Slashdot Mirror


Genetically Engineered Yeast Makes It Possible To Brew Morphine

PvtVoid writes: The New York times reports that newly developed yeast strains will soon make it possible to create morphine from fermentation of sugar. While no one has claimed to make morphine in lab from scratch yet, concerns are already being raised about potential abuse. According to the Times article: "This rapid progress in synthetic biology has set off a debate about how — and whether — to regulate it. Dr. Oye and other experts said this week in a commentary in Nature Chemical Biology that drug-regulatory authorities are ill prepared to control a process that will benefit the heroin trade much more than the prescription painkiller industry. The world should take steps to head that off, they argue, by locking up the bioengineered yeast strains and restricting access to the DNA that would let drug cartels reproduce them.

333 comments

  1. Sudafed by jdavidb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Forget morphine - could I just get a way to simply, legally obtain sudafed without rigamarole at the pharmacy?

    1. Re:Sudafed by countSudoku() · · Score: 5, Funny

      We KNOW what your up too, Pablo Escapebar! The cops are on their way to your drug lab to confiscate your chems, inhalers, and any other paraphernalia like shaving razor replacement packs and Q-tips. The jig is UP!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
    2. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding. That stuff is bad ass for people with horrible allergies. I am however glad I have not had to use it for the past 10 years since I moved from the midwest.

    3. Re:Sudafed by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Forget morphine - could I just get a way to simply, legally obtain sudafed without rigamarole at the pharmacy?

      I recall someone posted the directions for how to make sudafed from crystal meth. Being as the latter is easier to buy than the former, you could start with that. For obvious reasons I'm not going to search for that method myself.

      I don't recall if you get drain cleaner back out of it or not, though.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    4. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pff if we could get a barrel of methalymine we could just do it biker style.

    5. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fun fact: the word is "rigmarole," not "rigamarole."

      I know nobody cares. Further evidence for this: nearly everyone gets that wrong.

    6. Re:Sudafed by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pseudoephederine is already produced from yeast.

      Of course, if it becomes cheaper to produce opiates from yeast than from current processes, trying to keep the yeasts secret or locked up will be futile. The stuff reproduces itself; all it takes is one well-bribed or entrepreneurial employee.

    7. Re:Sudafed by Hartree · · Score: 0

      Fun fact: English is not a dead language. Proper usage shifts over time.

    8. Re:Sudafed by Holi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fun fact, doesn't change the fact that its spelled wrong.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    9. Re:Sudafed by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whole new angle on home-brewing and probably a heck of a lot less obvious than a field of poppies growing on your property

      I thought that the development of coal-tar based opioid synthesis processes in the US was supposed to support the wholesale eradication of poppies and black market production of opium and heroin.

      That obviously failed because farmers want the income, so in the EU they allow farmers to grow poppies, then purchase the entire crop in bulk for use in their pharmaceutical processes. This allows the farmers to get the income and reduces the opiates in the black market

      When will the US stop deluding itself and simply purchase bulk poppies from farmers in Central and South America who simply want a source of income? This will reduce the number of people who trade in the black market and reduce the opium available for heroin production

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    10. Re:Sudafed by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      all it takes is one well-bribed or entrepreneurial employee.

      Or one employee that believes in personal freedom, and also realizes that yeast produced opiates will shut down the cartels, hurt the Taliban, reduce violence, and pretty much make the world a better place ... unless you are either a criminal or a cop.

    11. Re:Sudafed by geekmux · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Fun fact: English is not a dead language. Proper usage shifts over time.

      Uh, proper usage? Of the word rigmarole?

      You mean when we stopped calling it balderdash because it was too old-fashioned, or when we stopped calling it a clusterfuck due to the overly protective censors?

      Bullshit words deserve their ongoing confusion, and belong in the Urban Dictionary and not much further.

    12. Re:Sudafed by netsavior · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Fun fact, doesn't change the fact that its spelled wrong.

      "Spelled" is actually "spelt," unless you subscribe to the philosophy that people living in a secondary English colony should be allowed to introduce their own spellings of words. In which case, being flusterful at misspellings on the internet would be silly.

    13. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fun fact, spelling changes over time as well. See the Merriam-Webster Letters to the Editor series on Youtube for reasons why.

    14. Re:Sudafed by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      as does speling

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    15. Re:Sudafed by flink · · Score: 1

      Or one employee that believes in personal freedom, and also realizes that yeast produced opiates will shut down the cartels, hurt the Taliban, reduce violence, and pretty much make the world a better place ... unless you are either a criminal or a cop.

      Unless, of course, the government goes on a pogrom against any large scale yeast operation, in which case only organizations with the resources to operate one illicitly will be able to benefit: the cartels and the Taliban.

    16. Re:Sudafed by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      We had this "better world" 130ish years ago. It was not better, addicts were becoming a huge problem for the society - the actual reason drugs became illegal. And yes, there still was a war in Afghanistan.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    17. Re:Sudafed by bobstreo · · Score: 2

      Or one employee that believes in personal freedom, and also realizes that yeast produced opiates will shut down the cartels, hurt the Taliban, reduce violence, and pretty much make the world a better place ... unless you are either a criminal or a cop.

      Unless, of course, the government goes on a pogrom against any large scale yeast operation, in which case only organizations with the resources to operate one illicitly will be able to benefit: the cartels and the Taliban.

      Oh the humanity, Budweiser and Miller breweries shut down by the feds.

    18. Re:Sudafed by dj245 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We had this "better world" 130ish years ago. It was not better, addicts were becoming a huge problem for the society - the actual reason drugs became illegal. And yes, there still was a war in Afghanistan.

      Yes, but 130 years ago we were still in an "all hands on deck" global economy. We now have the ability to produce all the things that the world needs or wants with far less than 100% of the population. The global economy no longer needs a significant portion of the population to participate in the economy. How do you solve that? Having a class of people who do nothing but drugs all day long may actually be somewhat helpful in solving the problem of what to do with all the people that society doesn't need.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    19. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's always a war in Afghanistan. Sometimes outside nations are involved, other times not.

      Afghanis seriously lack for anything else to do in their spare time. The country is too hilly for football (aka soccer).

    20. Re:Sudafed by Anon-Admin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Someone should read history.

      Drug laws in the US are less than 100 years old. It was the late 1930's for most of them. I would suggest you read the arguments in congress while debating the law. It seems that the group FOR the law was arguing that these substances empowered the lesser races. (Im making it polite and not using the slang they used)

      Drug laws in the US had more to due with racial control than they did with helping the addicts.

      Just to make a point stoners are considered "lazy, irresponsible, thieves, untrustworthy, etc" All the same stereotypes used to describe blacks in the 30's, 40's, and 50's.

    21. Re:Sudafed by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Unless, of course, the government goes on a pogrom against any large scale yeast operation, in which case only organizations with the resources to operate one illicitly will be able to benefit: the cartels and the Taliban.

      The only "resources" needed to grow yeast are a container, a loose fitting lid, and some way to keep it warm (a bowl of warm water works well). I know this because I make my own pizza dough.

    22. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, the only legal way to relieve your suffering is to buy as much alcohol as you can afford. There's no legal limit on that, oddly enough...

    23. Re:Sudafed by rockout · · Score: 2

      It does, actually. In fact, the shifting spelling of that word has already entered the spelling that you don't like into the dictionary.

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rigamarole

      Definition of RIGAMAROLE: variant of rigmarole

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    24. Re:Sudafed by FictionPimp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or worse, this shit becomes like wild yeast and the next time I brew beer I have to worry about creating a drink full of dope instead of just worrying a wild fermentation might just make it taste bad.

    25. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does, in fact. You seem very confused about this entire branch of human knowledge. Please read some books on it and get back to us.

    26. Re:Sudafed by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      It would be very short sighted too only look at the USA when it comes to history, even a relatively recent one.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    27. Re:Sudafed by tepples · · Score: 2

      Oh the humanity, Budweiser and Miller breweries shut down by the feds.

      It happened a century ago.

    28. Re:Sudafed by bytesex · · Score: 1

      Bollocks. In China maybe. Not in the Western world. And even here, most addicts were, as usual, alcohol addicts.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    29. Re:Sudafed by drkoemans · · Score: 3, Funny

      Slashdot needs to change it's subheading to be a bit more inclusive. News for nerds, pedantry, advertisements, occasionally stuff that matters... in that order.

    30. Re:Sudafed by Livius · · Score: 1

      Whereas in the 19th century China had drug laws to protect.... the Chinese.

      I'm confused now...

    31. Re:Sudafed by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was passed in 1914, but the impetus started closer to 1901.

      While it's a common theme in anti-drug control rhetoric to blame racism for drug bans, I think the race/drug tie-in is possibly something that happened later and not a prime mover for the origin of drug controls. I think once drugs were already illegal, the laws were adjusted in ways that made them more effective tools to use against people deemed undesirable.

      Personally I think the laws against drug use were probably at least as much motivated by industrialists who saw drug use as an obstacle in using low-skilled poor people in the new mass-production factories. Prior to the assembly line, I think a fair amount of industrial work was little more than scaling up the work of skilled artisans, people who probably had internalized a certain amount of self-discipline and work ethic. They were probably also drunks, too, but by virtue of their holding a skilled trade they were sort of self-selected into the group of people who could more or less hold their liquor.

      Once you got the assembly line and mass production involved, the growth in industrial employment required large workforces of unskilled workers from the lower classes of society, a demographic at the time that came from cultures where alcohol use was high and who probably used drugs and alcohol more like a crude anti-depressant tonic against the fairly harsh standard of living of being poor in the late 19th century.

      But you can't build an industrial empire with people who see a subsistence living under the influence as more desirable than industrial wage slavery, so better to criminalize their substance use and make work a slightly more palatable option than prison.

      It was really no different for the Harrison Act -- the impetus was some Protestant religious figure appalled with opium-consuming native savages in the Philippines who knew that he wasn't going to convert them into good little Protestants if chasing the dragon and lying in the sun was an alternative.

      I think a lot of the opposition to marijuana legalization really boils down to this -- a lot of moral cluckers who worry that if Johnny smokes pot, he won't be enthusiastic about going $150.000 in debt for a college degree and buying a house in the suburbs -- he'll think that it'd make much more sense to, in the words of Grandmaster Flash, "...learn to smoke reefer and be a street sweeper."

      Society *needs* bodies on the treadmill to keep it going. People who use substances tend to give a lot less of a shit about the treadmill.

    32. Re:Sudafed by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      fun fact, I hate fun facts

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    33. Re:Sudafed by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      no they werent. they make up a extremely small percentage of the overall population. the war was started for racist reasons, and business protectionism reasons simple as that

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    34. Re:Sudafed by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      all you have to do is read the propaganda at the time and watch the videos of the day to see that it was in fact racist at the time watch reefer madness if you dont believe me

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    35. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All drugs are not equal.

      Full blown Meth addicts largely are "lazy irresponsible untrustworthy thieves".

    36. Re:Sudafed by bugs2squash · · Score: 1
      --
      Nullius in verba
    37. Re:Sudafed by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I know nobody cares. Further evidence for this: nearly everyone gets that wrong.

      Wrong? Look further down the definition.

      Variants of RIGMAROLE
      rigmarole also rigamarole \ri-g-m-rl, rig-m-\

      Extra vowels have a way of making their way in when consonants abut.

    38. Re:Sudafed by meerling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True, but for a large scale operation you are going to want to have a bioreactor for both efficiency and scale, not to mention reducing the dead giveaway large quantity of people to tend the more manual methods.
      Further complication include issues with production of the new substance possibly interfering with the lifecycle of the host itself. (That's the yeast if anyone didn't get that.) And let's not forget the separation and purification of the desired product.
      You do know that they use microbes to make a number of different things, such as human insulin and interferon? Just look up some of the history of those developments, and you'll get a hint of some possible difficulties. Besides, there was a market for large quantities of cheap human insulin & interferon, while the previous methods of production were horribly inefficient and could never even come close to the demand.
      I'm going to hazard a guess that the criminal cartels would be opposed to this technology because it would be more expensive to the them to set up, would require workers of a higher skill & training, would cut out entire chunks of their existing structure, and would be easily capable of flooding the market and suppressing prices.
      Besides, other than banning the opiate producing strain, which only takes one leak to effectively neutralize that ban, what are you going to do? Ban genetically altered strains of microbes, and tobacco? Sorry, but I'd rather shoot the asshole that tries to do that, my life depends on one of those products, and so do a LOT of other peoples. Maybe you just want to ban the research into making illegal products. That would be a little better, but still futile. Eventually it will be easy enough to do that a talented high school student will someday succeed. Additionally, if it's not banned worldwide, someone will eventually do it someplace it's not illegal, and then there is the distinct possibility that it will get loose.
      Of course, there is still something people are not looking at, their strain produces morphine, a controlled, but legal, substance. Yeah, it can be turned into heroin, but so can all the legal morphine which is usually made from FLOWERS that people grow! It's used in medicine. I was once in a hospital ward and I was the only patient not receiving morphine. (The reason for that doesn't matter.) So there IS a legal trade in the product produced by that yeast, but because it can be used to make an illegal one, some people want to ban it. You know, that's not a wise path to tread upon. If something can be banned because something illegal can be made from/with it, how long until everything is banned? You know politicians, give them an inch, and they'll run you over with your own vehicle and drag you a mile down the road.

