5 ms·

That's a shame. These guys' lives are going to be seriously messed up by this, and from the drug list, it looks like they were selling fairly ethical stuff; acc

by pjscott 15y ago

That's a shame. These guys' lives are going to be seriously messed up by this, and from the drug list, it looks like they were selling fairly ethical stuff; according to the article, they sold "LSD, ecstasy, fentanyl, mescaline ketamine, DMT and high-end marijuana".

llambda 15y ago
> it looks like they were selling fairly ethical stuff; according to the article, they sold "LSD, ecstasy, fentanyl, mescaline ketamine, DMT and high-end marijuana" "Fentanyl is approximately 100 times more potent than morphine, with 100 micrograms of fentanyl approximately equivalent to 10 mg of morphine and 75 mg of pethidine (meperidine) in analgesic activity."[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl
- pjscott 15y ago
  Okay, that's an exception. Scary stuff. (My sympathy is still with the guys running this service, but my estimate of their virtue went down.)
Retric 15y ago
Ecstasy is horribly nasty stuff. People rarely OD, but it can vary quickly do significant and permanent brain damage with heavy use. The real problem is when the symptoms show up they are basically permanent. Honestly, prolonged heroin use is significantly less harmful, the only good thing about ecstasy is the unpleasant side effects and fairly long high limit how much people take.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- knotty66 15y ago
  MDMA (if that is what you mean, as street 'Ecstasy' can contain any number of other ingredients) is by most metrics one of the safer recreational drugs out there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210
  - paged90 15y ago
    MDMA isn't -that- harmful. You're assuming when you buy Ecstasy you're being solid pure MDMA, which often is not the case.
    - ckcheng 15y ago
      E.g. "Police link 25 deaths and counting from tainted Canadian ecstasy" http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/canada/120128/police-link-25-ecstasy-death-stories-canada http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/can... "12th death linked to tainted ecstasy in Alberta, B.C." http://www.vancouversun.com/12th+death+linked+tainted+ecstasy+Alberta/6074489/story.html http://www.vancouversun.com/12th+death+linked+tainted+ecstas... "8 Alberta deaths linked to ecstasy-like drug" http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/01/31/calgary-death-ecstasy-pmma-police-warning.html http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/01/31/calga...
      - pippy 15y ago
        It's not fair to call tainted ecstasy deaths a result of drug use. Despite the fact tainted ecstasy is technically not ecstasy, if the industry was regulated it wouldn't happen.
      - excuse-me 15y ago
        A larger number of Canadians also died from tainted pork from maple Leaf bacon This is especially surprising since God explicitly told you not to eat pork almost 3000years ago. Remember kids, pork and shellfish are evil - just so no.
      - nowarninglabel 15y ago
        "A cholesterol-lowering drug taken by 700,000 Americans — Bayer Pharmaceutical's Baycol — was pulled off the market Wednesday because of muscle destruction linked to 31 U.S. deaths and at least nine more fatalities abroad" http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-1788794.html http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-1788794.html
  - Retric 15y ago
- jmtame 15y ago
  There are two major misconceptions around MDMA, both funded by flawed government studies. The first misconception is that MDMA causes "holes in your brain" but this study was debunked. The original claim was based on the notion that MDMA "destroys up to 80% of your serotonin neurotransmitters irreversibly." This was shown to not be true for two reasons: a much larger study (the largest study ever conducted on MDMA use) showed that it's only possible for MDMA to affect up to 5% of your serotonin levels, and it's reversible after a period of weeks or months of nonuse. The second major misconception is that MDMA causes Parkinson's. The original study was retracted because the drug manufacturer mislabeled the MDMA bottle as Methamphetamine, a completely different drug. They gave the Methamphetamine to monkeys instead of MDMA. I would recommend checking this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjvNCijeYlI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjvNCijeYlI Skip to part 3 if you're wanting to get to the scientific studies.
