Great big bunch of coke heads!!

sobriquet · 07-11-2005 3:21pm

I don't see how being anti drugs could ever be described as a bad thing?

It can if it comes from an emotional or otherwise irrational standpoint - this is why I took issue with your categorical statement that illegal narcotics are bad irrespective of use, and why I brought up the medicinal use of cannabis.

Rejecting the use of any drugs, narcotic or otherwise, in the face of evidence that it could be used in treatment of disease is, to my mind, irrational and unreasonable. While I'm at it, so is the attitude that it is impossible for a mature adult to use drugs recreationally in a safe and educated manner, this flies in the face of reason.

audge · 07-11-2005 3:24pm

sobriquet wrote:

Rejecting the use of any drugs, narcotic or otherwise, in the face of evidence that it could be used in treatment of disease is, to my mind, irrational and unreasonable. QUOTE]

I refused to comment on the use of marcotics for medicinal purposes until I researched the topic, so I never gave my opinion on that matter.

And yes, my original post was quite irrational and emotional as it was posted as a personal issue, and at the time of post was something I was very worked up about.

Playboy · 07-11-2005 3:31pm

Wicknight wrote:

Like hyper idiots ... BTW coke mixed with alochol greatly increases aggression, so where people got the idea that coke was a nice mello drug like hash I have no idea.

Tbh Wicknight I am bit suprised with you. You usually can argue a point quite well but you have to be able to see the obvious flaws with your pov. Cocaine like any other drug has certain characteristics. But you cannot generalize behaviour on any drug. Some people behave like hyper idiots on the drug but others do not. I can garuntee you that for every hyper idiot you see on cocaine there are 2 who you wouldnt even notice were on the drug. The reason why cocaine is popular as a drug is because it is a discreet drug. You can socialize and even work on the drug w/o anyone even noticing you have taken it.

Wicknight wrote:

No it isn't, if I asked you to explain how most people acted when drunk it would be pretty easy for you to give a list of noticable behaviours, such as sluring of speach, lack of balance, aggressiveness etc

I didnt ask you how people act when drunk .. I asked how do people act when they drink. Big difference. Does everybody get drunk when they drink? No they don't because quite a few people drink in moderation. Also people can be very different when drunk. Some people can be agressive others are not. Like I said earlier you are making ridiculous generalizations.

Wicknight wrote:

Sure thats like saying why shouldn't I be allowed masterbate in a public cinema? No problem in the privacy of ones home, but in public ... And thats before you get on to the fact that it is illegal

Ye you are right ... its the very same thing :rolleyes:

Wicknight wrote:

And the other people in the class who agree with her?.. and society? ... and the law? ... everyone has a problem but the people actually taking coke right? :rolleyes:

You and people like you can bury your head in the sand all ye like. The fact is that drug laws and drug policy in this country and many others are out of date. Drugs are part of our society and always will be. People can continue to ignore obvious facts and listen to misinformation and propogandist claims but it doesnt change the widespread use and increase in use of illegal drugs in this country and others. It is this intolerant and uneducated attitude that causes rapists and peadaeophiles to get more leniant sentences than first offence hash dealers. People have to face up the problem of drugs in our society with an open mind or the whole situation is only going to get worse

old_lady · 07-11-2005 3:55pm

Ok, i haven't read all of the posts, cos there are about a million of them, but from, what I can gather, no need for people to keep attacking the OP.

she had an issue, which has been resolved.
she has even admitted to being a bit wrong in her original opinion.
She has taken a lot of advice on board and agreed that lecturing these people is not th way to go....

so maybe, just maybe, if we still wish to discuss the pro's and con's of illegal drug use, we could heave her out of it?

(please don't attack me now, I'm fragile:p )

Dave! · 07-11-2005 4:07pm

*angry mob slowly approaches old lady*

:mad:

Zombrex · 07-11-2005 4:18pm

Playboy wrote:

Cocaine like any other drug has certain characteristics. But you cannot generalize behaviour on any drug.

Yes you can because cocaine has the same biological effect on everyone who takes it. Of course the degree will vary with certain people, just as you can find drunk person who shows no outward signs of being drug (especially if they are alcholoics).

But the majority of people when drunk experience the same effects, just like the majority of people on coke experience the same effects.

To say that coke effects everyone differently is nonsense, the effects of cocaine on the human body are well documented. For someone going on about spreading propaganda about drug use you don't seem to be really listening to your own advice.

Playboy wrote:

I can garuntee you that for every hyper idiot you see on cocaine there are 2 who you wouldnt even notice were on the drug.

I doubt it

Playboy wrote:

I didnt ask you how people act when drunk .. I asked how do people act when they drink. Big difference.

Like I said before it is not possible to consume a "safe" level of cocaine, anyone on cocaine is "drunk" on cocaine by simply taking it, in that they have taken more than can be safely processed by the human body, just like a drunk person has with alcohol. The same is not true of drink, it is possible to consume a low level of alcohols so that the body can safely process that amount (though most people in Ireland don't).

Playboy wrote:

You and people like you can bury your head in the sand all ye like.

Funny, I was just claiming that the pro-illegal drug crowd was doing the same thing -

- Cocaine dealers are nice and friends, they wouldn't harm you or others.

