This is what happens when you’re stupid

Ever heard of Krokodil? The word itself means “crocodile” in Russian, but it has nothing to do with the reptile. Krokodil is some scary, SCARY shit! It’s a drug – desomorphine – a morphine derivative, originally developed in Switzerland. But the Swiss, realizing how horrifying this shit is, didn’t turn it into a whole kitchen industry. The Russians, however… that’s another story.

Always desperate for a new and better high, the Russians figured out a way to make Krokodil cheaply and easily – after a crackdown on other opiates made heroin harder to get.  The drug is easily made from codeine which can be derived from cough syrup, iodine from OTC medications and red phosphorus from match strikers. And guess what! This stuff is highly impure and is contaminated with various toxic and corrosive byproducts. Various other common products like gasoline may be substituted as part of the production.

Lovely, right?

Want to know some side effects?

Aside from the fact that this crap only gets you high for about an hour, it also eats away your flesh.  Yep, massive tissue damage… gangrene… nastiness.

Really… who would inject a drug into their bodies that literally eats away at your flesh and is so highly addictive, that they don’t even care!

Well, apparently, at least one dimwit in Mexico has decided she doesn’t like her vaj, so she injected Krokodil into it.

Yeah, you read that correctly. A 17-year-old injected a mix of morphine, gasoline, and fuck knows what else into her genitals!

I guess you could look at it this way. This fucktard was way too stupid to breed anyway, and injecting a drug into her hoo hah pretty much ensures that she never will.

And that’s a win.

13 responses

  1. See, this is where I admit I have little to no empathy for fucking idiots, because I am GLAD to see this drug. It’s a self-correcting problem, folks. No one is making them get high on this garbage; they choose it, so they deserve the consequences. I just wish it killed them faster.

    Like

    1. This is why I want to end the war on drugs. Stupid people tend to take themselves out of the gene pool. As an EMT, my opinion is the temporary bump in call volume is more than worth the gain in restored civil liberties.

      Like

  2. While my sympathy for this twat is best described as “non-existent”, I still have to wonder at what point does injecting a flesh-eating substance into one’s own cooze ever sound like a good idea?

    Like

  3. I am a physician and in my early years I was all for the various invasive means that our government has for controlling drugs. Then 40 years passed and I have seen just about everything. I now feel the exact opposite. The government is not controlling drugs, except among the law abiding and they make it very difficult for that group. I feel that you should be able to obtain and medication you desire without prescription, and many of my colleagues support this view. If you are stupid enough to abuse the drugs, then the situation is self-limiting. Many countries allow people to get the drugs they desire and the drug problems suddenly cease to exist. Consider this, the government has total control over your medical care, even before Obamacare. All doctors must have a government license and this license is subject to immediate confiscation at the desire of politicians. Doctors are told how to care for you by the state and when you can and can’t have medications. As it is now, if you sprain your back you have to beg for an appointment to a doctor’s office, if you can get one. Otherwise you have to go to the ER and pay $2500. You may or may not receive the drugs you need, something for muscle spasm and a pain med. Why? Why can’t you just go buy it at the drug store? Why can’t you have as much as you want? Because 16,000 nuts who abuse the drugs no matter what the law arrange to die taking them? This is crazy and we need to let people do what they want.

    Like

    1. I actually agree with you about getting the government out of people’s medicine cabinets. I will, however, say that first we need to get rid of the welfare society first, lest the rest of us wind up paying for these people’s care after they do something dumb like inject Krokodil into their cooch,

      Like

    2. David,
      I like your libertarian bent, but unfortunately the combination of an entitlement society and free access to drugs would be an economic and social disaster. If we were a truly free society, and you sat around smoking pot and injecting crocodil instead of going to work, you would starve to death and the problem would indeed be self-correcting. Unfortunately with our generous safety nets you would be fine; you and your nasty habits would thrive and even procreate, vote, and drive your car, thus endangering MY FAMILY. Your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins, so while we have such entitlements we do need controls on non-theraputic drugs.
      It will be interesting to see how this combination pans out in Colorado. When “medical” marijuana was legal for a couple years in Montana, THC detected in autopsies went from 27% to 87% of fatal wrecks! So much for MJ being a “benign” drug. Imagine if heroin, methamphetamine,and crocodil were legal.

