RTI denies it made mistake that torpedoed results of a $1.3M (mdma) study

E-llusion

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
5,975
Location
ALASKA
RTI International denies it is to blame for an error that led researchers at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center to retract the [mdma study] results of what had been hailed as breakthrough (MDMA)research.

Officials at Johns Hopkins in September were quoted as saying that RTI (Reasearch Triangle Park), which is headed by Victoria Haynes, is responsible for mislabeling a supply of the recreational drug ecstasy, or MDMA, that it supplied to the Baltimore hospital. Researchers say they discovered the drug actually was methamphetamine, commonly known as "speed," which is similar to but distinct from ecstasy.

Johns Hopkins representatives did not return several phone messages left by Triangle Business Journal.
The discovery of the drug mix-up was made a year after Johns Hopkins in September 2002 reported the results of a $1.3 million federally funded study that had concluded that ecstasy causes serious brain damage in monkeys and baboons. The study results were reported in the magazine Science.

A retraction of the study results, also published in Science, stated that "The toxic effects (the researchers) ascribed to ecstasy were caused by a sister drug, methamphetamine."

As for how the mistake happened, the article said, "Both drugs were delivered to the lab on the same day and in identical bottles but the labels were switched." The mistake had occurred because the vials, supplied by RTI International, had been mislabeled, said Dr. George A. Ricaurte, an associate professor of neurology and the lead researcher.

After reviewing its records of the transaction, a spokesman for RTI says the institute discovered "no evidence of labeling error" in its supply of ecstasy to Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center.

"As a result of Dr. Ricaurte's allegation, we conducted an analysis of records, which reveals no evidence of labeling error on our part," RTI International spokesman Reid Maness said in a written statement.

"We are disappointed that Dr. Ricaurte chose to blame RTI for the circumstances that led him to retract his study. We reject the certainty with which blame is exclusively placed on RTI," Maness' statement said.

Ecstasy, which was discovered in the early 1900s, originally was prescribed to help people lose weight. Research in 1992 discovered that the drug heightens certain sensory responses, including an intensification of the pleasure one enjoys while listening to music.

Such effects have led to ecstasy's current widespread use as a "party drug," especially in bars.

Because of its growing popularity among young adults, researchers have sought to determine any negative side effects that ecstasy might have on those who use the drug. The September 2002 study results by Johns Hopkins were considered a breakthrough in doing that.

In reporting the findings, Ricaurte wrote in Science, "The most troubling implication of our findings is that young adults using ecstasy may be increasing their risk for developing parkinsonism, a condition similar to Parkinson's disease, as they get older."

The study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. As far as that agency is concerned, how the drugs became mixed up remains a mystery.
Beverly Jackson, a spokeswoman for the agency, says there is no dispute that RTI International supplied the drug. Finding out how the error occurred is a "continuing work," she says.

RTI International's Maness says supplying drugs for research studies is a small part of the institute's business. "The only scientists to whom we supply drug materials are those who have grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse to conduct research on the health impacts of drug abuse," he says. "No one else can access these materials, and each order has to be validated by NIDA before it is sent to us."

RTI denies it made mistake that torpedoed results of a $1.3M study

By Leo John
Triangle Business Journal


Link
 
Last edited:
You'd kind of think that they would do a quick test, just to make totaly sure they had what they thought they had, before starting such a big study.
 
^^^
True.
Looks like it's $1.3 million tax payers money down the drain.

Next time they should give me the two bottles, and i'll perform my own 'studies'. ;)
 
bongbudda said:
You'd kind of think that they would do a quick test, just to make totaly sure they had what they thought they had, before starting such a big study.
Sample management and security in labs like this are extremely tight. They are under a Federal mandate from both the FDA and DEA requiring them to follow established Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). The lab is required to track each sample, follow chain of custody procedures, and pass all Q&A assessments.

Basically, the sample tracking makes it impossible to "grab the wrong bottle." And if a laboratory becomes sloppy about this they lose their certification, and their funding. Also, the lab providing certified samples (in this case RTI) must follow the same tracking procedures. This is why RTI is able to refute Ricaurte's claim that the samples were mislabeled.

What it boils down to is there is no way that the wrong sample could have accidentally made its way into those test monkeys.
 