- Buying drugs doesn't fund crime and murder (see above)

- Cocaine has no damaging effects on the human body, especially not as bad as the occasional drink or two

- Cocaine is not mixed with other dangerous substances to increase the profit of drug dealers (who are nice and friendly after all)

- Cocaine doesn't lead to outward behavioural effects (most people on cocaine, sure you don't even notice)

- Cocaine doesn't lead to dependence

- Cocaine doesn't cause lasting and serious damage to those taking it.

All of the above are not true, despite the constant repetition of people on this thread, who clearly don't know what they are talking about, saying they are.

Playboy wrote:

The fact is that drug laws and drug policy in this country and many others are out of date.

You are right, I think cigeraettes should be added to the list.

Playboy wrote:

People can continue to ignore obvious facts and listen to misinformation and propogandist claims but it doesnt change the widespread use and increase in use of illegal drugs in this country and others.

Gun crime is on the increase too, should guns be legalised?

Playboy wrote:

People have to face up the problem of drugs in our society with an open mind or the whole situation is only going to get worse

Exactly, which is why the posts that cocaine is harmless to you that you get above, by people who just don't want to feel guilty about taking it, are not helpful.

People can believe all they like that there is no down side to taking a drug like cocaine. As I have said time and time again, I don't care if people take cocaine. I object when people post mis-information about the subject in a public discussion board. The very fact that so much bulls**t is being posted about the drug here shows that people really don't know much about it, they just choose to believe that it is safe and harmless, because they want to keep taking it.

Playboy · 07-11-2005 7:56pm

Wicknight wrote:

Yes you can because cocaine has the same biological effect on everyone who takes it. Of course the degree will vary with certain people, just as you can find drunk person who shows no outward signs of being drug (especially if they are alcholoics).

But the majority of people when drunk experience the same effects, just like the majority of people on coke experience the same effects.

To say that coke effects everyone differently is nonsense, the effects of cocaine on the human body are well documented. For someone going on about spreading propaganda about drug use you don't seem to be really listening to your own advice.

There is a big difference between feeling and behaviour. People feel similar effects when consuming substances such as cocaine but their behaviour varies greatly. I'm not spreading propoganda about anything. You are the stereotyping and generalizing w/o any hard facts to back you up.

Wicknight wrote:

I doubt it

You can doubt it all you want but until you take the drug you wont know.

Wicknight wrote:

Like I said before it is not possible to consume a "safe" level of cocaine, anyone on cocaine is "drunk" on cocaine by simply taking it, in that they have taken more than can be safely processed by the human body, just like a drunk person has with alcohol. The same is not true of drink, it is possible to consume a low level of alcohols so that the body can safely process that amount (though most people in Ireland don't).

My point is that it is an individuals choice if they want want to take that risk .. not yours. Just like with smoking, alcohol or skydiving.

Wicknight wrote:

- Cocaine dealers are nice and friends, they wouldn't harm you or others.

Somare nice people and can be friends. Others are not. It is stupid to generalize either way.

Wicknight wrote:

- Buying drugs doesn't fund crime and murder (see above)

Yes ofc it does. What can we do about that? We have to realize that people are not going to stop taking drugs so we are going to have to try and do something about it. I'm not saying legalize drugs but a solution to the problem needs to be worked on as a blanket ban just isnt working.

Wicknight wrote:

- Cocaine has no damaging effects on the human body, especially not as bad as the occasional drink or two

Ofc it has damaging effects but if you are a moderate or recreational user then these effects are no worse than most of the prescribed medication out there such as anti-deppressants or sleeping pills.

Wicknight wrote:

- - Cocaine is not mixed with other dangerous substances to increase the profit of drug dealers (who are nice and friendly after all)

It is rarely mixed with a very dangerous substance. Mostly cociane and speed will be cut with a harmless substance like glucose.

Wicknight wrote:

- Cocaine doesn't lead to outward behavioural effects (most people on cocaine, sure you don't even notice)

Yes it does lead to a change in behaviour but the change in behaviout is not always negative. Most users will tell you that they just feel more confident and chatty.

Wicknight wrote:

- - Cocaine doesn't lead to dependence

Ofc it can lead to dependence .. anyone who says different is just plain stupid. It is also physically addictive and can potentially destroy someones life. But again this is just like alcohol. That choice is up to the individual.

Wicknight wrote:

- - Cocaine doesn't cause lasting and serious damage to those taking it.

That depends on just how much you take and for how long. Same as with most other drugs legal and illegal.

Wicknight wrote:

- You are right, I think cigeraettes should be added to the list.

I thin so too because cigarettes have the potential to harm someone else.

Wicknight wrote:

- Gun crime is on the increase too, should guns be legalised?

I dont know why you make these kinds of comments. This is completely different issue. And btw I'm not pro-drugs either and dont think they should be legalized.

Zombrex · 07-11-2005 9:21pm

Playboy wrote:

People feel similar effects when consuming substances such as cocaine but their behaviour varies greatly.

Not really, the biological effects are pretty much the same, as is the bodies response to it. Cocaine, like any drug including alcohol, has a physical effect on the human body as soon as it is consumed.

Increased temperature, dilated pupils, increased blood pressure, restricted blood vessels, an increased heart rate are all common effects of cocaine. They create a feeling of pressure in the person, resulting in hyper-activity, lack of concentration, and in later stages increase in stress as the effects wear off.

Playboy wrote:

I'm not spreading propoganda about anything. You are the stereotyping and generalizing w/o any hard facts to back you up.

