This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
The differences in chirality between d/l methamphetamines is not mentioned in the article. While I do not have sources, I was under the impression the chirality of the molecule changes its effects, like the comparison of d-amphetamine ( dextroamphetamine) and l-amphetamine . The synthesis methods are likely racemic, producing equal quantities of both d/l, however, the d-isomer is more potent. The molecule image does not represent the chiraliy of the molecule. Barring any objections, I would like to include these facts (and references) in the article and change the image to represent the d-isomer of methamphetamine. ~~davidknippers
...Further research has revealed that brand name desoxyn is a (S)-enantiomer (dextro). I'll change the image to represent the dextro isomer and add an appropriate exploration of the difference in chemistry soon. ( [1]) ~~davidknippers
I recently heard that extc does not enhance sexual feelings. Is this accurate? I personally have felt that while on speed or meth or extc that i get more sexually aroused. ~~Portillo
Wikipedia should not be used for selfish political opinions. Please remove the content in the paragraph titled "Current Controversy". Drug abuse in the United States is a serious problem. The attack on the Bush adminstration in "Current Controversy" lowers the integrity of Wikipedia!
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)
I'm just a tad concerned about the (for lack of a better word) unprofessional attitude that comes across in the following passage:
Just to put a bit of a more even slant on this article, it should be pointed out that the small scale labs and small time operators do not account for very much of the production in most places, most meth is actually made from bulk diverted pills or even pure crystal, likewise for the other reagents, these new legislations will simply shift some of the bottom end of the market back to the gangs and the corrupt law enforcement and customs agents who get paid to let this stuff through. It's pretty easy to see when you actually look at it they are restricting OTC pseudoephedrine simply to bring back the more, for the law enforcement, manageable situation of a smaller number of big labs which require as much forensics work as the little labs, but net a much bigger public relations score for the police.
The only thing that bothered me about this article is that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, should not be about opinions; rather, it should be as factual, accurate and neutral as humanly possible. I treat information I find on this website as seriously as information I find in the Encyclopedia Britannica - any sides of a multi-faceted issue are presented, but, unless I'm much mistaken, they are not argued.
-- MrSparkle847 04:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
MrSparkle, I've edited those paragraphs and hopefully moved them a bit more towards NPOV, although it'd definitely help if someone could find some citations to back them up.
-- Oh James 05:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Can someone please fix the spacing on the page, there's a large gap, clean 'er up.
There are many different recipes for conversion which can be found on the internet.
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.
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" gives interesting results. -- The Anome 23:19, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
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.
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
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)
Reanal and hepatic failure are listed. Are there studies to support this? Osmodiar 07:28, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
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 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
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC) 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
Osmodiar 06:20, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
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)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I changed this because if read as if Sudafed was a source for more than just the pseudoephedrine.
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)
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)
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)
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 nazi 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)
And don't forget that Methadrine is a brand name, not a chemical name!
-- Dudepal 1:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
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.
Drug-related emergency room statistics are worthless as a measure of a problem with any particular drug. If you come in after a satellite falls on your head and they find methamphetamine in your blood or you mention being on it, it gets recorded as methamphetamine-related.
Proposition 36 is an anti-freedom measure. Being a drug offender merely means you were caught with illegal drugs, not that you have a problem with drugs or need anyone's help. Admittedly being forced into going to rehab is somewhat better than going to prison for something as trivial as drug possession.
There is no meth crisis. It happens to be popular at present. Although it's popularity may actually be a consequence of the war on some drugs being that it is an easy drug to produce locally. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 06:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
The 'therapeutic' community live in their own little fantasy world. They've been spouting boneheaded rubbish for decades so they're hardly a reliable source.
We don't yet know what, if any, real negative consequences there are from any neurological changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 06:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
User Bastique reverted edits by Googuse and myself incorrectly. I have since reverted his changes.
-- Bk0 23:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
There is no reason to use specific slang terms such as "barebacking". Just calling it unprotected sex is easier to understand and removes the emphasis from him being homosexual, to him not using protection.- 128.113.195.139 13:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
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.
Smoking methamphetamine causes tooth decay. Methamphetamine vapor is acidic, and some of it is deposited on the teeth, causing enamel loss and decay.
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.