  - Retric 15y ago
    I gave a little more detail here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3850923 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3850923 But, while the holes in the brain and Parkinson's where not accurate there is significant evidence that MDMA causes issues and it's not old enough for a lot of long term issues to show up. PS: My mother has a PHD in neurology with a focus on brain development and MDMA is the drug she was most frightened of. Not that that actually means much in the grand scheme of things, but she has done a lot more literature review of MDMA than I or I suspect anyone on HN has done.
    - jmtame 15y ago
      Nobody knows what happens to long term chronic users of MDMA. But we do know that the propaganda that was spread by US government funded studies has been debunked. Scare tactics should be treated with strong skepticism. Before club users got their hands on it and it got banned in 1985 (against a federal judge's recommendation nonetheless), MDMA was a perfectly acceptable drug used by monks, priests and therapists for couples therapy. Edit: can you please link up the studies you're referring to?
    - nowarninglabel 15y ago
- celticninja 15y ago
  This right here is bullshit. long term MDMA use does not cause brain damage and is certainly not worse than long term heroin use.
ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
The entrepreneur in me really feels for them. They're true entreppies. Risking literally everything. Sure we risk our life savings and sacrifice having a normal life but they risk losing all that AND the chance at being thrown in jail for the rest of their lives. Every time you hear a new drug commercial on TV, pay close attention to its side effects: permanent lung damage, eye damage, brain damage, death, heart attack, stroke, birth defects, etc... Notice how a drug that damaging is perfectly legal. Then look at how weed and lsd are criminalized. Sadly, I guess we'll have to wait till the older congress retires little by little and gets replaced with new lawmakers.
- rufugee 15y ago
  You know...I have always hoped that as the older lawmakers died off, drugs would be decriminalized. However, I've since accepted that the huge amount of propaganda being shoved down our throats on a daily basis and the willingness of much of the population to not question what they're told/shown means the system will just recreate itself when that happens. Most voters are simply network repeaters...they happily echo messages/misinformation created by various sources who have a vested interest in seeing us continue to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol and eat unhealthy foods. And the moment any of these repeaters get out of line, the sources simply need to throw up a "it's killing our helpless children" argument to get them back on track. It's tiring and sad to watch. All of us came into this world on equal footing, in that we opened our eyes and had to learn about what life really means. The fact that we allow a controlling entity to tell us what we can and can't do with our own bodies is ridiculous and honestly downright scary. Why should they know better than I what's right for my own body? And I say this as someone who has a family, loves his children, and doesn't do drugs, but respects and values what I consider a basic human right. What you do with your body, as long as it doesn't impact others, should be your business.
  - lukifer 15y ago
    Hear, hear. I think it's important to acknowledge that the drug war persists for the same reason the TSA does: that there are large-scale industries, with hundreds of thousands of employees, which would be painfully disrupted by a change in policy. The fear-mongering is how they defend their continued existence, it is not the reason for it. Liquor companies; prison guard unions; police units who self-fund from drug raids; even semi-legal MMJ growers who oppose full legalization. All of these entities, and others, have a strong incentive to perpetuate the persecution of millions of Americans for the crime of questionable health choices.

