Ben Cousins in trouble - suffers fall in hospital

[Timmy from Thomastown]

umm, I dont think this is the thread topic either numbnuts.

Its about the recent Ben Cousins episode. Whether or not it was true is 100% relevant to the thread topic.

Legalisation, not so much.

 

[Blues_Man]

He has high addictive potentialities that would have manifested themselves in one form or another if meth did not exist. Pointing at one particular drug and screaming "EVIL!", is the act of a complete idiot.

Trying to defend the habitual use and of illicit substances is the act of a complete idiot ..or drug user.

 

[Blues_Man]

It is this kind of mentality/mind set used by junkies to justify their actions, and in reality it is quite sad and ultimately destructive to themselves and those around them.

It's human nature to defend what they are doing...they need to believe that they aren't stupid enough to be damaging their bodies and ultimately their lives by depending on illicit substances to endure their most likely boring existences.

My sister is a smoker, and refuses to believe that smoking is harmful in any shape or form .

It's their way of justifying a stupid decision.

 

[blueblooded]

Interesting thread with the prohibition stance from OldSkool, while i think prohibition is a good idea in theory in practice it would destroy lives...I myself have been a rec drug user, in my early20s i jumped on the pills for a little while (every few weeks) and dabbled with cocaine and still do on very rare occassions(2-3 times per year), i'm now in my mid 20s, have an excellent career and addiction has never been an option really.....mainly because cocaine in Aus is worth 300 dollars a gram plus and quiet frankly i can't justify the prices....on the flip side of that if the stuff was freely available and cheap as it is in the US there is a very good chance my intake would have increased at the tipping point 2-3 years ago and the fine line might well have been crossed! Thank god for the price, illegality and relative difficulty in sourcing the stuff here!

As somebody who has been fairly switched on with this sort of thing since my late teens i have always been aware that playing with meth (ice), heroin, liquid g etc is a big big no no....if somebody paid me to try meth i would never do it, i have never seen a drug destroy lives like that stuff...i know of people that have ended up in jail because of meth, psychotic because of meth, it is the devils drug! People think that because it is so clean that they have it under control and before they know it, they've been up for 4 days and are clinically insane.....

In Melbourne in particular the reason for the explosion of this despicable crap amongst young people is the decline of quality MDMA in the party scene in particular, MDMA in its purest form at least has been proven to be less addictive than most other party drugs and a hell of alot safer, for instance the need for more MDMA the day after a binge/party is almost unthinkable (the next weekend andthe thought is still almost too much), Ice on the other hand can be smoked and smoked for days on end and regularly is amongst young people, the reason for this shift was the decline in quality ecstacy......there has also been a significant increase in violence over the past 3 years in Melbourne....it has nothing to do with alcohol fueled violence it is meth fueled violence.

Not saying MDMA is a better option, every drug is addictive, all have negative side effects, but the amount of people i know personally or have heard of that have succumbed to this crap is frightening, the cops (that's who controls the supply of all this crap don't kid yourselves) should get together with whoever to put cleaner less addictive drugs back on the streets, if 18-21 y.o have access to clean party pills as were available 5-6 years ago they'd have their fun for a few years and come out the other side like most of the people in my age group have done.....curiosity and experimentation will always be there, kids will always try drugs, it's about education and making sure that they know who's who in the zoo, if you jump in the cage with a lion (Meth) it'll bite your head off, if you wanna play with the animals best to know which ones theoretically won't completely destroy you! Better still in an undercover and covert way the authorities should make sure there is some quality control on the streets.


Hope Ben pulls through, the finest example yet that Meth can take and destroy even the finest and healthiest of young people...

 

[lusheslewis]

Trying to defend the habitual use and of illicit substances is the act of a complete idiot ..or drug user.

I don't think he's trying to defend Ben's use of drugs at all, I'm sure he is as aware as anyone how utterly destructive and horrific drug addiction has been to Ben's life.

No matter one's view on drug legalisation/prohibition, I don't think you will find anyone who will defend another's drug abuse and addiction.

He only makes the point that society and the media's view on these issues is ignorant and counter-productive, which I agree with (although I don't necessarily share his view that full blown drug legalisation is a great idea).

