http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcocaine.html
Isn’t the obvious answer that the police officers in TV shows taste cocaine is to confirm to the audience that it is in fact cocaine? This is a hell of a lot faster than having to run a lab report on the drugs and create another scene.
Plus when you have actors like Tom Sizemore playing cops, do you think a little taste of cocaine will make a difference in their drug test?
Gee, I always wanted to hear an actor say as his (her) answer to the question “Is it cocaine?”, “Hey didn’t you read the script? Of course its cocaine”.
The last time I checked, cocaine had a very distinct, chemical taste that I would recognize again in a heartbeat. However, I´m pretty sure that very few cops would be tasting something they don´t know what contained (I´m not sure what Anthrax tastes like for example). I also think that cops usually don´t stumble upon a container full of coke as we tend to see in the movies - the big busts are usually the fruit of a lot of work and wait, so the cops often know exactly how much there is - not just what there is. Anyway… It´s obviously just to show us stupid viewers what´s going on in the movie. It´s almost as dumb as the classic discussion between two specialists about something they obviously know everything about and are just exchanging the same information they both already had. E.g.
1 “Have you heard about project EVE?”
2 “You mean where they tried to implant microchips into humans´brains?”
1 “Exactly, they did some tests on a girl in the late 90´s”
2 “Yeah, I was an intern at DNAMAX at the time - they used that orphan mexican girl, right?”
1 “That´s right…Eve…”
etc. etc.
Bad scriptwriters are easier to spot than a hooker at a country club. Or something slightly less stupid.
What I wanna know is, does heroin also have the tounge-numbing, anesthetic quality of cocaine? I saw Joe Don Baker do that “lick the powder” routine in the, now-classic, made-for-TV-movie “Mitchell”. 
And, yes it did eliminate the need for a second scene devoted solely to substance identification, allowing the films creators to economically and ingeniously combine two plot points into one scene.
But since I do not have ready access to any heroin to lick, I don’t know if heroin truely possesses that property or if the filmmakers got heroin and cocaine confused in this instance.
Anyone? 
For some reason I can´t remember my last Heroin experience very well… I can´t remember it numbing my tongue (although it did suceed in numbing the rest of me!), but then again I had the brown type, smoking version - might be that the white stuff is different. I´d expect most directors and actors to be so thoroughly soaked in coke and heroin that they´d never know the difference.
There is a quick, reliable chemical test for the presence of coke- IIRC, you add a little powder to the liquid chemical and shake it- coke will turn it blue (or some other color). Easy and realistic, and no cops failing drug screens.
This method has been used in television and films, but I think since the audience expects the cop to taste the stuff, they keep writing it in.
My dictionary backs UselessGit up, calling cocaine a bitter alkaloid. I was surprised that Hawk said it had no flavor. (I think all the alkaloids are bitter, but I could be wrong about that.)
I am a forensic drug ID chemist, and I know that it’s against policy to taste drugs. However, some of the old-timers used to “back in the day,” until the purity of the cocaine reached the point where it started numbing their tongues for longer periods of time and even leaving sores. Cocaine supposedly has a bitter taste (I wouldnt’ know I haven’t ever tasted it!), and in my experience it also has a fairly distinctive smell (at least the cocaine base form, or “crack”).
Heroin would not numb your tongue, it is an opium derivative not a local anesthetic, although it does have anesthetic properties. There are quick color tests that police officers have available in field test kits, usually consisting of a small tube you place your unknown substance into and shake to react with the chemical. For cocaine, cobalt thiocyanate (in solution it looks pink) turns blue. This test is by no means specific; other -caines such as benzocaine, lidocaine, and procaine will also produce the blue color, as will any tertiary amine. The test basically gives the police reason to send it to the lab for further testing, and in the lab we use the same color test as a preliminary test to narrow down the possibilities (we repeat the test because we have more experience with the chemistry, as well as access to standards for comparison).
**
**
Dear Hawk:
Have you yourself ever tasted cocaine? Have you ever used it? I have never used any prohibited drugs, not that I know of. Twice in my lifetime I was under general anaesthesia, that’s why I have the conclusion that being in that state is like being in transient death. Being in that state, it seems, is being under prohibited drugs, of course administered legally for a medical purpose. Anyway, I am curious for my own information whether you have ever tasted cocaine or used it, for then you could tell me from personal experience how it really tastes like and the effects of cocaine ingestion (that word, right?).
“I’ve been in the forensic pathology business for a long time”, you inform us. Are you a doctor in medicine specializing in pathology, like the doctors I know working in the diagnostic laboratories of a hospital, who can tell whether a piece of tissue is ‘sick’ and of what sickness; only you are more into finding out how a subject is criminally killed or injured, and also materials and methods employed?
