Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland has one of the highest cocaine death rates

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    orourkeda wrote: »
    No matter no miniscule the risks of dying by taking cocaine, I cant think of a more undignified way of dying.

    It's actually dying by sniffing a white powder (or whatever ways its taken).

    How sad is that?
    I think it's sad to miss out on some of the best mind altering experiences life has to offer based on the fear mongering of people that really don't have any clue what their talking about.


  • Options
    #93
    hinault
    Registered Users Posts: 5,932 ✭✭✭hinault


    No loss to society.
    Clowns stupid enough to consume drugs make the choice to do so - especially coke heads.

    Pushers and the users dying, don't get any sympathy from me.

    Waste of space, both.


  • Options
    #94
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    hinault wrote: »
    No loss to society.
    Clowns stupid enough to consume drugs make the choice to do so - especially coke heads.

    Pushers and the users dying, don't get any sympathy from me.

    Waste of space, both.
    Why is it stupid to consume drugs?


  • Options
    #95
    charlemont
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,725 ✭✭✭charlemont


    hinault wrote: »
    No loss to society.
    Clowns stupid enough to consume drugs make the choice to do so - especially coke heads.

    Pushers and the users dying, don't get any sympathy from me.

    Waste of space, both.

    please let me know when someone in your family dies from alcohol /tobacco related diseases so i can attend the funerals and dance around their graves, and ill dance ....:D:D:D:D


  • Options
    #96
    hinault
    Registered Users Posts: 5,932 ✭✭✭hinault


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Why is it stupid to consume drugs?

    You a doper apologist?


    Why is it stupid to take drugs?
    Consider the following for starters.

    1.How did the drugs get here?What misery did the mule have to endure to get the **** that users consume?

    2.What crimes were committed to get the stuff here?What crimes were committed to fund the distribution of the stuff? What was robbed from blameless citizens in order to procure the crime and substance?

    3.What are the effects of the drugs on the consumer of the ****?What are the physiological harmful effects? The pschological harmful effects on the user? The emotionally harmful effects on the user? The apply the same questions regarding effects on the people closest to the person consuming cocaine?

    4.The financial costs of cocaine for the consumer? How is the consumption funded? Are crimes committed to fund that consumption? What is the cost of that crime? The financial cost? the cost to society in terms of drug treatment/rehabilitation?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    hinault
    Registered Users Posts: 5,932 ✭✭✭hinault


    charlemont wrote: »
    please let me know when someone in your family dies from alcohol /tobacco related diseases so i can attend the funerals and dance around their graves, and ill dance ....:D:D:D:D

    Ah the old, alcohol and tobacco are drugs too, argument.

    You won't find any disagreement with me there, amigo.
    they're drugs too and they cause huge damage.

    Two wrongs don't make a right though either.


  • Options
    #98
    Snowie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,048 ✭✭✭✭Snowie


    Nulty wrote: »
    Not that I'd know


    glad to hear it :)


  • Options
    #99
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    UpAgainToday wrote: »
    ... some of the top financial brains use drugs especially cocaine and you have the nerve to include them as weak and you yourself as strong? ...
    Are these the top financial brains who ruined the world's economies and left our finances in such a parlous state that it'll probably take until my grandchildren retire to get the country on an even financial keel?

    I'm now clear on what went wrong - thanks for the insight, but maybe give up watching the old 1980's DVDs starring Michael Douglas.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    Probably all the bands in your music collection, the authors of any books you've read and most the people in any film you've ever watched.
    It's good to know you move in such exalted circles and to hear from a real insider, a genuine A-list celebrity. Are you on first-name terms with all those authours, musicians and actors or does your information come from looking at the pictures in the Daily Mail and Heat Magazine?
    ScumLord wrote: »
    One of the good thing about the likes of cocaine is that it hits you straight away, if you continue to do the dog on it after you've discovered it's 10 times stronger then you've no one to blame but yourself. Unlike with alcohol that can take a good half an hour to start to have effect in which time you could have already overdosed on it.
    Utter rubbish. It's safe to assume you know slightly less about this topic than you do about brain surgery. The first inkling a drug user discovering they just got a "10 times stronger" dose than usual will be saying hello to St Peter at the Pearly Gates.

