Is A Single Dose of MDMA Harmless

[23smooches]

From The American College of Neuropsychopharmacology

Is A Single Dose of MDMA Harmless

Franz X Vollenweider MD, Alex Gamma MS, Matthias Liechti MD and Theo Huber MDPsychiatric University Hospital Zürich, Switzerland
Drs. Gijsman, Verkes, van Gerven, and Cohen are of the opinion that the risk of long-term MDMA-produced serotonin reductions makes MDMA too dangerous to administer to humans, even when using a single moderate dose in research contexts.
We respect the authors' opinion and agree that the potential risk of administering MDMA to healthy volunteers is an important ethical issue that must be thoroughly evaluated in light of all available evidence. We do, however, not agree with the authors' conclusion that a single oral dose of 1.7 mg/kg MDMA in humans is likely to cause damage to serotonergic neurons. We think the existing evidence does not support such a conclusion.
Firstly, Gijsman et al. argue that repeated administration of MDMA in animals leads to damage of serotonergic axons and terminals and that this neurodegeneration is associated with decreased serotonin (5-HT) levels in the brain. They then conclude, since a single dose of MDMA can also lead to a decrease in serotonin levels, that this would be strong evidence for serotonergic neurodegeneration after a single dose. This conclusion,however, is false, since a MDMA-induced decrease in brain serotonin levels does, by no means,imply that such a decrease is ultimately associated with serotonergic neurodegeneration. Perhaps the best evidence of potential neurodegenerative risks of MDMA comes from studies demonstrating that MDMA decreases not only 5-HT and 5-HIAA, but also [3H]paroxetine binding, a measure of 5-HT uptake sites and more direct indicator of serotonergic neurodegeneration, in a dose- and frequency-dependent manner. In fact, Colado et al. (1995) found that 10 mg/kg, i.p. of MDMA decreased 5-HT and [3H]paraoxetine binding by 30%,while 5 mg/kg i.p. had no effect either on 5-HT levels or [3H]paroxetine binding (Colado et al. 1995 and personal communication). This finding was recently corroborated in a study demonstrating that a single dose (4-15 mg/kg i.p.) of MDMA dose-dependently decreased 5-HT, 5-HIAA and [3H]paroxetine binding in regions of the Dark Agouti rat brain 7 days later, while 4 mg/kg i.p. having no degenerative effects. This dose (4 mg/kg) was also without effects when given once daily for 4 days, but produced a decrease in 5-HT and [3H]paroxetine binding when given twice daily for 4 days (Oshea et al. 1998). Similarly, Battaglia et al. (1988) demonstrated that 10 mg/kg of MDMA given four times every 12 hour s.c. to Sprague-Dawley rats, did not reduce 5-HT uptake sites, although 5-HT and 5-HIAA levels were decreased by about 40%. Even more important for the human case is a study by Insel et al. (1989) performed in monkeys. This group found that administration of 2.5 mg/kg of MDMA twice daily for four consecutive days in rhesus monkey did not reduce the density of 5-HT uptake sites, although 5-HT and 5-HIAA were decreased by 50-70%. However, 10 mg/kg given twice daily for 4 days decreased both the number of 5-HT uptake sites and 5-HT levels. Finally, a linear doseresponse relationship between the amount of MDMA used and the average total reduction of 5-HT uptake sites (transporter binding) has recently also been reported in a PET study with MDMA users (McCann et al 1998). In that study, an average reduction in 5-HT uptake sites of about 25% was found in 14 people who had taken MDMA an average of 228 times with an average doses of each time of 386 mgs. None of the subjectsshowed any evidence of current DSM-IV Axis I psychiatric diagnoses in which 5-HT has been implicated.
In summary, these studies demonstrate that the MDMA-induced decrease in 5-HT and 5-HIAA levels can occur independently of changes in 5-HT uptake sites. Thus reductions in 5-HT and 5-HIAA alone are not reliable indicators of reduced 5-HT uptake sites and neurodegeneration. Given the fact that [3H]paroxetine labelling of the serotonin transporter constitutes a more direct marker for assessing structural changes in 5-HT terminals, and given the supposed dose-response relationship,it seems extremely unlikely that administering MDMA (1.7 mg/kg) only one, two or three times within an experimental context, in a dose of a maximum of about 50% of what subjects in the McCann study selfadministered (McCann et al. 1998), will produce measurable serotonin reductions or functional or behavioral consequences. Finally, it is noteworthy that changes in the number of 5-HT uptake sites in sensu stricto do not only indicate a loss or overall damage of 5-HT terminals,but also include adaptive modulations of 5-HT reuptake sites. In fact, subchronic (less than a month)administration of 5-HT transporter ligands like antidepressants (SSRIs, TCAs and tianeptine) has also be reported to reduce 5-HT transporter mRNA and radioligand binding to 5-HT transporter (see e.g., Lesch et al.1993). Hence more research is needed to address the question how to interpret discrete reductions of 5-HT ligand binding in human brain.
