Hacker News Reader

Comment by avree | Hacker News Reader

Why do you think meth is worse than heroin?

Heroin related problems are rarely caused by the substance itself, rather lack thereof.

Meth junkies go on violent psychotic rampages killing and injuring other people and have no other thought in their brains except to get more meth. When I read in the newspaper about someone murdering their family I expect, and often find either a statement or suggestion that the perpetrator was using meth.

Heroin junkies go to sleep and are making a poor health choice but it is possible with clean heroin to lead a functional life including work and family.

Drugs that harm the user are "better" (as such) whereas drugs that result in harm to others are "worse".

Apparently the FDA/DEA disagree, as methamphetamine is legal in the US and doctors can prescribe it for attention issues or obesity. Sales are somewhere above $10M a year. (This is just for methamphetamine. Other amphetamines like Adderall sell like 100x more.)

Whereas diamorphine, aka Bayer Heroin(TM)[1], is deemed to have zero medicinal qualities.

The DEA is almost certainly wrong (as usual), though if amphetamines were easily obtainable at good prices, the market for meth would likely crash.

And you're right that real opiates (to contrast with dirt mixed with fentanyl and sold as "heroin") seem to have little negative effects. Most of the damage is due to the legality and financing issues, which are entirely artificial. (Opiates are incredibly cheap to produce.)

1: Trademark stolen as part of WWI "reparations".

Meth and Heroin addicts tend to be poorer and prone to criminal activity, than pharmaceutical amphetamine and opiate users. Additionally, adverse reactions, are more likely when the drug is unregulated.

Do you know how much 1g of heroin cost?

It's been a while since I knew people who did heroin, but the people I knew who did it bought it in packs and bundles not grams. One dose (pack) was ~10$ and a bundle which, I think was, 12 doses was ~100$. And if memory serves me correctly Oxycontin was like ~30$ a pill. Too many of the people I used to know died from it, and I frequently think about how things could have been different for the people who overdosed and the people around them were afraid to call for help because it would have put them in criminal jeopardy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_harmfulness

Notice that heroin is the worst, both personally and socially. This is well established. Also, I would not use popular media as the basis for any sound argument. :(

Herion junkies lead a functional life including work and family? Seriously, what the fuck?! Cite just one source that heroin addiction is controllable because the addict uses "clean" heroin. Heroin addiction is the problem, not the adulterants, so purity is unimportant.

Wow. :(

Edit: This is the first time I wished I could downvote. lol. "Clean" heroin...

> Herion junkies lead a functional life including work and family? Seriously, what the fuck?! Cite just one source that heroin addiction is controllable because the addict uses "clean" heroin.

There are countless rock stars, for example, that maintained families and highly successful careers while regularly using heroin.

> Heroin addiction is the problem, not the adulterants, so purity is unimportant.

Heroin addiction doesn't kill you. What kills you is when you buy a gram that's three times as pure as the last one so you accidentally overdose.

Even if you don't believe addicts can lead normal lives, as long as they're shooting up clean, cheap heroin of predictable purity there at least exists a chance of rehabilitation and a normal life in their futures.

Agreed. And if your heroin costs cents instead of dollars you don't have to spend your available time trying to steal money to buy it, risking arrest and jail as well as making innocent people victims of your cash-seeking crimes.

Anecdotes are not a valid citation.

Heroin is the most harmful drug, statistically, according to numerous studies.

Diacetylmorphine is probably the best opiate analgesic modern medicine has. British ambulances still carry it as a first-line drug for acute myocardial infarctions. It's an anxiolytic, a wonderful painkiller, and dilates corony arteries. It's not as widely used as it probably should be because of the feat of addiction. Recreational heroin drug use is dangerous because of the illegality - you don't know what you're getting. The varying levels of purity have twofold danger - increasing the risk of overdose due to getting a more pure drug and using the larger dosage you became accustomed to from the less pure stuff, as well as the risk of the substance used to cut the heroin being harmful in itself.

Historically, heroin was used by people that WERE holding down jobs[0].

>According to Dr James Mills, a historian who has traced drug use through the 20th century, they tended to be doctors or middle-class patients who could afford to sustain a habit.

Additionally, if we were to legalize heroin's use, we could sell naloxone packaged alongside the heroin. Naloxone, if you're not familiar, is an opiate antidote that is extremely effective. This would greatly reduce the chance of an overdose having fatal effect.

As I've noted with meth elsewhere in this thread, I'm not suggesting anyone go and pick up a drug habit, but the vast majority of the dangers related to heroin (and most drugs - though obviously stuff like jimson weed is just plain bad for you...) are related to the illegal nature of it, and even those inherent to the drug itself can be mitigated much more easily in a legal setting

[0]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4647018.stm

Not heroin, but a completely unknown substance presented as heroin that probably consists of around 30% heroin.

