nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Legal Highs

TedB

I've heard a lot about these so called 'legal highs' in 'headshops' and I have to be honest, I was very skeptical.

1) There's being no research on any of these brands - Pulse, Spice etc. The party pills are particularly dangerous - they have 20 years + research on MDMA, nothing on most of these brands. I don't even think any of them are safety controlled.

AND they are only legal on a technicality. In that, we haven't gotten round to banning these particular substances just yet.

2) I like a bit of weed (Smoke maybe 5 or 6 times a year. Relaxing and a very nice buzz when with a couple of mates enjoying a few tins) So I think to myself - if I can get weed, why the hell would I smoke this crap?

Last night me and a friend tried out the 'Pulse' stuff. Went into a head shop, bought two five euro bags and smoked the balls off it. One five euro bag is the equivilent of a 20 euro bag of weed. Honestly, the stuff blew me away. As strong as weed - if not stronger, considering the quantity we took.

It sets your heartrate mad and it tastes like absolute dung, but it does give you a very very distinct 'high' and a great stoney buss for ages. It seems to be a cocktail of herbs thrown together.

Anyways, what is the story with these legal highs? I can testify that it is as good if not better than the illegal stuff and its so readily available - yet its not the same as weed at all - we don't really know what the long term effects of this stuff is - we know quite a bit about the effects of weed.

I'm not in favour of drugs legalisation, but I am in favour of decriminalising the stuff. It is, after all, a victimless crime (In that the only victim is me, the adult who occasionaly likes to dabble in the odd novelty) So don't try and make this into a drugs legalisation debate.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Prof.Badass

JC 2K3 wrote: »

What is Charge? Mephedrone?

ScumLord wrote: »

I'd say it's the same stuff that's in the rest of the pills, it's just not in a capsule.

I doubt it. Otherwise people would say it's more mdma-like than coke-like.

Pms sent. Anti-drug idiots will have to do their own research

ScumLord

vinylmesh wrote: »

I doubt it. Otherwise people would say it's more mdma-like than coke-like.

Pms sent. Anti-drug idiots will have to do their own research .

But it had the same effect as the pills. Most coke in this country isn't coke so I wouldn't really trust their judgement on it. I've only seen this post now, before the pm.

Gear9992

Is BZP still legal here? horrible stuff, heard it's even worse than E-tablets

Prof.Badass

ScumLord wrote: »

But it had the same effect as the pills. Most coke in this country isn't coke so I wouldn't really trust their judgement on it. I've only seen this post now, before the pm.

which pills were these?

The bzp ones?

The popular pills nowadays should feel a lot more like mdma than coke.

Some pills nowadays contain DMAA, perhaps that is it. Although i doubt dmaa is in any way good enough to be compared to coke.

@gear9992. Bzp is illegal.

dmcg90

If I was to try them Id rather do legals, they sound horrible, who'd want symptons described like ''like a spanner being thrown into your brain''

galwayrush

Feck the drugs, Music does it for me.:cool:

renraw

galwayrush wrote: »

Feck the drugs, Music does it for me.:cool:

+1 YAY

[Deleted User]

I'm so borrrred of drugs.

renraw

Lia_lia wrote: »

I'm so borrrred of drugs.

dont ever say that please?

[Deleted User]

Why?

snollup

seamus wrote: »

Nevertheless, you're comparing alcohol - a naturally-occuring toxin which has been consumed for so long our bodies have actually evolved methods of dealing with it

what total BS!

Powerhouse

MikeC101 wrote: »

How so? Any evidence I'm aware of points to prohibition doing nothing more than increasing the income and influence of criminal gangs trafficking in it.

Prohibition in the US and alcohol - led to organised crime becoming more powerful and prevalent than ever before.
Decriminalisation of all drugs in Portugal - has led to a drop in rates of long term addiction to every drug, and deaths associated with drug use.
Switzerland's heroin policy.

They all seem to work - I'm not sure why similar programs wouldn't work in Ireland, and it generally seems to be only opposed on a "drugs are bad" platform.

