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

On 17th century "cocaine"

resobscura.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 213 posts

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#151

Post by cynicalpeace »

Suppafly wrote: post #145
cynicalpeace wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is 100% true. It seems a DEA source would convince you: https://museum.dea.gov/exhibits/online-exhibits/cannabis-coc... . "In the late 1800s cocaine was used as a primary ingredient for flavor in Coca-Cola. In the early 1900s cocaine in its crude form was removed. Today the extract of the coca leaves, a de-cocainized version, is manufactured in the United States and used in the flavoring for Coca-Cola."

>Today the extract of the coca leaves, a de-cocainized version, is manufactured in the United States and used in the flavoring for Coca-Cola." Interesting, I had always heard that they had to "de-cocainize" the extract outside the US and import the resulting product.

Nope. Coca-Cola and the Stepan Company have worked very hard to keep this fascinating fact under wraps. It's obviously not a good look for them.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#152

Post by dfxm12 »

mossTechnician wrote: post #148
dfxm12 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to oxford languages, the #2 definition of democratize is "make (something) accessible to everyone" [0]. Can you elaborate on why using the dictionary definition of a word is really interesting? 0 - just google define: democratize

I've seen the word used in different contexts, usually as a marketing buzzword, a shortcut to elicit a positive feeling. (This article does not take that route, which is why I found it interesting.) If you look at the Google search recommendations after typing in the word "democratize," for example, you get people trying to understand what it means to "democratize finance" (initially, the solution was almost exclusiv…

All of these examples appear to have the same context: bringing something to the masses, just like a factory produced drug or can of corn.

If you look at the Google search recommendations after typing in the word "democratize," for example, you get people trying to understand what it means to "democratize finance"

I don't see these results (Google search results are personalized). I guess I took for granted that the meaning of the word was well understood or that people would look up words they thought were being used in an odd way.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#153

Post by lisper »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #143
lisper wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's been presumably hundreds of applicants Well, that's exactly the question, isn't it. You can't presume this because the answer to the question turns on the actual fact of the matter.

I'm presuming it because it's very likely, we don't need a double blind randomized controlled study to declare certain things are true. Like that the idea "equality before the law" doesn't exist in this country, unfortunately.

I will not defend the claim that equality before the law exists in the U.S. It's still far from obvious to me that hundreds of entities have applied for coca import permits with legitimate justification and been denied.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#154

Post by fluoridation »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #143
lisper wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's been presumably hundreds of applicants Well, that's exactly the question, isn't it. You can't presume this because the answer to the question turns on the actual fact of the matter.

I'm presuming it because it's very likely, we don't need a double blind randomized controlled study to declare certain things are true. Like that the idea "equality before the law" doesn't exist in this country, unfortunately.

We don't need double blind randomized controlled studies, we just need documentation showing that hundreds of business applied for an exception to import coca leaves for legitimate purposes and were denied.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#155

Post by standardUser »

cannonpr wrote: post #84

The ban on cocaine is kind of annoying even in its pure form, it’s a very useful local anaesthetic with good tolerance, low side effects that few people are allergic to. I have often wished it was included in some of the more advanced first aid kits, or used more widely for minor operations.

Cocaine is sometimes used in the US to stop nose bleeds and for blood vessel constriction generally, in addition to occasional use as a local anesthetic.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#156

Post by zexbha »

jowdones wrote: post #57
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had a hippy friend that discovered coca leaves while hiking in Peru. She packed a bunch to bring back with her to show us her great new discovery for natural energy. Apparently they already knew about these new things called 'coca leaves' at the border because they took them away from her. This is a true story. Friggin hippies man.

She had it easy. A local guy got 3 years in prison with no parole for bringing like 70 coca leaves. The level of retardness of some countries is unbelievable. https://cluj24.ro/pictor-clujean-condamnat-la-inchisoare-pen...

This is a surprise to me. That airport doesn't look at me twice when I travel through it. I've been >30 times and I'm foreign. Never once questioned anything I brought in. To be fair I'm not trafficking anything

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#157

Post by cynicalpeace »

lisper wrote: post #153
cynicalpeace wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm presuming it because it's very likely, we don't need a double blind randomized controlled study to declare certain things are true. Like that the idea "equality before the law" doesn't exist in this country, unfortunately.

I will not defend the claim that equality before the law exists in the U.S. It's still far from obvious to me that hundreds of entities have applied for coca import permits with legitimate justification and been denied.

Great, we agree on the far more important claim

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#158

Post by cynicalpeace »

fluoridation wrote: post #154
cynicalpeace wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm presuming it because it's very likely, we don't need a double blind randomized controlled study to declare certain things are true. Like that the idea "equality before the law" doesn't exist in this country, unfortunately.

We don't need double blind randomized controlled studies, we just need documentation showing that hundreds of business applied for an exception to import coca leaves for legitimate purposes and were denied.

To show that equality before the law doesn't exist in our country?

Also, you're asking for evidence no one can produce. How convenient.

I was being hyperbolic to point out that the "evidenced-based" culture has gone too far, to the point where you need obviously unobtainable evidence to prove something that is obviously true.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#159

Post by stef25 »

benbreen wrote: post #5
Etheryte wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As you would expect, this is covered in the actual paper [0]: > Therefore, the 3rd molecule detected in the brain tissues of our subjects, hygrine (an alkaloid present in the leaves of Erythroxylum spp. only), was essential to determine that the molecules detected in these human remains derived from the chewing of coca leaves or from leaves brewed as a tea, consistent with the historical period. If I'm reading this r…

Author here, I had the same question and looked into it. The author of that comment seems to be onto something because hygrine is indeed found in nightshades as well as in coca. Interesting.

No, it does not appear to be true that hygrine is found in nightshades.

Cuscohygrine does occur in those plants yet it's precursor hygrine does not. How it then gets there without us being able to detect hygrine could be because it only occurs in very small concentrations or is produced and then quickly and wholly converted in to its cusco metabolite, or that it's produced through a different biosynthetic pathway.

Re: On 17th century "cocaine"

#160

Post by stef25 »

DisgracePlacard wrote: post #59
lolinder wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting that hygrine is found in nightshades? The authors of the paper specifically say it's only found in Erythroxylum and I'm not finding any references in my own research to that specific chemical being present in nightshades.

I'm no chemist, but according to wikipedia, cuscohygrine is found in belladona plants and it metabolizes into hygrine. So that could be what he's referring to?

I read the same wikipedia page and that statement is confusing if not incorrect. Hygrine is a not a metabolite of cuscohygrine, it's in fact the other way round: hygrine is the precursor and cuscohygrine is the metabolite.

The first reference on that page is "The role of hygrine in the biosynthesis of cuscohygrine and hyoscyamine"

Post reply on HN