Don't be ridiculous, it is nothing to do with stereotyping someone. That's like stating that "Everyone will fall asleep given a strong enough tranqualiser" is stereotyping people. Cocaine, just like alochol, has a specific effect on the human body, it doesn't matter what type of person you are.

Playboy wrote:

My point is that it is an individuals choice if they want want to take that risk .. not yours. Just like with smoking, alcohol or skydiving.

Like I have said a millions times, if someone wants to take coke I have no problem with that.

Playboy wrote:

I'm not saying legalize drugs but a solution to the problem needs to be worked on as a blanket ban just isnt working.

A start would be to show people the truth about drugs and how it funds crime instead of nonsense about local drug dealers being nice guys.

Playboy wrote:

Ofc it has damaging effects but if you are a moderate or recreational user then these effects are no worse than most of the prescribed medication out there such as anti-deppressants or sleeping pills.

Omg ... You see this is exactly what I am talking about. The effects of cocaine use, even recreational (usage once a week for say a year) are far far worse on the human body than sleeping pills. It is that kinda bulls**t that is the problem. Do you even know what cocaine actually does to the brain and heart?

Playboy wrote:

It is rarely mixed with a very dangerous substance. Mostly cociane and speed will be cut with a harmless substance like glucose.

True, but it is routinely mixed with harmful substances. Do you get a money back guarantee when you buy your cocaine if it kills you? Or has the health inspector made sure you cocaine is supplied in a safe manner? Or are you just taking it on faith?

Of put it another way, would you buy bread from your local supermarket if there was a 1/50 chance it would cause a serious heart attack? What about 1/100 chance? 1/200 chance?

Playboy wrote:

Yes it does lead to a change in behaviour but the change in behaviout is not always negative. Most users will tell you that they just feel more confident and chatty.

Yeah like i said, hyperactive idiots. Not that there is anything wrong with being a hyperactive idiot.

Playboy wrote:

Ofc it can lead to dependence .. anyone who says different is just plain stupid. It is also physically addictive and can potentially destroy someones life. But again this is just like alcohol. That choice is up to the individual.

True. A lot of people on here who preach the joys of cocaine will tell you it is impossible to become dependent on cocaine.

Playboy wrote:

That depends on just how much you take and for how long. Same as with most other drugs legal and illegal.

Actually, as I said before, their is no safe level of cocaine. Even if you only do it once you have damaged your heart vessels and your liver. Not seriously mind, unless you are talking cocaine with cigeretts (dangerous) or alcohol (quite dangerous) or it is mixed with something (very dangerous). But then again who only does cocaine just once?

Playboy wrote:

I thin so too because cigarettes have the potential to harm someone else.

Well my objection is that it should be illegal to make money by feeding the addictions of others in a harmful manner. Same reason I think selling cocaine should be illegal.

Playboy wrote:

I dont know why you make these kinds of comments. This is completely different issue. And btw I'm not pro-drugs either and dont think they should be legalized.

So do you not think education on the truth about drugs and the drugs industry is a good attempt at a dealing with a real problem? And telling people that cocaine use is no more harmful than sleeping pills is not education (or true)

audge · 08-11-2005 12:42pm

http://www.clamnuts.com/comics/comics-pdf/shiznit%20issue%201.pdf

http://www.clamnuts.com/comics/comics-pdf/shiznit-issue-2.pdf

http://www.clamnuts.com/comics/shiznit.php

Dave! · 08-11-2005 12:51pm

...is that where you learn about drugs?

What the hell are those magazines?

audge · 08-11-2005 12:55pm

DaveMcG wrote:

...is that where you learn about drugs?

What the hell are those magazines?

No no, a friend from college, who obviously felt the same way about the class coke situation, put them together with a mate of his, he just sent me the links so thought I would share!

growler · 08-11-2005 5:57pm

someone must be selling your friends some very strange "coke" indeed, the "you're my bestest friend" is not typically a cocaine user's mental state, in fact I don' think I've ever seen a coke user experience a bout of "loved-upness". ( unless the sentence ended with... "you're my best friend can I have more of your charlie ?" ).

I'm bowing out this polarised debate, unfortunately I believe there is no truly objective viewpoint that any of us can reference in relation to the minutae of the health risks associated with cocaine use for humans of "normal" health, no matter what either side of the pro / anti debate references there will be another website/ report / blog / comic that contradicts.

Playboy · 08-11-2005 8:10pm

Wicknight wrote:

Not really, the biological effects are pretty much the same, as is the bodies response to it. Cocaine, like any drug including alcohol, has a physical effect on the human body as soon as it is consumed.

Increased temperature, dilated pupils, increased blood pressure, restricted blood vessels, an increased heart rate are all common effects of cocaine. They create a feeling of pressure in the person, resulting in hyper-activity, lack of concentration, and in later stages increase in stress as the effects wear off.

A biological effect doesnt equal behaviour. People can feel sexually aroused on cocaine ... that doesnt mean they are going to try and have sex with someone. We can get into the psychology of behaviour if you want but it would be pointless because you are wrong. Peoples behaviour varies greatly on substances like cocaine and xtc. They can have common features like dancing etc but individuals are unique therfore their reaction to the same feelings or effects are going to be unique.

Wicknight wrote:

Don't be ridiculous, it is nothing to do with stereotyping someone. That's like stating that "Everyone will fall asleep given a strong enough tranqualiser" is stereotyping people. Cocaine, just like alochol, has a specific effect on the human body, it doesn't matter what type of person you are.

