Time to Legalise GHB?

22-10-2008 08:27AM

if people become comfortable with a drug lik this, they'll definately progress onto pills, coke and speed.

just as easy to take but "awh man, you think thats good, try pills.. they're a mad laugh"

and as much as anyone mite like the above drugs, you don't want everyone on them.

meditraitor · 22-10-2008 09:24AM

The_B_Man wrote: »

So what happens if someone takes these drugs, goes to the pub, gets thirsty, orders a 7up, then someone spikes the 7up with a drop of west coast cooler?!?! That person would be well and truly buggered! and dont say this doesnt happen! My ex spiked my carlsberg with west coast cooler before! I had to dump her for her blatent irresponsibility. some people, eh??

Its the chance you have to take, she sounds lika a cold hard bitch your ex. west coast cooler can leave you in awefull mess if you mix it with kebab meat....... or hawaian pizza

seamus · 22-10-2008 09:26AM

vinylmesh wrote: »

If people were properly educated about GHB, and understood it is the same as alcohol, then they wouldn't get pissed out of their brains

Ah bless. You're clearly still young and idealistic. Probably in first or second year of college.

The public at large are morons. You can raise the general education level of the entire population, however educating everyone on one specific topic is next to impossible and even when educated, a significant number of people will ignore/forget what they've learned and do it anyway.

The public will never be educated enough to be trusted to take mind-altering pills in a responsible fashion. The country is littered with upper and middle class, highly educated people (largely women), who are completely addicted to to valium and similar drugs and who take far too much of it.

Imagine if it was freely available. We can barely be trusted to handle our drnk properly.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 10:15AM

seamus wrote: »

Ah bless. You're clearly still young and idealistic. Probably in first or second year of college.

You took half of my sentence and quoted it to make it look like i said something i didn't. Cheap trick tbh.I clearly said if educated people wouldn't get pissed AND THEN EFFECTIVELY DOWN SIX PINTS IN GHB FORM.you didn't leave in that bit, did you.

It's not that hard to imagine people not drinking on this stuff. It's a replacement for alcohol.If you down six pints while already tipsy of course it's not going to be pleasant, the same goes for drinking before taking an unkown dose of ghb. if the dose was known then this wouldn't happen.

Also GHB is non-toxic, but you can still overdose. not a contradiction.

Any sedative (including alcohol) taken in inhumane (obvious suicide) doses will knock you out and shut down your brain to the point where you no longer breath and thus sufficate to death.This is completely seperate from toxicity.

Street GHB could be any strenght and usually 1 "dose" is quite strong. If legally regulated people could pick the dose that suits them best.

seamus wrote: »

We can barely be trusted to handle our drnk properly.

you say that as if alcohol is somehow safer.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 10:21AM

RugbyFanatic wrote: »

With ecstasy you can drop insane amounts and be o.k lol at anyone going over 10 would die

I said party pills (the one's they sell in headshops), not mdma. party pills are legal, mdma is not.

one fool dropped seven and was hospitalised. he survived luckily, but given the fact that this made it into the national newspapers i'd say he was the first and only person to do so.

seamus · 22-10-2008 10:28AM

vinylmesh wrote: »

You took half of my sentence and quoted it to make it look like i said something i didn't. Cheap trick tbh.I clearly said if educated people wouldn't get pissed AND THEN EFFECTIVELY DOWN SIX PINTS IN GHB FORM.you didn't leave in that bit, did you.

I fail to see how that part of the sentence is relevant. My point still stands - people will get pissed on alcohol and then throw pills down their neck. Or vice-versa. No amount of education will change that.

If you down six pints while already tipsy of course it's not going to be pleasant, the same goes for drinking before taking an unkown dose of ghb. if the dose was known then this wouldn't happen.

But people do still down six pints while they're still tipsy. They would/will/do have a few pints and then take unknown quantities of GHB. You (or maybe it was someone else) already stated that alcohol clouds your judgement in the first place, which is how people end up completely arseholes when they were only going out for one pint.
To claim that by wagging your finger and handing out leaflets, people will somehow develop the gift of cop on, is boggling quite frankly.

you say that as if alcohol is somehow safer.