      Like

      1. I would submit that it would be a self-correcting problem, because the idiots who did that stuff would eventually kill themselves. Problem solved!

        Like

  4. Alex,
    What makes you think that deregulation of drugs would be associated with excessive use? I can answer that for you, you feel that people will try a drug and become addicted. I am sorry to tell you this, but addiction, or the concept that we know of as addiction, is a myth. It was not medical science that first espoused this concept, it was the economist. There are a number of economical papers on addiction and they have been able to put this to bed. Now, certainly people abuse drugs and do so persistently and have to go to rehab. But, the actual fact is that these people are sick and basically self medicate. As I said, somehow other countries are able to have deregulation of drugs and their problems with this seem to diminish, not increase. Just look at alcohol, a highly addictive drug. It was banned, but people still used it, and on return to normalcy (if can characterize anything in this country as normal) it was not excessively used. The fact is that we need to get out of others business and let them fail if they desire. Our attempts to do otherwise only brings everyone down. I will never forget seeing an 85 year old vet crying in pain because he refused to submit to the dishonor of a urine drug screen to get his needed pain medication.

    Like

    1. David, I won’t speak for Alex, but I don’t see where he said anything about addiction in his comment. What he is saying is that WE, as a society, are being forced to pay for these idiots’ bad habits. I am all for legalization, but I don’t want to pay for these assholes’ overdoses, their hospitalizations, etc. One of my relatives did heroin, drank himself stupid and injected and smoked other crap his entire life. He developed hepatitis and eventual liver failure. He was hospitalized, and guess who paid for his care! It wasn’t him – with no full time income and all his money going to drugs. It was society. We all pay for these shitbags, and we especially pay when they get into a car or another mode of transportation and cause wrecks and kill people while they’re high. If we’re going to decriminalize drugs, we need to make it very clear that these fucksticks are on their own. No, they won’t get care at taxpayer expense. Yes, they will get the maximum if they get into a car drunk or stoned. And yes, they will be put to death if they kill someone while under the influence. Then, if they still want to get high, more power to them. They’ll either kill themselves, or will be put out of society’s hair permanently via other means. But I don’t want a DIME of my tax dollars going to care for these losers’ bad choices in life.

      Like

      1. Nicki,
        The reference that I was making was secondary to the assumption in the previous narrator’s comment that made me believe that he was under the impression that de-regulation would result in increased use.

        Now, I totally agree that people who use drugs are a burden to the rest of us. At least, those that use in outside that parameters of health management. Most people that I know of use Lortab and similar mediations for very legitimate reasons and this is often life time. I am well aware of people that abuse the system, even with tons of money and regulations to try and prevent the concept. I also used to work at an indigent hospital. One of the largest in the US. I can assure you the 50% of the work we did was connected to illness induced by recreational use of drugs. So you can see that you are already paying the piper. In fact, I would say that our national health care bill incorporated about 25%, at least, in charges related to drug use and consequences. This will not change with de-regulation. In fact, proper use of quality drugs may reduce the problem.

        Like

        1. Well increased use doesn’t necessarily mean addiction. Merely the knowledge that there’s no punishment.🙂

          Like

    2. David,
      you first make a compelling case that addiction is not a medical disease.
      Then you refer to alcohol as “a highly addictive drug”.
      Methinks you inhale too much!
      Not a criticism… just an observation.
      Alex

      Like

  5. Also, when drugs are legal of course people use them more. The experiment in prohibition was the perfect example of a crossover study on this issue. During the period of Prohibition our rates of alcohol related diseases like cirrhosis plummeted. They went back to “normal” when the 21st amendment passed.
    Alex

    Like

%d bloggers like this: