Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 371 posts

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#211

Post by howlin »

daveguy wrote: post #205
rsj_hn wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People trying to steal to get drugs could. People high on drugs certainly could. A lot of Breaking and Entering, for example, is to obtain money to feed a drug habit. For the person doing the stealing, all they care about is the cost of the drug, so plans to regulate and tax meth, well, don't necessarily improve that situation.

Yes. That requires another specific decision to commit a crime. Respiratory viral infection requires no additional decision on part of the viral vector. I agree there shouldn't be a blanket decriminalization of drug use because it does alter judgement/motivation and make a theft or even violent crime more likely.

Drugs destroy your ability to make good decisions. They are essentially hot wiring the brain's reward circuits which directly feed back into the brain's decision making processes. Most obviously, it's almost never the case that addicts consciously choose to become addicted.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#212

Post by rsj_hn »

bananabreakfast wrote: post #209
tyingq wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that the gin->mean, whisky->emotional, etc, is all bunk. But I'm still convinced there's a link between alcohol and violence. If nothing else, the lowered cognitive function and reduced inhibition would mean more opportunity to be angry, and less self control. Like, a drunk person might misinterpret someone accidentally bumping into them as aggression. And would be less likely to suppress the urge to respond…

I think you're still describing a cultural cause here. Responding to perceived aggression with your own aggression is not a given. It's a culturally decided response, not an instinctive one. A good christian is supposed to respond to aggression by "turning the other cheek" and not responding at all. A strict, honor based society might say the only way to respond to aggression is by killing that person. Western cultur…

But we wouldn't say that Japan is more of a Christian culture than the U.S., or that the U.S. is more of an honor culture than Japan.

I understand the sociological theories you are referring to, but I'm not sure how useful they are.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#213

Post by HarryHirsch »

Scoundreller wrote: post #166
HarryHirsch wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell me who needs 200-ct bottles of imodium. People who observe proper hygiene have food poisoning maybe once in 10 years (and whether a motility agent is a good idea in such cases is another question).

People that ignore expiry dates. And at least in our household's case, a clinically ignored case of endometriosis.

a clinically ignored case of endometriosis

That's exactly what I mean (and the sibling posting is more of the same). If you need more than six doses in a row then you should see a physician for a thorough workup because loperamide is just for the symptoms. The package will say as much. It's really hard to find fault with the FDA coming down on the extended-family size packaging.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#214

Post by kragen »

rsj_hn wrote: post #200
daveguy wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, to be fair. Your drug use can't put me in the ICU.

People trying to steal to get drugs could. People high on drugs certainly could. A lot of Breaking and Entering, for example, is to obtain money to feed a drug habit. For the person doing the stealing, all they care about is the cost of the drug, so plans to regulate and tax meth, well, don't necessarily improve that situation.

But we aren't talking about plans to regulate meth; it's already very heavily regulated. We're talking about plans to partly deregulate meth, which we can expect to significantly reduce the cost of the drug, from the US$50 or more per gram described in this article down to US$1 per gram or less like other synthetic drugs with similarly simple synthesis routes. The US$50 a gram isn't the cost of operating the reactors or measuring the purity of the result; it's the cost of hiring an army of foot soldiers to keep drug addicts or the police from stealing the stuff, because you can't trust the police, because it's illegal.

Yeah, people high on meth do crimes. But at least if the stuff is legal they won't do crimes to buy meth.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#215

Post by trhway »

cwkoss wrote: post #146

RE: Quantity section. I wonder if the pharmaceutical amphetamines and/or novel 'research chemical' amphetamines metabolize into the same compounds that are being quantified in sewage. Are they detecting 'meth' specifically or amphetamines generally? > only $1k per pound now. Wow that's crazy. An equivalent quantity of generic adderall would cost ~$20k. Meth is effectively at commodity-level prices, if true - the drug…

I think P2P was the main type of meth in 196x-198x.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#216

Post by kragen »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #185
Zarathust wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada you can still buy that over the counter. You get id-ed and they keep a record of your purchases, but since it's now generic pills it is now much cheaper than it was before

It is the same in the US, but the FDA calls it "behind the counter". OTC means you grab it off a shelf yourself, BTC means the pharmacy checks your ID, and gives it to you, but still no prescription required. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-drug-class/legal-requi...

OTC normally means that it doesn't require a prescription.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#217

Post by rsj_hn »

daveguy wrote: post #210
rsj_hn wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the harm or benefit of a policy is not measured by how many specific decisions are performed, but rather by the overall effect of the policy on the community, no? So let's just talk about that rather than counting steps between A and B.

