Small ecstasy use 'harms brain'

i have done TONS of research about long term extacy use as well as short term, and doctors are currently doing clinical research all across the world using MDMA and this is the conclusion i have come to: MDMA has not done any damage to me. like people have previously posted though, you don't know what you get in your pill and meth has been proven to cause damage with neurotoxicity as well as nervous system damage. face it, meth is the devil. also i'd like to say that the damage could be caused from repeated ly staying up for consecutive days at a time. if you eat a methbomb how long are you up for? 48 hours or so at least? and you know how hard your body takes it without food or sleep. i'm sure thats damaging to your brain.
either way if its damaging i've done alot of dmage to my brain already so why stop now? momma didn't raise no quitter! as always, everyone be careful and enjoy yourselves. also check out http://www.maps.org/research/mdma/. there are alot of links there for both skeptics od MDMA and supporters. always educate yourself. and now, i'm done preaching.
 
what if it is?

What if there's no safe threshold for breathing road pollution? What if there's no safe threshold for eating GM food and the entire population of the USA develop catastrophic genetic diseases in 30 years?

We'll just have to deal with it when it happens.
 
lifeisforliving said:
*shrug* I look back at my use of MDMA, which was usually 400 to 600mg a night (once a month or so, off and on for 8 years), and then look at my grades in university... it sure hasn't hurt my intellect as measured by my GPA. I definitely experienced symptoms which only abated after 6 months of stopping MDMA, but I haven't noticed any permanent changes in my personality or memory...
Click to expand...

I've used small doses of this drug since 1992. I never binge, almost always get pure supplies... I eat well, look after myself I'm fit. I smoke weed pretty much daily, but without tobacco & I make an 8th last about 10 days... I hardly drink.

As above, I have not noticed any obvious detrimental effect on my intellect, or on my mental or physical health... My memory has always been pretty good is still is.
 
i have done TONS of research about long term extacy use as well as short term, and doctors are currently doing clinical research all across the world using MDMA and this is the conclusion i have come to: MDMA has not done any damage to me.
Click to expand...

haha so after all your research on long term ecstasy use you came to the conclusion that it hasnt affected you? Why even bother mentioning the 'research' and just add another meaningless personal anecdote on how it hasnt effected you personally.

I gotta say after reading through all this thread, Go-ee's posts have pretty much been the only voice of reason here. Every single article Ive ever read on bluelight that suggests that some illegal drug may be harmful gets about 50 replies by regualr users of that drug with obvious bias's, claiming the article is just anti drug propaganda.

It's been a pleasure to read some responses from someone who is actually looking at the topic objectively and thoughtfully, instead of jumping on the bandwagon and blindly defending their drug use as harmless.
 
ChemicalBeauty said:
2nd worst article ever.
Click to expand...


what was the first??

all i know is that after lengthy research on the subject, i have come across very little to idicate any sort of long term or permanent brain damage from the use of ecstasy in moderation. of course the drug has not been around long enough to be sure, but the underlying patterns seem to indicate that only those scientists who are paid by the government ever get the results that say mdma is utterly and unequivicably evil and causes irreprable brain damage on a scale likened to drinking mercury.

the majority of research shows, in my opinion, that ecstasy does cause damage to seratonin and its receptors, however over time the brain can repair itself. the main scientist employed by the dea to research ecstasy (whose name escapes me, and im too lazy to look it up right now) is notorious for bad experiments and miscalculations, as well as data misrepresentation. indeed, it seems the only real viable mode of employment for him seems to be as a lackey of the anti drug lobby, but i digress.

the point is, whether it causes brain damage or not, we dont know, at least not yet. for every experiment proving it is harmful there is one proving it isnt. scientific method is ultimatly flawwed, no matter how much researches try to insure its integrity. there is no such thing as a perfect experiment, not now anyways, and as every human is different, we cannot really compare one to another.

is this article going to stop anyone from using?? not likely. We will continue to do what we feel is right. i have never regretted my taking X, and i doubt very much i ever will. for the record, im not one of those kids who has a happy go lucky life where everything works out and shit. ecstasy has alienated me from someone i used to care very much about, but only because it helped me understand how our relationship was fundamentally flawed from the start, built not on the solid foundations of love, but rather on the shakey ones of lust. it was interesting to me that while many people i know were horrified when they found out i tried X, after listening to me talk about the experience, and see in my personality the changes it produced (i used to be sort of a mean person, prone to fighting and alcoholism), they felt different about it; maybe not to the point where they would do it themselves, but even the most staunch anti-drug persons agreed that it had been a possitive experience for me.

is the risk worth it?? in mo opinion, fuck yea it is

edit: i apologize for not reading the thread thoroughly before posting, i got about half way though and could not contain myself...
as noted about by fastandbulbous his name is George Ricuarte
 