Second, Gijsman et al. argue by referring to the review of Steele et al. (1994) that a single dose of MDMA can induce a biphasic decrease in 5-HT and 5-HIAA that may last for years. However, even if we take changes in 5-HT and 5-HIAA levels as markers for serotonergic neurodegeneration in to account, there is no indication in Steel's review that a single dose of MDMA approaching the dose used in our human study (1.7 mg/kg p.o.) leads to a reduction of 5-HT and 5-HIAA levels. The authors may have overlooked that the studies cited in Steel's review did not only use higher doses,but that the study by Schmidt et al. (1986) found that 2.5 mg/kg of MDMA given s.c. to rats produced no acute decrease in 5-HT and 5-HIAA 3 hours post-injection.Since this is the time point where the most dramatic decrease in 5-HT and 5-HIAA levels can be observed after higher doses of MDMA, it seems highly unlikely that there will be a such a decrease with 2.5 mg/kg MDMA at any later time-point. Moreover as outlined above,Colado et al. (1995) and Oshea et al. (1998) found no effects of a single dose of 5 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg (i.p.) respectively,on 5-HT and 5-HTAA content in rats.
Third, we agree that it is generally assumed that primates are more sensitive to MDMA than rats or other non-primates. Although it is difficult to extrapolate from animal to human data, we regard primate studies as more pertinent to the human case. To date, there is no evidence indicating that a single dose of MDMA approaching the dose used in our study (1.7 mg/kg, p.o.)leads to a loss of 5-HT uptake sites in primates. The above-mentioned study by Insel et al. shows that even after repeated administration of MDMA up to a cumulative dose of 20 mg/kg i.m., the number of 5-HT uptake sites was not significantly changed. This is several times the dose used in our study. Moreover, there is evidence that parenteral administration of MDMA increases toxicity 2-3 times over oral intake (Ricaurte etal. 1988), which may again widen the gap between the two dose regimens. In this respect, Ricaurte and colleagues' study (cited by the authors), where a single dose of 5 mg/kg MDMA was given orally to monkeys (Ricaurte et al. 1988), is probably the closest approach to the dose regimen used in our human study. This study found a reduction in 5-HT and 5-HIAA content of about 20% in the thalamus and hypothalamus 2 weeks postdrug.However, as shown above, this does not permit any conclusions as to a possible loss of 5-HT terminals.Finally, 2.5 mg/kg MDMA given p.o. once every 2 weeks for 4 months did not alter 5-HT and 5-HIAA brain content in squirrel monkeys (Ricaurte 1993, pers.comm. to the Swiss Federal Ethical Committee).
As to the benefits from our research, we see three kinds. One, we can generate objective, scientific information about the full range of effects of MDMA that can be used to shed light on the causes and consequences of the non-medical use of MDMA by millions of people around the world. Two, research into the mechanism of action of MDMA in normals should provide insight into pathophysiological processes underlying psychiatric disorders in which the 5-HT system has been implicated.Third, normative data obtained with MDMA in normals should also be useful to interpret psychological and neurophysiological data obtained in MDMA users.Such studies are under way or have been performed using PET, PPI, and EEG/ERP technique (Vollenweider et al. 1998, manuscript in preparation). Fortunately, regulatory authorities in the United States, Germany, Spain,and Switzerland, fully aware of the controversy over the neurotoxicity issue, have all approved human (phase I) studies with MDMA and related drugs such as MDE (Gouzoulis et al. 1992; Hermle et al. 1993; Gouzoulis et al. 1993) and fenfluramine (see e.g., Kapur etal. 1994; Mann et al. 1996; Smith et al. 1997; Meyer et al.1998). Such studies should allow us not only to investigate the mechanisms of action and potential risks ofMDMA, but also to gain insight into pathophysiological mechanism of psychiatric disorders related to the serotonergic system.
REFERENCES