You dont be ridiculous. People react to stimulants differently, it has everything to do with the type of person you are. You are applying stereotypes of general behavioural characteristics across the board to everybody.

Wicknight wrote:

A start would be to show people the truth about drugs and how it funds crime instead of nonsense about local drug dealers being nice guys.

Try and deal realistically with the issues instead of repeating someones naive view of drug dealers. Ofc drugs are going to fund crime if they are illegal. How do we solve this problem. People are always going to do drugs so should we leagalize them to take the crime element out of it? What do you suggest?

Wicknight wrote:

Omg ... You see this is exactly what I am talking about. The effects of cocaine use, even recreational (usage once a week for say a year) are far far worse on the human body than sleeping pills. It is that kinda bulls**t that is the problem. Do you even know what cocaine actually does to the brain and heart?

Please point me to the literature that suggests that moderate cocaine use leads to extreme health problems. Here, here and here are articles about the negative effects of sleeping pills.

Wicknight wrote:

True, but it is routinely mixed with harmful substances. Do you get a money back guarantee when you buy your cocaine if it kills you? Or has the health inspector made sure you cocaine is supplied in a safe manner? Or are you just taking it on faith?

What do you mean by routinely? Where are you getting this information? I dont get a safety guarantee with cigarettes or alcohol. If I get lung cancer or die of alcohol poisioning then thats my problem. We all know substances are harmful. It's a risk people take.

Wicknight wrote:

Of put it another way, would you buy bread from your local supermarket if there was a 1/50 chance it would cause a serious heart attack? What about 1/100 chance? 1/200 chance?

Where are you gettting these ridiculous figures? If there was 1/200 chance of getting a heart attack from cocaine there would be bodies everywhere.

Wicknight wrote:

Yeah like i said, hyperactive idiots. Not that there is anything wrong with being a hyperactive idiot.

Stereotyping and generalizing again. I have been around plenty of people who don't act like hyperactive idiots on cocaine. People usually are afraid of what they dont know and can react quite irrationally and negatively to people in a different social circle.

Wicknight wrote:

Actually, as I said before, their is no safe level of cocaine. Even if you only do it once you have damaged your heart vessels and your liver. Not seriously mind, unless you are talking cocaine with cigeretts (dangerous) or alcohol (quite dangerous) or it is mixed with something (very dangerous). But then again who only does cocaine just once?

We have had this discussion. People are free to take whatever risks they like with their own bodies. I think you are greatly exaggerating the health problems associated with moderate cocaine use. People who use cocaine moderatly at the weekend live perfectly normal and healthy lives. People are not droping dead everywhere of heart attacks and suffering from extreme health problems. Like any drug heavy use is going to lead to health problems but thats not what we are talking about.

Wicknight wrote:

So do you not think education on the truth about drugs and the drugs industry is a good attempt at a dealing with a real problem? And telling people that cocaine use is no more harmful than sleeping pills is not education (or true)

And whats your truth about drugs? That everyone who takes cocaine is a hyperactive idiot and every drug dealer is a psycho who wants to either poision you or shoot you? What a media influenced opinion on the subject :rolleyes:

Sarah** · 10-11-2005 11:46pm

Why do people do coke ?
It's an interesting and fairly subtle drug when taken in moderation, it gives you increased self confidence, it makes you think you are being sophisticated, articulate, charming and amusing, it seems to give you a mental edge (i.e. it makes your brain work faster) , it allows you to drink a lot more than you otherwise could without it. When self confidence mutates into aggression then its not necessarily the drug's fault it is as much to do with the personality involved, a few double Jamesons would probably result in the same attitude.
Many coke users far prefer it to booze, because its often a cheaper than drinking all night, you don't puke, get hangovers or drool , you can tell the taxi driver where you are going without slurring etc. etc. Nosebleeds are usually a sign of very poor quality charlie ( though not always) , and in general the quality of coke in ireland is very poor.

Personally I think that in moderation its no more dangerous than drink.

i totally agree with the above!! Growler is correct in what he says but i also think audge.....your more angry because of your sister who is in trouble is using it and she is your baby sister.....dont impose your thoughts on other ppl especially on such a widely debatable topic.

Each to their own.

Zombrex · 11-11-2005 4:32pm

Before I continue I would ask both Sarah** and Playboy to define "moderate"

Playboy · 11-11-2005 9:00pm

Wicknight wrote:

Before I continue I would ask both Sarah** and Playboy to define "moderate"

Maybe someone who shares a gram with a couple of their friends when out on a saturday night.

edanto · 11-11-2005 10:20pm

Playboy wrote:

You can socialize and even work on the drug w/o anyone even noticing you have taken it.

Ya reckon?

Maybe someone could get away with it a little, but not for long. People notice, people talk.

Please point me to the literature that suggests that moderate cocaine use leads to extreme health problems.

There's obviously the problem of defining moderate - but a Pubmed search for 'recreational cocaine use' finds about 70 articles. Some aren't relevant, but a lot of the titles are scary.

Research is linking cocaine use with heart problems, not to mention the obvious effects on the airway and the liver/kidney.

Also, you drew a disingenuous comparison with sleeping pills, since they're prescribed to people with a problem and the benefits/side effects are listed on the packet. Not likely to get a bag of coke with a warning saying 'this powder may turn you into a d1ckhead and give you a heart attack'

But, is it right for the government to regulate what other people choose to put into their own bodies?

Sure it is, for the greater good and all that.

