Startup founder wants to sell cocaine | Hacker News Reader

Startup founder wants to sell cocaine

thedailybeast.com

26 pointsc42052 comments

If someone wants to work on a new recreational drug, look into Alcarelle.[1] It's an alcohol replacement. It produces an alcohol-like buzz, but it's self-limiting - supposedly it won't take people all the way to drunk, and it's claimed to have no hangover.[2] It apparently works, but is a tough sell. Someone has to push it through FDA approval.

[1] https://gabalabs.com/

[2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/synthetic-alcohol-no-hangover-5...

If this is for real would-be game changing. The problem with alcohol is it works but the more often you drink the more it takes to feel the same effects. Hence being over the legal limit but not feeling ‘wasted’. The unnecessary calories are also a problem, did you eat; why pork chop in every beer. Seems that people who already have an alcohol tolerance will not feel much if they use synthetic Gaba, so a 2/3-week break is needed to experience the pleasure of Alcarelle (based on my reading). Social drinking is a great way to have some fun with co-workers and old friends, but something like this would give those who do not drink an opportunity to open without the guilt of drinking. I love a good buzz but also want to set a good example for my children and really hate the empty calories. Seems Alcarelle will have the same problem with the tolerance but seems like it will just not work anymore and require another break (which is not a bad thing). Very interested in the product but seems to be 3-5 years out before its mainstream.

Has anyone tried this product that seems to be using the same technology but is already on the market?

https://sentiaspirits.com/collections/non-alcoholic-spirits

Seems to be the ‘natural’ version of the substance. I also have heard people talk about taking straight Gaba in pill or powder form and wonder how Alcarelle differs (is not clear from a quick search).

Sentia, the "natural" version, was created to avoid regulatory problems. The GABA people say the synthetic one, Alcarelle, is better, but needs more approvals.

Their site indicates they're looking for an investor to put the products through FDA testing. That's a big effort. It's not clear what the criteria for recreational drugs should be. What if a small fraction of the population has an adverse reaction?

Like Star Trek's Synthohol ?

The fact is millions of people take illegal drugs every day, anyone who wants them, anywhere in the world can get hold of them, pretty much at any time.

The way drugs are produced and distributed causes harm to communities all along the path from production to people who use them. The level of danger that being illegal has caused whole sections of society cannot be overstated.

If criminalising all this stuff hadn’t worked over the last hundred odd years maybe it is time for a different approach?

The question is what does it look like?

It won’t ever be stopped so what comes next?

I was just reading bbc news and this article came up:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-68637317.amp

This is a classic example of drugs in the UK, a women who potentially could have gone to jail leaving her child without anyone to care for her, multiple handguns which are actually hard to get hold of in the UK and are themselves potentially lethal weapons.

A criminal network all created around and sustained for the distribution of heroin.

The irony is that prohibition does work at what it sets out to do but with massive side effects. It reduces levels of consumption, reduces levels of illness, reduces domestic and street violence, increases health, increases safety of women and children in the home, increases family stability, increases productivity. Obviously it also brings about massive organised criminal networks along with it which cause huge harms.

The question is what does an approach look like where we keep benefits of reduced usage with less crime.

I know in the uk looking at prohibition and cocaine, it has failed.

Almost every pub after a weekend will have traces of cocaine in the toilets - even the Houses of Parliament has cocaine in the toilets when it has been tested.

I honestly don’t believe if it was legal then there would be many more users taking it.

I think because alcohol is already legal and has problems associated with it you would get an incremental increase in crimes like alcohol driven fighting and vandalism, drunk driving etc which would increase (drug driving, drug driven fighting and vandalism, etc) but overall there would be a reduction in harm, and potential benefits like taxation which can be used for treatment and education to steer people away from harm.

Many of the things you're claiming haven't been established. It's hard to find a reduction in street violence when prohibition itself is a primary cause of gang wars and a major funding source for violent criminal organizations. The productivity claims are questionable at best. Amphetamine, for example, quite often on the prohibition hit list and banned in several countries, is sold in the US under the brand name Adderall and is typically not associated with reduced productivity. Conversely, cannabis does have a reputation for reducing productivity, but it can also be used for pain management and in that context do the opposite. Cocain is a little of both.

It's obvious that what's needed here is for people to use drugs responsibly rather than in excess, which is an education problem rather than a law enforcement problem.

> reduces levels of illness, reduces domestic and street violence, increases health, increases safety of women and children in the home, increases family stability, increases productivity.

These are bald assertions, and particularly suspect in light of deaths caused by contaminants and by unknown doses.

Even the claim of reduced use is suspect. Increased but safer use of some substances, without criminal consequences, could easily be a net gain in all of the categories you mention. Particularly if some folks prone to violent assholery chose things other than booze…

I'm in favor of trying something new, maybe legalize it and bring in taxes, as with alcohol and tobacco.

My main issue with that path is I don't want the drug lords to win. Maybe the guy from the article will make it, but I get the feeling the existing incumbents will try to use their position to simply get a legal version of their empire that was built on blood.

Just allow big pharma to make it. And then normal pharmacies to sell it over the counter. Even could get some limited license that only applies to over the counter items for independent shops...

Did that happen with marijuana where that has been legalised?

Not a leading question, genuinely haven't been following the saga

It's a good question, I don't know either. I'm not sure it's so simple to know.

