How long till regular use becomes a damage to your body

[JKLJKLJKL]

OK, SWIM at the moment only rolls every month or two, and its never really planned until the night of. But when SWIM started, SWIM was dropping once or twice a week minimum for about five months, then a two month break and then another couple of months with 1 or 2 a fortnight this time. that was up until a few months ago, now SWIM only does it every month or so.

SWIM's question is; was that regular usage in that amount of time damaging to him in the long term? SWIM isn't asking about how it would effect is usage high wise.

SWIM was dosing about 2-4 pills for a while, then 4-8ish for a few months. If it was MDMA then SWIM would have insuffulated about 1/3 > 1/4 of a gram each night.

Thanks.

[rob_uk]

Swim would also like to know this, as he is currently dropping 1 - 2 times a week

[Petethemeat]

The evidence about regular use causing damage is so far inconclusive. Yet it is believed that regular use can cause down-regulation of the serotonin re-uptake receptors causing less action from the neuro transmitter serotonin. In laymans terms this can lead to depression, mood swings and general decreased enjoyment of life.

Regular usage is believed by some to be neurotoxic, and while no strict conclusions have been made in this regard, SWIM would venture there is a degree of truth in this.

It is highly inadvisable to use it as regularly as SWIRob does or SWIJK did , the serotonin system is nowhere near back on form after so little time away and could cause permanent or long term changes in the serotonin system.

A good rule of thumb (while not suitable for all) is to wait about three months before using again. While we cannot be sure about its possible effects later in life, the harm associated with this level of usage is believed to be minimal (as well as increasing the quality of your high/ not losing the magic as quickly).

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good advice.

[RaverHippie]

If one were to assess damage done to the brain as a relationship to loss of magic i.e. the less magic there is the more damage there is. Then one could deduce the amount of damage one has inflicted on his own brain by analyzing how much MDMA or how many pills SWIY must take to achieve a similar roll then it used to.

1-2 times a week will yield brain damage guaranteed. One could consume all the antioxidants and have the perfect pre-load and post-load but that is still too much for a brain to handle.

www.ecstasydata.org has a good slideshow showing how MDMA works and also explains how your brain gets damaged by MDMA. That's a good place to start.

Also use the forum search engine, I'm sure the information you seek is laying around here.

[jaffacake]

There's no real scientific evidence that low serotonin levels are linked to depression, it's now becoming evident that this was a myth propagated by the pharma corporations in order to boost sales of useless SSRI's. Evidence has been released that show SSRI are no more effective than placebo, indeed recent anti-depressives work by DECREASING serotonin levels.

So there may be something else in Ecstasy that causes long-term depression, or it could be just placebo that people take E, read a story that it causes depression and then if they feel blue one day they automatically tell themselves "It's the E that has done this to me".

Reputation Comments on this post:

If you're going to make broad claims, that are against all known and accepted evidence, you MUST post legitimate sources...

[RaverHippie]

Originally Posted by jaffacake

There's no real scientific evidence that low serotonin levels are linked to depression, it's now becoming evident that this was a myth propagated by the pharma corporations in order to boost sales of useless SSRI's. Evidence has been released that show SSRI are no more effective than placebo, indeed recent anti-depressives work by DECREASING serotonin levels.

So there may be something else in Ecstasy that causes long-term depression, or it could be just placebo that people take E, read a story that it causes depression and then if they feel blue one day they automatically tell themselves "It's the E that has done this to me".

Why do you dismiss YEARS of anecdotal evidence so easily?

There are KNOWN effects of MDMA that you simply throw out the window claiming they're just a placebo effect. The information you're spouting off sounds like it's coming from someone seriously in denial that anything could possibly be wrong with their own mind, or from someone that may have taken the substance and didn't have a negative reaction. Either way, drugs affect everyone a little bit differently but there are some things that are true about MDMA.

For example, it's a proven fact that the neurotransmitter serotonin controls your mood. There's no need to offer speculation on the subject. The information contained in your posts are contradictory to years of anecdotal evidence, and the scientific evidence. Before you go off claiming all ill-effects are from placebo, please find some legitimate source that can back up your claim. Someone could see your posts, heaven forbid, and become misinformed, and damage their mind/body. I hope you see the implications these posts could have.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good post. :)

[Petethemeat]

I agree with you Raver Hippie, the post you reference sounds like it is coming from one with severe paranoia, determined to ignore any and all evidence contrary to ones world view.

[jaffacake]

Originally Posted by RaverHippie

There are KNOWN effects of MDMA that you simply throw out the window claiming they're just a placebo effect. The information you're spouting off sounds like it's coming from someone seriously in denial that anything could possibly be wrong with their own mind, or from someone that may have taken the substance and didn't have a negative reaction. Either way, drugs affect everyone a little bit differently but there are some things that are true about MDMA.

.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Are you saying the serotonin theory of depression has any evidence to support it? Most independent researchers would dismiss your claims. Do a search for serotonin myth and do some reading.

