Talk:Methamphetamine

Template:DrugsNotice Is there a way to write about the manufacturing process that sounds less like War on Drugs propaganda (which is POV)? I don't know enough about the process, nor am I confident I wouldn't go too far the other way. --Calieber 20:14, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)

Spacing

Can someone please fix the spacing on the page, there's a large gap, clean 'er up.

I assume you were refering to the one before the history section, which i've fixed. the tag has been removed accordingly. If this wasn't what you were talking about i apologize and you should pop that tag right back up there. --Heah 22:49, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Directions?!?

There are many different recipes for conversion which can be found on the internet.

This almost sounds like the author is instructing people to cook meth according to recipies found on the Internet. First of all, cooking methamphetamine is a VERY dangerous process, and one that can result in property and environmental damage, and potentially death. Second of all, as all ingredients involved in the production of methamphetamine, one mistake can be fatal. I would not trust my life or the lives of naive Wikipedians to a recipe taken from the Internet. Every person that I have ever met that has been involved in the production of methamphetamine has either been an expirienced chemist or has learned how firsthand from one. However, I am not encouraging or discouraging methamphetamine use or production, as that would represent a POV. But I do think we should emphasize the dangers of production and the importance of learning how from someone with expierience. DryGrain 12:50, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Never mind, I fixed it....DryGrain 12:14, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

please touch up entire production area. should it even be at the top? I dont think so. I attempted to correct what I thought was a serious POV problem in that 'its ok to cook meth if you learn from someone that knows' or 'the chemicals involved are only moderately dangerous'. as such i added alot of ancedotal information regarding recent rise in meth labs, why cops are busting them like crazy now (serious public safety issue) mobile meth labs, waste etc. I realize my changes are anonymous, but this is mainly for legal, employer, family reasons and in no way an attempt to hide my identity from wikipedias or any other improper reasons (as long as google is around I cant take the risk) Feel free to edit as you please, I just wanted to include additional material to really qualify how dangerous it is. dry: Almost every person i've ever met with that has been involved in the production of meth is suffering from some type of insanity / brain damage / mental defect. They did not start that way. Dont forget to learn about what is likely to become of you when you are learning how to cook. If this doesn't sound like the people you know, congradulations.

I think you went to far in the other direction with this. You point out some of the problem yourself when you describe the information as "ancedotal." I don't think it is ever a good idea to include unsupported statements. Deffinate POV issues here. Osmodiar 03:01, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Baby laxative?

What is the mysterious "baby laxative" which is invariably mentioned in the context of "cutting" drugs? -- The Anome 17:18, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

It's possible that it's a myth, but I'll try to find out. DryGrain 05:02, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

This search for "baby laxative" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22baby+laxative%22&btnG=Search) gives interesting results. -- The Anome 23:19, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Could they mean mannitol, I wonder? -- The Anome 22:29, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think that there might be a confusion of words and or substances. Maybe someone is refering to the teething of babies and how to reduce the pain affiliated with it. I thought about novocaine or similar drugs. Olaf Fritz 22:39, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm fairly positive what you're thinking of is "inositol". --Skrewler 21:46, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

repetitive behavior

The part about repetitive behavior should be expanded because that is a major part of meth's effects. The slang word for it is "tweaking".

- I was just at a meth workshop with the RCMP and "tweaking" is the behaviour when some is experiencing after a "crash" - basically someone, called a "tweaker", is having withdrawl symptoms.

is the dosage correct?

I read 0.2 grams in 3 ml water by injection. This corresponds to 200 mg injected.

An active dose would seem to be about 20 mg (2 Desoxyn tablets). The dose in the text would correspond to 10 times the active dose.

