The Fentanyl Crisis is finally solved....

[Markk]

Let me know when you find that data. I can't. I was told by a front line officer, we do not even scratch the surface of what is getting across. I never said that anything was seized under Biden.

You tried? If you tried and couldn't find anything, I will go back and see what I can dig up. Your front line officer knows what he sees at the front lines, it's a valid data point, but I wouldn't exaggerate it. After all, how would he know how much is getting through if he doesn't know what's there in the first place?

I did try. I honestly think it is so much they just don't know.

It does not matter whether you believe his opinion or not, but for me his point was that it very valid. He is experienced, well trained, and has seen it up front and first hand. Just the fact that it is a epidemic shows just how much is getting here.

Gad: Nope. They are simply buying from a better supplier. It would be like putting up a hamburger shop that sells better burgers for cheaper. If somebody wants to buy 10 burgers and eat them that day then we sell them. At this point, there is no user guidance. Just a new brand hitting the market that's better than the old.

You said yours would be stronger and less fatal. You can't really say less fatal unless you regulate intake, and methods of how it is taken, and age, and weight....etc. So your business plan here is a misnomer. Your are just addicting more people with a unlimited amount or better and cheaper drugs.

What about age limits? Can a teen buy your drugs?

Gad: And my point is that when 2 kg can kill 1 million people, it doesn't take a lot of kgs to keep a crises going. They can keep making more to cover greater losses. You still haven't tried to find data on actual use. You seem to think that if 1,000 pounds was seized, that equates to users going without.

That is just silly. They make billions each year selling fentanyl. In reality the cartel is winning, big time on many fronts.

Mark: HUH? you said at first you would undercut the cartel and if necessary give it away? You are changing that?

Gad: No. In phase 1, we are underselling the cartel. I can't say exactly by how much until we try it. It may involve giving a bunch away for free. It may be 10% cheaper, it may be 10% more expensive, considering the product is superior. Likely depends on the area. we are acting as if we want to take over for long-term profitability.

Gad we are talking about product that would be around 50 cents a pill. As you undercut, so would the cartel. And this is all based on you some how getting to this point, which you have not....you still have a back log of questions.

Gad: There are tiered programs. I said the 'A' tier will be more like Steuss's plan for the most high functioning. Unlike the walking dead, zombies aren't created when they die, only when they bite. The point is to have all users contained so that we're done with new people becoming users. Present users can't spread it others. "B" camps will be higher functioning users who are homeless and difficult, and don't want to put effort into following rules. "F" camps will be people barely alive and laying around unable to move. Initially, yes, it will be open air free drugs, do what you want. The point is to keep them there as voluntarily as possible, because they won't get it anywhere else. But slowly, they dry out, whether they want to or not. To put it starkly: either get clean or die. Because eventually it all disappears.

Okay

[I Have Questions]

The best solution would be for the drug companies to invest in creating an alternative product that doesn’t results in death but which satisfies the needs of the people who are wanting to consume it. Are they working on a solution?

So you disagree with Gad, and your solution as President would be to just create something that basically makes one a zombie, but does not kill them. No, I am not aware of anyone working on that. Noted.

Makes one a zombie? Why do you need to put tabloid words and phrases into other people’s mouths?

You seem to be intent on having a discussion where everyone agrees that you’re right and they are wrong. Okay, no problem. You’re completely right, about everything. No need to discuss things any further. Congrats.

[Markk]

So you disagree with Gad, and your solution as President would be to just create something that basically makes one a zombie, but does not kill them. No, I am not aware of anyone working on that. Noted.

Makes one a zombie? Why do you need to put tabloid words and phrases into other people’s mouths?

You seem to be intent on having a discussion where everyone agrees that you’re right and they are wrong. Okay, no problem. You’re completely right, about everything. No need to discuss things any further. Congrats.

Lol....You haven't discussed anything or answered any of my questions. You are clearly not capable, right, wrong or indifferent, of following your assertions out to any logical end. Go back and read our limited discussions and you will see the opposite of what you are asserted.

In regard to zombies, unfortunately, fentanyl and some of these other street drugs put such a physical toll on far to many of these sick people that they appear like Hollywood's depiction of a zombie, which Gad was describing. These open air drug markets are what Gad, and you if you agree with him, are recommending.

Take the time to watch videos like this one.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snN0PNZVWNA

or this one.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Da_02agE0

[I Have Questions]

Makes one a zombie? Why do you need to put tabloid words and phrases into other people’s mouths?

You seem to be intent on having a discussion where everyone agrees that you’re right and they are wrong. Okay, no problem. You’re completely right, about everything. No need to discuss things any further. Congrats.

Lol....You haven't discussed anything or answered any of my questions. You are clearly not capable, right, wrong or indifferent, of following your assertions out to any logical end. Go back and read our limited discussions and you will see the opposite of what you are asserted.

