Fun-loving UK teenager dies after taking drugs at Full Moon party in Thailand, inquest reveals

[PJ71]

59 minutes ago, bignok said:

If some kid wants to try a pill, you could just take half. Taking 1 or 2 pills unknown ingredients is pretty stupid imo.

when you were drinking alcohol as a teenage were you drinking 1/2 pints / bottles?

[Bday Prang]

13 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

Yes I remember the Leah Betts case very well and you are right it was overhydration that killed her.

 

I am not sure what the lethal dose of MDMA is, probably very very high.  I am in favour of controlled supply so the strength and impurities are known coupled with education in how to take it safely.  It seems to have very little downside and the upside is enormous where it replaces alcohol.

 

You are correct in saying alcohol tastes awful with MDMA use and from what I understand, the clubs running on MDMA only provided hot water in the toilets for the reason you describe.

             Nice reply , If I'm honest I didn't expect such unbiased common sense from an ex magistrate, fair play to you sir

   Regarding the Leah Betts case , if I remember correctly her father was a police officer   ( he may have been retired)  and after her death he was lauded for starting some sort of anti ecstasy campaign. which I guess was unsurprising considering what had happened.

           What I  did find remarkable was that whilst there was a "predictable"  drive to prosecute both dealers and users backed by the usual media hype  I don't think that the issue regarding the un availability of drinking water in nightclubs and the fact that bouncers would routinely confiscate water from those who attempted to bring their own, was addressed at the time.

            In reality the  reason for his daughters death, was  the incorrect, but no doubt well intentioned  advice   from her friends to drink a great deal of pure water. Just the addition of some essential minerals and isotonic electrolytes as found in sports drinks would probably have saved her    Sadly a clear indication that , as you mentioned, education  is very important in such matters.

             I'm sure you also remember at that time "illegal raves" were all the rage , young people would converge on disused warehouses or remote fields basically just to dance and have fun. The "establishment"  were, as expected, absolutely apoplectic about this, it was seen as a very real threat to the very fabric of society, the tabloid media fanned the flames and a great deal of time and money was invested in stopping the "outrage" ostensibly to protect the lives of the young.   Those in authority, as usual,  completely out of touch,  could not see that their actions only made it more popular and attractive to the young.

             Then there was the doomed to failure, "Just say no" campaign, having learned nothing from America's historical failed attempt at prohibition and still unable to understand that one sure fire way of making something attractive to naturally rebellious teenagers is to ban it.   It would probably, actually be more effective to make drug use compulsory, and just watch them rebel against it

             It's no surprise really that the obvious way forward, like you say, of providing a safe supply of drugs coupled with comprehensive education is of no interest to most governments, who's only real concern is to get re elected , and whose main worry would be the inevitable hysterical media outrage which would accompany any progressive drugs policies 

              In effect the real problem is again main stream media and as a result nothing will change anytime soon

Disgraceful in my opinion 

           

            

           

 

[Andrew65]

1 hour ago, Bday Prang said:

             Heroin has pain killing benefits whether prescribed by a doctor or taken "recreationally"   That is why addicts feel the need to take it. Nothing deals with the pain of withdrawal as effectively, and other than the issue of "quality" it makes absolutely no difference to the user whether it is supplied by a doctor or a dealer

            The word "recreationally" is actually somewhat inaccurate when used to describe heroin usage, the "recreational " phase is relatively short lived for most people, and the reason for taking it soon changes to one of necessity as physical addiction starts to take hold. There is no recreational value in taking heroin just to feel "normal" as once that stage has been reached the "fun" aspect has gone forever , and its  even worse when one needs to take it to avoid feeling like death warmed up.

               Alcohol for some people works in exactly the same way, there is a huge difference in the user experience for  those who enjoy a few glasses of wine with a meal or a fine brandy with a cigar afterwards when compared to an alcoholic satisfying their craving.

               However nobody here has suggested that alcohol should be supplied by a doctor, despite its dangers, I wonder why that is.

 

There' a question of whether or not one is "stupid" enough to take heroin in the first place. Who could be aware of the damgers of it and still take it!?

Bear in mind that many/most people who are given it medically are terminally ill, so addiction is a moot point.

I agree in a way with what you say about booze. And another angle on drugs, I'm surprised that a product/drug, tobacco, can still be legally sold in the knowledge that it is so harmful/has fatal consequences for many.

[Jackbenimble]

18 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

Not much fun owning a BMW if you are going to adhere to the speed limits, a nissan micra would suffice.

Plenty of people have also died as a result of BMW's over the years and alcohol or other drugs were not always a contributing factor.

I don't want to hear any further justification for these killing machines which are often also used illegally

so taking illegal drugs and having fun is ok in your book but legally driving a BMW and having fun isn't? Key element here is the legality issue, like it or not.  

