Englishman Arrested For Dealing Methamphetamine

[canadiangirl]

Sorry for "keeping it real"... but Ritalin (Methylphenidate) is NOT an amphetamine.

I stand corrected:

(from: http://www.erowid.org/ask/ask.cgi?ID=2846)

Ritalin (methylphenidate) does contain an amphetamine-like backbone, however it is more complex. Take a look at the difference in Chem-Compare. The additional structures on this molecule also alter its interaction with the body and the neurons in our brains. Methylphenidate is reported to have less euphoric effects (some people describe it as 'more dull') than methamphetamine, but every individual is unique in their reaction to psychoactives, so no statement is universally true. While similar in backbone structure, amphetamine, methamphetamine, and ritalin are all quite unique drugs, with somewhat similar, but distinct, effects.

[canadiangirl]

[quote name='ColPyat' date='2007-09-05 01:25:23' post='1517202'

No, it doesn't.

It is used to treat ADD, and is highly controversial. For ADD patients it works actually opposite to normal children - it calms them down instead of stimulating them. And one of the regrettable side effects is that it does prolong this condition, that usually goes by itself after puberty, almost indefinitely.

Ritalin may have profoundly beneficial effects on the parents and teachers of such a child, but it has lasting, and in many areas of life almost debilitating effects on the adult this child one day will turn into. There are much better ways to treat what is nowadays called "ADD" - understanding, tolerance, and teachers that are educated about why some children are a more hyperactive than others.

Ritalin does irreversible damage to the brain at an age when children should not be exposed to any such drug. But yes, it is legal and prescribed by doctors.

I would never put my children, should I someday have any, on that crap. Shove human beings into a school system whose basic structure was designed to create efficient factory workers, and surprise, surprise, some of them get bored, can't pay attention? Clearly the solution must be drugs, instead of making school more interesting.

[ColPyat]

Amphetamines were available as diet pills until quite recently, and are now available as Ritalin for 10-year old Johnny who can't concentrate in school -- that's it, speed for kids.

Sorry for "keeping it real"... but Ritalin (Methylphenidate) is NOT an amphetamine.

It is, however, a mild central nervous system stimulant (much less potent than amphetamines), which is why it does not warrant the "speed for kids" moniker.

It is a therapeutic medication that can have profoundly beneficial effects; it is not a recreational drug.

Is it sometimes misused by people that don't need it? Yes.

No, it doesn't.

It is used to treat ADD, and is highly controversial. For ADD patients it works actually opposite to normal children - it calms them down instead of stimulating them. And one of the regrettable side effects is that it does prolong this condition, that usually goes by itself after puberty, almost indefinitely.

Ritalin may have profoundly beneficial effects on the parents and teachers of such a child, but it has lasting, and in many areas of life almost debilitating effects on the adult this child one day will turn into. There are much better ways to treat what is nowadays called "ADD" - understanding, tolerance, and teachers that are educated about why some children are a more hyperactive than others.

Ritalin does irreversible damage to the brain at an age when children should not be exposed to any such drug. But yes, it is legal and prescribed by doctors.

You are wrong...

Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the largest study ever conducted on ADHD... (btw, ADD is no longer in vogue):

The Treatment of ADHD

The results of the study indicated that long-term combination treatments and the medication-management alone were superior to intensive behavioral treatment and routine community treatment. And in some areas—anxiety, academic performance, oppositionality, parent-child relations, and social skills—the combined treatment was usually superior. Another advantage of combined treatment was that children could be successfully treated with lower doses of medicine, compared with the medication-only group.

No, i am not wrong.

I don't need to read such studies, thank you very much, as i was a test subject of one myself, from the age of about 6 or 7 (maybe even earlier, but i do not remember exactly when part of my breakfast, lunch and dinner was such a little pill) until i refused to take any more when i was 15. And trust me - i was not in a placebo group - the friends i supplied with my pills before i flat out refused to take them anymore were very happy about them.

Now, a few decades after, i am still suffering the effects, which unfortunately do not include a reduction in intelligence so i won't know what happened to me, and what could have been.

Of course, children on Ritalin are much easier to handle for teachers and parents. But how those children handle life as adults is a completely different matter.