In regard to zombies, unfortunately, fentanyl and some of these other street drugs put such a physical toll on far to many of these sick people that they appear like Hollywood's depiction of a zombie, which Gad was describing. These open air drug markets are what Gad, and you if you agree with him, are recommending.

Take the time to watch videos like this one.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snN0PNZVWNA

or this one.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Da_02agE0

You're absolutely right.

[Markk]

Well for one that puts our government in to the fentanyl business. You are good with the bureaucracy it would create? Would this IYO, reduce addiction or enlarge it?

It would almost certainly enlarge it, unless there were harm reduction and addiction resources that coincided with it. Conceivably these efforts would basically pay for themselves, but it seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul sunk cost dilly.

Gad did, and you are championing his plan....unless I am missing something here. I am still unclear how you would make all this work....but I am all ears.

Good gravy dude, I am not “championing his plan.” I was explaining why it would work for his stated objective, and one of the ways it could be implemented based on existing examples with scheduled substances sold through government regulated outlets. As I said immediately before weighing in on his plan, I don’t agree with it. It was literally the very first words of my very first sentence:

I don't agree with Gad's proposal

Kind of a weird thing to say when "championing" something, don't you think?

Second Gad literally said:

the government will create fentanyl of the highest quality and perfectly measured and offer increasingly better prices

I don't think “increasingly better prices” is synonymous with “free,” and I think most people would (hopefully) agree. If he said it was free after this (and before my post), then I missed it, but I was following from the base proposal of the thread, and your comment about how the distribution would work.

I don't know if there's a full moon, if my brain and keyboard just aren't connecting in a way that makes for effective communication, or something else is going on, but I'm going to bow out.

He did say it might be free, two or three times. The bigger issue here is that he is just creating scenario asserting what he thinks will work, while ignoring questions that I ask that break down his ever changing straw-man.

Gad: Absolutely. That's the entire point of part A. If we could give it away for free immediately --- which I don't think we can at first but we will eventually -- then the cartel can't make enough money to sustain its operation.

Gad: When that starts it's free in terms of dollars.

Gad: "F" camps will be people barely alive and laying around unable to move. Initially, yes, it will be open air free drugs,

I appreciate our conversations, I get this is not an easy topic and a huge mess.

[Gadianton]

You said yours would be stronger and less fatal. You can't really say less fatal unless you regulate intake, and methods of how it is taken, and age, and weight....etc. So your business plan here is a misnomer. Your are just addicting more people with a unlimited amount or better and cheaper drugs.

What about age limits? Can a teen buy your drugs?

The whole point about my government-sponsored product being better is that it's consistent. It's exactly what it says, every pill and every batch, with no variation. The cartel can't do that. Garage cook shop A and garage cook shop B are going to do things slightly differently, and neither are going to be consistent with themselves over days, weeks or months. If my user wants 800mc then they get exactly 800, not 650 and not 945 like they would with crap produced in garages. That's all I mean or have ever meant by a superior product. It's precisely the dose the user thinks they are buying. If you think I have ever said anything else, you need to quote the full portion of what I said.

When I say in part A of my operation that I'm taking over the streets with a better product, then whoever was buying the last product or whoever planned on getting the last product will now get my product instead. For example, I turn a cartel dealer into my dealer. That dealer goes to a party and sells my stuff instead of the cartel's stuff. Anybody who would have bought the last stuff will now be buying my stuff. It's possible that my dealer will talk up how much better mine is or other users will endorse it, and therefore that raises interest a little. It's possible that during phase A, the number of users increases slightly because I have a better product. BUT, all of these new users are folks hanging around in crowds where they can get access to it. If it's teens then so be it. There's no way to avoid that and stay undercover.

If I wanted to get cartel Fentanyl I would likely get arrested before I successfully procured any, because I would have no idea where to start. I wouldn't know who to ask about it or how to ask. (this is one of the dumb things about sting operations for anything illegal, they usually catch the newbie idiots who don't know what they're doing.) The problem I have with the method of openly distributing through clinics, is that somebody like me who has no connections on the underground if curious, can just stroll into a clinic and get hooked up. That's the problem I have with making it legal. It produces a new class of addicts.

[Markk]

You said yours would be stronger and less fatal. You can't really say less fatal unless you regulate intake, and methods of how it is taken, and age, and weight....etc. So your business plan here is a misnomer. Your are just addicting more people with a unlimited amount or better and cheaper drugs.

What about age limits? Can a teen buy your drugs?

