• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

Outside of no physical addiction, is MDMA one of the most dangerous drugs?

T

thatdreamer123

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
127
I consume MDMA probably 3 or 4 times a year maximum. While I make it a somewhat regular habit to drink and smoke marijuana usually at least once a weekend. Not that I enjoy it more, but it has it's place and most importantly, socially acceptable.

I constantly hear people tour how MDMA is one of the least dangerous drugs and much less harmful than alcohol and possibly on par with marijuana when reviewed closely.

While I understand that it does not "put holes in your brain" or anything similarly mythical, I understand that it should be used only once every couple months to be safe.

I cannot think of any other drug (remember this is ignoring any sort of addictive factors), that SHOULD NEVER be used more than once every 2 or 3 months. Even of the much harder drugs.

I hear all sorts of people, even on here saying how they think they have permanent brain damage from frequent use and all sorts of problems.

Why is there such conflicting opinions on this? Usually with drugs, the well informed usually agree on these sorts of things one way or the other, whereas views of how harmful MDMA is vary greatly and it is always somewhat unclear to me how harmful it really is. Always this sort of on the fence "we know it's a neurotoxins but not to what extent".

Links to reliable sources on this would also be much appreciated, I've read what is on erowid but it once again is very unclear, and the "your brain on ecstasy" dancesafe slide show is like another language to me.

Thanks
 
It has potential to be very damaging but that's why the central message is to simplify it down to moderation.
Lots of things can be bad for you in excess. That doesn't necessarily mean that taken properly it will cause any lasting damage.

Ultimately it's an experiment and the freedom of choice plays a big part depending on the personality type. If you can sensibly look up the facts that have been acquired so far, since it's a drug that is still being researched after all, then you can decide what you want to do with your life. I'd imagine for some people it's worth the risk and that it's part of what life's about. Others may be too scared, even if they have read as much as possible on it they just don't feel comfortable taking it. Then there are others who may be self destructive, still know the facts, and choose to abuse it any way.
That's why I think personality plays a big part on if it's the most dangerous drug. It may be for some people. For others it could be a one time life experience. If you take the moderation route over the abusive route the consensus so far would seem that you aren't doing anything too terrible to your body and as long as you treat it(your body) right during and after the experience the possibility of it being dangerous is less important because you're consuming it as safe as possible.

I'm sure the scale balances out somewhere and somehow, I believe it was Ken Kesey who said something along the lines of that you can't entirely gain something without losing or sacrificing something somewhere else.

I think the alcohol comparison comes from an experiment of toxicity of one session at proper dosages. For example, it's not healthier to take MDMA on the weekends than it is to drink on the weekends. But one alcohol session can be more taxing on the body than one MDMA session. You brought it up and I do recall reading it. I'll have to hunt down a link about it.

Sorry that the answer is there is no answer. It's a gamble that is up to you to take. One of the cool things about life. Even if "they" try to make it harder for us and at times cause more harm than good from not allowing people to possess such chemicals.
 
Basically what I'm getting at is, people will inevitably consume substances recreationally on a somewhat regular basis.

And it's this sort of drinking/smoking on the weekends, that a LOT of people do, and end up just fine. But if you took MDMA on the weekends, you'd end up in pretty bad shape pretty quickly I'd imagine. Much worse shape than dosing ay other drug once a weekend. Which leads me to believe it is a very dangerous drug.

You bring up taking it once in your lifetime. I'm a firm believer that you can take ANY drug just once in your lifetime, probably a handful of times and be just fine (unless you get addicted of course). But it seems MDMA requires the largest spaces between doses.
 
MDA and 6-APB probably require slightly larger dose-spacing than MDMA does. Personally, I think you'd need to take a few more things into account to decide how "dangerous" a drug is. What do you think about Bromo-DragonFLY?
 
thatdreamer123 said:
You bring up taking it once in your lifetime. I'm a firm believer that you can take ANY drug just once in your lifetime, probably a handful of times and be just fine (unless you get addicted of course). But it seems MDMA requires the largest spaces between doses.
Click to expand...

