What Is Methamphetamine?

redjade

Padawan Learner
What Is Methamphetamine?
Methamphetamine is a stimulant that affects the central nervous system. Commonly known as "crystal," "speed," "meth," or "Tina," it is a white or off-white, odorless, bitter-tasting crystalline powder that easily dissolves in water. Meth provides the user with sustained energy and a general sense of well-being. Along with increasing alertness and wakefulness, it masks the body's need for food, water, or rest. It mirrors the body's natural "fight or flight" response, a reaction that slows digestion and increases alertness and concentration. Meth can be snorted or smoked as is or dissolved in water and drunk or injected. The effects can last from 6 to 12 hours or more, depending on the individual's tolerance and the dosage. With sufficient quantity of speed or use of time, a state of high agitation can develop along with extreme emotions and intense paranoia. These in turn can sometimes lead to violent behavior.

Read More: http://redjade2006.blogspot.com/


My Comment: I wanted to do some research up on this topic because this drug is
increase more and more around many areas around the world. Such as Sierra Vista, AZ only a small town but alot of lost people.
And not alot of people know about what it does to they're body until it is too late. The youth is getting stuck in it like it
should be part of they're life.?
 
From my experience recreational drug users are well aware of the harm narcotics can cause, in fact some are extremely knowledgable. It really makes little difference whether they are educated about the dangers or not. The way I see it and because of the current state of humanity people are always going to search for ways to get high, its just a thread that many people follow in their lives. Sometimes it ends in tragedy, sometimes in a greater understanding of themselves.
 
moonwalker said:
From my experience recreational drug users are well aware of the harm narcotics can cause, in fact some are extremely knowledgable. It really makes little difference whether they are educated about the dangers or not. The way I see it and because of the current state of humanity people are always going to search for ways to get high, its just a thread that many people follow in their lives. Sometimes it ends in tragedy, sometimes in a greater understanding of themselves.
In some cases some drugs user know what they are getting into, but the younger youth get pressered into doing it and dont know anything about the drug. I asked around in my area how and why they got into drugs. This is what I got alot of : How I just wanted something to escape to and didnt know what it would do to my mind and body or I got pressered into it and gave in.
 
There is a documented methanphetamine use epidemic in rural america. The stuff is apparently easy to make so in communities where there isn't much else going on, people so disposed are flocking to it. A good friend's neighbor lost their business, their kids and their marriage due to meth, and this in rural Colorado - it's nasty stuff.
 
anart said:
There is a documented methanphetamine use epidemic in rural america. The stuff is apparently easy to make so in communities where there isn't much else going on, people so disposed are flocking to it. A good friend's neighbor lost their business, their kids and their marriage due to meth, and this in rural Colorado - it's nasty stuff.
Its shocking among other things that are happening in the world. I feel sad for them and for many other things that are happening in the world. But these drug users out there made they're choice. Should I sit around? No. I'd rather put out the information so maybe something can happen.
 
I think we all need to remember that drug issues often have a lot of fear mongering. Meth is the issue of the day. Look at the propoganda in the past scares involving crack, PCP, LSD, marijuana, alcohol, cocaine, and opium (in roughly reverse chronological order). All these scares have been used to reduce our freedom in significant ways, and empower psychopaths. Take a look at http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=535

Nor is meth diabolically addictive. If an addict is someone who has used a drug in the previous month (a commonly used, if overly broad, definition), then only 5 percent of Americans who have sampled meth would be called addicts, according to the federal government’s National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
That figure is slightly higher than the addiction rate for people who have sampled heroin (3 percent), but it’s lower than for crack (8 percent), painkillers (10 percent), marijuana (15 percent) or cigarettes (37 percent). Among people who have sampled alcohol, 60 percent had a drink the previous month, and 27 percent went on a binge (defined as five drinks on one occasion) during the month.
 
joeshmoe said:
I think we all need to remember that drug issues often have a lot of fear mongering. Meth is the issue of the day. Look at the propoganda in the past scares involving crack, PCP, LSD, marijuana, alcohol, cocaine, and opium (in roughly reverse chronological order). All these scares have been used to reduce our freedom in significant ways, and empower psychopaths. Take a look at http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=535

