# Crack Cocaine vs Powder Cocaine distinction in our laws is a terrible policy

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [November 15, 2008, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810 "2008-11-15T03:40:31Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 10\
**Page:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/81 "2008-11-18T13:52:03Z")

</div>

Actually, the study seems to indicate that it is NOT the form of the cocaine that results in greater dependency and it then comes up with an _ad hoc_ rationale for believing that crack is worse, anyway. (And it still comes down on the side of getting rid of the ridiculous discrepancy between the sentencing rules.)

John P. Morgan and Lynn Zimmer performed the [same sort of meta-analyses](http://www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/cocaine/crack.htm) (scroll to _Comparing the Addictiveness of Crack and Cocaine_) in about the same time frame as the Hatsukami and Fischman paper and noted from several cross-studies that the rates of actual addiction were not greatly different and that an explanation use based on marketing and cost were quite as likely to be responsible for the difference–a point acknowledged if downplayed by Hatsukami and Fischman.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/82 "2008-11-18T13:59:50Z")

</div>

**Shodan** , not one of your citations makes a medical claim that crack is more addicting. The comments even in your links indicate that whether crack is “worse” or worthy of harsher punishment tends to be based on the political position of the author.

[QUOTE=Shodan]  
Speaking of things people are making up from whole cloth, could you please cite where anyone said you had mentioned conspiracy, or said that “whites” were soley responsible?  
[/QUOTE]  
Just as soon as you provide any evidence that the phrase “institutional racism” is “a method of making white people feel defensive.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/83 "2008-11-18T14:22:52Z")

</div>

Okay, let’s assume crack isn’t more addictive than powder.

What’s the cost to society?

These wealthy white folk can afford powder. They’ve got jobs, pay taxes and their health insurance pays the rehab when they get busted.

How do crack users pay for their habit, and what is the cost to society?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/84 "2008-11-18T14:51:03Z")

</div>

> [@tomndebb](#):
>
> **Shodan** , not one of your citations makes a medical claim that crack is more addicting.

Including the one from the Journal of the American Medical Association?

_:shrugs:_

Your own cite says

> [@](#):
>
> Because the excessive use of a drug over a short period of time is likely to cause more individual and social dysfunction than moderate use over a long period of time, the tendency of crack users to binge means that crack can be viewed as more risky than powder cocaine.

You’re simply ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your non-factually based opinion.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/85 "2008-11-18T14:52:06Z")

</div>

> [@levdrakon](#):
>
> Okay, let’s assume crack isn’t more addictive than powder.
> 
> What’s the cost to society?
> 
> These wealthy white folk can afford powder. They’ve got jobs, pay taxes and their health insurance pays the rehab when they get busted.
> 
> How do crack users pay for their habit, and what is the cost to society?

Crack is cheap enough that anyone holding down a job at slightly above minimum wage can afford it.

On the other hand, if we reduced the amount of effort and money we waste trying to stop it, its price would come down even further.

And if we’re going to talk cost to society from that perspective, we still need to address the issue of wasting money to build more prisons to hold more people while giving them felony records that inhibit to future employment, often for being users, not dealers (since the bar had been set so low to be named a dealer).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/86 "2008-11-18T14:55:38Z")

</div>

> [@Shodan](#):
>
> Your own cite says
> 
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Because the excessive use of a drug over a short period of time is likely to cause more individual and social dysfunction than moderate use over a long period of time, the tendency of crack users to binge means that crack can be viewed as more risky than powder cocaine.
> 
> You’re simply ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your non-factually based opinion.

More rsiky is not miore addictive.

I am weighing the same evidence as you and coming to a different conclusion. That is how these discussions go. Making an accusation of ignoring evidence is silly when one has also ignored evidence (or misread it).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![daksya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dc4da7/32.png) [@daksya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/daksya)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/87 "2008-11-18T16:37:02Z")

</div>

> [@tomndebb](#):
>
> Actually, the study seems to indicate that it is NOT the form of the cocaine that results in greater dependency and it then comes up with an _ad hoc_ rationale for believing that crack is worse, anyway.

You earlier said,

> [@](#):
>
> In what way is 1) true? A cheaper, quicker, shorter high does not make a drug more dangerous.

From the review,

> [@](#):
>
> The crucial variables appear to be **the immediacy, duration, and magnitude** of cocaine’s effect, as well as the frequency and amount of cocaine used rather than the form of the cocaine.

Crack cocaine is not a devilish substance that creates dependence by some magical virtue of its form. But its raison d’etre is to modulate the above-cited “crucial variables”. If someone were to chew miniscule amounts of freebase cocaine in a pill form, I daresay the effects would be less toxic than caffeine. But crack cocaine is not used that way, so the ‘form’ of the drug, per se, in this case can’t be decoupled from its predominant method of use and the contingencies it introduces viz. the immediacy, duration and intensity of effect.

Re: the Morgan/Zimmer analyses, they use the same survey but an earlier dataset as Anthony 2004 (which I cited above). In contrast to Anthony, their analysis is crude, apparently based on a comparison of continuation rates between crack and powder within the 1990 dataset. Anthony et al., OTOH, do a controlled statistical analysis on 3 years of data (95-98), also factoring in the responses to questions modeled on the DSM diagnostic criteria. M/Z seem to be debunking the instant/inevitable addiction perception of crack, and I agree with them there, but their crude analysis on comparative dependence liability is superseded by the rigorous analysis by Anthony et al.

**tomndebb** , I’d still like to know of the studies you refer to in this quote

> [@](#):
>
> from that we should conclude that previous studies in which powder failed to be more addictive than crack should be ignored?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/88 "2008-11-18T16:44:05Z")

</div>

> [@daksya](#):
>
> **tomndebb** , I’d still like to know of the studies you refer to in this quote

I am not sure that I will be able to find them on-line. They were published in 1987 and I have not kept track of the authors in the ensuing decades.  
I’ll keep looking.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/89 "2008-11-18T16:45:24Z")

</div>

Where does meth fit in all this?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/90 "2008-11-18T18:46:45Z")

</div>

> [@tomndebb](#):
>
> I am not sure that I will be able to find them on-line. They were published in 1987 and I have not kept track of the authors in the ensuing decades.  
> I’ll keep looking.

But weren’t the findings of these secret studies disproved in 1979 by Vernon Wormer and his double-secret studies?

😉

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810.md?page=4)
