• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

MDMA is considered very safe in moderation

Pretty old list and there are definitely some flaws like having inhalants as rank 11. Still MDMA is very safe when used in moderation but I definitely feels some urges and addiction to the substance so I think that rank 18 is a little far fetched.
 
Augusta's post: Lots of misinformation here. He didn't have to resign his posts because his list was wrong, he resigned his post because because the government, who are politicians, not scientists of any sort, refused to acknowledge his list in any way. HE was the person appointed to scientifically analyze and quantify the harms caused to both individuals and society of this list of drugs, and rate them accordingly. Those in power completely ignored his recommendations, so he chose to leave the post since he realized it was meaningless. If you were assigned to a post to give advice about a topic you were an expert on, and then a bunch of politicians who know NOTHING about the topic told you that you were wrong and ignored you, would you want to keep that job? You should actually read the study, especially its methods and the way they measured their data before making such sweepings generalizations about it. If you don't know exactly what the graph is measuring and you assume the wrong thing, of course it will look wrong to you.

First Bad Comedown's post: Same thing. While much of what you said is true, much of it also has nothing to do with the way in which Mr. Nutt's research was conducted, all of which you can see if you read more of the paper. Additionally, several of your claims are purely speculation - especially "Realistically, 100-200 mg of MDMA taken twice per YEAR could be considered relatively safe.
But even this will produce detectable changes after a few years.", and "This truth has been well known on BL for many years...". I'd like to see the journal articles credited to "Bluelight, et al." before I take that as anything more than a soapbox rant.

TLDR: Nutt's report wasn't a "Which drugs have the most potential for causing permanent harm?" list. It was a "Based on how many people actually use this drug, and in what ways they use it, how much harm overall is done to individuals and society by that drug RIGHT NOW?" list. So most of what you are arguing against has nothing to do with what his paper actually stated. Basically, read his paper and methods or get off of his Nutts.
 
Last edited:
One big rule; Everyone is different. General rule for most people, that I've stuck to is no more than once a month. Anymore than that and you risk the drug not being beneficial. Some peopel can handle heaps more, or heaps less.

At the moment I wont use it more than once a month. But I'm finding myself using it once every two months. Yay! It's good to have long breaks.


A friend rolls like crazy. Sometimes he blows half a gram in one night. And can roll up to 3 days in the week. That's at the worst. He probably rolls once per week on average with 2x 130mg dose. This has been going on for about four months now. He doesn't seem to have any major negative effects, YET. (according to him) Apart from bad comedowns and hallucinations during comedown.

I'm sure if I personally did that I would be in a lot of trouble.

And it also depends how long you keep using mdma.. I'd say you wouldn't want to use it for too long, and have year+ breaks at times.
 
Top