It is - purely by virtue of the ingestion method, as I've outlined it. Yet people still manage to kill themselves.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 10:30AM

penguin88 wrote: »

Now I know this stuff is the new wonder drug, but it's not magic. To be scientific for a moment, this is gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, acidic conditions (i.e. in the stomach) are only going to make it less soluble. Your mystical non-dissolvable pill is slightly impossible...

when used recreationally it is usually in the sodium salt form.It would be in this from in the pills aswell. In fact it is already available on prescription under the brand name xyrem, but it's mega impossible to get.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 10:41AM

seamus wrote: »

I fail to see how that part of the sentence is relevant. My point still stands - people will get pissed on alcohol and then throw pills down their neck. Or vice-versa. No amount of education will change that.

not if those pills have the same effect as alcohol.You assume that everyone is a complete idiot tbh. the simple fact is I'm destroying my brains every weekend in order to unwind, and i'd love to be able to switch to ghb and thus save my poor ravaged body and you're telling me I'm not allowed,:( to save some complete idiot an embarrasing experience! If someone is dumb enough to abuse it they'll learn pretty fast.

To claim that by wagging your finger and handing out leaflets, people will somehow develop the gift of cop on, is boggling quite frankly.

I never said anything about handing out leaflets, all people need to know is that it has the same effects as alcohol, nothing else.One street name for it is "liquid ecstasy", this name is particularly misleading because you can take ecstasy while drunk, so people assume GHB while drunk is ok aswell. One simple fact is all that needs to be explained.

It is - purely by virtue of the ingestion method, as I've outlined it. Yet people still manage to kill themselves.

if that's your only problem then surely you'd have no problem legalising it provided it is only allowed be sold in drinks containing enough of it for 1 pint to have the same effect as 1 pint of beer.

Smart Bug · 22-10-2008 10:44AM

People are stupid. End of. The vast majority of them will not act responsibly no matter how much 'education' you subject them to. They will take GHB, then alcohol, and promptly go unconscious or die. As with virtually every other form of drug, legal or otherwise, it will be abused to the nth dgeree if released for general sale.

I say this and I am a raving liberal when it comes to drug policies. I have learned self-control but it seems like this is a rare virtue, cenrtainly when you raom the streets of Dublin at 3am of (any) evening.

seamus · 22-10-2008 10:48AM

vinylmesh wrote: »

You assume that everyone is a complete idiot tbh.

The statistics back up my assumption.

I never said anything about handing out leaflets, all people need to know is that it has the same effects as alcohol, nothing else.

That means that they *will* in fact mix it with alcohol. If it has the same effect as alcohol, then people will think they can mix them freely.

if that's your only problem then surely you'd have no problem legalising it provided it is only allowed be sold in drinks containing enough of it for 1 pint to have the same effect as 1 pint of beer.

It would be a far better idea. But because of the chances of mixing them, you would need to ensure that everything containing GHB tasted nothing like beer, looked nothing like beer and had big warning labels on them saying, "Do not mix with alcohol". You would also have to pass laws preventing it from being sold in pubs and off-licences.
Which would seem to defeat the purpose of legalising it.

You seem to agree with the viewpoint that it's either beer or GHB, and not both. Well, beer was here first. And it's staying.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 11:00AM

seamus wrote: »

The statistics back up my assumption.

really i'd say otherwise. How many people in this country have died from legal drug overdoses (excluding suicides)........not many.

Responsible doesn't mean boring.
the vast majority of drug users don't end up dying from overdoses.therefore they are at least partly "responsible" users.

As far as I'm aware it's not that GHB + alcohol = death,
it's more that GHB + alcohol = double dose, just like alcohol + valium or any other drug with the same effects as alcohol. for most people a double dose of alcohol would involve a dangerous level of intoxication.

If you drank the equivalent of 3 pints of beer in GHB and also 2 pints of beer the level of intoxication you recieve would be the same as 5 pints of beer.If you bear in mind that GHB is (effects wise) the same as alcohol and you know what dose you are taking, then i don't think you should see many problems.

Spunge · 22-10-2008 11:04AM

10 party pills would be

no fanx

Quazzie · 22-10-2008 11:35AM

Would it not be possible to make each pill have the same effect as a pint therefore three pills equates to three pints. and then ya know that taken 20 is gonna make ya collapse.

This way would make it possible to take a pill every half hour or so as ya would a pint, and also regulate how much you take. Its impossible to account for A-holes and denying 95% of the population for the sake of 5% isn't fair.

The goverment could charge the same for a pill as a pint and that'd make them money and also make it something that can't be overdosed on withut spending big money on.

The argument that its too easy to overdose on is invalid because overdosing on alcohol is just as easy if you wanted to. Downing a litre of Vodka in a couple of mouthfuls would have a much more detremental effect.

