I can think of few candidates that might serve as popular new recreational drugs, but as to whether any of these would, or could catch on in quite the same way MDMA did is another thing.
The logistics of large scale distribution is a big one and a few points should be considered when deciding whether or not something has the potential to replicate what MDMA achieved i.e. become popular,
and be able to be produced and transported on the scale MDMA has..
For this discussion, I'm discounting the points gher made regarding the medical use of MDMA and LSD, and that popularity was a flow on affect from this – I’m not saying this wasn't in part the case, but other factors, such as a lack of effective detection methods in the 60's-70's definitely helped. Also, with LSD, in many ways a social need for a liberating drug like LSD already existed - public discontent at the time with Vietnam and the US government, trends in music and art, liberalisation and free thinking in the west, the Age of Aquarius, etc - and that made LSD readily acceptable to the youth and counter culture of the time.
MDMA on the other hand was somewhat different in that the drug was in part responsible for starting it’s own culture through raves. The social need may have been similar to the 60’s revolution, but the outlets were quickly limited by scheduling of the drug in 1985 and unlike LSD it was never marketed by a pharmaceutical company. So, while it was also initially used outside a medical environment by US "housewives and 9-5'ers" in many ways global popularity came about through a far more underground movement.
Since the advent of MDMA, the world has become a different place. The popularity of MDMA caught the DEA totally by surprise. Following its emergency scheduling, measures were introduced to prevent this sort of thing happening again. So, I believe that if we are to talk of a "new drug", then besides the obvious euphoric properties such a drug would need to possess in order to gain widespread acceptance from the MDMA market, optimally it will also need to be;
- Legal: fall outside the far reaching grasp of the analogues bill - particularly the Australian version, which is one of the toughest and most comprehensive forms of legislation existing. This piece of legislation was designed with great foresight: to provide a means of stopping or intercepting the next potentially big illicit drug discovery or fad.
- Be difficult to detect. Perhaps a super potent drug may be able to be shipped in sufficient quantities so as to avoid or minimise chances of detection. If this drug was odourless and able to be completely cleaned to remove any scents from solvents etc, it may improve chances of it being smuggled successfully.
- Be easy to manufacture, from easily obtainable or non-restricted chemicals. While it wouldn't necessarily need to be manufactured by an OTC method, the chemicals required would need to be fairly commonly used in industry, and probably not be substances listed in the present "Code of Practice for Supply Diversion into Illicit Drug Manufacture"
So there's how I see the requirements and basic logistics of getting a new drug out there. Some group may take a gamble and mass produce tons of a drug before unleashing it on the world, but if it's to spread like MDMA did - ( see Ecstasy Rising - ABC US- with Peter Jennings) - then IMO it will need to possess some of these properties as well as be already accepted by, and desired by, present drug users. Ecstasy Rising mentions that a drug like MDMA comes about every 50 years or so, and perhaps it will be less next time, but the world and it’s drug taking inhabitants are different to the period preceding the E revolution. They like the comfort and familiarity of MDMA and are not necessarily so keen for a replacement. Add that on to the powerful lobby against drugs, and the sophisticated methods to detect them that exist today, and I think it would be a daunting task, unless the
methods of distribution were innovative and very large scaled.
That’s not to say there won’t be attempts, it’s just they are more likely to be chopped off at the knees before society at large has experienced, and wants more of the new, better and improved “ecstasy”. Unless of course drugs are legalised, and then you can bet we'll see the pharmaceutical companies take over, releasing compounds that are both safe and cheap, as well as being full of desired properties ( see "If drugs were legal - BBC)
