Candies For The Candy Kids
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Sebbal replied on Thu Dec 16, 2004 @ 12:29pm |
 Coolness: 39245 | Well here's a fact however...
You know schizophrenia? Its a mental disorder wich develop itself at starting adulthood (let say usually between 18 an 24) if you have a big emotionnal shock and have a certain predisposition to develop it. If you don't have that predisposition, wich is a physical state, not only a psychologic one, you will never develop it. Unless... Unless you react badly to a PCP trip. Stupid heu. One damned stupid PCP trip that goes bad, a kind of allergy or I don't know, will make you schizophrenic for good. And don't tell me it's myth, two of my friends from teennage turned that way... (Well back then it was mescaline, buvard and acid that was the trend instead of E, speed or wathever, and they were all the same: PCP) Your not suppose to turn schizophrenic in teenage... I'm not telling that for anybody to stop taking pills since I don't give a shit about most people and about pills. Just don't come telling me it's safe. IT IS NOT. Sniffing cocaine is safer than taking pills. Period. I don't agree with religious argument, but I do agree with most of Pheonix argument. By the way, I don't do cocaine, it was just an example... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Thu Dec 16, 2004 @ 4:34pm |
 Coolness: 81810 | Originally posted by POISONED CANDY...
Pheonix, since I know you smoke pot I'll remind you of another anti-drug scare story: the "pot laced with crack" myth. Just like the "lethal pills" myth it doesn't survive common sense, since drug dealers make more money selling crack as crack than selling it as pot. Similarly, drug dealers aren't trying to poison their customers. You use the term myth very loosely however I definitely acknowledge that any drug (marijuana included) can potentially be laced or contaminated with foreign substances. Fortunately for myself I only buy directly from manufacturers, most of whom were friends of mine way before any of us became drug users. Although I may not fear for my life I have always been reluctant to buy shit off the streets or at metros simply because I'd be getting ripped off (more so on quantity than quality). Regardless, I don't suppose that most of your average ecstacy or speed users go directly to the manufacturer to buy their substance. The further down the ladder you go, the higher the risk of contamination becomes because many dealers are greedy and cut the product for their own profit (not to poison the clientelle). Either way, to categorize marijuana in the same "danger classification" as pills which are nearly impossible to identify by even the great majority of so-called "drug connaisseurs" is an ignorant statement to say the least. Originally posted by POISONED CANDY...
And I find it funny that you interpret the order to "not place a stumbling block in front of a blind man" to mean not take drugs. I interpret it as meaning, well, not to place a stumbling block in front of a blind man. 'do not place a stumbling block in front of a blind man' is an analogous example given by the bible which pertains to the DISTRIBUTION of negative substances (drugs or otherwise) and not the consumption thereof,... You should also know that it is not my interpretation but the interpretation of many self-described "bible experts" who believe that the message is that one should never knowingly harm his (or her) fellow man (or woman). Supposedly, it is meant to remind us that one should not do anything that may directly or indirectly affect an unsuspecting or ignorant peer in a negative way if he (the supplier) is consciously aware of the substances negative effects. Furthermore, a person who supplies an addictive and potentially harmful substance to his peer (who may or may not realize the dangerous effects of using the substance) is committing a sin as he is knowingly selling (or giving) a harmful substance with complete disregard to how it will affect the person who consumes it. I will admittingly state that I am guilty of sin as I often pass around my joints to whomever is around at the time they're burning. The difference is simply that I will not encourage people who do not ALREADY have the personal desire to smoke. My behaviour may be viewed as contradicting when compared to the above statements because I will more often than not offer to pass my joint out of politeness. The justification is simply that if and when I decide to pass my joint around, it is always to individuals who I can confirm (without a shred of doubt) already have intrest in smoking before the offer presents itself. I believe the moral interpretation of the above Leviticus statement is more geared towards uptting someone in a position where they may have trouble refusing the offer... meaning, persistantly trying to persuade someone into using a substance that they rejected at first. Pushers will commonly do whatever it takes to secure a sale, whether it be offering the user a free trial their first time. If the potential client rejects the initial offer and consequently the seller turns around and offers a lower price in hopes of solidifying a sale he is putting the potential client in a position where the temptation may be harder to refuse. Obviously every person is ultimately responsable for making their own choices but if we present oppotunities to our peers which increases the risk of them making bad choices, we are indirectly responsable for the negative results which may or may not follow. A blind man will may trip on his own without obstacles in his path. He may also be able to avoid obstacles already in his path HOWEVER the odds of him tripping are much greater should someone else deliberately place an obstacle in his way. Of course you could interpret it any way you want,... literally or otherwise. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» BobGratton replied on Fri Dec 17, 2004 @ 1:26pm |
 Coolness: 74210 | Originally posted by -- G --...
