Talk:Opium/Archive 1

message: The following does not cite any sources and is detracts from the quality of the article;
"Countless miracle cures contained opium, which of course was the reason many of these were so successful, since people started taking these cures because they made them feel good. Opium was even touted as an alcoholism cure, evidently to the wives of alcoholics. This would be because an opium addict, capable of supporting his habit on about 5 cents a day, would likely be a more suitable companion for a wife—being placid and calm, mostly—than an alcoholic husband."
Please provide a source.
Foolishben 09:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced 

message: The claim that "opium" comes from the ancient Macedonian "opi" (drunken) + "um" (mind) is probably BS.  I can't find any support for it anywhere else on the internet, and it contradicts the Oxford English Dictionary, which traces it to the ancient Greek "opion" meaning "vegetable juice."  Should it be removed, or just tagged with a "this needs a source"?
: Suggestion: start by tagging it and perhaps trying to search out a source of your own.  I don't buy it for a second (I see much more substance in your Oxford reference), but I'm not touching the main article; it's too mature.  DrMorelos 00:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology of "opium"

message: I wrote a little bit about the production of opium in Afghanistan but I don't think it is substantial. There is a lot more that can be put into that section and I would add more but I don't have the time to do research on other countries that produce opium and the statistics on opium production today. Rayana fazli 21:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can show where it might say that India is the leading producer of opium, then put it in the article. Rayana fazli 07:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Production today

message: what are the affects of cocaine and opium when smoked? a friend of mine has started doing this.
:Smoking both together?  Mixing stimulants (i.e. cocaine) and depressants (i.e opium) together is known as a speedball, and is bad news, and has caused a good number of (famous) drug related deaths.  It carries a large overdose risk as the effects of one drug will generally wear off before the other, causing a delayed-reaction overdose effect.  The combination can also be very hard on the heart, and can lead to heart attack.  Risks of death aside, according to the "experts" (hard core drug users), the speedball is also the most addictive drug combination, and if you've never tried it, it should be avoided at all costs.  --Thoric 15:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is cocaine and opium 

message: The article repeats twice that an opium addict could satisfy his need for five cents a day in the 19th century. This may be true, but I think it is a bit misleading to mention it, since the value of money was different those days. Maybe one should include the typical price of a bottle of whiskey of a typical pay of day's manual labour those days for comparison. Since five cents feels like a small amount of money for a modern reader, it causes a "wow that was cheap"-impression, and I am not quite sure if it is accurate. Does anyone have any data of other prices of the 19th century. This was just my five cents...Punainen Nörtti 08:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  My position is that the alcohol it replaced would cost about the same, and no mention is made of the near-completely erased libido in most male opium users.  What wife wants an asexual husband?  Isn't that why pfizer is suddenly so solvent?  I would prefer if someone else could correct this in the article, however, because I am very poor at distinguishing between propriety and its inverse when I have strong concerns regarding an issue.  DrMorelos 00:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five cents 

message: 203.87.187.190 05:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SKY AND EARTH 

message: Surely the Medicinal Uses section should mention Opium's use as raw material for morphine, codine and other modern pharmaceutical applications. Mind you, I may be misunderstanding the production of these licit drugs.
Also, it should probably be mentioned that licit opium poppies are cultivated legally in several countries. Australia and India I think are the leading producers of opium for pharmaceuticals.  Edward Tubb 15:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medicinal uses and cultivation: Morhpine, Codine, 

message: One of the sentences in the "modern usage" section looks like it needs to be changed. the sentence reads:
:"Many large American fortunes were built in the opium trade, including those of John Jacob Astor (partially and briefly), John Kerry (from his Forbes grandfather), and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (from his Delano grandfather)."
For now, I added the citation needed tag to the sentence. However, I would like to remove or change the sentence completely since John Kerry and Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not have anything to do with the sale of opium themselves. If anything, it should list the names of the men who actually sold the opium two generations earlier (if they really did, that is). The fact that Kerry and Roosevelt are descendants of these men has no relevance to the article IMO. Thoughts?
-km
68.85.97.73 03:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Fortunes 

message: Smoking opium must alleviate some pain. We know morphine is derived from it and morphine is definitely useful but what about opium for minor medical problems.
--69.151.62.226 (talk) 08:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Legal medicinal uses' section needed.