 

[1970crow]

Now that he has been proven totally and completely wrong about the thread topic (Ben Cousins and whether the media has invented stories about him to sell papers) he has subtlly and cleverly derailed the thread and turned it into his own little legalisation/anti prohibition soapbox.

don't forget his 2 sentence solution to rehabilitate drug addicts. does anyone need some fencing repaired cheap. it surely is amazing that someone with such an insight and wealth of knowledge on the topic, was so completely unprepared for this current issue to have been drug-related. it's been amusing though.

 

[lusheslewis]

Interesting thread with the prohibition stance from OldSkool, while i think prohibition is a good idea in theory in practice it would destroy lives...I myself have been a rec drug user, in my early20s i jumped on the pills for a little while (every few weeks) and dabbled with cocaine and still do on very rare occassions(2-3 times per year), i'm now in my mid 20s, have an excellent career and addiction has never been an option really.....mainly because cocaine in Aus is worth 300 dollars a gram plus and quiet frankly i can't justify the prices....on the flip side of that if the stuff was freely available and cheap as it is in the US there is a very good chance my intake would have increased at the tipping point 2-3 years ago and the fine line might well have been crossed! Thank god for the price, illegality and relative difficulty in sourcing the stuff here!

As somebody who has been fairly switched on with this sort of thing since my late teens i have always been aware that playing with meth (ice), heroin, liquid g etc is a big big no no....if somebody paid me to try meth i would never do it, i have never seen a drug destroy lives like that stuff...i know of people that have ended up in jail because of meth, psychotic because of meth, it is the devils drug! People think that because it is so clean that they have it under control and before they know it, they've been up for 4 days and are clinically insane.....

In Melbourne in particular the reason for the explosion of this despicable crap amongst young people is the decline of quality MDMA in the party scene in particular, MDMA in its purest form at least has been proven to be less addictive than most other party drugs and a hell of alot safer, for instance the need for more MDMA the day after a binge/party is almost unthinkable (the next weekend andthe thought is still almost too much), Ice on the other hand can be smoked and smoked for days on end and regularly is amongst young people, the reason for this shift was the decline in quality ecstacy......there has also been a significant increase in violence over the past 3 years in Melbourne....it has nothing to do with alcohol fueled violence it is meth fueled violence.

Not saying MDMA is a better option, every drug is addictive, all have negative side effects, but the amount of people i know personally or have heard of that have succumbed to this crap is frightening, the cops (that's who controls the supply of all this crap don't kid yourselves) should get together with whoever to put cleaner less addictive drugs back on the streets, if 18-21 y.o have access to clean party pills as were available 5-6 years ago they'd have their fun for a few years and come out the other side like most of the people in my age group have done.....curiosity and experimentation will always be there, kids will always try drugs, it's about education and making sure that they know who's who in the zoo, if you jump in the cage with a lion (Meth) it'll bite your head off, if you wanna play with the animals best to know which ones theoretically won't completely destroy you! Better still in an undercover and covert way the authorities should make sure there is some quality control on the streets.


Hope Ben pulls through, the finest example yet that Meth can take and destroy even the finest and healthiest of young people...

This is essentially my take on it all. I don't think I could ever support a policy that would allow meth, heroin and cocaine to be freely available unless there was some medical breakthrough that could easily cure or prevent addiction.

Doing those drugs as a once off or occasionally (as long as they are taken responsibly and are chemically pure) is effectively harmless I would agree. However putting so many more people (including myself) at risk of addiction and abuse because the drugs are freely available is, in my opinion, too dangerous.

I would think that a policy of legalising certain drugs (which we already do) would allow police to focus more resources on stopping the most dangerous ones and also push people towards the less harmful stuff. Of course even marijuana or MDMA can destroy lives...but so can alcohol.

 

[Gabbie]

What people are missing is that Cousins drug abuse was common knowledge(in WA) years before 2007
Something should have been done earlier

But hey he was still playing good football then and his problem could be covered up

Agree. Would be interesting to compare the stats on East Coast team drug testing compared to those in the West, especially in the late '90's and early to mid 20's.

