New study finds no cognitive impairment among ecstasy users

[Keaton]

This article is a step down the road to some accurate information about Ecstasy being in the public domain rather than urban myths. At least the truth is out there if people look hard enough.

It's going to be difficult for people to accept the truth after so long believing bullshit tho. I brought this up on the Ecstasy discussion board and the moderator closed the thread because:

I don't care what the article says tbph.
Damage from using MDMA is real and anyone that has anything else to say about it can shut up.

You can go ahead and tell em it was me dude.


It was a fun read.
The point I was trying to get through your head is that it people will misinterpret this article and think its ok to go out and eat shit tons of MDMA and that nothing will happen to them. That's why your thread was closed. Quit fucking whining about it.

 

[Ismene]

people will misinterpret this article and think its ok to go out and eat shit tons of MDMA and that nothing will happen to them.

I don't think anyone will "misinterpret" the article and then go and eat "shit-tons" of E. I think they'll read it and then make up their minds for themselves.

Harm reduction depends on knowing the truth about the drugs we're taking. The biggest scientific study ever done into Ecstasy carries a little more weight than your two-bit opinion.

BTW, please don't pollute this thread anymore - you've made it plain you don't care what the study says and don't even have to read it to know it's wrong. That's fine. Now just leave it at that and let the rest of us make up our own minds.

 

[edgarshade]

NHS report of the research.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/02February/Pages/ecstasy-brain-damage-research.aspx

Conclusion

This well-conducted research attempted to eliminate the influence of factors that could have affected earlier research into the effects of ecstasy on the brain. The study assessed ecstasy use in people who did not use any other drugs and compared them to individuals who did not take ecstasy but regularly went out dancing all night.

 

[3rd_I_blind]

Perhaps you should also have quoted:

This study looked at cognitive function using various tests, but did not look at brain structures (such as by using brain scans). As this study was not designed to detect brain damage and did not follow people over time, any differences it might have found in brain function could not have been confirmed as permanent or temporary.

and

This study has highlighted the importance of the confounding factors involved in this type of drug research, but has not fully resolved whether ecstasy impairs brain function.

both from the same NHS report.

This part

This was a cross-sectional study, which means that the assessment of cognitive function was made at one point in time. It is not possible to say from these results whether ecstasy use would affect the brain over time.

also adds extra nuance to the whole discussion.

 

[Budisti]

This must mean pure MDMA, some of the E-pills are filled with massive amounts of shite, and I wouldnt be suprised if they cause some damage.

 

[edgarshade]

Perhaps you should also have quoted:

and

both from the same NHS report.

This part

also adds extra nuance to the whole discussion.

Reading it as a whole I got the impression that the study openly acknowledged it's limitations and this review was sort of acknowledging that they acknowledged it's limitations.

 

[3rd_I_blind]

Reading it as a whole I got the impression that the study openly acknowledged it's limitations and this review was sort of acknowledging that they acknowledged it's limitations.

Did you also read the original study? (Just curious, that's all.) They acknowledged a few of the limitations, but not all. Must say it isn't really common to - for instance - name the limitations of a cross-sectional approach. But they could i.e. should have named more limitations than they actually did.

It just worries me that people are quoting this study as if it is the final proof that MDMA can safely be used, without ever having read past the title or abstract. It's just wishful thinking, and though it looks like my attempts to convince people otherwise are in vain, I keep trying.

 

[7zark7]

Did you also read the original study? (Just curious, that's all.) They acknowledged a few of the limitations, but not all. Must say it isn't really common to - for instance - name the limitations of a cross-sectional approach. But they could i.e. should have named more limitations than they actually did.

It just worries me that people are quoting this study as if it is the final proof that MDMA can safely be used, without ever having read past the title or abstract. It's just wishful thinking, and though it looks like my attempts to convince people otherwise are in vain, I keep trying.

I haven't read the whole study, but I don't get the impression that people will use it as proof that MDMA is "safe". I just think it's the first step in dispelling the some of the myths surrounding MDMA use - possibly to help rebuild the drug's reputation so it can be used more often as a helpful psychological tool.

 

[pofacedhoe]

it doesn't make you stupid but it can exacerbate and induce depression/anxiety/sleep problems, which over time often resolve but if you do it too often they will always be hanging around you as long as you are often consuming mdma

 

[slimvictor]

(reviving old thread due to recent re-posting and continual apparent interest and lots left unsaid)

What I find most interesting is that people are saying that they don't care what they study says; they believe what they believe.
That is what people here are saying, and that is what the general public says.
Now, the people saying that here (both in DiTM and in Ecstasy Discussion) are likely basing their opinions on personal experience, which is laudable, and the general public is likely not, which is ridiculous.
However, I doubt that the people here saying that they don't trust the study did a careful comparison.
Did you account for sleep and liquid deprivation, which have been shown to cause cognitive decline?
How about the shit put in "ecstasy" pills in addition to MDMA?
Hard to know...
But the researchers with the $1.8 million dollars to spend tried to do such things.
Admittedly, the didn't do brain scans, or address everything (which is not possible in one study).
But I think that we should all at least be open to what they are saying, despite personal experience/previous brainwashing.

 

[jamaica0535]

Anyone else find it ironic the biggest dangers of MDMA are a direct result of its illegality?

I could name a laundry list of compounds this applies to.

Atropa/Datura/Brugsmania are not illegal, but they are scary sorts of dangerous. Far more dangerous than pot or opium. Probably more dangerous than Ibogaine which kills 1 out of 300 people people.

Alcohol and tobacco are a profitable form of population control because they will kill people in numbers that make any example of genocide in the history of man pale in comparison.


I know far more people that have died or destroyed their life by becoming addicts of prescription opiates and benzos. I know a pretty good chunk of people who got into methamphetamine and stopped before it wrecked their lives. Most of my highschool classmates that did oxycodone (and there were lots of them) went on to being long term addicts to it.

Alcohol kills 100 times as many people as all of the illegal drugs, tylenol kills more than 3000 people a year. But when a litteral handful of people die per year worldwide they make it look like your eating rat poison.