Right right. So does that one time make it a dangerous experience? As long as you do it correctly, I'd think not.
If abused it can escalate to damaging measures quickly. People will drink on the weekends to excess and that too will escalate into damages after long term use.
It comes down to the individual. Can they handle taking it as safely as possible, thus making it not a dangerous experience? The reason things can get damaging so quickly if you constantly do it is because of how much strain it's putting your body and mind through. So it does indeed have potential to be dangerous depending on what the person is going to do with it. MDMA in itself is an inanimate object that isn't dangerous to be around or look at, completely harmless on it's own. If someone starts shoveling it down their throat weekly, they're in trouble. It's all about what you do with it. It can be safe or it can tear your psyche to shreds overtime if not respected.
If people will inevitably consume substances recreationally on a somewhat regular basis than they should rotate their party favor usage I suppose.
 
food is becoming pretty damn dangerous these days, have you looked around and seen how many morbidly obese people their are? have you switched on commercial tv and seen how many fucked-up weight loss/reality programs or on?

id be happy to drop mdma a few times a year than to eat micky dees, kfc, or burger king for breakfast, lunch and dinner..

dickheads always whinge about how much strain 'druggos' put on the health system, well fuck id argue fat people are just as bad, who draws the line, and where..

critically analyse :)
 
laugh said:
food is becoming pretty damn dangerous these days, have you looked around and seen how many morbidly obese people their are? have you switched on commercial tv and seen how many fucked-up weight loss/reality programs or on?

id be happy to drop mdma a few times a year than to eat micky dees, kfc, or burger king for breakfast, lunch and dinner..

dickheads always whinge about how much strain 'druggos' put on the health system, well fuck id argue fat people are just as bad, who draws the line, and where..

critically analyse :)
Click to expand...

Over eating seems to be a gluttonous addiction akin to drug consumption. I'm over weight probably due to shitty eating schedules that have been lowering my metabolism. For example, today I didn't eat anything. I drank lots of water and took vitamins. I just didn't feel like eating. It feels like an achievement to not give into food when you're overweight. But I know in the long run it's making weight loss trickier. People try to tell me it's genetic, but I don't know. I really believe it has to do with my on-off eating habits. But hey, when I do eat, it's not binging out on MacDonalds or that stuff. I don't know what they inject into that, the stuff makes me feel like crap afterwards. Worse than an MDMA comedown. All comparisons about food consumption being equally unhealthy as poor moderated drug usage aside- those fast food chains really seem to have something off about then. A specific taste, very artificial. And I never feel like crap after eating a homemade sandwich. I'm convinced Mcdonald's has some sort of chemical of their own creation in it.
My friends & I refer to it as McDroogz due to that vibe some of us get from it. I'll touch the stuff 1 or twice a year, but only when really in a bind and cornered, not by direct choice. I space out my Micky-D experiences farther apart than I would my MDMA experiences, lol.

Gluttonous substances; be it food, materials, and drugs and how the individual handles the existence of such things is what defines the dangers of it.
It's a good point to bring up, laugh, and ask people that too. Can't a sandwich be psychoactive, even if only very slightly? Just think, you're craving a sandwich for whatever reason and it's all you can think about. You chase it down, eat it and suddenly you're satisfied and soon after you're onto thinking of other things. Isn't that strikingly similar to a mind altering substance? Like they say "drugs" are. It's different, but is it?
"Where DO you draw the line." is absolutely correct as far as valid questions to ask go. There's no harm in asking, but to break it down may be a bit confusing. Or I just view things and putting stuff into our body differently from most.

