Desoxyn

[VanDamMan]

Soo......uhhh anyone have any experience with this? This might be an option for me. I am still feeling things out.

[Foh_Teej]

meth is generally frowned upon

[stealyourface722]

yea idk if anyone should reccomend meth. I think that its just a last resort to severe cases of add/adhd.

[meyaj]

Something you want to avoid if at all possible. The neurotoxicity is a huge issue.

[jim_morrison]

Isn't meth basically just super charged amphetamine? I can't see the point of it's use when dexedrine an adderall generally seem to work well enough in treating ADD/ADHD and reportedly also SA according to some users.

[VanDamMan]

My doc was saying it is actually great for ADHD. Much cleaner and less side effects than addy or dex. So functionally supposed to be better.

But there is that pesky addiction issue to beware of.

[korey]

If your doctor is willing to prescribe it, go for it. It's on par with Adderall and Dexedrine, so if you know the risks and benefits associated with those drugs, then Desoxyn is just a bit further - more effective for psychiatric stuff, but I'm guessing the euphoria/addiction risk and neurotoxicity are also a bigger issue with this drug.

[jim_morrison]

Originally Posted by korey

If your doctor is willing to prescribe it, go for it. It's on par with Adderall and Dexedrine, so if you know the risks and benefits associated with those drugs, then Desoxyn is just a bit further - more effective for psychiatric stuff, but I'm guessing the euphoria/addiction risk and neurotoxicity are also a bigger issue with this drug.

Yeah plus potential psychosis/paranoia.

[crayzyMed]

Originally Posted by jim_morrison

Yeah plus potential psychosis/paranoia.

I highly doubt there's bigger risk with this drug when prescribed.

[IllusionalFate]

Originally Posted by meyaj

Something you want to avoid if at all possible. The neurotoxicity is a huge issue.

A couple times more toxic than amphetamine is nothing. The FDA would take a look at the trials before giving their stamp of approval, don't you think?

Originally Posted by jim_morrison

Isn't meth basically just super charged amphetamine? I can't see the point of it's use when dexedrine an adderall generally seem to work well enough in treating ADD/ADHD and reportedly also SA according to some users.

The methyl group attached to the nitrogen atom I believe slows metabolism and might be longer-lasting. Also, the lower NE/DA threshold should equal less cardiotoxicity -- along with much less anxiety. Why not take the best amphetamine if it's available?

Originally Posted by VanDamMan

My doc was saying it is actually great for ADHD. Much cleaner and less side effects than addy or dex. So functionally supposed to be better

You have a smart doc.

Originally Posted by crayzyMed

I highly doubt there's bigger risk with this drug when prescribed.

[crayzyMed]

Originally Posted by IllusionalFate

A couple times more toxic than amphetamine is nothing. The FDA would take a look at the trials before giving their stamp of approval, don't you think?


The methyl group attached to the nitrogen atom I believe slows metabolism and might be longer-lasting. Also, the lower NE/DA threshold should equal less cardiotoxicity -- along with much less anxiety. Why not take the best amphetamine if it's available?


You have a smart doc.

I second everything.
Except Meth is more cardiotoxic/neurotoxic then regular amp, but this just isnt a big issue in prescribed doses.

[rocknroll714]

I disagree methamphetamine neurotoxicity is a big deal. You're already playing with fire with amphetamine so do you think increasing the possible damage by several fold is a good idea? Do not recommend.

[meyaj]

Originally Posted by IllusionalFate

A couple times more toxic than amphetamine is nothing. The FDA would take a look at the trials before giving their stamp of approval, don't you think?

Well I guess when can just go nuts with any approved med, then

Yes, it's cleaner-feeling and less anxiety-inducing than pretty much any other option, but d-amp comes close. Neurotoxicity at therapeutic doses on Desoxyn isn't nearly as extreme as with the far bigger doses taken recreationally, but it's significant enough that I'd consider all my other options first. D-amp, on the other hand, while technically neurotoxic, is pretty much negligibly so at the same therapeutic level.

[stealyourface722]

yea i agree if a drug is approved by the FDA, its pretty safe. Plus the people who abuse it and get alot of brain damage usually smoke it and snort it. I dont really think they ingest it. Smoking and snorting gives a more heavy onset and a bigger hit of euphoria fast. If it was ingested in the liver, it would most likely be more healthy. my opinion

[rocknroll714]

Originally Posted by meyaj

Well I guess when can just go nuts with any approved med, then

Yes, it's cleaner-feeling and less anxiety-inducing than pretty much any other option, but d-amp comes close. Neurotoxicity at therapeutic doses on Desoxyn isn't nearly as extreme as with the far bigger doses taken recreationally, but it's significant enough that I'd consider all my other options first. D-amp, on the other hand, while technically neurotoxic, is pretty much negligibly so at the same therapeutic level.

Again this cannot be said for certain and I would not be surprised at all if moderate doses like 20 mg daily were significantly neurotoxic.

Originally Posted by stealyourface722

yea i agree if a drug is approved by the FDA, its pretty safe. Plus the people who abuse it and get alot of brain damage usually smoke it and snort it. I dont really think they ingest it. Smoking and snorting gives a more heavy onset and a bigger hit of euphoria fast. If it was ingested in the liver, it would most likely be more healthy. my opinion

You're forgetting both amphetamine and methamphetamine were approved by the FDA over 65 years ago, long before we even knew they were neurotoxic. Additionally many people who start taking amphetamines for therapeutic purposes inevitably end up abusing it and once the damage is done it never goes away. Ask Vini Vidi Vici about this if necessary -- it is very, very easy to develop an amphetamine addiction even when it's merely prescribed to you.

