How does fentanyl get into the US?
142 comments
·February 4, 2025mtlmtlmtlmtl
be_erik
This rings true with my experiences. The people who I've known to become addicted usually started with something prescribed and then graduated to heroin. When heroin became harder to find, smuggle in, or too expensive, fentanyl happily stepped up to meet demand.
Addicts literally carry around fent testing kits so they can _avoid_ this synthetic opioid.
flustercan
>Addicts literally carry around fent testing kits so they can _avoid_ this synthetic opioid.
Its my understanding that heroin and street pharmaceuticals aren't really around anymore. Its ALL fentanyl now and everyone knows it.
dylan604
> Addicts literally carry around fent testing kits so they can _avoid_ this synthetic opioid.
Choosy addicts choose...is something I never thought I'd read. I'd suggest they weren't addicting right if they are choosy. When you can find your fix of choice, you just fix with what's available.
If your comment were accurate, fent sales would plummet and the problem would fix itself. This is clearly not the case.
Out_of_Characte
>fent sales would plummet
None of what you've described is how any of this works in the real world.
There's an entire world of behaviour from a seller's perspective for every drug and an entire set of behaviour from a user's perspective. They match closely to how 'legal' alcohol production and consumption works. Biggest profits are from the biggest addicts of alcohol and their suppliers are all on the stock exchange for everyone to see. Beer almost never kills anyone, same with the production from large reputable companies. but if you find a great deal of homemade hard liqour make sure you test for ethanol and methanol. Thats simply how addicts die no matter the product they are using.
'some white powder' could literally be anything and everything. Idiots could cut it up wrong and what previously got you high just fine might potentially be a lethal dose right in front of you in the form of a powdery white line with no way to tell. Theres the mostly harmless chemicals used to reduce dose to cut the dealer more profit but could still not be mixed properly so new users wouldn't be able to notice. Then theres the nitazenes and other stuff that most tests only detect 'presence of' but not the dose so you would still have to throw everything out even though it might be mixed and dosed properly. And then theres the less addicted group who doesn't even bother with anything ever and only wants the pure stuff in large single batches in order to test fully and properly. Those people never get screwed over because thats what they pay for.
snailmailstare
Are you channeling Bob Saget?
vlovich123
We did legalise opium by way of oxycontin and I'm not sure that helped reduce the scope of the problem. Arguably a lot more people got hooked on opium than ever before because something legalized has less stigma attached and is more easily accessible. Society has waffled repeatedly on the legality of opium and the effects of opium are a bit different than less destructive narcotics where legalization makes more sense.
slothtrop
Oxycontin was overprescribed for pain, it's not available for recreational use.
Possibly it's just too potent for legalization to be viable.
jdietrich
Oxycodone (Oxycontin) has similar potency to diamorphine (heroin) and is ~2 orders of magnitude less potent than fentanyl.
https://www.gloshospitals.nhs.uk/healthcare-professionals/tr...
salve-for-tears
[dead]
gedy
> Arguably a lot more people got hooked on opium than ever before because something legalized has less stigma attached
Growing up in the 70s and 80s, I know that by the 80s heroin had a bad stigma attached to it even by other drug users, and it was rarely seen in the circles I knew. Coke, pot and meth did not have that at the time.
slothtrop
Is opium considered the least harsh/dangerous variant?
1vuio0pswjnm7
By citing seizure numbers and mentioning nothing else about each respective border, this article and other news reports I am seeing seem to imply or suggest that that seizures are a direct representation of how much contraband is crossing a border. That's possible. It's also possible that seizures are a representation, at least in part, of something else. For example, the success of border authorities in detecting and confiscating contraband. Authorities on one border might be more more successful than authorities on another border. The frequency and amounts of seizures might not be indicative of the total amount of contraband that is crossing a particular border undetected. The seizure rate might be related to geographical or other characteristics of the border, for example.
janalsncm
It is possible the data is biased by enforcement ability. However, the difference is huge. Last year only 0.2% of fentanyl was seized at the northern border and 98% at the southern border.
aylmao
I agree. I'd expand this by noting this doesn't only apply to borders, but the whole territory too. The article does note:
> [...] the trade in other chemicals involved in the manufacturing of fentanyl - some of which can have legitimate purposes - remain uncontrolled, as those involved in the trade find new ways to evade the law.
