Meet the New Meth - P2P

[Clean39T]

This article from The Atlantic has been making the rounds (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...w-meth/620174/). I found it a really good read - actually, I listened to it, link is there to take it in as a pod.. I may not be drawing the right conclusions from it but my takeaway is that: 1) the new meth and its impacts on users calls for new approaches to fighting it and trying to deal with those who are already hollowed out by it, potentially irreversibly; 2) meth addicts living in tents/trailers are to be avoided at all costs by untrained, unprepared individuals (cyclists, homeowners, etc.); and 3) more programs are needed to prevent those who are being pushed into homelessness from falling into meth addiction and that underworld. It's one of the saddest and most frustrating long-form articles I've taken in recently. I still recommend it though..

[beeatnik]

Haven't read San Fransicko but I was surprised at how persuasively the author presented his ideas on addiction and crime on the Joe Rogan podcast.

National bestselling author of APOCALYPSE NEVER skewers progressives for the mishandling of America’s faltering cities.

Progressives claimed they knew how to solve homelessness, inequality, and crime. But in cities they control, progressives made those problems worse.

Michael Shellenberger has lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for thirty years. During that time, he advocated for the decriminalization of drugs, affordable housing, and alternatives to jail and prison. But as homeless encampments spread, and overdose deaths skyrocketed, Shellenberger decided to take a closer look at the problem.

What he discovered shocked him. The problems had grown worse not despite but because of progressive policies. San Francisco and other West Coast cities — Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland — had gone beyond merely tolerating homelessness, drug dealing, and crime to actively enabling them.

San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible.



https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko...s=books&sr=1-3

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5Nx...Q360-OycjYh5Cg

Full disclosure: my home is within a mile of hundreds of "meth encampments." Residents of those encampments occasionally leave shoes, bikes, undergarments in the car port. A few years ago, minutes after discovering an abandoned bike (an extra large hybrid), I went inside to call bulky item pickup. Then as I was walking to the driveway, a late 20s/early 30s 5'6" woman, wearing a filthy gown and no shoes, rode off. I thought: only a meth addict could comfortably ride a bike shoeless.

[Clean39T]

Haven't read San Fransicko but I was surprised at how persuasively the author presented his ideas on addiction and crime on the Joe Rogan podcast.

National bestselling author of APOCALYPSE NEVER skewers progressives for the mishandling of America’s faltering cities.

Progressives claimed they knew how to solve homelessness, inequality, and crime. But in cities they control, progressives made those problems worse.

Michael Shellenberger has lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for thirty years. During that time, he advocated for the decriminalization of drugs, affordable housing, and alternatives to jail and prison. But as homeless encampments spread, and overdose deaths skyrocketed, Shellenberger decided to take a closer look at the problem.

What he discovered shocked him. The problems had grown worse not despite but because of progressive policies. San Francisco and other West Coast cities — Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland — had gone beyond merely tolerating homelessness, drug dealing, and crime to actively enabling them.

San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible.



https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko...s=books&sr=1-3

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5Nx...Q360-OycjYh5Cg

Full disclosure: my home is within a mile of hundreds of "meth encampments." Residents of those encampments occasionally leave shoes, bikes, undergarments in the car port. A few years ago, minutes after discovering an abandoned bike (an extra large hybrid), I went inside to call bulky item pickup. Then as I was walking to the driveway, a late 20s/early 30s 5'6" woman, wearing a filthy gown and no shoes, rode off. I thought: only a meth addict could comfortably ride a bike shoeless.

Not saying you are doing this but blaming it on Progressives sort of misses the clusterfk of policies implemented by the other side of the aisle (and "moderate" Democrats) that have brought the massive amounts of income inequality, social inequality, education inequality, etc. that created a fertile ground for the opioid and meth crisis to take root in. Yeah, some of the "liberal" cities have effed up the response the last half-dozen years or so, but they didn't start the fire. Nevertheless, the fire is raging - so, what to do..

My point in posting the article though was just to raise general awareness of just how awful the problem is for everyone involved - some may not be aware of the changes in the street drugs that are out there... I wasn't.