[ColPyat]

I would never put my children, should I someday have any, on that crap. Shove human beings into a school system whose basic structure was designed to create efficient factory workers, and surprise, surprise, some of them get bored, can't pay attention? Clearly the solution must be drugs, instead of making school more interesting.

Absoluetely never would i put my son through that. I wish, when i was a child, that the information that is now available would have been then, so my parents could have made an informed decision.

It horrifies me, how some people who are so anti drugs can possibly advocate to treat small children with such heavily psycho active substances.

[canadiangirl]

Absoluetely never would i put my son through that. I wish, when i was a child, that the information that is now available would have been then, so my parents could have made an informed decision.

It horrifies me, how some people who are so anti drugs can possibly advocate to treat small children with such heavily psycho active substances.

I'm very sorry for what you went through -- no one should be subjected to something like that. :-(

In my case, I absolutely HATED school, in the worst possible way, because I went to a really ghetto, trashy high school where education wasn't really on the menu. My parents dragged me to a psychiatrist who declared that I had a "phobia" about school, and that I should be put on anti-anxiety drugs to enable me to keep on going. I refused to take them.

I think kids often have a very good idea of what helps them and damages them, much more than adults give them credit for. In my mind, it does no good to maintain kids in situations that are bad for them, through the use of drugs. It's the situation that we should be looking to change.

Edited September 4, 2007 by canadiangirl

[ColPyat]

Absoluetely never would i put my son through that. I wish, when i was a child, that the information that is now available would have been then, so my parents could have made an informed decision.

It horrifies me, how some people who are so anti drugs can possibly advocate to treat small children with such heavily psycho active substances.

I'm very sorry for what you went through -- no one should be subjected to something like that. :-(

In my case, I absolutely HATED school, in the worst possible way, because I went to a really ghetto, trashy high school where education wasn't really on the menu. My parents dragged me to a psychiatrist who declared that I had a "phobia" about school, and that I should be put on anti-anxiety drugs to enable me to keep on going. I refused to take them.

I think kids often have a very good idea of what helps them and damages them, much more than adults give them credit for. In my mind, it does no good to maintain kids in situations that are bad for them, through the use of drugs. It's the situation that we should be looking to change.

Opposite side of the social spectrum - after i had to go to a shitty primary school because that was the district school, i went to the top schools, and had to fit into the places where the future elite went (didn't work though, even with the pills). And yes, i really really hated school, already when i was 13 i ran off bording school several times until i was kicked out, and with 14 i was already master in forging my parents signature.

I would have been much better off in an alternative school models, and no pills.

[khall64au]

Some educational circles will label ADD or ADHD kids as "Indigo children" - special individuals born far beyond mundane, rote-learning systems. Unfortunately, many of these children are birthed into mainstream society who have no idea what to do with them or how to direct their potential brilliance.

Are the misunderstood experimentally shelved? I have met several distinct examples in my lifetime - whose brilliance is labelled as mentally unstable!

Does this line of thought (following on from other posts) deserve a separate topic - considering the OP?

[sriracha john]

Amphetamines were available as diet pills until quite recently, and are now available as Ritalin for 10-year old Johnny who can't concentrate in school -- that's it, speed for kids.

Sorry for "keeping it real"... but Ritalin (Methylphenidate) is NOT an amphetamine.

It is, however, a mild central nervous system stimulant (much less potent than amphetamines), which is why it does not warrant the "speed for kids" moniker.

It is a therapeutic medication that can have profoundly beneficial effects; it is not a recreational drug.

Is it sometimes misused by people that don't need it? Yes.

No, it doesn't.

It is used to treat ADD, and is highly controversial. For ADD patients it works actually opposite to normal children - it calms them down instead of stimulating them. And one of the regrettable side effects is that it does prolong this condition, that usually goes by itself after puberty, almost indefinitely.

Ritalin may have profoundly beneficial effects on the parents and teachers of such a child, but it has lasting, and in many areas of life almost debilitating effects on the adult this child one day will turn into. There are much better ways to treat what is nowadays called "ADD" - understanding, tolerance, and teachers that are educated about why some children are a more hyperactive than others.

Ritalin does irreversible damage to the brain at an age when children should not be exposed to any such drug. But yes, it is legal and prescribed by doctors.

You are wrong...

Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the largest study ever conducted on ADHD... (btw, ADD is no longer in vogue):

The Treatment of ADHD

The results of the study indicated that long-term combination treatments and the medication-management alone were superior to intensive behavioral treatment and routine community treatment. And in some areas—anxiety, academic performance, oppositionality, parent-child relations, and social skills—the combined treatment was usually superior. Another advantage of combined treatment was that children could be successfully treated with lower doses of medicine, compared with the medication-only group.

No, i am not wrong.

I don't need to read such studies, thank you very much, as i was a test subject of one myself, from the age of about 6 or 7 (maybe even earlier, but i do not remember exactly when part of my breakfast, lunch and dinner was such a little pill) until i refused to take any more when i was 15. And trust me - i was not in a placebo group - the friends i supplied with my pills before i flat out refused to take them anymore were very happy about them.

Now, a few decades after, i am still suffering the effects, which unfortunately do not include a reduction in intelligence so i won't know what happened to me, and what could have been.

Of course, children on Ritalin are much easier to handle for teachers and parents. But how those children handle life as adults is a completely different matter.

Yes, you are wrong when you say it is not a therapeutic medication that can have profoundly beneficial effects.

Your solitary experiences, although personal, are far outweighed by the exhaustive study cited as well as many other studies.

Is Ritalin sometimes mis-prescribed? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Does Ritalin have side effects? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Is Ritalin the sole cure for ADHD? No, but as the study showed, it's a valuable and crucial adjunct to a combination of therapies.

Are whatever adverse effects you are attesting to now directly attributable to your receiving Ritalin previously? It's an

unknown, particularly in light of your extensive history of illicit drug usage.

[sonnyJ]

At least we are on the topic, as long as there are troubles in the world. You should have known better.

[canadiangirl]

Is Ritalin the sole cure for ADHD? No, but as the study showed, it's a valuable and crucial adjunct to a combination of therapies.

Are whatever adverse effects you are attesting to now directly attributable to your receiving Ritalin previously? It's an

unknown, particularly in light of your extensive history of illicit drug usage.

Out of curiosity, what is your profession/job, sriracha?

Edited September 4, 2007 by canadiangirl

[sriracha john]

Anonymity Maintenance Technician...

[ColPyat]

Yes, you are wrong when you say it is not a therapeutic medication that can have profoundly beneficial effects.

Your solitary experiences, although personal, are far outweighed by the exhaustive study cited as well as many other studies.

Is Ritalin sometimes mis-prescribed? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Does Ritalin have side effects? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Is Ritalin the sole cure for ADHD? No, but as the study showed, it's a valuable and crucial adjunct to a combination of therapies.

Are whatever adverse effects you are attesting to now directly attributable to your receiving Ritalin previously? It's an

unknown, particularly in light of your extensive history of illicit drug usage.

It's not, the negative side effects started long before i have ever used any illegal drug. I have never taken illegal drugs, especially the harder ones, in quantities coming even close to Ritalin and its predecessors, which i was prescribed. In fact - the harder drugs i have only taken very carefully, with long pauses in between. Not every drug user is stupid.

Please don't make any long distance diagnoses here by assuming things about my life so it suits your views on me, and/or confirms your very mistaken views on Ritalin therapy. You may wish to ignore criticism of Ritalin. Why, i don't know - i just hope it's not one of your children, if you have any, who take Ritalin, and you may just want to avoid considering that it could be a terrible mistake.

In Thailand, unfortunately, Ritalin is still the choice drug for unruly children.

Basically, without going into complete soul exposure here - i am a classical case history of what is going wrong with Ritalin kids. Countless such cases are well documented, worldwide, and that is why many professionals do not recommend Ritalin anymore.

Again, it is shocking how people who are so anti illegal substances, even comparably mild ones such as cannabis, blindly believe in one of the most disputed therapies, in which very potent substances are given to children for a condition that is even not clearly defined or scientifically provable, according to many professionals does not even exist, and is only diagnosed by a guess method - if certain conditions out of a catalogue of several possibles are met then it has to be ADD - no lab tests to confirm, nothing. The only indicator that Ritalin works is that children who fall under this diagnose are artificially silenced, and appear to be well adjusted to the outside world, while going through hel_l and being too young to be able to even know why (we all trust doctors, don't we - they prescribe you a pill - it must be good for you), and having lasting negative side effects in later life.