One has to imagine there's local manufacturing of fentanyl too, and one has to wonder the magnitude of it.
badosu
It's revealing how many sub designs they found on south american jungles, but few actually found in traffic or on the targets coast.
Guid_NewGuid
There's nuance to these numbers since interception will be an artifact of where people are looking but 95% of intercepted fentanyl was from US citizens crossing the border.[0]
Funnily enough the Republicans seemed content to sit on their hands and play politics with this so called crisis until the media broke the story.[also 0]
[0]: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/border-fe...
coliveira
Drug trafficking has little to do with the border issue, since you cannot really do anything about it when you have thousands of miles of border to secure. The issue here is how much corruption exists in the US and how little it does against the really big criminals who control traffic.
The justice system concentrates only on putting small vendors behind bars (usually black people), but they're not the ones making real profits. I guarantee you don't know any big drug traffickers operating inside the US that were sent to jail. When you hear about big bosses it is always some guy outside the US, but the ones operating inside the country are all protected in one way or another. They're all laughing and buying mansions all over the country. This corruption is what the US should be concentrating on if they want to stop drug trafficking.
verdverm
Most drugs enter the country through legal ports of entry, not in the gaps. Most drugs are also brought back across by US citizens (~90%)
Here is one such study: https://immigrationforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/llic...
slothtrop
So, they were half-right since that's tantamount to "corruption in the US"
verdverm
I don't see corruption, I see supply & demand and "enterprising" people.
The war on drugs has shown that focussing on the supply side has done little to solve the problem. There will be new ways to smuggle or new drugs to catch in the drag net while the demand remains.
The question then is, why is the demand for drugs so high?
Retric
Thousands of miles of border isn’t actually the issue here. How many people are crossing the Korean DMZ each year without South Korea noticing?
Adjusted for population size and it’s roughly half the length of the US/Mexico land border and it’s designed for military incursion via tanks not just people in a pickup truck.
Similarly the amount of money spent on inspecting imports is well under 1% of the total value of said imports. It’s possible to inspect literally every package crossing the border, we just don’t want to.
beart
There is no commerce crossing the DMZ. There are no tourists crossing the DMZ. Hundreds of millions of people cross the southern US border every year. You cannot compare these two borders in any realistic way.
Edit: also, landmines
Retric
They do have cross broader trade and movement of people. I think SK is NK’s 4th largest trading partner right now, but there’s also some movement of people.
But that stuff is independent of length which is why I mentioned trade separately.
0cf8612b2e1e
I do not think it makes sense to scale national borders based on population size. It is what it is, you can choose to invest resources on the entire length, but there is no mathematical averaging out.
For anyone else that was curious, the Korean DMZ is 150 miles long. US Mexico border is 1950.
Retric
50 million people each paying 100$ in taxes can’t get as much done as 350 million people handing over 100$.
On the other hand suggesting there’s suddenly massive issues with coordination because a country is 7x the size just doesn’t make a lot of sense.
PS: 160 mi, but that should be obvious from my comment and the relevant population sizes.
coliveira
Your comparison doesn't even make sense. SK and NK have no relation and no border crossings. It is the easiest border to patrol.
Retric
Border crossings are independent of length. But they actually do have trade, and even people crossing the border.
https://www.voanews.com/a/korean-industrial-zone-reopens-as-...
MichaelZuo
Did you even take 30 seconds to check, before posting this?
henvic
Ending the war on drugs would be a wise choice. Treat drug addicts as people with a health issue instead of making the entire society pay for it due to the fact that the druggies pay the cartels to smuggle drugs to them and all the consequences of the drug wars...
Tariffs are just taxes that will destroy the economy.
pton_xd
Portland tried that in 2020 by decriminalizing drug possession.
They reversed course and recently passed a law to recriminalize possession. I think its the right move. Downtown turned into a very unpleasant place.
drpfenderson
Seemingly, the major failure there was having the one part (decriminalization) without the other - crucial - part (treatment and support).