I removed the line about deviated septum for two reasons. One, Deviated septum is unrelated the injury caused by snorting drugs. Two, it is the well-known vasoconstrictive effects of cocaine which lead to ischemia and necrosis of the septum. Amphetamines are not commonly associated with this sort of damage so this claim really needs a citation.
Anything that is snorted through the nose can cause a deviated septum, especially in the case of "unrefined" methamphetamines with impurities. Direct physical trauma (chemicals, cutting agents) can cause it, aside from any effects on the blood vessels. There are also cases of folks snorting "meth" that isn't really methamphetamine.
I just verified that Abbott Pharmaceuticals owns the patent for Desoxyn (not Ovation Pharma as listed in the article). I'm going to change that. For more info see this page:
http://www.drugs.com/PDR/Desoxyn_Tablets.html
Also, the wikipedia link Desoxyn states this.
-- ZZYZX 04:34, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
I do believe that Desoxyn is (at the least) manufactured by Ovation Pharma these days as Abbott has sold the rights of the drug to Ovation (in their attempt to move away from the production and distribution of conrolled substances.)
Refault 02:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
This section of the article gives great examples of production that is found in the United States, but fails to mention anywhere else in the world other than Mexico. Evil Monkey - Hello 03:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, methamphetamine is hugely popular in the United States, which accounts for the superlative examples. I see your point, nonetheless, and am without the data to supply this article with information pertaining to the production of, say, Yaba tablets. If some - Non-American - Wikipedians with such data would put something up, then I'm sure we would all be more than happy to read and enjoy. I have yet to visit any other country - and navigate their illegal drug scene - so I honestly couldn't tell you one iota of information about the production in such locations. Sorry man, but the data will be up there just as soon as someone with the data is willing to put it up.
Maybe you could help broaden this scope for a more worldwide view? -- Ddhix 2002 11:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
"and a prolonged depression, during which suicide is possible" (p. 1593 - ch. 195)."
Isn't suicide always possible?
--
Seems to be.-- Ddhix 2002 03:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
---
How about instead of talking about (this is funny:) "ingridiants," we talk about chemicals and laboratory procedure? I mean, just considering the fact that methamphetamine is not a narcotic cocktail of drugs that make some 'super mutant drug stirred in a stock pot for 5 hours.' -- Ddhix 2002 03:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I suspect the elimination half life is incorrect. Most of the literature suggests it is between 10 and 20 hours, with a shorter half life when urinary pH is low.
I think that saying that Methamphetamine is chemically structered similar to that of other stimulatns is misleading. It has a benzene ring, their are soooooo many compounds that have benzene rings. In fact, you could say that Methampetamine is structured similiarly to aspirin. I though I would post here before I changed it in order to get more input on my feelings toward the first sentence in the "Production" section. I'm new to wikipedia so perhaps this is not the correct course of action and if that is the case i apologize. ~~davethegnome
Why are there two "Effects" sections? This article needs a complete cleanup. I'll start as soon as I get some time. Fuzzform 22:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
The first county in which I have noticed the prosecution of meth 'cookers' for environmental offenses and child abuse relating to meth manufacture is Branch County, Michigan, which may not be the first. I cannot state that sentences of persons convicted of drug manufacture and either environmental offenses or child abuse/endangerment will serve terms consecutively as convicted and sentenced; sentences could be appealed and reversed.
I did not mention the jurisdiction in the because the community is relatively small, because I do not seek to give free political endorsements to any elected officials, and because I have no desire to claim that the county is first to do so or that the practice is limited to that county or to Michigan. I refuse to speculate on the spread of the practice to other jurisdictions because of the limitation of my knowledge on the matter.
Persons have been convicted of environmental crimes, child abuse or endangerment, and theft of anhydrous ammonia, in addition to the manufacture of meth.
-- 66.231.41.57 07:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the current military application of this substance be included in this article? I don't have the sources on hand to add the information myself, but my understanding is that methamphetamine is still used regularly (at least by the American military) by pilots and certain ground units for increased productivity in the field. It might be worth mentioning. -- Matthew Cohen ( Tccmod: user / talk / contribs) 12:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC) 12:14, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Assuming that it is currently used by the US Military, which I believe it is not. I think that at most, amphetamine would be currently in use. But even then it wouldn't be used to increase productivity in the field, but rather for use in an emergency situation. If amphetamine(s) is still in use, I would assume it would be reserved for special forces (like Navy Seals)-- Ddhix 2002 22:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Amphetamines are used by the military, given mostly to pilots that must go on long missions. They are commonly referred to as "Go-Pills" in the military. There is also another pill given when the pilot returns to help him sleep. However, I highly doubt that they are given methamphetamine. Dextroamphetamine or amphetamine salt are much more likely to be what's found in those "Go-Pills".
