Talk:Bath salts (drug)

Merger proposal

It should be considered to slim article down and merge it with the article about designer drugs. Many of it's content is arbitrary with weak sourcing. Most of it's content are actually about specific designer drugs and not about the phenomenon of them being sold as bath salts. A lot of times throughout the article the term bath salts is used when it would be more appropriate and accurate do describe them as designer drugs. The term is very unspecific and misleading as most of these designer drugs (or bath salts if you will) were never sold as bath salts, but as a variety of other things including vertilizer, research chemicals, make up, cleaning products, etc.

Also noteworthy is that the term bath salts is almost solely used in the US even though designer drugs like methylone and MDPV are sold all over the world. This is mainly thanks to claims made by the Miami police after the Miami Cannibal attack in may 2012 of Rudy Eugene being under the influence of designer drugs and the eagerness of the media to spread the false information along with the misleading term of bath salts to describe them. This term is rarely used by people who use, sell or buy designer drugs. SinglefinBlu (talk) 01:30, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree that bath salts is a US term which I've never heard used in this context in the UK. Such drugs are popularly but inaccurately referred to as mephedrone (often confused with methadone in media reports) or monkey dust, with a number of more obscure street names also used. The drugs are usually misdescribed as plant food if anything. At the very least the article should document this regional usage. --Ef80 (talk) 10:55, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion

• Keep: This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because... This is a rather new topic (as I have previously searched for 'bath salt' only a few days ago) and never understood that this was in fact, being used to cut other crystalline narcotics, much less why it led for a man in Miami to attack a homeless man so severely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.246.46.156 (talk) 02:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

• Keep: the article should be kept, if you want to delete it or redirect it, then place an +afd on the article. JunoBeach (talk) 08:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

• Delete This article is one of at least three that address extremely closely related topics, including methylenedioxypyrovalerone and Ivory Wave. Seems to me to be the best plan to use the technical term as the named page, and use the street names for the drug as redirects. I'm reinstating the speedy delete because I don't believe it was given ample consideration. erielhonan 00:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

See the discussion at [1]. Dream Focus 03:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Cannibalism

Deleted reference to "cannibalism" as a health effect. First of all, this is a behavioral effect, not a health effect. More fundamentally, however, it's now been shown that the Miami cannibal didn't have bath salts in his system. If bath salts have been tied to cannibalism in any other case -- and if you can provide a citation for that -- by all means feel free to put it back in.VaneWimsey (talk) 04:53, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

News Channel 5 wrote an updated article stating that Rudy Eugene, who attacked and ripped off a homeless man's face, was not on bath salt. He was actually on marijuana. http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/world/bath-salts-not-responsible-for-miami-zombie-attack-on-ronald-poppo-by-rudy-eugene-examiner-says — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christiee813 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

there really should be content in the article about how the media so very very very carelessly hyped up unsubstantiated claims about the involvement of the drug in such a high profile case where it turned out to be COMPLETELY WRONG and as a result how much of the public's the the government officials who are making laws about this are based on complete nonsense.-- The Red Pen of Doom 03:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

It's the same thing they did to GHB. The governement and media have an understanding when it comes to completely false propaganda against designer drugs. All we can do here is wait for the retractions to come out. Gigs (talk) 17:08, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussion to merge article with "Ivory wave"

• Oppose Merger: The most commonly used term for these types of street drugs is now "Bath Salts" not Ivory wave. JunoBeach (talk) 21:01, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I meant that Ivory Wave needs merging with this article, not the other way round. You redirected it but without merging the content. SmartSE (talk) 21:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    • If you want to merge relevant information, then merge the relevant information. JunoBeach (talk) 22:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
      • I will if/when I have time, but as I thought that someone else might be able to before me. SmartSE (talk) 12:27, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

"Ivory Wave" was Desoxypipradrol 66.96.79.223 (talk) 00:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Placement considerations for this content, and the discussions around them

I would like to suggest to the editors of this page and those that support its retention that there are editorial policies and standards that come into play here. Yesterday the drug was known as Ivory Wave and today it's known as Bath Salts, and tomorrow it may be known as Stinky Tubesocks. Best thing to avoid the trends of the day is to write up information on the topic under a permanent name, such as the scientific name for one of the principle chemicals in the drug. It's not like there are separate articles for "sticky icky", "da bomb", and "kind bud".

Also, the creator-author of this article makes some bold, unsupported assertions in defending the article, such as his opposition to the merger discussed above. I think your intention is right, but I don't think you necessarily seeing it from an encyclopedic perspective or are exhibiting objectivity over the fate of an article you created. erielhonan 00:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because... (your reason here) --24.36.139.78 (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

This article should not be deleted as this is a new drug. More information should be made available so that people are able to protect themselves and their children from this substance.

