News - WA's Deadly ecstasy risk - Sunday Times 18/9/05(**New: response from journo**)

[rah]

it is a gamble with ANY street drug u have. it's a gamble with prescription medicine!

Did you just compare the quality control of prescription drugs with street drugs?

 

[Cowboy Mac]

Did you just compare the quality control of prescription drugs with street drugs?

They are probably drawing the comparison that even legal drugs have risks. No drug is safe, not even pharmas with quality control.

 

[streetsurfer]

Of course not quality control but there is a huge question mark over practically every new drug released as to what could be the long term consequences of its use...... it is best guess then wait n see

 

[rah]

The government / conservatives / narrow minded people of this country need to realise that we're not going to stop taking drugs. The least they could do is make it as safe as possible for us.

I can hardly see the government putting money into pill testing programs. Ask yourself how many people die every year from ecstasy.

What are some more practicle ways the government could help to make your illicit drug use safer?

 

[Hater]

education and the truth its painfully obvious but so many are blinded by the brightness of bullshit to dare search the darkness for truth

 

[Juvenile]

The government / conservatives / narrow minded people of this country need to realise that we're not going to stop taking drugs. The least they could do is make it as safe as possible for us.

I can hardly see the government putting money into pill testing programs. Ask yourself how many people die every year from ecstasy.

What are some more practicle ways the government could help to make your illicit drug use safer?

The government are doing their least at the moment. Its is after all the government who creates the enviroment for criminal orginisations to flourish using the "illicit" drug trade to make their money.
Who stands to lose most from legalisation of illicit substances? The crims of course.

Back on topic. I too think an article focusing on harm reduction would go down well with myself. Not for my benifit but for those who may use pills but haven't heard of the concept.

 

[Cyberdyne]

HUGE props for coming here buddy. I have a LOT of respect for somebody that actually gives two shits about how his work is being received. Just one idea that occurred to me whilst reading your article;

These results have all been discovered by police, I would assume, by gc/ms testing. They are thus, extremely accurate and reliable.

I can understand ENTIRELY why they would not want to release a test saying "X pill contains 150 mg of MDMA"...whilst this problem was worked around quite brilliantly by www.ecstasydata.org by simply showing the ratio of what was contained in the pill, even saying a pill contains only mdma COULD, I suppose, be seen to be encouraging a user to buy that brand.

BUT; If there is such serious concern over all these harmful adulterants that they don't want these kids taking, why are the harmful pill tests not released to the public? Heck, why not have them automatically posted on pillreports? I know for a FACT that there are VERY few people out there who would ever go NEAR a pill containing 7 different chemicals including a high dose of caffeine. Yet because police choose to sit on this data and not make it available, people go on to take these dangerous pills which they believe are mdma. In my belief a failure to release these results SHOULD border on criminal negligence.

Considering the number of pills that are tested by authority's every year - every single person that goes to trial must have their pills analysed - this seems a rather rich source of completely free information that is simply overlooked by everybody. Why not write a police scandal article? Everybody loves scaremongering police scandals don't they?

"Police in WA refuse to disclose knowledge of deadly drugs"
'experts fear repercussions on youth health'

 

[KostoN]

Misinformation

Terevor Paddenburg

Not sure if that's your name, or the papers fault...

Anyway.


I'll just list out in point form what would make that article, and maybe future articles better.

Okay, i'll break the article down.

-
- The first sentence is misleading. This should have read:

"Pills being sold as ecstasy aren't always containing the intended product, MDMA, but other chemicals such as Ketamine, MDEA and MDA.
Or something similar.

Ecstasy = MDMA
Ecstasy does not = any tablet being sold that is going to make you high!

Note also that you do not need to put a little description of the chemicals in with the paragraph, but maybe later on in the article describe what those chemicals are, giving the reader a clear idea of what they are. After all we want facts, right?

Also I think we are so sick of hearing just "Animal Tranquillisers", also mention that is has been used, and still is used with humans.


