paypal just took me for $400

[peptideusername]

Thank you for the info - there's a lot of complaining noise on here around a few vendors, so it's sometimes difficult to determine if people just had problems like slow delivery, bad comms, or got completely fucked by a particular vendor.

(Also the OP just seems to have done it wrong by not putting an abstraction between Paypal and the vendor.)

I suggest finding information on other platforms like discord and Peppys. You're not going to get a bigger picture view of things if you're only staying here.

And yes, that abstraction you mentioned is a self-custodial wallet. It's a wallet that isn't beholden to an exchange like PayPal, Cashapp, Kraken or Strike.

 

[noggin]

People can do what they choose with their money but I find the idea of not purchasing peptides from SRY because a different arm of the company created opioids to be a little virtue signal-esque. Johnson and Johnson used to produce opioids, does that mean you'll never use Tylenol again? If you think there's a personal risk involved then sure don't buy but I think this whole PR nightmare has made SRY customer service better and the products cheaper.

 

[zpped]

Thank you for the info - there's a lot of complaining noise on here around a few vendors, so it's sometimes difficult to determine if people just had problems like slow delivery, bad comms, or got completely fucked by a particular vendor.

(Also the OP just seems to have done it wrong by not putting an abstraction between Paypal and the vendor.)

Yeah OP's problem isn't unique to SRY. But I don't know of any vendor that is bad mouthed around here for not a good reason.

 

[zpped]

People can do what they choose with their money but I find the idea of not purchasing peptides from SRY because a different arm of the company created opioids to be a little virtue signal-esque. Johnson and Johnson used to produce opioids, does that mean you'll never use Tylenol again? If you think there's a personal risk involved then sure don't buy but I think this whole PR nightmare has made SRY customer service better and the products cheaper.

Everyone has their own moral line. But legally producing a drug that has real legitimate use and was abused is not the same thing as illegally selling that drug on the black market.

 

[stickfigure]

Not to mention the synthetic opioid in SRY indictment has no legitimate medical use - it's only use is to cut drugs which kill americans.

 

[keangkong]

Everyone has their own moral line. But legally producing a drug that has real legitimate use and was abused is not the same thing as illegally selling that drug on the black market.

Agreed. Would I avoid SRY because of what they appear to have done? I'm not sure. But I have no problem understanding why someone would avoid them. These synthetic opiates are killing more people than other illegal drugs have killed Americans in the past.

 

[noggin]

Everyone has their own moral line. But legally producing a drug that has real legitimate use and was abused is not the same thing as illegally selling that drug on the black market.

I think you make a good point that there absolutely is a difference. One is legal and one is illegal and those that draw their moral line between legal distribution of opioids and illegal should rightfully stay away from SRY. My concern is that many are conflating the difference between legal and illegal with the actual harm caused. Illegal distribution of these opioids will absolutely harm people, but those who access them are likely already addicted and will get their hands on it one way or another, SRY or not. On the other hand legal distribution in my view causes much more harm as it's introducing otherwise unknowing people into potential opioid addictions. It's unfair to say that just because it's legal it is less harmful when there is reason to believe that's not the case.

 

[stickfigure]

Most people who buy illegal drugs in the US don't want fentanyl or some other synthetic opioid cut in their drugs, so the notion that they will buy opioids elsewhere is flawed.

 

[peptideusername]

I think you make a good point that there absolutely is a difference. One is legal and one is illegal and those that draw their moral line between legal distribution of opioids and illegal should rightfully stay away from SRY. My concern is that many are conflating the difference between legal and illegal with the actual harm caused. Illegal distribution of these opioids will absolutely harm people, but those who access them are likely already addicted and will get their hands on it one way or another, SRY or not. On the other hand legal distribution in my view causes much more harm as it's introducing otherwise unknowing people into potential opioid addictions. It's unfair to say that just because it's legal it is less harmful when there is reason to believe that's not the case.

I really don't understand your angle here. "Drugs addicts are drug addicts so who cares if they get sold something that will kill them, since it's already illegal and they're already addicted"?
That's a scary perspective.