[Bday Prang]

12 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

There' a question of whether or not one is "stupid" enough to take heroin in the first place. Who could be aware of the damgers of it and still take it!?

Bear in mind that many/most people who are given it medically are terminally ill, so addiction is a moot point.

I agree in a way with what you say about booze. And another angle on drugs, I'm surprised that a product/drug, tobacco, can still be legally sold in the knowledge that it is so harmful/has fatal consequences for many.

         Well i can't really answer your first point, Other than to say that many people take heroin and live to tell the tale often avoiding addiction, the euphoria it can produce is profound and well documented so i suppose there is always the " it won't happen to me" philosophy.  People are more than capable of doing many  "stupid" things how on earth can unwanted pregnancies  for example still be an issue in this day and age 

           Obviously as you say addiction is not an issue for the terminally ill but a quick look on google tells me that it is not available in the USA at all and has actually  been declared "of no medical value"  That seems a little bizarre to me as it is a common component of end of life care in the UK

            As regards to your final point, I think its a case of follow the money (as is virtually always the case) the tax revenue from the sales of tobacco and alcohol is immense, governments cannot afford to give it up A decision has obviously been made that any resulting deaths are acceptable collateral damage in other words they just don't care.

              In my opinion its actually somewhat immoral that in a country like the UK the tax levied on tobacco is exceptionally high but always just about affordable for the average person even if they have to economise in other ways, Considering that many "experts " consider nicotine to be almost as addictive as heroin this to me looks like a clear case of exploiting vulnerable people, something that would normally be considered morally unacceptable

              I always find it a bit strange when following a major drugs seizure, the authorities are always very quick to state the often wildly exaggerated  "street value" of the  drugs recovered which as far as I can see is of very little interest to the average person.

           Its always about the money

 

[Andrew65]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

         Well i can't really answer your first point, Other than to say that many people take heroin and live to tell the tale often avoiding addiction, the euphoria it can produce is profound and well documented so i suppose there is always the " it won't happen to me" philosophy.  People are more than capable of doing many  "stupid" things how on earth can unwanted pregnancies  for example still be an issue in this day and age 

           Obviously as you say addiction is not an issue for the terminally ill but a quick look on google tells me that it is not available in the USA at all and has actually  been declared "of no medical value"  That seems a little bizarre to me as it is a common component of end of life care in the UK

            As regards to your final point, I think its a case of follow the money (as is virtually always the case) the tax revenue from the sales of tobacco and alcohol is immense, governments cannot afford to give it up A decision has obviously been made that any resulting deaths are acceptable collateral damage in other words they just don't care.

              In my opinion its actually somewhat immoral that in a country like the UK the tax levied on tobacco is exceptionally high but always just about affordable for the average person even if they have to economise in other ways, Considering that many "experts " consider nicotine to be almost as addictive as heroin this to me looks like a clear case of exploiting vulnerable people, something that would normally be considered morally unacceptable

              I always find it a bit strange when following a major drugs seizure, the authorities are always very quick to state the often wildly exaggerated  "street value" of the  drugs recovered which as far as I can see is of very little interest to the average person.

           Its always about the money

 

I gave up smoking 2 years after I left Thailand to live in the UK. I had gone from paying 60 Baht (£1.50) a pack, to £12 a pack in the UK. That could be as much as £400 per month, simply unaffordable. I had been a smoker for 45 years.

[bignok]

1 hour ago, PJ71 said:

when you were drinking alcohol as a teenage were you drinking 1/2 pints / bottles?

Alcohol has known contents. Random pills don't. Do you not think before asking such questions?

[bignok]

1 hour ago, watchcat said:

Did you stop drinking when 19?

Do you always ask such hard hitting questions?

[Bday Prang]

10 minutes ago, Jackbenimble said:

so taking illegal drugs and having fun is ok in your book but legally driving a BMW and having fun isn't? Key element here is the legality issue, like it or not.  

              Yes in my book taking drugs and having fun is perfectly acceptable provided it does not affect others negatively, legality in its present form  should not come into it at all.

            However I cannot see any fun at all in driving a powerful car whilst adhering to the legal speedlimits.

             Are you suggesting that BMW drivers and those who drive other ridiculously over powered cars never break  the law or negatively impact others ?

              The ones who insist on tailgating me and others regularly , often inches from the rear bumper, blowing their horns flashing their lights and gesticulating wildly ,  along with the ones who regularly wrap their sports cars around trees  and innocent pedestrians would indicate that is often not the case 

             In that scenario  the legality is, as you say a key issue, as the law in this case is primarily to protect the innocent victims and not the mindless idiots who put the lives of others at risk by their behaviour

[bignok]

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

              Yes in my book taking drugs and having fun is perfectly acceptable provided it does not affect others negatively, legality in its present form  should not come into it at all.

