Spiking.

Ten of Swords

Mod - OK this bad faith posting has gone on for way too long and it's wrecking the thread.

@Donald Trump stop trolling the thread, right now, if you intend to keep participating in it. It's been going on all day.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118127315#Comment_118127315

A fine needle leaves no puncture wound. I have had to use them on myself for medical reasons, absolutely no tell-tale mark after a very short while once there’s been no allergic type skin reaction to the substance.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118127680#Comment_118127680

Drink spiking is much more likely to happen as it takes far less prep and effort than managing a syringe. Even a soft drink like Coca Cola can be spiked very easily. When victim becomes unexpectedly light-headed the “saviour” can just “bring them out for air”, “take them home”… “it was very hot and stuffy in there, I saw others faint from it”.

I think if people had had a very unusual reaction to alcohol or after taking a soft drink it would be better to have a medical examination at a hospital to determine the cause. Could be likes of undiagnosed diabetes, important to detect, or could even be spiking. One way or another bad reactions should not be dismissed and there should be an environment of acceptance that young people might seek medical help in such situations. It’s only this way that evidence can be gained.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118128996#Comment_118128996

I just misread the scenarios. I didn't change my mind, I just read the scenarios properly. I don't see any to bring gender into it. Gender would make no difference to my assessment of the situation.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118130956#Comment_118130956

A fine needle used carefully and methodically leaves no puncture wound.

A fine needle jammed into a person by a 3rd party? Without their cooperation? If it penetrates the subcutaneous layer, it will most certainly bruise at the very least.

Further, fine needles bend with the slightest misuse. Using a fine on oneself? Is a far cry from using one on someone else to deliver even insulin let alone some type of rapidly acting subcutaneous narcotic amnesiac agent.

I have administered subcutaneous injection daily for 15years, puncture marks and bruising post injection are very much a matter of luck as much as skill. Variables include the speed of penetration, the depth, the pressure applied when delivering the contents of the syringe and even the angle and speed of needle withdrawal.

A HSE hospital pharmacist posted earlier in this thread that he knew of no sedative, amnesiac agent that could be delivered surreptitiously via a fine needle subcutaneously. In this, I'd certainly defer to that experience.

Multiple agents are available for delivery via wide bore intramuscular injection, that can't be done surreptitiously though and would also be very fast acting.

There are delivery pumps for certain pain relief drugs that are also amnesiac and sedative, in particular ketamine that do use a subcutaneous method but via a subcutaneous cannula. But this is a method similar to insulin pumps and unsuitable for high dose or immediate delivery precisely because of the effect of subcutaneous drug delivery. Injecting into a fat layer acts as a timed release, rather than allowing immediate flood of a drug. The drug delivery in this method is rarely amnesiac and is very a much a whole body dose/weight/time over 24 hrs slow delivery to achieve a therapeutic effect.

The mode of needle spiking proposed is not an impossibility, it is however a massive improbability and in particular one. The effect of lipids on the release of narcotic and therapeutic agents in particular via subcutaneous injection is a reason why that method of delivery is used as a means of extended release low dosing regimes. It is not a practical means of administering a drug either surreptitiously or quick acting. Versus dropping extra alcohol or known effective drugs into a drink.

Further, if this method was either practicable, effective or suspected as such by Law enforcement? Surely it would behoove any agency to highlight it as a risk?

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118130993#Comment_118130993

Eminently sensible post.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118130956#Comment_118130956

Like insulin needles or something? Presumably if you inject yourself you're braced and ready and still. What would it be like to injection someone in a busy environment they're moving around and not holding still? And also you need to make sure they don't notice it, and you need to keep the needle in long enough to inject the drug.

I think the lack of people saying something to the effect of they were at the bar in a nightclub, felt a sting in their thigh, spun around and caught someone with a needle, or felt the needle scratch across their leg, or have a big welt where the needle was in them when they turned around.

Instead we have reports of syringe spiking where nobody felt the needle, never caught a person doing it, never came up in an obvious puncture wound, and nobody else ever witnessed it happening. These are things you'd expect to to see IF it's happening.

The people doing the syringe spiking are sexual predators. If you know anything about sexual predators you'll know they cover a cross section of people and includes a higher proportion of dum-dums and people with learning disabilities than the general population (that might be skewed by the people who get caught being more likely to be dum-dums). But in any case it seems the ones who are doing these syringe spikings are proficient enough to have never been caught, witnessed or even left a mark. Is there a part of the conspiracy that says they're all secret agents or have specialist training in covert injecting?

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131022#Comment_118131022

But gender did make a difference. It was your implicit bias. It is not that you read it quickly and missed a word - you assumed something additional for the female but not for the male. And you argued back and forth with me for quite a while before you corrected yourself. You don't want to portray an explicit bias which is fair enough but the implicit one has to be acknowledged.