Q. So why not then?

A. Because people can't accept change. The same reaction should be giving to alcohol because all arguments against it here can/should also be used against alcohol, but because we're Irish and we built a culture around alcohol then its fine to do that. People think socializing in pubs can't be done without a few pints.
I know I for one would welcome somethig that has the same effect as alcohol without the regular trips to the toilet, or the fattening effect or without the dreaded hangover. I'd easily sit at a table in a pub taking a pill with my water every 30 minutes to have the same effect as alcohol.

seamus · 22-10-2008 11:45AM

Quazzie2002 wrote: »

The argument that its too easy to overdose on is invalid because overdosing on alcohol is just as easy if you wanted to. Downing a litre of Vodka in a couple of mouthfuls would have a much more detremental effect.

Did you read my posts above?
Go get yourself a litre of vodka and try down it in a couple of mouthfuls and let me know how you get on. In fact, go buy a pint of it and try down it.

azezil · 22-10-2008 12:15PM

Picture the scenario, you meet up with a bunch of mates for a night out, you pop this pill, after what 30minutes? the pill takes effect. "aaaw jaaaasis man I'm bleedin maaadovit!" they soon get bored and want the night to last longer so they take some more, pass out and get raped by a random passer by.

My gawd, my eyes are now opened, screw you alcohol, I'm switching to the pill!

Dragan · 22-10-2008 12:31PM

Okay, reasons why it would be a bad idea to legalise GHB and why it will never happen.

1) Direct Competition to established market leader : You are never going to introduce something that will replace, or even challenge alchohol in the market. Why?

a) A long history and establishment of alchohol in the market and in the economy. The Vitners have pull, your not going to win if you try and remove money from their pockets.

b) Alchohol and the alchohol industry has established itself as an employer at this point. Millions are spent on booze each week. No one is going to threaten that either.

2) Safety - as Seamus has repeatedly said but people seem to be trying to argue against. The difference in volume will always be a killer. There is a reason why beers are not available above a certain percentage. It's a rough attempt to limit how much booze you can take in over what time frame. At the end of the day it is reasonably difficult to drink yourself to death in one night with a decent concerted effort and a large amount of negligence for your own health.

If you condense the effects of a pint into a single pill then we all know there are people out there who will take two pills at a time, then three, then some retard decides it's a good idea to take 10, record it, and put it on Youtube. See video's of a guy taking 1 XTC pill every minute for ten minutes and of the other guy taking 30+ tabs of acid in one go.

People are retards, the more freedom you allow them the more retarded they will be. It's that simple.

3) Is it something that society will benefit from? The simple answer is no. I enjoy all kinds of things i shouldn't and i have never and will never take GHB. You know why? It's WAY to easy to get you dose wrong, it's WAY to easy to **** up. I don't want people making those **** ups with GHB in situations where the would be traditionally allowed to drink alchohol.

If a substance simple replicates the effects of something else ( as is the case being argued that GHB replicates the "drunk" ) but is easier to abuse, easier to smuggle etc then it is not going to benefit society in any large way.

4) People on drugs do not mix with people on booze, for the most part. People can argue this point all they want but 9 years of door work and a long time spent experimenting with drugs tells me that people on a love buzz , for the most part, do not mix well with people who are drunk.

Thats just my opinion on it.

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 12:46PM

If someone wants to be an idiot,let them. We shouldn't let that ruin it for everyone else.

Alcohol is a really really bad drug. It destroys the brain, harms the body, and has a huge negative social cost. I don't think people realise the huge opportunity we are passing up.

Dragan · 22-10-2008 12:54PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

If someone wants to be an idiot,let them. We shouldn't let that ruin it for everyone else.

Hardly a socially responsible attitude either, depending on what you consider to be idiotic behaviour.

The whole point of limiting this type of behaviour is to stop other people being hurt by it afterall.

meditraitor · 22-10-2008 01:09PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

If someone wants to be an idiot,let them. We shouldn't let that ruin it for everyone else.

Alcohol is a really really bad drug. It destroys the brain, harms the body, and has a huge negative social cost. I don't think people realise the huge opportunity we are passing up.

I get it, but people in general are aweful eejits and the people who do drugs responsibly are in a minority no matter what drug it is.

If I thought for one minute that I could go out and neck a couple of pills, be cool for a few hours and then head home to bed with no consequences I would be paddling that canoe for the rest of my life.

But

The problem with mood enhancing chemicals is that when the music is over the need to continue usually sparks an urge to prolongue the buzz, its human nature whether it be drugs or experiences.
Recreational drugs are like this, whatever you poison. If you have an enjoyable experience its hard to let go and its easy to overcome the responsible attitude and increase your dose whether you know its wrong or not.

Then you have addiction.

A lot of people are of the impression that legalising certain chemicals will decrease the amount of chances you take I.E the dose/compound but it wont really help much.

