
High Crime in the Cocaine Industry - lermontov
https://meanjin.com.au/essays/high-crime-in-the-cocaine-industry/
======
tango24
> One aircraft was being pursued over Homestead, Florida in 1994, so ditched
> its cargo. A 34-kilogram bag of cocaine fell directly into a back yard where
> chief of police Curt Ivy was chatting with the Neighborhood Crime Watch
> about what to look out for in their quiet community.

Well that is ironic.

------
kneel
Cocaine is a terrible drug that can severely alter one's personality. Most
people turn into self centered twats.

One of the most addictive substances known, legalization, acceptance and wide
use could have drastic effects on society.

Apparently some have already forgotten about the crack epidemic of the 90s.
Many cities are still dealing with the crack generation offspring and the
mentally ill crackheads from that era.

~~~
stephengillie
It says a lot about the state of HN's community that this post is poorly
received, while posts supporting cocaine use are seeing more support. This
used to be a techie playground; between comments in the heroin thread
yesterday[∆] and in this thread today, now HN seems like a druggie haven.

[∆][https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18193884](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18193884)

~~~
Thriptic
It's poorly received because it's hyperbolic. I've been around many powder
cocaine users and have never seen someone's personality radically change. It's
a stronger version of caffeine with more euphoria, that's about it. Given the
health impacts, I dont recommend using it, but people should be honest about
what this thing is, what it does, and how it feels, not participate in fear
mongering.

~~~
anothergoogler
I stronger version of coffee _that might give you a heart attack_.

------
monotone666
Pure cocaine is a peaceful subtle drug. The product produced by cartels, even
at 90% purity is cut with amphetamines, bath salts, and other gross drugs.

Pure cocaine is habit forming but the cravings seem to be more of a daily than
a hourly thing, which is the case with cut products.

If you do cocaine you can practice harm reduction by washing in acetone, and
if you have it available, cloraform. “Pink cocaine” available on the dark net
has been washed using the above methods, then cut with b vitamins.

~~~
marcoperaza
Tell yourself whatever you want, but the awful cardiovascular and neurological
effects of cocaine are well-documented and their mechanisms are well-
understood. Impurities and adulterations don't make things better, but
_cocaine itself is awful for you_.

~~~
newnewpdro
What little experience I've had with cocaine just left me with the impression
that it's like caffeine turned up to 11.

This changed my views on both caffeine and cocaine.

I now see caffeine and caffeinated beverages as more problematic, habbit-
forming stimulants which I avoid consuming far more than prior to the "my
newly rich friends discovered cocaine" phase. And cocaine as a largely
overhyped, relatively benign (for an illegal drug with such a reputation) but
habit-forming substance made desirable by the media, and expensive by scarcity
the war on drugs creates.

They're more similar than they are different, and it seems absurd to me that
one is legal while the other isn't.

~~~
nkozyra
But cocaine isn't just caffeine dialed up to 11. The legality of one versus
the other has to do more with cocaine's far greater acute and long term health
risks when consumed at levels that provide effect.

~~~
barry-cotter
If the normal way of consuming caffeine was snorting a powder that was mostly
the pharmaceutically active conpund and bulking agents they’d look reasonably
similar. If cocaine was available legally as tea or as powder but taxed much
higher there’d be a lot of coca tea drinkers who wouldn’t touch the powder.

The dose, and the delivery method, make the poison.

~~~
nkozyra
That's why I specifically wrote to the point of effect. You can snort caffeine
to the point of effect and healthy individuals will be fine.

The distinction between compounds goes far beyond dosage and delivery
mechanism.

~~~
jrochkind1
> You can snort caffeine to the point of effect and healthy individuals will
> be fine.

How can you possibly know that? Do you have scientific research to cite?

I would assume that someone that ingests enough caffeine (by any means) to
"the point of effect" (whatever that means) is going to have some serious risk
of heart attack. I know several people who have wound up in the hospital for
monitoring after drinking, oh, about 8 cups of coffee within several hours.
They didn't realize it was the coffee, they were just like, uh oh, something
is not right with my heart beat. The doctors say "how much coffee have you had
today? Yeah, you'll probably be okay, but don't do that again."

