procured marijuana to give to my grandmother while she was diagnosed with terminal cancer and being treated with poison (chemo) to give her more months to live. The government made swim a criminal for assisting my grandmother in improving the quality of her life during the last months of her life while she was dying and suffering and in constant pain. I learned back then to not trust what the government says. Back then I just believed that marijuana was basically the only 'illegal' drug that was relatively harmless. After doing research on heroin a couple years ago I learned from several studies the positive effects of legalizing heroin and how the government lied about it and demonized it just like they did and do with other drugs.
Do you really believe that oxycodone is a safe and good treatment for severe pain, that methadone is a safe and good treatment for pain (yes it is prescribed for pain as well as for heroin substitution therapy) and that diamorphone is unsafe and a bad treatment for severe pain? Do you really believe that fent is a good treatment for severe pain but diamorphone is a bad treatment for pain? Do you really believe that oxycodone and fentanyl are sooooo much better treatments for pain than diamorphone that the first 2 are routinely used to treat pain but the last is outlawed and classified as having no valid medical use (at least in the usa)? Do you really believe that those substances differ soooo much that the first 2 are OK to use but the third is terribly, terribly dangerous?
It is my understanding and my belief that both MJ and Diamorphone are both relatively harmless to the human body, and that both, if used responsibly, have benefits to human beings. Nothing is without risk, people do die, secondarily, to MJ use (slowed reaction times leading to fatal car accidents for example). Diamorphone is wayyy more addictive but the vast majority of 'problems' it causes are not caused by 'it'. They are caused by the prohibition of it.
The government has demonized all drugs. Society is finally waking up to the fact that the government has lied about marijuana. Eventually it will wake up to the fact that the government has lied about diamorphone as well. I have woken up to that fact. I encourage all who read this to open their minds to the notion that heroin/diamorphone, in and of itself, is not 'dangerous'. In fact coke is much more dangerous as it induces phychosis after prolonged use which can drive people to do all sorts of wild and crazy things (which does not happen with prolonged heroin use), days of staying up doing coke or meth people become paranoid and every so often will kill another person secondary to the paranoia they experience due to lack of sleep and coke or meth use for days straight without sleep. Coke and meth users are more likely to get in fights, like alcohol users are. MJ and heroin users are both much more likely to sit back on the couch and chill.
Hedgehog is as pro-heroin as you can get, but wishes to point out some fallacies/discrepancies here.
First, both drugs are as close to "absolutely harmless" as a psychoactive chemical can get. Pure THC and pure diacetylmorphine, if used in a measured and controlled way, and following a few very simple safety precautions, would cause an insignificant to non-existent amount of damage to the body over the course of the entirety of decades of a human life. That's just a fact.
It is not appropriate to mismatch different ROAs and/or ignorant ways/means of usage, to conclude that one drug is more harmful than the other. Even if the drug itself is chemically completely non-toxic, like heroin or marijuana:
- If you smoke a drug, it's going to damage your lungs to some degree.
- If you snort a drug it's going to damage your nasal cavity.
- If you inject a drug (using best practices) it is going to cause vein damage,
With smoking, it is definitely going to cause some damage, but with certain drugs it is probably much less than others. With snorting the nasal cavity damage could be negligible depending on the drug and how much powder is snorted. With IVing, vein damage is going to happen no doubt, but it can be minimized by rotating veins, and having a healthy diet/vitamin/supplement intake.
So to say that marijuana is more dangerous than heroin is only true if you are referring to smoking marijuana, and assuming that the heroin was used in the safest way possible via one of heroin's safer ROAs (snorting, ingestion, and yes, even IV).
Now if you want to talk about how it works in the real world, the vast majority predominantly smoke their marijuana (although may or may not ingest it from time to time). I can't say whether the vast majority of heroin users do or do not inject, but heroin has a couple strikes against it in the comparision when regarding the real world: (1) most addicts don't use maximum safety precautions when using heroin, whose dangers are on average more directly harmful, or lead to more harm in ancillary ways, than the health issues caused by smoking marijuana; (2) the psychological addiction factor can directly lead to impulsive and erractic behaviors which greatly increase the possibility of death and bodily harm. Not always, and not to everyone, but occassionally to some people; much more so than marijuana. If you consider how many people have made dangerous or deadly decisions on heroin (e.g. rob a house/store for heroin money, or use this dirty needle from a friend because you are severely dopesick and don't have a clean one, etc.) compared to marijuuana, heroin hands down be the more dangerous of the two.