The opioid epidemic is well known and the prescription of these drugs has dried up considerably. So when they can't access (safer) legal opioids, whether prescribed or purchased from a dealer, addicted persons end up turning to the black market. Guess what's there? Fentanyl made with ingredients like SRY is selling.

Your reasoning leads me to believe that you haven't encountered drug addiction first or second hand. Harm reduction is the name of the game with addicts, and being flippant about anyone that sells fent ingredients is the opposite of harm reduction.

 

[zpped]

I think you make a good point that there absolutely is a difference. One is legal and one is illegal and those that draw their moral line between legal distribution of opioids and illegal should rightfully stay away from SRY. My concern is that many are conflating the difference between legal and illegal with the actual harm caused. Illegal distribution of these opioids will absolutely harm people, but those who access them are likely already addicted and will get their hands on it one way or another, SRY or not. On the other hand legal distribution in my view causes much more harm as it's introducing otherwise unknowing people into potential opioid addictions. It's unfair to say that just because it's legal it is less harmful when there is reason to believe that's not the case.

You imagined a line that isn't the same one someone else might have. You don't have that line and it seems you have trouble imagining a different one. But you are arguing against something that no one said.

Someone's line might be that. It might also be that supplying a drug for to people that need it (and some people that don't end up with it) and selling the drug directly to addicts.

 

[Bettyd48]

I send crypto from my CashApp wallet. Is that also as risky as pay pal?

Yes. Some cashapp accounts have been flagged. People send from cashapp to other wallets to
Be safe

 

[noggin]

I really don't understand your angle here. "Drugs addicts are drug addicts so who cares if they get sold something that will kill them, since it's already illegal and they're already addicted"?
That's a scary perspective.

The opioid epidemic is well known and the prescription of these drugs has dried up considerably. So when they can't access (safer) legal opioids, whether prescribed or purchased from a dealer, addicted persons end up turning to the black market. Guess what's there? Fentanyl made with ingredients like SRY is selling.

Your reasoning leads me to believe that you haven't encountered drug addiction first or second hand. Harm reduction is the name of the game with addicts, and being flippant about anyone that sells fent ingredients is the opposite of harm reduction.

Sorry if my point wasn't clear, it's definitely not that we shouldn't care about addicts going to the black market or the negative effects of the black market, these are real suffering people who deserve empathy. My point is that the black market is an opportunistic market that will find replacements as soon as one company is no longer producing. If SRY shrivels up and dies absolutely nothing changes and not a life is saved. The same isn't true about prescription opioids where if Purdue never would have existed a large part of the opioid crisis would have been fully averted, vs if the largest black market opioid producer never existed not much would be different (we learned a lot of this from the war on drugs)
As @zpped mentioned there's definitely other moral perspectives than legality and utilitarianism from which to look at this but personally I see the most reasonable to be the utilitarian view where I'd like to minimize harm, and I don't see boycotting purchases from SRY to be in-effect saving any lives.

 

[peptideusername]

Sorry if my point wasn't clear, it's definitely not that we shouldn't care about addicts going to the black market or the negative effects of the black market, these are real suffering people who deserve empathy. My point is that the black market is an opportunistic market that will find replacements as soon as one company is no longer producing. If SRY shrivels up and dies absolutely nothing changes and not a life is saved. The same isn't true about prescription opioids where if Purdue never would have existed a large part of the opioid crisis would have been fully averted, vs if the largest black market opioid producer never existed not much would be different (we learned a lot of this from the war on drugs)
As @zpped mentioned there's definitely other moral perspectives than legality and utilitarianism from which to look at this but personally I see the most reasonable to be the utilitarian view where I'd like to minimize harm, and I don't see boycotting purchases from SRY to be in-effect saving any lives.

well maybe you can jump in your Time Machine and go back to the 90s and stop the opioid epidemic from happening!

Or maybe we can all live in the same timeline where that toothpaste can't be put back in the tube. I'm not sure why you're stanning for SRY but your reasoning seems oblivious to the real world, and I'm not really interested in furthering this deliberation. Thanks for your input.