Renz - you are correct about METH users experiencing greater deficits than typical MDMA users.
That is the real finding of research...
Meth is highly HIGHLY addictive and months/years of use taxes the resilient dopamine system to its limits.
Just as with MDMA, redosing is the primary cause of damage - and few drugs are redosed and abused as much as METH.
And you have recent experience with this!
Meth is more destructive because it is more addictive.
But dose for dose, MDMA is FAR more neurotoxic.
If meth could be used in reliably controlled doses, absent lack of sleep and food, it would likely produce little neurotoxicity.
But that is simply against reality, not the way it really works.
Its like asking a crackhead to take just one hit.
I am familiar with MDMA users like yourself who
just don't get it.
They refer to their pattern of use and seeming lack of suffering.
They draw conclusions based on their own personal experience and that of their peers (don't we all).
And they somehow conclude that people like myself, somedud, altered perception, bben, catinthehat4, and now jason1981 - that we are all
creating the problem in ourselves.
Considering that high or repeated doses causes
reliable toxicity in primates, why is it so hard to believe that a minority of human users will experience crippling anxiety and depression that exists
outside of their control?
What does it do for you, to believe that we are
choosing to suffer?
That is the question I have asked time and again on this forum, especially earlier in my own recovery.
I cannot STAND people who point to every single conclusion other than
nerve damage from a neurotoxin.
It is choosing to ignore the most OBVIOUS answer!
Once again, I will concede that personal attitude, environment, and discipline do
play a role.
But the type of frontal lobe axonal destruction that is
probably occurring must be recognized as the PRIMARY cause.
Or else BL is just full of drug-using college kids who think they are invincible.
Typical...
BDNF is not just released during exercise.
It is an
activity-related protein.
That means an active lifestyle, both physical and mental, causes a release of this serotonin sprouting serum.
And serotonin releasers like MDMA are arguably taking advantage of
years of activity-related BDNF.
The serotonin in your higher brain represents the wiring that occurred when your brain was developing as a fetus and throughout childhood.
So when you begin using MDMA in your teens and early twenties, you have all that stored up serotonin potential.
Potential that is simply taken for granted in the young. They just assume that the brain is
designed to experience drugs.
When this is clearly not the case.
Yes, it is resilient and can withstand a lot of abuse.
But it is designed to experience life. Not get high for years in a row.
If using serotonin releasers is taking advantage of years of BDNF, then the destruction of serotonin axons and terminals might cause the brain to enter a heightened state of activity. Make sense?
In an attempt to restore itself, the brain causes a state of hyper-vigilance, anxiety...psychosis.
Why should we assume that the brain is making a mistake?
What gives us the ability to say - "Calm down. You are making it worse."
Should we not conclude that the brain is doing what it is
supposed to?
This is one argument against treatment of schizophrenia, a psychotic disorder that shares many symptoms with MDMA toxicity.
It is known that very early intervention in schizophrenia is the ONLY way to 'cure' the disorder.
Anti-psychotics blockade dopamine receptors, shutting off the cascade of events that occurs.
And in a minority of sufferers, this causes a lasting remission of symptoms.
But in general only about 20% of schizophrenics achieve life-long remission, possibly due to failure of early detection.
ECT, when administered in the first year, causes an 80% success rate in life-long remission.
Although about a third of patients suffer ongoing memory problems.
It is agreed to be a disease without cure by most doctors, which is a sad state of affairs for a disorder that effects a whopping 1% of our population!
Yet some scientists point to older data that suggests about 60% of patients will achieve remission ON THEIR OWN.
What?
How could that be?
Powerful anti-psychotic drugs.
It may well be that treating schizophrenia with dopamine blockers SHUTS OFF a critical process in the brain.
This disorder has a mild genetic component - about 10% higher risk for those with immediate family members suffering from it.
Some scientists have suggested that ALL humans carry the genetic potential for this disorder within the wiring of the brain.
In our genetic code there exists several 'retro-viruses' that were integrated into the nervous systems of our ancestors - not just primates but for billions of years. They are a critical part of our DNA, too.
But many of these are entirely dormant - simply another part of the code.
Activation of this viral DNA is a newly suspected cause of schizophrenia.
And even newer data shows that treatment with anti-psychotic drugs
increases the activation of several 'HERVS'.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0030054
Although the most common class of HERVs observed in schizophrenia is not in this group, this data suggests that the very drugs that BLOCK psychosis make the progression of the disease WORSE.
And this is on top of older data that shows a trend towards remission
without modern medicine.
