Party Vibe

@tryptameanie 975701 wrote:

I have to say GL that I don’t agree. The methylphenidate analogues were banneed in short order as they were doing actual harm. For methioprpamine to go the same way is not concouisable (if that is not a word it should be, it has an obvious meaning in this context) as the level of harm is minimal. This just sickens me.

for some reason the ACMD report for MPA (included below) was only published on line some days after the TCDO rather than before it (compared to previous TCDOs) but it does mention implication in more fatal ODs than I had thought was the case. Reports like these get audited by health professionals in other nations via the EU and UN; it would be more difficult / costly (if not near impossible and against all medical ethcs) to falsify any part of the report than do the job correctly.

It also mentions many more enquires to NPIS and TOXBASE that are usually only available to trained NHS staff via hospitals or GP surgeries; hinting that people had experienced health problems with the stuff that scared them enough to seek some kind of emergency healthcare treatment. This also matches up with “trip reports” and other chatter on bluelight and other RC forums (some linked more closely to vendors).

Comparing these with the other reports for TCDOs it does appear for all of them ACMD are using a broader definition of harm than just dead bodies; such as extra burdens on the NHS that wasn’t present before the substance became popular.

I am not a medical professional but the format of these reports (at least with regard to stims), the data gathered and conclusions found do seem to have some consistency to them – although I suspect many of the ill effects are due to either binge use by those who choose to ignore any harm reduction info provided and/or injecting; and will of course get worse if one popular one suddenly has the supply lines stopped without at “street level” addressing complex addiction problems of some users which is what is lacking in the UK.

the big difference with MPA compared to any other stim is the amount of sulfur-based metabolites that remain in the body after the initial pleasurable effects wear off. My personal view was this actually made stuff “safer” as doing too much left users feeling particularly ill and that most people would “listen to their bodies” and adjust their usage patterns accordingly; unfortunately this does not appear to be the case especially with those using it as a substitute for other stims that have always been controlled or recently ended up on TCDOs.

Unfortunately it does also seem the branded blends are often what is leading to the TCDOs – the report confirms the wide variation in contents strength and that some of them contain two stims on top of another which is clearly a recipe for potential disaster in the event of gross overdoses. Maybe its a British thing but it really does seem that some users are irrationally paranoid about a bag of powder with its full scientific name and a usually known strength/quality as they think its “more poisonous” than a random mix of the same chems + filler / bulking agent!

Might also explain how there are “NCA seizures” of something which supposedly isn’t or wasn’t illegal to distribute; as whatever people might claim there is little use for branded blends other than profit driven resale for human consumption.

OTOH if you aren’t breaking other laws or expecting the NHS to regularly pick up the pieces when/if things go wrong its not illegal or unethical to conduct a scientific experiment on yourself.

Other poly drug OD reports are similar to incidents from 1970s/1980s where people have taken one drug to go “up” and another to go “down”; if users take that too far they risk their internal organs not being able to cope and that can be fatal.