I have read about proposals to legalize some prohibited drugs, because they are not even more dangerous or harmful than alcohol or even coffee, and certainly tobacco. As a forensic pathologist, and on your own estimation, what are the today prohibited drugs that can be delisted from prohibition, without the public suffering more risks and more dangerous ones than alcohol, cigarette, and coffee.
Thanks for any information you can impart to the present inquirer. This program is a very good source to get to know things which I have always wanted to, but never seem to have gotten to the real answers.
Susma Rio Sep
kunoichi, could you email me at pls@claymore.nu? I’d like to ask you a couple of questions without bothering everyone else.
My dad has actually stood in front of a customs officer confronted with a suitcase full of baggies of white powder as said officer muttered “cocaine,” sliced open a baggie of white powder, stuck a finger in, and tasted it.
My dad then yelled at the guy that he was a friggin idiot for endangering everyone in the room, since he was transporting a suitcase full of asbestos. It was a sample to determine the viability of a mine.
The “cocaine”-tasting dork got hosed by his superior on the spot, and probably ended up with an official reprimand.
What ever happened to the urban legend of the Texas traffic officer who did this and ended up in the hospital for… ever, according to some accounts, for licking a finger covered in nearly pure LSD?
Perhaps ever-so-slightly off topic, but I heard that doctors sometimes administer very pure cocaine to people with e.g. a broken nose. I know they use some sort of ultra-fast, super-power painkiller thingamadave but I´d like to know if it´s really coke or if I owe my nose a massive apology. Oh, and I know that “cutting of your nose to spite your face” is a known expression but could “braking your nose to numb your face” not be just as good?
Boris B(ecker?) - thank you for your support, my proud scandinavian friend. I love your fragrance. Too often has my hard work for a better society been ignored. Good to know you´re appreciated.
It (or a slight variant) went were all good urban legends go to die - Snopes.
I had heard the story that drug dealers cut the stuff with quinine (why, I don’t know) and that this was what the “taste test” was for – if you tasted the bitter quinine it was possible that you had cocaine there, and it was worth delving into further. Quite possibly inaccurate; has anyone else heard that story?
In response to Susmo, Useless and MLS (bear with me the answers are fairly related!): This might differ depending on where you live, but I’ll use the US federal drug laws as an example. Drugs are controlled by a system of “Schedules”. Schedules are essentially a way to categorize substances based on their medical use and “potential for abuse”. For example, drugs with no recognized medical use in the USA and a high potential for abuse are placed in Schedule I. Drugs that have a high potential for abuse yet DO have a recognized medical use are placed in Schedule II. There are other schedules, basically in decreasing order of potential for abuse. Things like heroin, LSD, psilocyn (the psychoactive component of 'shrooms), MDMA (ecstacy) and, yes, marijuana, are placed in Schedule I. Schedule II encompasses cocaine (which is legal in certain circumstances, most of all under direct supervision of a physician, so it is still used in nasal surgery IIRC). Schedule III includes methylphenidate (Ritalin), and Schedule IV contains aprazolam(Xanax) and diazepam (Valium). For more comprehensive info, check out http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html.
As for the quinine, I personally have not seen it in any of my cocaine analysis, but it would not surprise me if it was used as a cutting agent. The idea of cutting is to make more money off of less active substance by mixing it with something relatively cheap that won’t alter the appearance too much, so it would make sense for a dealer to use quinine to increase profits. However, it’s a bad idea to base analysis for controlled substances solely on the cutting agents. If that were the case, there would be a lot of arrests for posession of baking soda
Oh I forgot to mention… the scheduling guidelines are developed by lawmakers, NOT scientists. Although they generally make sense, certain things seem absurd, such as marijuana being scheduled “worse” than crack. Incidentally, synthetic THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) is considered useful for medical usage ONLY in a gelatin capsule form; this form is in Schedule III.
Also, there are a number of compounds that are very closely related to controlled substances but are for one reason or another not controlled. Most of these are “worse” than the controlled substances, but the theory is that the side effects are so bad nobody would bother abusing them.
Sorry to beat a dead horse… this has to do with the LSD urban legend. Maybe it arose from the story of Albert Hofmann, the chemist who synthesized LSD and accidentally discovered the effects of it after he absorbed some through his skin. A translation of his account can be found online at http://www.flashback.se/archive/my_problem_child/
>Have you yourself ever tasted cocaine? Have
>you ever used it? I have never used any
>prohibited drugs, not that I know of. Twice in
>my lifetime I was under general anaesthesia,
>that’s why I have the conclusion that being
>in that state is like being in transient death.
>Being in that state, it seems, is being under
>prohibited drugs, of course administered
>legally for a medical purpose. Anyway, I am
>curious for my own information whether you
>have ever tasted cocaine or used it, for then
>you could tell me from personal experience
>how it really tastes like and the effects of
>cocaine ingestion (that word, right?).
