RE: ONe drug you should NEVER NEVER Do.

[Jase]

RE: ONe drug you should NEVER NEVER Do.

Your professor has a good point. The longer term effects of Ecstasy are still a bit murky.
Heroin/Crack/Crystal/Speed etc. may burn you out, you may overdose, you might be sectioned after a bout of Ampetamine Psychosis. But you can overcome all of that.
If there are any serious longer term effects from using ecstasy we will find out in time. Unfortunately if this turns out to be true, its too late for most of us...
Jase..

 

[XMonsooNX]

WOW I feel better HEHE. You sound like the media MAN. We gotta keep faith!! I still make myself believe that maybe there is something good about ecstasy, besides the feeling that you get, maybe it does something good for you body, who knows! It is obvious to me though that it has opened my mind up (I feel much more knowledgable now). LET ME BELIEVE THAT PLEEZE HEHE!
------------------
"Create Your Own Ecstasy"

 

[pegasus-]

The kind of frightening thing is that it takes a very long time in order to see the longterm negative effects of any pharmaceutical. Perhaps some of the promoters that are running into alot of flack form the gov't (Toronto) should be donating a portion of their earnings from these huge raves (just from one or two) to research. I don't know about the rest of you but I can honestly say that there are 10's of thousands of people rolling in Ontario each weekend.

 

[Helski]

Jase
I am disappointed at your post it demonstrates a lack of reasearch.
Haven't you researched the absolute affects of crack!!!! (Beyond question).
Even cocaine prducued in Columbia often has Benzene in it due to the USAs ban on certain ingredients into Columbia. Benzene as we KNOW causes cancer after only a few expsoures.
Speed and heroin are ok. Heroin in partyiocular is an incredibly non toxic and safe as bloody houses rug..HOWEVER .. I would suggest someone take E over it any day as heroin is, given a certain disposition, far more addictive. AND more importantly in our society taking heroin can and does lead to stealing andother criminal activity (the fault of black market) soooo I would advise against its use. Highly addictive, expensive and you can't get it legitimatley. Forget the long term affects!!!
As with many drugs the positives are not discovered till later either. Such as with alcohol and the 'one glass a day' campaign.
In addition, many liccit substances have not been tested as much as ecstacy and state on info. pamphlets that no one knows how they work or the long term affects. It's just that if you are taking it to get rid of a cold it is an acceptable risk. We should be asking the same questions and being just as concerned about Prozac, Anti-hystamins, Tylonal/ Panadol etc etc etce etc. Do we know about any of them? Not many. Drugs are being churned out at a reate of KNots. Most having been around a lot less time than E. What is the bet the answer comes up 'responsible use (and we ALL know what that is) is ok if not good while abuse has negative long term affetcs'.
I think a fair go is in order (aussie in me). Let's give E the same hearing and hurdles o jump we give everything else. Whay should it be held up for special treatment just because the politicians love to scare parents with it?

 

[pegasus-]

Helski,
In reply to your post....
"We should be asking the same questions and being just as concerned about Prozac, Anti-hystamins, Tylonal/ Panadol etc etc etce etc. Do we know about any of them? Not many. Drugs are being churned out at a reate of KNots."
In order for a drug to be FDA approved is has to go through vigourous testing ( not saying that this is perfect....thalidimide for example). These drugs each cost in the millions to research and develop and each one has taken about 10 years to be on the market. A drug goes thru 4 different stages of testing before it is released. The final trial being that of clinical trials where a select sample is chosen to test this drug. There are very strict protocols that are followed and so to say that we know "nothing" about prozac, anti histamines ect is ridiculous. If you really were curious you can look in ANY medical journal and find thousands of studies dealing with these particular pharmaceuticals. You could even ask any first year pharm student or if your really ambitious call the manufacturer and get the EXACT mechanism of action of each of the drugs or class (ie, antihistamines) mentioned. They will also tell you of any adverse side effects and who should or should not be taking that particular drug.
There is no info like this for MDMA. The studies that may have been done by Merck a VERY long time ago would in this day and age surely NOT be FDA approved. Even Caffiene if it were to attempt passing today would have a very difficult time. Nutrasweet would be removed from all shelves. The studies done for MDMA have been done basically in stages 2 and 3 NOT 4 so we have no substantial proof of the effects and MUCH more research needs to be done.

 

[Mr. Sticky]

Hey pegasus, ever notice how the FDA put a hold on thalidimide in the U.S. to see what the effects in Canada were, first? Most of the flipper babies in the world were born in Canada.
Ever piss you off that my country occasionally uses Canada as a testing ground? It sure pisses me off.
Hell, it pisses me off how mush of the northeastern U.S. air pollution is pushed into Canada by the prevailing wind currents. I believe that Buffalo, NY is one of the greatest polluters of Canada. Just makes you sick, doesn't it?
Screw the power of the almighty U.S. dollar!!!!
Sorry, just had to rant for a second...