Last edited:
ps for the record, i am neither a heavy nor current user of ecstasy.

recognized the need to take a break and so i did. also i havent been using for that long, maybe 3 or 4 months, and have been pretty good about keeping it down to a once a month minimum (except for the first week, three times, 4 pills, lol)
 
^
You have no idea what your talking about. There are thousands of studies on MDMA, from countries all across the globe. 99.99% of the studies show damage to serotonergic regions of the brain or cognitive impairment in the the study's participants. I could literally tear through every single sentence in your post but I will spare you the pain. Your post says more of your ignorance on the subject matter than I could ever illustrate. By the way if it's "in your opinion" it's not the majority of research.
 
Last edited:
well after reading the abstract its pretty clear they didn't take into account any other neuro-toxic substance or other activities their subjects were doing except for some fairly static statistical models.

Anyway where do you stand go-ee, is MDMA toxic? Is its use acceptable at any level? Your nick suggests you've used it before so do you continue to use it?

Your angry at what you claim are denialist, whom reject all studies suggesting MDMA is toxic - well i think except for some teenagers on this site most of the mature bluelighters are pretty balanced, open to new information (thats why we're here isn't it) and ultimately have taken steps to moderate their use of MDMA whilst protecting themselves from neurotoxicty by implementing strategies like maintaining a lower body temperature, keeping hydrated, consuming anti-oxidants etc.

Is that not tact admission that the substance can damage ones mind?

The consensus that i've read on bluelight is the psychological benefits ultimately outweigh the neurotoxicity of the substances (as long as steps are taken to mitigate that damage).

More importantly the vast majority of studies on humans have made some pretty giant leaps in correlating damage and made very wild claims that single doses are sufficient in creating lasting damage.

But back to the subject, all I saw with the BBC article was more of the diversion our political leaders seek to impose (through the use of a compliant media) on us. A form of control which seeks to close our minds with limited and emotional information, using scientists willing to sell their honesty for grants and such by making wild claims that are just not supported in the evidence (especially the empirical evidence).

So just because your a uni student who buys scientific journals doesn't make your arguments definitive. I've lived with scientists all my life, does that make me an authority on their honesty?

Coz i can write for days on the dodgyness of many a individual in the lofty halls of the bio-science unit of xxxxx university.

(like the time when they were stealing the speed that was meant to be used in their rat study) - those naughty undergrads

but hey they'd always be honest in their write ups right.....
 
My stance on MDMA is that it is neurotoxic, i.e. causes structural changes in the brain and mild cognitive impairment. The extent of this neurotoxicity remains to be assessed, factors such as other drug use, temperature, frequency of use and dosage all come into play. I believe the cognitive impairment is mild and is predominately on working memory and attention. MDMA users typically perform worse on tests of verbal fluency and tasks such as remembering a string of numbers than cannabis-controls, alcohol-controls, and no-drug controls. I believe MDMA can cause and definitely exacerbate depression and anxiety.

Having said that, I believe it has benefits as a psychedelic and has potential in therapy for sufferers of post traumatic stress disorder. Unfortunately, 99% of people do not take it for these reasons and typically take it in a club/rave environment or combined with other drugs for the simple reason "to get fucked up". I have used it in the past, but probably will not again unless for a very very special occasion. I simply don't feel the need for substances anymore. The growing scientific consensus seems to attribute MDMA to neurotoxicity. The point of all my posts in this thread have been to illustrate whenever any study comes out, countless MDMA users (usually in their "honeymoon" of ecstasy use) come out saying how bad the study is. There is very little if any research that does not show changes in the brain or cognitive impairment. It's up to you, either take the views of biased drug-users with no knowledge in the area or take the views of biased scientists with no experience in the area. The study in question isn't as bad as everyone making it out to be, but merely the BBC's interpretation of it. The other aspects of the study DID control for other drug use and confounding factors.

All in all, if you value your brain and mental health I'd limit MDMA consumption to a few times a year. More so, I'd make sure the proper precautions were taken. If you have suffered from depression in the past I would not recommend using MDMA at all. For some people the good times MDMA brings outweigh any of the costs, and that's your decision to make. All I'm saying is the current consensus of the research says that it is likely to cause negative side effects. Scientists aren't trying to stop you taking drugs (well some probably are..but the majority) are just trying to uncover what these drugs do to the human brain. I am just sick of the anti-study propaganda every time any study is presented. As a lot of people on here haven't the faintest idea what they are talking about other than their experience "getting fucked up" and reading erowid/maps/bluelight. As good as these resources are, they are far from being unbiased or definitive. Online journal systems (I don't buy any journals dude) are a far more valid and informative resource regarding MDMA. Unfortunately, many people do not get the privilege to access them.
 
go-ee said:
. Online journal systems (I don't buy any journals dude) are a far more valid and informative resource regarding MDMA. Unfortunately, many people do not get the privilege to access them.
Click to expand...

how about posting the interesting papers somewhere to provide a counterweight to the biased MAPS Erowid etc?

knowledge is power.
 
this article doesnt really say anything new.. "mdma is probably neurotoxic at some point, but we don't know exactly at what point that is"... raise your hand if this is news to you..
 