Nor is meth diabolically addictive. If an addict is someone who has used a drug in the previous month (a commonly used, if overly broad, definition), then only 5 percent of Americans who have sampled meth would be called addicts, according to the federal government’s National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
That figure is slightly higher than the addiction rate for people who have sampled heroin (3 percent), but it’s lower than for crack (8 percent), painkillers (10 percent), marijuana (15 percent) or cigarettes (37 percent). Among people who have sampled alcohol, 60 percent had a drink the previous month, and 27 percent went on a binge (defined as five drinks on one occasion) during the month.
Interesting I'll take a look.
 
Whats worse is that all the ADD and ADHD meds are derivatives of meth. They are often one or few methyl/carboxyl groups away from the pure substance! This means that the action of the chemicals is virtually identical. So basically, doctors are prescribing speed to kids.

This drug also makes you more open to suggestion. I don't have any evidence for this other then my experiences under its influence, which as far as i am concerned is proof positive.
 
anart said:
There is a documented methanphetamine use epidemic in rural america. The stuff is apparently easy to make so in communities where there isn't much else going on, people so disposed are flocking to it. A good friend's neighbor lost their business, their kids and their marriage due to meth, and this in rural Colorado - it's nasty stuff.
It is nasty stuff. It's nasty even in its pure chemical form, but that is not what people who use it are ingesting. The people making this stuff are not exactly highly educated biochemists working in a modern laboratory. The substances they produce are full of toxic chemical byproducts left over from incomplete synthesis and sloppy laboratory protocol.

Amphetamine, methamphetamine's chemical cousin is manufactured as a prescription drug and used for treatment of ADD/ADHD...
 
Hi,
This thread is very synchronise to what is occurring currently in my life. My partner and I recently moved to Chilliwack, BC from Vancouver BC. A smaller town of semi-rural status. We thought that Chilliwack was most likely in better shape than Vancouver. Because Vancouver is starting to really become big on the drug-use factor. To our surprise we found-out from locals, that the Chilliwack youth are horribly involved in meth. To a sense that they are resulting to prostitution, and other ugly ways of getting the stuff. This was quite a shock since Chilliwack is pretty much rural and in the country, and away from the city where there is such a big drug problem. Speaking personally, I used to be a meth user. I was addicted for some time-yes, and it could have for sure ended in tragedy but thankfully it didn’t. I know how hard it must be for other addicts, especially if they are not educated. Which is what is lacking in our society imo. Kids are not being told and taught of the affects of meth, and other ‘hard’ drugs. Because ‘soft’ drugs and ‘hard’ drugs are classified and grouped together. So, when kids experience the softer drugs, they assume the same for all designer drugs.

So, the question then becomes what is the solution??
That is what I am stuck on. Because I know that kids don’t listen well to authority. So if some drug doctor comes to school and starts to tell kids don’t do drugs… they are just going to shut-down and think it is the “same old, same old.” We need something else to reach the youth, but what??

Any ideas??
 
knowledge_of_self said:
Hi,
This thread is very synchronise to what is occurring currently in my life. My partner and I recently moved to Chilliwack, BC from Vancouver BC. A smaller town of semi-rural status. We thought that Chilliwack was most likely in better shape than Vancouver. Because Vancouver is starting to really become big on the drug-use factor. To our surprise we found-out from locals, that the Chilliwack youth are horribly involved in meth. To a sense that they are resulting to prostitution, and other ugly ways of getting the stuff. This was quite a shock since Chilliwack is pretty much rural and in the country, and away from the city where there is such a big drug problem. Speaking personally, I used to be a meth user. I was addicted for some time-yes, and it could have for sure ended in tragedy but thankfully it didn’t. I know how hard it must be for other addicts, especially if they are not educated. Which is what is lacking in our society imo. Kids are not being told and taught of the affects of meth, and other ‘hard’ drugs. Because ‘soft’ drugs and ‘hard’ drugs are classified and grouped together. So, when kids experience the softer drugs, they assume the same for all designer drugs.