    39. Re:Sudafed by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      New bumper sticker:

      When Yeast is Outlawed, only Outlaws will bake Bread.

      Don't laugh. Zero Tolerance has long arms these days.

    40. Re: Sudafed by guruevi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Budweiser/Miller make beer? With yeast? I always thought they made it with water flavored with leftover hops from a real brewery.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    41. Re:Sudafed by rea1l1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The US was founded as a republic, a structure designed solely to protect & defend the rights of the people.
      Today, this organization is used to limit and suppress the rights of the people through intimidation and force.

      Society does NOT need bodies on a treadmill unless you're using society as a massive global offensive weapon.
      Most working individuals within a "modern" society DO NOT PRODUCE A PHYSICAL PRODUCT.

      "We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living." -- Buckminster Fuller

    42. Re: Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And the products which replaced it are useless. I notice the party of small government has yet to get the government out if that part of our lives. The whole behind the counter/mandatory ID thing is one of the most intrusive, idiotic things in the history of this country and a testament to the social, economic, and freedom disaster that is the war on drugs. End it.

      As to this situation, how about we, you know, stop locking people up for wanting to briefly escape the miserable reality we force on too many and start offering proper treatment (including proper pain treatment where applicable) to those who need it? Addiction is no joke, but the crimes that go with it are largely the government's creation. They empower these drug dealers the same way they empowered gangs during prohibition. In a way they deserve each other, but we all end up paying for it.

    43. Re:Sudafed by Guppy · · Score: 1

      The stuff reproduces itself; all it takes is one well-bribed or entrepreneurial employee.

      Indeed. Right now, a spy or disgruntled insider might be able to smuggle out schematics of the factory. Now they can smuggle out the factory itself.

      This story from 201 doesn't explicitly state there was any theft of a bio-engineered organism (involved in biotech mass-production of a chemical substrate), but I wonder if something like that might have been involved: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12...

    44. Re: Sudafed by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Not beer, cereal malt beverages. Beer is made with Malted barley, yeast, hops and water.

      There are no hops in can type American cereal malt beverages.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    45. Re:Sudafed by Hartree · · Score: 1

      "He's no fun. He fell right over!"

    46. Re:Sudafed by itsenrique · · Score: 1

      When cheap gin first arrived in Europe there was a lot of social decay. When Native Americans first got access to alcohol, lots of problems. In fact these problems seem to persist for generations, but eventually the population in general does not have a problem with the new hard stuff, whatever it may be. I don't advocate abuse of opiates, but the biggest problem these people have is the obscene cost to get their fix. It's not the most dangerous drug out there. It makes people act weird, and that makes us uncomfortable. Because it's not booze, or something.

    47. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that's not really the question--the question is, are the problems related to drug regulation and enforcement better than the problems related to increased access to drugs? My position is that I'd rather deal with more drug use problems than more police state and government corruption problems.

    48. Re:Sudafed by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Hard thieving irresponsible untrustworthy thieves. Lazy, they are not.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    49. Re:Sudafed by Hartree · · Score: 2

      It's widely enough used that it's listed as a variant in the link the OP gave.

      That said, you're spot on about teleporters.

      I've been saying Kirk et al were a bunch of zombies for decades.

    50. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, let's say for the sake of the argument that drug control laws weren't motivated by racism at all.

      Even then, it's safe to argue that drug control laws are *currently* motivated at least in part by racism, at least in the US. That's not even my major objection to drug control laws, but it's not an argument for drug control laws.

    51. Re:Sudafed by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The US was founded as a republic, a structure designed solely to protect & defend the rights of the people.

      North Korea, Cuba, and The People's Republic of China, are also republics. So was Nazi Germany, and the USSR.

    52. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also the Irish, Chinese, Japanese, Native American, Hispanic....oh, you get the picture. It's not like we (people) do a very good job of keeping our inherent racism pointing at a single race. Don't look like us? Must be the opposite of what culture says is good. Don't believe in the same invisible sky fairy? That's a beheadin' Believe in the same invisible sky fairy but demonstrate it in a slightly different way? Beheadin'

      I'm not saying you're wrong about the drug laws; I can't be bothered to actually research them so I'll assume you're right. But your last sentence shows a remarkable tunnel vision.

    53. Re:Sudafed by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      and the next time I brew beer I have to worry about creating a drink full of dope

      You mean you accidentally brew super beer

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    54. Re: Sudafed by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's like we're incapable of learning from our mistakes and just keep repeating them over an over endlessly. How I wish people could just quit saying "they should make a law." That horrible, ignorant phrase has caused more harm than any other.

    55. Re:Sudafed by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Whereas in the 19th century China had drug laws to protect.... the Chinese.

      I'm confused now...

      Yes and the drug war in China was because British East India Company pretty much wanted make the Chinese dependent drug slaves and the Chinese government didn't want that.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    56. Re:Sudafed by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      all you have to do is read the propaganda at the time and watch the videos of the day to see that it was in fact racist at the time watch reefer madness if you dont believe me

      the propaganda is just how it was sold to the public, it does nothing to explain the motivation for it to be pushed in the first place

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    57. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having a class of people who do nothing but drugs all day long may actually be somewhat helpful in solving the problem of what to do with all the people that society doesn't need.

      Ah yes. I was just thinking to myself:
      You know what this world needs? Fewer self-aware people. More assholes. More burn-outs. Fewer motivated, dedicated human minds and more toothless, fucking idiots that I have to deal with every time I go downtown.

    58. Re: Sudafed by pspahn · · Score: 2

      I'd be curious, then, to know your explanation why the US hops farmers all got screwed when AB and InBev consolidated? AB had been propping up the farmers by purchasing hops even when they didn't need them and stockpiling the reserves. InBev came in and saw a chance to save a bunch of money by using the stockpile, causing farmers to go out of business.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    59. Re:Sudafed by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Fun fact: what some US dictionary states is of no interest to those from the country the word originated. And we spell it with the "extra" letter

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    60. Re:Sudafed by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 5, Informative

      The story is deeper than that. The Chinese liked to get paid in silver for their products (tea, porcelain, silk). Unfortunately silver is what the British money was made of (the pound sterling meant a pound of sterling silver = 92.5% pure). So it was creating a currency shortage. Britain thus wanted a product to balance trade and stop the silver outflow. Opium was that product.

      The Chinese didn't want their people hooked on Opium, so they made it illegal. British trading companies that supplied the opium (it was grown in India at the time) formed a cartel to bring it in illegally, thus becoming the first drug cartel. When their people got arrested and goods seized, the British government forced China to submit in what is known as the Opium Wars. They acquired Hong Kong in the process. Later, the now legalized trading companies needed financing for the ships to deliver the expanded opium trade. So they founded the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Company. Now known as HSBC, one of the largest banks in the world, it is no stranger to laundering money for cartels, because it was*founded* by drug cartel members. To this day they print paper bank notes (currency) for Hong Kong. This makes money laundering really easy, because they can give you a suitcase of brand new money, with no traceable history.

    61. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I was driven thence by foul winds for a space of 9 days upon the sea, but on the tenth day we reached the land of the Lotus-eaters, who live on a food that comes from a kind of flower. Here we landed to take in fresh water, and our crews got their mid-day meal on the shore near the ships. When they had eaten and drunk I sent two of my company to see what manner of men the people of the place might be, and they had a third man under them. They started at once, and went about among the Lotus-eaters, who did them no hurt, but gave them to eat of the lotus, which was so delicious that those who ate of it left off caring about home, and did not even want to go back and say what had happened to them, but were for staying and munching lotus with the Lotus-eaters without thinking further of their return; nevertheless, though they wept bitterly I forced them back to the ships and made them fast under the benches. Then I told the rest to go on board at once, lest any of them should taste of the lotus and leave off wanting to get home, so they took their places and smote the grey sea with their oars."

      From Greek mythology

    62. Re:Sudafed by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      it was pushed to keep the rich companies known at du pont and hurst timber in business (at least the changes in the 30s were)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    63. Re: Sudafed by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      I actually find the psudo sudafefvery effective, but also makes me feel funny.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    64. Re: Sudafed by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      ... Psudo sudafed very...

      Still haven't figured out the mobile site, sorry.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    65. Re:Sudafed by Incadenza · · Score: 1

      Yes, but can you sing it? (The Mekons - Brutal)

    66. Re:Sudafed by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Better yet, with this, can I just get a yeast infection or a series of them to take care of all my drug needs, synthesized from the sugar I eat directly in my small intestine?

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    67. Re:Sudafed by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2

      Spelling comes from wheat? Learn something new every day.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    68. Re:Sudafed by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      A good idea 20 years ago. Today, the farmer has a choice of death vs life due to the fully mature gang culture that has grown up around illegal drugs.

      Best to just legalize it - let the gangs convert to legal families with less income.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    69. Re:Sudafed by fafalone · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is, actual brand name sudafed is terrible for making meth, and good cooks avoid it like the plague. And almost never are gel tabs or products with other active ingredients use. Using anything other than generic, pseudo-only tablets with no weird fillers requires purification steps beyond the average trailer trash doing it, otherwise the result would be single-digit purity and loads of byproducts that even 99% of meth heads wouldn't buy. If it were really about controlling meth production, there'd be less restrictions on preparations rarely to never used in illicit production. Even more interesting is why they wanted to turn over production and distribution to the mexican cartels to begin with. IIRC a couple years back they seized a mexican meth lab with ***$2 billion*** worth of pure meth inside (15 tons at $150/g on the street, they claim higher tho), and there was not even a shortage afterwards.. at least I didn't read about one and would expect a victory lap if they even caused a weeklong drought.

    70. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but really, before you post anything else, actually read some history on this stuff. Seriously. Get off your idealistic high horse and actually read up on some of this stuff. If you're talking racist stuff and pot, yeah, you're correct. But opiates, and a lot of other drugs, not so much.

    71. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the usual "war on drugs" style, the "drug czar" has decided to seize all yeast, as it is now a well known substance for making drugs, and should be kept out of the hands of criminals. Anyone caught with more than 10 grams of yeast will be imprisoned for a minimum of 30 years and have all their property seized and kept by the arresting police force.

      In other news, police forces around the country are now offering fully furnished homes and cars to officers as part of their salary.

    72. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fun facts' response: fuck you.

    73. Re:Sudafed by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      Next Australians will be stopped at airport security for smuggling.

      Security Goon: "We detected a suspicious dark slurry in your luggage"
      Bloke: "Strewth mate, I'm not stupid enough to bring drugs into a country, with the tragic deaths of Chan and Sukumaran..."
      SG: "The canister gave off a salty odour. We fed a sample to our narcotics canine Charlie, who is now convulsing on the floor"
      Bloke: "Sorry um that's just my Vegemite. I have it on toast for breakfast"
      SG: "You eat that stuff? Surely not!"
      Bloke: "Honest to Warnie, I swear. Got any bread on ya?"
      SG: "(sniffs and dry retches) No one could stomach that!"
      Security Goon 2: "Chemical analysis reveals a high concentration of morphine. Lock him up for ten years"

    74. Re: Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I notice the party of small government has yet to get the government out if that part of our lives.

      Probably because this mythical party doesn't exist.

    75. Re:Sudafed by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      ive written papers on the subject, I know what im talking about. the post above as you pointed out had to do with one substance. opium was used against asians in the early days as well.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    76. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The US was founded as a republic, a structure designed solely to protect & defend the rights of the people."

      Some people, anyway.

    77. Re:Sudafed by swb · · Score: 1

      Laws against drug use are used as a means of control and intimidation by providing the police with a tool to suspect, stop and search people, usually the underclass. It's mostly a coincidence that the underclass is predominantly minority and it certainly enables further intimidation and control of minorities to be sure.

      But I think a big reason marijuana remains illegal is not because of any specific risk from marijuana use itself, but because marijuana use is so widespread it provides the police with near limitless justification, opportunity and motivation to suspect and search people. If you legalized marijuana you move the decimal point several places to the left on the chances someone you randomly stop may actually be a person of legitimae interest. You also lose the influence you had over people who use marijuana.

      Bottom line is legalization means the cops lose a major rationale to treat most people like criminal suspects. It makes it harder to run roughshod over minorities, too, but I think the general power and control outweighs its specific utility against minorities.

    78. Re:Sudafed by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0
      What a narrow perspective. I prefer a more left-wing view of life:

      "You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can't justify your existence, if you're not pulling your weight, and since you won't, if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we can not use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can't be of very much use to yourself."

      -- George Bernard Shaw, communist

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    79. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Sloshdat, everybody here who spent years of home skooling in there mom's basement knows that the correct speling is rigamarole.

    80. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Europe people actually eat poppy seeds in large quantities and it grows pretty much everywhere next to the roads and in the ditches. Noodles with poppy seeds - nom, nom, nom...

    81. Re:Sudafed by ultranova · · Score: 1

      True, but for a large scale operation you are going to want to have a bioreactor for both efficiency and scale, not to mention reducing the dead giveaway large quantity of people to tend the more manual methods.