No offence to our Freo bretheren, but Perth was a one team town isolated from the competition by thousands of miles and unless a WC player murdered someone, were treated like Gods by their fans and the media there. Put a guy with an ego bigger than Texas into that mix and things can spin out of control. Not that I'm saying there were cover ups, , BUUUUTTT, after reading various reports and watching the Cousins doco he has or had or hung out with some shady types, who really should be behind bars.

The saddest thing about the whole story, is here is a young man born into comfort, with a talent and the world at his feet and still manages to screw up, BIG TIME, yet doesn't seem to show genuine remorse.

As OldSkool has mentioned, take him out bush and get him doing hard yakka, an intervention of the strongest kind is needed or this man won't reach his 40's.

 

[Off The Couch]

^^^ what a load of rubbish. AFL footballers have been allowed to get away with crap across the board for as long as football has been played - the eagles have been feted by nightclubs, females and the downright seedy no more or less than their eastern state counterparts. The BIGGEST difference, the media in this town only had to focus on 40 odd players whereas in the east it's pretty hard to keep track of every player - in this state it was easy - taxi drivers, club patrons, groupies all wanted there two minutes in the spotlight and spilt the beans at every opportunity. Every club had its core of "bad boys" not just the eagles and there is no reason they would of treated their players any differently from how all the other clubs handled their indiscretions at the time. People may say that all the education going on for players is a waste of time but there can be no denying that all clubs have come a long way in making it a far safer industry for young men to be involved in.

 

[Old Skool]

When did a STORY (not scientific article/report in a pier-reviewed journal) in "ScieneDaily" become a "Scientific report" ??? That is like taking a snippet on economics out of the mX and classifying it as a "Business Report" .........

Article 1: Peer reviewed in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Article 2: Peer reviewed in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

Article 3: Based on a report in the October Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

I bet you feel really stupid right now.

Anyway why are you trying to use "stories" which are related to the treatment of CHILDREN with anti-ADHD medications NOT having a correlation with the development of substance abuse problems as a sign that recreational drugs are fine? What the reports are actually saying is if you treat the ADHD condition, and stabilize their behavior, they are less likely to smoke/develop a substance abuse problem. SHOCK HORROR, treating a conditions which increases the risk of developing a substance abuse problem decreases the chance of such as drug abuse??? .............

These articles lead one to conclude that a demographic which has a high predilection to drug abuse has been shown to exhibit a sizeable decrease in adolescent drug abuse, when prescribed the actual drugs that are usually forbidden to the rest of society.

It is a highly relevant point in relation to the overall picture of the drug problem.

Or are you trying to say that the childrens medications are the same as recreational drugs used by users/adicts,

Methylphenidate possesses structural similarities to amphetamine, but its pharmacological effects are more similar to those of cocaine, though MPH is less potent and longer in duration of action.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate

and if it is OK for kids (at VERY low levels under CONTROLLED doses) then it must be OK for adults (at VERY HIGH doses under UNCONTROLLED doses)???

I am intimating that perhaps we should look at the tragic situations surrounding Ben and others in a different light and consider treating these issues as a controlled regime health issue

Also why are you trying to relate an issue relevant to a small sub-set of people (children with ADHD) and trying to justify the actions of a large sub-set (Drug addicts/drug users) ???

Because it's highly relevant.

It is this kind of mentality/mind set used by junkies to justify their actions, and in reality it is quite sad and ultimately destructive to themselves and those around them.

I think what you know about addiction and drug abuse could fit comfortably on the head of a pin, and still leave room for the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

 

[Old Skool]

I don't think he's trying to defend Ben's use of drugs at all, I'm sure he is as aware as anyone how utterly destructive and horrific drug addiction has been to Ben's life.

No matter one's view on drug legalisation/prohibition, I don't think you will find anyone who will defend another's drug abuse and addiction.

He only makes the point that society and the media's view on these issues is ignorant and counter-productive, which I agree with (although I don't necessarily share his view that full blown drug legalisation is a great idea).

I appreciate your effort to behave like a reasonable adult instead of resorting to the standard emotional outrage response that has put society in it's current position.

All addictions are terrible, and fundamentally, this isn't about drugs.

It has much deeper psychological roots.