    Just browsing through the thread it's very sad to say but very clear that if cocaine, alcohol, heroin, tobacco and other drugs were to take their tolls, IMHO we wouldn't lose any potential Nobel prize-winners, Booker prize short-listers or High Court judges.

    C'est la vie as they say in Kilnascully.


  • Options
    #100
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    hinault wrote: »
    No loss to society.
    Clowns stupid enough to consume drugs make the choice to do so - especially coke heads.

    Pushers and the users dying, don't get any sympathy from me.

    Waste of space, both.


    No loss to society? What a stupid thing to say. What makes you the judge on who is a loss to society or not? Did Carl Sagan contribute nothing to society? Has Barrak Obama contributed nothing to society. Kary Mullis? The hundreds of artists, authors, scientists and musicians that were open about thier drug use and God knows how many that weren't? Not to mention the doctors, firemen, engineers, inventors, entreprenuers, hairdressers, mechanics, electricians, sons, daughters, mothers, fathers and people from all walks of life that take recreational drugs? All no loss to society? I doubt anyone is looking for your sympathy. But you should try to avoid sounding really stupid in any case.


  • Options
    #101
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Hinault, what age are you out of interest?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,981 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    hinault wrote: »
    1.How did the drugs get here?What misery did the mule have to endure to get the **** that users consume?

    Solved by legalization.
    hinault wrote: »
    2.What crimes were committed to get the stuff here?What crimes were committed to fund the distribution of the stuff? What was robbed from blameless citizens in order to procure the crime and substance?

    Solved by legalization
    hinault wrote: »
    3.What are the effects of the drugs on the consumer of the ****?What are the physiological harmful effects? The pschological harmful effects on the user? The emotionally harmful effects on the user? The apply the same questions regarding effects on the people closest to the person consuming cocaine?

    After a number of years of these drugs being illegal there is a wealth of evidence that they do less harm then current legal alternatives. And I would like people to be able to choose what they wish to do, rather then tell them because "won't somebody think of the children".
    hinault wrote: »
    4.The financial costs of cocaine for the consumer? How is the consumption funded? Are crimes committed to fund that consumption? What is the cost of that crime? The financial cost? the cost to society in terms of drug treatment/rehabilitation?

    Solved by legalization. The financial burden, similar to the burden of drink and smokes on our health system, could be financed through the taxing of these drugs. We could also fund proper studys into its effects.




    Lets go one thing very clear. Prohibition does not work and it never will. As long as we continue to fight drug use we will continue to victimize a huge portion of our society.


  • Options
    #103
    Predalien
    Closed Accounts Posts: 946 ✭✭✭Predalien


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Is it cocaine though? When you get a load of deaths due to a street drug it can often be because of the things mixed through it more than anything. I'm not saying long term cocaine use is safe or anything but the crap that's mixed through it can't help matters.

    It's a bit of a myth that "bad" coke causes the deaths, cocaine is a drug which causes heart attacks in overdose, there's very little you could mix with it that's more dangerous a substance than cocaine. When mixed with alcohol which most cocaine users do it forms cocaethylene which seems to increase it's toxicity potential. Some cocaine is mixed with lidocaine which is also bad for your heart and so increases the danger but the reality is that poor quality cocaine has a lower risk of death as it's normally just mixed with inert substances like glucose powder.


  • Options
    #104
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users Posts: 13,326 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Lando Griffin wrote: »
    We are always top of the league for everything thats protrayed bad.

    Not strictly true. Its more a case that only on those rare occasions that we happen to be top of these leagues do the newspapers bother reporting it and the scaremongering threads start.

    So if an equivalent survey is done worldwide for methamphetamine deaths or crack-cocaine deaths and we finish way down the league, then the newspapers won't bother reporting it.

    Because God forbid the message gets out there that Ireland is actually a safe and civilised place.


  • Options
    #105
    Predalien
    Closed Accounts Posts: 946 ✭✭✭Predalien


    strobe wrote: »
    A lot of drug overdose deaths are caused by people not knowing exactly how much of the drug they are taking. Like you say it is a minority component in the drug and from dealer to dealer, batch to batch it is rarely exactly the same amount any five times. Someone that is used to taking 2 or 3 grams of coke on a night out from a particular source that is usually say 4-5% pure will still take thier usuall 2 or 3 grams when they get it from another source presuming it is average strength stuff without knowing it is 9-10% pure. So they are taking double thier usual dose.

    If everyone knew that the dose they were taking was gauranteed 6% purity they would be far better able to judge what their body is capable of taking. That's the theory behind strictly regulated stuff leading to fewer OD's.

    Most people used to taking a gram of 10% purity cocaine before feeling unwell won't go out, buy 90% purity and take the exact same amount no more than most people who know they can drink 1.5 litres of 13.5% alcoholic drink before feeling sick will go out and buy a 60% alcoholic drink and then drink 1.5 litres of it.

    You'll probably think this sounds stupid but cocaine overdose isn't dose related, it can occur at any level. Sure the chance of overdose increases the more you take, but can occur also with consumption of only a small amount, so allowing for sale of a certain purity wouldn't prevent deaths. It is also a drug which you only build up short term tolerance to ie. while you are on it, regular social use doesn't build tolerance to the drug unlike alcohol.


  • Options
    #106
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    hinault wrote: »
    You a doper apologist?
    No, I've been using drugs for over 10 years and I've yet to commit any crime to fund my drug use, never been violent towards my fellow man and so far haven't dropped down dead or ended up in hospital.

    1.How did the drugs get here?What misery did the mule have to endure to get the **** that users consume?

    2.What crimes were committed to get the stuff here?What crimes were committed to fund the distribution of the stuff? What was robbed from blameless citizens in order to procure the crime and substance?
    Like Cuddlesworth said these are all problems that arose after prohibition was brought in. People had been using drugs for thousands of years and it didn't cause the kind of crime we see today. It's quite clear and obvious prohibition is the cause of everything you've said there.
    3.What are the effects of the drugs on the consumer of the ****?What are the physiological harmful effects? The pschological harmful effects on the user? The emotionally harmful effects on the user? The apply the same questions regarding effects on the people closest to the person consuming cocaine?
    Drug abuse can be dealt with, it would be much easier to deal with if it was above board and legal. The vast majority of illegal drug users don't end up with those problems though.
    4.The financial costs of cocaine for the consumer? How is the consumption funded? Are crimes committed to fund that consumption? What is the cost of that crime? The financial cost? the cost to society in terms of drug treatment/rehabilitation?
    I pay for drugs using the money I make at work like most drug users.
    mathepac wrote: »
    Utter rubbish. It's safe to assume you know slightly less about this topic than you do about brain surgery. The first inkling a drug user discovering they just got a "10 times stronger" dose than usual will be saying hello to St Peter at the Pearly Gates.
    No it won't it'll be "holy **** man that ****s ****ingcrazyI'mbuzzingoffmytit's letsputonthistune!!".


  • Options
    #107
    --Kaiser--
    Registered Users Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    Obligatory Bill Hicks clip

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J10w3FuCwfQ


  • Options
    #108
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Predalien wrote: »
    You'll probably think this sounds stupid but cocaine overdose isn't dose related, it can occur at any level. Sure the chance of overdose increases the more you take, but can occur also with consumption of only a small amount, so allowing for sale of a certain purity wouldn't prevent deaths. It is also a drug which you only build up short term tolerance to ie. while you are on it, regular social use doesn't build tolerance to the drug unlike alcohol.

    I don't think it sounds stupid. Just innacurate. I'm not sure where you are getting your info man but you are slightly wrong on all counts there.

    Cocaine overdose is dose related, hence the use of the term "overdose" but it can also kill at lower doses particularly when mixed with alcohol, due to something they describe as "sudden death syndrome", but all evidence suggests that risk increases relative to the higher the dose taken aswell. But most cocaine deaths by far are the result of overdoses. So regulation of purity would very much reduce accidental deaths.

    Cocaine tolerance does develop. Both physical and psychological. But you are right it is (primarily) short term tolerance, returning to base in about a week after regular use, regular social use will build tolerance if it is frequent enough. Your brain changes and requires more to notice the effect of the drug. But cokes a wierd drug, some people even report a reverse tolerance where they become more sensitive to it the more they use. Which has also been suggested as a contributing factor in some people to low dose sudden death from cocaine use.