Both drugs have the capacity to be completely harmless, but you also have the fact that most people in general are stupid. The reason heroin is more dangerous, is because people who are either careless, or just plain idiots, can hurt or kill themselves with heroin, whereas it is incredibly unlikely that they will on marijuana.
Do you really believe that oxycodone is a safe and good treatment for severe pain, that methadone is a safe and good treatment for pain (yes it is prescribed for pain as well as for heroin substitution therapy) and that diamorphone is unsafe and a bad treatment for severe pain?
No, i did not say this
But a Palliative Treatment is always like a walk on a Knife,
and the Ridge is very sharp!
And i am, as i said, only a Googleloge and not a Professor for Opionautic Research!
You need to look more into the details of the pharmacological Profile
of Diamorphine, Methadone and Oxycodone
(there are much more Opioids to fight Pain)
to understand why they use a Medication!
All 3 have a Profile in the Documents, so a research is very easy
I have no doubt that there are some people out there who are made healthier from heroin use. For one, there are people with disorders of the dopamine/endorphin system, who are sick, tired, and depressed all the time because of it. And of those, there are many (if not most) who do not respond at all to any type of psychiatric medication or other treatment, except to have "exorphins" introduced into their body (i.e. taking opiates). Being sick, tired, depressed, and/or anxious all the time is extremely unhealthy and leads to all kinds of new maladies due to wear and tear on the body, and such a person would definitely be healthier ON heroin than off.
Also, looking at the health benefits of heroin. Lets say we have two states, we are comparing, person taking nothing, and person taking heroin. There are without a doubt many people out there who would be healthier on heroin than on nothing. People (not necessarily with dopamine/endorphin deficiency), but with severe mental illness, PSTD, constant anxiety, or just an extremely stressful life, would probably be healthier on medical heroin than off it. It cannot be argued that stress and mental illness do not DIRECTLY cause all kinds of physical maladies. With mental illness, often times the issues, problems, and resulting stress and torment multiply as time passes. Someone who is suffering mentally to the point of making themselves sick, again considering only the two states, would undoubtedly be healthier on heroin. This shows that, even though heroin might not be the ideal option for people, that it DOES have health benefits.
Finally, if you consider the fact that something like ONE MILLION PEOPLE all over the world kill themselves every year, and that if you wrote every one of those people a prescription for heroin and let them have it the rest of their life, probably 900,000 of them wouldn't kill themselves.
Heroin do not heal People who suffer from Mood Disorders,
and anyway: we need to discuss Endogenous Opiates and their Influence of our Behavior first
before we can go from the tiny Mathematic (1 plus 1 is 3)
into Astro-Physics
Heroin do not heal People who suffer from Mood Disorders
Spucky that is an extremely poor argument.
Nothing "heals," people with severe mood disorders that result from a biological/genetic cause. The only thing that can be done is to alleviate the symptoms which torment them and drive so many to suicide.
Do you really think that the currently available anti-depressants actually "heal" anyone?
I am confident in saying that most people with severe mental illness would not say that any of the loads of different medications they have been on have ever really felt like they "healed" them. The only example of someone actually being healed might be the rare individual who actually does have a serotonin imbalance which is corrected by SSRIs. For the rest of mentally ill people, nearly every type of psychiatric drug out there works by trying to blot out the symptoms, not actually fix the specific biological cause of the malady. Most disgustingly, zombification i.e. blasting ALL of someone's emotions away just to try and stop the bad ones is presently pretty much the only type of treatment allowed BY LAW - it is illegal in most countries for doctors to try and make them feel good, and leave their mind and emotions intact, by using any of the scores of drugs which are capable of doing this. These laws have no medical basis whatsoever, they are made by politicians and are against the effective treatments many doctors would otherwise offer.
It's just a fact that the only drugs which presently exist that are able to almost completely "normalize" a certain type of mentally ill people are opiates.
Not being physically ill, but living in constant psychological pain due to biological makeup, and feeling tormented 24/7/365 and wanting to kill yourself all the time is not "healthy." Or even "healthy enough." People who are bipolar have 9 years less of a life expectancy than the average person. Obviously if our current non-opiate regiment of medicine actually worked, that would not be the case, and bipolar people would have the same lifespan as normal people and wouldn't die almost a decade earlier on average. For those people at the very least, you can say that heroin makes them much healthier.
Last edited by dyingtomorrow; 21-02-2011 at 11:28.