 

[pegasus-]

Hey Mr. Sticky,
Yep Thalidimide is a veddy scary drug that is NOW being used with oncology patients to combat vomitting that is induced by chemotherapy. But actually it was Europe that first started showing signs of "flipper babies" I think.
Its interesting now that Canada has VERY strict regulations now regarding food and drugs. Perhaps it has alot to do with that tragedy. I do believe that now the US FDA is alot less strict than Canada's, also Canada has set about laws that severly limit the development of new drugs by companies in Canada. And that hurts us a bit financially.
I live about 30 min from Buffalo and its a HOLE!!!

my two cents

 

[Mr. Sticky]

That's one of the benefits/detriments (depends on your viewpoint) of socialized medicine: 'let's keep a close eye on any new drug.'
I totally agree with you on the comparison between the US and Canada on drug availability. In the U.S, you don't need to do any drug testing beyond 8 weeks. Anything extra the government doesn't require or give a shit about. That's why a new 'miracle drug' gets squirted out by Eli Lilly or some other U.S. based pharmaceutical company, only to be replaced about 2 years down the road with the next 'miracle drug.'
The cycle disgusts me. What REALLY steams me is the tight connection betweeen pharmaceutical companies, health insurance providers, the American Medical Association, and the tobacco companies. That list alone should convince anybody that our 'privatized medical insurance' reeks of corruption.
Bleh bleh bleh!!! GodDAMN, I hate it when I view my country's practices without my prerequisite drug-induced haze! Seeing things clearly in this day and age only pisses me off.
DOUBLE BLEH!!!

Time to go pull a few tubes of KB. See you guys tomorrow...

 

[liquidocean]

What sort of protection is the FDA providing if it is consciously suppressing physiological research on a drug that millions of it's citizens are taking weekly on a recreational basis? What is the message that's being sent there, that the law is more important than safety? Yes, mdma is a very toxic chemical, possibly the most toxic i put in my body (in theory, of course). But the benefits outway the risks. And unlike it's schedule I status, it does have theraputic potential for depressed people, alcoholics, marital problems, etc, etc.
If we had legitimate research, one of two things would happen.
First, mdma would prove itself to be seriously toxic, and that long-term exposure would be threatening in X particular way. The results would be public, and people would realize the potential for danger and it would stop the soft core from experimenting and it would make the hard core a little more conscious about overdoing it.
Second, mdma might prove to be safe within certain limits yet toxic. In this case, we would eventually realize the mechanisms to prevent neurological damage.
Third, mdma might prove to be non-toxic, but i don't think that's really the truth we're all expecting to hear realistically.
In all cases, we all win. Safety and knowledge for the people that need it most. Deterrence for those who are not ready for it yet. Respect for the potential of mdma for good and for bad.
Who knows how many cottage industries could revolve around the ecstasy experience if it were legal? Other walks of life might follow the lead of the nightclub/rave/music scene.

 

[JuIcEr]

ARE YOU PEOPLE CRAZY. YOU THINK A DRUG MAYBE ONLY 15-25MG PER PILL CAN GET YOU FUCKED FOR HOURS AND THE NEXT DAY YOUR SPACED OUT AND RUNDOWN MIGHT NOT BE BAD FOR YOU. CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT IT DOES TO YOUR BRAIN WHEN YOU TAKE MORE THAN ONE. I DROP TOO BUT DONT KID YOURSELF THIS STUFF IS FUCKEN SOMETHING UP

 

[liquidocean]

40-60mgs. are usually the "threshold dose", the amount at which you can feel it. To get fu**ed up, you would need to take over 150 mgs. As for long-term effects, i have noticed no mental impairment, nor have i noticed it in my friends or them in me. If anything, i am sharper and can make connected thoughts easier, as well as easier verbal expression.
But that's also because i dose in moderation, always have, unlike most people under 22 or so i see nowadays. As well, i take cholinergenics (sp), antioxidants, 5-htp.
You can approach it carefully and responsibly, or you can be reckless about it and see how quickly you can fry your axons and dendrites.
Hopefully, if research ever gets done on it, it will show that a harm-reductive plan will leave you with no more damage than drinking.

 

[skydancer]

You could say that we're all guinea pigs. But there have been so many guinea pigs for decades now, and still there is no clinical evidence of sykologikal/fyzikal damage in occasional E users.. Most harmful OTC drugs were pulled in a few years.. E on the other hand has been around since the 60's, and LOTS of agencies have full time jobs trying to prove damage... And still! There is no conclusive evidence.
There is some SERIOUS research on neurotoxicity being carried out lately though.... I have read some interesting abstracts on Medline. Too bad you have to pay $20 to get a full text mailed.... Maybe a friend of mine can get them from his univ's library. I will put copies of them online when I get them!
blub
skydancer
------------------
[email protected]
http://www.bluelight.ru/