Battaglia G, Yeh SY, De Souza EB (1988): MDMA-induced neurotoxicity: parameters of degeneration and recovery of brain serotonin neurons. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 29:269-274

Colado MI, Williams JL, Green AR, (1995): The hyperthermic and neurotoxic effects of "Ecstasy" and 3,4,methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA) in the Dark Agouti (DA) rat,a model of the CYP2D6 poor metabolizer phenotype. Br J Pharmacology 115, 1281-1289

Gouzoulis E, Steiger A, Ensslin M, Kovar A, Hermle L (1992): Sleep EEG effects of 3,4-methylenedioxyethamphetamine (MDE; "eve") in healthy volunteers. Biol Psychiatry 32:1108-1117

Gouzoulis E, von Bardeleben U, Rupp A, Kovar KA, Gouzoulis E (1993): Neuroendocrine and cardiovascular effects of MDE in healthy volunteers. Neuropsychopharmacology 8:187-193

Hermle L, Spizer M, Borchardt D, Kovar KA, Gouzoulis E (1993): Psychological effects of MDE in normal subjects.Are entactogens a new class of psychoactive agents? Neuropsychopharmacology 8:171-176

Insel TR, Battaglia G, Johannesen JN, Marra S, De Souza EB (1989): 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("ecstasy")selectively destroys brain serotonin terminals in rhesus monkeys. J Pharmacol Exper Therap 249:713-720

Kapur S, Meyer J, Wilson AA, Houle S, Brown GM (1994): Modulation of cortical neuronal activity by a serotonergic agent: A PET study in humans. Brain Res 646:292-294

Lesch PK, Aulakh CS, Wolozin BL, Tolliver TL, Hill GL, andMurphyDL (1993) Regional brain expression of serotonin transporter mRNA and its regulation by reuptake inhibiting antidepressants. Mol Brain Res 1:31-35

Mann JJ, Malone KM, Diehl DJ, Perel J, Nichols ThE, Mintun MA (1996): Positron emission tomographic imaging of serotonin activation effects on prefrontal cortex in ealthy volunteers. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 16:418-426

McCann UD, Szabo K, Scheffel U, Dannals RF, andRicaurte GA (1998): Positron emission tomographic evidence of toxic effects of MDMA ("Ecstasy") on brain serotonin neurons in human beings. Lancent 352:1433-1437

Meyer JH, Kennedy S and Brown GM, (1998): No effect of depression on [150]H2O PET response to intravenous d-fenfluramine. Am J Psychiatry 155:1241-1246

Oshea E, Granados R, Esteban B, Colado MI and Green AR (1998): The relationship between the degree of neurodegeneration of rat brain 5-HT nerve terminals and the dose and frequency of administration of MDMA (Ecstasy). Neuropharmacology 37:919-926

Ricaurte GA, DeLanney LE, Irwin I, Langston JW (1998): Toxic effects of MDMA on central serotonergic neurons in the primate: Importance of route and frequency of drug administration. Brain Res 446:165-168

Schmidt CJ, Wu L and Lovenberg W (1998): Methylenedioxymethamphetamine:A potentially neurotoxic amphetamine analogue. Eur J Pharmacol 124:175-178

Smith GS, Dewey SL, Brodie JD, Logan J, Vitkun SA, Simkowitz P, Schioesser R, Alexoff DA, Hurley A, Coo-per T, Volkow ND (1997): Serotonergic modulation of dopamine measured with [11C] raclopride and PET in normal human subjects. Am J Psychiatry 154:490-496

Steele TD, McCann UD, Ricaurtre GA (1994): 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, "Ecstasy"): Pharmacology and toxicology in animals and humans. Addiction 89:539-551

[thrackelsby]

If I am interpreting this right, it seems to be heartening news. It makes me glad that regulatory authorities in several major countries are authorizing any sort of MDMA/similar compounds experimentation. It's a start on the road to allowing therapeutic usage of psychedelic drugs.