I would have to say .2 grams is indeed *way* more than anything I know of people normally injecting. People often will snort or eat .2 grams (closest street measurement is a quarter gram. Not a huge quanitity, but still a substantial ammount.) The people who I've spoken with regarding injection (I have no experience myself) have told me that you use less than you normally would. Its normal for someone to snort or eat maybe .1 of a gram. In other woods .2 grams is quite a bit, especially if injected. Also, 3ml of water? Doesn't that make it a pretty huge syringe? The only ones I'm familar with are diabetes syringes and as far as I know the biggest size is 1 ml. I'm not sure most users would know where to get larger needles as they generally seem to go for insulin needles because of the ease of aquisition, it being plausible that they may have diabetes and take insulin. Compare with a 3 ml needle. I have no idea what drugs would be administered by a 3ml syringe but it would be a lot in my opinion

Tina?

I don't know why the term "tina" redirects to here Flora 02:44, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

sorry you really meant Tina as in Christina as in slang for Crystal Methamphetamine (see http://www.tweaker.org/tweaker_arc/Tina.html)

Adverse Effects

Reanal and hepatic failure are listed. Are there studies to support this? Osmodiar 07:28, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Abbott

I assumed "Able Laboraties" was a typo, as Abbott is a well know manufacturer of methamphetamine. I am not sure if they produce a generic or just Desoxyn. Osmodiar 10:41, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cocaine

Cocaine seemed a bad example of physical addiction as tolerance does not develop and there is not really an acute physical withdrawl syndrome. I substituted alcohol, which has quite powerfull physical withdrawl symptoms. Osmodiar 10:43, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

Tolerance doesn't develop from cocaine use? Have you ever used cocaine? Where do you get your information from?

"Another aspect of addiction to cocaine or other agents is tolerance, defined as a reduction in the response to the drug upon repeated administration." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=neurosci.box.413

Also, read

E.J. Nestler. Molecular mechanisms of drug addiction J. Neurosci. 12: 2439-2450. 1992.

a good review article on physical/psychological addiction. if you don't have journal access email me skrewler@gmail.com and i'll send you the .pdf

No doubt there are permanent or near-permanent changes in the brains of addicts, as Nestler describes. This is not the same as tolerance. Cocaine remains a very poor choice for an example of physical addiction.

Osmodiar 06:20, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Forgive me if other references have talked about it, but apparently cocaine also has the potential to effect the expression of a gene related to endorphins. This has long term effects if not permanent on not just brain chemistry or genetics, but also emotionally and with regards to relationships. There are more than the following references, and I belive you will have to find one if you want to know about how the genetic changes effect you socially and emotionally. http://cocaine.org/health/cokeopioid.html

Did you read -- "Another aspect of addiction to cocaine or other agents is tolerance, defined as a reduction in the response to the drug upon repeated administration."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=neurosci.box.413

The main problem I had was this "Cocaine seemed a bad example of physical addiction as tolerance does not develop and there is not really an acute physical withdrawl syndrome." The link above states blatantly that it does, anencdotal experience also shows that without a doubt that it does.

My issue wasn't really whether or not you think alcohol a more suitable example, it does fit. So do a lot of others, though. I would pick benzodiazapines if I was writing the article, but I'd rather just make comments and suggestions.

Yes, I know physical addiction is not the same as tolerance, did I say that? If you read Nestler's paper, the common theme he comes back to is physical/psychological addiction overlap, the precise reason why I referenced it.

I apologize for any mistakes or lack of editing, as I'm new at this. There must be a better way to quote things previously said. --Skrewler 20:29, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree that benzodiazapines would serve as a good example of a drug with a well defined physical withdrawl syndrome. Cocaine users do not develop tolerance in the same way users of alcohol, benzos, or opioids do. There is even some evidence that there is a "negative tolerance" effect. I disagree with Purves's use of "cocaine" in that sentence from his textbook for the same reasons I though it was a poor example here. Osmodiar 07:19, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

- Well, ok. If it's not already done, there needs to be some solid definitions of terms that are going to be used. Tolerance (and the apparant different types), physical/psychological dependence, phys/psych addiction. I think I know where you're going with the "negative tolerance effect". I was recently reading a paper who's theory was the more and more times cocaine is administered, each time there are less euphoria/well being/physical effects. At the same time, the drive to do more and more of it, even though the user gets no gratification from the drug, becomes stronger and stronger each time. I'll have to dig this up.