The whole point about my government-sponsored product being better is that it's consistent. It's exactly what it says, every pill and every batch, with no variation. The cartel can't do that. Garage cook shop A and garage cook shop B are going to do things slightly differently, and neither are going to be consistent with themselves over days, weeks or months. If my user wants 800mc then they get exactly 800, not 650 and not 945 like they would with crap produced in garages. That's all I mean or have ever meant by a superior product. It's precisely the dose the user thinks they are buying. If you think I have ever said anything else, you need to quote the full portion of what I said.

You have asserted your product would be stronger, and less fatal. You said that is the cartel try's to compete by offering other products, you would counter with a stronger product.

The former: Gad wrote...." Which is the very low end and cartel fentanyl is getting debased; other chemicals mixed in lowering potency. So the price is falling. My Fentanyl will be the real deal. Mine will be stronger but less fatal overall because there will be no guesswork about potency; no variation from batch to batch or pill to pill."

The Latter: Gad wrote.... "I'm going to forgo speculation on the next steps, since you only asked about breaking the cartel supply infringements on the country, which is taken care of at this point. If the cartel tries to shift to cocaine, something they can produce better, then we buy or seize cocaine, lace it with fentanyl, and get the consumers hooked on our stuff; the strongest stuff there is."


Either way my point and question remains, that you can't regulate how it will be taken (smoked, shot up, or pill). If your pill is 800mg per your example, three pills are 2400 mgs.

Gad: When I say in part A of my operation that I'm taking over the streets with a better product, then whoever was buying the last product or whoever planned on getting the last product will now get my product instead. For example, I turn a cartel dealer into my dealer. That dealer goes to a party and sells my stuff instead of the cartel's stuff. Anybody who would have bought the last stuff will now be buying my stuff. It's possible that my dealer will talk up how much better mine is or other users will endorse it, and therefore that raises interest a little. It's possible that during phase A, the number of users increases slightly because I have a better product. BUT, all of these new users are folks hanging around in crowds where they can get access to it. If it's teens then so be it. There's no way to avoid that and stay undercover.

So then teens are collateral damage in your plan. Noted.

Gad: If I wanted to get cartel Fentanyl I would likely get arrested before I successfully procured any, because I would have no idea where to start. I wouldn't know who to ask about it or how to ask. (this is one of the dumb things about sting operations for anything illegal, they usually catch the newbie idiots who don't know what they're doing.) The problem I have with the method of openly distributing through clinics, is that somebody like me who has no connections on the underground if curious, can just stroll into a clinic and get hooked up. That's the problem I have with making it legal. It produces a new class of addicts.

Lol.... a lot in this one.

1. You would make it a crime to use in these open air markets you created? Or just out side of them? How will that work? I suppose you mean you will lock up anyone that uses any drug other than what you produce?

2. The plan you have already creates a new class of addicts, including teens, in your tiered plan.


I keep waiting for Allen Funt to show up here, but again it is interesting.

[Gadianton]

The former: Gad wrote...." Which is the very low end and cartel fentanyl is getting debased; other chemicals mixed in lowering potency. So the price is falling. My Fentanyl will be the real deal. Mine will be stronger but less fatal overall because there will be no guesswork about potency; no variation from batch to batch or pill to pill."

Right -- that first sentence comes from a report from October 2024 noting supply anomalies in cartel fentanyl. They are/were mixing in other chemicals to make it go farther, weakening it, and essentially defrauding the customer. So compared to THAT recent change, mine would be stronger, but in the long run, it will be less fatal because as users wise up to the fact they are getting cheated, they'll take larger doses of the cartel stuff to get the same high from their previous pills; but that requires guesswork, maybe they take 2 or maybe they take 1.5? The biggest danger is in not really knowing how much they are taking.

that you can't regulate how it will be taken (smoked, shot up, or pill). If your pill is 800mg per your example, three pills are 2400 mgs.

That's great. I'm not trying to regulate anything. I'm just capturing the existing market. Plain and simple. Have I ever said I'm trying to regulate what the users will do in part A? if users want to take 2400 mcgrams (micrograms) then god bless them. I'm just selling as a dealer with a better product. Nothing more. What they do with it is their choice.

So then teens are collateral damage in your plan. Noted.

Even more teens are collateral damage in the present order of things where nothing is being done to address the demand side. I'm noting that in return. And I'm noting it with pencil and paper.

1. You would make it a crime to use in these open air markets you created? Or just out side of them? How will that work? I suppose you mean you will lock up anyone that uses any drug other than what you produce?

This is where it gets draconian, I fully admit. I didn't say they were open air markets, they are essentially open air prison camps. This is part B. By the time we enter part B, there are no other fentanyl suppliers. We go to part B after we've driven the cartel out. Users are detained, but they are getting their fix plus solid meals and so where are they going to go? There are no other suppliers now. This is where they learn the truth, that they were tricked, and that government is running the show, and they ARE going to quit whether they want to or not.