This Ritalin therapy exposes one of the many blatant hypocrisies in the present drug legalization and debate.

Edited September 4, 2007 by ColPyat

[sriracha john]

Yes, you are wrong when you say it is not a therapeutic medication that can have profoundly beneficial effects.

Your solitary experiences, although personal, are far outweighed by the exhaustive study cited as well as many other studies.

Is Ritalin sometimes mis-prescribed? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Does Ritalin have side effects? Yes, same as EVERY medication in pharmacopoeia.

Is Ritalin the sole cure for ADHD? No, but as the study showed, it's a valuable and crucial adjunct to a combination of therapies.

Are whatever adverse effects you are attesting to now directly attributable to your receiving Ritalin previously? It's an

unknown, particularly in light of your extensive history of illicit drug usage.

It's not, the negative side effects started long before i have ever used any illegal drug. I have never taken illegal drugs, especially the harder ones, in quantities coming even close to Ritalin and its predecessors, which i was prescribed. In fact - the harder drugs i have only taken very carefully, with long pauses in between. Not every drug user is stupid.

Please don't make any long distance diagnoses here by assuming things about my life so it suits your views on me, and/or confirms your very mistaken views on Ritalin therapy.

As you didn't describe the adverse effects, my stating "unknown" is not a "diagnosis."

You may wish to ignore criticism of Ritalin. Why, i don't know - i just hope it's not one of your children, if you have any, who take Ritalin, and you may just want to avoid considering that it could be a terrible mistake.

I don't ignore criticism of Ritalin and my posts have not reflected that. I DO keep it all in context. Your personal experience, while intense and emotional to you, is but one of millions who have taken the medication, the majority of whom have benefited from it. As with any medication, an examination of risk versus benefit, needs to be made. If that assessment was made erroneously in your particular case, then I feel sorry about that, but it doesn't change the fact that for millions of others who were placed on it as part of a comprehensive therapy regimen, it has proven extremely beneficial.

In Thailand, unfortunately, Ritalin is still the choice drug for unruly children.

If it is being dispensed "for unruly children," then it is being done so improperly as that is not the clinical indication for it.

Basically, without going into complete soul exposure here - i am a classical case history of what is going wrong with Ritalin kids. Countless such cases are well documented, worldwide, and that is why many professionals do not recommend Ritalin anymore.

But yet, the vast majority still do when a properly conducted assessment is made. As I have previously stated, Ritalin DOES have side effects and should not be prescribed indiscriminately.

Again, it is shocking how people who are so anti illegal substances, even comparably mild ones such as cannabis, blindly believe in one of the most disputed therapies, in which very potent substances are given to children for a condition that is even not clearly defined or scientifically provable, according to many professionals does not even exist, and is only diagnosed by a guess method - if certain conditions out of a catalogue of several possibles are met then it has to be ADD - no lab tests to confirm, nothing.

Is reading one of your adverse effects you ascribe to prior Ritalin usage? Where did I state my opinion as "anti illegal substances, even comparably mild ones such as cannabis"?

I guess I was under the mistaken belief that you held some rudimentary knowledge about the medical field. If you had, you would know that there are any number of conditions that are treated without a "lab test to confirm"... from the simple, eg. there's no test for a headache.... to the complex, eg. there's not a blood test for schizophrenia.

The only indicator that Ritalin works is that children who fall under this diagnose are artificially silenced, and appear to be well adjusted to the outside world, while going through hel_l and being too young to be able to even know why (we all trust doctors, don't we - they prescribe you a pill - it must be good for you), and having lasting negative side effects in later life.

Obviously this issue is too personal and too emotive for you to discuss rationally, logically, and scientifically... so I'll desist and close by simply stating that all evidence has pointed out that Ritalin has helped millions and harmed proportionally few. It has been mis-prescribed, especially decades ago when it was first introduced. It should not be used as a sole treatment regimen. The decision to initiate it should not be taken lightly, and should only be utilized following a thorough examination and in conjunction with other therapies.

[sbk]

Looks like this has turned into another SJ/Colpyat debate that has very little relevance to the OP about a man who was arrested for dealing crystal meth.