Drug-Alchemist said:
Neaah, it's all bullshit. Ecstacy doesn't harm yer brain, you yourself do it by believing it does.
Click to expand...

There's a lot to this. I remember a study where dozens of people who had heard the idea that overhead electric pylons harm your health started going to the doctors claiming they were getting terrible headaches, depression and sickness from the pylons. It turned out the pylons they were living under hadn't been turned on for 5 years. They were just bits of wire.

If someone tells you ecstasy causes brain damage often enough, sure enough you'll get people saying they've got brain damage. If a story came out tomorrow saying satsuma's cause brain damage you'd get people saying "I've got brain damage from eating satsumas".

I'm not saying Ecstasy isn't neurotoxic but I'm just saying don't take everyone claims of "brain damage" at face value.
 
JollyRoger said:
Since when is six tablets considered a small dose?! That sounds like an awful lot of E to me.....a small dose is a single pill or less!!
Click to expand...

my sentiments exactly8(
 
^
The problem isn't people claiming they have brain damage. Nearly all MDMA users insist that they have no cognitive impairment or "brain damage". The problem rather is when studies are conducted and structural abnormalities and cognitive impairment are found in comparison to control participants.
 
I wonder to what extent this study may have been sponsored by someone biased against MDMA in order to counteract the recent trend to point out how MDMA isn't nearly as dangerous as it was once thought to be, which may eventually result in the legal status of MDMA being adjusted, ie downgraded in its 'illegality level'. My politics/vested interests alarm bells started ringing when I read this. This is not to say that they may not be onto something after all.
 
I have also read a lot of the research, and sadly go-ee is right, most of the studies suggest that taking pills has some negative effect on certain aspects of cognitive function, I think mainly short term memory. There is some evidence that the negative effect is larger at higher doses. The evidence is weaker for any long term mood alterations. It is also unclear whether negative effects are permanent, but the evidence tends to suggest that they probably are, and this makes sense when you consider that people who have really overdone it on pills in my experience never truly get the magic back. There does seem to be some fairly permanent change to the brain, and I doubt that its a positive one.

Thats the bad news. What's the good news? For the vast majority of people it probably makes fuck all difference if their verbal memory is slightly poorer than it once was. Indeed, they can't even tell. I know plenty of people, including quite heavy users, who have been able to pass doctor and lawyer exams despite using pills, and seem to be going fine with their careers and lives generally. In summary, there probably is an effect, but for most people it probably doesnt matter. Ultimately, its the user's call.

That said, I would love to somehow be able to read the data in a way that convinced me pills really are safe, but the only scenarios I can think of to explain the data without a negative effect from MDMA are
1) People with crap short-term memory are attracted to taking pills, and
2) The stress of knowing you have taken pills and might have damaged your brain makes you anxious and affects the results when they do the memory testing.

I don't really think this is right though..pity.
 
Tryptamine*Dreamer said:
This does not prove that using small amounts of MDMA causes significant harm. It is well known that ecstasy pills often contain other drugs instead or in combination with MDMA. It also does not account for possible harm caused by other drugs that may have been used. Ecstasy pills sometimes contain methamphetamine, which is known to be neurotoxic.

Unless they do a controlled experiment with pure MDMA and make sure the test subjects use no other drugs during the experiment, their findings will not mean much.


Unless they meant six tablets over the entire 18 months. But that is probably not what they meant. Even if the tablets contained only 50mg each, that would be a large dose. Many are stronger than that, but I don't know what the average is.
Click to expand...


You are forgetting they arent stating small MDMA use 'harms brain' they are stating that Ecstacy harms the brain.

Most people classify Ecstacy nowadays as the stuff you buy off the street. Which most of the time has been mixed with other drugs.

Most people classify pure MDMA as either Molly or exactly what it is... MDMA.

I understand your point and all just thougt I would add my 2 cents in :)
 
The pills they ate here didn't specifically contain MDMA. They could have contained other things (or no MDMA whatsoever). This study proves nothing OTHER than that the war on drugs is NOT working (and we're getting shitty pills filled with contents worse for us than the original drug itself).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top