The support and treatment structures have remained essentially unchanged since Measure 110 passed, with holdups to funding and logistics at almost every level of the state's government. Oregon was already ranked almost dead last in addiction treatment, and that hasn't budged. I can't see how it would work without this other critical piece.
Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB) has some good coverage about this failure from the first couple years (which was never really rectified): https://www.opb.org/article/2022/05/24/oregons-measure-110-i...
Also worth noting is that research has found no association with with Measure 110 and crime, and crime has been steadily falling since the measure was passed. (along with most other metro areas in the USA) https://www.opb.org/article/2024/01/24/portland-crime-violen...
culi
It wasn't Portland. Voters in Oregon as a whole passed Measure 110 in 2020 that replaced criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of drugs with $100 fines.
Then in April of 2024 House Bill 4002 made possession once again a misdemeanor but kept most of the other provisions of Measure 110 and still focuses on "deflecting" people who possess out of the criminal justice system and into treatment programs.
So Measure 110 is still mostly in effect. They just made it so you do in fact have something on your record if you're caught with possession.
throw0101a
> It wasn't Portland. Voters in Oregon as a whole passed Measure 110 in 2020 that replaced criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of drugs with $100 fines.
Unless you're forced to do something to deal with the addiction then there's probably not much point for this kind of thing:
> Starting September 1, 2024, possession of hard drugs became classified as a criminal misdemeanor outside of the regular A-E categorization system, carrying a sentence of up to 6 months of jail, which may be waived if the convictee enters into mandatory drug treatment.[8][9]
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Oregon_Ballot_Measure_110
Of course one needs to keep at it, otherwise things fall apart:
> Funding ebbed still more recently due to new national budget pressures, which undercut efforts encouraging addicts into rehabilitation programs. The results of “disinvestment” and “a freezing in [their] response” led Goulão to state that “what we have today no longer serves as an example to anyone.”
> Speaking more quantitatively, drug users in treatment declined from 1,150 to 352 (from 2015 to 2021) as funding dropped in 2012 from $82.7 million to $17.4 million. Budget pressures and the apparent desire to cut immediate program costs of drug addiction (distinct from the total societal cost of drug addiction) led to program decentralization and the use of NGOs. Anecdotal evidence of a fragmenting, even breaking, system abounds: Demoralized police no longer cite addicts to get them into treatment and at least some NGOs view the effort as less about treatment and more about framing lifetime drug use as a right.
* https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-dru...
The other question is does the US have the resources (that people can afford) to have folks go to treatment.
be_erik
Decriminalization is step the first step. The obvious result is going to be that a problem _sometimes_ hidden becomes more prevalent. What failed in the Portland experiment was a lack of stable housing coupled with a public space system that was never designed for use by those afflicted by addiction.
The deterioration of our public spaces is not caused by our drug epidemic, it's the logical outcome when the state fails to provide services to the most vulnerable. People literally have nowhere else to go.
dylan604
Decriminalizing possession is one thing, but if the selling market is still illegal you really haven't done much other than keeping the jails a bit less full
EA-3167
Imagine that you're a politician trying to keep your job ahead of an election, and your opponent points to your policy making the lives of your constituents miserable. You understand that the argument you're making here would be political suicide, you'd be replaced, and the policy would be reversed.
How would you sell this in a way that could get you re-elected?
aylmao
I haven't been to Portland since 2018, but I have been to and seen LA and San Francisco downtowns. They didn't decriminalize, but their downtowns are pretty unpleasant too.
I wonder to what degree Portland is a product of its local policy (like this decriminalization/recriminalization) vs the national trends that are seen across the USA.
aerostable_slug
One might argue they de facto decriminalized drug consumption and personal-usage-level possession in LA and SF.
bdcravens
The "war on drugs" has been waged for more than 40+ years. It seems like it takes more than a few years, most of which was during the worst public health crisis in generations, to succeed.
Most incarceration is about helping those who aren't the ones suffering (evidenced by "... a very unpleasant place"). Not attacking you for your comment, just pointing out the paradigm we as a society have.
slothtrop
Decriminalization seems to lead to negative outcomes in every respect, including prostitution. I expect legalization is what's required as that would allow for optimal regulation and tax.
