Anyone done Rush before

??? does it make u or does it make you

nah, more of an

it makes me feel like a homeless person sniffing glue. once i tried to build a mansion of cardboard boxes to live in, but after i'd built the first room the buzz wore off.

Think of a except that the headphones are actually a builder's vice squeezing hard and your smile is more like a and your brains go
Clear things up?

Kentron you should try glue or petrol. Make sure you inhale enough to pass out.

it's like your world is throbbing and your brain is broken

You requiring it as a sex aid Kentron?

now now brown cow..just asking as some people were passing it around a particular bar on Sat,wanted to know if anyone has tried leather cleaner..
keep your smart ass remarks to yourself styln

It's not a good buzz at all bro, stay away from that shit

che che

word, the only buzz you feel is the intense feeling of burning brain cells, pretty sure you can fuck more cells in one sniff on that than you can on a whole night out on the pills

Does anyone here actually know what the effects are on the brain? From what I am reading, I don't think there is.

Love it when biggies get all self righteous about 'dirty' substances....but 7 pills in a night =

My take on rush is that it can be good fun once in a while though if it used more than a few times over a night can lead to headaches and nausea depending on how you respond personally.

Very intense and pretty too. It's not going to kill you or do any lasting damage but it isn't something that should be done frequently either, or it will be nasty.

I don't understand why people like to advertise the fact that they do drugs on these boards?????

Each to their own but remember that what you write here is for keeps.

I passed out, then threw up.

Dude where did anyone say 7 pills in a night was all gravy?

I don't know what the effects on the brain are for this substance, but from my brief experience with it, it can't be too flash........everything in moderation i guess, kentron did ask for ppls opinions

I was just exaggerating.

But yeah, no worries about everyone giving their opinion, but 'negative effects on the brain' is all speculation from what I have seen.

Any inhaled solvent costs you brain cells, even NOS...

NOS is pretty harmless unless done frequently in large doses.

I have seen studies on this.

The bland generic statement that "X costs you brain cells" is pretty misleading.....life also costs you brain cells.....

Life does cost you baincells, which is why ypu shouldn't waste them inhaling leather cleaner... Would like some CD cleaner to go with that?

I didn't like rush. the buzz was horrible although mercifully short-lived, and I had a headache for two days afterward.

is it anything like amyl? in which case, i wont like it

Rush = Amyl Nitrate.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe it is a "solvent" either. And when did NOS become a solvent?

d&c: You don't wanna end up a little bit tardie later in life and start supporting Fulham or Chelsea by mistake.

I'm saving all my brain cells for old age! Their gonna be real useful then! I'm gonna have a big knowledgeathon at the old folks home! Good times!

make sure you take viagra with rush, it triples the buzz and halves the aftereffects

later in life doesn't necessarily mean old age.

At least all the druggies carrying around their little bottles of rush will be safe if they are poisoned with cyanide ...I bet they will be laughing then.

wtf..
a) Nos isn't a solvent
b) It doesn't cull neurons



Uhh, yes it does. Rush does kill neurons, and they don't grow back. That's lasting damage.


Where do people come up with this shit. I swear, some people just make up crap and actually end up believing it

Also, just because something has an industrial purpose aswell as a recreational one, it doesn't mean that it's any less/more dangerous, or less/more dirty

OMG THAT SHIT IS CD CLEANER!!!111... Please

Actually you're right, most of the stuff here was L not H which is a floor cleaner not CD cleaner.

Please point me to the study or article you've seen which shows infrequent users of Rush suffering negative effects or brain impairment due to usage later on in life?

That's right. You can't.

Thank you.

Heh, especially when its fully not CD cleaner eh?

You should really use water to clean your CD's eh! and shit you drink that eh?

Heh, it's quite funny when people think that the pills they are taking aren't too bad. Maybe it's got something to do with stuff like Rush and G being easily associated with substances used in some cleaning stuff etc ...whereas all the countless chamicals that nobody has any idea are in the lollies they consume are "safer" ...seems like a case of out of sight, out of mind.

I bet people said the same thing about ciggies 50 years ago too.

rush can kill you...


chances are... it won't

sure about that?
I'm not sure you understand the implications of what you're saying dazey.
To show that "infrequent users of Rush suffering negative effects or brain impairement due to usage later on in life", all I have to do is show that a single dose of Rush can kill a SINGLE brain-cell, which it does.