- With the second sentence, please note that any drug is dangerous. Ketamine can be a dangerous chemical, but so can Paracetamol. See the funny thing is with this, the Sunday Times has recently uncovered this, its been known for years there is adulterated pills going around. Having information available on pills circulating will save alot of people ending up in hospital simply because they know whats in the pill.

"One beige pill branded with an Xbox motif contained only ketamine - a veterinary tranquillizer that can cause delusions - and no trace of MDMA, the key ingredient in ecstasy"

- These ketamine tablets, yes, they are sold as Ecstasy but they are not simply made to fool people. They are made for people who want ketamine. I mean, if they wanted to make money, they'd pump out shit pills with hardly any MDMA content.

"One seized batch contained no MDMA, but a cocktail of seven other drugs, including extremely high doses of caffeine."

- I don't mean to be rude, but what the fuck ? If they are so extremely high, why hasn't the police or government warned us about the possible risks from caffeine or a highly adulterated pill? Not this "CAFFEINE IS DANGEROUS" crap. We want facts, statistics..etc.


Well thats where im going to stop, because the rest of the article is alright, except for the 1190 known brands...haha.


How about doing a article on the use of MDMA during the 70s and 80s as a therapeutic tool for couples having trouble for example?

Also, to stir things up a bit, mention in the article you are more likely to die from choking on peanuts than you are from taking MDMA.

 

[swifty]

Trevor, why don't you hit the streets of northbridge one Saturday night and spend a little time in the drinking clubs, like the Paramount, Varga Lounge and Pallas, then spend some time in the clubs where punters are less inclined to drink like Geisha and Ambar and write an article on the kind of behaviour that you see in each place.

It'd also be good to find out stats on how many times police/ambo's were called out to which clubs on friday and saturday night...

 

[ANDO420]

^^Good call

 

[phase_dancer]

Originally posted by Cyberdyne
These results have all been discovered by police, I would assume, by gc/ms testing. They are thus, extremely accurate and reliable.

I don't know about every state in Australia, but I do know about a couple of them, and I would bet a similar system exists for all.

That is, not all pills are profiled ( analysed to identify all impurities). From what I understand, this is only done in cases where additional evidence is needed for prosecuting a manufacturer.

Why?

Simply because of time and money. Specifically identifying multitudes of compounds present in very small amounts or when these are unusual or complex structures, takes time and can consume considerable resources. In the case of someone being charged with equipment, chemicals, but no product, it may then be concluded by analysing traces on equipment and glass, exactly what had been produced there in the past, and via what route, using what chemicals. Under Australian law, this evidence may be enough to see the chemist convicted.

But for a charge of possession of a few pills, at present it would not be worth doing a full analysis i.e. big bucks required, lots of time required -all superfluous for a possession or minor supply charge.

If Joe Blow is caught with 20 pills, and admits they are MDMA intended for supply, my bet is a fairly simple confirmation would be carried out, involving one or two GC runs . You see, unless he changes his plea, then even if the pills only contain sugar, the case is basically open and shut. possession with intent to supply 20 sugar pills considered by the owner to be ecstasy will carry ( in Qld at least) the same level of punishment for the dealer as if they contained MDMA.

So profiling is normally reserved for cases where the prosecution needs to substantiate beyond doubt that the person arrested is, or has been involved with manufacture.

Imported pills would naturally be analysed so far as to identify (by GC/MS) the active illicits present, but unless something was present in significantly large amounts, then I doubt it would get looked at twice. However, some impurities, even present in tiny amounts, could, as previously indicated, be highly toxic.

So, viewing it that way, you have to ask the next questions:

Even if governments said YES to comprehensive testing through the amnesty bin approach or similar method of getting the pills to the lab, who could have the resources to fully analyse them?

And Imagine if they did anything less than a full analysis on pill X, only to have some independent researcher later identify a very toxic cancer causing compound in pill X. Would the people who had consumed the pill be able to sue the government supported, and (expensively) funded testing laboratory?