Anyway not much point me being here. It is apparently verboten to suggest that all women who say they were spiked should not be automatically branded as liars. I didn't think that would be controversial but a lot of ye seem very fixated on insisting otherwise. One would have to question what is motivating that stance but I will leave it at that.

It seems that “Spiking” may have played a part in the Texas tragedy

“Houston Chief of Police Troy Finner claimed at a press conference Saturday that a crazed man injected at least one person with opioids during the chaos.

'One of the narratives was that some individual was injecting other people with drugs. We do have a report of a security officer, according to the medical staff that was out and treated him last night,' Finner said.

'He was reaching over to restrain or grab a citizen and he felt a prick in his neck.

'He went unconscious, they administered Narcan. He was revived, and medical staff did notice a prick similar to a prick you would get if somebody was trying to inject,' he added.

It is unclear what drug was injected into the security guard, although Narcan is used to revive people who've overdosed on opioids, including fentanyl.”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10173645/Travis-Scott-says-working-help-families-people-died-Astroworld-Festival.html

Darc19

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131593#Comment_118131593

again tabloid rubbish from the daily muck (why does anyone believe anything in such a rag) which prefers sensationalism before finding the truth.

The security guard said "he thought" he was spiked. The jabs were given as a precaution just in case.

Funny that this is such a "worldwide" issue and yet the number of people actually caught needle spiking or confirmed cases of drugs being needled spiked into people. (the 2 arrests in the UK had nothing to do with needle spiking and the tow men have now been released)

So far lab results from suspected needle spikes have come back negative.

https://fullfact.org/crime/spiking-by-needle-injection/

But sure facts do not matter to those who love to sensationalise stuff - especially rag tabloids that I wouldn't wipe my arse with as there's so much sh1t on the paper already.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131593#Comment_118131593

Had read this report too. As an unrelated aside, interesting that the swear filter on the POS vanilla software deems "Príck" an offensive word 🤷

I don't know if I'd call what is being described by the attack described as spiking though? I know it's largely an issue of semantics, but spiking is by it's very nature administration or attempted administration of drugs or alcohol in a surreptitious manner.

The description of the Houston incident very much makes clear that a man apparently went on a jabbing spree with a syringe. Almost a mass attack. A horrible attack that likely contributed to loss of life there. Hopefully said assailant is arrested and brought to justice.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131387#Comment_118131387

Not much point being here if you misrepresent what I've said. You have repeatedly framed the discussion as believing every claim of spiking as truth or believing the claimant is lying. And I've repeatedly pointed out to you that those aren't the only options. So yes, there's no point you being here if you can't assimilate new information.

ululator

My interpretation is that there are several layers to this, just like reality itself.

I imagine that the excuse of spiking is probably over-used to justify being overly pissed.

I'd say there are some people that go into places with the intention of drugging people. Which, with a minutes thought, is bizarrely crazy. So you're going to buy illegal drugs, plop them in someone's drink or even crazier, attempt to stick a syringe in them, watch them like a psycho from a distance, and hope that you can time it perfectly to lure them away during a sweet spot before they collapse on the floor, but after they lose all sense. And not get caught, and not have anyone intervene, and get away with sexual assault after the fact, and not be seen on cameras, and not be identified by the likes of taximen and so forth?

Desperate people like that, and I can't imagine there are many, need to have the skin flayed off their back in public at any rate, and if caught in the act, need to be punched around the place like a ragdoll on the spot.

Society just seems to be going down the toilet.

Also, because of the inherent lunacy involved in such a desperate attempt, I'd also imagine that some of these perpetrators are more than likely known to the victims, women or men, and could very well be a case of simply making someone sick for the sake of it.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131722#Comment_118131722

No need to claim I ever presented a false dichotomy. I have not. I have in fact said a few times that some people might use a false claim of spiking to try to explain away some embarrassment the next day after having made a tit of themselves the night before. That some people do that is not a reason to say that all do it.

I have only stated that spiking happens and that it is wrong to automatically brand any girl saying she was spiked as a liar. I would have hardly thought it a controversial statement but certain other posters have refused to do agree with it. You can read into that what you will. I seem to recall that you have at least stated you believe that spiking does happen so I am not putting you in that category.

If someone goes out and embarrasses themselves, well they might say it to you the next day and then never mention it again. They are unlikely to be talking about it 20 years later. We've had a few people on thread say it happened to them years ago. Why would you seriously suspect that someone was self-inflicted messy drunk 20 years ago, and then decided to post in an anonymous message board, to people who don't know them and will never know them, in order to relieve that embarrassment of that night 20 years ago? If someone goes out and makes a show of themselves, they just want people to hopefully forget about it as soon as possible. The posters who have shared their experiences of being spiked have been attacked and have had doubt cast on their stories by one poster in particular. You shouldn't be aligning yourself with him.