Playboy · 11-11-2005 11:20pm

edanto wrote:

Ya reckon?

Maybe someone could get away with it a little, but not for long. People notice, people talk.

Listen I don't want to come across like I'm defending or encouraging the use of cocaine as I don't even use recreational drugs myself. I'm not implying that someone can use cocaine regularly at work and not be noticed. What I am saying is that as recreational drugs go, cocaine is one of the most discreet. The signs are not as obvious as say if someone was using xtc, lsd, heroin etc. I have been around many people in different social circles who use cocaine and I have found the behaviour of the majority fine just like I find the behaviour of the majority of people on drink fine. Ofc you are going to get some people who use too much just like you do with alcohol but that is no reason to insinuate that everyone who uses cocaine behaves like a "hyperactive idiot".

edanto wrote:

There's obviously the problem of defining moderate - but a Pubmed search for 'recreational cocaine use' finds about 200 articles. Some aren't relevant, but a lot of the titles are scary.

Research is linking cocaine use with heart problems, not to mention the obvious effects on the airway and the liver/kidney.

Also, you drew a disingenuous comparison with sleeping pills, since they're prescribed to people with a problem and the benefits/side effects are listed on the packet. Not likely to get a bag of coke with a warning saying 'this powder may turn you into a d1ckhead and give you a heart attack'

But, is it right for the government to regulate what other people choose to put into their own bodies? Sure it is, the greater good and all that.

I'm not trying to say that long term cocaine use is not going to be bad for your health. My point is that many persription medications from anti-depressants to sleeping pills, which are perscribed all too easy and for long periods of time, have side effects which can be just as scary as moderate cocaine use.

My main objection is the totalitarian and no tolerance attitude people have to drug use in our society. That attitude in many countries has been proven not to work. People need to face up to the fact that there is an ever increasing number of people taking drugs in this country and we need to adjust our attitude and our drug policies to try and deal with the problem whether its user dependency, or as Wicknight said, the funding of crime. It makes me sick when I open a newspaper to see that our society treats petty drug dealers as harshly as paedophiles or rapists if not more harshly in some cases.

edanto · 11-11-2005 11:48pm

Fair enough - I gather that you're not a supporter of people using cocaine - merely trying to show that the it's not exactly in a class of it's own way above some legal and popular sustances. No argument here.

My mind isn't made up on the best way to deal with the problem though.

Should it be less of crime than it is or, on the other hand, should drug users be more ridiculed in society and generally made to feel embarassed about their habit?

That second approach could be a Pandora's box, given that there's probably some pre-existing connection between cocaine use and confidence problems (I'm basing that on what people have said earlier in this thread about the benefits of snorting).

There's probably more elegant solutions that would involve (expensive) support and treatment facilities and a lot more research into the reasons people take/come off Class As.

Zombrex · 12-11-2005 2:45pm

playboy wrote:

If there was 1/200 chance of getting a heart attack from cocaine there would be bodies everywhere.

Firstly I didn't saying there was a 1/200 chance, I asked you what odds would you consider "safe" ... I notice no one replied.

Seconldy there are bodies everywhere -

In the first 6 months of 2003 87 people died in UK due to cocaine consumption[1]. That is in 6 months. It is also a rising trend, so its safe to assume that at least 80 people died in the last 6 months of 2003 (probably a lot more due to increase of consumption around Christmas, but we will be conservative with these statistics). That is about 170 people dying in 2003 due cocaine in England. In Scotland the number was 37 for 2004.[2]

These are not binge cocaine users, they are young professionals with expendle income who are using cocaine recreationaly at the weekend. Moderate users as Playboy and Sarah** would say.

A quote from Dr Fabrizio Schifano, addiction researcher at St George's medical school in Tooting -

"People who use drugs after a hard week at work don't consider themselves addicts. They may take a combination of stimulants, which is more often implicated in fatalities. But these drugs can also kill on their own.
...
"Typically, we'll see people in our clinic who have become addicted through social habits. They go to a club, they drink a lot, they are offered coke and they take it. Then they crash out on a Sunday, and are back to work again on Monday morning. They will feel depressed and low, but they can get through the week until Friday when they start all over again.

Cocaine in moderate use is pattern forming. People need it to enjoy the weekend, as it is depresses the brain when it is not been taken. Moderate use is not addictive in the way crack cocaine, heroin or cigaretts are, but if you can't enjoy yourself without it then that can be considered an addiction.

The trends from America are of a similar line [3]-

In Baltimore City (pop approx 640,000) 299 people died due to cocaine consumption in 2002. 204 people died to taking a drug with alcohol (get to that in a minute).

In Atlanta city (pop approx 470,000) 155 people died to cocaine consumption in 2002

Seeing a trend here ...

People die from taking cocaine, and it is not just heavy drug addicts, but "moderate" users as Playboy calls them.

Of course the idea that if a drug doesn't directly kill you straight away it is "safe" is nonsense. Even moderate use of cocaine leads to heart trouble in later life

If you want to take the risks thats fine. I would suggest you have a proper check up with your GP before hand to make sure you heart can take it first, but if taking cocaine is that important to you, and you understand the risks, go right a head.

My objection is the miss-information being propagated through society these days that cocaine is a safe drug (or ridiculous statements that it is as safe as alcohol or sleeping pills). This ignores the fact that you have to seriously abuse alcohol or prescription medicine before you get to the same level of damage that moderate use of cocaine does. And I would be as vocal if someone claimed that binge drinking was harmless to them.