In fact, so far the only relevance I can see is the discussion of whether or not Ritalin as meth or not

[wilko]

Now will someone outline the effects of alcohol consumption?

Brain damage

aggression

memory loss and repeated postings on Thai Visa...about the same thing?

You've hit on the thing annoys me the most about discussion about drugs:

Why is that people only consider the bad side of drugs? Drugs do have a bad side, no argument there. But they also have good sides. It's like trying to decide if people should drive by only talking about car accidents, but never mentioning any of the benefits of driving.

Someone brought up a poor girl who became addicted against her will, her life ending in quite a sad way. I certainly feel sorry for this girl, and certainly this should have never happened -- but -- would you condemn all driving because of that idiot who plowed into passers-by in his mercedez?

Re: alcohol: You raise a good point. What "drugs" are legal and illegal is not just a simple matter of which are not dangerous vs. dangerous. Looking at the history of how various drug laws are passed over the past few centuries -- tons of it is politics. Canada's first drug law (against opium) was largely motivated by racism against the Chinese immigrants who came over to build our railroads. Similarly with the U.S. it's first laws against marijuana were directed at african-americans.

I wouldn't do speed, personally, but to those saying "it's illegal, that's why it's bad!" -- I beg to differ. Amphetamines were available as diet pills until quite recently, and are now available as Ritalin for 10-year old Johnny who can't concentrate in school -- that's it, speed for kids.

You seem to have studied the history and had your experiments.

We mustn't forget that side-effects of any drug are highly personal.

For example the Amphetamines family for the knowledge's sake. Well it never got me inspired enough to be even close to over do it. Amphetamine, Metamphetamine, also cocaine and -derivates felt like waste of money to me at the time. I must address that the ways of consumption of these substances will give very different effects, pill-powder vs. smoking-IV. I did see though most of the frequent users to fall in the trap, guess they liked it.

With MDA or MDMA (methylenedioxymetamphetamine) AKA ecstasy, that can be a very pleasant experience, but I wouldn't ever even consider taking it daily. Well some did.. Anyway I categorize the effects of E in a whole different group from speed etc..

The so called Gate Effect, I think it's called, sorry I'm not native in english, holds much truth to it for the one and only reason. Drugs are illegal, you get your pot, acid and smack from the same guys. They are in the business right. So you will probably end up to prefer heroine as your favourite because it's there and available, great and very addictive. Many opiates are legal within a more or less controlled environment in Europe these days. But not for recreation, there is very little research done. The medical world, and the governments should recognize that a person and psyche has a freedom to choose the recreational use over more than the 2 legalized toxic substances. We can see that the prohibition policy doesn't work at all.

:edit

I'm drunk by the way.

Drunk but good post!

Yes, I will never take cocaine even if they were free for me. It has absolutely no effects on me. And Neither does weed.

That's why I am now taking the legal one that is Guiness!

you were probably ripped off!

(Oh yes........By the man arrested)? - does that keep it on topic?

Edited September 5, 2007 by wilko

[ColPyat]

Obviously this issue is too personal and too emotive for you to discuss rationally, logically, and scientifically... so I'll desist and close by simply stating that all evidence has pointed out that Ritalin has helped millions and harmed proportionally few. It has been mis-prescribed, especially decades ago when it was first introduced. It should not be used as a sole treatment regimen. The decision to initiate it should not be taken lightly, and should only be utilized following a thorough examination and in conjunction with other therapies.

It may be emotive issue for me, but i can still discuss it rationally, logically, and scientifically.

Here a link that supports my view:

http://www.breggin.com/ritalin.html

This is a good one this site:

http://www.breggin.com/methylphen.html

Quote:

METHYLPHENIDATE AND COCAINE Parents are seldom told that methylphenidate is "speed"-that it is pharmacologically classified with amphetamines and causes the very same effects, side effects, and risks. Yet this is well-known in the profession. For example, Treatments of Psychiatric Disorders observes that cocaine, amphetamines, and methylphenidate are "neuropharmacologically alike" (American Psychiatric Association 1989, p. 1221).

Just type "Ritalin" and "ADD" into google, and you will more than a few scientific articles heavily criticizing the administration of Ritalin (a class 2 drug, in the same category as cocaine), and who even severely question the existence of ADD.