> The fact is millions of people take illegal drugs every day, anyone who wants them, anywhere in the world can get hold of them, pretty much at any time

If the goal post is "illegal drugs" then sure anybody can get some. If it's a specific illegal drug (say Heroin) then no not everybody can get some; and if you think I'm wrong go buy some and also a fentanyl test kit and I already know the positive result.

It would be interesting to see how overdose deaths change when people stop getting as adulterated drugs as they currently do.

the majority of people can't handle hard drugs, they will ruin their lives and their kids and their families lives as well 'startup founders' like him are idiots

the majority of people cannot handle a bunch of things. doesn't mean these things have to be illegal

They never ruin just their own lives though. I am open to something like letting then parachute on to 'Cocaine Island', never to return.

Drugs cause a lot of collateral damage to friends, family, and society, so it is reasonable to treat them differently than, say, extremely spicy peppers.

Making it illegal also causes collateral damage. Drug gangs, taxpayer money spent on jails and enforcement, deaths due to fentanyl lacing, spread of disease due to needle sharing, foregone taxation revenue, incentive for petty theft, adoption of worse but cheaper substitutes (crack cocaine, krokodil).

The majority of people cant handle coca cola and mcdonalds, cocaine is the least of problems

Alcohol is the one people really can’t handle. The evidence is that this causes far more harm to users and society than other hard drugs.

I am on the fence with this, maybe there should be research to create safer alternatives to the illegal recreational drugs. They are trying to make amphetamines and opioids that are safer and not as recreational for medical purposes. Why not make it safe and try to keep the recreational aspect of it. I am sure this can't ever be achieved 100%, but lots of people would probably rather buy some pure milder stimulant instead of random powder from a street dealer. Same with cannabis, the THC content on legal plants should have a limit on the THC content.

I wonder how the Cartel feel about Mr Panagiotakopoulos's plans?

They can't wait to go legit

If I were this guy, I'd be spending half my VC money on personal security...

Yes that was my first thought. The incentives seem high for cartels to sabotage something like that, and I imagine their tactics are not restricted to just destroying the product.

As a rule, in any business you start, you are going to become well acquainted with your competitors.

https://archive.is/CTNOY

We see that mass marketing and availability of opioids had a touch of harm that continues to be mitigated, but surely making cocaine widely available won't have any of the messy problems of opioids.

Seriously, though, let's stop trying to legalize and market any more addictive products in order to make a few a-holes rich while the risks are externalized onto society.

i've witnessed the incredible normalization of cocaine use during the last 40 years and it's getting out of control. The first symptom is holywood.

Back in the days, a scene with someone taking cocaine was always dark and sordid. The guy was obviously the bad guy, and it ended pretty bad for him (or her, as in pulp fiction for example). Fast forward 30 years and you now regularly see scenes of people doing hard drug as a mean of having fun without any kind of repercussions. It is totally absurd.

I've always wondered if that wasn't a symptom of some kind of infiltration of the drug cartel into the movie industry. Holywood is now basically routinely showing ads for hard drugs.

> I've always wondered if that wasn't a symptom of some kind of infiltration of the drug cartel into the movie industry. Holywood is now basically routinely showing ads for hard drugs.

That would make perfect sense. I'm sure they are ready to pay a lot more than Coca-Cola for a product placement..

I mean, that’s the reality though.

Most cocaine use is infrequent and short term. People who take it usually only take it occasionally, and usually for only a short period of their lives. Yes, it is really quite addictive, objectively, but even so within that context that’s how it goes for most. Other than meth and heroin, this is most drug users’ experience of most drugs.

So if Hollywood and TV are now showing things more in line with lived experience, is that so wrong?

Will someone think of the children??

There’s a lot of misinformation and fear around recreational drug use but the reality is people really like to use them! Hollywood can certainly be used for propaganda but I believe more often than not they’re simply reflecting the popular attitudes of the day.

Hard drugs are dangerous. Hard drugs are fun! Just don’t be an idiot, make good friends, and enjoy the trip.

Sorry but whoever is depicting cocaine like it’s some awful awful sordid thing hasn’t tried it. Good cocaine absolutely wont fuck you up unless you do it in excessive amounts.

The biggest problem with cocaine is how expensive it is.

“Just the wrong people are making the money.”

I couldn't agree more

Honestly this is kind of a double edged sword. Allowing all drug use, and legalizing some form of registered and sanctioned trade of it might be better than what we have now, who knows. But at the same time, imagine large companies advertising drugs, targeted drug ads, the highly likely increased recreational consumption and normalization...

I don't think society is fit to handle practically unhindered drug use.

Your dystopia is not the only alternative to prohibition. Legal sales through boring/uncool government outlets would be my preference.

You don’t have to allow advertising.

Adverts? Dont allow it (word of mouth will work even better - especially with known purities not available on the streets). Just follow the cigarette industries ad-rules, but stronger. Or....like beer and other alcohols.

Coca leafs have legitimate uses for medical and naturopathic purposes. Only in America will we twist such ancient traditions into a degenerate narrative.

Its true. We just dont appreciate ritual human sacrifice like we used to.

don't we all?

facetious, actually it seems like an awful customer base to have to deal with.

You always have another layer below you out on the streets pushing your product. The manufacturer never deals with the customers directly.

This layer would be the pharmacists. Just watch out for the rivalries. Any time people from CVS and Walgreens see each other, they start a shootout.

This is cyberpunk af

Cyberpunk is when people buy cocaine. Like the 19th century

I want to sell a heroin inhaler and nasal spray.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com