The overall harm or benefit to the community is certainly related to how many and likely those bad decisions are that result in a specific harm/benefit.

If true, then you should be able to make that case directly, no?

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#218

Post by kurthr »

daveguy wrote: post #197
xyzzyz wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they did that, the consumption would only go up, resulting in even more overdoses. That’s what happened in Portugal, after drug decriminalization — drug consumption there went up significantly (with exception of heroin, which went down, but it also went down in other European countries at the same time which did not decriminalize it). Full on legalization will increase consumption even higher. Of course, one might…

Well, to be fair. Your drug use can't put me in the ICU.

Yeah, it's not about you... it's the other people you may infect and kill. Kids are mostly fine... if only they didn't have teachers or parents.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#219

Post by pdkl95 »

dcolkitt wrote: post #88
dynm wrote: post #2

Around a week ago, I came across this link here on HN that suggested that there's a new form of meth: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28938888 The theory is that new meth is based on a synthesis using a chemical called P2P rather than the old synthesis that used ephedrine. There are claims that this new form of meth is chemically different in some what that started creating schizophrenia around 2017. However, wh…

Much of the effects of any intoxicant are culturally constructed. Alcohol is widely known for causing aggression, but this effect doesn’t seem to exist in cultures without that association. Nor does it exist in double-blind studies, yet the placebo group becomes more aggressive. You can start with two chemically identical intoxicants, and either by marketing or random path dependencies one gains a reputation in the s…

> It’s all ethanol

I used to believe that. It seemed obvious to me and a phd chemist friend of mine that - as you say - the different reputations were a cultural/social creation. The drink itself was just different amounts of ethanol.

Then one day that chemist friend of mine decided to get a bottle of Hornitos Reposado. We usually preferred a good bourbon or weird herbal stuff[1]. We drank most of the bottle, but that wasn't unusual for us at the time[2]. We were intending on a normal evening of video games. MTG, and/or VtES. Instead... we ended up spending the evening having the stupidest, most aggressive, pointless, childish, "macho" argument of our lives. It was shockingly out of character for us. The amount of ethanol consumption wasn't large, and we drank it at a normal rate. Both of us had been a LOT drunker in the past. The only significant difference was our unusual choice of tequila.

While I agree that the cultural preconceptions are probably responsible for most of the effect, there is at least some truth behind the reputations of different types of alcoholic beverages, because the actual drink isn't just ethanol. The different brewing/distilling/aging processes produce different amounts congeners[3][4]; their psychological effects might be small, but small effects amplified through social mechanisms are how "culture" is created.

> In many ways that makes these rumor filled, science light, unsubstantiated media stories about “this is the most dangerous drug ever” incredibly irresponsible.

Hear, hear!

> moral panic over Four Loko ... amaro and coffee

Yah, people have probably started putting whisky (Irish or otherwise) in their coffee the morning after they invented the whisky. Also, you probably have to drink the entire giant can of Four Loko to get the same caffeine in a typical cup of coffee.

> Yet it never caused moral panic until the “wrong type of people” started consuming it.

It's disturbing how often this kind of bs ends up just being a fancy form of racism/sexism/${targeted_group}ism

[1] e.g. Pernod, Herbsaint, Chartreuse

[2] Yes, we were regularly drinking WAY too much. 375ml/day/person minimum. WAY WAY WAY too much...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congener_%28beverages%29 "These substances include small amounts of chemicals such as methanol and other alcohols (known as fusel alcohols), acetone, acetaldehyde, esters, tannins, and aldehydes (e.g. furfural)."

[4] Also, the different amounts of sugars means different effects on bloodsugar/insulin/etc. The resulting effects are probably complicated and difficult to explain, but their contribution to the different reputations might be larger than we expect.

Re: The main thing about Phenylacetone meth is that there's so much of it

#220

Post by Scoundreller »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #213
Scoundreller wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People that ignore expiry dates. And at least in our household's case, a clinically ignored case of endometriosis.

a clinically ignored case of endometriosis That's exactly what I mean (and the sibling posting is more of the same). If you need more than six doses in a row then you should see a physician for a thorough workup because loperamide is just for the symptoms. The package will say as much. It's really hard to find fault with the FDA coming down on the extended-family size packaging.

I meant the clinician's ignorance about endometriosis.

The package will say to take 2 tabs stat and 1 after each loose bowel movement. Not hard to go through a dozen+ each menstrual cycle.

Post reply on HN