 

[Tulip]

The thing that most disturbed me about Ben is that he's happy to make documentaries and give interviews to Women's Day when he's not on the pipe, but all the royalties help lead to a screw up. In his doco, he never stated that he's change things if he could do it all again, that smirk on his face when he spoke about 'annihilating' drugs showed that he never really cared enough to get off them. I don't see him as someone whose fighting a losing battle as much as losing the urge to be healthy. I'm not at all ignorant about addiction, I know those in similar situations, it's just a damn shame that he gets all this sympathy and doesn't show remorse.

 

[Chimera]

The thing that most disturbed me about Ben is that he's happy to make documentaries and give interviews to Women's Day when he's not on the pipe, but all the royalties help lead to a screw up. In his doco, he never stated that he's change things if he could do it all again, that smirk on his face when he spoke about 'annihilating' drugs showed that he never really cared enough to get off them. I don't see him as someone whose fighting a losing battle as much as losing the urge to be healthy. I'm not at all ignorant about addiction, I know those in similar situations, it's just a damn shame that he gets all this sympathy and doesn't show remorse.

Cousins has shown plenty of remorse and is fully aware of the destruction his addiction brings.

He's just too weak to say no.

 

[coryne]

Article 1: Peer reviewed in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Article 2: Peer reviewed in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

Article 3: Based on a report in the October Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

I bet you feel really stupid right now.

Mate stop making shit up. The "stories" were based off of 1 article (first story, I wrote that in a paragraphy I deleted) and x2 hospital releases which didn't go through peer-reviewing (the stories sight "Story Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Massachusetts General Hospital, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.")



That said, the stories themselves ("Published" on the ScienceDaily website) are not from peer reviewed sources .........

These articles lead one to conclude that a demographic which has a high predilection to drug abuse has been shown to exhibit a sizeable decrease in adolescent drug abuse, when prescribed the actual drugs that are usually forbidden to the rest of society.

No the stories conclude

stimulant treatment decreases the risk and delays the onset of substance abuse in adolescence but neither increases nor reduces the risk of using tobacco, alcohol or drugs in adulthood.

In other words the use of the stimulants to treat the risk factor for early drug use (ADHD) had an effect during early development (eg addressed the behavoral problems which could lead to smoking/drug use) but had NO EFFECT on what may occur during adulthood.


As for the whole "Kids can have it so everyone should" line, what a load of bs. It is like saying "the Army/Police are allowed to have high powered fire arms so why can't I". I would have no problem using MPH as a TREATMENT for those trying to overcome cocaine addiction, but saying cocaine should be freely available as it would help reduce addiction (or what ever lines bleeding hearts use these days" is absolute crap.

It is a highly relevant point in relation to the overall picture of the drug problem.

Methylphenidate possesses structural similarities to amphetamine, but its pharmacological effects are more similar to those of cocaine, though MPH is less potent and longer in duration of action.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate

Yes they have a "similar effect" in they both block dopamine uptake, but MPH interacts differently with the dopamine uptake receptors. As you said it's effects are long-lasting (+90 minutes) thus you can't binge on it. It is also taken differently (oral apposed to injected) meaning it is slowly accumulated in the brain so a high (caused by high amounts of cocaine in the brain causing a rapid accumulation of dopamine in the neural synapse via an inhibition of dopamine uptake) isn't achieved unless it is abused (eg snorted or injected) and even then the high is limited due it it's long-lasting effects.

I think what you know about addiction and drug abuse could fit comfortably on the head of a pin, and still leave room for the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

I have lived with a drug addict (my brother) for a large portion of my life so don't tell me I have no idea about drug addiction. I have heard all the bs excuses used to justify drug use, and lived through what happens when the shit hits the fan during a binge. I have seen how badly drugs screw up peoples minds and lives, and the last thing addicts need is free access to leagalised drugs.

What they need improved rehab programs, long-term counsiling and out-reach support. But most of all they need to want to quit, because no amount of support will do anything if the addict is pulling shit out their ass about what is happening. This is why the justifications used by/for drugs addicts are so dangerous, because as long as you can justify it (drug use) you will never beat the addiction.

 

[scottwade]

FWIW Mick Malthouse gave his take on Cousins today.
He basically said when Collingwood were looking at drafting Cousins they were warned that a relapse was virtually certain.