Heroin addiction is one of the most harmful documented drug-addictions. The need for heroin, physically and psychologically, is the driving force behind the social and personal damage attributed to heroin.

People do not get addicted to non-narcotic adulterants and become prostitutes. A cutting agent like caffeine or sugar is probably the safest ingredient...

> People do not get addicted to non-narcotic adulterants and become prostitutes. A cutting agent like caffeine or sugar is probably the safest ingredient...

The biggest physical danger of heroin use is the risk of overdose. The main reason people overdose is because of the adulterants - they don't know how potent the stuff is. x mg of batch A might be a good high, whereash x mg of batch B will kill you from an overdose.

Even if the adulterants are themselves safe, the presence of them is a risk to the users, because they make it impossible to determine dosage.

30% how generous. In EU the average purity for heroin is ~2%.

Wikipedia states "The average purity of street heroin in the UK varies between 30% and 50% and heroin that has been seized at the border has purity levels between 40% and 60%" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Adverse_effects). It doesn't actually have a citation that confirms that, but another quick google gives http://drugscope.org.uk/how-pure-are-street-drugs/ saying "The 2010/11 police recorded average purity for heroin was 30 per cent."

So I'm inclined to believe the 30% number unless you have a source for thinking it's much lower.

I stand corrected, my information was wrong. Thanks for the sources.

2% is definitely not accurate, consuming that would be a very unpleasant experience.

Do you have links to those studies?

A lot of the harm from heroin come from adulterants which are injected, causing abscess; or from the illegality of providing clean needles and injection advice and safe spaces to inject which causes infection etc; or from the illegality of providing maintenance doses from doctors which cause people to burgle or sex work to get money to buy the drug.

Heroin is undoubtedly an unwise choice, but keeping it illegal has been a public health disaster.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/2/4/e000774.full.html#T1

There are more, but freely accessing journals online is troublesome. I have NEVER seen any study say heroin is anything but one of the most crippling and dangerous addictions. I am still waiting for anyone to cite one...

Your first one is available here: http://www.sg.unimaas.nl/_old/oudelezingen/dddsd.pdf

Have a read. Do you think it still supports your position? It says, clearly, that alcohol is more harmful than heroin. Are you calling for alcohol to be made illegal?

Or: Bob is a heroin addict. Should Bob continue to buy heroin from the street? That heroin will be adulterated; of unknown strength; sold by criminals; and may require Bob to engage in acquisitive crime or prostitution to get the money needed. It will be injected with whatever needle Bob has, which may not be sterile and may be shared with other people, some of whom have blood borne diseases. Or should Bob be prescribed heroin by his doctor. That heroin will not be adulterated; will be of known strength; will be supplied with clean needles and advice on safe injection; and will not require Bob to engage in acquisitive crime or prostitution to get it.

Again: Heroin is undoubtedly an unwise choice, but keeping it illegal causes very great harm.

I am not saying anything about legalization. I am arguing that heroin is known to be hugely dangerous, and sometimes classified as the most dangerous drug to use.

Yeah, alcohol, meth, crack all rank similarly and should be avoided unless you know are very sure how you will react.

People seem to be confused what my position actually is. That is mostly my fault though...

Just one link after 10 second Google search:

Fentanyl-linked heroin deaths part of larger drug overdose trend

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-02-08/news/bs-md-sun-i...

How is that a citation proving that heroin is controllable if only the heroin was pure? Overdoses happen even with pure heroin.

Also, I assumed "citation" would infer that a reputable book or scholarly white paper should be referenced, not a very short newspaper article.

Though, we both seem to be unwavering in our views, so I am cool with stopping this back and forth. :)

>> How is that a citation proving that heroin is controllable if only the heroin was pure

I didn't say that.

My point was that people can lead functional lives on heroin with families and jobs. If the heroin is impure, laced with dangerous chemicals or of unknown strength then the cutting agents can harm people or they may overdose.

Clean heroin is free of harmful cutting agents, of known purity and not laced with other drugs. You mock the term "clean heroin" but that's what it is.

You misread my original post.

I mock "clean heroin" because at it's purest, it is still the most harmful drug. More harmful than meth, crack, cocaine, etc, etc.

I cited Wikipedia.

You have still cited nothing of worth.

Can you compare psychotic violence of heroin addicts versus meth addicts?

That's what I mean by harmful. Meth addicts are psychotically violent and are responsible for countless murders and attacks.

Heroin addicts get smacked out and unconscious. Perhaps dangerous to themselves.

Go to an NA meeting (non-addicts can go, just be courteous) or read some white papers about drug use.

You are avoiding, or simply ignorant of, many aspects of drug addiction.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com