Recreational use is (by its very definition) abuse. The sentence after that is completely baseless; if there is a reference for it, then please add it. Otherwise, do not add this statement back into the article. The last part may be true, but it doesn't say who thinks that. Add a reference.
More edits to come,
Fuzzform 20:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Recreational use, by its very definition, is recreational use.-- Ddhix 2002 07:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, given that abuse is defined as a variety of things, part of the definition used by the medical community of abuse is using the drug in ways that it was not prescribed. The vast majority of meth as used by meth users are in ways that no doctor would ever prescribed. Recreational use of illegal drugs is a separate issue, but using is clearly abuse by that definition (since Meth is rarely prescribed by a doctor and created at times from prescription drugs).
i read (albeit in the rotten library) that there is something of a meth epidemic amongst gays. does anyone have any references for this? Joeyramoney 03:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
"Methamphetamine can be swallowed, snorted, smoked, dissolved in water and injected,inserted anally (with or without dissolution in water), or into the urethra." Urethra? Since when? No sane person would administer meth urethrally. The only drugs administered urethrally are for erectile dysfunction. Where's the evidence of people actually doing it for desirable effects? I mean, you can insert meth into your urethra if you want to, but you can also insert it into your ear, eye, vagina, belly button or armpit if you want to. There's just no reason to. -- 158.104.77.173 21:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
How on earth can dry mouth be worse than acid vapors? Look at the pictures on rotten.com, the teeth look melted. 69.168.21.138 11:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Anyone looking for citations (regarding the US) should poke around the Des Moines Register and other Midwest newspapers, the Register in particular has run many different series on these issues (including a recent article about meth mouth). California may have been the Meth capital in 1986 but today, it's the Midwest. Many state laws have been passed restricting pseudoephedrine, so the thousands of meth labs are starting to give way to an explosion of trafficked crystal meth, apparently bringing a surge of heroin traffic with it. (She swallowed the spider to catch the fly) Rainman420 20:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Some of the information in the addiction section doesn't seem very clear.
For example, "Former users have noted that they feel stupid or dull when they quit using methamphetamine. This is because the brain is adapting a need for methamphetamine to think faster, or at what seems to be a higher level"
That last sentence doesn't make any sense. Also needs a reference to back it.
Also, "With long-term methamphetamine use, enough dopamine will have flooded the brain to cause chemical cell damage".
Surely this needs a reference too. I've heard of glutamate causing cell damage through excitotoxicity, but dopamine??
83.245.88.120 21:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Steve A.
Yeah that dosen't sound too good. I heard some things about 5-HT binding to DA, which causes toxicity.
The whole article is a mess and does not represent anything "encyclopedic." A much re-vamp is needed overall.-- Refault 04:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'd tried to rewrite a section relate to Japan, but my English is quite limited. So could someone help to rewrite an article?
My suggestion is about Japanese streetname of the drug. 'Shabu' is a street name which is used by Yakuza, that name was not popular before ban of the drug. Before methamphetamine ban, 'Philopon' (ヒロポン) was the most popular name. 'Philopon' is a trademark of Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma ( http://www.ds-pharma.co.jp/), former Dainippon Pharma (大日本製薬). And there are ads of Philopon which was sold over the counter ( http://www.warbirds.jp/heiki/42000.htm).
Methamphetamine is the still number one illigal hard drug in Japan. Most common street name is 'speed' or 'S', and usually used by smoking. Methamphetamine regulation is very strict and difficult to use for medical purpose. (ADHD is treated with methylphenidate.) -- Blooms 12:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I would just like to point out the first paragraph, which is obviously inappropriate. "Methamphetamine is good if you want to get high. I strongly recommend meth if you are looking to start taking drugs. Its not that expensive either!!!!!" Please restore to the original introduction.
I think that the person who wrote that paragraph made a good point! I mean meth will get you high and it is not very expensive... come on where's the beef???
