Talk:Free base

revamp needed

This article is poorly written in terms of its chemistry content. Free base is a slang term used by drug dealers and addicts, not by professional chemists. The depiction of what free base is in slang terms and chemistry need to be better explained. Also the pharmacology of a street drug in free base/non-free base form is explained poorly. There is math involved using the Henderson–Hasselbalch equation. Plus the pH of the blood is stated without any range or correct citation. This makes no sense, and is completely useless to the article. It is as if this article was written by someone with only high school level chemistry knowledge. The article needs to be rewritten in many parts and more citations are needed. SneaselxLv94 17:52, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

duplication

At the moment, this is mostly a duplicate of parts of the cocaine article; however, that should change -- freebase vs. salts is a more general subject, extending across the alkaloids. I've made a start here by mentioning its role in heroin addiction. We also need some good references here to back this up. -- The Anome 02:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, so I changed this article into a redirect and put the chemical stuff at freebase (chemistry) and refer people to the cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine articles for specific discussions of freebasing with those drugs. --Treekids 17:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

"most" street heroin claim

I have to contest the claim that most street heroin is distributed in freebase form. I've been an IV opiate user for a while, and I've had plenty of Chicago and California heroin in addition to having also tried dope from New Jersey and Texas. Never have I encountered skag that was distributed in freebase form. There might be differences between heroin distributed for slamming and that distributed for smoking/snorting, but, in the US atleast, the vast majority of heroin out there is distributed for one purpose only: to be intravenously injected. Even though tar is sometimes smoked, and is easier to smoke than powder heroin, you still don't need to add citric acid to it in order to shoot it, so I don't believe it qualifies as freebase either. Generally speaking, if you are looking for heroin to inject, you'll be able to find it in its salt form, so the whole converting freebase to salt form for injection is only true with crack cocaine. -- 71.108.173.45 19:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Please take this point to the heroin article. --Treekids 17:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Addiction is a choice made by the user

The following is at the start of the article:

This can make freebase drugs even more powerfully "addictive" than their salt equivalents, bearing in mind that addiction is a choice made by the user.

That addiction is a choice made by the user rather than a dependency caused by alterations in the brain's chemistry is clearly an unorthodox view to say the least, so I propose removing it ASAP.81.109.148.20 19:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I vote it be removed under NPOV. Oh, wait. This whole point and counter point are totally off-topic- they belongs in e.g. addiction. --Treekids 17:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Self-referencing

The link to Freebasing refers back to the page, but I dont know how to fix that, so I ask someone who know to do so. 200.196.123.49 01:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Crack

So what is the difference between crack and free base? Can some one say it very concisely.

From reading the article, I would say the difference is that crack will contain the impurities that were in the aqueous solution during the chemical reaction (because almost all of the water will have been evaporated off... the remaining water boiling off rapidly during smoking... making the "crack"ing sound), while freebase will be only the cocaine base (with the impurities still left in the aqueous solution that the reaction took place in). Eyknough (talk) 03:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Crack is the free-base form of cocaine. Many drugs are salts of an acid and a base: cocaine, methamphetamine, morphine, and ephedrine are all salts. Each can be made into a neutral base by removing the acid. The salts are easier to digest or inject because they dissolve in water. The neutral bases have lower boiling points so they are easier to vaporize and inhale. Free-basing is the process of taking a drug like cocaine or methamphetamine and removing the acid so that the drug can be smoked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.56.86 (talk) 15:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Expanding this back to a full article...

This article got edited down to nothing. I agree that there was getting to be too much "clandestine lab-ish" information in the recreational usage part, but that doesn't mean it should be done away with completely. It's now a chemistry stub that "needs to be expanded"... Well it was much larger, and there was plenty of useful information that was taken out in that one large swipe. I propose someone revert to a previous version and edit out all the unnecessary illicit drug manufacturing information and the like, and also include some of the improvements that are in the current stub. Opinions before this task is attempted? Debollweevil (talk) 23:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I propose a short section detailing, in brief, the different forms of illicit drugs in freebase form and the effects on users versus salt form. There is plenty to pick and sort through from the many versions from the past year or two. The freebase cocaine section is mainly what had gotten out of hand; maybe a paragraph will do for each drug, and complete synthesis instructions are not really required to give an understanding of the chemistry behind it.Debollweevil (talk) 23:20, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Freebasing

The term "freebasing" is really just a derivative of "free base" or "freebase". It is best if the two articles were merged. WTF? (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Seeing no opposition, it's merged and redirected. WTF? (talk) 22:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

"Freebasing" needs to be separated into another article to focus exclusively on context within American drug culture, while the "Free Base" article continues to focus on chemistry and the pharmaceutical use. I came to this article trying to understand how the term freebasing was being used in context of a discussion on illicit drugs, and I left frustrated. I ended up going to this article instead, which was able to answer my question clearly and without unnecessary jargon: https://www.addictiongroup.org/drugs/illegal/freebasing/

By separating the two articles again, we can sift out all the jargon on the "Freebasing" page in order to better describe the pop culture usage. Fhbarfield (talk) 12:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Why "free"?