The advisors to Collingwood offered a number of scenarios where the relapse might occur, but whatever the trigger, they were clear that at some stage it would almost certainly happen.

Curiously the video has been taken down from Foxsports.com.au (although a link is still available).

But I think the comments may still being played on Foxtel's channel 513.

 

[pantskyle]

Cousins has shown plenty of remorse and is fully aware of the destruction his addiction brings.

He's just too weak to say no.

Top post.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

Interesting thread with the prohibition stance from OldSkool, while i think prohibition is a good idea in theory in practice it would destroy lives...I myself have been a rec drug user, in my early20s i jumped on the pills for a little while (every few weeks) and dabbled with cocaine and still do on very rare occassions(2-3 times per year), i'm now in my mid 20s, have an excellent career and addiction has never been an option really.....mainly because cocaine in Aus is worth 300 dollars a gram plus and quiet frankly i can't justify the prices....on the flip side of that if the stuff was freely available and cheap as it is in the US there is a very good chance my intake would have increased at the tipping point 2-3 years ago and the fine line might well have been crossed! Thank god for the price, illegality and relative difficulty in sourcing the stuff here!

As somebody who has been fairly switched on with this sort of thing since my late teens i have always been aware that playing with meth (ice), heroin, liquid g etc is a big big no no....if somebody paid me to try meth i would never do it, i have never seen a drug destroy lives like that stuff...i know of people that have ended up in jail because of meth, psychotic because of meth, it is the devils drug! People think that because it is so clean that they have it under control and before they know it, they've been up for 4 days and are clinically insane.....

In Melbourne in particular the reason for the explosion of this despicable crap amongst young people is the decline of quality MDMA in the party scene in particular, MDMA in its purest form at least has been proven to be less addictive than most other party drugs and a hell of alot safer, for instance the need for more MDMA the day after a binge/party is almost unthinkable (the next weekend andthe thought is still almost too much), Ice on the other hand can be smoked and smoked for days on end and regularly is amongst young people, the reason for this shift was the decline in quality ecstacy......there has also been a significant increase in violence over the past 3 years in Melbourne....it has nothing to do with alcohol fueled violence it is meth fueled violence.

Not saying MDMA is a better option, every drug is addictive, all have negative side effects, but the amount of people i know personally or have heard of that have succumbed to this crap is frightening, the cops (that's who controls the supply of all this crap don't kid yourselves) should get together with whoever to put cleaner less addictive drugs back on the streets, if 18-21 y.o have access to clean party pills as were available 5-6 years ago they'd have their fun for a few years and come out the other side like most of the people in my age group have done.....curiosity and experimentation will always be there, kids will always try drugs, it's about education and making sure that they know who's who in the zoo, if you jump in the cage with a lion (Meth) it'll bite your head off, if you wanna play with the animals best to know which ones theoretically won't completely destroy you! Better still in an undercover and covert way the authorities should make sure there is some quality control on the streets.


Hope Ben pulls through, the finest example yet that Meth can take and destroy even the finest and healthiest of young people...

Thanks Blueblooded for this quality post - very well reasoned and also very informative for an old fart like me with teenage kids. I support your link to violence and its growth in frequency and severity , thank god I'm no longer out clubbing !

 

[rustyg70]

Cousins has shown plenty of remorse and is fully aware of the destruction his addiction brings.

He's just too weak to say no.

I wonder if he is still friends with one D.C,who was a hero in their last premiership.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Thanks Blueblooded for this quality post - very well reasoned and also very informative for an old fart like me with teenage kids. I support your link to violence and its growth in frequency and severity , thank god I'm no longer out clubbing !

Ditto.

Have read the whole thread and its been in most parts informative and educational.

Realise how fortunate (and perhaps naive) I am about all this.

 

[Chimera]

I wonder if he is still friends with Daniel Chick.

He's still mates with Chick, Cox, Wirrpunda and Adam Hunter.

In particular Wirrpunda who has been attempting to counsel Cousins through his dark patches.

Cousins still socialises with the wrong crowd and seemingly cant help himself, which is the only way he'll get through it, once he takes ownership of it and actually wants to beat it.