 

[Bostonsox]

Being both a journalist and drug harm-reduction advocate I'd love to get my two cents worth in here.
Regarding the journalistic tendency to sensationalise and twist truths, a lot of it has to do with the act of selling papers. People have an interest in lurid tales, and by keeping the seperation between "normal people" and "druggies" it guarantees a well-stocked resource of lurid tales to tell.
Editors know that it's better for their bottom lines to keep reinforcing the negative public perceptions of "druggies", "criminals", "gangsters" and "solo mothers". Sadly, this gets in the way of balance and even the best journalists realise that to get ahead, they've got to play the editor's tune.
Regarding the article itself, and this is directed at Trevor (hey good on you for checking out this site and getting feedback), there's two ways to look at the angle of "contamination" (oooh, scarey word huh?)
One is the obvious one, which is that they are made up with all sorts of dodgy shit, often by people who wouldn't know their chemistry from the cock and devoid of ethical responsibility to provide clean product.
The other one is that the law has entirely encouraged this situation. Let's remember two things here: history and perspective.
1. History: Ecstasy was legal in the US until the mid-80s and was pretty-much unadulterated. Then it got banned because administrators took a moral approach to the gay community and dance music fans taking a fancy to it (look on www.erowid.org for more info) - this was not based on evidence about potential harm, official documents show the reasoning behind the banning of ecstasy.
2. Perspective: In terms of relative-risk compared to alcohol, tobacco, methamphetamine et al, ecstasy is actually pretty safe. However, because it has been driven underground (and let's face it, the law will never stop people from doing drugs) then there are no quality controls, no ethical responsibilities, nothing to guarantee the user of its purity.

Sooo... when we think about all these dodgy lurid ingredients that are being passed off as ecstasy, we must consider the reasons behind that. The law is the first and most obstinate obstacle to drug purity and, therfore, safety.
The law stops the flow of information, the law basically ensures that the people responsible for the manufacture and distribution of these substances are the ones who are desperate, criminal or couldn't give a stuff about the people at the other end of the food chain.

 

[Psychadelic_Paisly]

^^^ word

 

[Cyberdyne]

I don't know about every state in Australia, but I do know about a couple of them, and I would bet a similar system exists for all.

That is, not all pills are profiled ( analysed to identify all impurities). From what I understand, this is only done in cases where additional evidence is needed for prosecuting a manufacturer.

Why?

Simply because of time and money. Specifically identifying multitudes of compounds present in very small amounts or when these are unusual or complex structures, takes time and can consume considerable resources. In the case of someone being charged with equipment, chemicals, but no product, it may then be concluded by analysing traces on equipment and glass, exactly what had been produced there in the past, and via what route, using what chemicals. Under Australian law, this evidence may be enough to see the chemist convicted.

But for a charge of possession of a few pills, at present it would not be worth doing a full analysis i.e. big bucks required, lots of time required -all superfluous for a possession or minor supply charge.

If Joe Blow is caught with 20 pills, and admits they are MDMA intended for supply, my bet is a fairly simple confirmation would be carried out, involving one or two GC runs . You see, unless he changes his plea, then even if the pills only contain sugar, the case is basically open and shut. possession with intent to supply 20 sugar pills considered by the owner to be ecstasy will carry ( in Qld at least) the same level of punishment for the dealer as if they contained MDMA.

So profiling is normally reserved for cases where the prosecution needs to substantiate beyond doubt that the person arrested is, or has been involved with manufacture.

Imported pills would naturally be analysed so far as to identify (by GC/MS) the active illicits present, but unless something was present in significantly large amounts, then I doubt it would get looked at twice. However, some impurities, even present in tiny amounts, could, as previously indicated, be highly toxic.

So, viewing it that way, you have to ask the next questions:

Even if governments said YES to comprehensive testing through the amnesty bin approach or similar method of getting the pills to the lab, who could have the resources to fully analyse them?

And Imagine if they did anything less than a full analysis on pill X, only to have some independent researcher later identify a very toxic cancer causing compound in pill X. Would the people who had consumed the pill be able to sue the government supported, and (expensively) funded testing laboratory?

