This may be off topic but I was astounded to come across the following.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Daily Bulletin

ECSTASY LINK TO DAMAGE OF THE BRAIN 'MISLEADING' THE PUBLIC

by Charles Arthur, Technology Editor,

United Kingdom

Research claiming to prove that ecstasy damages the brain is fundamentally flawed and has misled politicians and the public, independent scientists say today.

An inquiry by New Scientist magazine concluded that many of the findings published in respected journals that purported to show long or short-term damage could not be trusted. It puts this down to two principal reasons: huge variations in experimental results and the fact that scientific journals are unwilling to publish "null" results in which research shows no difference between ecstasy users and non-users.

At the centre of the controversy are brain scans published in 1998 apparently showing that ecstasy destroys nerve cells involved in the production and transport of serotonin, a vital brain chemical involved in memory, sleep, sex, appetite and, primarily, mood. The scans used radioactive tagging to highlight the number of those nerve cells: those for non-users showed large "bright" regions but those of ecstasy users showed fewer. The pictures were used in anti-drugs advertising, and research findings used to underpin stiffer penalties for ecstasy use.

In an accompanying editorial today, the magazine says: "Our investigation suggests the experiments are so irretrievably flawed that the scientific community risks haemorrhaging credibility if it continues to let them inform public policy."

Two independent experts told New Scientist there was a key flaw a " the way brains reacted to this kind of scan, known as PET, varied enormously with or without ecstasy. Some "healthy" brains glowed up to 40 times brighter than others, and even a number of ecstasy users' brains outshone ecstasy-free brains by factors of 10 or more.

Stephen Kish, a neuropathologist at the Centre for Addiction and Health, Toronto, told the magazine: "There are no holes in the brains of ecstasy users. And if anyone wants a straightforward answer to whether ecstasy causes any brain damage, it's impossible to get one from these papers."

Similar uncertainty surrounds evidence that ecstasy impairs mental performance, according to New Scientist. In the majority of tests of mental agility, ecstasy users performed as well as non-users.

Andrew Parrott, a psychologist at the University of East London, found that ecstasy users outperformed non-users in tests requiring them to rotate complex shapes in their mind's eye.

Ecstasy users did perform worse when learning new verbal information. But according to Mr Parrott, their performance lay well within the normal range.

The findings will not change government policy. A Home Office spokesman said: "We know that ecstasy can and does kill unpredictably, and therefore there are no plans to change its classification as a Class A drug."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wonder who those independent scientists were? At last, the damn PET scans have been disproven. Everytime I see the holes in the brain picture, I shudder. Government propaganda at it's best.

The above is based on an article published in yesterday's 'New Scientist':
http://www.mapinc.org/safe/v02/n763/a07.html

Great, Party at my place :kaioken:

j/k:angel:

uhhh you might want to check all your sources.... that was one test, performed on the brain only. there are ample sources indicating there is strong verifiable evidence linking the use of ecstasy to parkinsons disease, long term depression via the decrease in serotonins. to say nothing of what happens to you while you're ON the drug.

just ask anyone who spends five days in a funk till their next hit.

i'm not preaching, and i certainly don't feel like getting in a war on a site that has nothing to do with drugs--but a little levity is in order:

http://www.theantidrug.com/

Check out DanceSafe forums:

http://www.dancesafe.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php

Good, I was wurried i might git brian daomainge form htaat xtacy

quoted from bully28: "uhhh you might want to check all your sources.... that was one test, performed on the brain only. there are ample sources indicating there is strong verifiable evidence linking the use of ecstasy to parkinsons disease, long term depression via the decrease in serotonins. to say nothing of what happens to you while you're ON the drug."

I think you're mistaken.

The New Scientist article was not a review over just one test but of many gov't sponsored drug researches and it uncovers alot of dirty research laundry.

http://www.mapinc.org/safe/v02/n763/a07.html <---You obviously didn't read it all the way through. Because it doesn't say there isn't any potential harm from using ecstasy (it's a drug after all-- no drug use is safe.); the harms being preached by www.theantidrug.com (a very biased gov't website) are not done so in an accurate manner before the public. In the end, parents are left just as misinformed about MDMA as their kids. There are huge discrepancies in the gov't studies' brain damage links.

MDMA doesn't cause Parkinson's disease (actually it could cure it) -- MPTP which is an entirely different drug (an opiate) does.

There is actually potential to use MDMA as treatment for Parkinson's disease:
http://www.time.com/time/europe/eu/column/0,9868,99059,00.html


That www.theantidrug.com is probably the least informative (and, at times, misinformative) of any drug awareness website around. They don't even have a slideshow that demonstrates how ecstasy affects the neurochemistry. At least DanceSafe went that far. (See: http://www.dancesafe.org/slideshow/) The terrorism and drugs connection leaves out much critical information. Not to mention the poor taste in calling kids, who experiment with ANY drug, a terrorist supporter. Please check out www.NarcoTerror.org for some badly needed levity.

BTW, ever wonder why Partnership for A "Drug-Free" America does not have a discussion board , unlike DanceSafe?

You would figure if they are spreading accurate data, based on exhaustive, high-standard drug research, they would encourage inquiry on a discussion board, like DanceSafe does. Why are they stonewalling the public?


quoted from bully28: "long term depression via the decrease in serotonins."