Being aware of a drugs toxicity is important. Being aware of the nutritional benefits or dangers of food is important. Everyone deserves the information. And everyone deserves to choose what they would like to do in their lives. It is not entirely the drug that is potentially dangerous, it's the person with it and their attitude towards consuming it. I'd hope they'd try to moderate their intake, you know? To ensure a longer life of partying in moderation.:)
But if they chose not to, then it would be dangerous.
 
I think it certainly is one of the most dangerous, WHEN it falls into the wrong hands. All the misinformation out there is a huge contributor to its destructive potential. The portrayal of MDMA is always black or white - it is either a poison (media view) or completely harmless (the naive etard view). Until people realize there is a middle ground, MDMA is gonna continue causing problems for people.

I think positives should far outweigh negatives as long as the drug is respected. But how many MDMA users (bluelight members not included) really understand the importance of spacing out rolls for example?
 
Never ceases to amaze me how little respect for mdma and other drugs the young people around me have, they will double drop tablets they have never seen before and snort anything put in front of them along with drinking as much alcohol as they can afford most weekends. It surprises me that there aren't a lot more deaths.
 
Unfortunately, everyone's opinion of MDMA is based on what is sold on the street. Out of every illegal drug sold on the black market, MDMA is one of the worst with regard to fakes & impurities. It is therefore hard to determine just how dangerous unadulterated weekly consumption of MDMA really is. This is my opinion of why opinion is so varied amongst users. Further, the users who typically use it every week usually, and somewhat ironically, don't have the knowledge/education about the drug. Thus, they're not testing it & consuming random Ecstasy pills/powders weekly because their mate said it was 'Bangin MD' (Personal favourite expression :P). Its not surprising that these users then report negative adverse effects from regular use of random chemicals & even cocktails of different substances in some cases. These consequences are then attributed to MDMA because that is what the uneducated user believes they are always taking. I've yet to meet one roller at a rave who knew what a test kit was when I mentioned it. Further, so many tell me they've 'dropped a gram.' The point is, not many users actually know what they're doing.

Unfortunately, there are not enough clinically-controlled longitudinal studies examining regular MDMA use at standard recreational doses (100-200mg). If you've read one or seen one somewhere, please tell me. The research is always involving rats getting their brain fried on 5mg/kg doses every hour - not realistic to the responsible, casual users.

This is my personal opinion as to why the opinion of 'MDMA' is so wide-reaching & varied.
 
thatdreamer123 said:
I cannot think of any other drug (remember this is ignoring any sort of addictive factors), that SHOULD NEVER be used more than once every 2 or 3 months. Even of the much harder drugs.
Click to expand...

With MDMA, there is a difference between "optimal usage" and "danger". The 2 to 3 month dosage schedule people advise is so you can keep rolling *while maintaining the magic*, and not getting into as much of the low serotonin type issues that frequent MDMA use will cause.

You can frequently use MDMA, though, with relatively little chance of death.

Sure you may become emotionally numb and brain-fogged and get zaps and other sorts of brain function issues when you use it a lot. Even with this, from all I know, with an extended break (which could be a year or more for the heaviest users) you will return pretty close to normal function. (There is considerable debate on how "permanent" the neurotoxic nature of MDMA is, but at this point I'm of the opinion that people can indeed eventually recover.)

In contrast, many other drugs can kill you with heavy abuse.

So, um, I guess it depends on how you define "dangerous".
 