what about spitting on blind people hahahahahahahhahahahahah |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sat Dec 18, 2004 @ 1:42am |
 Coolness: 91810 | Originally posted by ! PHOENIX !...
Regardless, I don't suppose that most of your average ecstacy or speed users go directly to the manufacturer to buy their substance. The further down the ladder you go, the higher the risk of contamination becomes because many dealers are greedy and cut the product for their own profit (not to poison the clientelle). I agree with this, and that's why buying from a reliable source is a much better way to ensure high quality. But even if you buy a shitty, heavily cut pill, its exetremely unlikely to be dangerous, since the dealers will cut their pills either with cheaper drugs (ephedrine, caffeine, etc) or with an inactive substance (ex. sugar). The only reason why a dealer would deliberately choose a harmful substance to cut their product with, is if they are trying to poison their customers, which I maintain is very unlikely. Originally posted by ! PHOENIX !...
Supposedly, it is meant to remind us that one should not do anything that may directly or indirectly affect an unsuspecting or ignorant peer in a negative way if he (the supplier) is consciously aware of the substances negative effects. Every substance has both positive and negative effects. It is the responsibility of the person who is considering drug use to inform themselves of the drug's risks, and to make an appropriate decision. I beleive this is true regarding the voluntary consumption of all potentially dangerous substances, whether a drug or an artery-choking Big Mac. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of the drug supplier to be honest regarding their product. I'm not suggesting that use of MDMA or speed is harmless or "safe". Obviously, both these substances have side-effects ranging from the possibility of addiction to neurotixicity and so forth. However, the risk of buying MDMA/speed and it turning out to be some kind of poisonous drug that will cause instant death is pretty close to nill. In fact, a heavily cut and weak MDMA pill is probably alot safer than a pure MDMA pill, because you're then consuming less of the drug! |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Zz.ee.vV replied on Sun Dec 19, 2004 @ 1:49am |
 Coolness: 194145 | I think you guys got a good argument going.
About pills being cut, however. The substance the pill is cut with may be cheaper yet nowhere near as forgiving as MDMA itself. PCP/DXM for example are disassosiatives and have more harmful side effects (Onleys Lesions anyone?). Synthetic Heroine is, well, synthetic heroine! And what about "extasy" pills which are 75% speed and 25% mdma or an even worse ratio? Aside from the fact that speed has worse negative effects than MDMA (whoever disputes that, go read [ Erowid.org ] first), you're paying for an extasy not speed. Anyways I'm not necessarily agreeing with and/or disputing eaither side of the argument... theres some to be said for both... carry on gentlemen :b |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Plan-C replied on Mon Dec 20, 2004 @ 11:10pm |
 Coolness: 62710 | i'm with p candy on this one. the chances of a pill directly killing you is extremely unlikely as no one is going to want to poison their clientele. however, as you never know specifically what's in a pill unless you're the chemist himself, you never know how you may react to that specific pill. people commonly develop allergic reaactions for instance. it can be the same shit with pills. there could be one chemical in one specific type of e or speed that's benign to most, but could seriously kill someone as fast as a peanut allergy in others. I feel I should also point out that most of the horrible death stories associated with impurities in drugs are centered either around overdose cases which speak for themselves or fentanyl and fentanyl analogs (synthetic heroin) as zeev mentioned. there aren't any analogs for mdma and mda, and unless your dealer is a complete idiot or mass murderer he prolly won't be fucking around by cuttin your shit with synthetic heroin. but seriously folks, fuck pressies. talk to molly and cidny ;) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cvxn replied on Tue Dec 21, 2004 @ 9:30am |
 Coolness: 178765 | Just be careful and well informed when you do drugs :) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Wed Dec 22, 2004 @ 5:55pm |
| Coolness: 81810 | Here's a game,... who can put the following pain killers in order from weakest to strongest...?
