3 ms·

This is still very (very) much in dispute. You will find serious scientific evidence on both sides arguing for and against, but since three beers floors me the

by cnp 12y ago

This is still very (very) much in dispute. You will find serious scientific evidence on both sides arguing for and against, but since three beers floors me the next day and completely destroys my ability to think clearly, where MDMA refreshes and revitalizes pretty much every mental and sensory organ, I'll just go with my own findings on the matter :) This is the article I always like to post whenever the discussion comes up: "Pure MDMA can be 'safe' for adults", says BC's top health official http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pure-ecstasy-can-be-safe-for-adults-health-official-says-1.1229517 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pure-ecstasy-... ...And this video from 60 Minutes ("Ecstasy Rising") pretty much describing the demonization of MDMA as an elaborate government frame-up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNpFqJcJcps&feature=kp https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNpFqJcJcps&feature=kp

leephillips 12y ago
The article doesn't mention the neurotoxicity issue at all. The fact that you enjoy taking it doesn't mean that it is not a neurotoxin, just as the fact that I enjoy a martini doesn't mean that alcohol is not carcinogenic. Again, not my area of expertise, but I think it's notable that a neuroscientist with a rational attitude toward drugs who recounts his own positive experiences with MDMA says that he wouldn't take it now specifically because of what he claims is conclusive evidence that it kills nerve cells.
- cnp 12y ago
  It's a benefit vs risk scenereo. But the verdict is still out.
- Nursie 12y ago
  MDMA is (as the great man showed) just a small part of a whole family of compounds. It's no doubt a very magical part, but it's just one of many. IIRC there are others that have been found to have similar action but without the neurotoxicity. MBDB was one I think. Personally I'd love to try EVE and EDEN too... but that's a pipedream in a world where it's rare you can ever know what you're getting.
  - Scoundreller 12y ago
    It might be rare to know what you're getting, but that doesn't preclude you from utilizing various drug testing services that will test what you have and let you know the results.
  - girvo 12y ago
    Eve (MDEA) was quite an amazing experience, though (as always) lacking in a certain quality that MDA/MDMA have. The ones that have similar action (though subjectively don't really come that close) are the aminoindane-class analogues. They're interesting in their own right, too.
    - Nursie 12y ago
      Which ones? MDAI is odd and not all that much fun (on its own at any rate), and AFAICT from reading various forums, 2-AI and NM-2-AI don't really seem to do much for people either.
- aaren 12y ago
  I don't have a citation to hand, only my recent discussions about this, from someone that should equally know what they are talking about: The neurotoxicity has been demonstrated in rats, but at a dose that would be fatal in humans. Rats have better tolerance of the effect that mdma has on thermo-regulation and this allows the neurotoxic effect to manifest. If you gave a dose to a human that was sufficient to kill nerve cells, you would kill the human. Like I said, no citation to hand (someone else maybe??), but this is food for thought I think.
  - praxeologist 12y ago
    This can happen that some particular difference between species makes inferring risk of a molecule inaccurate. The real LD50 of nicotine is probably a good bit higher than thought now, but we can't just go poisoning people to really find out so we rely on animal models. I suspect that MDMA and related are somewhat physically harmful but is it more neurotoxic and has a greater addictive potential than legal drugs like alcohol? I don't think so.
    - cnp 12y ago
      yup.
- simonster 12y ago
  As you say, when it comes to the brain, there is only a modest relationship between how things feel and what damage is being done to neurons. Neurons themselves do not feel pain, so it is quite possible that you could take drugs that severely damage your brain without feeling their effects. Conversely, headaches and hangovers reflect irritation of the tissue surrounding your brain or of the nerves leading to it. While in some cases a headache can reflect a serious problem that affects or could affect the brain itself (e.g. meningitis), in most cases headaches don't imply damage to the central nervous system. I am a neuroscientist (in training, at least, in a subdiscipline that's only somewhat related but does occasionally involve drugging monkeys). There is good evidence that frequent use and probably even rare use of MDMA is bad for brains. Neurons don't necessarily die, but axons disappear. It is not clear that rare use of MDMA can cause lasting cognitive impairment in humans. While DrugMonkey is sometimes a bit of an asshole, I don't find much fault with his assessment of the current state of MDMA research in this post: http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2012/07/25/single-oral-dose-mdma-neurotoxicity-revisited/ http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2012/07/25/single-ora.... Note the caveat in the comments: although MDMA is probably neurotoxic, it is still not clear that the neurotoxicity translates to behaviorally meaningful deficits. There exist studies that have shown such deficits, but there also exist studies that have not. Most studies are correlational; I have yet to see a longitudinal study that provides convincing evidence that MDMA itself is a causative factor.