One of the most dangerous elements of "moderate" cocaine use is the fact that it is used in a night out setting and in the vast majority of cases it is mixed with alcohol. Why is this bad? Because of a long word: Cocaethylene

Cocaethylene is produced in the human liver when cocaine is consummed with alochol. From the Observer interview -
"Heavy drinking with the drug really pushes up the level of risk,' said Schifano. 'Most people take it with alcohol, not realising that it increases the chance of having a stroke or a heart attack."

Cocaethylene greatly increase the risk of sudden heart attack in the user as the body -

"Cocaethylene is an active metabolite of cocaine believed to play a causative role in the increased incidence of sudden death in individuals who coadminister ethanol with cocaine".[4]

"Cocaine and ethanol in combination were more toxic than either substance alone. Co-administration resulted in prolonged cardiac toxicity and was dysrhythmogenic. Peak serum cocaethylene concentrations were associated with prolonged myocardial depression."[5]

"Many promising athletes have died due to such pathologies most due to cocaine ingestion."[6]

I wouldn't want anyone to think that if cocaine and drink doesn't kill them that night it hasn't actually done anything. I am not saying this to scare people about sudden death, because that is still relatively rare amoung cocaine users. But point is if it can cause sudden death due to heart attack in some people, just think what it is actually doing to your heart everytime you take cocaine. The strain and damage it does is rather horrifying. Just cause you don't die right there doesn't mean it isn't doing long term damage, even with 4 lines on a saturday night. Combine this with production of Cocaethylene and simply the effects of drink, you are doing serious damage to your body every Saturday night.

By all means do it if you understand the risks and what it actually does. But I hope this will spur some cocaine users who believed cocaine was harmless to actually do some research on the subject and find out exactly what it does to you.

[1] http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1222814,00.html
[2] http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/press/news2005/drug-related-deaths-in-scotland-in-2004.html
[3] http://www.samhsa.gov/news/newsreleases/ACF20D.htm
[4] http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/271/1/319
[5] http://www.aemj.org/cgi/content/abstract/8/3/211
[6] http://sulcus.berkeley.edu/mcb/165_001/papers/manuscripts/_265.html

Zombrex · 12-11-2005 2:47pm

BTW, I am not using the information above as a reason why cocaine should be illegal or not. My reasons why I believe it should be illegal are different

THe purpose of posting the above is to counter some serious miss-information presented on the thread. If people understand the risks and want to do it anyway that is fine by me. But i very much doubt, from reading this thread, that people understand or even consider the health risks with taking cocaine. And that is a crime in itself.

Playboy · 12-11-2005 5:02pm

Wicknight wrote:

Firstly I didn't saying there was a 1/200 chance, I asked you what odds would you consider "safe" ... I notice no one replied.

Seconldy there are bodies everywhere -

An Exaggeration don't you think.

Wicknight wrote:

In the first 6 months of 2003 87 people died in UK due to cocaine consumption[1]. That is in 6 months. It is also a rising trend, so its safe to assume that at least 80 people died in the last 6 months of 2003 (probably a lot more due to increase of consumption around Christmas, but we will be conservative with these statistics). That is about 170 people dying in 2003 due cocaine in England. In Scotland the number was 37 for 2004.[2]

These are not binge cocaine users, they are young professionals with expendle income who are using cocaine recreationaly at the weekend. Moderate users as Playboy and Sarah** would say.

How do you know they were not binge users of cocaine. Links to the report which tells us how much cocaine they had in their system pls.

Wicknight wrote:

A quote from Dr Fabrizio Schifano, addiction researcher at St George's medical school in Tooting -

"People who use drugs after a hard week at work don't consider themselves addicts. They may take a combination of stimulants, which is more often implicated in fatalities. But these drugs can also kill on their own.
...
"Typically, we'll see people in our clinic who have become addicted through social habits. They go to a club, they drink a lot, they are offered coke and they take it. Then they crash out on a Sunday, and are back to work again on Monday morning. They will feel depressed and low, but they can get through the week until Friday when they start all over again.

An opinion from a researcher. Links to the studies that prove his point.

Wicknight wrote:

Cocaine in moderate use is pattern forming. People need it to enjoy the weekend, as it is depresses the brain when it is not been taken. Moderate use is not addictive in the way crack cocaine, heroin or cigaretts are, but if you can't enjoy yourself without it then that can be considered an addiction.

And who's opinion is this then? Again links to studies that are not correlational and actually prove the researchers findings.

Wicknight wrote:

The trends from America are of a similar line [3]-

In Baltimore City (pop approx 640,000) 299 people died due to cocaine consumption in 2002. 204 people died to taking a drug with alcohol (get to that in a minute).

In Atlanta city (pop approx 470,000) 155 people died to cocaine consumption in 2002

Are these crack addicts or moderate cocaine users. I would probably think that most if not all of these deaths are related to over consumption.

Wicknight wrote:

People die from taking cocaine, and it is not just heavy drug addicts, but "moderate" users as Playboy calls them.

Of course the idea that if a drug doesn't directly kill you straight away it is "safe" is nonsense. Even moderate use of cocaine leads to heart trouble in later life

I'm sure people die from taking cocaine but the risk of dying suddenly from a heart attack is minimal.

Wicknight wrote:

If you want to take the risks thats fine. I would suggest you have a proper check up with your GP before hand to make sure you heart can take it first, but if taking cocaine is that important to you, and you understand the risks, go right a head.