      No, you don't.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    82. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly correct. Due to the fact that S. America countries began winning their independence from their colonial masters, Europe stop having a cheap source of silver, this caused a collapse in silver production, and Europe no longer had a way to trade with China which still used the silver standard. So Britain decided to trade opium for products instead.

    83. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Psssst.

      The treadmill was a metaphor.

    84. Re:Sudafed by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Way to not tell the whole story. The Chinese were arrogant and insisted that they didn't need anything the British could trade with. This is the same arrogance that started China down the road to 150 years of tragedy. They insisted on cash payment for everything, and the foreigners could go fuck themselves because they weren't racially equal to the Chinese. The product the British ended up with was opium, but could have been anything that they had a surplus of. To pretend that the Chinese gave a single shit about their commoners - LOL. They didn't, any more than today's rulers give a shit about their people. The Chinese didn't make it illegal because they were caring and sharing, they made it illegal because they thought they didn't need anything from the outside world and thought Chinese products were inherently superior because they were Chinese.

      And then the war started, and China discovered real fast that it wasn't up to modern standards. Fun fact: the British didn't even want Hong Kong, they wanted Zhoushan (at the time, an important port south of Shanghai). The negotiator screwed up and got a barren island instead of a busy city, and today Zhoushan is a small town that never went anywhere.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    85. Re: Sudafed by djdarko · · Score: 1

      Fun fact: "wrong" is an adjective. The usual grammatically-correct way to put it is "it was spelled incorrectly."

    86. Re:Sudafed by tsotha · · Score: 1

      That's what I was thinking. This is definitely one of those genie in the bottle stuffing exercises that's never going to work. Drug cartels have more money than God - either they'll hire their own scientists to reverse engineer the yeast strain, or someone will slip it to them for a suitcase full of cash.

    87. Re:Sudafed by Ramze · · Score: 1

      Fun fact, words can have more than one spelling, and rigamarole is a perfectly acceptable spelling:

      http://www.merriam-webster.com...

      Also, it's a bit stupid to declare "rigmarole" as the proper spelling over "rigamarole" when the term itself is a colloquial bastardization of "ragman roll."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

    88. Re:Sudafed by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Which is bullshit, because by definition a word cannot have itself in the definition for it to be a usable definition.

      So who the fuck changed that rule?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    89. Re:Sudafed by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "True, but for a large scale operation you are going to want to have a bioreactor for both efficiency and scale, not to mention reducing the dead giveaway large quantity of people to tend the more manual methods."

      No, all you need is a carboy and an airlock. Could bury that shit in the ground and make it nearly undetectable minus the emissions of CO2. Which, if you're smart, you'd plant a crop around that and take advantage of the naturally higher localized CO2 levels for a better crop, while you're at it. Weed up top, opiates underground. Two birds with one stone. Thick cannabis canopy would hide those airlocks peeping up out of the ground pretty easily. A setup like this could be quickly accomplished in states legalized/medical cannabis laws.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    90. Re:Sudafed by Khyber · · Score: 2

      Actually it would probably be considered closer to laudanum than beer.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    91. Re:Sudafed by Khyber · · Score: 1

      No more need for poppy seed bagels to cause false positives on urinalysis tests! I can just literally boil and bake opium bagels!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    92. Re:Sudafed by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Of course there was no shortage. You don't think there's 15 tons of meth in an evidence locker somewhere, do you?

    93. Re: Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't call this "getting screwed". If you're selling a product that you know is not needed, you're gambling. You *have* to be prepared for your streak to end.

    94. Re:Sudafed by advocate_one · · Score: 2

      When will the US stop deluding itself and simply purchase bulk poppies from farmers in Central and South America who simply want a source of income? This will reduce the number of people who trade in the black market and reduce the opium available for heroin production

      Because then the CIA would have no source of 'black' income and means to bribe officials/governments with...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    95. Re:Sudafed by dave420 · · Score: 1

      A republic merely means a country without a dynastic leader. That's it. It has absolutely nothing to do with democracy or "protect[ing] & defend[ing] the rights of the people". Why is it nearly everyone who starts an argument by describing a republic gets it wrong? Is your education really that bad??

    96. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      instead of just worrying a wild fermentation might just make it taste bad.

      This should be modded 'Funny' because he doesn't care if his beer is alcoholic... just what it tastes like. While I admire all beer drinkers that are willing to, say, argue or even brawl over their insistence it is the taste of beer that they seek the beverage for, I find it hilarious.

      Here's where you'll say I'm off the rails, but its flat true: anyone that "drinks" is an alcoholic. No one drinks 4 drinks per year. That guy isn't an alcoholic, but if you drink almost every weekend, you're a drunk, and no different from a pot-head, or heroin addict or a base-jumping thrill seeker. All equal.

      Alcohol, Morphine, Cannibis... this is actually medicine. Fuck regulation, only YOU decide what medicine you get.

    97. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone should read history.

      Drug laws in the US are less than 100 years old. It was the late 1930's for most of them.

      Check your facts, Anon-Admin:

      the very first written law in the New World (paraphrased):

      YOU MUST GROW THIS WEED

    98. Re:Sudafed by rockout · · Score: 1

      You should probably read up on the differences between description and prescription.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    99. Re:Sudafed by drewlake2000 · · Score: 1

      They beat Ireland and Scotland in the World Cup (Cricket that is, not football)

    100. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA doesn't need black income... Maybe, *maybe* it did at one point, but that's definitely not true today.

      http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/...

    101. Re: Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The party DOES exist. You are under the mistaken belief that only two parties exist.

    102. Re:Sudafed by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I don't know about all that, but regardless, 100 years ago we made the mistake of believing that banning drugs would make them unavailable, and/or stop people from using them because laws are somehow more compelling than addiction. We wanted, as always, an easy solution to a complex problem.

      At the same time, we didn't need to ban cigarettes to decrease usage, so clearly addictive and harmful products can be discouraged without the need to make them illegal.

    103. Re: Sudafed by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Hops go stale. Perhaps AB needed a tiny amount of stale, tasteless hops to make their piss water.

      Just maybe InBevs products (e.g. Stella) need an equally tiny amount of fresh hops.

      I just don't think AB used all that many hops to begin with. You can wave a single hop above a giant kettle of Buttweiser and it's fully hopped. Kind of like most Kona blend coffee.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    104. Re:Sudafed by Hartree · · Score: 1

      I still use both balderdash and clusterfuck. Guess I'm just too old fashioned.

    105. Re:Sudafed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All this time time I thought rigamarole & malarky were Italiano expressions

    106. Re: Sudafed by K10W · · Score: 1

      And the products which replaced it are useless. I notice the party of small government has yet to get the government out if that part of our lives. The whole behind the counter/mandatory ID thing is one of the most intrusive, idiotic things in the history of this country and a testament to the social, economic, and freedom disaster that is the war on drugs. End it.

      As to this situation, how about we, you know, stop locking people up for wanting to briefly escape the miserable reality we force on too many and start offering proper treatment (including proper pain treatment where applicable) to those who need it? Addiction is no joke, but the crimes that go with it are largely the government's creation. They empower these drug dealers the same way they empowered gangs during prohibition. In a way they deserve each other, but we all end up paying for it.

      aye the replacement (mainly phenyl eph) MAY work but not in the dosages that have been tested as safe. I tend to just buy ephedrine these days (in POM OTC asthma drugs in UK like chesteze) because I can just flash an inhaler if I get 20 questions where as blocked sinuses etc didn't seem to stop the 20 question BS here when buying pseudo in UK. Despite no ID needed etc not very intelligent pharmacy staff tend to get a little ott like you're asking to buy Methedrine pills ffs.

      Funny thing is hardly any meth would be made from the pills since the price is extortionate and when you consider amount needed, yields (chemistry wise I mean) and all the waste in decanting/filtering etc it would be hundreds of times more expensive before any markup. Most street meth across the globe is either diverted legit supplies or illicit made by crew from bulk precursors (various amphetamines and phenethylamines) bought it MASSIVE amounts. The kind of amounts that get LE knocking or rival crews coming to tax or hurt you because the amount wont go unnoticed. Only time homebrew is worth it is during droughts, similar to the desomorphine homebrew in Australia and later Russia (when it got krokodil name) because users couldn't get heroin. Russian thing is probably due to cost rather than true drought as a lot of global heroin moves that way from Afghanistan green zone.

    107. Re: Sudafed by hawkfish · · Score: 1

      ... Psudo sudafed very...

      Still haven't figured out the mobile site, sorry.

      It was funnier the first time!

      --
      You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
    108. Re:Sudafed by Agripa · · Score: 1

      unless you are either a criminal or a cop.

      But you repeat yourself.

    109. Re:Sudafed by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      While it's a common theme in anti-drug control rhetoric to blame racism for drug bans, I think the race/drug tie-in is possibly something that happened later and not a prime mover for the origin of drug controls.

      There may have been alternative motives, but the main ones expressed by the creators of the Act you reference were very explicit:

      The drafters played on fears of “drug-crazed, sex-mad negroes” and made references to Negroes under the influence of drugs murdering whites, degenerate Mexicans smoking marijuana, and “Chinamen” seducing white women with drugs.[16][17] Dr. Hamilton Wright, testified at a hearing for the Harrison Act. Wright alleged that drugs made blacks uncontrollable, gave them superhuman powers and caused them to rebel against white authority. Dr. Christopher Koch of the State Pharmacy Board of Pennsylvania testified that "Most of the attacks upon the white women of the South are the direct result of a cocaine-crazed Negro brain".[4]

      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

    110. Re: Sudafed by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      tasteless hops to make their piss water.

      "their diabetic horse's piss", please. Go the whole hog on the (entirely justified) insult.

      (The version I'm thinking of is $BIG_MERKIN_BREWERY$ sends crate of it's best product to Czech brewery $BIG_CZ_BRAUERIE$. Some weeks later a reply is recieved at $BIG_MERKIN_BREWERY$, which is opened with excitement : "Dear Sirs. We regret to inform you that your horse has diabetes.")

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    111. Re: Sudafed by Occams · · Score: 1

      Bumgravy! Recreational drug use never improved the life of anyone.

      --
      Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
  2. the inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... which will inevitably make it into the wild, and then ...

    1. Re:the inevitable by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Yeah we already have so much trouble with good old alcohol producing yeast escaping into the wild and getting unsuspecting people drunk.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:the inevitable by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Except that alcohol bakes out of the bread while morphine does not.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    3. Re:the inevitable by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

      Forget 1920's Coke... BEER! - now with morphine...

      If there is a will, there is a way.... -to make people stupid.

    4. Re:the inevitable by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't worry morphine is not temperature stable and will break down at bread-baking temperatures. But seriously, don't make bread with it. If you're worried about contamination of regular yeast, however, then remember only a really really small part of your yeast will not be wild-type. Unless you went out of your way to select for the genetically engineered yeast in your sample, you're getting plain old yeast (with maybe a trace of genetically engineered yeast after many years of this strain being commonly available). There's no reason to think that fermenting to morphine provides any evolutionary benefit to yeast versus fermenting to ethanol. So you won't be overdosing on opioid bread just yet.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    5. Re:the inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My point (I'm the poster of the thread's head) was that wild yeasts are frequently used to brew beers, wines, and as the followup poster suggested, leavened breads. Not that pathogenic yeast infections might not at some point be a problem (yeasts do trade genetic material), but that inadvertent consumption might be an immediate problem.

    6. Re:the inevitable by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Dude have you tried this bread? No. Problem. At all. Hang on..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:the inevitable by BronsCon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Damn.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    8. Re:the inevitable by gtbritishskull · · Score: 1
    9. Re:the inevitable by Anonymice · · Score: 1

      Wut? There's no alcohol in yeast - it (& carbon dioxide) are created as a by-product in a warm, damp, sugar-rich environment. You'd have to be really lax with your storage methods if you're getting alcohol in your bread mixture.

    10. Re:the inevitable by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Starches process into sugars. What do you think happens while the bread is rising?

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    11. Re:the inevitable by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      ... such a yeast infection could be fatal. The weapon potential of this technology is horrific. Only if it is done in a totally synthetic life-form (incompatible DNA and dependant on unnatural food sources), that has zero chance of surviving in the wild, would it be remotely safe for even the big pharmacology companies to consider trying.

    12. Re:the inevitable by Cocioc · · Score: 1

      As far as I know (from my home-brewing), starches are not fermentable (that's why you mash the grain prior to pitching the yeast, to convert the starches into fermentable sugars). The yeast in bread makes the bread rise by using the fermentable sugars in the dough, and as a by-product CO2 is released, which makes the bread rise. Some alcohol may/amy not be also be realeased (I never looked into the bread process), as based on what I know, the yeast starts producing alcohol as a biproduct only when it runs out of oxigen (until then it keeps multiplying). So, going back to your statement, starches are not processed by the yeast in any way. Sugars are processed into some other stuff and also CO2, that's what happens when the bread is rising.

    13. Re:the inevitable by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Actually, yeast convert carbohydrates—starches and sugars—to alcohol and carbon dioxide gas. That article is about as plain-english of an explanation as you'll find; and yes, it even confirms that the starches are processed into sugars before being turned into alcohol and CO2. All the yeast can make from a simple sugar (which, aside from starches which the yeast breaks into simple sugars via enzymes, is all yeast can process) is CO2 and alcohol and, since sugar isn't pure carbon, if CO2 is being produced, so it alcohol.