Doctors are beginning to suspect that preventing the psychosis itself contributes to the 'life-long' nature of the disease.
I.E. the brain
knows what it is doing.
Anxiety and psychotic behavior may be a
critical component to recovery.
And the belief that people should just 'calm down' or that they are just
making it worse is a dangerous assumption.
We are only beginning to understand the brain - yet the presence of so much research and a technical language to accompany it leaves the FALSE impression that we really get it. That science is somehow in command.
Commence laughter.
To digitally represent every neuron in ONE human brain would require a storage capacity that exceeds the ENTIRE digital content
of the world.
Science is only beginning to understand.
The mind is a deep ocean, a new frontier.
And understanding it is a long-term goal, very long.
It should be conceded that even if the brain 'knows what it is doing' - that damage is still occurring.
Neurons die. Ventricles enlarge. Glial cells activate and rewire.
Yet our understanding is so basic that to interfere in this process may only produce more 'brain damage'.
This is often the case with Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors.
HPA axis dysfunction is WORSE in half of patients upon withdrawal!
There is plenty of clinical evidence, backed by pages of impressive technical terms, that shows a deficiency in serotonin transmission is a central cause of depression. And we have spent billions of dollars on engineering molecules that shove serotonin into the higher brain.
And they WORK - marvelously.
Until withdrawn.
So we have medications that have powerful impacts upon brain function in people with severe depression or psychosis.
Yet both SSRIs and anti-psychotics are linked to
worse-outcomes when compared to those not treated with medications.
Yes - some people do indeed benefit from the changes these drugs make.
But only 20% of schizophrenics will 'recover' with medical intervention and only 30% of
severely depressed patients will maintain results after withdrawal.
All that is known about these drugs is that taking them causes a temporary change in brain function and a visible improvement in patient behavior.
But they do NOT substitute for the
re-wiring that the brain itself is capable of.
Perhaps one day we will learn to aid the brain in its own recovery process.
That is why I recommend exercise so often.
With ALL types of brain injury, from stroke to gunshots to TBI - physical therapy is given daily for HOURS in a row.
It is forced upon the patient, because there is solid data showing that physical activity causes a better long-term prognosis.
The body serves to heal the mind.
So my opinion is clear.
Anxiety is meant to happen.
It serves a function - one dismissed too easily by doctors and drug-users alike.
Even recovered MDMA users that have been there before often make statements like Somedud.
And that is perhaps the greatest indication of hope.
Somehow the brain is capable of telling itself - "I was just making it worse on myself."
Its not brain damage at all.
I can't tell you how many posts I have read from former suffers that made such statements!
In the end we are gifted with a unique ability to remain positive, to deny the negative.
To fool ourselves for our own benefit.
What a miracle the brain is.
Only after a long period of intense suffering and anxiety can Somedud make such statements.
I assure you, he was not capable of this in recent months. For a year and a half he has bravely endured a constantly changing brain structure.
And now, before it is even finished, he is concluding that it wasn't as bad as he originally thought!
He points to his friends that showed no psychosis, to the trend of MDMA users around the world being repeated dosers without major consequence.
He even omits a critical fact from his own history of use.
You have done this time and again, my friend.
I remember an email you sent long ago in which you admitted a period of
heavy use more than a year prior to the pills you now count.
I have repeatedly reminded you of this fact, yet you still focus on the limited doses you took just prior to your meltdown.
That is positive thinking.
And my pointing it out is not meant disrespectfully.
I am very pleased to see you making such statements.
I have been very concerned for you lately, in part because you did not respond to my last message.
Let me know if you reconsider about the voice chat.
I can't help but oppose some of your conclusions, but I have to admit they are good signs for you.
Here is another...
Research CLEARLY shows mild cognitive deficits among heavier users, even after years of abstinence.
That invalidates some of your certainty about the lack of neurotoxicity among most users.
The scientific data suggests that a measure of toxicity is occurring to ALL users.
The 'sides' are
more than apparent to researchers.
Yet they are tolerable and do not usually involve psychosis in most users.
But 'toxicity' still occurs.
And with enough doses MOST humans would fall victim to 'brain damage'.
One day we will have more longitudinal data on MDMA users.
And I strongly suspect that modest cognitive and emotional deficits will be teased out, and perhaps an increased risk of Alzheimer's or other forms of age-related cognitive decline. We shall see...
Until then I continue my tirade against MDMA and its glorified status on this worldwide stage.
And I will support the notion that recovery occurs on a protracted schedule.
Good luck to the OP, Somedud, Renz, Folley....and all my readers.
FBC