Osler's Razor

Great article. In particular, I like the bicycle and bagel metaphors. The circle and spoke pattern evokes the image of the CIA seal, thus hinting at a secret message regarding a "denied" conspiracy.

But more importantly, I feel like I can speak intelligently about crack cocaine production and the five freebase methods.
 

Very interesting and comprehensive article, I think it did the job of making it an easy read for non-experts such as myself (funny, in science writing we call the non-experts “laypeople”). I have a question though, is there anything that baking soda doesn’t have an application for? And a question on a topic related to the narcotics business model…the one which is totally legitimate, the one Big Pharma runs with supreme impunity. Why not implicate them in the “fight” against illegal narcotics? They sure join forces when it comes to knock-offs of their prized cash cows (i.e. Viagra for Pfizer). There’s a lot to be said for the benefits of all legal narcotics, tranquilizers and sedatives, but the line is very fine because of the subjective matter of the symptomatology (who is there to tell me how painful is painful, or how long should I suffer my bratty kid before I tranquilize her, or count the sleepless hours before I pop some chemical help?), but when some drugs are pushed in spite of devastating side effects (suicide being the case for all nervous system altering medication) why not push back? It does not pertain to US, but a drug manufactured here called Cymbalta (Eli Lilly) is prescribed in Europe for incontinence, in spite of its potentially devastating side effects. Too bad a highly addictive drug for common sense has not yet been invented...too much an anti-business model, I guess.
 

phenomenal piece, mark.
easy to read and understand, even for a small-brained knuckle-dragger such as myself.
especially after understanding it in such clear and simple terms, it blows my mind that your fight to do away with the crack-powder ratio took anything more than a 10-minute powerpoint in front of a few key decision-makers.
also stunning is the bass ackwards approach our country's law enforcement arms took in regards to the so-called 'war on drugs.' of course, that's a little easier to understand, given that busting street dealers took little effort compared to the much more difficult undertaking of picking apart a crime syndicate until you get to the top levels, where arrests would actually make a difference.
plus, busting the street dealers gave law enforcement agencies an easy opportunity to get pictures in the paper of what appear to the average citizen to be large amounts of a drug taken off the street, interpreted as a great success in the war on drugs.
the picture of the guy in the suit, who quite possibly has never touched cocaine, being led out of a new york city office building is not nearly as compelling. and it would have consumed far more time, effort and resources to get to that upper-level arrest.

what is your sense re: why law enforcement didn't approach it as a business model and go after the top dogs more aggressively, versus picking off street dealers like fish in a barrel? was it laziness? lack of resources? i wish i could find it hard to believe that it was sheer ignorance of the problem you so clearly outlined. unfortunately, i cannot. was that the problem?
 

It's how people are rewarded, Woody-- by the number of cases they bring in. So, they go for the easy ones, and the law defines those street dealers as "major traffickers." At least that is part of it.
 

This is excellent. NPR's "Planet Money" should get a hold of it--the economics of crack.

I also liked the part at the end about the similar (and ultimately, dissimilar) trajectories of HIV/AIDS and crack. That made a lot of sense to me.