    Either way everything suggests people knowing exactly how much of the drug they are taking would reduce the risk of death.


  • Options
    #109
    Predalien
    Closed Accounts Posts: 946 ✭✭✭Predalien


    strobe wrote: »
    I don't think it sounds stupid. Just innacurate. I'm not sure where you are getting your info man but you are slightly wrong on all counts there.

    Cocaine overdose is dose related, hence the use of the term "overdose" but it can also kill at lower doses particularly when mixed with alcohol, due to something they describe as "sudden death syndrome", but all evidence suggests that risk increases relative to the higher the dose taken aswell. But most cocaine deaths by far are the result of overdoses. So regulation of purity would very much reduce accidental deaths.

    Cocaine tolerance does develop. Both physical and psychological. But you are right it is (primarily) short term tolerance, returning to base in about a week after regular use, regular social use will build tolerance if it is frequent enough. Your brain changes and requires more to notice the effect of the drug. But cokes a wierd drug, some people even report a reverse tolerance where they become more sensitive to it the more they use. Which has also been suggested as a contributing factor in some people to low dose sudden death from cocaine use.

    Either way everything suggests people knowing exactly how much of the drug they are taking would reduce the risk of death.

    That's why I said it'd probably sound sound stupid, you've missed the point I was trying to make. I know the term overdose is used but the reality is it's impossible to give a definitive fatal dose amount as "overdose" can occur at any level, even very small amounts. I'd find it very hard to justify making a substance which can cause sudden death at any dose legal. Even if people knew exactly how much they were taking deaths would still occur due to the nature of the drug.

    As for the tolerance thing I wouldn't consider taking the stuff more than once a week "social use" I'd consider that to be problem use. Also with regards the reverse tolerance thing yeah some studies seem to suggest that long term social use could perhaps cause people to become more sensitive to cocaine, perhaps due to some damage to the heart, leading to sudden death occurring after small doses.


  • Options
    #110
    UpAgainToday
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭UpAgainToday


    orourkeda wrote: »
    Maybe they should stop.

    Then they might do their jobs properly

    Last time I checked their job was to make money, they are doing that pretty well cheers :)


  • Options
    #111
    UpAgainToday
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭UpAgainToday


    mathepac wrote: »
    Are these the top financial brains who ruined the world's economies and left our finances in such a parlous state that it'll probably take until my grandchildren retire to get the country on an even financial keel?

    I'm now clear on what went wrong - thanks for the insight, but maybe give up watching the old 1980's DVDs starring Michael Douglas.

    Yeah and its called competition - so you should be able to understand what happened right? And if not I will ask the ''financial journalist'' to write you a little column on it so you can ''learn'' about ''what happened'' - you sound like one of these ''damn these greedy banker'' types - when you know what your talking about reply to me if you have not expanded your knowledge since they dont reply, pointless cheers :)

    And btw your little Douglas quote was moving shame it has nothing to do with whatever your babbling about, cheers :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    sugarbecks
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭sugarbecks


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    So what?

    Well guided kids with caring parents don't do drugs. Just because you're living next to a dealer doesn't mean that they're going to turn in to junkies.

    Ahahaha, good one. I laughed at this piece of bullshxt along with many others I'd say.

    Well guided kids with caring parents don't do drugs. Haha, look into the real world love. Sorry to burst your bubble, people do as they please. Please god you don't have a son/daughter who happens to end up on drugs. I can only imagine the, "But how did they become drug addicts, I fed them their 5 a day" HAHA.

    I had a cousin whose parents were at a very good end of the scale in terms of career, money, etc. A well off family, who sent this cousin to private school, something like ten grand a year, he was a 'well guided' kid with very caring parents. He's been a drug addict on and off for 15-20 years.

    Many other cases like that, so don't speak your shxt about well guided kids with caring parents don't do drugs, it sounds like you're saying everyone on drugs is basically an unloved child or that their parents didn't raise them properly. PEOPLE WILL DO AS THEY PLEASE


Advertisement