Sorry to sound like such a buzz kill but people need to know about this ****. These drugs can destroy lives.

[stealyourface722]

yea RnR i do agree. for an abusable substance, amphetamines cause significant health risks and problems. like if your addicted to benzos, it doesnt cause a sh!t ton of damage like amphetamines.

[meyaj]

Originally Posted by stealyourface722

yea i agree if a drug is approved by the FDA, its pretty safe. Plus the people who abuse it and get alot of brain damage usually smoke it and snort it. I dont really think they ingest it. Smoking and snorting gives a more heavy onset and a bigger hit of euphoria fast. If it was ingested in the liver, it would most likely be more healthy. my opinion

Coming from a guy who accused someone else of being a substance abuser because they said they needed benzos to sleep is a little shocking...

In all seriousness though, the ROA can skip first-pass metabolism, improve bioavailability, etc, but that doesn't make it inherently more safe. That just means the exact same dose will have less of an effect when taken orally. It can still be neurotoxic.

There are LOTS of FDA-approved drugs that are neurotoxic, hepatotoxic, cardiotoxic, nephrotoxic, myotoxic, ototoxic, teratogenic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, etc.

FDA-approved doesn't mean safe. All it means is that the people (ALSO implying human error and bias) responsible for approving drugs felt that that the negatives were outweighed by the potential benefit of having the drug on the market AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL, which in the case of meth was ages ago. Drugs can be withdrawn, but the requirements are understandably even a bit looser for withdrawal than they are for denying a New Drug Application in the first place. Suggesting you should throw caution to the wind because the FDA doesn't allow harmful things onto the market is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this site. What about all the countries that disagree with the FDA? Is meth somehow less toxic in the USA?

And yes, there is likely a potential benefit to having methamphetamine on the market, even today. For severe ADHD and ESPECIALLY narcolepsy that doesn't respond to less toxic medications. Having severe GAD and/or Panic Disorder that is exacerbated by stimulants may also make it a more attractive option but any prudent doctor would make their patient try other stimulants first (especially the less anxiogenic ones like d-amp), or even drugs like atemoxetine. I have "very severe" GAD with some panic attacks and I do just fine with d-amp, it's silly to just ASSUME otherwise.

But hey, if you want to go ahead with meth, that's up to you. Yes, it has neurotoxicity issues, but as long as you consider them, you are capable of making your own choices of what to put into your own body. Just don't be so quick to believe that FDA approval implies that it's perfectly safe simply for the fact that it's a more attractive stance for someone in your position. Make an informed decision.

[crayzyMed]

You're forgetting both amphetamine and methamphetamine were approved by the FDA over 65 years ago, long before we even knew they were neurotoxic.

They have been used for that long and even given to kids without any issues.

Sure, they may cause some neurotoxic damage, but it doesnt appear to cause any significant trouble, i think that the fact they have been around for so long is a good argument for those meds being safe.

The rat studies also show that amp only is toxic in excessive doses because of oxidative stress.

[euphoria]

Therapeutic doses shouldn't be too much cause for concern. Still, I'd take a number of antioxidants if I were taking meth or amp.

[stealyourface722]

Originally Posted by meyaj

Coming from a guy who accused someone else of being a substance abuser because they said they needed benzos to sleep is a little shocking...

In all seriousness though, the ROA can skip first-pass metabolism, improve bioavailability, etc, but that doesn't make it inherently more safe. That just means the exact same dose will have less of an effect when taken orally. It can still be neurotoxic.

There are LOTS of FDA-approved drugs that are neurotoxic, hepatotoxic, cardiotoxic, nephrotoxic, myotoxic, ototoxic, teratogenic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, etc.

FDA-approved doesn't mean safe. All it means is that the people (ALSO implying human error and bias) responsible for approving drugs felt that that the negatives were outweighed by the potential benefit of having the drug on the market AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL, which in the case of meth was ages ago. Drugs can be withdrawn, but the requirements are understandably even a bit looser for withdrawal than they are for denying a New Drug Application in the first place. Suggesting you should throw caution to the wind because the FDA doesn't allow harmful things onto the market is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this site. What about all the countries that disagree with the FDA? Is meth somehow less toxic in the USA?

And yes, there is likely a potential benefit to having methamphetamine on the market, even today. For severe ADHD and ESPECIALLY narcolepsy that doesn't respond to less toxic medications. Having severe GAD and/or Panic Disorder that is exacerbated by stimulants may also make it a more attractive option but any prudent doctor would make their patient try other stimulants first (especially the less anxiogenic ones like d-amp), or even drugs like atemoxetine. I have "very severe" GAD with some panic attacks and I do just fine with d-amp, it's silly to just ASSUME otherwise.

But hey, if you want to go ahead with meth, that's up to you. Yes, it has neurotoxicity issues, but as long as you consider them, you are capable of making your own choices of what to put into your own body. Just don't be so quick to believe that FDA approval implies that it's perfectly safe simply for the fact that it's a more attractive stance for someone in your position. Make an informed decision.

does anyone notice on how he targets me? lol
the person said only weed, booze, z drugs confuse his mind enough to make him go to sleep. sorry but i agree to disagree. you are just trying to make me look like im not smart. power to you because your powerless over your problems