Look at alcohol.

Its been legal since day 1 but it doesnt stop it reeking havok on alcoholics and their families.

Most drugs are the same

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 03:53PM

People are trusted with alcohol, maybe wrongly (i don't agree but i'll humor you). Alcohol is a very toxic drug who's use has huge social implications. GHB is non toxic and has relatively little social costs, i.e the impact of GHB use on others would be miniscule compared to that of alcohol.

Would it not be ok if some people switched from alcohol to a safer drug, with the same effects for the reasons above.There'll be no extra addiction because they're just as addictive as each other and as far as your mental state is concerned they're the same drug.

The argument that its too easy to overdose on is invalid because overdosing on alcohol is just as easy if you wanted to. Downing a litre of Vodka in a couple of mouthfuls would have a much more detremental effect.]

this is the sensible conclusion.

Anyone could drink a bottle of vodka if they wanted to, don't believe me... check out this video;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3J8_bpMTkE

Ishmael · 22-10-2008 04:55PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

The argument that its too easy to overdose on is invalid because overdosing on alcohol is just as easy if you wanted to. Downing a litre of Vodka in a couple of mouthfuls would have a much more detremental effect.

I think that is the important part here, if anyone wanted to intentionally over dose on any drug, it is easy enough. More important is how easy it is to unintentionally over-dose on it. Just due to size, this is far more likely with pills than with alcohol.

Fanny Cradock · 22-10-2008 05:09PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

Also GHB is non-toxic, but you can still overdose. not a contradiction.

It is toxic, Bub.

I would take the findings of the article entitled Toxicity, Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate over your word.

As for Xyrem being 'mega impossible' to get by prescription, well, that's probably for a good reason. In fact, the labelling given with Xyrem is quite clear as to the potential risks.

Sodium oxybate is GHB, a known drug of abuse. Abuse has been associated with some important central nervous system (CNS) adverse events (including death). Even at recommended doses, use has been associated with confusion, depression and other neuropsychiatric events. Reports of respiratory depression occurred in clinical trials.
Almost all of the patients who received sodium oxybate during clinical trials were receiving CNS stimulants.

Important CNS adverse events associated with abuse of GHB include seizure, respiratory depression and profound decreases in level of consciousness, with instances of coma and death. For events that occurred outside of clinical trials, in people taking GHB for recreational purposes, the circumstances surrounding the events are often unclear
(e.g., dose of GHB taken, the nature and amount of alcohol or any concomitant drugs).

http://www.biopsychiatry.com/ghb/xyrem.pdf

Prof.Badass · 22-10-2008 06:26PM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

It is toxic, Bub.

I would take the findings of the article entitled Toxicity, Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate over your word.

I read through the article and found no mention of any specific toxic effects.
they mentioned patients coming in presenting "ghb toxicity" which is obviously just their way of saying GHB overdose, what you're seeing here is the whole "drugs are bad" thing at play.

However they also claimed that people take GHB in order to have hallucinations , which shows that they're info is way off.

It was already quoted here, that despite chronically administering GHB to rats no eveidence of brain/organ damage was found.They've been studying this for years. In fact rats given GHB actually lived slightly longer than those not given anything.

chem · 22-10-2008 08:16PM

OP, Is it outlawed in Ireland?

I Put GHB and Gamma hydroxy Butrate in the search box here:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/

And result was 0?

Can you point out where in law it says anything about GHB or GBL?

JC 2K3 · 22-10-2008 08:40PM

GHB is a naturally occurring chemical in the body.

Fanny Cradock · 22-10-2008 11:48PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

I read through the article and found no mention of any specific toxic effects.
they mentioned patients coming in presenting "ghb toxicity" which is obviously just their way of saying GHB overdose, what you're seeing here is the whole "drugs are bad" thing at play.

You have categorically stated that GHB is not toxic even in the cases of overdose. I've done you a favour and linked to the definitions of toxicity and overdose. As it is difficult to determine a 'safe' intake, there is a noted risk of overdose, which is a reaction to a toxic quantity of a substance.

vinylmesh wrote: »

However they also claimed that people take GHB in order to have hallucinations , which shows that they're info is way off.

So you must know the expectations for every person who decides to take GHB? I guess that it is totally inconceivable to you that anyone who has ever taken GHB did so with a primary or secondary desire to hallucinate.

The drug directly effects the central nervous system and hallucinations are a documented result of ingestion. The members of this drug forum seem well aware of this effect.

vinylmesh wrote: »

It was already quoted here, that despite chronically administering GHB to rats no eveidence of brain/organ damage was found.They've been studying this for years. In fact rats given GHB actually lived slightly longer than those not given anything.