You could go the way of East Asia. That would be very difficult, but easy access to narcotics could lead to disastrous results.
tayo42
decriminalizing is a half assed way to try to help. The only issue with drug use isnt that you'll get arrested for possesion.
You need access to safe and clean drugs. Support systems need to be in place. The look of downtown isn't the only way to measure success. How many people aren't dying because there isn't a stigma around drug use, where clean and predictable drug doses (like alcohol) can be had, drug testing kits, safe pieces to use with, safe places to be etc
fortylove
This sentiment peaked in popularity in urban areas ~4 years ago. Since then I've noticed support for this position slowly eroding, and my hypothesis is that the general population has slowly had enough interactions with someone who is on fent.
throw0101a
> Tariffs are just taxes that will destroy the economy.
Tariffs are taxes and subsidies. See "Tariffs Give U.S. Steelmakers a Green Light to Lift Prices":
> Executives from U.S. steel companies were enthusiastic backers of the 2018 tariffs and have urged Trump to deploy them again in his second term. They have called for the elimination of tariff exemptions and duty-free import quotas, saying those carve-outs allow unfairly low-price steel to enter the U.S. and undermine the steel market.
[…]
> Higher prices for imported steel are often followed by domestic suppliers raising their own prices, which then get passed through supply chains, manufacturing executives said. For consumers already reeling from rising retail prices and inflation, pricier steel and aluminum could further lift costs for durable goods like appliances and automobiles, as well as consumer products with aluminum packaging, such as canned beverages.
> “The issue with tariffs is everybody raises their prices, even the domestics,” said Ralph Hardt, owner of Belleville International, a Pennsylvania-based manufacturer of valves and components used in the energy and defense industries. Steel and aluminum are Belleville’s largest expenses.
* https://www.wsj.com/economy/trade/trump-tariffs-mexico-canad...
So tariffs are taxes in the sense that consumers are paying higher prices. But they are subsidies in that domestic companies don't have as much pressure on prices and can get more money.
So if you want to help a particular industry might as well just go with subsidies directly instead of the taxation add-on as well.
bdcravens
This is something that is ignored: the companies not affected by tariffs will raise their prices. Any intimation that they will keep prices the same is disingenuous. Leaving money on the table would be anti-capitalist.
tayo42
People making decisions around drugs have no experience with drugs and users.
They just get hysterical information about the extreme cases and extrapolate to everyone.
People just need to be supported through hard times and experimentation phases so they come out the other side.
So many people eventually get clean, stop using and get back to having productive lives.
I saw so many unnecessary deaths, friends with potential, die, because we don't want to help and support them. Overdoses are not needed.These aren't street people that make up so much of the hysteria, just middle class normal people that had their life go a certain way.
People don't want fentanyl or fake drugs in general. Access to drugs that can be measured are safe. Opiods are safe, doctors give fentanyl to patients constantly, and you don't come out of surgeries a opioid addict because you got a dose one times.
The hysterical people need to learn there place in the discussion on drugs and get to the side.
bdcravens
One thing this article doesn't cover is WHO is doing the trafficking, and in most cases, it's Americans.
https://www.ussc.gov/research/quick-facts/fentanyl-trafficki...
Most seizures happen at checkpoints or vehicle searches.
https://www.cato.org/blog/fentanyl-smuggled-us-citizens-us-c...
coliveira
Also who is coordinating this trafficking in the US? They make it believe that there is only the border smuggling and the retail sale problem. From the US point of view, NOBODY is handling and managing the drug business in US soil.
aylmao
> Despite this, the trade in other chemicals involved in the manufacturing of fentanyl - some of which can have legitimate purposes - remain uncontrolled, as those involved in the trade find new ways to evade the law.
From a purely economic perspective, it just sounds like local production will replace foreign imports if the US does manage to stop fentanyl from entering from abroad.
janalsncm
According to CBP, last year there were only 43 pounds of fentanyl seized on the northern border. The problem is almost entirely a Southern border problem. So it seems crazy to punish Canada. Also India is responsible for many precursors but are not named.
twic
> Despite this, the trade in other chemicals involved in the manufacturing of fentanyl - some of which can have legitimate purposes - remain uncontrolled, as those involved in the trade find new ways to evade the law.