You raise a very important point there and obviously this would limit the quantity of results available, BUT, the article is based on what appears to be pretty conclusive evidence that there are at least some detailed tests done, and those detailed tests have not been released to the public even when there is a clear possibility of serious harm being done.

Your second discusion point there would require the passing of a statute specifically exempting the official government agency from any liability regarding inaccuracy, BUT this could result in very low standards in the testing. It may, as an alternative, be possible to disclaim liability through a notice on an amnesty bin. It would need to be fairly detailed but along the lines of "all care, no responsibility". This would prevent standards from dropping too low as they would still be under a legal duty to carry out testing to the best of their ability within the confines of 'reasonable accuracy', but would free them from liability where extra ordinary testing could have revealed extra content. In any case a legal team would be needed to make sure they got that one bang on but I have no doubt it could be done.

First one is a real problem. Private funding or some kind of government operated/funded trust seem to be the only real possibilities without some kind of new pill testing centre being set up. The question really needs to be asked though; What level of detail do we require on the content of pills? We don't ever really know EXACTLY what is going into our food, do we need to know EXACTLY what is going into our drugs?

My own thought is that while it would be very, very good to be able to identify impurities - this is quite possibly what is doing most of the long term damage in pills - it is at this point, an unrealistic aim. Leave the trace content for another future proposal and simply aim for testing to identify the active contents.

Also a quick question; Is it possible to yield results like
pill 300 mg
binder/filler 100 mg
mdma 100 mg
meth-amphetamine 50 mg
unknown 50 mg
?
Perhaps if the amount of unknown in a pill can at least be identified then people will have a better grasp of what kind of risk they might be taking

 

[phase_dancer]

Also a quick question; Is it possible to yield results like
pill 300 mg
binder/filler 100 mg
mdma 100 mg
meth-amphetamine 50 mg
unknown 50 mg
?

In principle yes, but he binder/ filler may be best described as that which was not extracted, as I doubt resources would ever stretch far enough to allow such a detailed analysis of the compounds 'remaining' after std amine/ other solvent soluble extraction. But perhaps I'm wrong here.

I think though, that any report that includes a 50mg amount of anything that wasn't completely benign is a big waste of time. There would therefore be some responsibility for the analyst to provide a much more thorough evaluation of anything over 1-2% by weight of the principle active.

Another problem lies with the physical nature and potency of some compounds. Good examples include LSD and some tryptamines. Some of these present real problems to the analyst when only a single - small amount - sample is available.

To a degree it's also related to the skill and experience of the analyst, as not only can an optimised extraction of the small amount be difficult, but conditions employed with GC and to a lesser degree HPLC, can sometimes cause the compounds (or derivatives made from them) to change chemically under the conditions of the GC. While the latter problem has largely been solved for normally encountered compounds by employing SOTA technologies and published techniques, there remains significant problems for previously un-encountered substances.

The trace impurities thing is a worry IMO. Sometimes it's almost impossible to tell if a peak in the GC is actually masking (covering) another compound with similar properties (mass/charge). In an optimal situation, other techniques such as IR and NMR may be used to distinguish this or to confirm a suspected GC result. While any good lab would have IR and other analytical equipment, NMR is quite expensive and requires regular maintainance. A proper analytical lab that worked solely in analysing tablets and powders, would not likely use all such procedures very often and economics issues would then become significant. That being said, MS is a very useful tool, and can usually sort out most of the problems if a pure sample of the suspected chemical is available.

Another, most important point the chemist made in the story was that nothing is known about how toxic some of these contaminants could be. Due to the infinite range of impurities produced from different synthesis routes - made more extreme if the reagents are to be themselves synthesised in a clandestine environment - a typical "thorough" analysis may be, as you've indicated, impossible to address initially with any proposed system of Lab testing.

And there in lies the dilemma. How does one conclude what levels of unknowns should be regarded as harmful?

