New Scientist article. MDMA Research.

[malakaix]

Perhaps you ought to have read the article with better care; you would have seen that the people being tested started using MDMA back in the early 80s when the pills were pure MDMA. The people sampled were middle-aged, early adopters of MDMA.

It may of been tested on people from the early 80's.. but it still says 'Recent Research' suggests most ecstasy pills on the market contain MDMA as their only active ingredient.

Keyword - "Recent"

This may of just been poorly written, but for anyone reading it.. it would be interpreted as pill's on the current market only contain MDMA.. which is far from the truth.. they should of stated "Recent Research' suggests most ecstasy pills from the early 80's contained MDMA as their only active ingredient.

 

[anarquista420]

check out ABCs 'ecstasy rising' w/ Peter Jennings; The most interesting piece of media that i have seen on ecstasy. This was a great article, new scientist usually has really good stuff, they did an article on psilocybin a couple of years back that was really good. The bullet points at the end were pretty off though.

 

[topgunner19]

I read the entire article and found this almost at the very end..........


# Recent research suggests that most ecstasy pills on the market contain MDMA as their only active ingredient. Toxic impurities are often said to be common, but there is very little evidence that this is the case.


Somehow that statement makes the rest of the document look like its probably not worth the paper its not even written on.

If they managed to determine that the number of impure pills is insignificant then you cannot possibly believe a single thing written in the rest of it.

wow, you are bang on,, what a bunch of RE tards!!! why is there pill reports?? tell them to view all the crap online, most pills are junk,,,, and mdma tabs are in the minority for sure nowadays

 

[FiveBucksFool]

UK Advisory Council Calls for Reclassification of MDMA

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126954.500-ecstasys-legacy-so-far-so-good.html

http://drugs.homeoffice.gov.uk/publication-search/acmd/mdma-report?view=Binary

"Ecstasy's long-term effects revealed


THEY called it the second summer of love. Twenty years ago, young people all over the world donned T-shirts emblazoned with smiley faces and danced all night, fuelled by a molecule called MDMA. Most of these clubbers have since given up ecstasy and are sliding into middle age. The question is, has ecstasy given up on them?

Enough time has finally elapsed to start asking if ecstasy damages health in the long term. According to the biggest review ever undertaken, it causes slight memory difficulties and mild depression, but these rarely translate into problems in the real world. While smaller studies show that some individuals have bigger problems, including weakened immunity and larger memory deficits, so far, for most people, ecstasy seems to be nowhere near as harmful over time as you may have been led to believe.

The review was carried out by the UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), an independent body that advises the UK government on drug policy. Its headline recommendation is that, based on its harmfulness to individuals and society, MDMA should be downgraded from a class A drug - on a par with heroin and cocaine - to class B, alongside cannabis.

Nobody is arguing that taking ecstasy is risk-free: its short-term effects are fairly uncontroversial. MDMA is toxic, though not powerfully so - an average person would need to take around 20 or 30 tablets to reach a lethal dose. And for a small fraction of people, even small amounts of ecstasy can kill. For example, around half a million people take ecstasy every year in England and Wales, and 30 die from the acute effects, mostly overheating or water intoxication..."

TL;DR: UK Council calls for reclassifying MDMA to the same level as cannabis (B).

 

[Brody]

isn't this from a documentary called attack of the happy people?

 

[muntedmunter]

Parrot also calls ecstasy a "gateway" drug. "Former users are often heavy users of alcohol, tobacco and cannabis. When you move off ecstasy, you look for other drugs. Ecstasy use leads to other, more problematic drugs."

I don't agree with his statement about it being a gateway drug.

Any drug could be a gateway drug whether it be alcohol, nicotine, MJ etc.

If you tried xtc then went onto heroin I am sure that's your own stupid decision, but it is definitely not a gate way drug.

Otherwise, good article, thanks!

Edit -

A single ecstasy tablet used to cost £15. Now they cost just £2.30.

Wish they were that much over here in OZ, 25 bux is too much!

 

[universedweller]

In my view, the article has merit. I do not believe that this drug is benign, but I don't believe that it is as detrimental as some previous research has shown. There has been a potential for iatrogenic effect on peoples performance in memory tests ... in general, if you believe you will fail, then you probably will.

The mind is a powerful thing ... the potential healing or destruction cannot be underestimated. We have all heard stories of a person dying shortly after the passing of their spouse, even though they were in fair health. Was this not the mind giving up on the body?

Our brains and minds are all different, there is no uniformity in what constitutes a pill of ecstasy, and people take various quantities of the drug under various circumstances for differing periods of time. There is surely a wide range of long term effects given the number of variables.

IMO the average long term affect as indicated by the article is in the mild category. There will always be extreme cases ... just what the sensational and obsessive media relishes.

 

[DJ 303]

what a great post - i read the lot twice.
a lot of it confirms things i suspected/knew,
confirms uncertainty in itself,
it is an intelligent, well balanced case study, though lacking in fiber in some places, simply due to a lack of data or evidence.
the fact that this substance has remained a class a for so long, means that the one thing these researchers need, human living specimens, are few and far between. those users who are pushed underground into the black market due to stringent and frankly nonsensical legislation (ie 99.9) are hardly going to be inspired to offer themselves for case study without social acceptance as a prerequisite.
i think flaming/dismissing this article therefore, is for the uneducated, uninformed, and unhelpful, frankly. im sorry if that sounds harsh. it is important to treat all media with skepticism i agree, but don't post if A) you clearly didn't read the article B) you clearly didn't understand the article C) you persistently misquote the article or D) are not speaking from fact or logical reasoning based on solid evidence or sufficiently valid subjective experience.
I feel no need to point any fingers - because its evident who the culprits are.
we should be adding to these case studies, and helping the government to head in what is clearly a more intelligent direction. - harm reduction.

forgive me if im wrong but isn't harm reduction the point of bluelight?

If you feel some information is wrong or lacking - then constructively create an informed and well founded argument, or inform those who are misinformed - especially if its clearly for the greater good.

i apologise for the length of the post but i feel agitated when faced with persistent ignorance.

failure to back up your argument, or even make any point whatsoever is destructive not constructive, and frankly highlights your own idiocy

fucking top notch quality thread here xgal.

a valuable asset to the community you are.
and respect to you and all those who strive to keep bluelight what it is.

peace

DJ

p.s before the flaming begins, please try to understand that at least my intentions are not
malicious - even if my social skills are poor.

 

[KidA]

Agreed. Also, sometimes I get the impression the Etards weren't so smart to begin with.

I'll agree with that statement