Are you sure meth is called speed, because they are two totally different substances.. -- 193.190.88.130 14:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
The differences in chirality between d/l methamphetamines is not mentioned in the article. While I do not have sources, I was under the impression the chirality of the molecule changes its effects, like the comparison of d-amphetamine ( dextroamphetamine) and l-amphetamine . The synthesis methods are likely racemic, producing equal quantities of both d/l, however, the d-isomer is more potent. The molecule image does not represent the chiraliy of the molecule. Barring any objections, I would like to include these facts (and references) in the article and change the image to represent the d-isomer of methamphetamine. ~~davidknippers
...Further research has revealed that brand name desoxyn is a (S)-enantiomer (dextro). I'll change the image to represent the dextro isomer and add an appropriate exploration of the difference in chemistry soon. ( [1]) ~~davidknippers
I recently heard that extc does not enhance sexual feelings. Is this accurate? I personally have felt that while on speed or meth or extc that i get more sexually aroused. ~~Portillo
Wikipedia should not be used for selfish political opinions. Please remove the content in the paragraph titled "Current Controversy". Drug abuse in the United States is a serious problem. The attack on the Bush adminstration in "Current Controversy" lowers the integrity of Wikipedia!
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)
I'm just a tad concerned about the (for lack of a better word) unprofessional attitude that comes across in the following passage:
Just to put a bit of a more even slant on this article, it should be pointed out that the small scale labs and small time operators do not account for very much of the production in most places, most meth is actually made from bulk diverted pills or even pure crystal, likewise for the other reagents, these new legislations will simply shift some of the bottom end of the market back to the gangs and the corrupt law enforcement and customs agents who get paid to let this stuff through. It's pretty easy to see when you actually look at it they are restricting OTC pseudoephedrine simply to bring back the more, for the law enforcement, manageable situation of a smaller number of big labs which require as much forensics work as the little labs, but net a much bigger public relations score for the police.
The only thing that bothered me about this article is that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, should not be about opinions; rather, it should be as factual, accurate and neutral as humanly possible. I treat information I find on this website as seriously as information I find in the Encyclopedia Britannica - any sides of a multi-faceted issue are presented, but, unless I'm much mistaken, they are not argued.
-- MrSparkle847 04:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
MrSparkle, I've edited those paragraphs and hopefully moved them a bit more towards NPOV, although it'd definitely help if someone could find some citations to back them up.
-- Oh James 05:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Can someone please fix the spacing on the page, there's a large gap, clean 'er up.
There are many different recipes for conversion which can be found on the internet.
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.
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" gives interesting results. -- The Anome 23:19, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
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.
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
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)
Reanal and hepatic failure are listed. Are there studies to support this? Osmodiar 07:28, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
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 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
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC) 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
Osmodiar 06:20, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
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)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I changed this because if read as if Sudafed was a source for more than just the pseudoephedrine.
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)
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)
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)
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 nazi 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)
And don't forget that Methadrine is a brand name, not a chemical name!
-- Dudepal 1:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
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.
Drug-related emergency room statistics are worthless as a measure of a problem with any particular drug. If you come in after a satellite falls on your head and they find methamphetamine in your blood or you mention being on it, it gets recorded as methamphetamine-related.
Proposition 36 is an anti-freedom measure. Being a drug offender merely means you were caught with illegal drugs, not that you have a problem with drugs or need anyone's help. Admittedly being forced into going to rehab is somewhat better than going to prison for something as trivial as drug possession.
There is no meth crisis. It happens to be popular at present. Although it's popularity may actually be a consequence of the war on some drugs being that it is an easy drug to produce locally. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 06:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
The 'therapeutic' community live in their own little fantasy world. They've been spouting boneheaded rubbish for decades so they're hardly a reliable source.
We don't yet know what, if any, real negative consequences there are from any neurological changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.195.197 ( talk • contribs) 06:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
User Bastique reverted edits by Googuse and myself incorrectly. I have since reverted his changes.
-- Bk0 23:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
There is no reason to use specific slang terms such as "barebacking". Just calling it unprotected sex is easier to understand and removes the emphasis from him being homosexual, to him not using protection.- 128.113.195.139 13:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
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.
Smoking methamphetamine causes tooth decay. Methamphetamine vapor is acidic, and some of it is deposited on the teeth, causing enamel loss and decay.
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.