[x cynic x]

Originally Posted by thrackelsby

If I am interpreting this right, it seems to be heartening news. It makes me glad that regulatory authorities in several major countries are authorizing any sort of MDMA/similar compounds experimentation. It's a start on the road to allowing therapeutic usage of psychedelic drugs.

Therapeutic? Nah, Swim thinks the value of MDMA is much more applicable to recreational usage. All that is necessary to maintain good health is moderation. MDMA is perfectly safe when used on occasion with supplements such as 5-HTP. These doctors simply want to justify the legal status of the drug, as results such as theirs are praised by most of society. If doctors went around saying why MDMA should be legal, they surely would be execrated by all of their Christian friends/family/associates.

[thrackelsby]

Originally Posted by x cynic x

Therapeutic? Nah, Swim thinks the value of MDMA is much more applicable to recreational usage. All that is necessary to maintain good health is moderation. MDMA is perfectly safe when used on occasion with supplements such as 5-HTP. These doctors simply want to justify the legal status of the drug, as results such as theirs are praised by most of society. If doctors went around saying why MDMA should be legal, they surely would be execrated by all of their Christian friends/family/associates.

I am not quite sure what you are saying. This article is refuting claims that:
A) a single dose of MDMA causes serotonergic neurodegeneration a.k.a. brain damage

They then conclude, since a single dose of MDMA can also lead to a decrease in serotonin levels, that this would be strong evidence for serotonergic neurodegeneration after a single dose. This conclusion,however, is false, since a MDMA-induced decrease in brain serotonin levels does, by no means,imply that such a decrease is ultimately associated with serotonergic neurodegeneration.

B) MDMA is not able to be used ethically in experimental situations on humans

Fortunately, regulatory authorities in the United States, Germany, Spain,and Switzerland, fully aware of the controversy over the neurotoxicity issue, have all approved human (phase I) studies with MDMA and related drugs such as MDE and fenfluramine

MDMA is also being tested as a therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and by all indications, is serving its purpose well. Here's a link to an article concerning it in the Washington post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...112001777.html

[23smooches]

I think moderation, as in once every other month would be good. Other than that, I think even once a month is pushing it. This drug is great for therapy under controlled circumstances, but other than that its definitely not good. Recreational use of any drug is not very good in my opinion though. These are valuble chemicals, and its almost sacreligious to use them for anything but therapy. A good dance session is therapy for me, and its almost spiritual to be feeling the music, and experiencing the complete connection with an entire crowd and bonding, with or without any chemicals. A good time with friends is therapy, and very spiritual, in fact, everything about life is beautiful and spiritual. These chemicals only need to be used to remind swim of that every once in LONG while. Using all the time to feel that way is wrong, swim doesnt need a drug to feel complete ecstasy and connection with the cosmic. If you are using these drugs "recreationally" I think you are misusing them, and you are the reason they are illegal.
(but swim must admit, mdma is fun as hell!)

Reputation Comments on this post:

You fail to see that the examples you give are examples of ecreational use in the truest sense - recreational does not e...

[entheogensmurf]

Originally Posted by 23smooches

If you are using these drugs "recreationally" I think you are misusing them, and you are the reason they are illegal.
(but swim must admit, mdma is fun as hell!)

Who gets to choose what is and is not ok for recreational usage? Talk about control freak issues. The FACT that we have booze legal, negates everything in regards to any downtalk of other drugs used in recreation. IN case you didn't know: Alcohol is a drug.

The recreational use may be the therapy in itself. There's recreational use and THEN there is abuse. They are not the same by any means. As horrid as alcohol can be, it's the abuse that is the primary destructor. If people were sticking to 1-2 pints would we see the 300,000+ dead a year from booze? I'd think not, though that is only a guess.

It's only a smaller population who over do the drug fun in comparison to the whole.