If we are to analyse pills to a level where LSD potency or greater chems are to be included, then these undesirable impurities may be present in greater quantities the the LSD itself. Unusual Example Cited:

Pill X is submitted. It's analysed completely for actives. It's reported to contain 100mg of MDMA and 50ug of LSD. If we looked at the probable range of impurities percent wise from a sloppy MDMA synth, then these could easily amount to considerably more weight wise, than the LSD. Single compounds could be present in amounts 8 or 9 times levels of LSD, yet still be under 1% of the MDMA. So where do we draw the line?

I tend to feel the food quality argument isn't really applicable to drugs that could have been produced in a clandestine environment with no QC in place. At least in the food industry there are standards which most (hopefully) adhere to. But in the often unclean environments where drugs are made, the potential for contamination, or an incorrectly handled or prepared product is obviously much worse.

I would also argue that any such analysis should include metals. Different routes to MDMA can employ a wide variety of catalysts, including heavy and toxic metals and metal ions. I can cite a long list of examples here, but a few that deserve mentioning are; mercury, palladium and chromium VI.... the later of which is carcinogenic. To fully test for these metals, which may be present in sub-milligram amounts, a piece of equipment known as ICP or inductively coupled plasma is usually used. A good ICPOES or MS is around the 200g mark.



Personally, while an illegal market supplies a product constantly varying in quality (impurities wise), I feel it would be a logistics nightmare to coordinate minimum requirements as demanded by necessary health bodies, social and supporting groups, law, and insurance assessors, to name but a few. I sincerely hope it can be done. But unless Harm Minimisation takes an improved priority within government policy, I have serious doubts it will be possible to accomplish.

 

[fcuking_in_heaven]

Once again Phase your knowledge proves invaluable!

 

[Misterwize]

MDEA or MDMA?

MDEA and MDMA are quite easy to switch between in synthesis.

Use nitroethane for MDEA and Nitromethane for MDMA in the relevant stage of the synthesis which if my ever failing memory recalls is the wacker oxidization.

Though I may be wrong...........

 

[phase_dancer]

Not in a wacker oxidation, but in the reductive amination where choice of nitromethane or nitroethane would give MDMA or MDEA respectively.

However, in clandestine production of MDXX, the market is MDMA, and as piperonal in a condensation reaction with nitroethane is another route to the ketone, I wouldn't think it be likely that nitroethane would be 'wasted' producing MDEA. Of course the chemist may be limited to using what's on hand - or by what knowledge he has, so who really knows.

 

[LittleHedgehog]

my ten cents.

maybe we should be talking to the Netherlands instead.
in Amsterdam for example, clubs will test pills for their punters.


i get tired of all hype about (illict) drugs killing/harming people. if you actually pull out and examine the health statistics there are many, many more people who die and/or are harmed from the legal drugs of alcohol and tobacco.
sure: the odd dehydration 'e' case, the occaisional drug-induced psychosis, sometimes someone overdoses on smack. but those figures pail into insignificance against the alcohol poisoning, alcoholic dementia, death/injury through drink driving, tobacco related heat, lung disease, and cancer...

our priorities are all messed up.
i'd like to see a fact based, reasoned debate on why some drugs are prohibited in the first place when others clearly cause so much more damage. i'd like to see discussion on a 'solution' to drug use other then prohibition. it didn't work for alcohol, just caused more problem, why do governments think it will work for any other drugs? humans have been altering their consciousness since humans existed and its time to do something far more intelligent then ban particular substances.
the ultimate way to reduce harm, would be to legalise.



and it REALLY irks me when the sensational story is published, rather then the WHOLE, TRUE story.

 

[Zonee]

mabey the answer to all our problems regarding the purity of ectasy would be solved by simple leglising of the drug, and allowing it to be purchased over the counter at the local pharmacy. this way we know exactly what is in the pill we are taking, and heck it may even get a bit cheaper....

i know this idea is both unrealistic, and will probably cause good reason for a lot of flame, but heck with it.