This discussion may appear off topic. Nevertheless - children are prescribed class 2 drugs 'legally', for a highly disputed condition that many professionals refuse to accept that it even exists, while adults are arrested for the use and trade of exactly the same class of drugs.

Is it just me - or is there some serious hypocrisy surrounding the subject matter of the thread topic?

[Prakanong]

Obviously this issue is too personal and too emotive for you to discuss rationally, logically, and scientifically... so I'll desist and close by simply stating that all evidence has pointed out that Ritalin has helped millions and harmed proportionally few. It has been mis-prescribed, especially decades ago when it was first introduced. It should not be used as a sole treatment regimen. The decision to initiate it should not be taken lightly, and should only be utilized following a thorough examination and in conjunction with other therapies.

It may be emotive issue for me, but i can still discuss it rationally, logically, and scientifically.

Here a link that supports my view:

http://www.breggin.com/ritalin.html

This is a good one this site:

http://www.breggin.com/methylphen.html

Quote:

METHYLPHENIDATE AND COCAINE Parents are seldom told that methylphenidate is "speed"-that it is pharmacologically classified with amphetamines and causes the very same effects, side effects, and risks. Yet this is well-known in the profession. For example, Treatments of Psychiatric Disorders observes that cocaine, amphetamines, and methylphenidate are "neuropharmacologically alike" (American Psychiatric Association 1989, p. 1221).

Just type "Ritalin" and "ADD" into google, and you will more than a few scientific articles heavily criticizing the administration of Ritalin (a class 2 drug, in the same category as cocaine), and who even severely question the existence of ADD.

This discussion may appear off topic. Nevertheless - children are prescribed class 2 drugs 'legally', for a highly disputed condition that many professionals refuse to accept that it even exists, while adults are arrested for the use and trade of exactly the same class of drugs.

Is it just me - or is there some serious hypocrisy surrounding the subject matter of the thread topic?

This is not my field at all but Greg Critser in his book ~"Generation Rx" puts the oldest of the Pharma "Tribes" as the Ritalin - ADD guy's

He stats it was 1980 berore the American Psychiatric Association put ADD into its diadnostic and statistical manual and that there never was nor ever has been a consensus about the causes of ther disorder.

He states the drug - Ritalin - became the diagnosis ie if you responded to Ritalin you had ADD.

He cites the explosion in cases as having three causes

The Pharma Industry (always wearing the black hat)

Patient Asdvocacy Groups (We are not bad parents - its a disease)

Over incentivised Physicians

He cites two books

Lawrence Diller "Running on Ritalin"

And for a pointed argument against Ritalin - Richard Grandpre "Ritalin Nation"

[deldaley]

[

Hear! Hear!

I have no sympathy for Michael whatsoever, but he does have family in England and they are devastated by what has happened, they are the ones that are having to suffer at this moment in time not knowing what will happen to him, i just hope none of them get to hear of this site and read some of the postings that have been put on!

thank for your comments on having some sympathy for the family we are stuggling to come to terms with what has happened anybody who knows michael knows he has a self destructive nature, i have read the comments posted here and everybody is entitled to their views

michael needs help and because none of us live in thailand if anybody can give any pointers in what we can do next please feel free to post back please dont send abuse we know what he has done is wrong

he is in our prayers and thoughts constantly

Edited September 5, 2007 by deldaley

[Maigo6]

michael needs help and because none of us live in thailand if anybody can give any pointers in what we can do next please feel free to post back please dont send abuse we know what he has done is wrong

he is in our prayers and thoughts constantly

Del, there's not a lot you can do mate.............

I would suggest you contact The British Embassy Bangkok, they will be involved in this case and will give you much better advice than you can get on any Forum.

UK has a deal with Thailand and he will be able to return to UK eventually, no matter what the sentence. No White Farangs have been executed in Thailand for drugs, so no worries there...

I knew a guy that got bail and done a runner, he was caught with 300 E's, let out for health reasons on Bail (nearly 14,000 Pounds} and he fled the scene, returned to UK via Malaysia and a dodgy passport. Although this was a few years ago, the chances are that dodgy passports are not so easily available as they once were.

Good Luck.

