3 ms·
I don't believe Portland's efforts caused the rise of fentanyl, though. How do we know it wouldn't be worse, if not for Portland's efforts?
by tunesmith 3y ago
I don't believe Portland's efforts caused the rise of fentanyl, though. How do we know it wouldn't be worse, if not for Portland's efforts?
- adolph 3y agoMy recollection is that in 2007 Mexico banned pseudoephedrine in order to remove feed stock from meth labs supplying the US.[0,1] As a result of this and other factors suppliers in Mexico found fentanyl, which bypassed growing cycles of agricultural drugs like pot and heroin. During the pandemic, Mexico grew additional trade ties with China which included fentanyl precursor chemicals.[2] 0. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-crime-pseudoephedrine-idUSN1927125520070719/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-crime-pseudoephedr... 1. https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/2005/06/the_mexican_connection_pseudoe.html https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/2005/06/th... 2. https://coffeeordie.com/china-mexican-cartel-alliance https://coffeeordie.com/china-mexican-cartel-alliance
- Scoundreller 3y agoPlenty of other precursors to use if you can't get pseudoephedrine at scale. Trying to control ultra-small scale producers doesn't accomplish much other than sweeten the cartels (and purity/yields, so I guess that's a positive). Opioids being more dependence-inducing than stimulants would better explain a production shift. Big legitimate trading volumes with China (and any other large producer of goods/inputs) make a customs-focussed effort at controlling supply basically impossible.