      Unless you've discovered a strain of yeast that can transmute matter at the atomic level, in which case you need to apply for some grants to further that line of research.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  3. Taliban tally... by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...in other news, so many Taliban are going to divorce their 3rd and 4th wives due to low opium sales.

    1. Re:Taliban tally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...in other news, out of true belief in allah the true god, the 3rd and 4th wives of many Taliban volunteer for martyr service.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Taliban tally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they do that? I would think they'd divorce the 1st and 2nd wives, them being the older models.

    3. Re:Taliban tally... by plopez · · Score: 1

      Just like in the US. Swap out the old wife for the young one.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    4. Re:Taliban tally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might think so, but the older wives are the ones more likely to have kids who would be very upset about the divorce.

  4. Major changes in many countries by amorsen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If we eliminated the need to grow opium, a some countries would find their economies transformed. Imagine Afghanistan without opium financing various criminal factions. We just need to figure out how to make cocaine without coca, and Middle America would be changed too.

    Of course that relies on the secret getting out. Otherwise we are still stuck with the morass of violent crime.

    --
    Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    1. Re:Major changes in many countries by geekmux · · Score: 0

      If we eliminated the need to grow opium, a some countries would find their economies transformed. Imagine Afghanistan without opium financing various criminal factions. We just need to figure out how to make cocaine without coca, and Middle America would be changed too.

      Of course that relies on the secret getting out. Otherwise we are still stuck with the morass of violent crime.

      Yes, let's figure out ways to continue to make the drugs that kills us without using the base products instead of oh, I dunno...figuring out how to not ensure demand stays at 100%.

      After all, it's obvious the inherent problem to solve with cocaine addiction is the cocoa leaf.

      I'm certain the cure for obesity is smaller forks too.

    2. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile here in America the war on drugs is keeping everything nicely in check.

      The greatest threat to our economy is the secret KFC original crispy chicken recipe getting out.

    3. Re:Major changes in many countries by amorsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There has been practically zero progress on handling the demand side. Doing so would require a radical rethink of how Western countries deal with drugs and drug addiction. This is not likely to happen in the next 20 years at least, and it is stupid to condemn other countries to 20 more years of violence by keeping our focus on limiting supply.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    4. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, the one effective treatment for opioid addiction is Ibogaine, and medical study or application of it in America is illegal because it is a schedule 1 drug

      Yippee for 'Merica shooting itself in the foot for over 200 years

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    5. Re:Major changes in many countries by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      oh, I dunno...figuring out how to not ensure demand stays at 100%.

      An obvious first step is to start treating addiction as a medical problem rather than as a criminal problem. Maybe we should spend less on police and prison guards, and more on doctors and nurses.

    6. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We already did eliminate the need to grow opium and all opioids used in American pharmaceuticals come from a coal-tar process.

      This was supposed to bring about the end of illegal opium and heroin, but has not had the effect because it is very hard to get people to stop growing a plant that they can get paid lots of money for.

      Countries like Hungary allow farmers to grow a limited amount of poppies, which are purchased for use in the European pharma industry. This allows the farmers to make money and keeps it from becoming heroin

      There is no reason to believe that creating new ways to synthesize opioids will reduce the growing of poppies

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    7. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I imagine you are pretty young. I'll let you in on a little secret, constantly talking to people like they are idiots isn't going to bring anyone around to your way of thinking.

      As an aside, your way of thinking in this particular case is pretty extreme and not really borne out by reality. It turns out that there are all kinds of drugs that are currently illegal that people continue to use regularly without dying. Heck, there are completely legal substances and activities that can kill you if not handled with moderation. I'm sure you know all of that.

      Now, if you were instead trying to get people to consider that treatment of addiction is important, then you should probably suggest that more directly and without all the hyperbole, and you may find that you are among many like minded individuals.

    8. Re:Major changes in many countries by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      It is not a crime to be addicted.

      How about we work on prevention as well.

    9. Re:Major changes in many countries by dj245 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There has been practically zero progress on handling the demand side. Doing so would require a radical rethink of how Western countries deal with drugs and drug addiction. This is not likely to happen in the next 20 years at least, and it is stupid to condemn other countries to 20 more years of violence by keeping our focus on limiting supply.

      In Canada (at least in Sydney, Nova Scotia), addicts get their fix right at the hospital. For free.

      It seems stupid at first, but it is extremely effective in reducing all kinds of crime related to drugs and addiction. Nobody there is breaking into houses or summer cabins looking for painkillers or goods to pawn. Nobody is stealing car stereos and pawning them to finance their habit. The number of people mixing dangerous chemicals in their house or garage is reduced. Why bother with all that when you just go to the hospital and get your legal high for free? Product originating from Taliban-controlled areas can't compete with free.

      If Marijuana is more your style, they have medical marijuana laws and lax enforcement of recreational use. The end result is that local people grow it in their basements, cutting out any foreign supplier or middlemen. Marijuana isn't free, but I have yet to hear of any case where someone broke the law in order to get money to buy weed.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    10. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are playing word games

      An addict can either pay for heroin, or pay for a substitute like methadone (assuming that they want to get off of heroin)

      If they decide to use heroin for their addiction, then they are criminals because there is no legal way to get heroin in America.
      This is very expensive and in many cases requires that they either steal from others, or sell heroin themselves. These are both criminal activities

      We have a lot of 'prevention' activities going on right now. They seem to be ineffective. One big problem with them is that they have created a large blackmarket infrastructure that is particularly good at finding and supplying new customers.

      Portugal has decriminalized all drugs and as a result reduced the number of new users, which is to say that decriminalization is the path to prevention

      Try selling that idea in America

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    11. Re:Major changes in many countries by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 0

      Selling heroin, not using it, is what gets prosecuted in the US.

    12. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to crimes commited while trying to pay for the drugs since you're addicted.

    13. Re:Major changes in many countries by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      You are incorrect about the origin of prescription opiates in the US. A small portion of opiates prescribed are fully synthetic: methadone, pethidine, fentanyl are the only relevant ones. By volume of prescriptions as well as sheer number of products, opiates synthesized from poppy constituents (if not extracted directly from poppy) are way more: codeine, morphine, hydrocodone, oxycodone, hydromorphone, oxymorphone, ...

    14. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 2

      Possession of heroin is a felony

      The theory is that having a felony for possession allows the police to pressure the defendant into turning over their supplier

      The theory goes onto suggest that they can use this technique to gain knowledge of and arrest the kingpins of the drug syndicate

      This has not been demonstrated in reality where most of the people serving time for drug possession are wither users or low level stooges used to transport the products

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    15. Re:Major changes in many countries by geekmux · · Score: 1

      oh, I dunno...figuring out how to not ensure demand stays at 100%.

      An obvious first step is to start treating addiction as a medical problem rather than as a criminal problem. Maybe we should spend less on police and prison guards, and more on doctors and nurses.

      Alcoholism was officially defined as a disease over half a century ago, paving the way for treatment centers to open all across the country with full official support and backing from the medical and insurance community.

      What was the direct impact on alcoholism today? By the time you finish reading this sentence, three more humans will become addicted to alcohol.

      Treating addiction as a medical problem? Oh yeah. I can really tell how well that fucking tactic worked out...

    16. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      Codeine and Morphine are both synthesized in the US by processes patented in the 1950's and promoted in the US in the 1970's

      "President's Nixon's War on Drugs made it increasingly difficult to obtain these poppies that grow mostly in areas of the world that are unfriendly to America's pharmaceutical interest, such as Afghanistan. Drug manufacturers have had to barter with heroin dealers for the purchase of this raw codeine product. This led chemist to the discovery of a method to synthesize codeine from coal tar, which eliminated the need for having the original black-tar opium and freed the drug companies from having to compete with the illicit drug cartels. "
      http://www.narconon.org/drug-i...

      In the US the official doctrine is to suppress the growing of poppies for opiate production:

      "The United States, however, has no present intention of entering the field of poppy cultivation. On the contrary, this field was abandoned as a matter of national policy, and commercial poppy cultivation suppressed even during the war: for it is the conviction of the narcotics authorities of the United States that only by striking at the source can the opium evil finally be overcome. It may be that in some countries the poppy can be grown for seed alone, or for seed and alkaloids, without the danger of narcotic addiction spreading among the population. Certain it is, however, that, in some countries, opium is produced far in excess of legitimate needs. It is the belief of the United States that the only way to conquer the opium evil is by restricting, and, where necessary, completely abolishing, the cultivation of the opium poppy plant itself. The narcotics authorities of the United States have expressed their satisfaction that the United States can contribute, by its own sacrifice and example, to this end"
      http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/...

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    17. Re:Major changes in many countries by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Horseshit.

      There are two charges when it comes to narcotics:

      Possession
      Possession with intent to distribute

      The difference between them is basically the seized quantity of the illicit substance. Both are prosecuted. Often.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    18. Re:Major changes in many countries by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      I'd prefer that we just let the Afghans sell their poppy-scrapings to drug companies and keep it above-board.
      Just my $.02.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    19. Re:Major changes in many countries by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      Here in Colorado, there's a bunch of crime centered around grow facilities (robbing them) and robberies and burglaries for the cash being transported. It's one of the main reasons why the state is lobbying very hard for banking regulation reform at the fed level, for example.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    20. Re:Major changes in many countries by rea1l1 · · Score: 2

      That was intentional. The people were never supposed to get comfortable. That would result in individual creativity, personal independence, and thus a loss in profits & control.

    21. Re:Major changes in many countries by rea1l1 · · Score: 0

      "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

      The majority of modern legal institutions are unlawful.

    22. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymice · · Score: 1

      Opium may be produced by some criminal groups, but the overall majority is produced by poor farmers who have no other choice. The Americans went in all heroic & destroyed many of their crops, without giving them any other viable alternative to make a living. You want them to grow something else? Okay, create a demand for it.

      It's the same for coca, in fact coca is a traditional crop that's nationally consumed in Bolivia as both a tea & chewing herb. The majority of cocaine is produced from illegal, unlicensed plantations.

      I actually find it quite tragically humorous that the very nation that created this narcotics black market & has so heavily bullied other countries to fight its "War on Drugs", is now going through the process of liberalising & legalising the production of its own drugs. The hypocrisy after all the damage they've caused is startling.

    23. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was the direct impact on alcoholism today? By the time you finish reading this sentence, three more humans will become addicted to alcohol.

      Stopped reading your post halfway through this line.

      #doingmypart

    24. Re:Major changes in many countries by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      I did not say it was not a crime.

      Users only are generally not prosecuted.

    25. Re:Major changes in many countries by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Charges are different than prosecution and putting people in jail.

      The first one rarely. The second one much more often.

    26. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your number is meaningless without knowing the rates of of alcoholism and alcohol-related mortality over time.

    27. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Countries like Hungary allow farmers to grow a limited amount of poppies, which are purchased for use in the European pharma industry.

      You are misrepresenting the situation. In (at least) Hungary, Austria, and the Czech Republic, there are no limits as you suggest, and the primary reason for growing poppies is that poppyseeds are popular foods. Maybe the leftover poppy straw is useful for pharmaceutical uses, I don't know. But the primary use is as food.

    28. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasmanian_Alkaloids
      http://www.wired.com/2007/10/tasmanian-heroi/

    29. Re:Major changes in many countries by inflamed · · Score: 1

      Could you provide a reference that's not narconon (a division of scientology)?

    30. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lolwut?? I've been to jail TWICE for possession of marijuana. Both times it was little more than a 20 sack. No other arrests.

    31. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      Mr D seems to be expressing the 'soft side' claims of prohibitionists that there are no 'drug users' only 'drug dealers' in jail

      This is an attempt to negate the 'less harm' argument that the most harmful thing that can happen to most drug users to being arrested, receiving a felony and going to jail, which places a life-long stigma on them and their ability to earn a living

      Unfortunately, Mr D is wrong and prosecutors across the country make use of stiff felony convictions for drug users, frequently placing naive offenders into prison with violent convicts who only deepen the antisocial practices of the drug users

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    32. Re:Major changes in many countries by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      Reference to coal-tar base synthesis of Morphine
      "It was announced in 1973 that a team at the National Institutes of Health in the United States had developed a method for total synthesis of morphine, codeine, and thebaine using coal tar as a starting material. A shortage in codeine-hydrocodone class cough suppressants (all of which can be made from morphine in one or more steps, as well as from codeine or thebaine) was the initial reason for the research."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

      However, on further research these steps may have been abandoned or subsidized with 'less expensive' means by importing Narcotic Raw Materials (NRM) from seven allowed countries, since NRMs may not be produced in America. The allowed countries are:
      "Traditional suppliers India and Turkey must be the source of at least 80 percent of the United States' requirement for NRM. Five non- traditional supplier countries--France, Poland, Hungary, Australia, and Yugoslavia--may be the source of not more than 20 percent. "
      http://www.deadiversion.usdoj....

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    33. Re:Major changes in many countries by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Do you think these places will actually be better off? Seems hard to believe. A big cash infusion like that isn't going to get spend only on guns. Those guys are buying things from legitimate businessmen.