I removed the line about deviated septum for two reasons. One, Deviated septum is unrelated the injury caused by snorting drugs. Two, it is the well-known vasoconstrictive effects of cocaine which lead to ischemia and necrosis of the septum. Amphetamines are not commonly associated with this sort of damage so this claim really needs a citation.
Anything that is snorted through the nose can cause a deviated septum, especially in the case of "unrefined" methamphetamines with impurities. Direct physical trauma (chemicals, cutting agents) can cause it, aside from any effects on the blood vessels. There are also cases of folks snorting "meth" that isn't really methamphetamine.
I just verified that Abbott Pharmaceuticals owns the patent for Desoxyn (not Ovation Pharma as listed in the article). I'm going to change that. For more info see this page:
http://www.drugs.com/PDR/Desoxyn_Tablets.html
Also, the wikipedia link Desoxyn states this.
-- ZZYZX 04:34, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
I do believe that Desoxyn is (at the least) manufactured by Ovation Pharma these days as Abbott has sold the rights of the drug to Ovation (in their attempt to move away from the production and distribution of conrolled substances.)
Refault 02:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
This section of the article gives great examples of production that is found in the United States, but fails to mention anywhere else in the world other than Mexico. Evil Monkey - Hello 03:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, methamphetamine is hugely popular in the United States, which accounts for the superlative examples. I see your point, nonetheless, and am without the data to supply this article with information pertaining to the production of, say, Yaba tablets. If some - Non-American - Wikipedians with such data would put something up, then I'm sure we would all be more than happy to read and enjoy. I have yet to visit any other country - and navigate their illegal drug scene - so I honestly couldn't tell you one iota of information about the production in such locations. Sorry man, but the data will be up there just as soon as someone with the data is willing to put it up.
Maybe you could help broaden this scope for a more worldwide view? -- Ddhix 2002 11:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
"and a prolonged depression, during which suicide is possible" (p. 1593 - ch. 195)."
Isn't suicide always possible?
--
Seems to be.-- Ddhix 2002 03:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
---
How about instead of talking about (this is funny:) "ingridiants," we talk about chemicals and laboratory procedure? I mean, just considering the fact that methamphetamine is not a narcotic cocktail of drugs that make some 'super mutant drug stirred in a stock pot for 5 hours.' -- Ddhix 2002 03:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I suspect the elimination half life is incorrect. Most of the literature suggests it is between 10 and 20 hours, with a shorter half life when urinary pH is low.
I think that saying that Methamphetamine is chemically structered similar to that of other stimulatns is misleading. It has a benzene ring, their are soooooo many compounds that have benzene rings. In fact, you could say that Methampetamine is structured similiarly to aspirin. I though I would post here before I changed it in order to get more input on my feelings toward the first sentence in the "Production" section. I'm new to wikipedia so perhaps this is not the correct course of action and if that is the case i apologize. ~~davethegnome
Why are there two "Effects" sections? This article needs a complete cleanup. I'll start as soon as I get some time. Fuzzform 22:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
The first county in which I have noticed the prosecution of meth 'cookers' for environmental offenses and child abuse relating to meth manufacture is Branch County, Michigan, which may not be the first. I cannot state that sentences of persons convicted of drug manufacture and either environmental offenses or child abuse/endangerment will serve terms consecutively as convicted and sentenced; sentences could be appealed and reversed.
I did not mention the jurisdiction in the because the community is relatively small, because I do not seek to give free political endorsements to any elected officials, and because I have no desire to claim that the county is first to do so or that the practice is limited to that county or to Michigan. I refuse to speculate on the spread of the practice to other jurisdictions because of the limitation of my knowledge on the matter.
Persons have been convicted of environmental crimes, child abuse or endangerment, and theft of anhydrous ammonia, in addition to the manufacture of meth.
-- 66.231.41.57 07:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the current military application of this substance be included in this article? I don't have the sources on hand to add the information myself, but my understanding is that methamphetamine is still used regularly (at least by the American military) by pilots and certain ground units for increased productivity in the field. It might be worth mentioning. -- Matthew Cohen ( Tccmod: user / talk / contribs) 12:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC) 12:14, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Assuming that it is currently used by the US Military, which I believe it is not. I think that at most, amphetamine would be currently in use. But even then it wouldn't be used to increase productivity in the field, but rather for use in an emergency situation. If amphetamine(s) is still in use, I would assume it would be reserved for special forces (like Navy Seals)-- Ddhix 2002 22:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Amphetamines are used by the military, given mostly to pilots that must go on long missions. They are commonly referred to as "Go-Pills" in the military. There is also another pill given when the pilot returns to help him sleep. However, I highly doubt that they are given methamphetamine. Dextroamphetamine or amphetamine salt are much more likely to be what's found in those "Go-Pills".