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118128501#Comment_118128501

No one said that. If you have to make up bullshit you’ve lost the debate.

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118128710#Comment_118128710

Biggest load of waffle on Boards. Congratulations. The fact you didn’t report it is on you. No one else. Only you.

Jequ0n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131593#Comment_118131593

Strange, I can’t see any relation between the stampede (that killed people) and the alleged spiking incident. Two separate issues.

And this has now also busted the argument for the camp that tries to argue that scepticism towards spiking incidents is gender based and misogynistic….how could you.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131410#Comment_118131410

I mentioned I personally know two girls who were spiked. Doubt was immediately cast on them by certain posters. One - @banie01 tried to cast doubt on them by telling us he wasn't able to handle his drink when he was young (Post #324 + #322). That was despite me making clear from the outset that neither of the two girls I was referring to drank......

@Potential-Monke wrote he was spiked (#58). They were not challenged on this.

@CaitCat (#193) wrote they were spiked and were challenged on it by multiple posters in including @banie01 (#203) who cast shade on their failure to get evidence and reiterated that spikings were "exceedingly rare". Later accused the poster of "claiming victimhood" (#214)

@Northernlily (#265) posted about their experiences of being spiked in Germany. They were not challenged by @banie01

@Lisha (#269) spoke about their experiences of being spiked on a night out when they were the designated driver and only drinking water. @banie01 took a little longer to get around to confronting them (#423) and reminding them that their experience wasn't definitively a spiking.

So there you go. 6 stories about being spiked. 2 not challenged, and 4 challenged, by @banie01 .

The two I spoke about were female. I would take a guess that @Lisha and @CaitCat are female. Those were the 4 challenged.

I would guess that @Potential-Monke is male. That leaves @Northernlily who, despite their username, I will take a guess that they are male.

Make of that what you will

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118130993#Comment_118130993

It is well known that many of the drugs used are present for only a short term in the body. e.g https://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/12/02/how-long-does-ghb-stay-in-your-system/

To accurately determine how long GHB is likely to remain in your plasma after discontinuing treatment, it is necessary to know its elimination half-life. GHB is understood to have an elimination half-life within the range of 20 to 60 minutes when taken orally; this is extremely short-compared to most medications. By knowing its elimination half-life, we can estimate that it’ll take up to 1 hour (on average) for your body to eliminate 50% of an ingested GHB dose from plasma circulation.

With this information, we can estimate that it’ll take (on average) between 1.83 and 5.5 hours to eliminate 100% of the GHB from systemic circulation. This means that GHB should be out of your system within a few hours post-ingestion.

If you are unfortunate to be a victim of spiking with GHB, by the time you wake up the next morning, the "evidence" is gone.

Jequ0n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118133917#Comment_118133917

Well it’s lucky so that there seem to (have been) people on Twitter etc who had these tests done and even got confirmation quickly after. Hopefully this will eventually be confirmed so people can believe it, because so far it’s nothing but broad statements.

God protect these poor, innocent souls and their immaculate chastity.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118131036#Comment_118131036

That’s why I indicated further on that I would believe drink spiking to be far more common. However just hearing tonight on Sky News about at least one security officer being injected at that concert in US to render him incapable of doing his job, where people tragically died in a crush, is a timely reminder here that such things go on around the world, but likely much much less so in Ireland.

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118133828#Comment_118133828

How many of the 6 got tested and/or reported this "spiking"??

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135168#Comment_118135168

Poor attempt at deflection to try to obscure the simple fact I highlighted:

4 were challenged - presumed female

2 were not challenged - presumed male

Posters can draw their own conclusions.

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135292#Comment_118135292

Again, how many were tested and/or reported this spiking?? Otherwise it's just speculation that they were spiked.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135372#Comment_118135372

It has no relevance to the point I was highlighting. All you want to do is have another opportunity to sneer. Let's divide it into three subgroups for you:

1) I have already said the two females I know were tested. Those two were challenged

2) The other two (presumed) females said they were not tested. Those two were challenged

3) The two (presumed) males said they were not tested. Those two were not challenged

4 females - all challenged by poster. 2 males - neither challenged by poster. As I said, you can draw your own conclusions. Any of the other 4 posters are welcome to correct me if I got their gender wrong.

You have a strange way of getting your kicks.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135292#Comment_118135292

The presumption is entirely yours tho. There is an inherent gender blindness built into a site that identifies people by their chosen nicknames.

It's also quite rich for someone who posted the following...

Perhaps the perpetrators thought you weren't worth the "investment".