message: Hmmm... here's a philosophical question.  A recent editor sourced the statement about the winged deity in a bas-relief from the palace of Ashurnasirpal II at Nimrud to two reputable sources:   . 
 The comic part is that these sources are both copied precisely from the old version of this article, including the original unsourced statement.  Eventually, if I can stop snickering, I should try to decide what to make of that. Mike Serfas 04:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully this doesn't mean the universe is about to collapse on itself ;) --Daniel11 04:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry guys I removed it before implosion ;)  I can hopefully replace some of the weaker sources in this article with good sources (i.e. Medical and Archaeological Journals) as I have access to them.  I have access to most scientific journals so if there is one you know of specifically that could be of use let me know.--Iosef U T C 17:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - you've been doing good editing, and I have a wishlist. ;)  Especially, I'd like to get in more detailed information about the Yongzheng Emperor's 1729 ban - was it only a ban on madak smoking, or did it prohibit domestic Chinese opium production?  I'm guessing that opium became a high value commodity for the British to trade because it was banned, and that some aspect of the British trading concession or extraterritoriality gave them a loophole - is that true?  If Arab traders brought opium to China in 400 A.D., why were they importing it in 1729 anyway?  I've seen mention of the British "preferring" to trade opium rather than silver - what were the relative values of these products from the sellers' point of view?  Also, there was a brief mention of "drastic penalties" for Chinese users but what were they?  Was it definitely the first ban on opium in the world?  I'll get back to a good library eventually but thanks if you beat me to it. Mike Serfas 03:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced statements gone feral 

message: For years this article contained an unsourced statement which in my opinion really wasn't very nice.  "At the Metropolitan Museum's Assyrian relief gallery, a winged deity in a bas-relief from the palace of Ashurnasirpal II at Nimrud, dedicated in 879 BC, bears a bouquet of poppy capsules on long stems, described by the museum as "pomegranates".  Early versions even said "prudishly" described as pomegranates!  It was unsourced, but perhaps people felt they had to leave it in - it was once the only mention in the article of any ancient use of opium.  Well, for the record, I found the museum with a quick Web search,  wrote up their help desk and asked what they had to say.  In a few days I received a response from Kim Benzel, the assistant curator, admitting that there was always room for debate on interpreting highly stylized bas-reliefs, and both plants were known to the Assyrians, but they generally more closely resemble pomegranates, which are better represented in iconography of the period.  She suggested further reading on the topic:
* Curtis, John E., and Julian E. Reade, eds. Art and Empire: Treasures from Assyria in the British Museum. Exhibition catalogue. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1995.
* Kuhrt, Amélie. The Ancient Near East c. 3000-330 BC, vol. 2, From c. 1200 B.C. to c. 330 B.C.. London: Routledge, 1995.
* Reade, Julian E. Assyrian Sculpture. 2d ed. London: British Museum Press, 1998.
While there may be some interesting possibilities here for original research, I see no reason to doubt her expert opinion.  Wikipedia owes the museum an apology for this slur against its integrity. Mike Serfas 23:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The last word on Ashurnasirpal 