What are these chemicals, and what are their other uses? Which of them don't have any other uses?
Beijinger
Phenethyl bromide5 Propionyl chloride4 4-Anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (4-ANPP)2 N-phenethyl-4-piperidone (NPP)2 Propionic anhydride2 Sodium borohydride1
spiderfarmer
Imposing tariffs, further impoverishing the poor, in order to not show compassion for your own citizens? That doesn’t just sound backwards, it just is. The fentanyl crisis is just being used as an excuse to impose the tariffs. By now it’s well known that Trump desperately wants to proof his professor wrong and if the world has to burn, so be it.
tivert
> By now it’s well known that Trump desperately wants to proof his professor wrong
By now it it's well known that globalization is for a fantasy world that doesn't exist, and people should stop listening so much to economics professors. Trade barriers need to go up to re-orient things. Unfortunately, Trump is unlikely to do it competently.
janalsncm
A 10% tariff on China won’t stop globalization. Even an 100% tariff wouldn’t. American goods aren’t 10% more expensive, a lot of them are 10x more expensive.
Look for American made kitchen knives. You will be lucky to spend less than $2k on a block of Made in USA knives. Meanwhile you can get a pretty good set made in China for under $200.
If you wanted American companies to compete, you would need a 10x tariff to make that $200 knife set cost $2000.
spiderfarmer
You guys tried everything but the things other countries that do well are doing. But hey, let’s try to stop globalization as a single country.
abimbostrawman
[dead]
blastonico
I don't like Trump but I have to admit he's doing a great job here.
dgfitz
He is doing what he said he would do, hard to argue with that.
Hard to say at the moment if anything he is doing is "great" or not. I choose to observe instead of emoting about it. Half the world is convinced the sky is falling, and half are cheering.
I'm the person in the middle of the (probably) not-overlapping venn diagram.
ks2048
I don't think it's hard to argue with "He is doing what he said he would do".
He said on day one he'd lower grocery prices. He said he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and on day one he signed a stack of executive ordered hand written by the Heritage Foundation. etc.
_DeadFred_
Don't forget he said the Ukraine was would already be over as well. MAGA has moved the goalpost so far from 'get away from being warmongers on day one' to 'Annex Canada, annex Greenland, go to war with Panama, send troops to take out the Cartels'. Truly 1984 stuff going on.
dgfitz
And yet Guantanamo Bay is still open.
Yeah, he hasn’t done everything he claimed, and I imagine he won’t, most politicians don’t. He was very clear about all the things he has done so far, and this is hard to argue.
Making a bad-faith argument about one specific point doesn’t negate the argument.
ge96
Project 2025 is crazy when you read off the items
bdcravens
I think it will take several months to know if that's the case, since we don't know (or choose to ignore) the ramifications for the economy as a whole.
null
_DeadFred_
In the inland northwest we are sending a lot more fent/mexi's north than are coming south. BC bud was an issue...back before Washington legalized.
Also the deals announced were deals already done prior to this administration.
TwoNineA
19kg of Fentanyl got smuggled from Canada into the US in 2024, not even 1% of the total. Yet POTUS decides to impose a 25% tarrif on all canadian goods because of it. Even if it was a bluff, 100+ years friendship, solidarity and good will was just flushed down the toilet and it will probably take decades to fix. But hey, good job!
How are those egg prices coming?
tenpies
> 19kg of Fentanyl got smuggled from Canada into the US in 2024, not even 1% of the total.
I realize this is the Liberal's talking point, but it just doesn't add up. For starters they are talking about detected/caught smuggling, which is a terrible metric to use.
Then there's the problem of how much is being produced domestically. Just in Q4 of 2024, in Canada found:
* Super lab with 55 kilograms of fentanyl, 390 kilograms of methamphetamine, 35 kilograms of cocaine, 15 kilograms of MDM - https://globalnews.ca/news/10840910/largest-drug-superlab-bu...
* 30 tons of precursor chemicals - https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/30-000-kilog...
