Bad press and/or innaccurate reportage continues to demonise ecstacy in the public eye with busts typically referring to the siezed pills as being 'ecstacy' despite the truth on the streets. Sourcing strong, clean pills in Oz these days is more miss than hit as any roller will tell you and as confirmed daily on pillreports. Bust details never include lab tests confirming the pills' actual ingredients, otherwise folk would be hearing about the piperazines and other potentially lethal adulterants being palmed off as ecstacy. It is indeed tragic that people are hospitalised or worse killed by what they have taken, but anecdotal evidence suggests even large doses of pure MDMA won't shut a person down as the media (advised by 'experts') would have everyone believe. Logically, if it wasn't MDMA that did it then people should have a right to know what did. So my question is, what harm would telling people the whole truth do? Wouldn't that be real harm minimalisation? Sure, talk about the thousands of pills (sold as ecstacy) seized in busts... describe/show these pills, but why not inform the public truthfuly about some of the truly noxious chemical concoctions being taken off the streets? It's a crying shame some journo hasn't brought the fun police and detractors to heel with a few home truths about ecstacy as the peacemaker that it is rather than towing the establishment line that all drugs are just plain bad.