Sudafed

I changed this because if read as if Sudafed was a source for more than just the pseudoephedrine.

Physical Addiction

Is the assertion that methamphetamine is not physically addictive a simple, incontrovertable fact? It seems counterintuitive to me. --AStanhope 04:45, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It is not physically addictive in the same sense that opiates, benzodiazepines and (to some extent) alcohol are. There is no severe physical withdrawl syndrome upon abrupt cessation as with those other drugs. There, of course, are unpleasant psychological effects. Cocaine is not physically addictive either, but the severe psychological addiction more than makes up for it. --Bk0 19:42, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The fact is, crystal methamphetame does, in fact, cause particularly physical withdrawals, which may be erroneously classified as psychological, because of the neurological nature of the withdrawal. Seizures are a common withdrawal symptom associated with meth use. The confusion rests in the fact that the physical symptoms are not as pronounced or as apparent as opiate or alcohol withdrawal, but are, ultimately, no less physical in nature. --Bastique 18:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Inventor

From the the lead

Methamphetamine was first synthesized in 1919 in Japan by chemist A. Ogata.

From the History section

Methamphetamine was first synthesized in 1887 by German chemist L. Edeleano

They can't both be first...

I can assure you with 100% confidence that A. Ogata was the first one to synthesize methamphetamine. L. Edeleano is the one who first synthesized Amphetamine (which he called phenylisopropylamine). I will delete L. Edeleano and add it to the AMPHETAMINE entry.

So, A. Ogata synthesized Methamphetamine in 1919, and L. Edeleano synthesized Amphetamine in 1887.

--Ddhix 2002 07:21, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Comments on a couple of glances.

It does go by tina in the south east us... I have never heard christina. I guessed the origin however.

About the discovery date; I was discovered by a german scientist working for merck pharmaceuticals in 1887. METHADRINE was discovered in 1919 by the Japs.

No wonder this encyclopedia is free.

---

Um, Yeah, that's why I changed it. Someone posts bad information, then someone who knows better makes the change.

--209.163.199.15 22:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Whoops! Forgot to sign in, lol -- messed the signature up.

--Ddhix 2002 22:55, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Decline in use? =

I would like to see recent statistics of a decline in use, as California studies of drug users related to Proposition 36 and drug related emergency room statistics indicate there are twice as many meth users as heroin and cocaine/crack users combined in the state. Other western states' data also indicate very high usage. Any claims of victory over the meth crisis seem to be War on Drugs propaganda.

Breaking up

imo this page should be broken into subpages, it's getting quite large which is no good for people who don't know about firefox . . . but it's also just too long, it loses fluidity and just gives too much info- but all the info deserves to be here on the wikipedia. It seems that much of the "production" section and the "effects and use" section can be split into subpages. thoughts?? --Heah 02:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

reorganization

i've reorganized the page. none of the info was removed, although some is no longer so in depth; the several paragraphs discussing rotting teeth were cut down, for instance, taking into consideration the lack of any clinical testing on the matter. the "military use" section was removed as it was already covered in history; the brand name of the drug used during the war was merged into history, if someone is attached to to anything from the military use that was deleted i'd recomend they pop it back into the relevant place in the history section. hopefully it is better organized and easier to read now, but as i said above, i think it should be split into sub articles. --Heah 02:32, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Where is Hamilton?

Near the end of the ==Production== section the article states "Hamilton police reported in 2003 of a case of a mobile meth lab" but I don't think it mintions where Hamilton is. —Teknic^Talk/Mail 19:39, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I can't find any sources for this info so I'm removing the sentence. —Teknic^Talk/Mail 16:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Hallucinations

I believe the article fails to mention hallucinations an an effect of the drug. It talks about stimulant psychosis hallucinations and sleep deprivation hallucinations, but not acute hallucinations caused by hyperactivity in the visual cortex immediately upon consumption. This is a pronounced primary effect of high doses. —Teknic^Talk/Mail 19:50, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

There is a lot of data in this that is either incomplete or outdated. I had actually missed that portion of it. With modern chemist's techniques, street methamphetamine is becoming purer, and many of the symptoms are more pronoounced.
Additionally, I reiterate that I would like to see the withdrawal portion of the article upgraded to specificy that methamphetamine does possess specific physical withdrawal symptoms, most especially with concentrated use over an extended period of time. The broad statement that methamphetamine purely psychologically addictive is being proven to be a fallacy. The physical changes that methamphetamine causes in the neurological systems of its users is proof against this. --Bastique 21:10, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Please provide references for these neurological changes. Meth is known to be neurotoxic after chronic administration but that is very different from the classic withdrawl syndromes produced by opioids, benzodiazepines and ethyl alcohol. --Bk0 23:31, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

'Classic' withdrawal symptoms notwithstanding, It does not matter. The therapeutic community is moving away from terms such as "physical" addiction because the addiction spectrum is entirely broad. [[User:Bastique|Template:Unicodeastique]]Template:Unicode^talk 01:21, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Homosexual promiscuity and the use of dirty needles

User Bastique reverted edits by Googuse and myself incorrectly. I have since reverted his changes.

The claim that homosexual men are more sexually promiscuous as a group is inflammatory POV that doesn't belong here. It is bigoted and incorrect. Googuse was justified in editing that preposterous claim out of the article.

The use of dirty needles by IV drug users (which includes meth addicts) is a huge contributer to the spread of HIV and STDs. The title of the section is "Effects" and goes on to describe the factors that cause meth use to be associated with HIV/STD infection. Use of dirty needles is both relevant and informative. Do not edit that out again simply because you apparently want the article to focus on the alleged promiscuity of gay men.

--Bk0 23:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

There was no claim that gay men are more promiscious.
Heterosexuals do not experience the sexual compulsion that gay men do on methamphetamine. This is due to the method of introduction of crystal meth into our subculture is tied in with sex. I am gay and I doubt that you are. This is not a bigoted remark.
Gay men are experience a rapid rise of HIV and syphalis (which cannot be transmitted introvenously) becuase of methamphetamine use. This is 1) important to the article and 2) a fact.
You've broken the three revert rule.

[[User:Bastique|Template:Unicodeastique]]Template:Unicode^talk

I have re-edited the section. The problem with sexual compulsion, which is not the same thing as promiscuity, has been amended to refer to gay and bisexual methamphetamine users. I have removed dirty needles once again because it's not pertinent to this paragraph. You can write a paragraph on HIV and Hepatitis C transmission if you like in which you discuss dirty needles. The simple facts are:
An inordinate amount of gay and bisexual men are using crystal meth.
They are experiencing a rise in HIV and STD transmission because of the "pig-sex" in which they participate while on it, and rarely from exchanging needles. Most gay men who use crystal these days are smoking it.
I can cite many articles if you would like, as well as the rise in outreach programs toward gay men about methamphetamine and sex.
No amount of sugar coating and pretending the problem doesn't exist will make it go away.
Getting honest about it will make it go away. I would like to see the problem go away, because I care about my community. [[User:Bastique|Template:Unicodeastique]]Template:Unicode^talk 01:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

saliva

I removed the following sentence: "It has been demonstrated clinically that methamphetamine use dries the mouth, and saliva combats tooth decay by washing bacteria off the teeth" for a couple of reasons. It is true that as a sympothetic agonist, methamphetamine can cause xerostomia, and it is true that xerostomia can cause tooth decay, but the mechanism is not as simple as washing bacteria off the teeth. It is also not clear that methamphetamine use causes periodontal disease by this mechanism. We need to cite sources to include this statement.

Drugs in Oregon

Meth is a huge problem in Oregon, and I added the section about the pharmaceutical restriction law. I'm not 100 percent positive I got everything, but I got the gist of it. I feel that this article does not cover the near epidemic that meth is causing, especially among low-income areas.

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/Talk:Methamphetamine"