So, the question then becomes what is the solution??
That is what I am stuck on. Because I know that kids don’t listen well to authority. So if some drug doctor comes to school and starts to tell kids don’t do drugs… they are just going to shut-down and think it is the “same old, same old.” We need something else to reach the youth, but what??

Any ideas??
Ideas? Absolutely!
There has never been any evidence that prohibition stops use. Even very prohibitionist Iran has a history rampant heroin use:
Ecstasy use has risen in Iran, which already suffers from widespread heroin addiction. During the recent election, many people said they thought drug use among the young was one of the main problems the new Government had to address.
People will use drugs no matter what. Its for a person to decide for themselves. Prohibition prevents open information about drugs. First, legalize all drugs. Then we can see some people can use drugs responsibly, and some people cannot. Some people are fine, and some people are effected horribly. Being raped in jail for choosing what you want to put into your own body is psychopathic in the extreme.

As for the latest drug scare, read this:
That's a question that Whitaker ought to be directing at himself and his staff. As I argued during my On the Media appearance, misinformation about drugs and their effects make it impossible to have serious, mature discussions about the best public policies related to prohibtion, treatment, law enforcement, and much more. The Newsweek cover story on meth sadly reminds us that most coverage of drug use has not really improved since the old tales of LSD-eating hippies staring into the sun until they went blind filled the nation's newspapers.
 
knowledge_of_self said:
Any ideas??
Unfortunately, I don't have any ideas specific to your situation. A good starting point would be for people to gain more objective knowledge about drugs, and not just the drugs the government decides should be illegal. The "war on drugs" rhetoric is so full of hypocrisy, lies and misinformation that it almost guarantees, by its nature, that people tune it out.

The problem with the government and media's portrayal of illegal drugs is that, like so many things these days, they have reduced it to another "black or white", "good or bad", "with us or against us" issue by saying that all illegal drugs are bad and there are no varying degrees of good or bad.

Both illegal and legal drugs all have varying degrees of negative effect, ranging from no negative effect to very negative. The negative effect not only varies depending on the drug, but also on the individual using it, how often they use it and in what quantity. Unfortunately, this sort of data is not usually available as part of the campaigns to stop drug use...
 
joeshmoe said:
People will use drugs no matter what. Its for a person to decide for themselves. Prohibition prevents open information about drugs. First, legalize all drugs. Then we can see some people can use drugs responsibly, and some people cannot. Some people are fine, and some people are effected horribly. Being raped in jail for choosing what you want to put into your own body is psychopathic in the extreme.
I am trying to decide whether I agree with you or not. I feel like the issue here is the very young folks. I mean, very very young kids using this stuff, or being coherced to use it by friends or gangs... because of the intemperance of men is that laws exist. Just a thought...
 
knowledge_of_self said:
So, the question then becomes what is the solution??
That is what I am stuck on. Because I know that kids don’t listen well to authority. So if some drug doctor comes to school and starts to tell kids don’t do drugs… they are just going to shut-down and think it is the “same old, same old.” We need something else to reach the youth, but what??

Any ideas??
Ex-users or sufferers of a drug or any problem are usually the best way to get a message across.

These people are believable and genuine and they 'know' because they've 'been there'. Information and statistics have no-where near the impact of a person standing up and saying; "Look what happened to me when I did this or when this happened to me". People listen to that because its real.
 
joeshmoe said:
People will use drugs no matter what. Its for a person to decide for themselves. Prohibition prevents open information about drugs. First, legalize all drugs. Then we can see some people can use drugs responsibly, and some people cannot. Some people are fine, and some people are effected horribly. Being raped in jail for choosing what you want to put into your own body is psychopathic in the extreme.
I think that legalizing all drugs may or may not be something of a solution; but the decision is not in my grasp, and a hypothetical idea. But I can see the point you are trying to make.

Ruth said:
Ex-users or sufferers of a drug or any problem are usually the best way to get a message across.

These people are believable and genuine and they 'know' because they've 'been there'. Information and statistics have no-where near the impact of a person standing up and saying; "Look what happened to me when I did this or when this happened to me". People listen to that because its real.
I think that is a very good idea, I’m just not sure of a practical way of doing it.

Nina
 
Back
Top Bottom