[beeatnik]

The title may be intentionally sensationalistic. I'll try to read the book this weekend. What I found compelling, in the podcast, was the thesis that treating the new class of violent users and habitual offenders as purely persons suffering from the pathology of addiction is naive at best and inhumane at worst. But no simple solutions as the options only seem to be treatment or incarceration (back to that cycle).

It's bad in LA.

Not saying you are doing this but blaming it on Progressives sort of misses the clusterfk of policies implemented by the other side of the aisle (and "moderate" Democrats) that have brought the massive amounts of income inequality, social inequality, education inequality, etc. that created a fertile ground for the opioid and meth crisis to take root in. Yeah, some of the "liberal" cities have effed up the response the last half-dozen years or so, but they didn't start the fire. Nevertheless, the fire is raging - so, what to do..

My point in posting the article though was just to raise general awareness of just how awful the problem is for everyone involved - some may not be aware of the changes in the street drugs that are out there... I wasn't.

[smontanaro]

I'm sorry, but I'm all out of free articles on The Atlantic for the month (obviously, not a subscriber). I'm sure I'm just out of the loop or dense, the the only thing "P2P" means to me is "peer-to-peer". I find no other online definitions. Is that what the usage in the article title refers to? If so, in what way is "peer-to-peer" appropriate when discussing meth addiction?

[AngryScientist]

I'm sorry, but I'm all out of free articles on The Atlantic for the month (obviously, not a subscriber). I'm sure I'm just out of the loop or dense, the the only thing "P2P" means to me is "peer-to-peer". I find no other online definitions. Is that what the usage in the article title refers to? If so, in what way is "peer-to-peer" appropriate when discussing meth addiction?

from the article (I didnt know either...):

There was another way to make methamphetamine. Before the ephedrine method had been rediscovered, this other method had been used by the Hell’s Angels and other biker gangs, which had dominated a much smaller meth trade into the ’80s. Its essential chemical was a clear liquid called phenyl-2-propanone—P2P. Many combinations of chemicals could be used to make P2P. Most of these chemicals were legal, cheap, and toxic: cyanide, lye, mercury, sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, nitrostyrene. The P2P process of making meth was complicated and volatile. The bikers’ cooking method gave off a smell so rank that it could only be done in rural or desert outposts, and the market for their product was limited.

[zachateseverything]

Not saying you are doing this but blaming it on Progressives sort of misses the clusterfk of policies implemented by the other side of the aisle (and "moderate" Democrats) that have brought the massive amounts of income inequality, social inequality, education inequality, etc. that created a fertile ground for the opioid and meth crisis to take root in. Yeah, some of the "liberal" cities have effed up the response the last half-dozen years or so, but they didn't start the fire. Nevertheless, the fire is raging - so, what to do..

My point in posting the article though was just to raise general awareness of just how awful the problem is for everyone involved - some may not be aware of the changes in the street drugs that are out there... I wasn't.

Liberal cities, particularly those in warm climates, have support systems that make being homeless survivable. but I agree that it's awful disingenuous to blame the existence of homelessness on those kinds of policies. Also, at this point in time the Joe Rogan podcast is pretty cringe. Any guest who isn't an entertainer talking about their life growing up should be taken with a massive grain of salt.

anyway, drugs are cheap and readily available. we have an awful lot of people in this country that aren't happy with their day to day lives. For someone on the wrong side of the income inequality gap it's pretty easy to fall into a self-perpetuating cycle of destructive habits. I watch this happen with my older brother and countless other people from my part of rural Pennsylvania.

My brother and I grew up in college town, to pretty well off parents who both had careers and college degrees. Affording a college degree wasn't much of a stretch. After high school, I went off to a state school, got an engineering degree, and then moved into a fulfilling career of my own that doesn't involve busting my ass to complete physical labor. Easy peasy.

My older brother took a different route. as a teenager he bristled at authority. He didn't have a desire to get a degree though he was certainly smart enough to pursue something in computer science should he have wanted to. Instead, he wanted to "have fun with his friends." He moved out shortly after graduating HS, moved in with some friends, and alternated between working short stints at low wage jobs, partying, and drifting around on various couches.