Setting a restriction of recreational use or condemning it with negativity where a person is having fun and harming none seems a bit religious and overseerian in nature. Punishing the whole for the acts of a few (who might not even abuse to the point they do IF the drug was not illegal) is simply sickening. There needs to be an application of common sense and fairness.

Some people become deathly ill and die from eating peanuts. While this is not abuse BUT it is an example of a few that cannot consume them. Should we then make peanuts illegal because of the few? Hell no. You make the dangers known on the side.

The roots and current reason for the illegal status of drugs has little to do with recreational usage as a whole. It's about control and fear of freethinking. We just happen to be more exposed to the downsides of abuse as that is all we hear about in the media. The front page gleams with reports on teens taking ONE pill of ecstasy and dying but they fail to mention that ecstasy does not equal MDMA only. If they do mention MDMA: they then explain how dangerous the drug due to impurity issues; however, the drug wouldn't be impure if it was legal. In fact, as a whole, it's the illegal status that killed the teen. The law and lawmakers are more responsible than anyone else.
They didn't force the teen to take the pill but the product would have been clean and in theory the silly teen could have taken a small dose to check for reactions.

Lets have a front page for all of the acetaminophen complications:
The National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) indicates that there are an average of 26,256 hospitalizations per year related to acetaminophen overdoses. Although the TESS data best indicate the time trend for acetaminophen-related mortality, the best estimate of the average number of deaths per year related to acetaminophen is 458, according to death certificate data. Acetaminophen is the leading cause of toxic drug ingestions in the U.S. By any measure, this is a major national health problem.

If that's all we saw in relation to acetaminophen on reports, that would slowly warp the minds of laypeople and individuals who simply don't care to research the validity of the drug, into thinking this medicine is evil.

When you purchase hair dye you are suppose to place a small dab on your arm or wherever to make sure there isn't some horrendous allergic reaction. It's that simple. Because of the laws against recreational drug use these things are sought out less. Who cares if a person is stupid enough to not test for allergies. That's their own undoing.

Booze and cigarettes would be illegal if it was based on abuse and danger... you know, the things that actually harm others and self.

While I do believe many people do ABUSE MDMA and may in fact be inflicting some damage to their brain, there seems to be enough data out there that would counter these problems.
It's not common knowledge that a simple pre/post dose of certain antioxidants along with other measures reduce possible damage. Why is that? Because it's illegal. We should have kits at the store that are specifically designed in respect to harm reduction. Instead we have people (I usually assume teens) taking high doses (which is moronic regardless if pure MDMA or cut) and exposing themselves to the elements that contribute to an overheated brain.

Why do we not have these over the counter preventative measure kits at the store? Because, according to the twits in control "This sends the wrong message. It says we have given up and lost the war." Tripe such as that.

GHB would be a great replacement for booze if we had a tight regulation on dosage control. This meaning that a drugtender (bartender) provides exact doses to prevent an... overdose and what have you. GHB can be deadly of course, but this is more of overdosing related issues. Yet again to call upon the indisputable example of alcohol. Too much = dead or other naughty things. Ketamine used correctly is a better alternative than what is legal as well.

So, I don't agree with you.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Good post.
	Strayed off topic, too much unnecesary information, trying too hard to sound smart, brininging prejudices and biased opi...

[23smooches]

Originally Posted by entheogensmurf

Who gets to choose what is and is not ok for recreational usage? Talk about control freak issues. The FACT that we have booze legal, negates everything in regards to any downtalk of other drugs used in recreation. IN case you didn't know: Alcohol is a drug.

The recreational use may be the therapy in itself. There's recreational use and THEN there is abuse. They are not the same by any means. As horrid as alcohol can be, it's the abuse that is the primary destructor. If people were sticking to 1-2 pints would we see the 300,000+ dead a year from booze? I'd think not, though that is only a guess.

It's only a smaller population who over do the drug fun in comparison to the whole.

Setting a restriction of recreational use or condemning it with negativity where a person is having fun and harming none seems a bit religious and overseerian in nature. Punishing the whole for the acts of a few (who might not even abuse to the point they do IF the drug was not illegal) is simply sickening. There needs to be an application of common sense and fairness.