If you still want to vehemently stand by stupidity, then let's bet $100 on it I will bet that Rush causes irrepairable damage.

Methinks Dazed likes it for other reasons...

"Rush" sounds kind of quaint to me, everyone I know just calls it "amyl" guess it depends on what circles you move in...

still "rush" does describe the feeling pretty well, methinks

They call them 'poppers' in the UK and they had them on all the tables in this one club I went to.. just help yourself?!?

dazey:

I've noticed that while you often preach humility, you seem to grow silent when someone shows that you're talking quite directly from your arse.

Please explain, or accept the bet

Yaksha, be pragmatic and don't be a twat

Is the losing of one brain cell going to negatively impair your brain function to any noticeable degree in the future?

There may be many things which cause you to 'lose braincells'. It's only where it actually leads to an appreciable effect that's it's something to worry about eh?

Losing a single neuron is not going produce a noticeable impairment, no, but that's not what you said. I believe it is important to be truthful when talking about matters such as drug education, and that includes not omitting things just because you consider them negligible.

You said that Rush won't kill you, or do any lasting damage. And the simple fact is, you're potentially wrong on the former, and definitely wrong on the latter; that's all I was pointing out. ANY inhalant can be subject to SDS (Sudden Death Syndrome), and any use of Rush WILL result in the loss of neurons which IS a lasting-effect, as they cannot be re-produced. Users should be aware of this.

Now, where's your retraction?

I think its a really interesting buzz, had me going nuts on the dancefloor for a few minutes, then back to being on a comedown again
Would'nt mind trying it while doing the nasty -that- would be interesting

Sudden Death Syndrome has got to be the most nonsense name ever.

Yeah it's not very descriptive is it... One of my sister's friends died from that, sniffing a solvent. First time she'd ever done it apparently. People are misinformed if they believe that infrequent use makes it safe..

When I said a lasting effect I was expecting people to use a degree of common sense and know that what was meant was a lasting effect that's actually going to have an appreciable difference or impact on their lives, otherwise who cares?!
There was a degree of common sense I expected which I should have known you would not have exhibited. So that was silly of me.

As for people dying from Rush no one in New Zealand has ever died from using it have they? Rush wont kill you....you might point to one isolated example overseas or something so we have 1 in 0.000000000001% million users 'dying from Rush'. Chances are you have a higher chance of dying taking a shower. Again I expected a degree of common sense in interpreting my statement and this I know is not your strong point

Shit I meant no-nonsense but typo'd it.

Every time you do rush, god kills a kitten.

I'm liking this new 'zany' Harvey.....

Good weekend was it?

lol @ Harvey

New? Zany?

...and my weekend was possibly the most uneventful weekend I've ever had ...I only left the house to get food.

dazey:

I had thought that maybe you'd just overlooked some of the greater dangers of inhalant use, which was why I was being cheeky, but no, it appears as though you are actually ignorant to them, which is a shame.

Yes, Rush has killed people in New Zealand, to answer your question.
Yes, it is a relatively minor proportion of rush users that die, but the danger exists, and to gloss over it just because you consider it insignificant is totally irresponsible. Furthermore, while we may not noticeably miss the lost neurons from a session of rush, it is still irresponsible to claim that there is "no lasting damage", in case people actually take that to mean that there is "no lasting damage", and take a more hazardous approach to their use than is advised.

I don't think what I'm doing is pedantry here dazey, nor is it lacking in common sense. Surely it's common sense to open and honest about the consequences of drug use, rather than glossing over things that you consider unimportant?

Seeking retraction,
Yaksha.

I have said there is no lasting damage if it is used infrequently. You have said that is irresponsible because people may take a more hazardous approach to their use. But I've specifically said 'infrequent use'. If someone does any drug frequently then all bets are off and I think we're all clear on that. So what have I done that is irresponsible? What you are doing is pednatry and it IS lacking in common sense.

On the other issue I am unaware of anyone dying from the sole use of amyl in New Zealand. If I am wrong then please link me to the article or outline the cirucmstances of this and I'll admit I am wrong. I'm not talking butane here or other substances, I'm talkin amyl. Thanks.