Nominated for deletion

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bath_salts_(drug)

Opening paragraph

Hello group, would you please comment on the opening paragraph noted below and let's work together to make it better. My suggestion, would be that we note that "Bath Salts" is the parent name for the designer drug and then note a sample of the brand names it is sold under, so readers have a better understanding of the subject. Here is my suggestion for the opening paragraph:

Bath salts is the name of the parent structure for designer drugs containing synthetic cathinones, which have effects similar to amphetamine and cocaine. The white crystals resemble legal bathing products like epsom salts. Bath salts are sold under a variety of brand names, such as, but not limited to: Aura, Black Rob, Blizzard, Bloom, Blue Silk, Cloud Nine, Drone, Hurricane Charlie, Ivory Wave, Lovey Dovey, Lunar Wave, Maddie, MCAT, Meow Meow, Monkey Dust, MTV, Ocean Snow, Peeve, Purple Wave, PV, Red Dove, Scarface, Snow Leopard, Stardust, Super Coke, Vanilla Sky, White Lightning, Zoom.

JunoBeach (talk) 12:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I've already removed parent structure as this is incorrect - bath salts are not a specific chemical class, and could be any designer drug (I'm sure we can find references for this too). I'm really unsure about including so many names for several reasons. Firstly, previous consensus in drug articles (e.g. for cannabis and synthetic cannabis) has been to only include very common names, rather than specific slang or brand names. We do this is all other articles about drugs so in my opinion this shouldn't be any different. It sufficient to tell the reader that they are sold under many different names and only mention specific ones in context if they are significant. In the case of bath salts only Ivory Wave and perhaps NRG-1 has been mentioned in reliable enough sources to merit inclusion. SmartSE (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, instead of using the term "Parent Structure" can we think of another term? The problem people are having is thinking that Bath Salts is the same thing as the brand names! We need to make a differentiation. I don't mind pruning the brand names OR perhaps we could include a sample of the brand names in a separate paragraph, so it does not interfere with the opening paragraph?! What do you thing SmartSe? JunoBeach (talk) 15:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I think saying that the name is 'generic' is the best solution - it's a catch all term. I'm not sure what you mean by "The problem people are having is thinking that Bath Salts is the same thing as the brand names!"? Which people? I agree that the brand names that are mentioned in academic sources should be mentioned. Spiller lists brand names and only 'Cloud 9', 'Ivory Wave' and 'White lightening' were reported regularly. SmartSE (talk) 10:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Did you know

I've nominated the article to be in the 'did you know' section of the main page. You can find the nomination here. SmartSE (talk) 13:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Incidents involving the drug bath salts

For Your Information:

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Incidents_involving_the_drug_bath_salts#Incidents_involving_the_drug_bath_salts JunoBeach (talk) 22:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Merge Incidents involving the drug bath salts to this article (discussion)

It's been suggested at the deletion discussion currently occurring for the Incidents involving the drug bath salts article that it be merged into this article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that there is nothing to merge - single events about people getting high aren't exactly encyclopedic, whether or not the media make a fuss. To include any incidents we should require the incident to have had a lasting effect, as shown by sources spread out over time, rather than clustered over a few days. So far, AFIAK the only incident to meet these criteria is the miami cannibal case. SmartSE (talk) 20:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem with that is that the only connection the Miami case has to bath salts is that the actual toxicology reports show THERE WERE NO BATH SALTS INVOLVED, only the speculation at the time of the event by an officer not even involved in the case that got repeated over and over and over and over. -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes I know, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't include it. In the UK two teenagers died after supposedly taking mephedrone when in fact they had taken methadone. This case lead to mephedrone being made illegal even though toxicology proved that they hadn't taken it. As the source I had previously included mentions, this was the case spawned "a wave of media interest" about the drug and is therefore worthy of mentioning. If it hadn't been for those reports, then none of the other incidents would have been reported. SmartSE (talk) 11:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

The Dickie Sanders one on the other hand might be. I think that is the case where his father has been crusading against bath salts and was one of the chief lobbyists who got the federal anti-bath salts law passed. -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you find any sources about this? If they exist, then I think it would be best to include some information in the context of the legal status in the US, rather than as an 'incident'. SmartSE (talk) 11:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

it wasnt sanders, it was Rozga [2] and again, it is not the "incident" itself, it is the "impact" of the incident that is encyclopedic. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