Most do not suffer short or long term depression but feel perhaps a little burnt out over the weekend. Some of the people who go through a mild, short-term depression over the weekend, but long term depression is extremely rare. To this day, there has been no evidence showing that MDMA itself is the cause of the long term depression. It could be other drugs sold as MDMA (see: www.ecstasydata.org). These tablets sold on the black market are notoriously impure. Much of what is sold as "ecstasy" on the black market actually contains other drugs, some of which can be more dangerous than MDMA, like PMA, speed, DXM and PCP. (THese chemicals are totally neglected at the following anti-ecstasy page: http://www.theantidrug.com./drug_info/drugs_ecstasy.html) See:

For more levity, see: http://www.dancesafe.org/documents/druginfo/ecstasy.php

People, who use ecstasy, can reduce the depressive after effects. See: http://www.dancesafe.org/documents/druginfo/depression.php
(This info is also not mentioned at: http://www.theantidrug.com./drug_info/drugs_ecstasy.html Why do they even bother?)

While narcs are talking about the horrors of this drug on sappy, ratings-oriented, talk shows, back in November of last year, the Food and Drug Administration approved www.maps.org 's researching MDMA's potential in treating Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Those are the facts, jack.

in a study conducted by me i found out there is a strong link between retardation and people that pop those pills. hell the pills might not cause it, but if thats your idea of kicks lol the case is rested your honour.

srry if people here indulge in pills and powder but i just dont get it. its messes with you big style, no one knows just how bad. scientists can argue forever, people still die on the stuff. im just anti pills n powders.

beaver put the "smack down" on bully...best sit down bully...


personaly...I am against pills/powders/needles or any other non-natural chemical drug...

although ive been very tempted to try ecstasy...ive heard its a blast...i have yet to do so, and probly never will.

I do on the other hand agree with the fact that there is lots of shady research out there...and we should learn from this to be more skeptical of all research...government or private...

I myself am guilty of believing anything a "scientist" says...its hard to remember to consider the fact that maybe this scientist is paid off, or completely fake all together.

I think in the end, corruption will always rule...just when you think youve found someone or something that is pure...that organization gets bought out and corrupted...everyone has a pricetag...it all goes back to the old saying...

MONEY=POWER...sad but true...

of course there are exceptions...but they are few and far between.

Originally posted by nocturnix123
I myself am guilty of believing anything a "scientist" says...its hard to remember to consider the fact that maybe this scientist is paid off, or completely fake all together.Or simply that the results of any study are subject to interpretation, the conditions of any study may vary from those in the real world, often two or more studies taking slightly different approaches to answering the same question come up with contradictory results, and sometimes even a seemingly credible result can't be duplicated in later studies.

I haven't read the magazine article in question here, or any studies on the effects of MDMA use (while I have read articles, other peoples' interpretations of those studies, about them) so I'm not making a judgement about the results or conclusions. Just recommending that when you read stuff like that you should keep in mind what it is you are reading.

Originally posted by richy
in a study conducted by me i found out there is a strong link between retardation and people that pop those pills. hell the pills might not cause it, but if thats your idea of kicks lol the case is rested your honour.

srry if people here indulge in pills and powder but i just dont get it. its messes with you big style, no one knows just how bad. scientists can argue forever, people still die on the stuff. im just anti pills n powders.

Richy,

You hit the nail on the head. The scientists can argue the facts till they are blue in the face (uhhm...is that a symptom of something)...the real truth is....if you are so un-intelegent that you accept the risk of playing Russian Roulette with your life for an artificial high then you deserve the body bag that is waiting for you.

Simon

I was in dancesafe for a few years.

The people I came across that were on drugs (E more so than others) were in a retarded-like state of mind. :)

People are going to do what they are going to do, but they need to be more responsible.

Originally posted by appletreats
Good, I was wurried i might git brian daomainge form htaat xtacy


lmao

i nos haw u fealls

Coincidentally, in the Science Times section of today's NY Times (for some reason, though, I can't find it on the web edition) is an article highlighting one kind of problem that studies like those on Ecstasy face. The article specifically focuses on studies on hormone replacement therapy, but the point is the same, and it's a big issue in the field of epidemiology -- randomized studies often contradict the results of observational studies, and that is often casting doubt on the validity of observational results.

Studies on things like Ecstasy use have all been observational: taken from the observation of people who use it. The problem is that there are likely things the group of people who use any drug (to use this example; similar problems can be found with any other observational study) have in common that might influence the results. More accurate results presumably could be gotten from a random study: a group of randomly-selected people would be given Ecstasy, and the results tracked. For obvious reasons, those studies haven't been done.

yepper dooo..

First a post about weed, now extasy, man you guys party to hard :)

I'm surprised nobody mentioned "spine" :D

Ecstasy is stored at the bottom of your spine.

It releases itself after 5 years* for about 1 to 5 seconds**

During its release, if you move your eyes, one of two things happen:

1. your vision becomes blurred for about **
2. or you either blank out for about **

If you don't move your eyes for **, you'll be okay.
If you move your eyes during this ** period, you might have a problem, especially if you're driving.

* off the tip of my head, I think it was 5 years
** average