 

[Old Skool]

Mate stop making shit up. The "stories" were based off of 1 article (first story, I wrote that in a paragraphy I deleted) and x2 hospital releases which didn't go through peer-reviewing (the stories sight "Story Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Massachusetts General Hospital, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.")

That said, the stories themselves ("Published" on the ScienceDaily website) are not from peer reviewed sources .........

People can use their own eyes and read for themselves

No the stories conclude

This relates to men and you have chopped it so it appears out of context. It doesn't even "conclude" the paper, it's "concludes" the top half of the paper.

The entire paragraph reads:

It is well known that individuals with ADHD have a significantly increased risk for cigarette smoking and substance abuse, and concerns that treatment with stimulant drugs may increase the risk of drug or alcohol abuse have often been expressed. Wilens and his MGH colleagues have conducted several studies in boys and young men with ADHD, the overall conclusions of which are that stimulant treatment decreases the risk and delays the onset of substance abuse in adolescence but neither increases nor reduces the risk of using tobacco, alcohol or drugs in adulthood. Evidence on treatment's impact for girls has been limited and conflicting, with at least one study suggesting the ADHD-associated risk may persist in spite of treatment.

In other words the use of the stimulants to treat the risk factor for early drug use (ADHD) had an effect during early development (eg addressed the behavoral problems which could lead to smoking/drug use) but had NO EFFECT on what may occur during adulthood.

In other words, the "at risk" group (ADHD sufferers) shows no deviation against the mainstream population (general drug using population).

This is a win.

As for the whole "Kids can have it so everyone should" line, what a load of bs. It is like saying "the Army/Police are allowed to have high powered fire arms so why can't I".

Well, they're allowed to have meth, so your point is moot. Don't get me started on firearms.

I would have no problem using MPH as a TREATMENT for those trying to overcome cocaine addiction, but saying cocaine should be freely available as it would help reduce addiction (or what ever lines bleeding hearts use these days" is absolute crap.

Ahhhh "bleeding hearts", you have already reduced me to a cliche. Bravo!

The cocaine thing is a figment of your imagination, not mine.

Yes they have a "similar effect" in they both block dopamine uptake, but MPH interacts differently with the dopamine uptake receptors. As you said it's effects are long-lasting (+90 minutes) thus you can't binge on it. It is also taken differently (oral apposed to injected) meaning it is slowly accumulated in the brain so a high (caused by high amounts of cocaine in the brain causing a rapid accumulation of dopamine in the neural synapse via an inhibition of dopamine uptake) isn't achieved unless it is abused (eg snorted or injected) and even then the high is limited due it it's long-lasting effects.

Thanks for the free pharmacology lecture.

Isn't google amazing?

I have lived with a drug addict (my brother) for a large portion of my life so don't tell me I have no idea about drug addiction. I have heard all the bs excuses used to justify drug use, and lived through what happens when the shit hits the fan during a binge. I have seen how badly drugs screw up peoples minds and lives, and the last thing addicts need is free access to leagalised drugs.

Look, contact Noel:

http://www.cvsa.com.au/?author=3

He's always looking for a few more vengeance types to update his repertoire of Herald Sun guest appearance spots.

What they need improved rehab programs, long-term counsiling and out-reach support. But most of all they need to want to quit, because no amount of support will do anything if the addict is pulling shit out their ass about what is happening. This is why the justifications used by/for drugs addicts are so dangerous, because as long as you can justify it (drug use) you will never beat the addiction.

The war was lost a long time ago, and it cannot be won, nor is it designed to be won.

There's far too much money at stake on either side of the fence.

 

[Blessed]

Ben has these sores that are not healing as well as the mental issues.

Mental and physical issues.

 

[David the Cat]

Interesting thread with the prohibition stance from OldSkool, while i think prohibition is a good idea in theory in practice it would destroy lives...I myself have been a rec drug user, in my early20s i jumped on the pills for a little while (every few weeks) and dabbled with cocaine and still do on very rare occassions(2-3 times per year), i'm now in my mid 20s, have an excellent career and addiction has never been an option really.....mainly because cocaine in Aus is worth 300 dollars a gram plus and quiet frankly i can't justify the prices....on the flip side of that if the stuff was freely available and cheap as it is in the US there is a very good chance my intake would have increased at the tipping point 2-3 years ago and the fine line might well have been crossed! Thank god for the price, illegality and relative difficulty in sourcing the stuff here!