message: This is the question that I'd like to see answered most of all.  There are countless descriptions of the addictiveness of opium dating from the last three centuries, but before then, I'm not finding them.  During the Islamic Renaissance, it was apparently a drug available to poor people who couldn't afford to go to the doctor - without causing social disruption.  During the Roman Empire it was widely known and used medically, but one reference I found guessed that there was little if any hedonistic use or addiction.  I think there must be many more sources that weigh in on this issue that can be added.  But perhaps the explanation is among the interesting biochemistry and evolutionary biology still hidden in the poppies. Mike Serfas 03:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So far my thoughts focus on two points.  As now described in the article, for some time the Chinese purchasers regarded their domestic opium as "inferior" and paid twice as much for opium from India.  Also, a few scientific articles (, , ) suggest that Papaver rhoeas extract can interfere somehow with the development of morphine addiction.  I'm tempted to speculate that Papaver somniferum was artificially selected for maximum potency at some time between the introduction of poppies to China (600-1200) and when addiction to Indian opium was observed (1700), and that perhaps such selection not only increased the fraction of alkaloids made up by morphinans, but also decreased the level of a beneficial antagonist or weak agonist of opioid receptors.  But is there any evidence to support this? Mike Serfas 05:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Opium addiction has always been, but spread more recently as the smoking method was popularized. Smoking anything has a higher addiction potential. Similar to how smokers find nicotine gums useless in most cases, although chemically the same addiction cue as cigarettes. Smoking opium is far more addictive than ingesting. That is why it became a problem, but to say Opium addiction is a new thing, is wrong, there have always been opium dependent people, but perhaps not a problem worth noting since ingesting opium is easily controllable opposed to smoking which will rapidly increase the users tolerance at higher rates than ingestion. Ingesting opium even has lower dependency rates than oxycontin or MST continus (Morphine sulphate), partly because of its cocktail of alkaloids. It's also worth noting Thebaine plays a vital role in reducing the rapid build up of tolerance, duration of effects and limiting large amounts of opium use due to thebaine poisoning. When opium is smoked, only the Morphine and some of the Codeine alkaloids are inhaled, whilst thebaine and the other non-narcotic alkaloids are destroyed due to high heat, therefore it allows a user to use large quantities of morphine without the effects of thebaine (thebaine if taken in large amounts can cause thebaine poisoning which results in seizures, convulsions and involuntary muscle movements), so it seems by the smoking method, the natural safeguard (thebaine) is bypassed. Also, ingesting cooked opium will also carry low levels of thebaine as it is destroyed in the cooking process. Cooked opium is most common type of opium latex in Mid-Asia and Southeast Asia today, which carries a higher addiction potential than natural opium, even when ingested. So the increasing opium addiction potential is partly because of 1. popularization of smoking method 2. removal/reduction of thebaine 3. higher morphine to thebaine content ratio. If alcohol could be smoked, i'm sure we will have a alcohol epidemic on our hands, and handful of alcoholics. Hope this has helped guys. I was involved in a study researching Iran's opium usage, and thats where this information is from. If you need a copy of the report for citation, let me know. And if you want to know more about thebaine poisoning, here is a good link http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/services/view.php?id=939 .--78.86.117.164 (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why did opium addiction become a problem after more than 5900 years of uneventful use?

message: While trying to tighten the history of prohibition in China, I decided the list with the three Americans who made fortunes on opium really doesn't belong.  (John Jacob Astor, James Grant Forbes, Warren Delano, Jr.)  I know this is a contentious point (see Talk:Opium/Archive 1), but the problem is that if the Americans are listed surely a larger number of British subjects should be listed, and if they're listed that's quite a bit of space to give to a list of names without context, even before you start listing famous grandchildren.  This information definitely should be featured prominently in the individual biographies of these people.  If you can cite a source that says "Lots of prominent American politicians including X,Y, and Z owe their upper-class status to dope-dealing ancestors" then that would be a good thing to have in the article, but otherwise what we have is just an arbitrary subset of a long list. Mike Serfas 17:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: American fortunes

message: At WT:PHARM#Opium_and_Apolipoprotein_A1 some time ago, Fvasconcellos suggested putting this article up for peer review.  I delayed doing this until I'd fixed some of the obvious flaws, but it's getting near time for wider input.
As a preliminary I've put the automated script review output at Talk:Opium/autopeerreview for reference. Mike Serfas 03:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review