When he was about 30 he met a girl, stopped partying, and got a decent job. Eventually they were engaged and bought a house together. We thought he had finally figured it out. The problem was, he had a job that paid well but was physically taxing. He was working in a grocery warehouse putting together pallets of orders. It was a rough job. You're on your feet running around all day. Eventually he fell back into old habits of using stimulants. It started with caffeine pills. Then he got a legal adderall perscription to treat his ADD. Eventually he dabbled with coke but then quickly transitioned to bathsalts because it was cheaper and legal. That's when the shit hit the fan.

That set off a sequence where he would use, do something absolutely ridiculous (3 hour standoff with a swat team while barricaded in his attic during a psychotic break, set his own house on fire in an attempt to kill himself) spend time in jail or rehab, get out, drift around homeless for a couple months, go back to using, and repeat. In two years he had physically aged ten. His personality was completely changed. He became entirely focused on short term things like feeding his addiction. His sense of humor was gone. His mental state became more and more fragile. Eventually he took his own life after being denied a bed at a long term state mental facility. The toll it took on my parents was immense.

I've since seen about a half dozen or so other friends from my youth go down a similar trail.

[Octave]

I'll stay out of the political discussion but had to pop in for a comment on the actual chemistry being discussed here. Racemic methamphetamine (containing both D-methamphetamine and L-methamphetamine) and a well-purified isomeric amphetamine have both been around for ages, and P2P syntheses never really fell out of fashion (except for a very brief period when pseudoephedrine as a precursor really took off). Even the old DEA newsletter, now discontinued, which would detail noteworthy seizures of drugs, used to note high isomeric purity in occasional batches of methamphetamine. Point being: discussing this like it's a new drug problem and not just an iteration of an old one is a bit misleading. The case with heroin or oxycontin being adulterated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids is another discussion, one which really does revolve around a "new" drug problem. But calling high-purity d-methamphetamine a "new meth" is pretty sensationalized.

[Clean39T]

I'll stay out of the political discussion but had to pop in for a comment on the actual chemistry being discussed here. Racemic methamphetamine (containing both D-methamphetamine and L-methamphetamine) and a well-purified isomeric amphetamine have both been around for ages, and P2P syntheses never really fell out of fashion (except for a very brief period when pseudoephedrine as a precursor really took off). Even the old DEA newsletter, now discontinued, which would detail noteworthy seizures of drugs, used to note high isomeric purity in occasional batches of methamphetamine. Point being: discussing this like it's a new drug problem and not just an iteration of an old one is a bit misleading. The case with heroin or oxycontin being adulterated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids is another discussion, one which really does revolve around a "new" drug problem. But calling high-purity d-methamphetamine a "new meth" is pretty sensationalized.

Thanks for that. I may have misrepresented things in my opening post as far as the history and "newness". But I think the takeaway that the most popular version of meth out there now is having a different human impact than before is still valid. Maybe I'm wrong. It just seems like the level of psychosis among the addicted is different than it was... and maybe that points to different ways of dealing with the situation. I know that it is influencing choices I make, or will be making, when I'm back cycling in Portland, or really doing anything in an area where people under the sway of those influences are present.

[Clean39T]

The toll it took on my parents was immense.

Thanks for sharing - I imagine it took a toll on you as well.. The number of lives ruined by drugs just boggles the mind. I've lost friends to it as well. And it is getting worse year after year. The only thing I can point back to is economic policies that have made an increasingly smaller number of people insanely rich while leaving an increasingly larger number of people struggling to get by, find meaning, deal with setbacks, and generally just live a dignified life. No human starts out in 4th grade thinking "I want to live in a tent addicted to meth.." - it's a series of A/B decisions and determinations that push them in that direction, some under their control, many not. Sliding doors, and doors being slammed shut. It's hard to think that anything is going to improve without a massive reset and complete change in our priorities as a society. Unfortunately I don't think that is going to happen until the problem gets bad enough that the wealthy and powerful folks' lives are truly being impacted - when they can't get their services/goods they need to live their privileged insular lives and can't ignore what's going on around them. Maybe we are close to that with the labor and supply-chain shortages, the in-you-face homelessness that seems to be everywhere now, collapsing of health-care services, or the breakdown in civil society in many cities that is bringing the crime and desperation closer to their doors. I guess we'll see. Not that we know what will be on the other side of that either. It could be Children of Men, or we could somehow stumble into a democratic-socialist utopia.. Oooff. Too much for a Thursday.