~~~
nkozyra
> How can you possibly know that? Do you have scientific research to cite?

Of course, this is well worn territory:

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5445139/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5445139/)

The method of delivery is not my claim, so someone would need to show that
snorting to effect has a greater negative effect on health than drinking.

"Effect" here typically means desired or pleasurable palpable impact on mood
or behavior. For both caffeine and coca that typically entails euphoria and an
increase in energy. Beyond a certain point that trend reverses and negative
effect come into play.

Anecdotes aren't particularly useful metrics for these discussions, frankly.

~~~
jrochkind1
From that article,

> The threshold of caffeine toxicity appears to be around 400 mg/day in
> healthy adults

That's only about 4 cups of coffee, man! Or just two "NoDoz".

The article does not mention snorting caffeine. It seems reasonable to me to
predict that if people starting snorting caffeine in an effort to get greater
neuropharmacalogical effects, it would be pretty easy to go over 400mg.

There are few (if any?) documented deaths from caffeine overdose from drinking
coffee (or even energy drinks), probably because the delivery mechanism means
you need to drink a lot of beverage to get that much caffeine (8+ cups of
coffee is really gonna fill up your stomach etc.). There ARE documented deaths
from caffeine overdose from caffeine pills etc. though. Mechanism of delivery
matters. The range between usual caffeine dose and an amount that can be
dangerous is smaller than most people think (in that respect similar to
aspirin and acetaminophen).

I am not sure what you mean by "to the point of effect", but I don't believe
the literature you cite supports your claim that "You can snort caffeine to
the point of effect and healthy individuals will be fine." Method of delivery
does matter, in part because it effects practical dosages.

In fact, we don't need to guess, while as far as I know nobody's snorting it,
highly-concentrated caffeine in powder/granule form (presumably similar to
what we'd hypothetically imagine people snorting) _is_ documented as
dangerous:

> "FDA Warns Consumers About Pure and Highly Concentrated Caffeine"

> "The FDA advises consumers to avoid pure and highly concentrated caffeine
> sold in bulk as powdered and liquid dietary supplements."

> "It can be extremely difficult to accurately measure pure and highly
> concentrated caffeine, and you can easily consume a dangerous or even lethal
> amount."

> "Dietary supplements consisting of pure or highly concentrated caffeine are
> potentially dangerous, and serious adverse events can result, including
> death."

\--
[https://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/ProductsIngredie...](https://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/ProductsIngredients/ucm604315.htm)

> "On May 27, his brother found him unresponsive on their living room floor.
> In an effort to increase his energy, Mr. Stiner had used caffeine powder a
> friend had purchased on Amazon, but miscalculated the dosage, overdosed and
> died. The medical examiner said the cause of death was “cardiac arrhythmia
> and seizure, due to acute caffeine toxicity due to excessive caffeine
> ingestion.”"

\-- [https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/18/caffeine-powder-
po...](https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/18/caffeine-powder-poses-deadly-
risks-2/)

~~~
nkozyra
I don't think you're making a counterargument here; I'm not saying caffeine
doesn't have negative impacts on health at any level. I'm saying to the point
of effect (which again I detailed), it is safer than cocaine is comparably.

The mechanism of ingest only matters if the latency of effect is so great that
a user goes past the point of pleasurable effect. Drinking or snorting cocaine
has negative physiological effect closer to the point of pleasurable
pyschological effect than does caffeine.

~~~
jrochkind1
That's like saying fentanyl isn't particularly dangerous, because you aren't
going to OD on the level that is pleasurable. Not how it works. If the
difference in dose between what you would have wanted and a toxic dose is
relatively small, that makes it dangerous.

Pure or high-concentration caffeine is quite clearly dangerous.