            However I cannot see any fun at all in driving a powerful car whilst adhering to the legal speedlimits.

             Are you suggesting that BMW drivers and those who drive other ridiculously over powered cars never break  the law or negatively impact others ?

              The ones who insist on tailgating me and others regularly , often inches from the rear bumper, blowing their horns flashing their lights and gesticulating wildly ,  along with the ones who regularly wrap their sports cars around trees  and innocent pedestrians would indicate that is often not the case 

             In that scenario  the legality is, as you say a key issue, as the law in this case is primarily to protect the innocent victims and not the mindless idiots who put the lives of others at risk by their behaviour

Pills with unknown ingredients are high risk and stupid.

[Bday Prang]

13 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

I gave up smoking 2 years after I left Thailand to live in the UK. I had gone from paying 60 Baht (£1.50) a pack, to £12 a pack in the UK. That could be as much as £400 per month, simply unaffordable. I had been a smoker for 45 years.

Well done for managing to kick the habit, many never manage to do so.  £400 per month is a very realistic estimate of the cost of smoking ,  but,  in my opinion it is not actually technically unaffordable, especially for an addict who will economise in other ways to enable them to feed their addiction.  I would say that the number of people who still smoke confirms this

[bignok]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

Well done for managing to kick the habit, many never manage to do so.  £400 per month is a very realistic estimate of the cost of smoking ,  but,  in my opinion it is not actually technically unaffordable, especially for an addict who will economise in other ways to enable them to feed their addiction.  I would say that the number of people who still smoke confirms this

No such thing as addicted to smoking. Just an excuse. People smoke due to boredom.

[Andrew65]

3 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

Well done for managing to kick the habit, many never manage to do so.  £400 per month is a very realistic estimate of the cost of smoking ,  but,  in my opinion it is not actually technically unaffordable, especially for an addict who will economise in other ways to enable them to feed their addiction.  I would say that the number of people who still smoke confirms this

If I look at my wages/outgoings are now, £400 would mean having NO other money for ANYTHING else. As you say though, an addict will always find a way.

[Bday Prang]

4 minutes ago, bignok said:

Pills with unknown ingredients are high risk and stupid.

Of course you are correct, and it is a very good reason why the supply of such pills should be entrusted to the pharmaceutical companies and not left to criminal organizations.

Powerful cars are also high risk, especially in the hands of people who have not received any specialist training and as such are unable to control them.

It would be interesting to know which of the above are responsible for more deaths. 1 person died in Thailand as a result of a very rare reaction to an "illegal" drug on the day in question. How many died on the same day as a result of a "legal" vehicle being operated in an illegal manner ?

Answers on a post card please

[bignok]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

Of course you are correct, and it is a very good reason why the supply of such pills should be entrusted to the pharmaceutical companies and not left to criminal organizations.

Powerful cars are also high risk, especially in the hands of people who have not received any specialist training and as such are unable to control them.

It would be interesting to know which of the above are responsible for more deaths. 1 person died in Thailand as a result of a very rare reaction to an "illegal" drug on the day in question. How many died on the same day as a result of a "legal" vehicle being operated in an illegal manner ?

Answers on a post card please

Agreed cars are very dangerous.

[Bday Prang]

7 minutes ago, bignok said:

No such thing as addicted to smoking. Just an excuse. People smoke due to boredom.

You obviously  know nothing of addiction  or the reasons for it,  

[bignok]

Just now, Bday Prang said:

You obviously  know nothing of addiction  or the reasons for it,  

You obviously havent read up on tobacco. It isnt that addictive.

[Bday Prang]

9 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

If I look at my wages/outgoings are now, £400 would mean having NO other money for ANYTHING else. As you say though, an addict will always find a way.

as confirmed by the number of unemployed who seem to be able to find the money

[Bday Prang]

1 minute ago, bignok said:

You obviously havent read up on tobacco. It isnt that addictive.

Having been addicted to tobacco for nearly 50 years, my personal experience is to the contrary, Totally opposite to my experience with a whole range of other "recreational" drugs

Have you ever smoked ?

[Andrew65]

4 minutes ago, bignok said:

You obviously havent read up on tobacco. It isnt that addictive.

I had an old American friend, Ned, in Thailand who was a heroin addict. He said that giving up cigarettes (tobacco) was harder for him than giving up heroin (now on Methadone).

[bignok]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

Having been addicted to tobacco for nearly 50 years, my personal experience is to the contrary, Totally opposite to my experience with a whole range of other "recreational" drugs

Have you ever smoked ?

Yes i quit. Hard for 3 weeks. After that it is easy. Simply dont buy them. Dont get drunk for a month. Dont hang around smokers. Easy. Find something else to do. Eat apples, chew gum. Go for a walk. Easy really.