[Chopper]

I'm not up on the drug lingo -- is yaa ice the same as yaa baa?

No, it isn't.

Ice is a cleaner form of meta amphetamines, or crystal meth, comes in powder, while Yaa Baa (Yaa Maa - old name) is cheaper, dirtier and comes in pills (mostly red, stronger are the blue ones, heard also of very strong purplish pink ones).

ColPyat, you seem to have your colours mixed up. There are no blue Yaa Baa pills the stronger ones are green and one green pill is placed in approximately every one hundred pills packed ready for distribution.

Edit/typo.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Chopper

[ColPyat]

I'm not up on the drug lingo -- is yaa ice the same as yaa baa?

No, it isn't.

Ice is a cleaner form of meta amphetamines, or crystal meth, comes in powder, while Yaa Baa (Yaa Maa - old name) is cheaper, dirtier and comes in pills (mostly red, stronger are the blue ones, heard also of very strong purplish pink ones).

ColPyat, you seem to have your colours mixed up. There are no blue Yaa Baa pills the stronger ones are green and one green pill is distributed in approximately every one hundred pills packed ready for distribution.

Well, my information is from late '90s up to '04, things may have changed.

[Chopper]

No blue pills in the 90's either.

[ColPyat]

No blue pills in the 90's either.

Absolutely definitely there were/are blue pills - a lightish blue color. I have smoked them once, and i just asked two formerly addicted relatives who are just sitting in front of my house. It appears that they even have a special nickname - 'Hua Gan Choen'.

They are known to be very strong, with a very ugly comedown.

Edited September 6, 2007 by ColPyat

[Neeranam]

No blue pills in the 90's either.

Absolutely definitely there were/are blue pills - a lightish blue color. I have smoked them once, and i just asked two formerly addicted relatives who are just sitting in front of my house. It appears that they even have a special nickname - 'Hua Gan Choen'.

They are known to be very strong, with a very ugly comedown.

I smoked some of them once in 1995. Weren't they called 99s?

[pointofview]

Dealing is trafficking.

Wrong,

Trafficking is moving drugs across borders, a much more serious charge.

In most countries possession for the purpose of sale constitutes trafficking.

name one

[pointofview]

I'm not up on the drug lingo -- is yaa ice the same as yaa baa?

No, it isn't.

Ice is a cleaner form of meta amphetamines, or crystal meth, comes in powder, while Yaa Baa (Yaa Maa - old name) is cheaper, dirtier and comes in pills (mostly red, stronger are the blue ones, heard also of very strong purplish pink ones).

ColPyat, you seem to have your colours mixed up. There are no blue Yaa Baa pills the stronger ones are green and one green pill is placed in approximately every one hundred pills packed ready for distribution.

Edit/typo.

you seem to have a lot of drug knowledge - are you a dealer? Your avator sure loks like one

[Chopper]

No blue pills in the 90's either.

Absolutely definitely there were/are blue pills - a lightish blue color. I have smoked them once, and i just asked two formerly addicted relatives who are just sitting in front of my house. It appears that they even have a special nickname - 'Hua Gan Choen'.

They are known to be very strong, with a very ugly comedown.

ColPyat you are correct my apologies. There does seem to have been a blue tablet produced some years back as well as a few other colours. I am told they are a by product of the pressing process. When the tablets are pressed the first in the batch are sometimes of a different colour and are stronger thus are distributed less frequently.

[sbk]

Dealing is trafficking.

Wrong,

Trafficking is moving drugs across borders, a much more serious charge.

In most countries possession for the purpose of sale constitutes trafficking.

name one

The United States:

A “drug trafficking offense” is defined in the Guidelines

commentary as:

an offense under federal, state, or local law that prohibits the

manufacture, import, export, distribution, or dispensing of a

controlled substance (or a counterfeit substance) or the

possession of a controlled substance (or a counterfeit

substance) with intent to manufacture, import, export,

distribute, or dispense.

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment., n.1(B )(iii). The Guidelines commentary further provides

that conspiracies and attempts to commit such offenses are included in “drug trafficking

offenses.” U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment., n.4.

[sriracha john]

The USA is so cool it inserts a into its laws....

[sbk]

Sorry SJ, copy paste, missed the b