Well that's just great for the rats. However, as already posted in regards to Xyrem, there are documented side-effects in humans:

Sodium oxybate is GHB, a known drug of abuse. Abuse has been associated with some important central nervous system (CNS) adverse events (including death). Even at recommended doses, use has been associated with confusion, depression and other neuropsychiatric events. Reports of respiratory depression occurred in clinical trials

Whatever about the smoking ban. I reckon that you would not see a soul drinking in a pub again for fear of getting drugged.

In terms of side effects arising from ingesting GHB (including the high likelihood of mixing it with other drugs, especially alcohol) and the broader social and economic consequences, I can see absolutely no benefits to legalising GHB. And I believe that you have not provided much in the way of evidence to sway opinion.

Prof.Badass · 23-10-2008 01:30PM

chem wrote: »

OP, Is it outlawed in Ireland?

I Put GHB and Gamma hydroxy Butrate in the search box here:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/

And result was 0?

Can you point out where in law it says anything about GHB or GBL?

They are both illegal. I remeber reading it, but that site is impossible to navigate.so i might not find it again. GBL is legal up north though.

Hallucinations can occur in an overdose scenario, but that does not make the drug hallucinogenic.That's like saying valium is hallucinogenic, which we know isn't true.

All the negative side affects associated with GHB are also associated with alcohol.So any time you give out about anything, what you're saying also applies to alcohol. Also as previously said you could easily make it so people can't spike it in other peoples drinks.

A group of scientist spent months weighing up the relative dangers of 20 drugs. Not just in terms of physical harm caused but also addiction potential and social harm caused. This is what they came up with;

http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/img/scale_of_harm.jpg

. These results were backed up by another independant team. Now, you're probably going to pretend to yourself the results are innacurate, but there's no way you can account of the huge gap between alcohol and ghb without accepting the truth.

I've come to realise that some people completely block out opinions that differ from the norm, that they'll clutch at the flimsiest of arguements to try and justify it for themselves ( i guess they just don't want to be seen as different or something), and they somehow assume that those in power are always right and aren't just doing what will get them the most votes (bear in mind homosexuality was illegal in 1994).

There's no point me arguing anymore now, I've said it all already and it's not like you're not going to listen to me anywasy. funny thing though, if there was a major report in the media you'd be all ears!

Pat Sheen · 24-10-2008 08:46PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

They are both illegal. I remeber reading it, but that site is impossible to navigate.so i might not find it again. GBL is legal up north though.

No only GHB is illegal. The legislation uses the more up to date name "4-hydroxybutanoic acid and its salts". (Apparently US schools don't teach modern nomenclature, or metric for that matter) If i remember rightly it was controlled here long before it was in britain, maybe the eighties. Gbl is legal otherwise i wouldn't keep a bottle.

Fanny Cradock · 26-10-2008 06:08PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

Now, you're probably going to pretend to yourself the results are innacurate, but there's no way you can account of the huge gap between alcohol and ghb without accepting the truth.

I'm not pretending anything. Nor have I attempted to argue that one drug is 'better' than another. So I am unsure as to the relevance of your chart, which incidentally, only looks at individual drugs, and not the effects of mixing drugs. You have consistently failed to provide a compelling case as to why GHB should be legalised, especially when it's effects are so potentially harmful when consumed with a pervasively used drug - alcohol. Your insistence that people will simply use common sense does little to assuage concerns over this very negative potential aspect of legalising GHB.

vinylmesh wrote: »

I've come to realise that some people completely block out opinions that differ from the norm, that they'll clutch at the flimsiest of arguements to try and justify it for themselves ( i guess they just don't want to be seen as different or something), and they somehow assume that those in power are always right and aren't just doing what will get them the most votes (bear in mind homosexuality was illegal in 1994).

Oh please! That homosexuality was at once illegal has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this debate. It's nothing but a cheap, transparent strawman argument on your part.

What I'm asking you to do is to provide some evidence that legalising GHB will be beneficial to society. In other words, what societal positives will arise from the introduction of GHB if you got your wish? I'm also asking you to provide evidence that people will be sufficiently rational in their choices and will not mix alcohol and GHB. Added to this, I would like some explanation as to how GHB can be easily made so as to avoid the possibility of spiking other people's drinks (I missed that post).

JC 2K3 · 26-10-2008 06:24PM

The idea that GHB is or ever was frequently used to spike drinks is widely accepted as a myth.

Time to Legalise GHB?

Comments