A $20 EZ-test would have saved them $1.3 million and institutional embarrasement, lol. Idiots.
If they ever re-do this study, hopefully it will recieve the scrutiny it deserves ... those Government propaganda commercials which mentioned the results of this study didn't mention that the negative effects were results of massive amounts of the drug being injected into gorillas for several days in a row.
 
This wasn't an accident, and RTI had nothing to do with it. Fuck Ricuarte and any of his "studies".
 
i am sure that it was all a big mix up. i mean how could you accidently give a monkey speed instead of rollz? he obviously had no idea what was going on and cant be held liable. come on guys give him a break! i bet he is just as hard working, devoted and honest as any other drug related government employee...
 
Crazeee said:
Such effects have led to ecstasy's current widespread use as a "party drug," especially in bars.

dont people go to bars to drink...not do E???
 
Research in 1992 discovered that the drug heightens certain sensory responses, including an intensification of the pleasure one enjoys while listening to music.

1992?
 
I've been reading about this discredited Ricaurte bloke and his flawed and essentially government funded research for the last 10 years... I cannot believe this chemical mix up was a mistake, it strikes me that if it wasn't deliberate, then there's a DEA mole in Recaurte's team. Perhaps they spotted that this research might ultimately exonerate MDMA and so they sabotaged it... Do love a conspiracy theory. 8o

There's this chemist dude called Dr John Henry and he appeared in many early 90's Ecstacy/Rave features on UK telly. He was always very negative about Ecstacy, and his job seemed to be to highlight as many negative effects of MDMA as possible. Then one day in the late 90's I saw him in a brief TV news article prostiletising against ALCOHOL, which he readilly admitted was the single greatest hazard to young peoples health (given that tobacco takes a relatively long time to kill you).

I Just found it amusing that this obviously well educated and intelligent Doctor who'd been utterly apposed to MDMA use, was even more opposed to our British binge drinking culture...:D
 
Dr. Funkenstien said:
come on guys give him a break! i bet he is just as hard working, devoted and honest as any other drug related government employee......

This guy's been botching research into MDMA for a decade... no more benefit of the doubt. I'm only gratefull we KNOW he's botched his recent work, and hopefully doubt will now be thrown on all his previous, already dubious research.
 
Last edited:
bet them gorrilaz were tweaked the fuck out..how can u not tell the differnece. i would be like damn..these monkeys are acting rather strange today. no come down was proubly noticed...just a monkey and his water bottle, up for weeks. this is nutz. ~damoN~
 
^^^^ tweaking monkeys... HAHAHAHAHA. I would absolutely love to play with a rolling monkey while i was rolling. I wonder how... well fuck i'm just going to end it there, too many inquiries. Dont they like have to study the effects of the drugs and stuff before they do research with them? Ricaurte, Ricaurte, Ricaurte...*sigh*
 
obviously what happened is the monkey were given the mdma, and once they started coming down, they needed something to bring themselves back up so they broke into ricaurte's meth stash..
 
This smells fishy to me... Considering that they were studying the drugs' actions etc, any idiot that knows any details on the mechanisms of these drugs would know that in a general sense, MDMA works primarily on serotonin and meth on dopamine. If you were one of these 'qualified' researchers, wouldn't you think you'd wonder if something was up when you were testing neurotransmitter levels and found them to be opposite of what usually happens? I mean at least before your first 1/4 mil of funding went down the drain? Wtf!? F@#$ this fraudulent fake.
 
No Psychadelic....

At first I thought there was a contradiction, but if you further analyze it, it makes sense. Things can be similar, but distinct from each other.... i.e. mdma belongs to the "meth" family... therefore they are similar, but they are also distinct from each other.
 
what i think is odd is the 1.3 million dollar price tag on the research.

it only took a day, maybe two. Im sure the scientists, who arent even scientific enough to make sure what they are experimenting with is actually indeed what they need, get paid alot. Then im sure it costs alot to maintain their lab. Then the price of the chems, which was probably next to nothing. Lab eqiupment, needles, cages, etc...but what I believe was the most expensive aspect was the monkeys.

This study pretty much spent 1.3 million $$$ to discover that if you inject small primates with 300+ mg of methamphetamine IV, several times over the course of a few hours, they can die or have serious brain damage. Wow what a discovery that was worth spending 1.3 million taxpayer dollars. We paid them millions to kill monkeys.
 
Top