Dazey.. Please let me know when you're done digging this hole: I believe that if you go much further, we may be able to get commercial sponsorship to reach the UK.

You speak of common sense in an industry that knows nothing of it. Remember, this is an industry which has produced the following situations:

- People going out, getting drunk, having 6 mls, waking up in hospital, repeating the very next weekend
- Someone coming-to after an OD on pills, waking up in hospital, running back to the Mid City venue with needle still attached to arm
- People sticking acid on their eye-balls, because some guy said it makes it a bit stronger
- Someone wanting to try NOS while driving, coming-to a few seconds later to find his car embedded in a lampost
- Someone crushing an e and putting it in a female friend's drink, because said female was too anxious to try it, so the guy thought he was doing her a favour by making her have it without her awareness
- People taking BZP caps by the dozen (despite explicit instructions to the contrary) because they're legal; so they must be safe, right?

These are all 100% true stories. Clearly, common sense is not as common as we'd like to think dazey. And it's on both sides of the table too. We have people G'ing out time and again, then we have the other side saying "BUT LOOK WHAT THAT SHIT DOES TO PLASTIC!!!11"

In an industry where it is clear that mistruths, blatant lies, and ignorance are the norm, who are you to assume that people have the common sense to take your comments sensibly, rather than literally? Is it such a leap to imagine that someone might take your comments seriously, and think that infrequent use of Rush is 100% safe?

You professed that Rush will not kill you, nor will have any lasting damage. However much you try to get around that, what you said is WRONG, on both counts, both factually and ethically. Rush CAN Kill you. It DOES have lasting damage. It IS irresponsible to spread LIES about a drug simply for convenience of argument.

Now just admit you're wrong, so that we can carry on with this noble endeavour of saving stupid people.

That was a bit of waste of time wasn't it. I said Rush hasn't killed anyone in New Zealand and you said it had and pointed to SDS - you actually were referring to butane and now you're stuck because I'm correct eh?

Hard luck. But , unlike you, if you had shown me I was wrong I would have admitted it.

Uhh, wtf?

I pointed to SDS before I said that amyl has killed New Zealanders, and it has killed New Zealanders. Now you've assumed that I'm instead referring to butane, and have patted yourself on the back in advance? You're reaching new depths dazed. Amyl has killed in NZ, I know/knew of at least one personally at my school; although I don't have an article present. I do know it was amyl and amyl alone.

Is it really THAT embarassing for you just to admit that you're wrong? It shouldn't be the traumatic experience that you're making it out to be. Try it out dazey, I'm sure you'll be surprised. Hell, it might even get you some credibility.

ok, that was good.

This is such a Kentron thread.

Unlike you, if proven wrong, I don't mind admitting it. I have retracted and apologised on this site a few times before. Everyone makes mistakes and that is part of being human.

You just haven't given anything beyond what you usually do with people on here and I have, stupidity, bitten and wasted my time with your pedantic musings....

If you want to find a case all you have to do is goggle it, I'm sure if someone has died from amyl it will come up just in the same way searching on butane (something that does kill) and New Zealand brings up cases. It would be newsworthy I'm sure.

But you have nothing.

google

Maybe they keep some of the the amyl deaths fairly quiet. I mean, no family really wants it known that xxxx died using amyl because they were using it to try and insert a rugby ball up their arse.

So not only have you produced two blatant lies, but now you're going back on your word to refute them too? Tut tut...

I'm not able to find anything on the case on google for some reason. But her name was Cushla Metcalfe, she was a year above me which would've made her 24ish now, and she died on-route to a party on Schnapper Rock Road in Albany. She would've been 5th form when she died.

Heh... Harvey you're on form today!!