Oh, and keep an open mind because you're going to find an awful lot of facts that challenge your belief system.

[KillroyMindless]

Originally Posted by RaverHippie

Why do you dismiss YEARS of anecdotal evidence so easily?

There are KNOWN effects of MDMA that you simply throw out the window claiming they're just a placebo effect. The information you're spouting off sounds like it's coming from someone seriously in denial that anything could possibly be wrong with their own mind, or from someone that may have taken the substance and didn't have a negative reaction. Either way, drugs affect everyone a little bit differently but there are some things that are true about MDMA.

For example, it's a proven fact that the neurotransmitter serotonin controls your mood. There's no need to offer speculation on the subject. The information contained in your posts are contradictory to years of anecdotal evidence, and the scientific evidence. Before you go off claiming all ill-effects are from placebo, please find some legitimate source that can back up your claim. Someone could see your posts, heaven forbid, and become misinformed, and damage their mind/body. I hope you see the implications these posts could have.

hes right and yes they are connected. the serotonin myth sounds like some conspiracy theory. Its like saying 911 was fake or that we never landed on the moon. Look at both sides of the argue ment and there have been A LOT of different studies about the link between seratonin and depression and they arnt just by pharmasutecle companies. Seratonin is the chemicle in your brain that can relax you. Why dont you google seratonin and leave off the myth part and read some facts not people opininions about weather or not its a myth.

[jaffacake]

the serotonin myth sounds like some conspiracy theory. Its like saying 911 was fake or that we never landed on the moon.

Nope, I'm afraid you're the one believing the conspiracy theory. From the latest research released this week:

New-generation anti-depressants are largely a waste of time, research suggests.

A review of clinical trials found they worked no better than a dummy pill for mildly-depressed patients and for most people suffering severe depression. Even trials suggesting benefit for severely-depressed people did not provide evidence of clear clinical benefit, researchers said.

Dr Tim Kendall, deputy director of the Royal College of Psychiatrists Research Unit, said the findings were "fantastically important".

A group of experts, led by Professor Irving Kirsch, from the Department of Psychology at the University of Hull, analysed 47 clinical trials using data released under Freedom of Information rules by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The researchers looked at four commonly-used anti-depressants and the clinical trials submitted to gain licensing approval. They included anti-depressants regularly prescribed in the UK, including fluoxetine (Prozac), venlafaxine (Efexor) and paroxetine (Seroxat).

They found little evidence of benefit when analysing both unpublished and published data from the drug companies. Furthermore, the seemingly good results for very severely-depressed patients came from the fact that a patient's response to the dummy pill (placebo) decreased rather than any notable increase in their response to antidepressants.

The researchers said their study was one of the most thorough investigations into the efficacy of new generation anti-depressants, known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs).

The researchers concluded: "We find that the overall effect of new generation anti-depressant medications is below recommended criteria for clinical significance." Professor Kirsch said: "The difference in improvement between patients taking placebos and patients taking anti-depressants is not very great. This means that depressed people can improve without chemical treatments."

http://ukpress.google.com/article/AL...2eGWus-IPauPlA

[JKLJKLJKL]

Cheers guys, SWIM will jut ay what hw noticed mentally for the month when it was twice a week.

SWIM even after his initial comedown (which were getting generally worse and worse to the stage where he'd just lay in bed and stare at the ceiling until he fell asleep) was generally feeling more depressed than usual. The 'mid week blues' seemed to last most of the week until say the Friday morning when he''d start to feel fine again and then of course he'd go out to a friend's house and drop another seven pills.

SWIM started to get very paranoid and anxious about little things - SWIM never used to be afraid of the outside at night time, and was very fearless about it. Then after a couple of months SWIM would be outside having a cigarette and he would stand with his back against the wall due to fear of what might be out there - burgulars and stuff, not ghosts or anything.... SWIM lived in a quiet little village. If SWIM was walkin through a room of his house that was illuminated then he'd shut the curtains so no one could see in. It was this kind of paranoia, and the increased depression - SWIM had found himself a girlfriend and so naturally happy, but ultimately was feeling pretty low most of the time, and looking forward to the next weekend. SWIM completely replaced drinking with E/MDMA and while he wouldn't say he needed it to have a good time, it became synonyomous with it.



Well that was the psychological differences SWIM noticed, seven months later having only dosed 3 or 4 times, SWIM feels generally a lot better, the paranoia when sober has completely dissappeared and he finds it possible to be happy again. SO SWIM has realised that those psychological factors are mid term factors - last longer than the inital ones, but aren't life long.

[Micklemouse]

Actually, RaverHippie is right - that study says nothing about the serotonin theory of depression. What it does say is that for many people antidepressants are ineffective, often because their depression is reactive to circumstances, & nothing to do with chemical imbalance. At most it proves that blocking the uptake of serotonin does not necessarily benefit the depressed patient. It goes nowhere to prove or disprove the hypothesis that serotonin is related to mood.

