China disputes US claim it's top source of synthetic drugs

[inanna]

Source: Associated Press

Dec. 19, 2016 5:59 AM ET

BEIJING (AP) — U.S. assertions that China is the top source of the synthetic opioids that have killed thousands of drug users in the U.S. and Canada are unsubstantiated, Chinese officials told the Associated Press.

Both the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy point to China as the main source of fentanyl, fentanyl analogs and fentanyl precursors that end up in North America.

Such statements "lack the support of sufficient numbers of actual, confirmed cases," China's National Narcotics Control Commission told DEA's Beijing field office in a fax dated Friday.

In its letter to the DEA, which the commission also sent to AP, Chinese officials urged the U.S. to provide more evidence about China's role as a source country.

Read more: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2016-12-19-AS-China-Drugs%20Dispute/id-41081c5d8e7343eca8676b4c622eb40a

[Feeling the Bern]

1. I can buy it for $.45 a pill from a manufacturer in Kunshan, no questions asked, just provide pay

Christ, you can buy any drug here illicitly from the suppliers and manufacturers straight up. All you need is a bank transfer and an address.

[DK504]

2. Seriously?

How? Doesn't the DEA follow you? WOW.

[Feeling the Bern]

4. I live in China. I buy pharms when I need them, but you can buy from distributors and manfacturers

here and all you need is money. No questions asked.

Everything I buy I use personally here. I doubt the DEA will bother me in China for buying and using for personal use.

And before you say, yes, I go to a doctor first, then I buy from the manufacturer. Most of the time, it's cheaper than the pharmacy.

[Igel]

3. Key words: "sufficient, confirmed".

I've seen this kind of not-quite-counterclaim in the past, repeatedly, from various sources.

Is X a valid claim? Well, you can deny it, but to undercut the claim you twiddle with language. There are so many cases that you accept as true--but it's not enough. Are 5 cases confirmed? You need 50. 50 confirmed? You need 500. "Sufficient" is a word that's useless unless both sides agree on it. Don't agree, and you can use the word, it appears to be meaningful, but it's not really.

Then there's "confirmed." By whom? In Crimea and the Donbass we had a lot of Russian soldiers and military materiel. But since many relied on Russia to do the confirming, by denying their presence Russia could say, "Sorry, no confirmed presence." And a lot of useful idiots liked that lack of confirmed presence. Perhaps they were Russian trolls and believed that the arc of history bent their way; perhaps they were anti-US or anti-NATO trolls and thought anything that hurt the West they didn't like was good; perhaps they just didn't want distraction from more important things. (Pun alert: duga is Russian for 'arc', and Dugin is the architect of much of Putin's one-Russia policies.)

On the other hand, the problem with this kind of claim is that it rests in ambiguity and plausible denial--and one you've bought into plausible denial when the denial is very plausible, it's hard to back out of it when the denial is pretty much impossible.

[AngryAmish]

5. Yeah, China is a bad actor in this.

[catsudon]

6. well

Well, maybe there is a market for fake chinese synthetic opioids...

personally, I stick with natural pot ...