Rush or Amyl Nitrate has a number of effects on the body. One of the primary effects is that it is a smooth muscle relaxant (muscles that contract and relax out blood vessels). Thus when we/you take Amyl Nitrate the smooth muscles that control our blood vessels in our body relax. This causes our blood pressure to drop significanly in a few seconds, our body responds instintively to balance this out by increasing our heart rate. i.e. Increased flow of fluid through pipe equals increased pressure. Thus your heart rate can go from resting 60-80bp/min to very fast 140-200bp/min. If your dancing around at the time and so your heart rate was not just at a resting level it can go even higher 220bp/min. This sudden increase in heart rate can unsurprisingly cause people with prexisting heart conditions (which they may be unaware of) or in cases of large doses completely normal people to suffer a large and rather deadly heart attack. This happened to my 5th Form Science teacher in 1996 who was found dead in a Wellington Bar from a heart attack brought on by Amyl Nitrate (he was 36). Long term abuse of Amyl Nitrate can also lead to Heart Valve damage, which is permanent. Hopefully this answers your question Kentron. Using amyl nitrate for some people is like basically doing the 5 finger exploding heart trick on your self ala 'Pai Mei' in Kill Bill

And once again, dazey goes silent, becoming a regular thing..
Despite agreeing that he was wrong, albeit embedded in an insult.
Despite promising that he would retract if I outlined the circumstances of an amyl death in NZ, which I have done.
Despite his many preachings in the past about humility.

In other news: Dazey will soon have finished his NZ --> UK express tunnel, please enquire to the address on his profile for more information.

Now Daisy and Yaksha can put there hand bags away, cheers dude

IF someone died in NZ then I was wrong

You know very well that the infrequent use of amyl once every few months is very unlikely to do anything harmful to you that going to affect you long term. Your 'it kills a few brain cells' line of reasoning is nonsense as much as it would be to say that alcohol once in while is also harmful long term because ethanol kills off brain cells.

You, I'm sure, essentially agree with me. Just more classic Yaksha that we see in quite often....

Well, there's two cases of someone dying from Amyl.
Maybe Dazey's credibility has been sniffing a few too..

If 2 people dying from amyl makes it dangerous then what about your beloved G / GBH??!!!!!

I never disagreed that it's unlikely to do anything harmful long term. I've stated explicitly here that it's a minor set of the population of amyl users that have any problem with. BUT, I have a zero-tolerance policy as far as deception and ignorance goes with drug education. I've seen so many needless incidents caused by ignorance with drugs, so I feel that it's best to be truthful if you're going to bother outlining the dangers (or lack thereof) with drugs at all. What you said was factually incorrect, and requires the assumption (or 'common sense' as you call it) of others to interpret it correctly before it could be considered safe. Then you called me pedantic, a twat, and lacking in common sense for adopting these policies geared towards personal safety

But, you've finally admitted you were wrong.
What an epic journey it was.

fuck, do you guys ever let go?

It's GHB, and I challenge you to find anyone that has died from GHB, free from any other chemicals or stupidity. One person.

you are kidding, right?

Nah, it was a throw away line...I can't be assed....

Good night.

No, I'm not kidding.

I note that you carefully added "free from any stupidity". Such a qualification would greatly reduce the amount of harm associated with any substance.

A kid from ponsonby died on that shit not too long ago.

Are you a filthy g whore, luke?

I don't know who the kid from ponsonby was who died, but I can tell you that he was stupid. Therefore, he fits within my qualification.

And my personal habits are pretty irrelevant. I will defend anything that is getting wrongly blamed for human stupidity.

although I agreed with some of you sentiments earlier in this thread, I believe that you are now committing a far worse crime by suggesting that G is not as harmful as it really is.

A KID UP THE ROAD FUCKING DIED ON IT FOR FUCKS SAKE. GET IT?????

Oh, and so you are a filthy g whore, then?

figures....

Try doing rush and nos......

Sucks when you throw an tanty an noone cares eh?

Why don't you provide some evidence for how dangerous it really is?
All anecdotal evidence (which is a lot) always points to stupidity; either in dosage, or in mixing with other drugs etc. All scientific evidence I've seen shows that, taken correctly, there is no reason for G to be considered harmful at all, except socially. It makes people feel aroused, so you could perhaps consider some social harm in that, but nothing physical. This is why it was sold legally OTC for years, until clubbers (and imminently: stupidity) got a hold of it. Erowid, the holy bastion of drug information itself, even sees no reason for it to be illegal based on chemical properties, and speculates that the only reason it is illegal is because of pressure from pharmaceutical corporations, who realised that G was competing with some of their products, and was not able to be patented being that it's a naturally occuring compound!

Or perhaps you were just referring to what it does to plastic?