Now, back on topic please.

[jaffacake]

Again, that's not what I'm saying. I'm perfectly willing to accept that serotonin might have something to do with mood. I would accept that pretty much everything in the brain has something to do with mood.

You're also misunderstanding what SSRI's are. The entire theory on which SSRI medication rests is that low serotonin levels are causing depression.

[Micklemouse]

Believe me I know exactly what SSRI's are & do. Another thing I know is that they have absolutely nothing to do with How Long Till Regular Use [of Ecstasy] Becomes A Damage To Your Body (note to self - must change the title there!), so please can we stick to the topic? Pretty please? There is a whole forum for the discussion of Antidepressants & another one for the discussion of Pharmacology, either of which would be better suited to such discussion.

Seriously, kittlings - Stick To The Topic!

[xstalkrx]

its been like 15 years since ecstasy became well known. if there were going to be some crazy weird side effects later in life we would have seen them by now.

this, of course, likely only pertains to those whose use was fairly light.

[jaffacake]

Originally Posted by JKLJKLJKL

SWIM's question is; was that regular usage in that amount of time damaging to him in the long term? SWIM isn't asking about how it would effect is usage high wise.

Something to remember is what is the real meaning of studies that claim E causes "brain-damage" in rats and mice. I'm sure when most E users hear the term "brain-damage" they get pictures in their minds of brain-damaged rats limping across the lab, hiding their heads whenever someone turns a light on and generally sitting in the corner depressed and not doing anything.

The reality is very different. Even after you inject industrial quantities of E directly into rats brains every 3 hours for days on end, if you leave the rat alone for a day or two it's health and behaviour become completely indistinguishable from rats who have never taken E. The "brain-damage" can only be noticed when you cut the rats head off and examine certain brain cells under an electron microscope.

So there's two questions to ask yourself regarding this - the first is the validity of "brain-damage" after the rat is exposed to such massive doses and whether they have any relevance to human beings. The second question is SO FUCKING WHAT? So you would be able to see damage to a braincell under an electron microscope if your head was cut off - does this have any effect on your health or behaviour?

We are all undergoing massive "brain-damage" every day of our lives - thousands of brain cells die every week. No-one ever notices. Mind you, I suppose if there were articles in the newspapers every week saying "Another thousand braincells just died causing terribe brain damage" most people would start worrying about it.

[KyleM]

Sound like another good thread ruined by "the serotonin theory of depression is a myth!"

When it comes to damage, one must first define "damage" and then relate that to human recreational doses of MDMA and then of course SWIY's own body.

Some researches would define depleted serotonin, downregulation of receptors/transporters as neurotoxic. So some researchers will say this constitutes damage. In that case it's a matter of opinion.

As for doses, physical harm to neurons has been detected in studies involving doses many times greater than human recreational doses. And to add to that, most substances on earth will be toxic eventually at some dose and there are unscrupulous researchers that will exploit that fact to show a substance causes damage by finding that toxic dose, regardless of how high it is, and injecting it into rats and then scaring the ignorant public with their findings of degenerated neurons. SWIM could do a similar test and keep injecting rats with water until they die and then publish his results and say that there is conclusive evidence that water is lethal.

The results of these toxic studies have yet to be duplicated in a legitimate unbiased study using human recreational doses on humans. As for using 1-2 times per week there is no current evidence that this is physically damaging assuming SWIY's doses were pure and at recreational weights. But SWIM will join the others and advise against this of course.

On a final note, there are millions of people who abused MDMA in the past 40 years and there has not been this wave of stroke-like victims finally succumbing to damages of their ecstasy use earlier in life that the prohibitionists promised us when they made it illegal.

Reputation Comments on this post:

One of the helpful ones in the topic

[jaffacake]

Sound like another good thread ruined by "the serotonin theory of depression is a myth!"

It's not as if there were hundreds of people offering opinions tho is it? If we hadn't discussed serotonin the thread would have had about 2 responses so far. I think the serotonin myth is always worth mentioning when people start talking about E's affects on serotonin. It's not as black and white as most E users believe.

[RaverHippie]

This thread would have been better off if it had stayed on topic, regardless whatever opinions may be surfacing because the discussion would be masked under a title where people wouldn't know it existed. If there is a hot topic, make a thread so that more people can pipe in about it.

This thread is better off showing the information suggesting that there isn't conclusive data suggesting that long-term use has major damage to a person's brain, to the point of impairment in daily situations.

[Micklemouse]

ENOUGH!

Closed pending clear up. There is too much sniping & derailment going on here (partly my fault for not keeping a closer eye on things, partly others for not hitting the report button).

The serotonin myth hypothesis is perhaps a valid area for discussion, but only in relation to MDMA, not SSRI's. Thus far I have nothing to back up any claims either way from the main protagonists of this derailment. If you cannot back up your claims then anything written is opinion & should be made clear it is such.