If I understand what this article is saying, an AMINE salt breaks down into an acid and a FREE base, whereas per my (amateur) understanding salts in general break down into just a plain old acid and a base. What makes an amine base special? Why FREE? What makes a FREE base so much freer than other bases?

Confused — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.36.61.222 (talk) 21:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

It's not chemistry terminology -- it's pharmaceutical terminology. Amines usually aren't very soluble in water so they are hard to digest or inject. Amine salts are vey soluble. So the standard form of many drugs is a salt. The term "free" base simply refers to the fact that the chemical is not in its standard form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.56.86 (talk) 15:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

And it's not a term used on the street, it's a term that gives creedence to the conspiracies that purifying cocaine into a smokeable form known as crack, was intentionally introduced in the United States because bigots believed it would eliminate whom they saw as a problem, African Americans. There are several fallacies in this entry, the one that especially stands out is cited by a supposedly legitimate source; the statement that smoking narcotics became popular in the States due to avoiding the risks of intravenous use. This is a patently false statement, as is the claim that smoking heroin became popular at any time. Heroin users damn near exclusively inject it, if smoking the drug ever had become popular then we would have opium epidemics. The opiate that is a problem for many Americans is Heroin used intravenously. The opposite is true for cocaine, the epidemic is the less purified powder form and the purified for smoking form called crack. Smoking it did not become popular due to Hep C and AIDs, but rather it is an all too common progression of users addicted to cocaine. They start snorting it, and if they continue in their disease they begin smoking it. The false statement made about freebase is a good example of how seemingly authoritatve sources are in reality bunk (a street term for substance passed off as a drug, but it is not the drug, like buying plain paper when you thought you were purchasing acid, seaweed instead of pot, sugar instead of cocaine, or seasalt instead of crack). - Dirtclustit (talk) 19:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference to authoritative source in chemistry or pharmacology would help this article

"Free-base" is used in the pharmaceutical industry and most likely originated there. I came across the term today in reference to the anti-cancer drug Imatinib vs Imatinib mesylate in PubChem records. In the first record in the Identification section under Depositor-Supplied Synonyms is the term "Imatinib free base" and this links to a PubChem substance entry under that title: sid=99431951. In this example it is clear that Imatinib is without (free of) mesylate and hence is "free base" Imatinib.

Long story short, the term "free base" is in normal use and it should be possible to find a text book in chemistry or pharmacology that could be used to support the definitions given here.

Johnfravolda (talk) 11:05, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

A chemistry question re. "Some alkaloids are more stable as ionic salts than as free base"

Disregarding the issue of drugs altogether, what does 'more stable' mean in this context? Less prone to oxidation or heat, greater stability over time? Something else?

Also, *why* more stable? What is the chemical mechanism?

I'm curious because I've had pointed out to me that lots of OTC pharmaceuticals are hydroxides which I'd not noticed before.

85.211.200.83 (talk) 12:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Could someone give me a pointer, or at least a name for this (I'd guess amine salting but that's very unlikely to be even close to right)?

thanks

88.108.221.72 (talk) 19:56, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Dammit, a year later and I notice I said 'lots of OTC pharmaceuticals are hydroxides'. Obviously I mean hydrochlorides. I am a divvy. And still ignorant as to why this is a stabilising mechanism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.230.235 (talk) 20:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Why is the History and Other section talking solely about cocaine freebase/crack?

This seems entirely irrelevant and should honestly be removed. Freebase is a chemistry term and I can't imagine why a "History" section that only pertains to crack is relevant, let alone an "Other" section which also only talks about crack/cocaine. There's already a Cocaine page, that information should go there and this page should pertain solely to the term as it applies to chemistry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.234.137.87 (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

"Freebasing" is not specific to cocaine, and I believe it applies to any drug that can be modified to provide a stronger high. Info on cocaine is not sufficient, and we really need to revert to the pre-2010 status quo of having a separate article for Freebasing that discusses the drug culture usage. Fhbarfield (talk) 12:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Freebasing means "taking by injection" AFAIK. Which should either be this page, or at least its own page. James (talk) 00:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

This page is very confused and confusing

If you search for "freebase" you end up at a disambiguate page which uses the very beginning of this page to describe one of those. It makes this entire page sound like its going to be a chemistry article and its not. James (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Further note that what i actually wanted was to know if i was using the slang term correctly or even spelling it right, and despite this being the wikipedia page answering that question, it is not begun in a way that really identifies that fact. James (talk) 00:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

No anunsios

Asiendo mi casa 177.249.60.250 (talk) 01:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Sin internet

Creando mi granja 177.249.60.250 (talk) 01:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

This does not belong in Wikipedia

I came here along the link from "hydrochloride" looking for a way to turn urea hydrochloride into free urea. It's a chemistry topic. The answers here imply that this is a drug producing lab topic. Maybe it should be re-written to eliminate all illegal drug-related content. 172.103.222.67 (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

The fact that the subject-matter of a Wikipedia article is illegal activity does not render it inappropriate for inclusion. Information is included on Wikipedia if it is notable and accurate. A lot of information that may be misused or otherwise objectionable is still included on Wikipedia WP:NOTCENSORED. Asasa64 (talk) 06:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)