Recreational use is (by its very definition) abuse. The sentence after that is completely baseless; if there is a reference for it, then please add it. Otherwise, do not add this statement back into the article. The last part may be true, but it doesn't say who thinks that. Add a reference.
More edits to come,
Fuzzform 20:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Recreational use, by its very definition, is recreational use.-- Ddhix 2002 07:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, given that abuse is defined as a variety of things, part of the definition used by the medical community of abuse is using the drug in ways that it was not prescribed. The vast majority of meth as used by meth users are in ways that no doctor would ever prescribed. Recreational use of illegal drugs is a separate issue, but using is clearly abuse by that definition (since Meth is rarely prescribed by a doctor and created at times from prescription drugs).
i read (albeit in the rotten library) that there is something of a meth epidemic amongst gays. does anyone have any references for this? Joeyramoney 03:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
"Methamphetamine can be swallowed, snorted, smoked, dissolved in water and injected,inserted anally (with or without dissolution in water), or into the urethra." Urethra? Since when? No sane person would administer meth urethrally. The only drugs administered urethrally are for erectile dysfunction. Where's the evidence of people actually doing it for desirable effects? I mean, you can insert meth into your urethra if you want to, but you can also insert it into your ear, eye, vagina, belly button or armpit if you want to. There's just no reason to. -- 158.104.77.173 21:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
How on earth can dry mouth be worse than acid vapors? Look at the pictures on rotten.com, the teeth look melted. 69.168.21.138 11:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Anyone looking for citations (regarding the US) should poke around the Des Moines Register and other Midwest newspapers, the Register in particular has run many different series on these issues (including a recent article about meth mouth). California may have been the Meth capital in 1986 but today, it's the Midwest. Many state laws have been passed restricting pseudoephedrine, so the thousands of meth labs are starting to give way to an explosion of trafficked crystal meth, apparently bringing a surge of heroin traffic with it. (She swallowed the spider to catch the fly) Rainman420 20:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Some of the information in the addiction section doesn't seem very clear.
For example, "Former users have noted that they feel stupid or dull when they quit using methamphetamine. This is because the brain is adapting a need for methamphetamine to think faster, or at what seems to be a higher level"
That last sentence doesn't make any sense. Also needs a reference to back it.
Also, "With long-term methamphetamine use, enough dopamine will have flooded the brain to cause chemical cell damage".
Surely this needs a reference too. I've heard of glutamate causing cell damage through excitotoxicity, but dopamine??
83.245.88.120 21:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Steve A.
Yeah that dosen't sound too good. I heard some things about 5-HT binding to DA, which causes toxicity.
The whole article is a mess and does not represent anything "encyclopedic." A much re-vamp is needed overall.-- Refault 04:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'd tried to rewrite a section relate to Japan, but my English is quite limited. So could someone help to rewrite an article?
My suggestion is about Japanese streetname of the drug. 'Shabu' is a street name which is used by Yakuza, that name was not popular before ban of the drug. Before methamphetamine ban, 'Philopon' (ヒロポン) was the most popular name. 'Philopon' is a trademark of Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma ( http://www.ds-pharma.co.jp/), former Dainippon Pharma (大日本製薬). And there are ads of Philopon which was sold over the counter ( http://www.warbirds.jp/heiki/42000.htm).
Methamphetamine is the still number one illigal hard drug in Japan. Most common street name is 'speed' or 'S', and usually used by smoking. Methamphetamine regulation is very strict and difficult to use for medical purpose. (ADHD is treated with methylphenidate.) -- Blooms 12:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I would just like to point out the first paragraph, which is obviously inappropriate. "Methamphetamine is good if you want to get high. I strongly recommend meth if you are looking to start taking drugs. Its not that expensive either!!!!!" Please restore to the original introduction.
I think that the person who wrote that paragraph made a good point! I mean meth will get you high and it is not very expensive... come on where's the beef???
Are you sure meth is called speed, because they are two totally different substances.. -- 193.190.88.130 14:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)