Surely you don't mean that the awful spikers found the person you replying to, too unattractive to be worth wasting their intoxicant on? Or should I actually judge your post on what it says? Rather than selecting a snippet that will reflect as poorly as possible?

Perhaps the entire post will clarify what you really meant? So let's read it together.

Perhaps the perpetrators thought you weren't worth the "investment".

I know a girl who ended up in hospital having her stomach pumped when she was a teenager. She never drank (still doesn't) due to a medical condition so when she started swaying her friends immediately knew something was up.

Doesnt really improve with context does it? Now to be clear, I don't believe you meant to imply that the poster you replied to was too ugly to be worth wasting booze/drugs on. But that's what you said.

Yet the evidence presented of known spiking on the thread to date? Has been male victims. Ignoring the posters you claim are male, but the Singha case. Known instance of 200+victims many yet to even be identified. Yet your primary preoccupation is with women? Rather than victims and in persisting to gender this matter.

Why?

You then bang on about spiking being a gender issue. It's a point that on the whole, I'd agree with. Not just because of the volume of claimed instances but the physiological aspects of intoxication too. I mean you say Northernlilly wasn't challenged? Yet they were asked if they'd had a tox screen. Not by me, but they were asked.

Toxicology/drug test after the incident? I assume you would have mentioned it if there had been one.

Why lie? Why lay claims that are patently and demonstrably untrue? Or is it a further indication of your issues with comprehension and solely binary thinking?

You then take the binary view that if someone believes that evidence is needed before a claim of spiking is to be believed, that all women are to be labelled liars. If they don't present a tox screen?

Further you make the claim, multiple times over this thread that I have said or claimed as much. Point out where.

Context matters, as in your cherry pick of my response to CaitCat, context of your cherry pick is below.

Wind your neck in. There's no victim blaming going on, but your race to assume that mantle says quite a bit.

You made a claim regarding being spiked. I take that at your word. I'm not asking you to back it up nor even attempting to refute it.

What I am saying is that your assertion you didn't report it because no serious crime had been commited is wrong. Demonstrably so, and I provided a range of offences of up to 10yrs tariff that such an attack could attract.

Your claim that because you made it home, that no serious crime occured is wrong.

Your response to any attack, spiking or unwelcome attention is entirely your own.

But? Claiming victimhood, sharing a story that thankfully ended without any further infringement on your person, as evidence of widespread spiking? When unfortunately other than your recollection? No matter how well founded. Is not evidence of drug based spiking.

It is perfectly reasonable to show care, consideration and compassion to someone who has encountered spiking or an incident they believe to be spiking. It isn't a matter of racing to call someone a liar. That you can't reconcile that, that it is possible to accept someone's belief they have encountered such and experience without accepting that such an experience no matter how harrowing? Cannot be definitely labelled a spiking? Is odd.

It is as if you believe were I a paramedic attending a car accident? That you would expect me to breathalyse everyone and not treat the drunk. You do understand that everyone gets treated? That it's only after care and safety are achieved that the causes are investigated?

Multiple reasons exist for loss of control and black out. As has been said multiple times over the course of this thread drink, excessive drinking and drink spiking are probably prime amongst them. Others have given medical reasons for such instances. All valid.

Earlier this week El_Duderino asked you

Do you get the difference between functionally accepting something (usually inconsequential) as true, and belief based on evidence?

Its fairly evident based on your posts that you don't or worse, that you are ignoring it to pursue a clearly gendered agenda.

That you can't reconcile the simple truth that the extant evidence lays out with certainty a far lower rate of drug based spiking, than seems to be anecdotally the case?

That you can't see the need for that narrative to be countered by reports and evidence from anyone, anybody who believes they have been victim of any form of Spiking? Really highlights the narrow and binary mode of your position.

To counter the narrative of drug spiking being rare, which is based on academic and medical evidence gathered and assessed even in suspected cases in the report shared earlier in this thread?

Victims and suspected victims need to report, evidence to counter that report needs to be gathered and collated.

A person can believe they were spiked, I can believe a person was spiked and in either instance the person should be supported and helped to recover.

Now this is the part you seem to have difficulty with, believing someone was spiked? Does not mean they were spiked, it also doesn't mean they are a liar.

For a Spiking to be definitively labelled as such? It requires actual evidence and not belief. Do you appreciate that difference at all? Or are you going to persist with your I believe her hyperbole?

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135457#Comment_118135457

What drugs showed up on those who were tested?

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135646#Comment_118135646

You can write all the essays you want. I'm only highlighting what is written on here.

6 accounts of spiking. You challenged 4. Didn't challenge 2. The former are female. The latter are male. Might be coincidence. Might not be.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135691#Comment_118135691

Just to be clear.

You are choosing to ignore the content of my post and persist with your gendering of this issue? Even tho it's demonstrably groundless?