    34. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heroin is expensive because drug cartels like extremely high profits. Drugs wreck your health to a large extent because of the impurities that exist in them because of the poor quality of manufacture. If manufactured in government labs, shots would be a) far cheaper b) far purer and c) of known standardized strength. If sold by Pharmacists it becomes possible to offer medical and counselling services to users who are returning for refills too regularly.

      Bingo, boingo, you've saved your nation the $5+ billion dollars spent annually fruitlessly fighting the war on drugs whilst simultaneously destroying the cartels business model.

      Sounds like a win win to me.

    35. Re:Major changes in many countries by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Your number is meaningless without knowing the rates of of alcoholism and alcohol-related mortality over time.

      Just in the United States, someone becomes addicted to alcohol at the rate of one every three seconds.

      http://www.substance.com/live-drug-stats-visualizing-drug-use-in-america/13180/

      According to the CDC not long ago, alcohol was the 3rd leading cause of preventable death. Not sure what more we need to talk about. This problem isn't getting better or going away. We've just managed to waste billions making it acceptable to insurance companies for the last few decades by trying to reclassify it as a disease.

    36. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait? What? That's the best you got? Narcanon kill your brother or something?

    37. Re:Major changes in many countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you still arguing this, moron! It isn't 1963 anymore. Go to your local convenience store and get one of those "Look Who's in Jail This Week" papers. The majority is for possession both with and without intent to distribute. As typical of most slashdotters, the lack of knowledge pertaining to a subject in no way reduces the amount of expertise in a subject one pontificates about.

    38. Re:Major changes in many countries by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      "The difference between them is basically the seized quantity of the illicit substance. Both are prosecuted. Often."

      In some jurisdiction quantity isn't a factor if it's a second arrest for the same charge. For instance in my state a second arrest for possesion of marijuana, regardless of quantity is automatically elevated to "with intent to distribute".

  5. Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think its inevitable that the drug cartels will find a way to get this. The answer to the drug problem is legalisation and regulation, treat addiction as the disease it is!

    1. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The drug cartels would prefer that it remain illegal, as that is what protects their niche market. If recreational drugs were legalized, then legitimate businesses would produce them, and the drug cartels would not be able to compete. Some of their members might be able to go legit, but most will not, because if they could, they already would be legit.

      Don't forget: drug cartels are rich, which makes them very politically powerful, which is part of why their products remain illegal...they have more influence over government than anyone would like to believe they do.

    2. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I think its inevitable that the drug cartels will find a way to get this.

      When this gets out, the cartels will be out of business. No one has a greater interest in keeping these yeast locked up.

      The answer to the drug problem is legalisation and regulation

      That would also put the cartels out of business.

    3. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 2

      Interesting...

      Drug cartels make money because drugs are illegal

      Therefore, politicians that work to keep drugs illegal are enabling drug cartels to make money

      Would it be going too far to wonder if the drug cartels would bother to support the election of politicians who work to keep drugs illegal?

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    4. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Khashishi · · Score: 2

      If, by drug cartels, you mean Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Novartis, then yes, they will find a way to get this.

    5. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Frobnicator · · Score: 2

      Drug cartels make money because drugs are illegal

      No, drugs are regulated.

      After a whole bunch of deaths, addictions, permanent damage, and otherwise destroyed lives, laws regulating medicine were established to help protect people both from scammers and also from their own ignorance. Back in the late 1800's morphine was available to anyone and was widely abused, then in 1895 Bayer launched heroin as a less addictive substitute sold directly to the public, only to have it lead to even more drug abuse problems. Drug stores were not regulated and would frequently swap out relatively expensive drugs with other compounds. Many drugs were sold as tinctures, which the store could heavily dilute with alcohol.

      Too many "snake oil salesmen", too many drug abuses, too many fake drugs, too many overdoses, and over time people demanded rules and regulations.

      Today there are regulations in most nations.

      Chemicals that had a significant reaction are regulated, not illegal. In the US that means five different classifications of drugs, from Schedule 1 (no accepted clinical use, limited research use only), through Schedule 5 over-the-counter (readily available preparations including OTC drugs). Potentially dangerous or addictive preparations require a physician's direction. Drug stores are required to meet strict standards to ensure the exact prescribed medicine is given out rather than diluted or fake products. That is a GOOD THING. That is how you know your heart medication or allergy pill is not a sugar pill, or insulin wasn't replaced with saline, or your child's antibiotic for pneumonia wasn't swapped out with bubblegum flavored liquor.

      In this case of morphine-producing yeast, that would fall under a Schedule 2 product, same as morphine, and require the same oversight to help reduce abuse and misuse of the highly addictive compounds.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    6. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by rea1l1 · · Score: 1

      Here we have an effect of the supposedly republican government overstepping its bounds and pretending to be a democracy, resulting in the disrespect of the rights of the people. My rights end where yours begin.

      We now have people telling other people what they can and cannot do with their own property; their own bodies, their own compounds, their own free agency.

      What happened to liberty, freedom, and responsibility? Profit. Nearly every single one of our mainstream industries have been monopolized by social industrial groups as if we were living in a democracy, & not a republic, as was founded.

      Who cares that the constitution is entirely ignored by everyone in the field of law? You should. Modern law is unlawful in its entirety.

      The tenth amendment clearly states:

      "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

      Today, everything is under the rule of the plutocracy of the Forcefully United States Corporation.

    7. Re: Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abuse and misuse according to who? You and your particular morals you think it's a good idea to impose on others under pain of imprisonment and loss of employability for life? That's your 'regulation', and trying to sugarcoat it is insulting the intelligence of those of us in the real world. We need that kind of regulation and punishment for wall street and not for people trying to get by in life.

      No, I don't do drugs and I've never had any of those things happen to me. Just seen too much of it happen to otherwise good people and I want to see it stop.

    8. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can grow herbs in your backyard, or even on your counter top. Do you have any idea how popular and expensive mint or coriander are in the grocery store?

      People have better things to than to synthesize drugs in their home, no matter how easy it is. There'll always be a market, and a quite large one at that. People will always pay a premium to relatively large-scale producers with stable quality and pricing.

    9. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the view you have posted I have to ask, are you in law enforcement or politics? You can call it 'regulation' but when you have laws that say selling, buying, or even possessing and using a substance is forbidden, then that is NOT regulation, that is illegal. The 1800s where indeed rife with abuse of opiates, BUT the issue was not really that people just had junky addicted attitudes, it was an entire culture issue at the time, opiates where seen as cure-alls and marketed for use in just about any ailment from headaches to cold sores, combined with horrible understanding of the substance itself. So yes there was death, addiction, and damages but most of that could of been avoided by understanding things better. As a collective people we don't always know or realize what is best for us, and humans can be knee jerk reactionaries very easily often overlooking the big picture to focus on a single thing and allowing a narrow mindset to guide us to a hasty decision, this combined with agendas from politicians can easily lead to far overreaching laws that have dire consequences. I do agree that the pharmaceutical industry does need regulation so that when you go to get medicine you know it is what it is supposed to be, and that it has been proven to be safe and do what it's marketed to do, but that is where it should stop, if an individual wants to grow his own poppies he should be able to, if he wants to grow his own coca he should be able to, if he wants to grow is own weed he should be able to, but the moment he decides to go into business with it that is when regulations should start and not before.

    10. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want to apply "sectioning" to people with a drug addiction, rather than criminal incarceration? What is the difference, you come out at the end without a criminal record, but your term is set by psychiatrists and is potentially indefinite?

    11. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You don't know what "republic" and "democracy" mean, yet insist on using them ad nauseam. Please stop. It's embarrassing.

    12. Re:Yeah good luck with that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowhere in his statement did he use the word sectioning, segregation, detainment, or any other simile. Treatment can come in many forms and are constantly being debated. IS your eye ok? That knee jerk probably hurt pretty bad.

  6. Reshape prohibition by edtice1559 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hopefully this reshapes our modern prohibition. Whether or not laws change, this stuff will now be manufactured in small facilities. No need to control large swaths of land. The opium farmers will go from terrorized to abandoned. Don't know whether that will be good for them or not. No more smuggling loads around the world. Just import some bacteria and start producing. Should increase competition in the market, too, and drive the price down. Less lucrative to control the inner city distribution points so those areas will go from terrorized to abandoned too. Should be interesting to see this unfold. I hope for the best.

    1. Re: Reshape prohibition by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Or the US government could suddenly declare that genetic engineering is subject to DEA oversight, subjecting that particular field to a dark age.

      Which given the US government's stupidly overzealous substance control laws, it's not far removed from being a reality.

    2. Re:Reshape prohibition by beep54 · · Score: 1

      Capitalism at its finest, then.

    3. Re: Reshape prohibition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sick of the nanny state.

      The US needs to deregulate the medical and health care industries now. It costs our economy and country in untold lives, lost time, and money.

      Who gives @#$*( if people start brewing narcotics at home. Don't we have better things to do? The government should be supporting freedom and independence of its citizens, not obstructing it.

      The failed drug war and failed health care system are two sides of the same coin.

      Do we really trust a bureaucracy that has decided cannabis is a life-threatening substance? It's broken all the way through.

    4. Re: Reshape prohibition by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      The US government may do as you describe. But I don't think it will matter to the drug traffickers or users! They will go about as if the restriction didn't exist.

    5. Re: Reshape prohibition by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who gives @#$*( if people start brewing narcotics at home.

      The same people who take the time to airbrush and blur out a boob on a Picasso, that's who. The best part is this kind of person thinks it is doing the world a favor.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re: Reshape prohibition by plopez · · Score: 2

      The health care industry was unregulated until about the 20's. So many people died that the FDA and a host of health and sanitation laws were pass. Then the death rate started to drop.

      People forget that for a long time going to a hospital actually increased your odds of dying.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    7. Re: Reshape prohibition by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Most people still die in hospitals. Avoid them if you can.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re: Reshape prohibition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never mind the boobs; they should have blurred out the whole painting -- cubism is disgusting.

    9. Re:Reshape prohibition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      some bacteria

      Pet peeve: Yeasts are not bacteria, they are fungi.

    10. Re:Reshape prohibition by hey! · · Score: 1

      Hopefully this reshapes our modern prohibition.

      This kind of presumes reason is the basis of our drug laws.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    11. Re:Reshape prohibition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pet peeve, the plural of yeast is still yeast.

    12. Re: Reshape prohibition by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      The same people who take the time to airbrush and blur out a boob [jezebel.com] on a Picasso, that's who. The best part is this kind of person thinks it is doing the world a favor.

      Actually I think they probably had a good reason to do that. Remember how much of a shitstorm the 2004 superbowl halftime caused? The FCC made a lot of money that day by fining the shit out of everybody involved.

      And I like how the website you linked just jumps on Fox News and conservatives, even though this action likely has nothing to do with either of them (Fox affiliates are independently owned.)

    13. Re: Reshape prohibition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "point" only reinforces Dubai's. He's bitching about the fact you need to cover your ass from lawsuits because some soccer mom will sue your ass over a fucking boob- two of which she probably personally owns. So no, they don't have a good reason because that reasoning is based on a shaky foundation. People have tits. Let's move on.

    14. Re: Reshape prohibition by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Dude, pay the fuck attention to what he said, he was specifically calling blame for the people who airbrushed it out. You can't blame somebody for not wanting to get fined to last Tuesday and/or having their broadcast license (which is their sole means of employment) revoked over a titty.

      Ever since 2004, there's been a heavy sense of "if in doubt, blur it out" in the entire broadcast industry, and it's not their fault at all.

  7. Yeah, good luck with that by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    The world should take steps to head that off, they argue, by locking up the bioengineered yeast strains and restricting access to the DNA that would let drug cartels reproduce them

    How would they restrict them to something that someone with enough money couldn't buy their way around? Being as the drug cartels have no shortage of money, it seems like a pointless move.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Yeah, good luck with that by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      How would they restrict them to something that someone with enough money couldn't buy their way around?

      Now that it's known to be possible, the drug cartels don't even need to buy or steal the recipe. If necessary, they could just hire some genetic engineers to independently re-discover how to do it.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:Yeah, good luck with that by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 0

      It's as stupid as algorithm export bans. Supply of anything is rarely hampered for long provided sufficient demand. However, given a vacuum of good ideas invented by a certain political party, that party will happily supply bad ones. Should the other side manage to come up with something better, of course they'll make sure they encounter roadblocks.

      Spoken another way. Conservatives seem to like to keep with the tradition of attacking supply. Liberals try to attack the demand. Since the latter came from the liberals it of course is socialism and therefore evil. It's unclear how successful tackling demand would be, but hitting supply is good for the MIC and prison industry even if it has a clear historical demonstration of failing to solve the original problem.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  8. Sweet...Breaking Bad reboot storyline in 2025 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heisenberg!

    1. Re:Sweet...Breaking Bad reboot storyline in 2025 by dmbasso · · Score: 2

      No, no, no! This time it will be Pasteur!

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
  9. They can't stop tons of heroin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But they can prevent even a few spores from getting into the hands of the cartels.
    Truthfully it would be the cartels who would fight a desperate drug war to keep this production democratizing yeast out of the hands of home brew street dealers and junkies killing off their trillion dollar middleman industry and their other side of the drug war profits with it.
    This is dangerous as it would take all of the violence and money form the heroin trade.

  10. One more assult on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mankind's freedom and her communion with nature.

  11. Fan-tastic! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now buying homebrewing gear will join buying hydroponic gardening equipment on the list of 'completely legal things most likely to cause the DEA to batter down your door and shoot your dog.'

    That'll be fun.

    1. Re:Fan-tastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or throw a flash bang grenade into you baby's crib. http://abcnews.go.com/US/family-toddler-injured-swat-grenade-faces-1m-medical/story?id=27671521

    2. Re:Fan-tastic! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      And get away with it scot-free, that's the absolute best part.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Fan-tastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell puts a baby's crib right inside the front door of their house?

    4. Re:Fan-tastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just wait til they ban sugar. everything will be fucking corn syrup and sucralose.

    5. Re:Fan-tastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you shoot them back? The US needs a civil war. You cannot keep taking this.

      Shoot them before they even start.

  12. Yeast Banned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can foresee the future, home recombinant DNA kits to add drug genes to yeast proliferate on the dark web. Government outlaws home use of yeast, no more home brewed beer or bread making.

    1. Re:Yeast Banned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can foresee the future, home recombinant DNA kits to add drug genes to yeast proliferate on the dark web. Government outlaws home use of yeast, no more home brewed beer or bread making.

      Don't worry, after a few years of this, some state (e.g., Colorado and Washington state) will legalize it and you will see a huge market of opiate "edibles" like heroin-bread and morphine-beer hit the market... Happened already with pot, will happen again in a shorter time now that people see the greenbacks flowing...

      The down-side will be that our addict-laden society will be thrown back to the stone ages for about 150 years (like the Chinese) before we recover again...

    2. Re:Yeast Banned by bobbied · · Score: 1

      How do you stop people from making sour dough? Yeast is literally everywhere...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Yeast Banned by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 0, Troll

      I prefer to think that the addicts will just quickly die off and get out of our hair. This will mean that we will have to go through a spike in crime while this happens, but that's what the Second Amendment is for.

    4. Re:Yeast Banned by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      The only thing that stops you from guzzling Laudanum is the law?

      In the USA all drugs are _readily_ available to any adult that want's them. Laws mean nothing.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  13. It will kill the Afghan opium market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And all our soldiers will have died for nothing, since that is why they are there, to keep the pipeline open.

    1. Re:It will kill the Afghan opium market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      And all our soldiers will have died for nothing, since that is why they are there, to keep the pipeline open.

      No the war was fought to bring to everyone the God-given right to drink alcohol and for women the right to wear bikinis... The tradeoff is we also fought for the right for women drivers. Some tradeoffs are worth it, though... ;^)

  14. Here you go.... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 5, Informative

    heterodoxy.cc/meowdocs/pseudo/pseudosynth.pdf

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Here you go.... by jfengel · · Score: 1

      That's a riot. Thanks for that.

    2. Re:Here you go.... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      That's hysterical. Along those same lines, a co-worker met Bryan Cranston this past weekend.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  15. WoY begins! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And thus begins the war on yeast. Soon yeast will be heavily regulated, soon you will need a state issued license to bake anything. Bakers will be closely watched by the DEA's special yeast proofing unit. Amatuer bakers will have their assets seized and will be forced serve 30+ year prison sentences.

    Also, it takes a good guy with a yeast to stop a bad guy with a yeast.

    1. Re:WoY begins! by slew · · Score: 1

      Also, it takes a good guy with a yeast to stop a bad guy with a yeast.

      As any baker will tell you, it often only takes a little bit of bad yeast to stop the good yeast...

  16. How? by grasshoppa · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure how they hope to contain such a yeast strain. Sure, they can lock it up *now*, but for how long will that last? It'll only take a single corrupt employee, or group of employees, being offered more money than they could ever hope to make in several lifetimes. Then it's out in the wild. Unless they plan on building in some kind of critical vulnerability in the strain, any home brewer can replicate the yeast with ease. Even if they do build in a critical vulnerability, it'll be an "addon" and thus, possible to disable.

    I foresee another "War on Drugs" coming, where the objective in unobtainable. Fortunately after the first round of funding, the objective becomes irrelevant ( of course, the cynic in me is YELLING that the objective IS the funding..but I digress ).

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:How? by hankwang · · Score: 2

      "any home brewer can replicate the yeast with ease." I wouldn't be so sure of that. If this yeast is slow to replicate compared to wild yeast strains that float around in the air, it may be quite difficult to keep your strain from getting outcompeted by other strains unless you have a cleanroom facility at home.

    2. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Small cleanboxes can be easily build at home. Instructions can be found in every good book about mushroom cultivation.

      Made one myself and it works quite well.

  17. Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I know first hand how devastating drug addiction can be, it is about time we abolished the DEA and repealed all the laws making drugs illegal. We could spend one quarter of the money on treatment programs and end up with fewer drug abusers than we've managed with the "War on Drugs". Ted Cruz and his cronies like to point to the "War on Poverty" as being an abject failure because after 50 years we still have all these poor people. Well, isn't the logic just as valid? After 50 years we have millions in prisons and jails, violent drug gangs, police corruption, etc. Perhaps it is time to try something different. In fact, the two kind of go hand in hand. With poverty we should look to actually fostering employment via training and subsidies for employment and a lot of the drug problem goes away right there. With the drug situation we focus on treatment and funnel the treated into job training. For those who want to snort cocaine or shoot heroin, well, they seem to go right ahead and do just that now, drug laws or not.

    1. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tea partiers are too busy taking it up the ass from the Jesus freaks to deal with your big government problems right now, and it's not like any of these people wanted small government anyway, they just wanted big government that they're in charge of. After all, a government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it away from the people they don't like.

    2. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by spauldo · · Score: 2

      We could spend one quarter of the money on treatment programs and end up with fewer drug abusers than we've managed with the "War on Drugs".

      That's not how libertarians work.

      It's more like:

      1) Abolish laws that make drugs illegal, thus saving money on prisons and law enforcement, and lower taxes accordingly
      2) Let addicted people pay for their own treatment, "entitlement" and whatnot
      3) Wealthy Americans install better security or live in gated communities, paid for by the savings in taxes
      4) Who cares about everyone else? If they were important, they'd have money.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    3. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by rea1l1 · · Score: 1

      Incorrect or simply poorly portrayed.

      Libertarians believe:
      1) Laws restricting private property are unlawful in a republic ("public thing") as the republican structure does not have the authority to control any individual unless that individual is breaching the rights of another. A republic is not supposed to have anymore authority than any individual member of the society. Republics are created for the common good, such as for the building and maintence of roads and the defense of the rights of people. What we have today is a form of mob rule, a false democracy, as the republic has completely and entirely breached its founding principles and has been unlawfull, in practice, been converted into a raw democracy.

      2) Government does not have the authority to force an individual to do anything WHATSOEVER, unless that individual is explicitly damaging another person's rights. IT IS NOT that libertarians do not believe we should help addicts, but it is NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB. Any other organization may fill the role.

      3) What?

      4) What? You have a rather prejudiced view of Libertarian?

    4. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by spauldo · · Score: 2

      1) Your idea of a republic doesn't resemble any actual government in the world. Idealism is nice, I suppose, but that's just not the way things work. Also, I've met quite a few libertarians who believe (as did pre-civil war Democrats) that the government shouldn't be responsible for public infrastructure, such as roads. The free market - that magic bullet that fixes everything - will take care of it.

      2) I was not arguing that the government would force addicts to seek treatment, only that libertarians would offer no assistance in doing so. And from what I've seen, many libertarians fully believe that no, they should not help addicts.

      3) You saying this doesn't happen? Also,

      4) The idea that those with money shouldn't be responsible for those without money (at least insofar as taxation is concerned) is one of the core principles of libertarianism. Anything else would be wealth redistribution. To quote one libertarian I know personally, "that's what churches are for."

      Just as an aside, I do generally agree with the libertarian ideas on social issues. Too bad the rest of the Republican party doesn't.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    5. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Despite what you hear from nutty ACs, Tea Party groups are based around fiscal conservatism. It's not a true party, and most of them choose not to take positions on issues unrelated to taxes and spending.

    6. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      There you go again misusing the word "republic". It doesn't help your argument that the very first point you make is flat-out wrong. All I have learned from that is some Libertarians seem to think they know more than they actually do, which on reflection would explain an awful lot of things.

    7. Re:Where's the Tea Party When You Need Them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk got me laughing at you http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  18. Sometimes the banhammer is the wrong tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Decriminalise drugs and there's suddenly no reason to deal with criminals to get your preferred recreational pharmaceutical. This ought to drop prices and even reduce related crime like thefts to fund the habit. Then this whole yeast thing is not a problem either. Not that I particularly care about this, as even with legal drugs gratis for all I'd still refrain.

    But the discussion is focusing on the wrong thing. The problem is criminality around drugs, where you could have safe legal supplies and high quality help on hand instead. That would be a much better proposition than hitting rock bottom before getting shipped off to rehab, or jails full of addicts with really poor --but always some-- supply and inevitably such niceties as very poor needle hiegiene. Most of the problems of drug abuse are the result of poorly thought-out countermeasures, not of the abuse itself. Scientists ought to be smart enough to recognise this and debate that instead.

  19. Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by Rhacman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

    "Auto-brewery syndrome, also known as gut fermentation syndrome, is a rare medical condition in which intoxicating quantities of ethanol are produced through endogenous fermentation within the digestive system."

    Now imagine this with a yeast that produces morphine...

    --
    Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
    1. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now imagine this with a yeast that produces morphine...

      Shut up and take my money!!

    2. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now imagine this with a yeast that produces morphine...

      I was going to make a joke about how I will be pooping out large quantities of morphine metabolites, but if my gut making morphine directly, I am never pooping again.

    3. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by slew · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Now imagine this with a yeast that produces morphine...

      Or just a standard yeast infection...

    4. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by Cmdr-Absurd · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing: Star Trek TOS "The Naked Time." IRL.

    5. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      where do I get some o'that?

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    6. Re:Imagine auto-brewery syndrome with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just to feel the full gravity of the situation, realize how many junkies will be specifically searching out frothy vagina to munch on...

  20. Re:This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

    Yes, I'm sure the Crips and Bloods, and the south of the border cartels, are just full of Republicans.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  21. Why fight it? by bistromath007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let's just make opiates the opiate of the masses. They're way more effective than what we've been using instead.

    1. Re:Why fight it? by spauldo · · Score: 1

      Religion is the traditional opiate of the masses, and has better lobbyists.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    2. Re:Why fight it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Religion is the traditional opiate of the masses

       

      They're way more effective than what we've been using

      Methinks someone doth protest too much.

  22. Destroy the cartels by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Easy home brewing of mind-degrading drugs is the drug cartels' worst nightmare. Cartels disappear almost overnight as US citizens can brew drugs at far below the cartel cost of production.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    1. Re: Destroy the cartels by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

      It hasn't happened with alcohol. Very easy to make at home using yeast, yet people still buy alcoholic drinks.

    2. Re: Destroy the cartels by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      I haven't since I built my own still.

      Now my seeing dog has to hit the valves.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  23. Just wait for it... by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

    The genome will be on pastebin faster than you can say "DeCSS".

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  24. A lot of people would worry: by Hartree · · Score: 1

    If it works out and is economical compared to the old methods (and that's a heck of a big "if"):

    There are a lot of illegal opium poppy growing operations that would have to drop their prices, use other means (killing those running brewing operations) or go out of business.

    I can't say I'll shed many tears for some of the leaders of those groups.

  25. go away greenwow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a fool, it is the way of your kind.

  26. What can you do about it? by MikeRT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At this point, anyone who uses hard drugs in the US is doing so after years of being told all of the nasty things they do to your body. There's no curing that level of stupid. There's a percentage of the population that in the absence of morphine, will abuse bath salts and model glue. No law can fix that complete lack of long term thinking.

    1. Re:What can you do about it? by bobbied · · Score: 0

      Perhaps not, but addiction treatment for users and prison for producers/distributors seems like a good thing to try, even if we don't seem to have an epidemic of long term thinking going on in the country. I believe in giving multiple chances and upping the anti each time.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:What can you do about it? by Khashishi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of people who abuse drugs do so because their lives suck. Maybe they don't care about their long term health because they have no hope for the future and don't care if it kills them. Efforts to penalize them for using drugs simply makes their lives suck more and their future even more hopeless.

    3. Re:What can you do about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of people whose lives suck don't abuse drugs. Why not examine that relation?

    4. Re:What can you do about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who uses hard drugs in the US is doing so after years of being told all of the nasty things they do to your body.

      Not opiates. They generally won't damage your body. The negative effects you might be thinking of are usually because users neglect their bodies.

    5. Re:What can you do about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just FYI people weren't getting high on bath salts like are made for baths. There was a wave of synthetic drugs, many sold over the internet and packaged as "bath salts" in order to fly below the radar. The drugs didn't have a popular name so they became known as bath salts.

    6. Re:What can you do about it? by tsotha · · Score: 1

      From what I can tell, rehab does jack shit. People who want to get clean get clean. The others don't. The best we can do is give them pharmaceutical quality methadone so they don't die before they decide to get clean.