message: I am suggesting merging a section from the article Smoking to here. Any discussions about this should take place here.  Naacats 22:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose.  The paragraph you want to merge is generally intended to be in summary style (see WP:SS).  Ideally, it should summarize the information about opium smoking that is presented here, and it certainly is not too long to serve as a summary.  Removing it entirely might be perceived as a "POV fork" (e.g. perhaps an attempt to dissociate the smoking of tobacco from the smoking of opium, despite their fairly close historical ties).  Additionally, the content of that paragraph differs in some respects from what is presented here and the only reference is offline in French and might only support the last sentence. Mike Serfas 15:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Oppose.  The Smoking article covers the whole of smoking and the substances associated with it.  Opium is a significant smoked-substance, and therefore deserves its own section beside the sections concerning tobacco, cannabis, and other smokables.  The section on the smoking page is succinct and covers the smoking side of opium use.  The opium article covers the whole of opium and its historical significance.  Both the article and the section are fine as they are. TeamZissou 04:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I oppose too, however, I DO think there needs to be a section here about opium smoking, or at least a paragraph or two, but not as detailed as in the smoking section. --78.86.117.164 13:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Smoking 

message: I have a request for details pertaining to early prohibitions against opium use at Talk:Prohibition (drugs)#Earliest prohibition, and citations, which perhaps some editors of opium can help with. Thanks! --Daniel11 16:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for details/citations 

message: From the article: "Recreational use of the drug began in China in the fifteenth century". Hope I'm not offending anyone, but I find this laughable. Were magic mushrooms never used "recreationally" until the hippies came along? The definitive change has not been in the use, but the cultural perception. And anyway, even if I'm wrong on that, opium use for it's euphoric properties is as old as time. --MQDuck 03:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you are right, Opium was first used for its euphoric properties, followed by the discovery that it also numbs physical pain. Almost all drugs were used used due to their euphoric effects. --78.86.159.199 (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since opium use goes back to prehistoric times, the above referenced statement is incomprehensible. So I'm changing it.Unsignedunforgiven (talk) 06:06, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: China and recreational use

message: That infobox photo is terrible... That's a picture of opium poppies, not opium...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lelandrb (talk • contribs) 00:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I replaced it with a photo of opium latex oozing out of a cut poppy fruit. This is likely the most helpful image for someone who has never seen a poppy. We could have an image of prepared opium, but there are so many different forms. Likiva (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Infobox Photo 

message: Where in the article do we describe eradication efforts?  I note that some have been suffering from contradictory estimates from "differing methodologies." "US claims Afghan opium progress" (BBC) 69.228.211.27 (talk) 07:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting estimates of production 

message: Colloquially and especially noted on these online drug use forums these days, it is an extremely common occurrence that "opium" is being smoked as a recreational drug. However, raw opium extract doesn't exist in the United States (you can find home made poppy tea but not the raw opium extract these people are thinking they are getting): What these people are doing, unbeknownst to them, is black tar heroin. True opium should smell strongly plant matter, heroin smells like acetic acid (vinegar), can be orange or yellowish in color, and can be injected when broken down in a solution (opium cannot be because of it's codeine content). The amount of raw morphine in opium is no where near the amount of acetylated morphine in the content of black tar heroin. People in the U.S. should know what they are doing, and it is not "opium", there has not been a DEA report of finding opium extract in the U.S. and that should tell these people something. It is heroin. Not opium. 4.255.49.220 (talk) 01:26, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the source of this information, please? Looie496 (talk) 01:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[Black tar heroin]]" sold as "opium" in the western United States. 

