Talk:Crack cocaine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Someone write iwiki

[[ru:Крэк]] --Mercury13 kiev (talk) 11:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Serious racism correction

"Some claim that this disparity amounts to institutional racism, as crack cocaine is more common in inner-city black communities, and powder cocaine in white suburban communities"

As I seem to constantly have to point out to people, white people are poor too. Saying an inner-city area is predominantly black is ridiculous. An inner city area is predominantly poor, for your information.

Therefor the racism is against poor people, not against Black people. If it were against black people, the sentences would be regulated by race, not by substance.

I think that just like everyone else, you are playing the racism card to avoid a far, far more sinister form of discrimination. A discrimination that poor white people are taking alongside poor black people. With the difference that, unlike blacks, poor whites get no public sympathy whatsoever and have been completely ABANDONED. Now that ... is racism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.65.242.154 (talk) 05:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Health risks

The health issues section is very poor. It says crack can cause 'crack lung', but doesn't mention what this actually is. It says it can cause cardiovasucalar problems, but not which ones. However a whole paragraph is given over to 'crack lip', which is surely a minor problem in the big scheme of things. Also it does not mention whether crack use can cause death, and how it would do so. LouiseCooke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.33.191 (talk) 19:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adulterants in crack cocaine, laundry detergent? really?

it's listed as a possible cut in crack, i find it hard to believe anyone would cut their crack cocaine with laundry detergent, what dealer wants to kill/lose all his/her customers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.138.8 (talk) 03:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Global Context

The parts Italic textof this article discussing the affects of the drug on society are completely US centered. Someone please correct this, and add an explanation reagrding the impact of crack on other countries. Volland 14:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This might have something to do with the US being the country it was created and actually used in high amounts in. By the way, you should go check out the United States page. It's very US centered. BmorePunk 21:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Why have a section about crack in France if it isn't smoked there? Regionalsimp 21:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CIA involvement

Is there a reason that CIA involvement with crack distribution isn't mentioned? Here's a source - http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/crack.htm 71.60.38.109 16:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

It's 1 very vague source from a biased political website, so there is no reason for it to be implemented in the wiki. -Feldmaus

Yes, but it's a very common pop-culture reference. The example that immediately comes to mind is a joke from an American Dad episode: "Everyone knows the CIA invented crack cocaine and introduced it into the inner city, but what we never get credit for is malt liquor." That's actually why I came to this page, to see the underlying history behind that joke. - Mokele —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.204.66 (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, that's why I'm here. I've heard that crack was made by the CIA countless times and I wanted to see if there was anything about it here. I don't mean about it being true, I mean about the rumor itself. Maybe it's origins.74.194.27.245 07:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Although I'm not familiar with American Dad, a number of these claims can be heard in numerous rap songs. For example Mos Def, Immortal Technique, and other political/activist rappers mention it in their lyrics. 70.119.14.177 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What about addiction?

While Cocaine isn't physically addictive, Crack is. Can't remember why offhand though since IIRC it's the same stuff in just really high concentration. Klosterdev 20:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Not physically addictive? I have at least three pharmacology texts that list the withdrawal symptoms of cocaine. Crack is more addictive then cocaine, in that crack users have a greater recidivism rate. However, the demographics are different and crack users tend to have less resources to help the quit. The unsigned comment above was made by Dkriegls 19:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Umm that's crap, cocaine is physcially addictive just like crack! perhaps one may become addicted quicker on crack than on cocaine, but a junky is a junky and drug is a drug.

Well, that is not crap. A "junky" as you call them are a very diverse group of people and are not at all the same. As for a drug being a drug, the US government has several classifications for drugs because even they know that drugs are not all the same. As for strength of addiction, this has nothing to do with how fast a person becomes addicted (because there are way to many factors involved), but rather, the percentage of people who relapse after standardized drug treatments. The suggestion being, that their desire to relapse is stronger if more people relapse. An example being that Marijuana has a relatively low recidivism rate after clinical treatment whereas crystal meth has something like an 90% or higher relapse rate after treatment (even higher then crack). My numbers are not exact, but my point was relevance not precision. If you need me to look up the exact recidivism rates for whatever reason, just ask. Also, see my previous post regarding regarding the difference in populations that use drugs and how that may effect recidivism rates. Dkriegls 19:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

They should lock the page, i keep seeing, **** is on crack or **** smokes crack. its getting annoying.