    7. Re:What can you do about it? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Yea, so? It doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try to help because you never know if that addict really is at the end of themselves and ready to get clean, or just saying what they have to in order to stay out of jail. Going clean should ALWAYS be an option, and staying clean should be the requirement to stay out of jail, but we should offer to help anyone who is willing to do rehab... (We being the government.. Personally, a whole lot of addicts are enabled by their loved ones to remain addicts and that should stop... But government should never give up trying.)

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    8. Re:What can you do about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that opiates (like morphine) are notable for their decided lack of physical ill effects. The one negative physical effect is constipation, which is simply uncomfortable in 99% of cases (the elderly can develop an impacted colon, which they might wind up with even without drugs involved) and can be avoided with lots of water and fiber. There's withdrawal, too, of course, but that's short-term and the physical effects are no worse than a flu.

      Unsafe injection practices can cause infection or damage to veins, but despite what the mainstream media tells you, most opiate users do not inject their drugs (even heroin is more often smoked than injected). In any case, this is a problem with *needles,* not with opiates themselves, and can be avoided with safe injection practices. Unfortunately, US laws exist to make safe injection practices difficult to use, which makes your statement that "no law can fix that complete lack of long term thinking" rather ironic.

      Compare this to the legal drug alcohol, which positively destroys multiple organs and has a withdrawal that can cause seizures and death. But no one (outside of insufferable sticks-in-the-mud) talks about how people who have a few beers on Friday night are idiots with no long term thinking.

      Oh, and no opiate user is turning to "bath salts" (you know that's a slang term, and not the household good, right?) or inhalants if they can't get their drug of choice. That's a pretty absurd suggestion.

  27. Why do I get the impression... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that this call for regulation has been brought to us by a drug cartel?

    I mean, if it was that easy, then no one would need the cartels anymore.

  28. Re:This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 0

    Entrepreneurs that love guns and gold crosses, hate gays and regulations, and don't care about the effects of their business on the environment or their customers? Sounds like the green party to me ;)

    --
    This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
  29. Finally, an end to the War on Drugs by penguinoid · · Score: 2

    There's already a drug with many harmful effects that is widely abused, that was legally (as in, the Constitution was modified) banned, and is made by yeast.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Finally, an end to the War on Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's already a drug with many harmful effects that is widely abused, that was legally (as in, the Constitution was modified) banned, and is made by yeast.

      Ergotamine ?

    2. Re:Finally, an end to the War on Drugs by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      ethanol.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  30. It's the next revolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While most people still work in the present-day information age and think they're clever, and some people think 3D printing is some sort of revolution, and some hard-core minority thinks the 1960s Space Age fantasies are real, the real game-changing paradigm-shifting game changing stuff will come from the biology revolution.

    Prepare for weirdness.

  31. All your genes are belong to us! by pla · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and restricting access to the DNA that would let drug cartels reproduce them

    One problem there - Humans contain the DNA for producing morphine. It works so well precisely because out body already uses it to regulate our natural pain response.

    1. Re:All your genes are belong to us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. We produce a number of peptide opiate receptor agonists (e.g. enkephalins). We don't produce opiates.

    2. Re:All your genes are belong to us! by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      we produce opioid peptides (endorphines) in our liver, which bind to opioid receptors. Morphine is simply very pure endorphine. On speed. Out of a needle. Other natural sources for opioid peptides include gluten in cereals, mammalian casein, soybean, and spinach. The gene for human endorphine was isolated and sequenced in 1982. (Sources: MeSH/VAST local databases)

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    3. Re:All your genes are belong to us! by etinin · · Score: 1

      Well, not correct. Endogenous opiates include endorphins, enkephalins, dynorphins and, surprisingly morphine itself (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10941194).

      Morphine has particularly bad side effects when taken orally. But no endogenous opiate release can ever match the dopamine release of even small opioid intake. Anyone who's ever taken (pharmceutical) opioids for any reason surely understands why one gets addicted to those. Having happiness anxiety-be-gone pills in your pocket can be tempting.

      And what's even worse: unlike true depressants, up to a certain threshold there is almost no effect whatsoever on cognitive performance and will not make you sleepy. So when used in a certain way people get happy and work (and even find work interesting). It is said that chinese immigrants making use of opioids to work better in factories resulted in prejudice which led to opioids being banned in the United States.

      --
      "I decided I could write something better than everything out there in two weeks. And I was right." - Linus Torvalds
    4. Re:All your genes are belong to us! by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      please send your corrections to MeSH/VAST. Wait, strike that, nothing you said except the first three words actually contradicted any of the information I gave.

      The fuck was the point of that, then?

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    5. Re:All your genes are belong to us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To say that your own naturally produced endorphins/opioids will in no way whatsoever get you fucked up like a handful of hydros will? I don't even know what the fuck you two are talking about and I comprehended that!

  32. Yet another attempt... by cynicist · · Score: 1

    to deal with symptoms instead of causes. The drug cartel is only so powerful and dangerous because the laws banning these drugs make it extremely lucrative to trade them. Although... legalizing would be easier said than done, given that you would make a number of law enforcement personnel entirely redundant if you could achieve it, not to mention piss off many misguided people who still think they can impose control of these things through law. When will they see that their short-sighted views are responsible for this monster? Probably never.

  33. Dumb dumb dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So these people think that locking it up will keep it out of the hands of cartels? These are the same cartels that hire engineers to dig tunnels and build micro-submarines. All of a sudden they cannot hire scientists? Stupid.

    1. Re:Dumb dumb dumb by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Statists believe everyone is as stupid as they are.

      While widespread availbility of narco-yeast seems a bad idea, the only way to prevent it is a global total-surveillance totalitarian state. Which would be far worse.

      Most likely the cartels are way ahead of government science in these areas, as they have a ton of money and an eager market.

  34. Politicians... by eth1 · · Score: 1

    Given the amount of sense I've come to expect from regulators, I'm sure sugar is about to become a controlled substance...

  35. Surprised it has taken this long by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    I'm honestly surprised it has taken this long for drugs to be made this way. Well, not that many aren't already, but ones that the average person would be interested in making, that is... really anything that isn't toxic to yeast ought to be doable.

  36. Re:This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

    You betcha, just ask Freeway Ricky Ross...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%...

    about the conduit that he was apart of between Central America and the mean streets of LA as part of the Iran Contra fiasco
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

    Fascinating

    --
    Wherever You Go, There You Are
  37. Re:This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by plopez · · Score: 1

    Do a little reading on Iran-Contra and the role drug money played. See also how the same approach was used to fund an illegal war in Laos by the CIA, Panama, Mexico and a host of others.

    Here's a starting point:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  38. "Restricting Access to DNA" R.O.F.L. by burni2 · · Score: 2

    You want yeast DNA?

    Lick your hand.
    Lick your feet.
    Lick your *beep*.

    And the best thing D.N.A. is a puzzle, but a very logical one.

    When you have watched bio engineering students doing their *basic* experiments with basic yeast you will be astonished what they can achieve by just playing around.

    DNA is a perfect self assembling puzzle you will quickly see how things work out.

    Basically what I want to lay out is that there is not just even the slightest chance of succeeding to conceal that information from drug makers, because they will find out otherwise because in DNA if it works .. you can redo steps or start variations and your own research.

    So yes, the cartels will find a way and hey .. they won the war on drugs haven't they?

    Also in case genetic engineering is too complex there is still Afghanistan.

    1.) So you have many (and I mean many) "underpaid" bio engineering students.

    2.) Decent equipment makes everything easier, but you can built that equipment, that knowledge cannot be subdued(it's too widespread)

    3.) You have "fungus"(yeast) DNA everywhere

    4.) Variations - If you want to find an unknown strain .. go to a brothel, public toilet, the more cultures clash .. the more variations you will find in one spot.

    5.) you have scientific journals (and you also have a black list of crap journals)

    6.) Money = Resources (Hey we are talking here about drug cartels that have no problem to just loose cocain worth being 200 mUSD)

    7.) We have a black pharma market that produces counterfight - and at a 50% chance high quality - drugs for old mens problems from industrial scale made basic chemicals. And nobody can stop them - or wants to.

  39. I can't wait for Anheuser-Busch gets ahold of this by SpankiMonki · · Score: 1

    I can see the Super Bowl commercials now. It'll be like that Farley/Sandler bit on SNL, except the gays will be substituted with heroin models.

  40. Narcobeer? by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1

    I seem to be the only one so far to make the connection to narcobeer. Alan Cole and Chris Bunch wrote a series of military sci-fi (The Sten Chronicles) in which narcobeer is the drink of choice for low status migrant workers. Corporations in the sci-fi equivalent of mining/single industry towns would encourage the consumption of it as a means of controlling the "migs".

    --
    I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    1. Re:Narcobeer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, there are 2 posts above you that mention it.
      Still, opioids in your beer open lots of possibilities for culinary adventure.
      And don't forget baking - muffins, brownies, pizza dough, bread, all can potentially make you narcotically unhealthy in ways we can only imagine now.

    2. Re:Narcobeer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One "Sleeping Beauty IPA" coming up!

  41. Triticum aestivum spelta by tepples · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fun fact: Spelt (Triticum aestivum spelta) is a subspecies of wheat that has become more popular over the past couple decades for needing fewer fertilizers than common wheat. Thus "spelled" has come to be spelled "spelled" to distinguish it from spelt.

    And America south of 49 degrees north latitude has been not an English colony for nearly 240 years.

    1. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

      The last time I saw the word "smelt" outside of metallurgy was in The Hobbit.

      The English language has been losing its grammatical nuances for a long time, which is why we don't wear shoon on our feet anymore. Although I suspect that the sheer weight of so many non-native English speakers participating these days has had an accelerating effect.

      Britain will just have to console itself with the fact that Americans are giving up on "gray" in favor of "gree", I mean, "grey".

      But that's a horse of another colour.

    2. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2

      Really? We have a small oily fish by that name. Also known to pioneers as a Candlefish, because you could catch them by the bucketfull, smoke them, and either eat them or actually *use them as candles* in your log cabin for months after.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by tepples · · Score: 0

      The last time I saw the word "smelt" outside of metallurgy was in The Hobbit.

      The English language has been losing its grammatical nuances for a long time, which is why we don't wear shoon on our feet anymore.

      Hobbits don't wear shoon (or even shoes) for a different reason: thicker skin on the soles and hair on the rest of the feet. But wouldn't they get infected going barefoot all the time?

    4. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by jblues · · Score: 2

      Fun fact: Spelt (Triticum aestivum spelta) is a subspecies of wheat that has become more popular over the past couple decades for needing fewer fertilizers than common wheat. Thus "spelled" has come to be spelled "spelled" to distinguish it from spelt.

      And America south of 49 degrees north latitude has been not an English colony for nearly 240 years.

      As I understand it Spelt is wheat's wild ancestor. Now that its being cultivated there will probably be selective pressure through that process turning in to something else. Perhaps we could call the new stuff 'Spelled'

      But on a very serious note: How long before these new strains of yeast become the dominant strains? It sounds like Ergot all over again, with a new twist. In the middle ages a fungus called Ergot got into Rye grain stores causing trip-out LSD like effects. Folks had visions, heard the voice of god and generally went around doing all kinds of crazy things. Witch hunts, random decapitations, etc. But it all remained just under the medieval radar, since folks were more than half-way mad anyway. This time a slice of morphine-laced soft-white will smack the people out and have them doze around like zombies all day. Again no body will notice, since that is the status quo for our age :)

      --
      If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
    5. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by youngone · · Score: 2

      And America south of 49 degrees north latitude has been not an English colony for nearly 240 years.

      What!? Why was I not told of this?

    6. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by dunkelfalke · · Score: 0

      Since Hobbits don't live in Africa, I guess they are fine.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    7. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by dintech · · Score: 0

      The last time I saw the word "smelt" outside of metallurgy was in The Hobbit.

      Huh. I suppose, "Whoever smelt it, dealt it", refers to the sale of mithril shirts.

    8. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by paiute · · Score: 0

      The last time I saw the word "smelt" outside of metallurgy was in The Hobbit.

      He who smelled it delled it?

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    9. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by drewlake2000 · · Score: 0

      Then you haven't met someone who dealt it then... (a bit of British humour - when someone asks "who farted" the reaction is usually - "Those who smelt it, dealt it", quickly followed by "Those who denied it, supplied it" I'll agree with "shoon", and I only hear "shod" when talking about horses.

    10. Re:Triticum aestivum spelta by RabidReindeer · · Score: 0

      Idioms don't count. Idioms are often the last refuge of dead words.

      I forgot about the fish, though. I'll leave the fish for Gollum and takes the nasty chips. To each his own.

  42. eliminating the demand? by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    ... build large industrial crematorium and air tight shower rooms?

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  43. Switch to Sudafed OM by tepples · · Score: 1

    You may be having an XY problem. You say you want Sudafed but what you most likely want is a decongested nose. I'm no physician, so I'll just tell you what worked for me: I switched from pseudoephedrine tablets to oxymetazoline nasal spray. Brands include Afrin, Sudafed OM, and store brands. To avoid dependency, I use it in one nostril in the morning and the other at night.