by cnp 12y ago

leephillips 12y ago

The article doesn't mention the neurotoxicity issue at all. The fact that you enjoy taking it doesn't mean that it is not a neurotoxin, just as the fact that I enjoy a martini doesn't mean that alcohol is not carcinogenic. Again, not my area of expertise, but I think it's notable that a neuroscientist with a rational attitude toward drugs who recounts his own positive experiences with MDMA says that he wouldn't take it now specifically because of what he claims is conclusive evidence that it kills nerve cells.

cnp 12y ago
It's a benefit vs risk scenereo. But the verdict is still out.
Nursie 12y ago
MDMA is (as the great man showed) just a small part of a whole family of compounds. It's no doubt a very magical part, but it's just one of many. IIRC there are others that have been found to have similar action but without the neurotoxicity. MBDB was one I think. Personally I'd love to try EVE and EDEN too... but that's a pipedream in a world where it's rare you can ever know what you're getting.
- Scoundreller 12y ago
  It might be rare to know what you're getting, but that doesn't preclude you from utilizing various drug testing services that will test what you have and let you know the results.
- girvo 12y ago
  Eve (MDEA) was quite an amazing experience, though (as always) lacking in a certain quality that MDA/MDMA have. The ones that have similar action (though subjectively don't really come that close) are the aminoindane-class analogues. They're interesting in their own right, too.
  - Nursie 12y ago
    Which ones? MDAI is odd and not all that much fun (on its own at any rate), and AFAICT from reading various forums, 2-AI and NM-2-AI don't really seem to do much for people either.
aaren 12y ago
I don't have a citation to hand, only my recent discussions about this, from someone that should equally know what they are talking about: The neurotoxicity has been demonstrated in rats, but at a dose that would be fatal in humans. Rats have better tolerance of the effect that mdma has on thermo-regulation and this allows the neurotoxic effect to manifest. If you gave a dose to a human that was sufficient to kill nerve cells, you would kill the human. Like I said, no citation to hand (someone else maybe??), but this is food for thought I think.
- praxeologist 12y ago
  This can happen that some particular difference between species makes inferring risk of a molecule inaccurate. The real LD50 of nicotine is probably a good bit higher than thought now, but we can't just go poisoning people to really find out so we rely on animal models. I suspect that MDMA and related are somewhat physically harmful but is it more neurotoxic and has a greater addictive potential than legal drugs like alcohol? I don't think so.
  - cnp 12y ago
    yup.
simonster 12y ago
As you say, when it comes to the brain, there is only a modest relationship between how things feel and what damage is being done to neurons. Neurons themselves do not feel pain, so it is quite possible that you could take drugs that severely damage your brain without feeling their effects. Conversely, headaches and hangovers reflect irritation of the tissue surrounding your brain or of the nerves leading to it. While in some cases a headache can reflect a serious problem that affects or could affect the brain itself (e.g. meningitis), in most cases headaches don't imply damage to the central nervous system. I am a neuroscientist (in training, at least, in a subdiscipline that's only somewhat related but does occasionally involve drugging monkeys). There is good evidence that frequent use and probably even rare use of MDMA is bad for brains. Neurons don't necessarily die, but axons disappear. It is not clear that rare use of MDMA can cause lasting cognitive impairment in humans. While DrugMonkey is sometimes a bit of an asshole, I don't find much fault with his assessment of the current state of MDMA research in this post: http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2012/07/25/single-oral-dose-mdma-neurotoxicity-revisited/ http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2012/07/25/single-ora.... Note the caveat in the comments: although MDMA is probably neurotoxic, it is still not clear that the neurotoxicity translates to behaviorally meaningful deficits. There exist studies that have shown such deficits, but there also exist studies that have not. Most studies are correlational; I have yet to see a longitudinal study that provides convincing evidence that MDMA itself is a causative factor.