News reaches us that Ecstasy isn’t as bad as the authorities have led to us believe.

Politicians always seem to be on the prohibitionist side and have been telling us that drugs are bad. Drugs lead you into the depths of hell. Drugs are taboo. They have been backing their claims up with scientific evidence though not everyone agrees that the evidence means that Ecstasy should be classified as a very dangerous drug. But even those who disagree about the classification have agreed that Ecstasy can cause long term damage.

But it seems that the scientific evidence has been a bit lax in checking all the facts out. A bit like the climate change science that cherry picks its figures to push its message and to keep the up the funding for the scientists.

What all the previous studies into Ecstasy have missed out is that the environment in which the drugis taken can cause lasting damage on its own. Yep, raves. When the scientists studied the damage to mental capabilities of taking Ecstasy for long periods they used as controls people who didn’t and who also weren’t ravers.

The latest study^[2] has found that when the controls are ravers who didn’t take drink or drugs but did stay up late and danced till exhausted the results were a bit different. What was found was that both groups of ravers had similar deterioration in cognitive facilities. Mainly due to the lack of sleep and dehydration rather than Ecstasy.

It seems more studies should be taken into whether the group of people who rave about drug abuse are actually under the influence of alcohol. Do people who rave but don’t take drugs potentially damage their brains for life compared to other groups who don’t rave at all? Maybe the ravers should be compared to boxers who also damage their brains. What might be found from all these studies is that every human activity has a risk and everyone weighs up whether it is worthwhile doing for the benefits or pleasure it gives them, be it jumping on a trampoline to smoking.

What is interesting is that when asked if Ecstasy was dangerous the scientists said that it still was. But for totally different reasons to the effects of the drug. J Halpern says

“Ecstasy consumption is dangerous: illegally-made pills can contain harmful contaminants, there are no warning labels, there is no medical supervision, and in rare cases people are physically harmed and even die from overdosing.

“It is important for drug-abuse information to be accurate, and we hope our report will help upgrade public health messages. But while we found no ominous, concerning risks to cognitive performance, that is quite different from concluding that ecstasy use is ‘risk-free’.”

What this is basically saying is that if the drugs could be guaranteed to be free of contaminants and other shit then fewer people would die from the effects of the bad stuff and from overdosing because of the unknown quality of the drugs.

Maybe what is needed is some form of labelling of drugs with some EU style coding numbers to show the purity of MDMA and its place of manufacture. Surprisingly for authoritarians who like to regulate everything and anything they haven’t touched this aspect of life.

[1] Ecstasy –noun, 1. Rapturous delight; 2. an overpowering emotion or exaltation; a state of sudden, intense feeling; 3. the frenzy of poetic inspiration.

[2] Halpern, J. H., Sherwood, A. R., Hudson, J. I., Gruber, S., Kozin, D. and Pope Jr, H. G. , Residual neurocognitive features of long-term ecstasy users with minimal exposure to other drugs. Addiction, no. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03252.x

SBML

Roue le Jour
February 19, 2011 at 04:06

All such surveys are highly suspect because drug users are a self-selected
group. All you can ever know is, how does this drug affect someone who has
tried it, likes it, and continues to use it?

Information about how drugs affect people not inclined to use them is much
harder to come by because of the legal and moral implications, of, say, making
a hundred test subjects heroin addicts just to see what happens.

Old Slaughter
February 19, 2011 at 00:30

I highly recommend MDMA.

I ask this question seriously, how many people have to do something before
they should expect the benefits of consumer protection?

backwoodsman
February 18, 2011 at 13:20

A totally unscientific observation – a friend using my spare room did the
rave /e thing for a few months. On arriving home on the Sunday, they were
great company and as happy as larry. Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday, however,
they were completely zonked out ! This was a recognisable pattern each
week.

Jeremy Poynton
February 18, 2011 at 10:14

I have been fortunate to have access to very pure MDMA in California. As a
therapeutic tool, this medicine has the most extraordinary powers, as it
enables sufferers from trauma to revisit that traume and come to grips with it
without fear and pain. For those not traumatised, it can also release profound
emotions and awareness about one’s self that can move and heal.

It’s also bloody fantastic to go dancing on, and to be with a loved one on.

Yrs, truly, the 60 years old hippy….

woodsy42 February 18, 2011 at 09:51

Every single activity carries a risk. Every time authority meddles,
especially with prohibitions ‘for people’s own good’, they make the risk
worse, by attracting criminality, and harder to assess, by progandising the
real facts, for the person carrying out the activity.

JuliaM February
18, 2011 at 10:19

What woodsy42 said..

Tacitus February 18, 2011 at 08:30

Caution here please. Over the years they have had us belive cigarettes and
cocaine are harmless too.

I am not saying ecstasy is the dreaded evil some would suggest, but I would
argue it is not a smartie either. If you use a drug, you take risks – so be
prepared there may be consequences.