As somebody who has been fairly switched on with this sort of thing since my late teens i have always been aware that playing with meth (ice), heroin, liquid g etc is a big big no no....if somebody paid me to try meth i would never do it, i have never seen a drug destroy lives like that stuff...i know of people that have ended up in jail because of meth, psychotic because of meth, it is the devils drug! People think that because it is so clean that they have it under control and before they know it, they've been up for 4 days and are clinically insane.....

In Melbourne in particular the reason for the explosion of this despicable crap amongst young people is the decline of quality MDMA in the party scene in particular, MDMA in its purest form at least has been proven to be less addictive than most other party drugs and a hell of alot safer, for instance the need for more MDMA the day after a binge/party is almost unthinkable (the next weekend andthe thought is still almost too much), Ice on the other hand can be smoked and smoked for days on end and regularly is amongst young people, the reason for this shift was the decline in quality ecstacy......there has also been a significant increase in violence over the past 3 years in Melbourne....it has nothing to do with alcohol fueled violence it is meth fueled violence.

Not saying MDMA is a better option, every drug is addictive, all have negative side effects, but the amount of people i know personally or have heard of that have succumbed to this crap is frightening, the cops (that's who controls the supply of all this crap don't kid yourselves) should get together with whoever to put cleaner less addictive drugs back on the streets, if 18-21 y.o have access to clean party pills as were available 5-6 years ago they'd have their fun for a few years and come out the other side like most of the people in my age group have done.....curiosity and experimentation will always be there, kids will always try drugs, it's about education and making sure that they know who's who in the zoo, if you jump in the cage with a lion (Meth) it'll bite your head off, if you wanna play with the animals best to know which ones theoretically won't completely destroy you! Better still in an undercover and covert way the authorities should make sure there is some quality control on the streets.


Hope Ben pulls through, the finest example yet that Meth can take and destroy even the finest and healthiest of young people...

Thank you for this post. Essential reading for those interested in the topic of drug usage in young people.

Educate your kids with accurate information...not idealogical nonsense.

 

[a_fighting_fury]

Thank you for this post. Essential reading for those interested in the topic of drug usage in young people.

Educate your kids with accurate information...not idealogical nonsense.

x 2.

One of the best posts in this thread.

 

[Old Skool]

An interesting paper on amphetamines for those that wish to further educate themselves:

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1413747/americas_first_amphetamine_epidemic_19291971/

ORIGINS OF THE EPIDEMIC, 1929-1945

.......amphetamine production for civilian use by SKF and Clark & Clark in late 1945 must have stood between 13 million and 55 million tablets monthly and may be conservatively estimated at about 30 million tablets monthly, each containing 5 to 10 mg of amphetamine salts.20 This national (civilian) consumption rate for the United States in 1945 was sufficient to supply half a million Americans with 2 tablets daily, the standard dosage schedule for depression and weight loss. Pastyear use in 1946 would have almost certainly been higher, because many were only occasional users.

A million over the counter doses in 1945.

THE EPIDEMIC’S CRISIS IN THE 1960s

.....according to the FDA, of the roughly 8 billion to 10 billion 10-mg amphetamine tablets manufactured by drug firms annually in the United States by the late 1960s.......

The FDA’s crude population level amphetamine consumption estimates based on manufacturing surveys (80000-100000 kg of amphetamine salts produced for a total population of around 200 million in 1969, or up to 50 10-mg doses per person) were supplemented with prevalence estimates from the first modern drug use surveys.

...........the United States in 1970 had 970000 amphetamine users meeting some criteria of dependence and about 320000 addicts. 73 These should be regarded as minimal figures given the multiple sources of conservative bias in our national past-year amphetamine usage estimates for 1970 and 1971. Furthermore, 1970 to 1971 prevalence presumably underestimates amphetamine use at the epidemic’s peak around 1969, because consumption in the United States was already declining when the surveys were conducted.

10 billion doses in 1969

970,000 dependent users in 1970-71.

Where are all the loonies?