Unfortunately I missed the boat on spacing out rolls because with all the self-study I did on MDMA before I ever took it, no one ever explained the importance of turning the calendar a few times between highs. I did Molly off and on for over two years, sometimes going a month between highs, sometimes getting high four times a week. I would classify myself as being "the wrong hands" for a drug habit to fall into. As far as what I perceive to be the negative effects of my MDMA abuse, taking it in the same frequency as a "weekend drinker" can't be good. At the height of my MDMA use I was probably taking almost a gram at a time, but it didn't start that way (and the mental problems kicked in REAL soon after the dosage got to that point). I don't personally believe I got to DP/DR or anything close, but something just felt "off" in my head. Like, I couldn't even lay on my bed and think about stuff while looking at the ceiling. Imagine if your thoughts are a train, and your brain in the track, but there's a break in the track and the train can't move until the track is repaired. Not the greatest analogy, but I'm sure you can understand what I'm getting at. A lot of times it would feel like I was just going through the motions in my own life. Add to that the fact that I dropped out of school, lied about it to my family for three straight semesters by forging transcripts (don't recommend this at all, habitual lying is like doing drugs, just with over nine thousand times the guilt)... things got very depressing for me. For a while when I got drunk I'd have breakdowns and start crying over how I screwed up my own life so badly. But yeah, I did think that my brain got to a point that I couldn't come back from. I thought it would always be like that and felt genuinely sad that I'd done that to myself. I've been clean for almost six months and life is more-or-less back to normal, but that's with a lot of vitamins, a lot of working out and a lot of replacing drugs as a hobby with something else. I think the "brain won't get better" nonsense is just the subjective viewpoint of the addict.
 
I think as far as neurotoxicity goes, MDMA is probably one of the most harmful drugs. I mean feeling that euphoric and energetic comes with a price. But I think the fact that it isn't physically addictive is what makes it a lot easier to do recreationally and that makes a BIG difference. So yes, it probably is up there with the most harmful drugs, but since the risk of addiction is so low it won't do you as much harm in the long term as for example alcohol, heroin, coke, etc.
 
i think is safe unless your genetics are prone to interact with mdma metabolism in the wrong way...just like a lot of legal meds can do to you. The problem maybe is the fact that those meds are in doses that even in gives you a bad trip, is not so bad in the long term. With mdma we play with over 60mg dose...i think is unsafe cause is not legal, and is not a doctor or a specialist who guide you to take it (and to check you sensibilty with the drug before with a low dose!)
 
Most every list that I have seen puts alcohol as the most dangerous far above MDMA with regards to damage to ones self and damage cause to others attributed to the drug. there are many articles on this that are easily available on the internet.

They arn't the be all and end all but well thought out enough IMO to use as a guide as to the danger involved in the use of a particular substance.

here is a graph from prof. David Nutt. his name carries some weight in the pro-drug community so I would consider it pretty accurate...

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm
 
matt2012 said:
Most every list that I have seen puts alcohol as the most dangerous far above MDMA with regards to damage to ones self and damage cause to others attributed to the drug. there are many articles on this that are easily available on the internet.

They arn't the be all and end all but well thought out enough IMO to use as a guide as to the danger involved in the use of a particular substance.

here is a graph from prof. David Nutt. his name carries some weight in the pro-drug community so I would consider it pretty accurate...

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm
Click to expand...

I like that graph, at least it appreciates just how bad alcohol is in relation to other drugs. I'm still waiting to see one longitudinal study into human recreational use. A study that followed a recreational user consuming 1.5mg/kg weekly of professionally-produced laboratory MDMA for 6-12 months while controlling for all other substance use & maintaining a healthy lifestyle could help determine what risks are actually involved with 100% guaranteed MDMA-use & no poly drug consumption. Pre, during & post FMRI scans could determine what the real dangers of weekly MDMA use are, then the Government could report the real dangers - not that they would anyway.
 
Professor Nutt considered factors such as addiction, physical harm, and social harm. The harm to persons he considers was primarily death or physical injury. Something as nebulous as damage to neurons, synapses or whatever was not considered. On the other hand the ecstasy on the streets in the UK is of a much higher quality than that available in the US. Professor Nutt famously remarked that the risk of taking mdma was less than that of practicing a sport like horse riding.
As you can imagine that did not go down well in England.
 
I don't really like the Nutt, I find he takes his pro-drug bias too far


This is such a loaded question, really. The most damaging drug is the one you abuse the shit out of, they all have just as much potential to hurt as they do to make you feel good.





Drugs are not good, drugs are not bad. They're drugs. They do what they're supposed too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top