Crack Clouds Over Hells Kitchen (1988)

[Field Marshall Bradley]

No it isn't.
Numerous studies prove it isn't as well.
The difference you are describing is the method of absorbion, smoking is a different effect than snorting, same as injecting power cocaine is more "intense" than smoking.

Crack cocaine and cocaine hydrochloride. Are the differences myth or reality? - PubMed - NCBI

This shyt has long been proven scientifically.

Crack is way more addictive because its smoked...... I don't need articles from white geeks to tell me shyt about something I lived through...... Crack is cocaine concentrated..... you aint never heard of a cocaine epidemic in the black community, and nikkas was snorting blow left and right...... Cocaine gets you high and makes you feel good.... Crack was making nikkas feel like GODS

 

[David_TheMan]

Crack is way more addictive because its smoked...... I don't need articles from white geeks to tell me shyt about something I lived through...... Crack is cocaine concentrated..... you aint never heard of a cocaine epidemic in the black community, and nikkas was snorting blow left and right...... Cocaine gets you high and makes you feel good.... Crack was making nikkas feel like GODS

No its not more addictive at all.
The effects of consumption make a more intense experience, but the same can be said for injecting cocaine compared to smoking crack.
The effects of consumption though, don't make the products different. Same exact product, no difference in addiction.
You don't need research and logic, I get it, you like talking about myths and stories, not reality.
Cool

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

No its not more addictive at all.
The effects of consumption make a more intense experience, but the same can be said for injecting cocaine compared to smoking crack.
The effects of consumption though, don't make the products different. Same exact product, no difference in addiction.......
You don't need research and logic, I get it, you like talking about myths and stories, not reality.
Cool

And you talking bullshyt from a science paper, because you have no experience with it..I don't deall in myths/theories..... they are chemically the same.... if you want to make the argument against the difference in criminal sentencing then cool.... but blasting>snorting, you offered a geeker some cocaine over crack, 9 times out of 10, he/she would look at you like you were crazy.......... nikkas was snorting cocaine from the beginning, so why was there never a "cocaine" epidemic..... why wasn't nikkas trying to chase that cocaine high 24/7?

 

[Amestafuu (Emeritus)]

I been seeing the same crack heads on the street for 20 years. that drug did a number on people.

 

[David_TheMan]

And you talking bullshyt from a science paper, because you have no experience with it..I don't deall in myths/theories..... they are chemically the same.... if you want to make the argument against the difference in criminal sentencing then cool.... but blasting>snorting, you offered a geeker some cocaine over crack, 9 times out of 10, he/she would look at you like you were crazy.......... nikkas was snorting cocaine from the beginning, so why was there never a "cocaine" epidemic..... why wasn't nikkas trying to chase that cocaine high 24/7?

LOL, why are you mad breh.
I understand, you believe myths and stories, you don't deal in reality.
Its okay, I do, so of course we will have different views.
lol

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

LOL, why are you mad breh.
I understand, you believe myths and stories, you don't deal in reality.
Its okay, I do, so of course we will have different views.
lol

Who the fukk is you to be mad at?.... yall just corny....... straight from a junkie's mouth...

 

[KeysT]

No its not more addictive at all.
The effects of consumption make a more intense experience, but the same can be said for injecting cocaine compared to smoking crack.
The effects of consumption though, don't make the products different. Same exact product, no difference in addiction.
You don't need research and logic, I get it, you like talking about myths and stories, not reality.
Cool

So if the effects of consumption make for a more intense experience, why wouldn’t that contribute to people being more likely to use that method to achieve that same high?

 

[David_TheMan]

So if the effects of consumption make for a more intense experience, why wouldn’t that contribute to people being more likely to use that method to achieve that same high?

The effects of cocaine via injection are more intense than crack, using your logic that would mean cocaine is more addictive than crack. Right?
So that kills the argument period right?

Who the fukk is you to be mad at?.... yall just corny....... straight from a junkie's mouth...

No mad at all, you are projecting.
I literally wrote, we will see things different and its cool

 

[Piff Perkins]

No its not more addictive at all.
The effects of consumption make a more intense experience, but the same can be said for injecting cocaine compared to smoking crack.
The effects of consumption though, don't make the products different. Same exact product, no difference in addiction.
You don't need research and logic, I get it, you like talking about myths and stories, not reality.
Cool

Snorting coke and smoking crack result ib very different highs. The crack high and subsequent addiction are stronger. That's a fact. Brehs in the 70s were using coke recreationally. You can't smoke crack recreationally. That's the difference.

Drug use was always a thing. It simply became stronger and addictive with crack. That's not to say nobody was addicted to shyt in the 70s. Obviously heroin was a thing.

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

No mad at all, you are projecting.
I literally wrote, we will see things different and its cool

 

[David_TheMan]

Snorting coke and smoking crack result ib very different highs. The crack high and subsequent addiction are stronger. That's a fact. Brehs in the 70s were using coke recreationally. You can't smoke crack recreationally. That's the difference.

Drug use was always a thing. It simply became stronger and addictive with crack. That's not to say nobody was addicted to shyt in the 70s. Obviously heroin was a thing.

the highs being different, don't make the body chemcial dependence different.
The addictions are in fact not stronger, and numerous scientific papers have shown that to be the case.
Plenty people do smoke crack recreationally, weekend warriors, people recreationally do a lot of drugs, the vast majority of drug users aren't folks you see on the street.
Like I said, cocaine via injection is a stronger "rush" than crack smoking, yet you still seem to want to ignore that to continue the crack myths.

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

Like I said, cocaine via injection is a stronger "rush" than crack smoking,

This isn't pertinent because the shyt was never conventional..... cocaine aint been pure enough to dissolve in liquid since the early 80s.... you really think nikkas was trying to inject themselves with stomped on powder that was 65% cut with God knows what? again, you don't know what the fukk you are talking about.....

 

[Deflatedhoopdreams]

Watching your dreams die will do it to you bruh

“I seen hoop dreams deflate, like a true fiends weight”

 

[David_TheMan]

This isn't pertinent because the shyt was never conventional..... cocaine aint been pure enough to dissolve in liquid since the early 80s.... you really think nikkas was trying to inject themselves with stomped on powder that was 65% cut with God knows what? again, you don't know what the fukk you are talking about.....

LOL, why you still mad breh.
Your logic breaking down on your myths is your problem not mine.

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

LOL, why you still mad breh.
Your logic breaking down on your myths is your problem not mine.

You can't refute anything that's posted in regards to ready rock being more addictive..... you just gon declare yourself right even though you are dead fukking wrong..... using buzz words like :"myth" and shyt........