Some people become deathly ill and die from eating peanuts. While this is not abuse BUT it is an example of a few that cannot consume them. Should we then make peanuts illegal because of the few? Hell no. You make the dangers known on the side.

The roots and current reason for the illegal status of drugs has little to do with recreational usage as a whole. It's about control and fear of freethinking. We just happen to be more exposed to the downsides of abuse as that is all we hear about in the media. The front page gleams with reports on teens taking ONE pill of ecstasy and dying but they fail to mention that ecstasy does not equal MDMA only. If they do mention MDMA: they then explain how dangerous the drug due to impurity issues; however, the drug wouldn't be impure if it was legal. In fact, as a whole, it's the illegal status that killed the teen. The law and lawmakers are more responsible than anyone else.
They didn't force the teen to take the pill but the product would have been clean and in theory the silly teen could have taken a small dose to check for reactions.

Lets have a front page for all of the acetaminophen complications:
The National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) indicates that there are an average of 26,256 hospitalizations per year related to acetaminophen overdoses. Although the TESS data best indicate the time trend for acetaminophen-related mortality, the best estimate of the average number of deaths per year related to acetaminophen is 458, according to death certificate data. Acetaminophen is the leading cause of toxic drug ingestions in the U.S. By any measure, this is a major national health problem.

If that's all we saw in relation to acetaminophen on reports, that would slowly warp the minds of laypeople and individuals who simply don't care to research the validity of the drug, into thinking this medicine is evil.

When you purchase hair dye you are suppose to place a small dab on your arm or wherever to make sure there isn't some horrendous allergic reaction. It's that simple. Because of the laws against recreational drug use these things are sought out less. Who cares if a person is stupid enough to not test for allergies. That's their own undoing.

Booze and cigarettes would be illegal if it was based on abuse and danger... you know, the things that actually harm others and self.

While I do believe many people do ABUSE MDMA and may in fact be inflicting some damage to their brain, there seems to be enough data out there that would counter these problems.
It's not common knowledge that a simple pre/post dose of certain antioxidants along with other measures reduce possible damage. Why is that? Because it's illegal. We should have kits at the store that are specifically designed in respect to harm reduction. Instead we have people (I usually assume teens) taking high doses (which is moronic regardless if pure MDMA or cut) and exposing themselves to the elements that contribute to an overheated brain.

Why do we not have these over the counter preventative measure kits at the store? Because, according to the twits in control "This sends the wrong message. It says we have given up and lost the war." Tripe such as that.

GHB would be a great replacement for booze if we had a tight regulation on dosage control. This meaning that a drugtender (bartender) provides exact doses to prevent an... overdose and what have you. GHB can be deadly of course, but this is more of overdosing related issues. Yet again to call upon the indisputable example of alcohol. Too much = dead or other naughty things. Ketamine used correctly is a better alternative than what is legal as well.

So, I don't agree with you.

. . We are all entitled to our opinion, and I gave my opinion. All I was doing was expressing how I felt about recreational usage. If you have a problem with that, you need to check your head, because I dont care what anyone does with drugs, lifes pretty good without them though.
You didnt have to write an essay on why your right and Im wrong. Thats your issue though. Relax please. and smile.
it seems like you put alot of effort into that reply, maybe I said something that offended you? Im sorry, and Im not a control freak, Im pretty far from it.

PS, I didnt even read that shit because it was too long and felt driven by your bitterness and more or less like you just wanted to sound smart.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Badmouthing an intelligently written post without reading it, or giving any particularly valid reasons.

[chemlove]

i agree w/ the assumption though not fully proven that MDMA is more recreations then medicinal. There seems to be a faction that believes MDMA is a great therapy tool to help people open up and such. I hope well intended research is continued on this compound. Because i think its very evident that the research in the 80's and early 90's was completely flawed and self serving for the Gov and the DEA.

[TheBlackPope]

Originally Posted by x cynic x

Therapeutic? Nah, Swim thinks the value of MDMA is much more applicable to recreational usage. All that is necessary to maintain good health is moderation. MDMA is perfectly safe when used on occasion with supplements such as 5-HTP. These doctors simply want to justify the legal status of the drug, as results such as theirs are praised by most of society. If doctors went around saying why MDMA should be legal, they surely would be execrated by all of their Christian friends/family/associates.

