Hi Mister Spike.
I've got the poppers article on my 'watch list' and noticed your edits today []. They're great. You have a cool writing style.
I spent a lot of time a couple of weeks ago reading the history of the article and noticed there was lots of dispute, argument, edit reverts, and even what seemed to be vandalism on the article. If you read the talk page for the article you'll see what I mean.
In an effort to make the article the best it can be, and especially since there's so much controversy on the poppers article, one of the things that should be avoided, is weasel words Wikipedia:WEASEL
Can you provide a citation, or other verifiable support, for the following comments you added:
1) "Some people report that the smell of second-hand poppers (which delivers a relatively small dose) can cause head-aches and nausea."
Do you have a verifiable reference for this statement? Too, what is "second-hand poppers"? Is that like 'second hand cigarette smoke'?
2) "These undesirable effects occur for most people as exposure increases, reducing the likelihood of a dangerous overdose"
Do you have a verifiable reference for this statement? Also, what is a "dangerous overdose"? Do you have a citation for this, that shows it's even a possibility, and if so, how it's defined?
Again, your writing style has definitely added something to this article. Thanks!
Lt. Dan 21:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
============== Response on 5 June 2006 =============
Hi Lt. Dan,
I didn't discover the difficult update history of this page until well after I'd submitted my edits. I'm glad you thought my writing style helped.
I can certainly understand the desire to avoid weasel words. I found that the previous version had too many of them, which is what provoked me to want to make the edits in the first place.
The reason I didn't provide references at the time was, well, time; I didn't have a chance to look anything up.
Here's a first pass at answering your questions:
I wrote: "1) "Some people report that the smell of second-hand poppers (which delivers a relatively small dose) can cause head-aches and nausea."
Lt Dan asked: "Do you have a verifiable reference for this statement? Too, what is "second-hand poppers"? Is that like 'second hand cigarette smoke'?"
Reply: Exactly; I meant the usage to be exactly the same as second-hand smoke, and as someone who gets head-aches very quickly from second-hand smoke, I can feel sympathy for those, like my partner, who get similar head-aches from smelling the poppers that others are using.
In an enclosed environment, any use of poppers can be smelled almost instantly. They are marketed, after all, as "room odourizers." I was in a bar once where someone dropped and broke their bottle, and the smell was overwhelming; that corner quickly emptied. :-) But in more typical use, where someone covers the bottle opening with their finger except when sniffing, it STILL quickly fills the air. After all, most of what they inhale is then exhaled; it's not like cocaine, where most of the drug sticks to your sinuses. The second-hand poppers of even one person using them in a small space is not enough to get most people high, but it is certainly enough to cause some people to complain of nausea and headaches.
My authority for this is my own personal experience, and observing that of others. I first encountered poppers recreationally around 1990, I think, and I've encountered and sometimes used them on occasion ever since. I've been in many spaces where poppers are used, and for six years have hosted monthly sex parties at which they are used, so the importance of good airflow is something I am very cognisant of. I must understand and accommodate those who like poppers, and those who don't, or my parties would quickly fail.
According to Goldfranks Toxicologic Emergencies by Lewis R. Goldfrank, Flomenbaum, Lewin, Howland, Hoffman, and Nelson, "...inhalation of as little as 5 drops can result in hypotension and reflex tachycardia." My guess is that people with chronic sinus conditions would in particular find the smell of poppers irritating, and those who experience frequent sinus headaches, tension headaches, or especially migraines would find the smell of poppers could quickly bring those on. I haven't examined or tested this guess, however.
In The Physicians Guide to Psychoactive Drugs by David E Smith & Richard Seymour, they claim that head-ache tolerance is quickly built up with experience. In my experience, people who find the smell distasteful and head-ache causing avoid it and so rarely build up that experience.
To a certain extent part of this response might be snobbishness. Some gay men look down on those who use poppers as being degenerate, or deviant, or just 'too into sex.' (The definition of promiscuous: "Anyone who has more sex than me.")
Why should anyone trust my word? They shouldn't particularly; they should trust their own experiences and observations more, if they are aware of their preconceptions and biases, and know how to take those into account. But the assertions appearing in medical and drug-related publications are almost always references to other papers, and ultimately I would guess that many are based on much less experience with the drug than I have had. I am by nature and training a scientist, engineer, student of social psychology, and observer of human nature and behaviour, and I strive to be fair and balanced in my writing.
I wrote: "These undesirable effects occur for most people as exposure increases, reducing the likelihood of a dangerous overdose"
Lt Dan asked: "Do you have a verifiable reference for this statement? Also, what is a 'dangerous overdose'? Do you have a citation for this, that shows it's even a possibility, and if so, how it's defined?"
Reply: I can't recall where I first read that the head-ache warning sign discourages overdose, but it is certainly true in my experience. Another side-effect of over-exposure is loss of tumescence, which also discourages further use, for obvious reasons. :-)
For the possibilities and effects of overdose, there are many medical references. Here's just one:
On the other hand, here's an exerpt from the above source: "Continuation of Substance Use Despite a Serious Physical Disorder Exacerbated by Use of the Substance
"Home et al. (1979) report emergency room admission on two separate occasions of a 25year-old man after he inhaled butyl nitrite. The occurrence of clinically significant methemoglobinemia was not sufficient to deter self-administration in this individual. In a survey of 255 experienced users (Lowry 1979), 10 percent had experienced nasal irritation at least once, and 5 percent had experienced nausea or temporary loss of erection. These negatlve effects were associated with 'overuse' (emphasis Lowry's). Fisher et al. (1981) report several cases of facial dermatitis due to butyl nitrite inhalation. Two of the three cases reported that they were 'in the habit of inhaling butyl nitrite,' and continued to do so during the 6-week period in which the dermatitis was evident. The skin lesions cleared when nitrite use was terminated."
Clearly, not all people are detered by deleterious effects. He goes on to address those who feel quite dependent on popper use, despite long term effects. I have certainly met a few men who felt incapable of having or enjoying sex without poppers, which is a little disturbing.
Anyway, I hope I've address your questions. I'm sorry for reponding in this way; I wasn't aware of any other mechanism for responding.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Caledonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kanaka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
REPLY 27 AUG 2013 BY MISTERSPIKE
I deliberately chose the disambiguation page, since the first two links on it are both relevant to the topic, and I wanted to make the reader aware of this, without disrupting the flow of the existing text. --MisterSpike (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Naren Shankar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Expanse. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)