2. The plan you have already creates a new class of addicts, including teens, in your tiered plan.

not at all. definitely not a new CLASS of addicts. It's taking over the current market plus whatever the newcomers the current market would have brought in had they operated without my intervention.

A new CLASS of addicts would be created by legalizing fentanyl and selling it through pharmacies. People without connections to the underground who otherwise never would have experimented will be tempted to try it in that scenario.

[Markk]

Gad: Right -- that first sentence comes from a report from October 2024 noting supply anomalies in cartel fentanyl. They are/were mixing in other chemicals to make it go farther, weakening it, and essentially defrauding the customer. So compared to THAT recent change, mine would be stronger, but in the long run, it will be less fatal because as users wise up to the fact they are getting cheated, they'll take larger doses of the cartel stuff to get the same high from their previous pills; but that requires guesswork, maybe they take 2 or maybe they take 1.5? The biggest danger is in not really knowing how much they are taking.

Do you think these folks follow instructions, and again drugs by a doctor are prescribed to people according to different variables....often determined by bloodwork tests. will you drug be formulated for a heathy person, or an already addicted person who body has adapted and needs more. For 100lb pound woman or a 220 pound man? Designed for needles, pills, or to smoke?

Gad: That's great. I'm not trying to regulate anything. I'm just capturing the existing market. Plain and simple. Have I ever said I'm trying to regulate what the users will do in part A? if users want to take 2400 mcgrams (micrograms) then god bless them. I'm just selling as a dealer with a better product. Nothing more. What they do with it is their choice.

Okay, if you are not regulating it, how will it stop OD's?

Gad: Even more teens are collateral damage in the present order of things where nothing is being done to address the demand side. I'm noting that in return. And I'm noting it with pencil and paper.

Yours is a plan, that incudes teen addiction.

In reality addiction starts far too often in teen years. And there are many reasons it starts, often because of broken families. There are secular and faith based programs that go after root reasons, even in vain given a the crisis.

The first thing that one needs to do is admit their is a crisis, which you denied.

This is where it gets draconian, I fully admit. I didn't say they were open air markets, they are essentially open air prison camps. This is part B. By the time we enter part B, there are no other fentanyl suppliers. We go to part B after we've driven the cartel out. Users are detained, but they are getting their fix plus solid meals and so where are they going to go? There are no other suppliers now. This is where they learn the truth, that they were tricked, and that government is running the show, and they ARE going to quit whether they want to or not.

You said if one can get up and walk they could go to another camp, I assumed that was literally. So they are prison camps. You will arrest users?

So in part B you are just going to force them to quit, like in prisons today, giving them drug like methadone to slowly quit?

What happens if they reuse once out?

Gad: not at all. definitely not a new CLASS of addicts. It's taking over the current market plus whatever the newcomers the current market would have brought in had they operated without my intervention.

A new CLASS of addicts would be created by legalizing fentanyl and selling it through pharmacies. People without connections to the underground who otherwise never would have experimented will be tempted to try it in that scenario.

So will you need a prescription to buy through the pharmacies? Or will it be over the counter? If the latter, are their restrictions?

[Gadianton]

Do you think these folks follow instructions, and again drugs by a doctor are prescribed to people according to different variables....often determined by bloodwork tests. will you drug be formulated for a heathy person, or an already addicted person who body has adapted and needs more. For 100lb pound woman or a 220 pound man? Designed for needles, pills, or to smoke?

Okay, if you are not regulating it, how will it stop OD's?

If you have a choice of buying Excedrin from a place that has "100mg" on the bottle and the pills are consistently 100mg, or a place that says "100mg" on the bottle but sometimes they are 75 or sometimes way over like 527, then who are you going to buy from? Assuming the price is the same.

If you buy from the reliable supplier and choose to take the whole bottle, it won't stop you from dying. However, if your intention is to get the maximum effects possible without dying, then your chances of avoiding accidental overdose are substantially reduced by buying the pills that are consistently 100mg so that you can properly estimate how much you're taking.

You said if one can get up and walk they could go to another camp, I assumed that was literally. So they are prison camps. You will arrest users?

quote me where I said that. I said there are tiered programs. Tier A isn't a camp. Tiers B and lower are the camps. I explained how I would get them there. Arrest isn't necessary if you have a monopoly on the only thing in the world that they care about. We are calling this "operation honeytrap" just so there's no confusion.

So will you need a prescription to buy through the pharmacies? Or will it be over the counter? If the latter, are their restrictions?

I really don't know how to be more clear. There are no sales through pharmacies. Not in part A and not in part B (the camps).

I think the problem here is as Steuss and Chap have participated, i've had side conversations with them and also contrasted how my operation would work in comparison to theirs in my responses to you. For now on, I won't be commenting on other competing kinds of programs to eliminate fentanyl, in this thread, only clarifying my government program.