I am trying to research as much as I can about SN and I found the following article about methemoglobinemia :
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071541/. What worries me is the following:
"N-Acetylcysteine,
cimetidine, and ketoconazole are experimental therapies in the treatment of methemoglobinemia that have shown some promising results.
20,
21,
22 Exchange transfusion is reserved for patients in whom methylene blue therapy is ineffective."
We are taking cimetidine or famotidine or ranitidine as an antacid to INCREASE the chances of succes with SN but here it is said that cimetidine is actually considered to be a recovery therapy for methemoglobinemia. What am I missing here?
Without doing any in depth research, could it simply be that the positive outweighs the negative ?
The H2 blocker helps reduce the amount of acid (which would otherwise reduce the potency of the SN), so using the blocker helps the SN to be more potent. Perhaps that effect is not fully offset by the "methemoglobinemia recovery" aspect, so you are left with a "net gain" ?
Or could there be a timing difference, eg the SN acts more quickly than the H2 blocker ?
Or perhaps higher quantities of the H2 blocker would be needed for that recovery aspect to become significant ?
Unless you wish to undertake major research effort (which I'm certainly not dissuading you from), then I would focus more on the overall outcomes from those who have followed Stan's guide without being discovered or calling an ambulance themselves.
I believe there may be only 1 (or 2 ? need to revisit/check) genuine failed cases based on that definition.
(And
@Dartz does state : "I've died of a deliberate heroin OD before and bear in mind my body can take vastly more abuse than most", so perhaps he is an "outlier")
Of course, that does mean you need a certain amount of determination to undergo some discomfort without calling an ambulance for SN to be a suitable method for you....