A) 
B) 
C) 
D) 
E) 
F)  |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Thu Dec 23, 2004 @ 8:17am |
 Coolness: 102885 | a) demerol 100 mg*
b) dilaudid 2 mg** c) codeine 15 mg*** d) dilaudid 4mg** e) demorol 50mg* f) codeine 30mg*** so from the weakest to the strongest in each of THEIR narcotic category. cuz putting them together would just be asinine. * Pethidine (INN) or meperidine (USAN) (also referred to as: isonipecaine; lidol; operidine; pethanol; piridosal; Algil®; Alodan®; Centralgin®; Demerol®; Dispadol®; Dolantin®; Dolestine®; Dolosal®; Dolsin®; Mefedina®) is a fast-acting opioid analgesic drug. It is used to deal with moderate to severe pain, and is delivered as hydrochloride as tablets, as a syrup or by intramuscular injection E. A. ** Hydromorphone is a drug used to relieve moderate to severe pain. Hydromorphone is known by the trade name Dilaudid®. It belongs to a category of drugs known as opioid analgesics. It is commonly given to patents who have recently undergone surgery or who have suffered serious injury, and it is given intravenously, intramuscularly, or orally. B. D. *** Codeine (INN) is an opioid used for its analgesic, antitussive and antidiarrhoeal properties. It is commonly marketed as the phosphate salt codeine phosphate. Codeine is an alkaloid found in opium in concentrations ranging from 0.7 to 2.5 percent. While codeine can be extracted from opium, most codeine used in the United States is synthesized from morphine through the process of methylation. C. F. isn't it high time you go on your knees and suck God's cock? |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cvxn replied on Thu Dec 23, 2004 @ 1:56pm |
| Coolness: 178765 | Codéine...
I know a friend who was high on it once... Was funny :b |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Thu Dec 23, 2004 @ 4:36pm |
| Coolness: 81810 | As impressed as I am with your apparent knowledge on these pain killer narcotics it's obvious that you've missed the purpose of this exercise.
Perhaps I should have uploaded each image instead of linking them to prevent cheating as you've obviously checked the properties of each image. Regardless, the point that I was trying to get across was simply that you cannot determine the strength of medication solely based on its appearance. At a quick glance larger pills may appear more powerful than smaller ones however the tiny 4mg tablet of Dilaudid is significantly more powerful than the 30mg Codeine tablet or even the 100mg Demerol tablet. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cvxn replied on Fri Dec 24, 2004 @ 10:25am |
| Coolness: 178765 | Ouais, c'est que dans certaines pillules t'as juste 1mg mais ça a l'air + gros que d'autres pillules pke ils mettent d'autres affaire qui font rien (comme du sucre)...
Aussi, certaines pillules ont pas besoin d'avoir 100 mg pour être effective... Genre les hormones, t'as quasiment rien dedans, mais ça en prend pas bcp pour fonctionner... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Fri Dec 24, 2004 @ 11:42am |
| Coolness: 102885 | Au contraire, i didn't miss the purpose of your exercise. I was merely entertaining myself.
Maybe if you stop blazing Mexican dirt weed for a day, you'll understand what the fuck we've been saying all along. You're saying people don't know what is the content of pills when they're buying. Well no shit sherlock. What we are saying all this time is, if you chose to take MDMA, or whatever drugs, is that you informed yourself first. FFS, i just posted a picture with no comment. I didn't say anything. But it is still information for those inexperienced. Another example, is when people post their experience, one can decided whether or not to try it. At least they learn something from other. It kinda a bitch for you, you thought you were clever with your own exercise? i did what we're saying, that is to informed yourself. I look what those narcotics were and i research them. The problem with you is that you're misinforming the public. It is funny how you use doublespeak, yet do you even know if your bud is laced with mesc or chems. The people have the choice, theirs to make. You try to to influence them by saying by taking mdma, one might die or be forever be in sin in (your) God's eyes. Please, are you trying to justifying your morals? Isn't that how most religious people lived their life, to coward other in fear and misguided truths? Your rhetoric is tiresome and ineffectual. Your idiolatry is abhorrent. why don't you go to the girls gallery and comment on how hot they look. your time is better served that way. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Fri Dec 24, 2004 @ 1:20pm |
| Coolness: 81810 | Originally posted by TREY...