[bigbill]

I live in a town along I-40 in NW Arizona. We have an enormous meth and homeless problem and for the most part, the two issues are linked. We had an employee that was so messed up that he left his rig in a bathroom after shooting up. If an accident or injury occurs at work, the affected employees are sent for drug testing. On many occasions the person tests positive for amphetamines. People wander out in the streets chasing invisible animals, start yelling at everyone, making threats, and passing out in parking lots. I never liked going to Walmart, but now I won't go near the place because part of the parking lot is a homeless camp with meth addicts.

Not sure how to solve this, but something has to change.

[takashi]

"my home is within a mile of hundreds of "meth encampments."
@beeatnik

where are these located if I may ask?

[beeatnik]

The encampments are concentrated in parks, freeway embankments and the bike path on the LA stretch of the Arroyo Seco. My progressive town keeps them just outside the city limits. It’s as if there were an invisible wall of respectability. That and a likely active and effective yet humane police dept (for the most part) working in the proverbial shadows. I haven’t seen a traffic stop in town during the pandemic. When I was a kid LAPD would ticket me twice a year on average.

Within a mile in 3 directions the median home price is 1.5M.

Exponentially worse since 2015:

https://archive.kpcc.org/programs/of...omeless-camps/

https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la-west...-highland-park

"my home is within a mile of hundreds of "meth encampments."
@beeatnik

where are these located if I may ask?

[GrantM]

The encampments are concentrated in parks, freeway embankments and the bike path on the LA stretch of the Arroyo Seco. My progressive town keeps them just outside the city limits. It’s as if there were an invisible wall of respectability. That and a likely active and effective yet humane police dept (for the most part) working in the proverbial shadows. I haven’t seen a traffic stop in town during the pandemic. When I was a kid LAPD would ticket me twice a year on average.

Within a mile in 3 directions the median home price is 1.5M.

I don't understand what the political labels have to do with any of the issues. Have you got conservative coalitions fighting to get local power so they can finally get in there an solve the problems?
Or do they just move away? These are hard problems to solve, that most people aren't the slightest bit interested in solving.

-g

[j44ke]

As a card-carrying Progressive (I found the card in my meth lab - someone dropped it,) I am tired of being blamed for everything. Communism, homosexuality, the decay of the family, drug addiction, apathy, the corruption of youth, political malaise, etc. etc. etc.

I'm going back to being a Good Ole Stick in the Mud. Anyone wants me I'll be somewhere in the woods stuck in the mud.

[johnnyace]

I don't understand what the political labels have to do with any of the issues.

It has everything to do with the issues. Here in Oregon, the "progressives" have decriminalized all drugs. As such, we are now a destination for drug addicts. In Portland, the mayor, Ted Wheeler, early on was marching with the likes of BLM and Antifa, offering encouragement for anarchy. The police have been defunded, and homeless camps are rampant. Just yesterday, one of my friends was in a shoe store close to PDX, when four men entered the store with a giant trash bag, and proceeded to clear the shelves into the bag, filling it up and then leaving, unchallenged. The police are often fearful of responding to calls because of possible blowback. Portland has basically become a parody of itself... "Keep Portland Weird" indeed. Their chickens have come home to roost.

[beeatnik]

I don't understand what the political labels have to do with any of the issues. Have you got conservative coalitions fighting to get local power so they can finally get in there an solve the problems?
Or do they just move away? These are hard problems to solve, that most people aren't the slightest bit interested in solving.

-g

That's exactly it. I'm in a liberal town (85% for Biden) which has zero tolerance for encampments or visible homelessness.
While across an artificial boundary a few hundred feet down the Arroyo, the City of Los Angeles, next door, deals with the public health issues and most of the crime.

[GrantM]

Progressives claimed they knew how to solve homelessness, inequality, and crime. But in cities they control, progressives made those problems worse.