I don't think it's the actual drug that's the addiction. From what I read, and can start putting sources up if anyone unlocks it or wants to maintain this, the actual "addictive" qualities is from the rush of endorphins and dopamine. I guess what I need to put down formally is that there isn't the withdrawal from the crack cocaine itself that's creates the addictive aura around the drug, but withdrawal from the side-effects of the drug. Think of squeezing a sponge dry. After the drug is used for a while... well, you get the idea. Allot can be cross-referenced if someone took the time to do it. Shadowspawn 18:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh and I think it should be locked as well. Most crack addicts won't even come to this page to edit it, just seems like normal vandalism. Shadowspawn 18:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Shadowspawn is pretty on base there, it is not physical, ala heroin or nicotine. It is a psychological addiction, the intensity of which changes from person to person depending on their state of mind and largely on individual circumstances, such as where they are, how much crack they have, how much they have done, whether they have any coping mechanisms for the come down ,such as using other intoxicants like marijuana, alcohol or barbiturates, eating food or sexual activity (though this can be hard to accomplish). Trust me on this issue, I have a large amount of...lets call it "experiance".. on this subject.

Heatsketch 05:16, 13 July 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:74.123.81.159 (talk • contribs)

User was signing others names to this talk. See this diff. Struck sig, placed unsigned. --SXT40 15:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, hey there, this is heatsketch, I wrote that and signed it, I don't know why you crossed it out, maybe i forgot to sign in or something...

Heatsketch 06:21, August 5, 2007

[edit] Why no discussion of addiction?

It seems a very serious omission that there is no discussion of addiction in the prose on this entire page. Cazort (talk) 16:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "dank shit" / SPAM

I removed an edit giving "dank shit" as a slang for crack. Apparently, this term applies to any strong drug.[1] -Everyguy 17:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I took out The bum out of The Projects is referred to as a "damn stupid crack head". --Seth slackware 00:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


I agree that this page should be locked. Just removed chunk of text about sweaty arse cracks.

[edit] Coca paste

more than half of this article is about coca paste. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:70.23.222.149 (talk • contribs)



[edit] What the hell happened to this article?

Let's see, it's ridiculously short and has a TYPO at the top. There needs to be a LOT more to this. Like, wasn't it briefly legal due to having a different chemical structure from pure cocaine? I'd like to hear the details of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 22:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah this article is way too short. We need a description of what it can do to a user's personality. We need statistics on crack related deaths and arrests. Discussion of Marion Barry. There should be discussion of CIA involvement, if only to disspell rumors. Crack in pop culture....

This article is way too flimsy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowyCaballero (talk • contribs) 05:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

    Alright.  You guys get on that.  We'll wait.74.194.27.245 07:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I've tried to bulk it out a bit. I've worked with a lot of crack cocaine users, and have done some study on the matter, but have no sources to quote. I am a bad wikipedian. So that's my background, Ive written a lot on the psychological and physiological effects of the drug. rakkar 15:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protect Page Request

This article gets WAY more vandalism than constructive edits, and I am a bit tired of monitoring it for edits like the recent 'crack is poop" or whatever that guy was saying. Should we put a mild article protection on this page? rakkar (talk) 08:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hector Berlioz and La Poignée Fumant don't seem to belong here

there is a relatively old edit that claims crack was invented by a group called "La Poignée Fumant" with a link to Hector Berlioz. I can find nothing anywhere but this article on anything called "La Poignée Fumant" or anything that connects Hector Berlioz to crack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.96.12.204 (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Chemistry"

There is a difference between describing the chemical makeup of a product, to the process of making it. I really think this part should be removed or atleast edited. Wikipedia shouldn't be a resource for people who want to make their own crack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.156.108 (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not meant to tell people HOW to make crack, but rather how it is made. It makes no difference whether or not it is on wikipedia, demographics suggest that crack addicts generally do not have internet access, so probably aren't on wikipedia looking up how to cook crack. SvWrestler (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] cultural disapproval

shouldn't the cultural stigma around crack users vs. cocaine users in certain cultures be noted? Such as "crackheads" being seen as trashy? Of course not in those words but there is quite a stigma around crack users in north america. Mocking of crack heads is quite popular in American and Mexican comedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junkupshowup (talk • contribs) 04:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why the needed citation?

"Crack cocaine is illegal in most parts of the world."

You need a source to prove that? It is listed as a class A drug in the United Kingdom.

Some facts shouldnt need someone writing about it to make it reliable Xkingoftheworldx (talk) 19:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


–All facts should have sources, no matter how obvious they may seem to you personally. Junkupshowup (talk) 16:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


It isn't obvious to me at all that crack is illegal in most parts of the world. It's obvious that it should be, lol.

(did research in the middle of writing this)

In trying to find a valid citation, I've come up with a few hopefully decent sources and learned far more about crack and cocaine than I ever wanted to know. I didn't find any sources that backed up the quote as is. However, I found something that might be close enough. I made a change here that I think says as much as we can say without saying something unfounded. Let me know what you think. WDavis1911 (talk) 07:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, it is not obvious that crack is illegal worldwide. Since coca is an American plant, it is much more readily available in the Americas. Whether the crack cocaine is enough of an issue in other countries to be specificaly prohibited definitely needs citation. 213.201.175.114 (talk) 12:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)