Wow, you are a generalizing moron.

Many, many, many christians are involved in drugs to one degree or another.

I myself have a huge cross tattooed on my body to signify my relationship w/ Christ. I promote drugs relentlessly. I thought this forum was more open minded than that. Wow.

[Euphoric]

Originally Posted by entheogensmurf

however, the drug wouldn't be impure if it was legal.

There will still be counterfeit drugs and production errors. Purity would likely improve but it would remain imperfect.

[entheogensmurf]

Originally Posted by 23smooches

. . We are all entitled to our opinion, and I gave my opinion. All I was doing was expressing how I felt about recreational usage. If you have a problem with that, you need to check your head, because I dont care what anyone does with drugs, lifes pretty good without them though.

Sure, your life (perhaps you are more along the lines of chemically balanced) is fine without rec drug use. The thing is, some people self medicate. There are boozers that take this route at times; though, not always being fully conscious of their choice in alleviation. I will never deny some or many are simply gluttonous pleasure seekers but the others found a way to break out of their apathy or constant onslaught of unpleasant existence. When a human brain is not 'balanced' within the typical range, they may be under par in well being. There are other drugs but medications under the class of SSRI (and other antidepressants) have negative side effects as well. Additionally they may have never sought help, lack the medical insurance, etc...

IF Zoloft, Prozac and other such drugs were illegal and people used them to feel good... that would be considered rec use and then looked down upon for their method of resolution or at least balance.

Life is not always good without drugs for some people. Their recreation may be their medication. That and it still seems silly to be jaundiced towards recreational drug use when 'they' are not harming others.

Originally Posted by chemlove

i agree w/ the assumption though not fully proven that MDMA is more recreations then medicinal. There seems to be a faction that believes MDMA is a great therapy tool to help people open up and such.

MDMA in the doses for therapy are lower than rec doses. While DXM is not used for therapy, the same line applies. In low doses DXM is used for medical reasons and in high doses it's used to get high (in general).
MDMA 'was' being used for therapy back then and they just recently began more trials. I believe the current victory was an ok to perform MDMA testing on soldiers with PTSD. And I believe in the olden days PTSD was referred to as shellshock

Originally Posted by TheBlackPope

Wow, you are a generalizing moron.

Many, many, many christians are involved in drugs to one degree or another.
I myself have a huge cross tattooed on my body to signify my relationship w/ Christ. I promote drugs relentlessly. I thought this forum was more open minded than that. Wow.

Well, Christians by default are ignorant and brainwashed. ANYTHING that takes away love from their disgustingly sexist God is repugnant in His eyes. Just read the Bible, it's plainly stated.

Originally Posted by Euphoric

There will still be counterfeit drugs and production errors. Purity would likely improve but it would remain imperfect.

I don't recall ever reading a report of bunk pills when MDMA/Ecstasy was legal. Surly it could have happened. However, it was only during the aftermath of the scheduling that we saw cut pills as a norm. There wasn't a market for fake pills as the chemicals were readily available and plenty of chemists willing to produce the drug without the fear of prison.
Also, if it was legal, MDMA could be produced through heavily regulated labs where quality testing is required. Instead of some guy/gal that is a chemist and knows how to follow instructions, we'd have professionals outputting the hug drug.

Not to mention that we might have more exacting and non biased based research to help people from fcking themselves over.

[TheBlackPope]

Your a very closed minded, ignorant and angry individual. Just as not all black people steal and murder, not all Christians folllow the OLD TESTAMENT bible to the tea.

Reputation Comments on this post:

added excellent balance to the discussion

[23smooches]

Originally Posted by TheBlackPope

Your a very closed minded, ignorant and angry individual. Just as not all black people steal and murder, not all Christians folllow the OLD TESTAMENT bible to the tea.

