Search

Background and Aims: Drugs sold on cryptomarkets are thought to have lower levels of adulteration and higher strength compared with those sourced off-line. The present study aimed to determine whether cryptomarket and off-line-sourced 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methamphetamine (MDMA), cocaine, amphetamine, methamphetamine and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) differed in adulteration and strength., Design and Setting: A between-groups design was used to compare cryptomarket versus off-line-sourced drugs. Regression analyses controlling for year and service were conducted. Drug-checking services were conducted in Spain (Energy Control) and the Netherlands (Drugs Information and Monitoring System)., Cases: The cases comprised drug samples that underwent drug checking between 2016 and 2021 and were expected to contain MDMA (tablets; n = 36 065; powder: n = 6179), cocaine (n = 11 419), amphetamine (n = 6823), methamphetamine (n = 293) and LSD (n = 1817)., Measurements: Drugs were measured for (1) matching the advertised substance (i.e. containing any amount of the expected substance); (2) strength; (3) presence of adulteration; and (4) number of adulterants., Findings: The expected drug was more likely to be identified when sourced from cryptomarkets versus off-line for MDMA tablets [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.28-3.43], MDMA powder (AOR = 2.64, CI = 1.55-4.51), cocaine (AOR = 3.65, CI = 1.98-6.71) and LSD (AOR = 1.75, CI = 1.13-2.72). Cryptomarket-sourced MDMA powder (β = 0.03, P = 0.012), cocaine (β = 0.08, P < 0.001) and methamphetamine (β = 0.15, P = 0.028) were statistically significantly higher in strength than substances from off-line sources. Conversely, MDMA tablets (β = -0.01, P = 0.043) and amphetamine (β = -0.07, P < 0.001) from cryptomarkets were statistically significantly lower in strength than from off-line sources. MDMA powder (AOR = 0.53, CI = 0.33-0.86) and cocaine (AOR = 0.66, CI = 0.55-0.79) were statistically significantly less likely to be adulterated if sourced from cryptomarkets. However, amphetamine (AOR = 1.54, CI = 1.25-1.90) and LSD (AOR = 1.31, CI = 1.00-1.71) were found to be more likely to be adulterated when purchased from cryptomarkets. Cocaine from cryptomarkets exhibited fewer adulterants (incidence rate ratio = 0.71, CI = 0.60-0.85)., Conclusion: The relationship between on-line drug market-places and substance quality varies depending on both the specific substance and the dynamics of the cryptomarket., (© 2024 The Author(s). Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Aims: To evaluate the consequences of criminalising khat, with a focus on the changes in law enforcement and the use, availability, price and quality of khat in the Netherlands.Methods:Mixed methods, including law enforcement data, expert interviews, focus group interviews with members of the Somali community, and a survey among 168 current (last month) khat users.Findings: Soon after the law changed (early in 2013), and khat had become an illicit drug, much of the khat imported from Africa was confiscated at Schiphol International Airport and users found it more difficult to obtain fresh khat leaves. About two years after the ban had been implemented, the price of fresh khat at user level had increased tenfold on average, and much of it was of poorer quality (e.g. sold in dried or powdered form).Conclusion: Criminalisation of khat in the Netherlands had substantial consequences for the khat market, predominantly because the ban was actively enforced at a crucial stage in the distribution chain (transcontinental import by air) and there was a lack of alternative transportation routes that could supply users with fresh khat. It is highly likely that the total number of Somali khat users in the Netherlands dropped, but that the proportion of dependent and poor, “problem users” increased. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]