No, I have never tasted cocaine myself, nor have I ever used it. I don’t even have much use for the legal ones. I don’t even use aspirin, if I can help it. As for the body of knowledge that would best answer the question, “What does cocaine taste like?”, I’m afraid that is generally not available. You see, any reputable scientist won’t do it, much less PUBLISH it. As for those who have fewer issues with reputation (e.g., drug users and traffickers), their accounts also are not published, even when you can find one that can be considered reliable. Additionally, cutting agents and the degree of cutting will vary, making any scientific practice uneven. Further, cocaine is taken either by snorting or injection, having little to do with the tongue at all. (There are other ways of introducing cocaine into the body, but they are more unusual and not very common.) Having said that, I will add that I do have a friend who was a cocaine user. He states that, while there is a taste, he was never sure what the taste was from, due to the cutting that invariably takes place.
>“I’ve been in the forensic pathology business
>for a long time”, you inform us. Are you a
>doctor in medicine specializing in pathology,
>like the doctors I know working in the
>diagnostic laboratories of a hospital, who can
>tell whether a piece of tissue is ‘sick’ and of
>what sickness; only you are more into
>finding out how a subject is criminally killed
>or injured, and also materials and methods
>employed?
No, I am not a doctor, of any kind. I am a forensic biologist, performing DNA analyses, blood typing, and the like. I hold a BS in pre-medical sciences, meaning I majored in biology and minored in chemistry and microbiology. After graduating in 1991, I received additional training by the FBI, the McCrone Research Institute, and the Serological Research Institute, to name a few. (My actual curriculum vitae takes several pages.) In the dozen years I’ve been working professionally, I’ve never been very far from the Drug Chemistry Units, from which, some of my information comes. Narcotics officers and toxicologists are also among those whom I consult from time to time in matters I don’t have particular experience in. The biggest problem in answering the question of the taste of cocaine is that, of the many people I know, none of them have any experience in this matter. Furthermore, of the police officers that I know, none of them are old enough to have performed the taste test before it became a violation of policy to do so. In short, the only authorities who are old enough to have done any of this are retired or close to it. Of the toxicologists I’ve polled, they argue amongst themselves: some say that the anesthetic effect would numb the tastebuds before the sensation of taste would work, while others say that cocaine, being an alkaloid, would have to be bitter and that tasting isn’t necessary.
So what could the taste test tell you? Certainly, the little dip that you see police officers on TV take shouldn’t be enough to render much of a detectable taste, unless cocaine had a sharp flavor. I’m not even going to go into how “real” TV is, even “reality” shows like Survivor or “factual” shows like CSI. Having been on nearly ten forensic documentary shows myself, I know what goes on behind the camera. While many people seem to agree that “it’s only TV,” some still can’t seem to make the link that any actions observed on TV may not be true, either. Having worked on a number of high-profile cases, I even have doubts about the news. At this point in my life, I think that the most accurate person on the news is the meteorologist…
So, again, what COULD a taste test tell you? Despite being an alkaloid, whose bitterness could be easily detectable even in small quantities, it is my belief that it is the effect of cocaine that’s being tested, or more specifically, the lack of it. I don’t think the taste test would tell you WHAT the substance is; instead, it’d tell you HOW PURE it is. A drug shipment that was heavily cut with sugar, flour, etc., would have little anesthetizing effect and HAVE A TASTE. Of course, today’s drug lord is quite crafty, and cutting his product with another anesthetic would border on ingenious.
I apologize to The Teeming Millions if “forensic pathology business” was misleading, but it is a difficult task to explain some things here in only a few paragraphs, so any shortcuts that don’t affect the explanation are usually welcome, even if they do tend to cause confusion every so often.
>I have read about proposals to legalize some
>prohibited drugs, because they are not even
>more dangerous or harmful than alcohol or
>even coffee, and certainly tobacco. As a
>forensic pathologist, and on your own
>estimation, what are the today prohibited
>drugs that can be delisted from prohibition,
>without the public suffering more risks and
>more dangerous ones than alcohol, cigarette,
>and coffee.
Not being a forensic pathologist, I can offer no information on this readily. I can ask my colleagues what they think, but, since this is a matter of opinion, I’m sure they’ll be quite varied. However, in a country where a lawsuit to ban Oreos can be filed while cigarettes and alcohol remain available, I doubt that common sense is the rule of the day. Heck, remember Olestra? One published side effect was “anal leakage.” Anal leakage! Imagine what this company didn’t want to tell you…
>Thanks for any information you can impart
>to the present inquirer. This program is a
>very good source to get to know things
>which I have always wanted to, but never
>seem to have gotten to the real answers.
Yes, we’re proud of that too, certainly much better than TV.