I also can't agree with the idea that criminal gangs will "find something else" to support their lifestyles. That's a poor attitude to fighting crime. Maybe they will - this doesn't mean we shouldn't try to take sources of revenue away from them though, does it?

Your arguments work off the erroneous assumpttion that the only problem created by drugs is the enrichment of a few violent gangs. Drugs need to be illegal in the first instance to reduce supply and to prevent massive social damage.

Look at the social damage alcohol does as a legal and reasonably regulated drug and it is one of the more benign ones as far as I am aware.

I have to laugh at your last point. Can you imagine the criminals "oh they've legalised drugs, aw shucks, let's all train to be teachers and nurses so".

But if saying that criminal gangs will find something else to do is a poor attitude to fighting crime, then legalising drugs simply to try to deter those gangs is even worse.

It also assumes rather naively perhaps that any legalisation of drugs would ensure enough of a supply to prevent a black market emerging.

rubadub

TheZohan wrote: »

And the worst comedown out of all the highs.

The worst comedown I ever experienced was from alcohol, and the worst I have ever witnessed were from alcohol. People even set out taking "anti-hangover pills" in advance of drinking without a second thought. It is bizarre that people so blindly dismiss alcohol as being a drug, and one with such a horrendous comedown that is simply laughed off by many. Loss of work due to alcholic comedowns has a huge effect on the economy. If people had to take 1-2 days off work after any illegal drugs they would probably never touch it again.

The typical opiate drug addict out there is NOT the heroin junkie on the street, it is alcohol abusers who then go onto abuse opiate painkillers like solpadeine and neurofen plus. A huge amount of people are addicted to codeine as a direct result of their alcohol intake. Just like many end up hooked on tobacco as a result of smoking joints, or even worse think they are addicted to cannabis since they mix it with the most addictive drug known to mankind. Many alcohol abusers are also hooked on antacids, some doctors would consider them the most abused drug of them all.

Unintended consequence

Father Mathew's temperance campaign in 19th-century Ireland – in which thousands of people vowed never to drink alcohol again – led to the consumption of ether, a much more dangerous intoxicant, by those unwilling to break their pledge

Same is going on now, people in fear of the law rather than religion.

TedB wrote: »

1) There's being no research on any of these brands - Pulse, Spice etc. The party pills are particularly dangerous - they have 20 years + research on MDMA, nothing on most of these brands. I don't even think any of them are safety controlled.

How do you know there is no research? MDMA has research done, so what? there is no control over what you buy on the street

TedB wrote: »

if I can get weed, why the hell would I smoke this crap?

Because some would trust the "crap" over contaminated weed or other drugs.

TedB wrote: »

I'm not in favour of drugs legalisation, but I am in favour of decriminalising the stuff.

So you are fine with the lack of safety control?

Terry wrote: »

As for legalising drugs, it doesn't make them any less addictive.

Another poster mentioned route of administration, people resorting to injecting expensive drugs. But also on the flipside you have the tobacco industry allegedly adding additives to make it more addictive.

MikeC101

Powerhouse wrote: »

I have to laugh at your last point. Can you imagine the criminals "oh they've legalised drugs, aw shucks, let's all train to be teachers and nurses so".

But if saying that criminal gangs will find something else to do is a poor attitude to fighting crime, then legalising drugs simply to try to deter those gangs is even worse.

I'm too tired to start debating these points right now, but I just want to point out I never said anything as utterly stupid as implying criminals would all run off to train as teachers and nurses. If you're reading my post as saying that, I don't know what to say to you.

Powerhouse

rubadub wrote: »

Loss of work due to alcholic comedowns has a huge effect on the economy. If people had to take 1-2 days off work after any illegal drugs they would probably never touch it again.

I'm not sure where you get the impression that "if people had to take 1-2 days off work after any illegal drugs they would probably never touch it again" since they often have to do so with alcohol and do indeed touch it again. That's the very nature of these drugs, people quickly forget the downsides.