JunoBeach replaced the incidents section and I have removed it pending further discussion here. I think that in order to have the correct WP:WEIGHT we need sources over a range of time. Without these sources, it is hard for us to filter news into encyclopedic content. SmartSE (talk) 11:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Having *notable* incidents that are well cited and written strengthens the article. JunoBeach (talk) 13:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

you have not provided any evidence that these are significant examples that help people understand the actual topic of the article and are not merely random examples, ie non notable trivia. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

ie you need sources describing the actual impact of the incidents and not just the incidents themselves. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Notability deals with the subjects of articles but not the content. We need to weigh up the sources available and decide which ones are the best to use. Can you explain how the incidents strengthens the article? I'm repeating myself here, but it should be obvious that we don't include 'incidents' like this and this in the alcoholic beverage and alcohol intoxication articles. Why should we treat this drug[s] any differently? It is much better to use academic sources, where the authors have witnessed many patients under the influence and listed the possible effects than to rely on single news reports. Please discuss this further rather than edit warring - you were bold to replace it, but after I reverted, we should discuss it rather than you simply replacing it. SmartSE (talk) 14:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I mentioned the Miami cannibal incident because it plays a large role in how "bath salts" are perceived and understood by the public. c.tccj (talk) 05:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

NYS reference: authoritative source

Footnote 33 was flagged as a potential questionable source. The original press release appears on the web site of the NYS Department of Health: http://www.health.ny.gov/press/releases/2011/2011-05-23_bath_salts.htm Danchall (talk) 18:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Pharmocology

I removed serotonin from the list of monoamines that bath salts supposedly increase the activity of. Even though the article referenced cites "catecholamines such as dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine", it is wrong, because serotonin is not a catecholamine. Catecholamines are molecules that have a catechol group on them, which serotonin does not. Anyone can consult standard sources for this fact if interested. Further, there is no other evidence in the article that MDPV directly contributes to any serotonergic activity. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 04:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

You're certainly correct that serotonin isn't a catecholamine, but there is good evidence that mephedrone does increase serotonin, so the article cited isn't completely wrong. Would it be better perhaps to change 'catecholamines' to 'neurotransmitters' and then replace serotonin? SmartSE (talk) 10:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, sure, thanks for pointing that out. There is also a good article cited in the mephedrone wiki that we should cite here too. And since we're talking about specifically about monoamines here, I guess that's what we should say. I will go ahead and make these changes. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 18:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

You might find this article interesting: http://www.adn.com/2013/11/27/3201318/parents-wish-son-hadnt-been-left.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.30.237.163 (talk) 17:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

This sounds like a fabrication

I don't really believe "bath salts" are a thing that exists, it certainly smells of the "Jenkem". Just a scare-story from authorities to scare parents and youth. There might be "Synthetic cathinones" on the market but I don't believe that most reports of bath salts are actually related to this class of compounds. They are probably incidents unrelated to bath salts but that have been explained away with the drug-du-jour. 15 years ago that cannibal guy would have surely been on PCP in the story.

69.172.94.73 (talk) 05:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Could you be more specific, and say what you think is wrong with all the sources currently in this article? There is no evidence that the Miami cannibal attack had anything to do with bath salts. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Detection possible

My daughter, suffering many psychological issues, had her urine tested to determine changes caused by her medications and to determine any other substances she was using.

The report sent by the testing facility came back positive for "Cathinone (Bath Salts)" (direct quote) and listed the compounds tested for. Her mother sent a photo of the report to me, and I'm doing my here best to list the tested compounds although they are hard to read from the photo.

• MDPV
• Mephedrine
• Methylone
• Methedrone
• MDPBP
• Buphedrone
• Naphyrone
• Pentylone
• alpha-PVP
• Ethylone (this is the compound which tested positive)
• Butylone

I'm not sure how I can prove this as I will not post the report. I will, however, say the name of the testing lab is "Axis". The clinic only revealed the lab name in their report, no other details about the lab. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.243.215.202 (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

All a bit of a mess, really....

Although the ingredients generally appear to be cathinones, this umbrella/blanket term still relates to multiple substances, so to have statements such as, "very little is known about how bath salts interact with the brain and how they are metabolised by the body," are pretty much meaningless. Likewise, since the term is restricted to the United States, it make no sense to claim that, "In Europe the main synthetic cathinone is mephedrone, whereas in the US MDPV is more common." The UK equivalent appears to be "plant food" phenomenon from a few years back, which now is pretty much sublimated into the overall umbrella of "legal highs," although that still a specific subset of what that term currently redirects to, i.e. "Legal intoxicant." Nick Cooper (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Almost a decade on, and this page is still no better. I see that someone had added a claim that "monkey dust" is the UK equivalent, and yet this is a relatively recent term for MDPHP specifically. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Image needed

Aren't there any photos of this drug at Commons? 204.11.189.94 (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2022 (UTC)