I agree entirely. EntheogenSmurf seems to be harboring some unhealthy bitterness towards men, God, and Christians, and it is making his/her posts biased. It became clear as soon as entheogensmurf called me a control freak that there was something wrong. Lets agree to disagree if we must. An excellent example is that Some black people murder and steal, most dont. That doesnt mean that we will label black people in america as criminals. We will also not label all christians as closed minded. Here comes the Irony, Some "liberal minded" drug advocates that have contributed to this discussion are just as closed minded, and are in addition angry about something or other.. We will not label all liberals and "open-minded" individuals as angry, bitter and biased because of these few individuals.
It is simply not healthy to label any group of people in a negative way because of their beliefs. Acceptance is peace, and the rave culture is all about PLUR. I am not putting down your god, or your beliefs, so please grow up, and dont criticize anyone else until you are perect yourself. And once again, chill the fuck out.

Well, Christians by default are ignorant and brainwashed. ANYTHING that takes away love from their disgustingly sexist God is repugnant in His eyes. Just read the Bible, it's plainly stated.

That is what I call hipocrisy and Irony. "May Lilith Smile Upon You"
If I started criticizing you or Lilith, or women, and started talking about how illegitamate, sexist, and biased your beliefs are, would you be pissed? Would I be wrong? YES.
I have grown up Christian, women are highly reguarded and equal to men in every aspect. It is not even an issue. This is not the stone ages. It seems like you are the one who is stuck in stone age like thinking.
Generalizing anything is never right.

[TheBlackPope]

Originally Posted by 23smooches

the rave culture is all about PLUR.

Huh, I thought Plur was only a SoCal thing. Is that nation wide?

[edit]
Nevermind, just saw you were from Cali.
[/edit]

[ticketmaster]

p.l.u.r. is world wide....

but mostly for under age ravers, other wise it stands for...

"P"etaphile "L"oves "U"nderage "R"avers....



Namaste'

[23smooches]

Originally Posted by TheBlackPope

Huh, I thought Plur was only a SoCal thing. Is that nation wide?

[edit]
Nevermind, just saw you were from Cali.
[/edit]

Yeah Im from L.A. but I thought it was world wide, or at least nation wide.

Yeah, raver kids... lol raves can be pretty nasty, but you can meet some really cool people there.

[Euphoric]

Originally Posted by entheogensmurf

I don't recall ever reading a report of bunk pills when MDMA/Ecstasy was legal. Surly it could have happened. However, it was only during the aftermath of the scheduling that we saw cut pills as a norm. There wasn't a market for fake pills as the chemicals were readily available and plenty of chemists willing to produce the drug without the fear of prison.
Also, if it was legal, MDMA could be produced through heavily regulated labs where quality testing is required. Instead of some guy/gal that is a chemist and knows how to follow instructions, we'd have professionals outputting the hug drug.

Not to mention that we might have more exacting and non biased based research to help people from fcking themselves over.

I agree quality will go up, but there are lots of perfectly legal medications and supplements that are counterfeit because there is profit in placebos/cut product/different chems. There is counterfeit tylenol. I've read about busts of fake pharmacy (prescription only and otherwise) pills. Not a good thing when a man dies because he thought his heart medication would work.

[Heretic.Ape.]

If you wish to debate religion etc, please do so in an appropriate thread and without the flaming.

[entheogensmurf]

Originally Posted by Euphoric

I agree quality will go up, but there are lots of perfectly legal medications and supplements that are counterfeit because there is profit in placebos/cut product/different chems. There is counterfeit tylenol. I've read about busts of fake pharmacy (prescription only and otherwise) pills. Not a good thing when a man dies because he thought his heart medication would work.

Thanks for sharing. I didn't know we had bunk Tylenol out there. That appears to be a good example of how fully legalized and produced drugs does not equal pure product all the time. And, of course I know that doesn't mean "oh no! We must test all Tylenol." It simply means it can happen, in theory. Online pharmacies would be more prone to this vile scam I'd imagine.

[stoneinfocus]

this article is quite positive, as I think tat 4mg/kg bodyweight is a huge dose. In human only the fine embedded axons are damaged by huge repated doses and this only through oxidative damage by H2O2 and NH3.

4mg/KgBW is 280mg and I doubt that this can be easily had in pure form in one night or several times.

Swim was happy with 30mg pure stuff, as a therapeutic dose and I think, that many pills are cocktails with psychedelic amphetamines, amphetamines and alike, to get the optics into your "eve" or a more euphoric feel in the user.