Au contraire, i didn't miss the purpose of your exercise. I was merely entertaining myself. Maybe if you stop blazing Mexican dirt weed for a day, you'll understand what the fuck we've been saying all along. I think you're getting a little bit defensive on the topic at hand. First and formost, I don't smoke "Mexican dirt" nor to I appreciate the racial discriminatory implication towards Mexicans through use of that statement as I have Mexican friends. I know exactly where my weed comes from cause I only buy directly from growers all of whom are friends I've known for many years and appreciate my business enough not to risk losing it. Originally posted by TREY...
You're saying people don't know what is the content of pills when they're buying. Well no shit sherlock. It must be very comforting for you to admittingly state the reality that you have no clue what's in the pills you probably take on a periodic (if not regular) basis. Which again proves my point from earlier on... Originally posted by TREY...
What we are saying all this time is, if you chose to take MDMA, or whatever drugs, is that you informed yourself first. FFS, i just posted a picture with no comment. I didn't say anything. But it is still information for those inexperienced. Another example, is when people post their experience, one can decided whether or not to try it. At least they learn something from other. It kinda a bitch for you, you thought you were clever with your own exercise? i did what we're saying, that is to informed yourself. I look what those narcotics were and i research them. The problem with you is that you're misinforming the public. It is funny how you use doublespeak, yet do you even know if your bud is laced with mesc or chems. The people have the choice, theirs to make. You try to to influence them by saying by taking mdma, one might die or be forever be in sin in (your) God's eyes. Please, are you trying to justifying your morals? Isn't that how most religious people lived their life, to coward other in fear and misguided truths? Your rhetoric is tiresome and ineffectual. Your idiolatry is abhorrent. why don't you go to the girls gallery and comment on how hot they look. your time is better served that way. I find your ignorance quite amusing. Although some statistics may show a probable 'safety' or 'danger' in using a specific substance you stated above that a person describing their experience on a drug is "educational" for other potential users... hence, by implication every person reacts the same to every substance which, sorry to burst your bubble is quite the contrary. How am I the one misinforming anyone when there are people like you giving the public a false sence of security? There is nothing education about informing others about YOUR particular experience on any particular substance as every drug related experience is very circumstancial. The circumstancial element of any trip is not only based on the substance itself but also the environment surrounding the user (especially with hallucinogens), body temperature, hydration levels, and any other substance or chemical (legal or illegal) which may be present in a person's bloodstream. Any person giving a false sence of security to themselves or another by saying "well, the pink pill was safe last time so it'll be fine the next time..." is pure heresy. Besides a false sence of security can have alot more potential danger than a false sence of fear (or simply being over cautious). Another thing for the record... I'm agnostic. Interpreting the bible (which we all know was written by man) and finding ways to apply its analogies to modern day life does not make anyone a religious person. Perhaps you lost all your morals at a young age which is why you encourage and pursuade others to poinson themselves.... For that you have my deepest sympathies and pity. My only faith is in humanity and each person's ability to make the right decisions for their own physical health and physchological well-being. If any individual gives up those decisions it is they who will suffer the consequences. So honestly,... do whatever you want... because the same way I'll suffer from the irreversible effects of smoking if I don't quit soon, you will surely suffer from the irreversible side effects of whatever drugs you use. maybe one day you can write "I was young and thought I was immortal" on your tombstone but hopefully you'll soon realize the blasphemy in your contradictions... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sat Dec 25, 2004 @ 8:44am |
| Coolness: 91810 | "So honestly,... do whatever you want... because the same way I'll suffer from the irreversible effects of smoking if I don't quit soon, you will surely suffer from the irreversible side effects of whatever drugs you use."
Exactly. But people need accurate and balanced information to make decisions. And an accurate assesment of MDMA is that the risk of dying from a pill is VERY low (according to dancesafe, 1 in 100,000). In fact, you are far less likely to die from taking an "ecstasy" pill than you are from a night of heavy drinking. Rather than talk about theoretical situations, why not look at the actual results in Montreal. Between all the afterhour clubs, the raves, and house parties, I'd say there's over 1,000 people on average taking pills on any given weekend (possibly many more). And theres a good chance that many of them will not do so in a particularly safe manner. Some will take 3 or more pills at once, others will mix pills with alcohol or other drugs, and even more will forget to drink a proper amount of water. Yet when was the last time you heard of an ecstasy fatality in Montreal? I can't even think of one myself, and you can be sure that if there WAS one it'd be plastered all over the news. [ dancesafe.org ] for more risk-assesment information |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Sat Dec 25, 2004 @ 12:16pm |
| Coolness: 81810 | Originally posted by POISONED CANDY...