^^ It can actually be quite seriously addictive and easily abused, I think that could be one factor for its status. (Yeah I know alcohol is too)

"easily abused" is not something which can be reduced to chemical properties, PD. That is a factor of human stupidity, which is exactly the point I'm making. Furthermore, there is almost no [physical] addiction properties at all, except for very heavy use, and we're talking about 2-3 times a day here. So yes, it can be seriously addictive, but once again, it wholly requires a pre-requisite of stupidity for that to happen.

I remember the news about Cushla Metcalfe stating it was butane. I remember this because some of my friends were into butane at the same time.

However, I still think amyl is nasty horrid stuff. It may not be scientific ir nuffin, but I'd think less of anyone who took it on a regular (no matter how infrequent) basis.

From what I can remember, you may be right, there was some false-reporting intially which pointed to Butane. That stuff, however, was wrong. They said she was sniffing butane out of a plastic bag, but I've spoken personally to people who were with her at the time, and this was not the case. It was Amyl (as was later correctly reported).

alright, I'll bite briefly before I head home.

First, you tell me that you don;t know the kid that died but you can tell me that he was stupid. How can you do this? SUrely you would need to know the circumstances to validly draw this conclusion, no?

Second, because the dose-reponse curve for g is so steep, it is a VERY dangerous drug. Sure, if you have a group of experienced users adminstering it in a careful manner, it may be less risky. But the bottom line is that many people use it in much more haphazard (and therefore potentially dangerous) ways. (eg) not measuring it and doing it in dark places when they are already half-cut. It is thus a dangerous substance.

Third, most things are benign in the absence of stupidity. That qualification is just a convenient method for circumventing the core issue, which is that G is fucking dirty and potentially lethal.

Good night.

p.s. I am surprised that a smart kid like you whores the g.

classic I was waiting for some one to refer to it's other known properties.

By easily abused I mean accessible and cheap.

Stupidity is pretty simple way of explaining human behaviour dontya think? And really.. were all pretty damn stupid at some point or another.

I've been stupid before.. and I'll be stupid again..

That's the problem with G. Even if it's not mixed with uppers like say e or speed or other downers which are fasr worse it's easy to fuck up the dose and it's a fine line between having a good time and g'ing out.
Tolerances can be built up easily and you have far less margin for error than some other illicit drugs.

g is for the gutter! Say no to G kiddies despite Yaksha's assurance to it's safety.

yaksha, your absence in this thread speaks volume and has been duly noted.

Knowing the chemical properties and the predictable nature of g (when taken sensibly), I have deduced that the person you know was stupid. It's a fair safe deduction given all current data, but I will concede a fraction of a percent for margin of error, if this satisfies you.



No, that doesn't make a dangerous drug. It is merely anoter indictment against human stupidity. If people are measuring in conditions where they will make mistakes, or if people are using it in "haphazardous ways", then that is WHOLLY a comment on them, rather than their choice of drug. If they used it sensibly, then that shit wouldn't happen. The response curve is steep, yes, but anyone who did some light reading would expect that in advance and behave accordingly. Anyone who didn't read up before taking it, is stupid, and deserves it.



That's not true at all.
There are many drugs which without stupidity are still dangerous, especially when discounting taking them in the first place. E, for example, can act wildly unpredictably, even when taken in recommended doses in favourable circumstances. Datura can fuck you up permanently, when taken in typical doses. G on the contrary, when taken sensibly, is extremely predictable and consistent. You've been unable to substantiate ANY claim which shows G to be dirty, you're merely showing yourself to be an uninformed bandwagon-jumper like the rest of the adorning public.



Maybe it's because smart people actually do some research?

Rush is horrible, the one time I tried it I got a really bad headache

Unfortunately Yaksha, especially in NZ if someone can harm themselves with something.............even if they are stupid........it is usually called dangerous, the law has to accomodate the lowest common denominator

E if you can insure the quality, is a safer drug than most, problem comes when its laced with trippy additives and ampethamines.

Problem is with all drugs safe and not is that once you are on them, it impairs your judgement, so the chance of loading up is higher thus causing more damage

I know it's usually called dangerous. But I just don't think we should accept that form of rationalisation, especially in a scene where safetey and informed decisions should be considered paramount..

Who do you know that can ensure the quality/additives of their E?
And what exactly do you mean "laced with amphetamines"? MDMA = Methyldioxy-methamphetamine