Kamal Singh

Cold cook methods: an ethnographic exploration on the mythsof methamphetamine production and policy implications

• Authors Details :  
• Miriam W. Boeri,  
• David Gibson,  
• Liam Harbry

Journal title : International Journal of Drug Policy

Publisher : Elsevier BV

Print ISSN : 0955-3959

Page Number : 438-443

Journal volume : 20

Journal issue : 5

1.3K Views Research reports

Background Urban legends and myths are prevalent in drug-use environments. However, the distinction between myth and fact is not always clear. We found contradictory claims regarding the emergence of cold cook methods for producing methamphetamine when contrasting user-generated reports with official reports repudiating such methods as myths. Our aim is to open the topic for more academic discussion. Methods We examine cold cook methods of methamphetamine production revealed in our ethnographic study and interviews with former (n = 50) and current (n = 48) methamphetamine users. Data were collected in the suburbs of a large southeastern city in the United States. We compare the data with reports from law enforcement professionals and public health officials. Results Official reports claim the cold cook method described by users in our study is a myth and does not produce methamphetamine. Small-scale producers sell it as methamphetamine and users claim it has the same effect as methamphetamine. They are charged for possession and distribution of methamphetamine when caught with this drug. It appears the unintended consequences of recent policy aimed to reduce production and use of methamphetamine may be a user-friendly production method. We do not know the health implications at this time. Conclusion We do not make any definitive conclusions on the legitimacy of the stories or myths discussed here but instead suggest that labelling drug stories as myths might lead to dismissing facts that hold partial truth. The subsequent dismissal of cold cook methods among policy and public health officials risks a range of unintended consequences among vulnerable populations. We present our case for more research attention on the myths of methamphetamine production. Keywords: Cold Cook Methods, Cold Cook Methods step by step, Cold Cook Methods steps, Methamphetamine, Cold Cook Methods list

Article DOI & Crossmark Data

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2008.12.007

Article Subject Details

• Basic science

Article File

Full Text PDF

---

---

Article References

• (1). 10.1177/104973201129118948
• (2). 10.1177/193672440700100108
• (3). 10.1016/j.drugpo.2004.03.004
• (4). 10.1080/08941920601117371
• (5). Drug Enforcement Agency. (2005). Methamphetamine myths. NDIC Narcotics Digest Weekly 2005, 4, 2, 1, retrieved on August 4, 2008 from http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/programs/forensicsci/microgram/mg0205/mg0205.html.
• (6). Drug Enforcement Agency. (2006). General information regarding the combat methamphetamine epidemic act of 2005. [Title VII of Public Law 109-177], retrieved on November 28, 2008 from http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/meth/cma2005_general_info.pdf.
• (7). Escamilla B. (2004). Methamphetamine urban legends. CSA Newsletter, The Clandestine Safety Academy, a Division of Network Environmental Systems, March, 1–2.
• (8). 10.1080/16066350290001687
• (9). 10.1016/S0955-3959(00)00075-X
• (10). 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01018.x
• (11). Lambert, E. Y., Ashery, R. S., & Needle, R. H. (1995). Qualitative methods in drug abuse and HIV research. NIDA Research Monograph, 157 NIH Publication No. 95-4025. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
• (12). 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02099.x
• (13). National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC). (2001, June). Pennsylvania drug threat assessment. Retrieved June 9, 2008 from http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs0/670/meth.htm.
• (14). National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC). (2003, December). Arizona drug threat assessment. Retrieved August 30, 2008 from http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs6/6384/meth.htm.
• (15). Office of National Drug Control Policy. (2004). The price and purity of illicit drugs: 1981 through the second quarter of 2003. Washington DC: Executive Office of the President (Publication Number NCJ 207768).
• (16). 10.1177/002204260603600405
• (17). 10.1177/1049732305275639
• (18). 10.1016/j.drugpo.2005.12.005
• (19). 10.1016/S0955-3959(02)00222-0
• (20). 10.17730/humo.52.2.c5886935g71h7350
• (21). 10.1525/sp.1989.36.4.03a00070

---

More Article by Kamal Singh