people need accurate and balanced information to make decisions. And an accurate assesment of MDMA is that the risk of dying from a pill is VERY low (according to dancesafe, 1 in 100,000). In fact, you are far less likely to die from taking an "ecstasy" pill than you are from a night of heavy drinking. I'm sure that the statistical probability of dying as a result of heavy drinking IS much higher than from MDMA....however I'm sure that a great majority of the alcohol related deaths are due to drunk driving and not from actual alcohol poisoning. I don't think anyone on MDMA would even dare attempt to drive while intoxicated for obvious reasons. Either way I'll be reading the assesment on Dancesafe but when the debate here is not dying from pure MDMA,... I understand the risk is low if it is in fact pure MDMA thats being ingested however as Ze'ev stated earlier: Originally posted by Ze`ev ...
The substance the pill is cut with may be cheaper yet nowhere near as forgiving as MDMA itself. PCP/DXM for example are disassosiatives and have more harmful side effects (Onleys Lesions anyone?). Synthetic Heroine is, well, synthetic heroine! And what about "extasy" pills which are 75% speed and 25% mdma or an even worse ratio? Aside from the fact that speed has worse negative effects than MDMA (whoever disputes that, go read [ Erowid.org ] first), you're paying for an extasy not speed. If I found out after requesting MDMA that I was given a pill that was 75% speed (or whatever else) I'd not only want my money back, I'd get really fuckin pissed at whoever sold it to me... It's one thing if you WANT a substance in your system, its another if someone drugs you. Cutting pills with any other narcotic or intoxicating substance (regardless of whether its PCP, synthetic heroin, speed, DXM, or whatever) is unacceptable. People tolerate it cause they feel confident because of the person who sold it to them or a gut instinct that the pill is majority MDMA (or whatever they were initially requesting). Can anyone guarantee that every supposed MDMA pill they've taken was 100% MDMA?... highly doubtful. Why settle for a smaller percentage? It's like ordering a steak in a restaurant and getting a hamburger instead. Would you pay for it or be satisfied if it gave you a stomach ache? probably not. If manufacturers are cutting pills with cheaper substances doesn't that tell you that they care more about your money than your safety? How can anyone encourage that sort of malpractice? If I went into the pharmacy for a simple cough syrop and got one with Codeine and DXM by accident at least the ingredients are written on the label. They should design E pills with a big "?" on it... At least that way people would see what they're really taking. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Dec 30, 2004 @ 10:45am |
| Coolness: 91810 | Finally I agree with you. Yes, it sucks that many "E" pills are cut, and this is of course a result of MDMA's illegal status. If MDMA were legalized and controlled, than this problem wouldnt exist.
But the point remains, if you order steak and get hamburger instead, you might be disapointed, but you won't die on account of eating the hamburger |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Lady replied on Thu Dec 30, 2004 @ 12:19pm |
 Coolness: 182650 | if it sucks so much then how about NOT doing "e" |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Zz.ee.vV replied on Thu Dec 30, 2004 @ 12:30pm |
| Coolness: 194145 | i dont think he does it hehe |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Phoenix replied on Thu Dec 30, 2004 @ 12:32pm |
| Coolness: 81810 | Originally posted by POISONED CANDY...
Finally I agree with you. Yes, it sucks that many "E" pills are cut, and this is of course a result of MDMA's illegal status. If MDMA were legalized and controlled, than this problem wouldnt exist. Yes! thank you. After all this debating someone finally understands what I've been suggesting all along: LEGALIZATION. People will seek out & do drugs no matter what their legal status is... but legalizing drugs would at least drastically reduce certain risk factors which are otherwise unavoidable on the underground market. Originally posted by POISONED CANDY...
But the point remains, if you order steak and get hamburger instead, you might be disapointed, but you won't die on account of eating the hamburger I suppose it wasn't the greatest analogy although "ground beef" often contains other random meats and substances which if not cooked properly (well done), could result in salmonella poisoning. |
Candies For The Candy Kids
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