And yes, we are aware that "loss of work due to alcholic comedowns has a huge effect on the economy". That is one of the many reasons why many people oppose the legalisation of other drugs because alcohol as a legal drug is so destructive.

Pace2008

Powerhouse wrote: »

Look at the social damage alcohol does as a legal and reasonably regulated drug and it is one of the more benign ones as far as I am aware.

This comment here shows that you don't know what you're talking about and undermines your whole argument.

Dragan

TedB wrote: »

I suppose you don't drink, or enjoy the odd cigarette? Hell, I'm sure you don't even eat anything that has being fried.

I repeat - get off yer high horse.

Is it at all possible the smoking this imitation smoke turns you into an unreasonable and cranky bitch?

At the end of the day i can find and read peer reviewed studies on the effects of smoking cannabis, you can't find **** about what you are smoking.

If you saw something odd on the ground would you pick it up and suck it off?

JC 2K3

Dragan wrote: »

Is it at all possible the smoking this imitation smoke turns you into an unreasonable and cranky bitch?

At the end of the day i can find and read peer reviewed studies on the effects of smoking cannabis, you can't find **** about what you are smoking.

If you saw something odd on the ground would you pick it up and suck it off?

Be honest. Did you actually do in depth research into the effects of cannabis before you ever tried it?

It's probably just a synthetic cannabinoid, and it's probably fine, particularly when done very occasionally.

Hysteria about the relative dangers of drugs is a bad thing. A drug which both gave enjoyable effects and had the capability to destroy someone's life when only used infrequently would be pretty exceptional.

Dragan

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Be honest. Did you actually do in depth research into the effects of cannabis before you ever tried it?

Well, i first started smoking at the age of 14, so it's not really the same comparison. The better question to ask me would be "Do you do in depth research on anything you might try now?" and the answer is yes, of course.

rubadub

Powerhouse wrote: »

I'm not sure where you get the impression that "if people had to take 1-2 days off work after any illegal drugs they would probably never touch it again" since they often have to do so with alcohol and do indeed touch it again. That's the very nature of these drugs, people quickly forget the downsides.

If you do a search for BZP you will see loads of people saying it has a horrendous comedown and that is a big reason many were turned off it. My point is people view alcohol as acceptable and just laugh off the damage done physically in the short term (like falling over) and do not pay much attention to long term effects. They suffer such bad comedowns that they resort to taking opiates and think nothing of it, there is a mentality "if its legal it must be grand, if its illegal it must be bad".

I know if I told certain mates of mine that I needed to take painkillers to stave off the comedown of cannabis (I don't) they would think I would be crazy to be smoking it, if pointed out they do the same they shrug it off "ah its only booze, everybody knows you get a hangover".

If alcohol had been illegal while I grew up I seriously doubt I ever would have touched it, can you imagine the image portrayed of it in the media? it would have seemed like the ultimate nightmare drug, worse than heroin or crack. Also if I did have it and suffered a hangover I would probably have presume it was contaminated and not risked it again.

Powerhouse wrote: »

And yes, we are aware that "loss of work due to alcholic comedowns has a huge effect on the economy". That is one of the many reasons why many people oppose the legalisation of other drugs because alcohol as a legal drug is so destructive.

And it is one reason people argue for the legalisation of other drugs, to give people a safer alternative with fewer side effects than alcohol. Most people I have met will drink far less on a night out if they are ingesting cannabis or ecstasy too (threshold to low doses of each).

Research published in the medical journal The Lancet rates the most dangerous drugs (starting with the worst) as follows:
1. Heroin
2. Cocaine
3. Barbiturates
4. Street methadone
5. Alcohol
6. Ketamine
7. Benzodiazepines
8. Amphetamine
9. Tobacco
10. Buprenorphine
11. Cannabis
12. Solvents
13. 4-MTA
14. LSD
15. Methylphenidate
16. Anabolic steroids
17. GHB
18. Ecstasy
19. Alkyl nitrates
20. Khat

Documentary on that list here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6108672696241807159&ei=kcFkStTmIJWj-AbOpvC0CQ&q

[Deleted User]

Anyone watch that customs show there on RTE? Now I havn't smoked in a while but my god those big bags of weed looked tasty.

Pace2008

rubadub wrote: »

If alcohol had been illegal while I grew up I seriously doubt I ever would have touched it, can you imagine the image portrayed of it in the media? it would have seemed like the ultimate nightmare drug, worse than heroin or crack. Also if I did have it and suffered a hangover I would probably have presume it was contaminated and not risked it again.

I’d love to see the piece they’d do on it in The Sun

“The killer drug Alcohol is rapidly gaining popularity with the youth of Ireland. Going by the street name ‘Gargle,’ ‘Dutch Gold,’ or ‘Rocket Fuel,’ alcohol is derived from rotten fruit and, due to a loophole in the law, is currently legal to purchase as an item aptly labelled as ‘not fit for human consumption.’

Alcohol, usually consumed in liquid form, has a rapid onset and produces intoxicating effects that range from increased confidence to sexual dysfunction and anger. It has already been linked to a terrifying number of road accidents and violent crimes including assaults, with the perpetrators frequently reporting ‘blackouts,’ or loss of recollection of the incident. Due to its sedative effects and ability to impair judgement, it has become the drug of choice in date rapes.

Alcohol has already been linked to a frightening array of health problems, including permanent brain damage, heart disease and acute liver failure. It is highly addictive with withdrawals resulting in hallucinations, delirium and death.

It is being used by children as young as thirteen. We talked to two such teenagers…”x100 sensationalism

Research published in the medical journal The Lancet rates the most dangerous drugs (starting with the worst) as follows:
1. Heroin
2. Cocaine
3. Barbiturates
4. Street methadone
5. Alcohol
6. Ketamine
7. Benzodiazepines
8. Amphetamine
9. Tobacco
10. Buprenorphine
11. Cannabis
12. Solvents
13. 4-MTA
14. LSD
15. Methylphenidate
16. Anabolic steroids
17. GHB
18. Ecstasy
19. Alkyl nitrates
20. Khat

That list is a bit dodgy if taken out of context. I believe they rated the drugs based on their perceived threat to society as a whole, rather than on how dangerous the substance itself actually is. I mean, inhalants are about as dangerous as they come but they obviously don't give a **** about them since they're sort of a thing of the past. I was actually pretty surprised to see GHB so far down the list since it's quite popular and pretty easy to OD on.

hedgeh0g

jeckel wrote: »

the legal smokes are pretty effective but they feel more toxic when used over a period of time. if you can get good weed you're probably better off smoking that but i'ld smoke the legal stuff before a lot of the crap i've gotten over the years.

to be honest, it's so easy to get legal highs of every sort that it seems a complete waste of time to keep the old reliables illegal, legalise them and tax them to the nines, that'll sort the budget out.

nothing like a bit of escapism in times of economic crisis.

+ 1. I want to get stoned with some badgers.

Darlughda

What are the ingredients in Spice Gold?
Are new anti-depressants hitting the pharmaceutical/healthcare market really from a trusted non criminal source? What's really in them?
Is it not better to fund headshops as a consumer rather than funding the criminals?
Why are people self-medicating on this?

I got four questions, anyone got the answers, please?

Pace2008

Darlughda wrote: »

What are the ingredients in Spice Gold?

Are new anti-depressants hitting the pharmaceutical/healthcare market really from a trusted non criminal source? What's really in them?

Is it not better to fund headshops as a consumer rather than funding the criminals?

Why are people self-medicating on this?

I got four questions, anyone got the answers, please?

1. Most a likely a synthetic cannabinoid; possibly JHW-018
2. Some people don't trust big pharm companies but they're not from a 'criminal' source as such; why would you think that? Whatever's listed on the label is what's in them.
3. Legal highs generally pale in comparison to the real thing.
4. I've never heard of anyone self-medicating on Spice. Where did you get that idea?

Prof.Badass

Pace2008 wrote: »

I was actually pretty surprised to see GHB so far down the list since it's quite popular and pretty easy to OD on.

GHB is actually a really safe drug. It's only so easy to od on because of how it is sold. If it came in pills with marked doses it wouldn't be any easier to od on than benzos.

Dublin_Gunner

seamus wrote: »

Nevertheless, you're comparing alcohol - a naturally-occuring toxin....

There's no comparison.

Naturally occurring, such as... THC, opiates (heroin, methadone, opium etc), Cocaine, St. Johns Wort etc etc...

:rolleyes:

Yes, because its naturally occuring, it should be legal.

What are you smoking?

jarhead20

TedB wrote: »

I've heard a lot about these so called 'legal highs' in 'headshops' and I have to be honest, I was very skeptical.

1) There's being no research on any of these brands - Pulse, Spice etc. The party pills are particularly dangerous - they have 20 years + research on MDMA, nothing on most of these brands. I don't even think any of them are safety controlled.

AND they are only legal on a technicality. In that, we haven't gotten round to banning these particular substances just yet.

2) I like a bit of weed (Smoke maybe 5 or 6 times a year. Relaxing and a very nice buzz when with a couple of mates enjoying a few tins) So I think to myself - if I can get weed, why the hell would I smoke this crap?

Last night me and a friend tried out the 'Pulse' stuff. Went into a head shop, bought two five euro bags and smoked the balls off it. One five euro bag is the equivilent of a 20 euro bag of weed. Honestly, the stuff blew me away. As strong as weed - if not stronger, considering the quantity we took.

It sets your heartrate mad and it tastes like absolute dung, but it does give you a very very distinct 'high' and a great stoney buss for ages. It seems to be a cocktail of herbs thrown together.

Anyways, what is the story with these legal highs? I can testify that it is as good if not better than the illegal stuff and its so readily available - yet its not the same as weed at all - we don't really know what the long term effects of this stuff is - we know quite a bit about the effects of weed.

I'm not in favour of drugs legalisation, but I am in favour of decriminalising the stuff. It is, after all, a victimless crime (In that the only victim is me, the adult who occasionaly likes to dabble in the odd novelty) So don't try and make this into a drugs legalisation debate.

did you really get a buzz from that pulse,iv smoked it and got nothing i think it is absolute dung,how did you get a buzz from this stuff theres none of these chemicals you say in this its all garbage like the rest of the stuff they tell you this chemical is in,whats the buzz like from this stuff if you did get one,and is there seriously a difference in the pulse to normal weed,because the weed in ireland is muck,no matter how good its suppose to be

jarhead20

Pace2008 wrote: »

1. Most a likely a synthetic cannabinoid; possibly JHW-018
2. Some people don't trust big pharm companies but they're not from a 'criminal' source as such; why would you think that? Whatever's listed on the label is what's in them.
3. Legal highs generally pale in comparison to the real thing.
4. I've never heard of anyone self-medicating on Spice. Where did you get that idea?

pulse,spice or any other of this ****e you buy in headshops are all bull****,the buzz is sleeping pills mashed and sprayed on the things your smoking and whatever way you take it hahahahaha suckers

jarhead20

Pace2008 wrote: »

This comment here shows that you don't know what you're talking about and undermines your whole argument.

cannabis is the safest drug known to man,drink is worse than them all,alcohol is just in the mind and thought of ignorently as not harmful,iv done extacy,cocaine,sleepers,and not to mention the dddrink,drink has the worst effect and buzz,extacy gives u a buzz that you can keep doing extacy and will not go past a certain buzz when u keep taking it it just tops up the buzz thats wearing off extacy is not that harmful you can just overheat,or is harmful to people with high blood pressure or bad heart problems,other than that anyone else who takes extacy will have the best buzz of there life,but well not worth the try,,cocaine, u will not get a buzz from cocaine sniffing it without drinking,anyone who thinks they will get a buzz from snorting on its own is feeling the headbuzz from the amount of novocaine in the cocaine,try it and get back to me with the results i bet you anything the buzz u will get while drinking is ten times better than when u snort it,if you even get a headbuzz at all