message: I removed "Powdered Opium" from the opioids template as it simply redirected to the opium article. However "Granulated Opium", "Raw Opium", "Smoking Opium" & maybe even "Poppy Straw Concentrate" all too had redirect links on the opioid template that might very well rightly have sections here in this article if they are so notable. I simply did not want them to be overlooked being removed from the template if they can indeed muster their own article. Nagelfar (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of 'opium' from "template:opioids" 

message: as of now it reads under retail price $3 per gram Retail price $16,000 per kilogram that seems ridiculous, why would something, when bought in large increments, be more than 4 times more expensive, than when it is bought in small increments. maybe only one is the retail price and the other something else (what?), but it is terribly confusing.118.172.70.237 (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  retail price 

message: The Map indicating "Main producers of opium for the heroin trade" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HeroinWorld-en.svg) is extremely misleading. Iran produces no illegal opium or heroin. Not only is opium production in Iran totally banned, illegal, but also carries a penalty of death by lethal injection or strangulation. Like all other countries Iran has a limited number of globally recognized opium fields for research, medicine and the pharmaceutical industry, and despite the outrageous claim from the map, the number of the legal opium fields in Iran is LESS than the number of legal opium poppy fields in France or Spain, let alone claiming heroin production. According to U.N. statistics, Iran has no role, and no contribution to the worlds illegal heroin production. Iran's contribution to the worlds illicit opium production for 2008 was... guess...... 0... 2007.... again 0.... 2006 again 0... and so on (www.un.org & www.unodc.org). The map maker is obviously not a professional in the subject, or is a professional but has a bias or a defamatory intention when it comes to Iran, and to some extent Pakistan. However, even though opium production in Iran is none existent, Afghan opium and heroin is illegally trafficked through Russia, Iran, India and Pakistan, via lorries, air, cross-mountain camel bandits, and tunnels. Iran's border patrol confiscates more Afghan heroin and opium annually than any other country in the world, however, the trafficking through Iran is less than what is trafficked through Russia both from Afghanistan, meaning Russia is a bigger conveyor belt for Afghan Heroin than Iran or Pakistan. Never the less, Trafficking and production are 2 separate topics and factors, rendering the map inaccurate, misleading, and defamatory to Persians who are not just struggling to stop Afghan heroin trafficking from reaching Europe and other parts of West Asia but are also victims of the influx of cheap Afghan heroin/opium itself, let alone being mislabeled as producers and accomplices to the global Heroin production. Pakistan though does produce opium for illicit use, but the numbers are very insignificant to even bear mentioning. Iran alongside Russia, and Turkey is only a frequent route for Heroin trafficking, but has no contribution to illicit Heroin or Opium production. I will remove the map until the creator fixes this problem. Please do not upload/create maps before running them through the discussion group first. Things like this results in misinformation to many, and possibly students who then print out the map thinking it is reliable information. --93.97.181.187 (talk) 04:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Information on Map - Removed until author fixes the problem 

message: and that they say that the Senlis report is out of date and that they,
 as the largest producers of morphine in the world, were never asked to contribute to its 
findings: 
--Janeyjo (talk) 11:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want to say that opium is being produced all over Europe by Macfarlan Smith 

message: This chart is misleading and should be replaced. 
1) The peak value of 41000 metric tons in 1906/1907 is disputed. This estimate includes 35,000 metic tons (584,400 piculs) for Chinese production, but the Qing Court estimated only 8,800 metric tons (146,000 piculs) in this same year.Anti-drug crusades in twentieth-century China: nationalism, history, and state building. Yongming Zhou. Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. (page 20) See also below for response from the British Medical Journal.
2) The chart apparently mixes figures for Chinese production and import with figures for total global production. 
3) Opium varies widely in morphine content.Dikötter, Frank, Lars Laamann, and Zhou Xun. Narcotic culture: a history of drugs in China Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004. 
4) Non-opiate pain relievers and anti-biotics were not widely available until the 20th century, and opium was used medically in China and elsewhere for pain, diarrhea and fever. 
5) Has only four data points between 1850 and 1950, misleadingly implying a sharp peak in production. 
6) Missing labels on the Y-axis.
Rewriting history, A response to the 2008 World Drug Report, Transnational Institute, June 2008:
:A lot of opium was used for medicinal purposes, which are treated now by other medications. In order to compare production and consumption figures a century apart one should take into account that a lot of the use in the past is now replaced with other regular medicines and remedies to treat these diseases, such as antibiotics as well as synthetic opioids and other lighter painkillers, the so-called antipyretic analgesics including paracetamol, aspirin and ibuprofen.
:Another question is how reliable the 1906/07 production figures are. They were based on a report of the Chinese delegation to the International Opium Commission (IOC) in Shanghai in 1909. These estimates were already challenged at the IOC itself. “The statistics in this report are of very little value,” according to an article in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), of January 8, 1910, about the report of the Chinese delegation. “They were challenged by the British delegates, with the result that the Chinese delegation has represented to the Government the necessity of obtaining more reliable data. The figures dealing with the growth of the poppy and the consumption of opium are, as a rule, nothing more than rough estimates or mere expressions of opinion.”
:The production rapidly declined to 22,200 metric tons in 1908, and to 4,000 metric tons in 1911, when the eradication campaigns due to the anti-opium edict issued by the Qing government in 1906 – mandating the cessation of poppy cultivation over a ten-year period and requiring licenses for smokers – began to have an impact. However, other sources quote a production of 16,300 metric tons in 1904, well below the peak in 1906/07 and the 1908 figures.
:On the other hand the figures of 2007 seem to be too low. According to the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) there is now an unmet demand in opiates. Ironically, the current drug control regulations hamper access to controlled opiate medications for therapeutic use. Many patients are unable to access morphine, methadone or an equivalent opioid. Global medical morphine consumption would rise five times if countries would make morphine available at the level of the calculated need, according to a recent WHO estimate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Likiva (talk • contribs) 11:18, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opium Production Chart 

message: I removed two images. This image of an old book is unnecessary. 
And this image is a fantasy based on exaggerated and fictional accounts of London opium dens.  Likiva (talk) 09:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you about the fictional den, but I think the Avicenna image is justified, as it illustrates what is discussed in the text. I have also made some other partial reversions, which I'll be happy to discuss here if there are any questions. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed images 

message: Were jewish doctors the main source of opium for europeans during the middle ages?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.99.132.30 (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand where that question comes from. The "Reintroduction to Western medicine" section of the article deals with that period, and there is nothing to indicate a role for Jewish persons there. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish doctors during middle ages 

message: It would be nice if it were legal to grow and sale Opium as food because it is a supressed food. The first book of the Holy Scriptures in Genesis says YEHOVAH God gave man all plants bearing seed as FOOD. That is right OPIUM is a gift from YEHOVAH God to man as a FOOD. It should be legal to grow and consume. 99.148.204.217 (talk) 03:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but I'm afraid references need to be verifiable and Yehovah is the epitome of WP:NOTRELIABLE. Thank you for your comment. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 03:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Also: WP:NOTAFORUM. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genesis in the Holy Scriptures says ALL PLANTS WITH SEED IS FOOD 

message: The articles states without citation "After 1860, opium use continued to increase with widespread domestic production in China, until more than 25% of the male population were regular consumers by 1905." Although I'm no expert, this seems pretty hard to believe. Moreover, I know that there is a fair amount of anti-British propaganda about opium use in China connected with the opium wars.  Is a citation available?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.78.34.253 (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  25% of Chinese males were opium users? 

message: Page 19
http://criticalasianstudies.org/assets/files/bcas/v08n03.pdf
Rajmaan (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jonathan Marshall - Opium and the Politics of Gangsterism in Nationalist China, 1927-1945 

message: http://www.thailex.info/THAILEX/THAILEXENG/lexicon/opiumgebruik.htm
should be
http://www.thailex.asia/THAILEX/THAILEXENG/lexicon/opiumgebruik.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.100.224.17 (talk) 16:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: . Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: I have a book that states otherwise.  Like I stated before the educated are too far away from what is real in this country and in this world.  Are you ready to take responsibility for your children?  This in no wasy is a threat, I am the furthest thing from stupid and the educated are a lot smarter than I am.  I believe the money problem is a worst addiction then drugs.  But I can certainly understand why only certain children and people are dying in the streets.  I know the rich want to keep their families safe.  I understand that fear all too well.  But unfortunately my life has been dedicated by someone other than me, to protect our country, no exceptions.  I at least understand it just can't be about this country, Whatever I feel for this country has grown into a love for all countries and their people.  I can barely breathe as long as I see the danger.  And what is the "why".  But then I suppose someone rich bought a lot of us.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.177.242.131 (talk) 03:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I disagree with the article. 

message: The article says that a modern method of producing opium is to harvest and process mature plants by machine. This is simply not so. No opium is produced from mature plants (poppy straw). Morphine and other opioids are produced from poppy straw, but not opium. The mature poppy straw has very little moisture, and thus no latex, and no opium. In the process of maturing, the fruits not only dehydrate, but the materials of which they consist also undergo some chemical changes.Nomenclator (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds not unreasonable to me, but we really need to have sources for that kind of information, lest it be original research. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen the sources but I don't have time to search for them. It would be nice if someone would go look for them and add the info. Now, you want sources that say no latex is available from the mature plant, but you willing accept the statement "The modern method [of obtaining opium] is to harvest and process mature plants by machine" without sources. Why different degrees of citation for diff statement - why need citation for has no latex, but accept statement as it without citation? Especially since by definition a mature herbaceous plant, such as a poppy plant, is a plant that has gone to seed, and become dehydrated, and no longer has fluid in its vascular bundles or in its ovaries, or in its seeds, and therefore has no latex. This self-evident, that this kind of plant, a herbaceous plant, is dry when mature, and has no latex. Nomenclator  (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BURDEN. If you want to add more material than was here before, you have the primary responsibility for providing sourcing, so the different degree of expectation for citations comes from when the material showed up, not from the nature of the material (see also WP:NOR). Perhaps, also, we really don't need all that detail in the lead section, with it belonging better somewhere lower on the page. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not want to add more material. Want suggest someone else do it. I too lazy. Agree perhaps too much detail, leave out from first paragraph, sentence start with  "The modern method." Also leave out next sentence. Maybe move to somewhere further along in in article. Or maybe move info that some morphine is made from poppy straw rather than from opium, to article on morphineNomenclator (talk) 20:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in article 

message: In this Wikipedia article it is said "As seen in case studies today, the use of opiates in medicine, namely morphine, is seen as a safe and effective form of treatment for pain even if given over longer periods of time if given in controlled doses.". Is that really correct? Maybe this should be cited from the article:
"Whereas it was previously thought that
unlimited dose escalation was at least safe, evidence
now suggests that prolonged, high-dose opioid
therapy may be neither safe nor effective. It is therefore important that physicians make every effort to
control indiscriminate prescribing, even when they
are under pressure by patients to increase the dose
of opioids."
Especially in the light of this news article: Rx Painkiller Deaths Rising Faster in Women http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/PainManagement/40243
Nopedia (talk) 22:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, yes, you are quite correct about that. The previous wording on the page was going way beyond what mainstream source material would claim. I've rewritten that paragraph accordingly. I didn't add the new material you cited here, thinking that it doesn't really need to be on this page, but if you feel like adding something more than what I wrote, please go ahead. Thanks for catching that. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ballantyne & Mao 2003 seems wrongly cited 

message: Not that it's bad or uninteresting, but it's reached the point where it should probably be spun off in bulk as History of opium and then dealt with in broader terms here at the main page. Should help with keeping this page well sourced and less edit-heavy and getting it relisted as a GA. — LlywelynII 13:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a great idea, actually! See my comment in the section below. Madalibi (talk) 06:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: History section overlong