Most drug users are probably well aware of the risks contrary to popular belief. I have yet to meet one person irl who didnt know what they were geting themselves in for.

Wicknight wrote:

My objection is the miss-information being propagated through society these days that cocaine is a safe drug (or ridiculous statements that it is as safe as alcohol or sleeping pills). This ignores the fact that you have to seriously abuse alcohol or prescription medicine before you get to the same level of damage that moderate use of cocaine does. And I would be as vocal if someone claimed that binge drinking was harmless to them.

Misinformation and propoganda goes both ways. A report in the new scientist a few years back contradicted most of the studies done on the harms of xtc in the US. America has a lot invested in the war on drugs and they are no stranger to propoganda.

Wicknight wrote:

One of the most dangerous elements of "moderate" cocaine use is the fact that it is used in a night out setting and in the vast majority of cases it is mixed with alcohol. Why is this bad? Because of a long word: Cocaethylene

Cocaethylene is produced in the human liver when cocaine is consummed with alochol. From the Observer interview -
"Heavy drinking with the drug really pushes up the level of risk,' said Schifano. 'Most people take it with alcohol, not realising that it increases the chance of having a stroke or a heart attack."

Cocaethylene greatly increase the risk of sudden heart attack in the user as the body -

"Cocaethylene is an active metabolite of cocaine believed to play a causative role in the increased incidence of sudden death in individuals who coadminister ethanol with cocaine".[4]

"Cocaine and ethanol in combination were more toxic than either substance alone. Co-administration resulted in prolonged cardiac toxicity and was dysrhythmogenic. Peak serum cocaethylene concentrations were associated with prolonged myocardial depression."[5]

"Many promising athletes have died due to such pathologies most due to cocaine ingestion."[6]

I'm not saying that using drugs and drinking alcohol isnt dangerous. But as you say about 170 people died in the Uk from cocaine. I wonder how many crack or cocaine addicts are in the UK? I wonder how many of the 170 deaths were moderate cocaine users? Come to think of it I would like to see 170 as a percentage of the estimated cocaine users in the UK?

Wicknight wrote:

I wouldn't want anyone to think that if cocaine and drink doesn't kill them that night it hasn't actually done anything. I am not saying this to scare people about sudden death, because that is still relatively rare amoung cocaine users. But point is if it can cause sudden death due to heart attack in some people, just think what it is actually doing to your heart everytime you take cocaine. The strain and damage it does is rather horrifying. Just cause you don't die right there doesn't mean it isn't doing long term damage, even with 4 lines on a saturday night. Combine this with production of Cocaethylene and simply the effects of drink, you are doing serious damage to your body every Saturday night.

By all means do it if you understand the risks and what it actually does. But I hope this will spur some cocaine users who believed cocaine was harmless to actually do some research on the subject and find out exactly what it does to you.

I applaud your efforts to inform people of the dangers of a drug. But try not insulting them in future b4 you do it.

Zombrex · 12-11-2005 7:17pm

Playboy no offense, but what are you talking about?

I made claims that you asked me to back up. when I did back them you dismiss them as "propaganda" or try and deflect the issue with statments like "How do you know they were not binge users of cocaine?" or "Well that is just someones opinion" (a doctor in biology and drug abuse) :rolleyes:

You seem to be convinced of this vast international media and government conspiriciy to provide miss information about drug use. Everyone that says something you personally don't want to hear must by lying. THat is nonsense, but it makes it rather pointless to discuss things with you because you dismiss any evidence, opinion or research as being propagranda. The only person who is right is you, despite the fact that you are basing your opinions on nothing but the very limited contact you have had with cocaine users who were probably your friends anyway. Rose tinted classes anyone.

I could spend another hour find even more research to back up my claims, to with you would probably reply "More propaganda.." ... it seems rather pointless.

Laguna · 12-11-2005 7:23pm

Is this thread still going?

What's the discussion?

<Mr Mackey voice>Drugs are bad m'kay

Playboy · 12-11-2005 8:02pm

Wicknight wrote:

Playboy no offense, but what are you talking about?

I made claims that you asked me to back up. when I did back them you dismiss them as "propaganda" or try and deflect the issue with statments like "How do you know they were not binge users of cocaine?" or "Well that is just someones opinion" (a doctor in biology and drug abuse) :rolleyes:

You seem to be convinced of this vast international media and government conspiriciy to provide miss information about drug use. Everyone that says something you personally don't want to hear must by lying. THat is nonsense, but it makes it rather pointless to discuss things with you because you dismiss any evidence, opinion or research as being propagranda. The only person who is right is you, despite the fact that you are basing your opinions on nothing but the very limited contact you have had with cocaine users who were probably your friends anyway. Rose tinted classes anyone.

I could spend another hour find even more research to back up my claims, to with you would probably reply "More propaganda.." ... it seems rather pointless.

The fact is Wicknight you have provided nothing which backs up your claims. You posted numbers of deaths and you think that this proves moderate cocaine use leads to extreme health problems or death. You have not proved that those deaths are as a result of moderate cocaine use and not binge use. Would you like me to find figures relating to alcohol related deaths and then try and tell you that all these people died from having a few drinks. Get a grip.

How I am supposed know that Dr Fabrizio Schifano, addiction researcher at St George's medical school in Tooting is an independent and reliable source. Where are his studies that back up his claim? Is it an opinion or is it a fact? How am I or you supposed to know? You just expect me to take a claim made on a message board at face value and not be sceptical?

