The problem with cocaine (in my limited experience) is people take a bit, want more, and wind up binging. And quite often it turns into a habitual thing which does affect both health and wallet.
Cocaine (insufflated, injection and smoking are different cases) doesn't have to be used like this just as a person can have a beer or two now and again without great harm or danger. However people often lack control once they get started with it. Some people are like this with alcohol, habituation and binging and generally out of control behavior once they have a little.
I'm not a doctor, I don't know the harm levels at low dosage infrequent use, but I personally doubt a small bump or two a few times a year is really that harmful or dangerous.
The problem is, given access, dosage doesn't usually stay low nor infrequent. I haven't been around cocaine in years, decades really, but I have seen some sad stories and it is best stayed away from in my opinion. However it's not quite as bad as some people believe, and I have seen people who used it in a way I would consider responsible.
This changed my views on both caffeine and cocaine.
I now see caffeine and caffeinated beverages as more problematic, habbit-forming stimulants which I avoid consuming far more than prior to the "my newly rich friends discovered cocaine" phase. And cocaine as a largely overhyped, relatively benign (for an illegal drug with such a reputation) but habit-forming substance made desirable by the media, and expensive by scarcity the war on drugs creates.
They're more similar than they are different, and it seems absurd to me that one is legal while the other isn't.
The dose, and the delivery method, make the poison.
The distinction between compounds goes far beyond dosage and delivery mechanism.
How can you possibly know that? Do you have scientific research to cite?
I would assume that someone that ingests enough caffeine (by any means) to "the point of effect" (whatever that means) is going to have some serious risk of heart attack. I know several people who have wound up in the hospital for monitoring after drinking, oh, about 8 cups of coffee within several hours. They didn't realize it was the coffee, they were just like, uh oh, something is not right with my heart beat. The doctors say "how much coffee have you had today? Yeah, you'll probably be okay, but don't do that again."
Of course, this is well worn territory:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5445139/
The method of delivery is not my claim, so someone would need to show that snorting to effect has a greater negative effect on health than drinking.
"Effect" here typically means desired or pleasurable palpable impact on mood or behavior. For both caffeine and coca that typically entails euphoria and an increase in energy. Beyond a certain point that trend reverses and negative effect come into play.
Anecdotes aren't particularly useful metrics for these discussions, frankly.
> The threshold of caffeine toxicity appears to be around 400 mg/day in healthy adults
That's only about 4 cups of coffee, man! Or just two "NoDoz".
The article does not mention snorting caffeine. It seems reasonable to me to predict that if people starting snorting caffeine in an effort to get greater neuropharmacalogical effects, it would be pretty easy to go over 400mg.
There are few (if any?) documented deaths from caffeine overdose from drinking coffee (or even energy drinks), probably because the delivery mechanism means you need to drink a lot of beverage to get that much caffeine (8+ cups of coffee is really gonna fill up your stomach etc.). There ARE documented deaths from caffeine overdose from caffeine pills etc. though. Mechanism of delivery matters. The range between usual caffeine dose and an amount that can be dangerous is smaller than most people think (in that respect similar to aspirin and acetaminophen).
I am not sure what you mean by "to the point of effect", but I don't believe the literature you cite supports your claim that "You can snort caffeine to the point of effect and healthy individuals will be fine." Method of delivery does matter, in part because it effects practical dosages.
In fact, we don't need to guess, while as far as I know nobody's snorting it, highly-concentrated caffeine in powder/granule form (presumably similar to what we'd hypothetically imagine people snorting) _is_ documented as dangerous:
> "FDA Warns Consumers About Pure and Highly Concentrated Caffeine"
> "The FDA advises consumers to avoid pure and highly concentrated caffeine sold in bulk as powdered and liquid dietary supplements."
> "It can be extremely difficult to accurately measure pure and highly concentrated caffeine, and you can easily consume a dangerous or even lethal amount."
> "Dietary supplements consisting of pure or highly concentrated caffeine are potentially dangerous, and serious adverse events can result, including death."
-- https://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/ProductsIngredie...
> "On May 27, his brother found him unresponsive on their living room floor. In an effort to increase his energy, Mr. Stiner had used caffeine powder a friend had purchased on Amazon, but miscalculated the dosage, overdosed and died. The medical examiner said the cause of death was “cardiac arrhythmia and seizure, due to acute caffeine toxicity due to excessive caffeine ingestion.”"
-- https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/18/caffeine-powder-po...
The mechanism of ingest only matters if the latency of effect is so great that a user goes past the point of pleasurable effect. Drinking or snorting cocaine has negative physiological effect closer to the point of pleasurable pyschological effect than does caffeine.
Pure or high-concentration caffeine is quite clearly dangerous.
It's actually the total opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying that caffeine specifically is less likely to do that than cocaine (or fentanyl).
> Pure or high-concentration caffeine is quite clearly dangerous.
This is another argument I did not make.
Cocaine was present in Coca-Cola for over a decade before being removed, not because of the negative health risks but because blacks got access to it once it became available in bottles. Prior to bottles, it was only available at fountains accessible only to whites. [1]
It's not like caffeine is without its risks and negatives. I lived with someone addicted to caffeine for a decade and it was like living with a junky in a number of ways. She tried quitting dozens of times and it would just cause a week of migraines and dysfunction before she'd relapse. Every morning she would be pissy and make a mess of the kitchen until she got her caffeine fix.
Caffeine is also a major cause of suffering for surgical patients because the operation is oftentimes the longest they've gone without caffeine in decades, so they're experiencing withdrawal symptoms throughout the experience having already fasted for a day.
Some day Cocaine will be legal again.
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/why-we-to...
That said, I agree it is pretty clear that cocaine is a much more dangerous drug than caffeine. (not talking about coca leaf tea, which may not be, but cocaine specifically)
Read that again: you can drink coca leaf tea, and NOT suffer the effects of caffeine addiction.
Peruvian neighborhoods usually have it buried somewhere in their bodegas.