Doesn't sound to me like these people are very progressive if they can't fix the problems of the most vulnerable.
maybe they need a new political label, like "ineffectives". "Vote for me, i'm ineffective!"


-g

[bcm119]

Haven't read San Fransicko but I was surprised at how persuasively the author presented his ideas on addiction and crime on the Joe Rogan podcast.

National bestselling author of APOCALYPSE NEVER skewers progressives for the mishandling of America’s faltering cities.

Progressives claimed they knew how to solve homelessness, inequality, and crime. But in cities they control, progressives made those problems worse.

Michael Shellenberger has lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for thirty years. During that time, he advocated for the decriminalization of drugs, affordable housing, and alternatives to jail and prison. But as homeless encampments spread, and overdose deaths skyrocketed, Shellenberger decided to take a closer look at the problem.

What he discovered shocked him. The problems had grown worse not despite but because of progressive policies. San Francisco and other West Coast cities — Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland — had gone beyond merely tolerating homelessness, drug dealing, and crime to actively enabling them.

San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible.



https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko...s=books&sr=1-3

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5Nx...Q360-OycjYh5Cg

Full disclosure: my home is within a mile of hundreds of "meth encampments." Residents of those encampments occasionally leave shoes, bikes, undergarments in the car port. A few years ago, minutes after discovering an abandoned bike (an extra large hybrid), I went inside to call bulky item pickup. Then as I was walking to the driveway, a late 20s/early 30s 5'6" woman, wearing a filthy gown and no shoes, rode off. I thought: only a meth addict could comfortably ride a bike shoeless.

I haven’t read San Fransicko either, but I plan to. At first glance, and after listening to him on Rogan (I avoid that dude-bro usually), he seems to make some good points about taking the compassion too far, but I think he’s too narrow in his blame. I think there are two big reasons why west coast cities are failing to solve the problem: first, the programs and policies charged with helping the addicted and mentally ill are a patchwork of inconsistency, and second, the “carrot” of a stable life is not all that appealing anymore.

It's not really progressivism per se that is the problem, it’s the pattern in which polices are implemented. I identify as progressive, but admit that one trait of the modern ultra-progressive is extreme narcissism, and that plays out as the “too many cooks in the kitchen” syndrome when applied to a lot of problems: everyone wants to lead their own little non-profit, to one-up their progressive friends by saying they are “leading” something important. I think caring for the addicted and mentally ill would be far more effective if there was a statewide program, with consistency across geography and policy, but this solution isn’t attractive to the typical highly educated progressive with an outsized ego. It’s not very sexy to be a worker bee for a state program, but it would probably be better for the folks on the street if all of these smart, motivated people worked on the same team.

Schellenberger also mentions the lack of a “carrot” to persuade people to get back to leading productive lives one step at a time. But what does that look like in today’s economy? Around here at least, it means renting a godawful apartment 90 minutes from your workplace and enduring daily traffic nightmares, low pay, and inhumane treatment by faceless corporate employers. I suspect a lot of people on the street already know this, and in many cases it played a role in how they ended up addicted to drugs. There’s no effective carrot until inequality is addressed in the economy. Anyway, my 2 cents.

[spopepro]

It's not really progressivism per se that is the problem, it’s the pattern in which polices are implemented. I identify as progressive, but admit that one trait of the modern ultra-progressive is extreme narcissism, and that plays out as the “too many cooks in the kitchen” syndrome when applied to a lot of problems: everyone wants to lead their own little non-profit, to one-up their progressive friends by saying they are “leading” something important. I think caring for the addicted and mentally ill would be far more effective if there was a statewide program, with consistency across geography and policy, but this solution isn’t attractive to the typical highly educated progressive with an outsized ego. It’s not very sexy to be a worker bee for a state program, but it would probably be better for the folks on the street if all of these smart, motivated people worked on the same team.

I don't think you're wrong, but this isn't "progressivism" it's called "charity"--the power remains where it currently is while "helping" others but not enough to make them equals. Folks get the two confused a lot. I agree that there's a lot of interest in charity, but not a lot of interest in the sort of powershift that's required for structural change.