I'm not saying that cocaine isn’t harmful. I'm contending two things here, 1. That all people who take cocaine behave like hyperactive idiots and 2. The over exaggeration of the health problems that stem from moderate cocaine use. You have failed to prove either point so try stop insinuating that I'm looking at the world through rose tinted glasses and am too self righteous to take on board someone else's opinion. Getting Personal in a debate is just a little bit childish.

ger85 · 12-11-2005 8:20pm

i dont think it matters

Zombrex · 13-11-2005 3:51am

Playboy wrote:

You have failed to prove either point

I have failed to "prove" either point to you because any evidence i post in your mind must be propaganda and incorrect because you refuse to consider any position but the one you have already formed about cocaine, base it seems purely on your own experiences with the drug and your friends who take it. And if they are fine it must mean the drug is relatively harmless in moderation, surely.

I've posted the evidence that shows the real and serious health risks of even moderate cocaine use. People can choose to accept that or they can choose to ignore it. People can continue to believe it is no more harmful than drinking alcohol or using prescription medicine. I would imagine most cocaine users here will choose to ignore what I presented and continue to tell themselves that their cocaine use is too moderate to be harmful.

As I said continuing to argue with you when you won't accept anything I present is, as I said, pointless ... I'm out a here

Playboy · 13-11-2005 1:31pm

Wicknight wrote:

I have failed to "prove" either point to you because any evidence i post in your mind must be propaganda and incorrect because you refuse to consider any position but the one you have already formed about cocaine, base it seems purely on your own experiences with the drug and your friends who take it. And if they are fine it must mean the drug is relatively harmless in moderation, surely.

I've posted the evidence that shows the real and serious health risks of even moderate cocaine use. People can choose to accept that or they can choose to ignore it. People can continue to believe it is no more harmful than drinking alcohol or using prescription medicine. I would imagine most cocaine users here will choose to ignore what I presented and continue to tell themselves that their cocaine use is too moderate to be harmful.

As I said continuing to argue with you when you won't accept anything I present is, as I said, pointless ... I'm out a here

The "evidence" that you produced isnt evidence. That is the problem. You were the one making claims about behaviour and health and you have failed to back them up. I have an opinion and I refuse to change that opinion because someone on a message board puts foward their own biased opinion without sufficent evidence to back it up. Don' try and turn this around to make me sound unreasonable. If you had produced reliable evidence to back up your claims then I would have no hesitation in changing my opinions. Cocaine like any other drug including perscription medication has side effects. I'm not trying to deny that. My pov is that in moderation cocaine isnt going to cause people to drop dead or have serious health problems. My other point was that people don't all behave like "hyperactive idiots" when using cocaine. There was nothing produced in this thread that would make me change that opinion.

growler · 13-11-2005 2:25pm

growler wrote:

unfortunately I believe there is no truly objective viewpoint that any of us can reference in relation to the minutae of the health risks associated with cocaine use for humans of "normal" health, no matter what either side of the pro / anti debate references there will be another website/ report / blog / comic that contradicts.

comes back to this, its all subjective and any 3rd party report by any recognised body with likely be influenced by political pressures, as such a political key issue I don't think any respected scientist could / would publish a wholly objective report that concluded that cocaine use was "ok" for certain groups of people without suffering the consequences , and 1st hand reports will be dismissed , correctly, as inignificant.

Also I was surprised that the numbers who died in the UK was so low, so low in fact as to be almost insignificant (statistically speaking) given an estimated 32% of the UK population is thought to have used coke at least once !!! , to put this in perspective 125 people die each year in the USA from an allergic reaction to peanuts, yet peanuts are not illegal, peanut exporting countries are not subject to global political pressures and even though we all know the risks of peanut consumption ( warnings on the relevent packaging) we continue to munch away on this fruit of nature without a second thought.

Penicillin causes 400 deaths per annum in the USA , but because the risks are understood by the medical profession (if not necessarily by patients) this is deemed to be an acceptable risk.

So given the precedents for making the risks known on potentially harmful substances through clear packaging would Wicknight not agree that cocaine, if properly labelled with clear warnings as to the consequences, should be available to consenting adults ? ;-)

Some interesting reading: www.cocaine.org

Zombrex · 13-11-2005 6:42pm

growler wrote:

to put this in perspective 125 people die each year in the USA from an allergic reaction to peanuts

jesus christ, are you kidding me

You quote figures for the UK (87), then start talking about figures for the USA, and people are saying I am distorting the picture!! :rolleyes: ...

127 people died in America from peanuts, out of a population of 200 million

400 people die in American from peniciln out of a population of 200 million

300 people died in Baltimore from cocaine, out a population of 600,000

You do the math

Bloody hell, I think people should be asking Santa for calculators this year

growler wrote:

So given the precedents for making the risks known on potentially harmful substances through clear packaging would Wicknight not agree that cocaine, if properly labelled with clear warnings as to the consequences, should be available to consenting adults ?

I would be all for educating the public about the health risks of cocaine, considering that from your posts, Playboy's posts and a the rest, there seems to be huge mis-understanding and miss-representation of the risks of cocaine use. Basically people don't seem to have a clue about the risks, or even what cocaine does to the human body.

I would also pointout the people who are in danger of nut allergies stop taking nuts, where as cocaine users continue to use cocaine despite the serious risks to their health.

Great big bunch of coke heads!!

Comments