The Economist is bullish on coke, bearish on meth

ive never tried coke but i do meth and its fucking amazing while im on it but it has like 101 side effects: insomnia(my 4th sleepless night), bad taste in mouth, dry mouth, hypothermia on my legs and arms, moodswings, hairloss, loss of appitite and weightloss(good thing!), some social anxiety, paranioa, i ramble on about the randomest shit and dont think before i speak, MEMORY LOSS***, umm i forgot the rest haha. although i gotta say i used to smoke weed daily for a couple years and im waaaaay happier doing meth because it brought me closer to my best friend, although ive ran everyone else off because i get mad at them sooo easily. So idk about meth vs coke but i always say: shrooms and speed, booze and weed, but i draws the line at crack. dunno why. im broke and im sick of being burnt out 24/7. meth is the perfect sollution i guess. doing something like adderal helps when i dont have much $ and need a fix and there so easy to get

Meth is only dangerous if you have an addictive personality and have a tendency to abuse things. If you use it responsibly and view it as a tool instead of a party then we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Hahahaha

Yes, most of the costly and illegal drugs are actually cheap to produce/refine properly. They're usually just plant extracts.

Added to that of course, is that if they weren't a law enforcement issue then you could grow most of them yourself anyway and use the natural versions. There's not that many of the well-knowns that actually require you know about chemistry.

And wouldn't it be fun to be able to take legal classes in making chemical psychedelics and the like.

Just like to call attention to this short article about cocaine production and the devastation it wreaks on the environment -

Snort">[link] coke, shaft the environment

Apologies if previously posted but I'm a relative newcomer to this site.

sorry, yeah, chocolate, not the same. In my defense, I was drinking.

I don't think cocaine is in any way safe - but generally you're right, many drug legalisation supporters point out that it's possible to be addicted to some substance and still function without any major problems. Compare to the situation of former heroin addicts - many are now dependent on methadone, but it isn't a substance that causes dramatic consequences. Also because it's a pharmaceutical quality drug... Price also makes a huge difference - tobacco addicts are generally able to support their habit (however, when my granny gave up smoking, it was because of the prices. Any reason for quitting is good...), but lots of people addicted to illegal drugs turn to crime to get money for a daily dose...
Btw, I think you meant COCA and not COCOA? ;)

I wrote about meth vs. coke neurotoxicity in this">[link] posting a while back, with good references.

This is true; methamphetamine has been proven to be neurotoxic, which of course means it causes cell disruptions in the nervous system. The same is not true of cocaine. Imagine, a drug that lasts a short enough time that you can sleep at a normal hour, while still provides a high of the (punny) highest quality. Too bad it's so expensive.

One thing that always troubled me; what is necessary to isolate sugar from sugar cane or beets? Is this process not similar to the isolation of cocaine from cocoa plant matter? Why then, is sugar 2$ a Kg, while Cocaine is, well, significantly more. Imagine, if cocaine and opium and marijuana, hell, all drugs, were priced relative to the cost required for their production in a legal setting? You could BE an addict and work for minimum wage. As we all know, the right drugs make an otherwise boring situation, much more exciting. Cocaine lozenges, packs of joints instead of cigarettes, vali-gum, if drugs were cheap, well, wouldn't.....

***

I'm a dreamer I guess.

meth IS way more dangerous...bllaahh!