* 31 kg of fentanyl and 7.6 tons of precursors - https://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/merchants-of-death-to...
So that leaves us in a very awkward position with three possibilities:
* Canada has busted virtually every lab in Canada within the span of one quarter and was consuming amounts of fentanyl domestically that would render every Canadian an addict.
* Somewhere in Canada, someone is stockpiling absurd amounts of fentanyl just for fun.
* Canada is catching a negligently small fraction of what their crime syndicates are smuggling into the US.
I know which seems more likely to me.
kjksf
In 2024 Canada had those tariffs on US goods:
- milk: 270%
- cheese: 245%
- butter: 298%
- poultry: 238%
- eggs: 163%
People freak out about Trump's proposed tariffs as if other countries do not already have tariffs on US.
aylmao
Worth noting, Canada doesn't actually charge 270% tariffs on milk. The base tariff for milk is 7.5%:
> Canada’s whole system is built to avoid a surplus -- hence its name, “supply management.” [...] Within quota, the tariff is 7.5%. Over-quota milk faces a 241% tariff. [1]
I also have to agree with Derek Holt here:
> Derek Holt, an economist at Scotiabank, said in a research note. “Better judgment would question whether an entire trading relationship needs to be jeopardized in order to appeal to dairy farmers in Wisconsin.” [1]
[1] https://www.farmprogress.com/management/does-canada-really-c... https://www.farmprogress.com/management/does-canada-really-c...
nullhole
A country that tears up an agreement it renegotiated and signed four years earlier over spurious claims* isn't a friend and isn't to be trusted.
Sure, the dairy carveouts - which the US and Trump agreed to, again, just four years ago - are stupid artifacts of a farmers lobby group, but threatening to blow up our economy on a whim makes the US unfriendly and untrustworthy. Doing all that while the leader repeatedly says they want to annex our country by economic force and make us a state turns things from untrustworthy to adversary.
If trump wanted free trade to end, he may have gotten it, because a huge amount of the trust that underlay the north american economy is gone now. If you're cheering that on because the number of eggs your dairy farmers are able to export is under a quota, then I can only say your point of view is far too limited.
* The effectively null amounts of fentanyl & migrants crossing the border.
fooster
Even if those numbers are true, you do understand that is a very different situation than 25% tariff across the board, and 10% on energy for completely disingenuous reasons.
If it wasn't for oil, natural gas, power Canada would be at a trade surplus with the US. Oil and Natural gas are not things are not easy to find replacement US based sources.
polotics
source?
oremolten
How do you know the exact figure of fentanyl smuggled into the US from CAN?
I doubt even the cartels could give you an exact figure as they aren't the only ones smuggling the drugs or the precursors.
Are you saying we only intercepted 19kg? How wouldn't that make sense to you considering the disparity of population density at the borders, as well as the infrastructure and staffing at each border??
Canada already Tariffs many products coming from the USA, many even exceeding 200%. The political theater and kindergarten understanding of geo-politics would explain your take on "100 years of friendship flushed down the toilet" lol.
senectus1
a great job of what?
honestly all i see is incompetence and creating situations only to solve them and claim victory, while letting some loon terrorize and try to dismantle the bureaucracy
aredox
Mexico and Canada agreed to do something... They were already doing with Biden.
"Hook, line and sinker", heh?
blargthorwars
Mexico agreed to an additional 10,000 troops.
bdcravens
The question is was their level of support already maxed out without the threat of tariffs? Previous agreements were already pretty substantial. (And fly in the face of a conspiracy of an "open border" where both sides are just looking the other way)
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/presidents-us-mexico-...
If you want to stop the flow of hyperpotent opioids like fentanyl and nitazenes, legalise opium and heroin. As drugs, the only advantage of these compounds is that their potency makes them easier and cheaper to smuggle. I've asked a lot of opioid addicts about this and not one of them has described an all-things-equal preference for these drugs. I'm sure some people do exist, but they're likely a very small minority. Most people don't even know what they're using, they just take whatever's available to get a fix.
This is a completely artificial problem, created by the war on drugs. Just like the waves of PMMA deaths in europe caused by safrole seizures. Western nations have no one to blame for this but themselves.