by pjscott 15y ago

llambda 15y ago

> it looks like they were selling fairly ethical stuff; according to the article, they sold "LSD, ecstasy, fentanyl, mescaline ketamine, DMT and high-end marijuana" "Fentanyl is approximately 100 times more potent than morphine, with 100 micrograms of fentanyl approximately equivalent to 10 mg of morphine and 75 mg of pethidine (meperidine) in analgesic activity."[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl

pjscott 15y ago
Okay, that's an exception. Scary stuff. (My sympathy is still with the guys running this service, but my estimate of their virtue went down.)

Retric 15y ago

Ecstasy is horribly nasty stuff. People rarely OD, but it can vary quickly do significant and permanent brain damage with heavy use. The real problem is when the symptoms show up they are basically permanent. Honestly, prolonged heroin use is significantly less harmful, the only good thing about ecstasy is the unpleasant side effects and fairly long high limit how much people take.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
knotty66 15y ago
MDMA (if that is what you mean, as street 'Ecstasy' can contain any number of other ingredients) is by most metrics one of the safer recreational drugs out there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210
- paged90 15y ago
  MDMA isn't -that- harmful. You're assuming when you buy Ecstasy you're being solid pure MDMA, which often is not the case.
  - ckcheng 15y ago
    E.g. "Police link 25 deaths and counting from tainted Canadian ecstasy" http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/canada/120128/police-link-25-ecstasy-death-stories-canada http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/can... "12th death linked to tainted ecstasy in Alberta, B.C." http://www.vancouversun.com/12th+death+linked+tainted+ecstasy+Alberta/6074489/story.html http://www.vancouversun.com/12th+death+linked+tainted+ecstas... "8 Alberta deaths linked to ecstasy-like drug" http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/01/31/calgary-death-ecstasy-pmma-police-warning.html http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/01/31/calga...
    - pippy 15y ago
      It's not fair to call tainted ecstasy deaths a result of drug use. Despite the fact tainted ecstasy is technically not ecstasy, if the industry was regulated it wouldn't happen.
    - excuse-me 15y ago
      A larger number of Canadians also died from tainted pork from maple Leaf bacon This is especially surprising since God explicitly told you not to eat pork almost 3000years ago. Remember kids, pork and shellfish are evil - just so no.
    - nowarninglabel 15y ago
      "A cholesterol-lowering drug taken by 700,000 Americans — Bayer Pharmaceutical's Baycol — was pulled off the market Wednesday because of muscle destruction linked to 31 U.S. deaths and at least nine more fatalities abroad" http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-1788794.html http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-1788794.html
- Retric 15y ago
jmtame 15y ago
There are two major misconceptions around MDMA, both funded by flawed government studies. The first misconception is that MDMA causes "holes in your brain" but this study was debunked. The original claim was based on the notion that MDMA "destroys up to 80% of your serotonin neurotransmitters irreversibly." This was shown to not be true for two reasons: a much larger study (the largest study ever conducted on MDMA use) showed that it's only possible for MDMA to affect up to 5% of your serotonin levels, and it's reversible after a period of weeks or months of nonuse. The second major misconception is that MDMA causes Parkinson's. The original study was retracted because the drug manufacturer mislabeled the MDMA bottle as Methamphetamine, a completely different drug. They gave the Methamphetamine to monkeys instead of MDMA. I would recommend checking this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjvNCijeYlI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjvNCijeYlI Skip to part 3 if you're wanting to get to the scientific studies.
- Retric 15y ago
  I gave a little more detail here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3850923 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3850923 But, while the holes in the brain and Parkinson's where not accurate there is significant evidence that MDMA causes issues and it's not old enough for a lot of long term issues to show up. PS: My mother has a PHD in neurology with a focus on brain development and MDMA is the drug she was most frightened of. Not that that actually means much in the grand scheme of things, but she has done a lot more literature review of MDMA than I or I suspect anyone on HN has done.
  - jmtame 15y ago
    Nobody knows what happens to long term chronic users of MDMA. But we do know that the propaganda that was spread by US government funded studies has been debunked. Scare tactics should be treated with strong skepticism. Before club users got their hands on it and it got banned in 1985 (against a federal judge's recommendation nonetheless), MDMA was a perfectly acceptable drug used by monks, priests and therapists for couples therapy. Edit: can you please link up the studies you're referring to?
  - nowarninglabel 15y ago
celticninja 15y ago
This right here is bullshit. long term MDMA use does not cause brain damage and is certainly not worse than long term heroin use.

ChrisNorstrom 15y ago

The entrepreneur in me really feels for them. They're true entreppies. Risking literally everything. Sure we risk our life savings and sacrifice having a normal life but they risk losing all that AND the chance at being thrown in jail for the rest of their lives. Every time you hear a new drug commercial on TV, pay close attention to its side effects: permanent lung damage, eye damage, brain damage, death, heart attack, stroke, birth defects, etc... Notice how a drug that damaging is perfectly legal. Then look at how weed and lsd are criminalized. Sadly, I guess we'll have to wait till the older congress retires little by little and gets replaced with new lawmakers.

rufugee 15y ago
You know...I have always hoped that as the older lawmakers died off, drugs would be decriminalized. However, I've since accepted that the huge amount of propaganda being shoved down our throats on a daily basis and the willingness of much of the population to not question what they're told/shown means the system will just recreate itself when that happens. Most voters are simply network repeaters...they happily echo messages/misinformation created by various sources who have a vested interest in seeing us continue to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol and eat unhealthy foods. And the moment any of these repeaters get out of line, the sources simply need to throw up a "it's killing our helpless children" argument to get them back on track. It's tiring and sad to watch. All of us came into this world on equal footing, in that we opened our eyes and had to learn about what life really means. The fact that we allow a controlling entity to tell us what we can and can't do with our own bodies is ridiculous and honestly downright scary. Why should they know better than I what's right for my own body? And I say this as someone who has a family, loves his children, and doesn't do drugs, but respects and values what I consider a basic human right. What you do with your body, as long as it doesn't impact others, should be your business.
- lukifer 15y ago
  Hear, hear. I think it's important to acknowledge that the drug war persists for the same reason the TSA does: that there are large-scale industries, with hundreds of thousands of employees, which would be painfully disrupted by a change in policy. The fear-mongering is how they defend their continued existence, it is not the reason for it. Liquor companies; prison guard unions; police units who self-fund from drug raids; even semi-legal MMJ growers who oppose full legalization. All of these entities, and others, have a strong incentive to perpetuate the persecution of millions of Americans for the crime of questionable health choices.