    1. Re:Switch to Sudafed OM by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      +1 As an old Perl programmer, I have to appreciate any response that mentions the phrase "XY problem." :)

    2. Re:Switch to Sudafed OM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that makes sense, because somehow the left nostril is completely separate from the right, let's just ignore the fact that the chemical is absorbed into the thin blood barriers of the nose and goes into the same blood stream either way... and really, addicted to nose spray? I have never heard of such a sillyness!

    3. Re:Switch to Sudafed OM by tepples · · Score: 1

      addicted to nose spray? I have never heard of such a sillyness!

      You have now. It's called Rhinitis medicamentosa or rebound congestion.

  44. Better Drinking by AnotherAnonymousUser · · Score: 1

    Now you can literally drink to numb the pain :).

  45. Already proven pointless by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    The whole idea is just DRM on meth. It is just information, and you can't lock up information.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  46. Re: This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way these gangs have a lot in common with Republicans. They believe in acquiring wealth by whatever means necessary, they protect their turf and that of their friends from anybody else who may want to compete because competition is abhorrent to them, and they care not one bit about the consequences of their actions for others as long as they get their way.

    The similarities are kind of striking really.

  47. Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thing drug cartels dont have enough money to finance their own bio and genetics research?

  48. Misquote? by A+non+moose+cow · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't it have said:

    "The world should take steps to head that off, they argue, by locking up the bioengineered yeast strains and restricting access to the DNA that would let competing drug cartels reproduce them."

  49. 1997, mescaline and psylocibin - transgene yeast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://mescaline.com/misc/index.html

    Preliminary Feasibility Study for The Biological Production of L-Dopa, Mescaline and Tryptamines by Intact Recombinant Yeast Cells Using Only Common Amino Acids as Precursors to Bioenzymatic Synthesis

    Overview

    I intend to present here a culling of existing and proven laboratory techniques for the recombinant transformation of microorganisms to the purpose of their production of pharmaceutical compounds which at the present time are only being made via organic syntheses using legally restricted and costly chemicals, and chemical procedures both difficult and dangerous to utilize for the layman not extensively trained in traditional organic synthetic methods.

    Genetically transformed yeasts and e. coli cultures are currently harnessed on an industrial level to make such varied compounds as human insulin, opiates (see references) and cytokines and other immunological artifacts. There is every reason to believe that provided with a moderately equipped recombinant genetics lab and the use of these proven techniques, that yeast cells could be made to produce in high yield tryptamines such as DMT and psilocybin, mescaline and other drugs. I chose to start with tryptamines and phenethylamines as they are simple molecules, which are almost identical to their biosynthetic precursors: the ubiquitous amino acids tryptophan and tyrosine. THC, LSA, and other restricted compounds could also be made in this fashion, but with much, much greater difficulty as they are very much more complex molecules and their biosynthesis is not explored in great detail at this time. With such a recombinant yeast (and I chose yeast over e. coli due the simplicity of yeast culture, i.e., bread and brewing techniques considered-- and also due to the total lack of pathogenicity of cervesia yeasts in general and the fact that yeasts are eukaryotic) all an untrained layman would need to produce these compounds in a pure yield would be: one transformed yeast cell, a bucket, warm water, sugar, amino acids and 12 hours-- and simple acid base extraction techniques to separate the pure psychedelic compounds from the waste materials. Even given theoretical restrictions on amino acids such as those currently imposed on tryptophan, these amino acids are present in almost all living tissue and could be obtained from such. The yeast would utilize its foreign dna inserts to code enzymes that would biochemically substitute the molecular groups that create mescaline or DMT from their amino acid precursors as part of the transformed yeast's metabolic routine. It is not unrealistic to expect a gram or two of pure material from such a 'brewing' effort, in theory--and perhaps more with the use of a pH balanced, aerated fermentation chamber.

    In addition, several useful pharmaceuticals could potentially be made by precursor strains of such a yeast, including L-DOPA, a valuable medicinal compound. L-DOPA is one hydroxyl group (one cactus enzyme) away from tyrosine; it is one further aromatic hydroxyl group and three methyl groups and a decarboxylation away from mescaline. A yeast transformed with only one of the cactus enzymes would produce L-DOPA. I hold out the potential to royalties from such an organism to a prospective funding agency as another reason to support this project: biologically manufactured L-DOPA would be hundreds of times less costly than that which is currently made by pharmaceutical companies using expensive traditional methods which, unlike enzymatic synthesis, create a toxic waste stream. Bioenzymatic synthesis is totally clean and extremely efficient. Also enzymes almost always produce a single enantiomeric species, though that is not a consideration here.

    Considerations

    The following techniques would most easily produce tryptamines, as DMT is created from tryptophan by the work of only two enzymes: one enzyme decarboxylates the L-alkylaminocarboxy chain to an ethylamino chain which is then N-methylated by the second enzyme. The decarboxylation gene is already known and commer

  50. But...it's GMO! by Ranbot · · Score: 2

    No self-respecting drug addict would use franken-morphine!

  51. opiates in your beer by dala1 · · Score: 1

    I'd just like to point out to all those mentioning it that you really don't want opiates in your beer. It's a good way to stop breathing.

  52. Too Late to Stop the Real News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that it can be done. What one man can create/invent, so can another. And you can bet somebody's going to duplicate it and it will get on the Darknet. (Silk Underground Biohackers, perhaps?) And after that, every government in the world will react the way they have to things like filesharing, namely, they'll piss into the wind and tell us it's salt spray.

  53. Re: This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way these gangs have a lot in common with Democrats. They believe in addicting people with handouts and then using that addiction to assist them to accumulate wealth and power by whatever means necessary. They protect their turf by framing their opponents as evil people who don't deserve respect, because compromise is abhorrent to them, and they care not one bit about the consequences of their actions for others as long as they get their way, the ends justifies the means.

    The similarities are kind of striking really.

  54. So, When Will This Be Cheap? by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

    This thread is making me wonder, Is it feasible we will someday see a USB-like device for home organic synthesis, like a 3-D printer but for products of organic chemistry?
    Impossible? Waiting to happen?

    --
    Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
    1. Re:So, When Will This Be Cheap? by inflamed · · Score: 1

      This thread is making me wonder, Is it feasible we will someday see a USB-like device for home organic synthesis, like a 3-D printer but for products of organic chemistry? Impossible? Waiting to happen?

      The device you propose has an unlikelihood level somewhere between human immortality and teleportation.

  55. never mind the cartels by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    AKA "Big pHarma" (yes, I did that deliberately), what about those who actually need the chemical yet are priced out or legaled out due to BP's greed and the terminal myopia of the legislature? Don't they get to grow their own?

    I grow my own elder and willow, you get some amazing stuff out of those. Including a form of aspirin out of the willow bark that doesn't cause my throat to close.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  56. restricting access to the DNA by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    restricting access to the DNA

    What a joke! Do they plan to introduce DRM-enabled DNA?

  57. more laws and regulations now by paul+mafinga · · Score: 1

    The record of the drug war has been phenomenal -- every weekend around 22 black males die in drug turf battles across the USA.

    The legal industrial complex in the tax and spend social utopias is making so much progress. When they catch an armed gang banger, they can no longer afford to cage and feed them. They just release them back to the streets with zero time, another felony conviction, see you in a couple weeks, no room at the Inn. It's really working out well for America.

    More laws and regulations -- on yeast -- are practically guaranteed to take the drug war to an entirely new level of success.

  58. The war on some drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will get even stupider.

  59. Good by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    The drug war needs to be made as impotent as possible.

    Beyond that, one thing that would be quite interesting is if long term medication could be administered by adding the bacteria to your gut. So it just bred down there naturally turning some of your food on a regular basis into whatever drug you need.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  60. Just grow a few poppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is perfectly legal to grow poppies. They grow very easily and is practically a weed. Since it is so easy, why would one want to use yeast?

    1. Re:Just grow a few poppies by inflamed · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly legal to grow poppies. They grow very easily and is practically a weed. Since it is so easy, why would one want to use yeast?

      No, it's not perfectly legal (in the US) and may be perfectly illegal in other jurisdictions. That said, they grow like weeds in the part of Canada where I live - and they are the very first item in our criminal code's list of illegal substances

  61. Re:This will make the Republicans so happy,s... by tsotha · · Score: 1

    Except if you actually read the pages you're linking you see the drugs didn't get shipped to LA as part of the "Iran Contra fiasco". Despite the screeching from Crazy Maxine, the stories directly linking Iran Contra to drugs in the US turned out to be poorly sourced bullshit.

  62. right here, chump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No need for the pharmacy; just press print

    New research into 3D printers could mean cheap, personalized medicine — but could it also mean greater access to recreational drugs?

    No need for the pharmacy; just press print
    Researchers at the University of Central Lancashire have filed a patent for a 3D printer that can create personalized medicines. [Image credit: Rob Ireton]

    Everyone from toymakers to the military is clamoring to use 3D printing. The medical industry is no exception. Your dentist might soon print off an incisor for you, or maybe your new replacement knee or hip joint will be fresh from the printer. Even kidneys, blood vessels, skin and ears can now be 3D printed (including a living replica of van Gogh’s missing ear).

    But researchers are still exploring a particular medical application for 3D printing, one that might have the broadest application: medicine itself.

    In late October, a research team from the University of Central Lancashire in England announced that they filed for a patent on a 3D printer that can fabricate pills. The printer would be able to reproduce existing drugs, like common painkillers and allergy medicines, but the real coup lies in the printer’s ability to produce more complex tablets tailored to a patient’s specific dosage needs, using a new chemical “ink.”

    Demonstration of a 3D printer fabricating a tablet using the drug-polymer “ink” developed by researchers at the University of Central Lancashire.

    There are multiple types of 3D printers, but the most common type pulls filament from a spool, heats it up and prints out the final product layer by layer, from the bottom up. These filaments could be made of various materials, including rubber, plastics, polyurethane (used in insulation and bathroom sealant) and metals.

    The key challenge in 3D printing medicines is creating a new type of filament, a set of chemical inks, for the printer. These inks were at the crux of the University of Central Lancashire team’s innovation: the researchers invented a drug-polymer filament system that can be inserted into 3D printers to accurately carry out complicated tablet designs.

    The basic idea behind pharmaceutical ink systems is similar to that of everyday printers. Just as most regular printers use four tones — cyan, magenta, yellow and black — to create innumerable combinations of colors, a 3D drug printer would assemble complex molecules by combining simple chemical compounds and other common ingredients in drugs, such as vegetable oils and paraffin. These simple compounds would contain elements such as carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, which make up the skeleton of most drugs. The 3D printer could then carry out chemical reactions to stitch everything together.

    “If you were looking to make a sugar, for example, you would start with your set of base sugars and mix them together,” Lee Cronin, a chemistry professor at the University of Glasgow in Scotland, told the Guardian.

    Cronin also wants to develop the technology to custom-print medicine. And Cronin and the University of Central Lancashire researchers are not alone in trying — many others, in both private industry and research universities, are pursuing the same goal.

    In 2012, Cronin delivered a TEDGlobal talk on 3D printing drugs. “The idea is that we want to have a universal set of inks that we put out with the printer, and you download the blueprint, the organic chemistry for that molecule, and you make it in the device,” Cronin explained in the talk. “Ultimately, it could mean you could print your own medicine.”

    A few years ago, Cronin and his colleagues created their own prototype of a 3D drug printer for under $2,000. Their machine works by first printing a customized reaction chamber using bathroom sealant filament, and then using chemical filaments to print out medicine within the chamber. Each chamber is uniquely suited for the chemical process needed

    1. Re:right here, chump by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      The insightful AC forgot to cite, but the title was enough for a Google search. First hit: No need for the pharmacy; just press print. When it comes out, let's call it Dial-A-Drug and plug it in right next to the fridge.

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
  63. Pathogen-filled poo by tepples · · Score: 0

    Hobbits are fictional. I was addressing the plausibility of the fiction, not particulars of the geography. People who go barefoot and raise animals are likely to catch pathogens by stepping in the animals' feces. This risk is present whatever the continent.

  64. well, there goes the Taliban by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    without the need of poppies, Afghanistan's Worst will lose out their major funding source

  65. Just legalize it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has been practically zero progress on handling the demand side. Doing so would require a radical rethink of how Western countries deal with drugs and drug addiction. This is not likely to happen in the next 20 years at least, and it is stupid to condemn other countries to 20 more years of violence by keeping our focus on limiting supply.

    Legalize anything consenting people want to take. H, coke, booze, nicotine, drain cleaner, laxatives, aspirin, bullet to the brain, who cares? Gut organized crime, slash prison populations, minimize the police (state) and strangle official corruption. Boost entrepreneurs and tax the hell out of it. It's a bright new world waiting for us. Remember: puritanism is that terrible feeling that somewhere out there, someone is having fun!

  66. Need synthesis of apomorphine as well by photoinchicago · · Score: 1

    Apomorphine is a blocker for the effects of morphine like substances. Don't understand why it isn't used here in the USA,

  67. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  68. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  69. Preppers and Pain meds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we need the whats and how to do it and a chart that equates dose with weight. Or however that's figured out. And knowing the shelf life.