 

People who smoke enjoy it and do it when bored or frustrated. Really just a sign of mental weakness.

[bignok]

4 minutes ago, Andrew65 said:

I had an old American friend, Ned, in Thailand who was a heroin addict. He said that giving up cigarettes (tobacco) was harder for him than giving up heroin (now on Methadone).

Then he is mentally weak. Man can walk 100 miles, build rockets but cannot stop smoking? What a joke. Easy. Mental decision. I no longer smoke. I quit. End of.

[Bday Prang]

10 minutes ago, bignok said:

Agreed cars are very dangerous.

And just imagine how much more dangerous they would be if they were "illegal" and uncontrolled, supplied by criminal organisations , and not subject to any form of quality control,  yet  all too readily available to anyone stupid enough to want one

The argument for the legalization and subsequent control of drugs by the responsible authorities, coupled with some serious education is actually overwhelming

[JBChiangRai]

13 minutes ago, bignok said:

You obviously havent read up on tobacco. It isnt that addictive.

I gave up 35 years ago.  I went from 30 cigarettes a day to zero overnight.  It was incredibly hard, I had a really short temper for 3 weeks.  Nicotine is highly addictive.

 

I started again 10 years later and gave up the following year.  Easier the second time because I had nicotine chewing gum to relieve the symptoms.

[Bday Prang]

6 minutes ago, bignok said:

Yes i quit. Hard for 3 weeks. After that it is easy. Simply dont buy them. Dont get drunk for a month. Dont hang around smokers. Easy. Find something else to do. Eat apples, chew gum. Go for a walk. Easy really.

 

People who smoke enjoy it and do it when bored or frustrated. Really just a sign of mental weakness.

Well done you managed it. It is patently not that easy for everybody 

The inability to quit may well be a symptom of mental weakness,  You can probably see from my posts that I'm not exactly a paid up member of the woke club, but even  i don't think the mentally weak should be exploited , vilified or denied some sympathy. in this day and age.   Do you?

[bignok]

1 minute ago, JBChiangRai said:

I gave up 35 years ago.  I went from 30 cigarettes a day to zero overnight.  It was incredibly hard, I had a really short temper for 3 weeks.  Nicotine is highly addictive.

 

I started again 10 years later and gave up the following year.  Easier the second time because I had nicotine chewing gum to relieve the symptoms.

Nicotine leaves your body after 3 days. So really the first 3 days are a test. Stay busy before you know it 5 days have passed. If the early explorers can walk to the south pole then surely someone can quit smoking.

 

The best way to replace a bad habit is find a better habit.

[Andrew65]

13 minutes ago, bignok said:

Yes i quit. Hard for 3 weeks. After that it is easy. Simply dont buy them. Dont get drunk for a month. Dont hang around smokers. Easy. Find something else to do. Eat apples, chew gum. Go for a walk. Easy really.

 

People who smoke enjoy it and do it when bored or frustrated. Really just a sign of mental weakness.

"Dont hang around smokers". That was a big thing for me, I wasn't going out at all socially, and I live on my own.

Even though I didn't like it, I can see the logic in banning smoking in pubs etc. Many years ago I had given up twice, for 6 months or so, both times that I restarted were when I was in a bar and people were smoking.

[bignok]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

Well done you managed it. It is patently not that easy for everybody 

The inability to quit may well be a symptom of mental weakness,  You can probably see from my posts that I'm not exactly a paid up member of the woke club, but even  i don't think the mentally weak should be exploited , vilified or denied some sympathy. in this day and age.   Do you?

I feel sorry for cancer victims or innocents killed by a bad driver. People who buy smokes nope. It is just a dumb practice with no upside. I was dumb and weak enough to do it before but woke up to myself.

 

If you say something is hard to yourself everyday then your mind records that negative message. If you say I don't smoke anymore. I quit. Im saving 5 grand a year now. Your mind records that message and your body follows the message. We know this from studying human behaviour. We have known this for 100 years. If you think you can or you can't, you're right either way" Henry Ford

[Spock]

On 5/5/2023 at 1:39 PM, BangkokReady said:

Very sad, of course, but how many people actually die due to some sort of problem with the actual ecstasy tablet itself and not some sort of reaction?  I mean, these things get made in batches, so presumably many other people took them without incident.

Your chances of dying from one ecstasy tablet are almost non existent.

[Spock]

I can't believe how many straight, goody two shoes types frequent Thailand and Thai visa. What a boring lot so many of you are with your 'I never touch drugs' approach to life. You seriously have no idea how few people die as a result of taking MDMA, and those unlucky enough to do so, must be about one in a million among the users. You've far more chance of dying from some alcohol related incident than from an ecstasy pill. Honestly, if you don't know the facts and only know the hype built up in your own mind, don't bother commenting.