kimbuka
Enthusiast
Reged: 12/14/03
Posts: 217
Loc: Midwest
|
|
Hi,
I heard a term once as..."filtering" regarding hydro. I was wondering if anyone might PM me and explain what this is. I would appreciate all responses....if I get some.
Thanks so much,
Kim
I have only been a member for about a month now, and truly respect all of what I've read and learned from this forum. It is the greatest and am so thankful that there is actually a place for us sufferers who can lean on each other, help each other, and learn from each other. 
|
kimbuka
Enthusiast
Reged: 12/14/03
Posts: 217
Loc: Midwest
|
|
I'm sorry....
I had no idea what this meant, let alone I had no idea it was something illegal.
please forgive.
|
Spectre13
Enthusiast
Reged: 12/10/03
Posts: 298
Loc: ThunderHeadTippyTops
|
|
Forgive what? You haven't done *anything* wrong. As to the illegality of "filtering", some say it is, some say it isn't. If it is, it would be nice to see it spelled out somewhere in black & white. Heck, I've heard of some doctors recommending the practice to patients with bad livers who live on a budget. As to finding a technique that actually works reliably for the average layman in the home, that is another story entirely.
--------------------
When you think it's beyond your comprehension, it probably just precedes it.
|
Tred
Enthusiast
Reged: 10/18/03
Posts: 262
Loc: USA
|
|
PM me if you like.. I can explain.
Tred =)
--------------------
Entertainment Specialist!
|
yawkaw3
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 03/22/03
Posts: 1193
|
|
We had a thread here that explained why it was illegal, can't remember who it was, but it was a member who knew their legal stuff. If I remember correctly, the actual law it breaks is manufacture of a Schedule II controlled substance- the reason being is that hydro in the form of, say, Norco, is a Schedule III...but when you change the amount of hydro per the amount of APAP yourself- it becomes a Schedule II you're in possession of- plus you "manufactured it." Could be wrong about that, but I'm pretty sure that's what the thread had said.
-yawkaw
|
Spectre13
Enthusiast
Reged: 12/10/03
Posts: 298
Loc: ThunderHeadTippyTops
|
|
It makes you wonder what the consequence would then be if you were prescribed the Schedule II "end result" to begin with. In that case, I suppose you could only be charged with manufacturing your own prescription, but even this seems moot simply because these techniques always leave some acetaminophen behind. The end result would almost always be Schedule III. At worst, it would seem to be a same-schedule "conversion".
Then again, any prosecutor worth his salt can manufacture a seemingly valid charge out of thin air.
--------------------
When you think it's beyond your comprehension, it probably just precedes it.
|
night_shade
Threadhead
Reged: 08/26/03
Posts: 907
Loc: The State of Hockey
|
|
This raises an interesting point. I posted an article a few months back about the lawsuit brought against Purdue and OxyContin. The plaintiffs had adulterated the OC by both crushing and mainlining it, yet somehow PURDUE was found responsible for not warning patients NOT to crush and snort or crush and inject their product.
There was no mention of legal charges brought against the plaintiffs for misusing their prescription drugs.
--------------------
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
|
Dasani
Enthusiast
Reged: 10/29/03
Posts: 286
Loc: FL
|
|
Spectre13, How right you are. Good point!
Quote:
Then again, any prosecutor worth his salt can manufacture a seemingly valid charge out of thin air.
Almost anything is arrestable, but not always convictable.
D
|
sigmund
Member
Reged: 07/29/03
Posts: 181
Loc: Vienna
|
|
Hydro has a specific ratio of APAP or other substance to make the codeine:APAP ratio within Schedule 3 limits. Due to the higher non-opiate component it is not subject to the same regulations as a Schedule 2 medication. One prescription for hydro can have refills on the same script and is the script is valid up to 6 months.
On the other hand a Schedule 2 med which has a much higher concentration of opiates without other substances is governed by different regulations. The script from the doc must be filled out in triplicate, filled within 7 days of the date on the script and cannot be refilled without another prescription from the doctor.
Therefore, by filtering out the APAP, aspirin, or ibuprofen, a prescribed Schedule 3 medication is being converted to a Schedule 2 without the restrictions. That is where the illegality comes in.
Hope this helps.
anna22
--------------------
how can you tell the Dreamer from the one who dreams the dream?
|
BlackCat
Old Hand
Reged: 09/22/03
Posts: 403
Loc: Bed
|
|
Anna, I agree with your logic re: converting the schedule iii (hydro/apap) to schedule ii (pure hydro) using CWE being illegal.
Perhaps the poster was questioning the illegality of using CWE to converting an existing schedule ii, such as percocet (oxy/apap) to a diferent schedule ii (?): pure oxy. That is the only thing that makes sense to me....
|
sigmund
Member
Reged: 07/29/03
Posts: 181
Loc: Vienna
|
|
Blackcat,
Thanks for the clarification. I sent a pm to the poster explaining the logic and terminology more clearly. He is new and there's so much to learn. You're right that he could have been prescribed S-2s all along.
From my understanding, "filtering" is terminology for removing large amounts of the substance combined with the codeine. In his case, he mentioned minimizing liver damage.
However, in other "worlds" it's a way of extracting a purer form of the active ingredient. I'm sure his intentions were health-motivated no matter what the circumstances.
Live and learn!!
anna22
--------------------
how can you tell the Dreamer from the one who dreams the dream?
|
hottiefromky
Member
Reged: 05/29/03
Posts: 149
|
|
Maybe I'm stupid, but how in the world could you 'filter' out the APAP of hydro? If it's mixed together in one pill form, I couldn't see how that would work at all.
|
SeekMotion
Newbie
Reged: 01/03/04
Posts: 39
Loc: usa
|
|
Quote:
Maybe I'm stupid, but how in the world could you 'filter' out the APAP of hydro? If it's mixed together in one pill form, I couldn't see how that would work at all.
If there is a liquid in which one substance dissolves and the other does not they may be separated using this technique. The solution is poured through a filter paper. The insoluble substance is left in the filter paper and the dissolved material passes through with the liquid. Then the excess liquid may be evaporated from either of the separated substances.
--------------------
"These boots are made for walkin'..." - Nancy Sinatra
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