~~~
nkozyra
> That's like saying fentanyl isn't particularly dangerous, because you aren't
> going to OD on the level that is pleasurable.

It's actually the total opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying that caffeine
_specifically_ is less likely to do that than cocaine (or fentanyl).

> Pure or high-concentration caffeine is quite clearly dangerous.

This is another argument I did not make.

------
tcj_phx
Cocaine is a sort of anti-depressant. When used as unrefined coca leaf, it's
relatively safe. Three Catholic Popes have partaken of coca leaf tea on visits
to South America [0] -- it helps people deal with altitude sickness while they
adapt. Coca leaf extract was used in the original Coca-Cola formula. The
stimulant was removed in 1903 [1], leaving just the coca leaf flavoring and
some of the plant's other beneficial compounds.

[0] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/09/its-not-
cocain...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/09/its-not-cocaine-what-
you-need-to-know-about-the-popes-coca-drink)

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-
Cola#Coca_%E2%80%93_cocai...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-
Cola#Coca_%E2%80%93_cocaine)

There are drugs that are mood-elevating substances sort-of similar to cocaine,
but without the euphoria and crash. They are available as prescriptions and in
the market (slightly less pure, but good enough for my dog). This class of
drugs mostly fell out of favor as their patents expired and the drug industry
came out with newer patent-protected generations of drugs.

I met a fellow who tried cocaine in college. He said, "been there, done that,
don't need to use again". People who get hooked on cocaine are those who are
severely depressed -- they like cocaine because it helps them feel normal.

I've never used cocaine myself, but I've watched the use crack cocaine. Too
much makes the user temporarily psychotic, which is why it's now an illegal
substance. I learned from a Hacker News comment/submission a while ago that
cocaine causes its harm by shredding the mitochondria. [searching] Ahh, found
it, this one:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10956058](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10956058)

~~~
cik2e
"been there, done that, don't need to use again"

Agree with this sentiment. I have a super addictive personality but the
diminishing returns are so extreme that after an hour or two it's just a waste
of time. I've never really understood how people can develop a problem with
coke given how expensive it is.

~~~
pimeys
The loop works like this: you start drinking, you get drunk, too drunk to
drink more so you buy cocaine, happily drinking and doing cocaine until the
next day.

It goes hand in hand with alcohol and if you're developing a problem with
booze it's easy to continue with cocaine.

------
stephengillie
> _Because more than 500 kilograms of leaves are needed for just one kilogram
> of cocaine, requiring almost two hectares, vast plantations are essential
> for production in any serious volume..._

How much water does it take to produce a kilo? This seems like a much less
environmentally-friendly vice than cannabis or even tobacco.

~~~
toomanybeersies
It's generally grown in South American rain forests, I would imagine they
don't use irrigation, so the water requirement is irrelevant.

~~~
stephengillie
Not irrelevant, just not tracked. In a Bayesian sense, we're using water, but
we don't know how much.

------
jrochkind1
The illegal economy is a huge part of the overall economy (nationally or
globally). We would benefit from more economic research into it, although
there are obvious challenges to doing such research. But I liked this article.

------
poisonarena
Who ever wrote this article spelled Colombia wrong 4 times

~~~
mahesh_rm
And spelled plata (money) as plato (dish). Also, was grossly off with prices
of cocaine paste sourced from fields (it's actually less than half of reported
price of 3k kilo). And about the fact you can easily buy it at the source
without running into big issues, as in: almost certain death.

~~~
55555
I paid like 3 dollars for a single gram in Medellin and I'm a dumb foreigner
who speaks no spanish so the field price should be like 1000 dollars a kilo or
less

~~~
bfuller
You are the same person claiming to have used "pure cocaine" because it was in
Colombia. Your product was cut, which is why it was so cheap. Pure cocaine
easily turns into an oil so socially consumable amounts almost have to be cut
to use efficiently.

