PayPal
BitCoin
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon
RSS
iTunes

DoseNation Podcast

Weekly news, talk, and interviews. More »

SUGGEST A STORY  |   CREATE AN ACCOUNT  |  
DoseNation.com

Ecstasy research gets $1.7 million grant

Hmm, this sounds promising:

The National Council on Drug Abuse awarded The University of Arizona College of Pharmacy $1.7 million for a nearly five-year study of the long-term adverse effects of the street drug ecstasy.

Terrence J. Monks, head of the UA's department of pharmacology and toxicology, is a specialist in the study of drug toxicology, or the "bad" effects of drugs. He will be the principal investigator on the newly funded project.

"Most research on ecstasy focuses on the pharmacological, or nontoxic effects of the drug," said Monks. "My interest lies in learning how the drug negatively affects the brain."

I rely on the more educated members of our audience to clue me in as to how "most research" into this substance has focused on "nontoxic effects" of Ecstasy given that researchers seem to be literally stumbling over each other to announce so-called negative effects from the drug. But thank goodness someone is willing to spend over a million dollars looking into this; after all, as Terrence Monks notes:

"A number of adverse effects are associated with the use of MDMA," Monks added. "MDMA use and abuse therefore has the potential to give rise to a major public health problem."

Ahhhh... let's see, after approximately, um, thirty years or so in which MDMA use has been relatively prevalent, it just might possibly have the "potential" to create a "major public health problem" and it's only the valiant, altruistic efforts of the likes of Terrence Monk (as funded by the National Council on Drug Abuse) that could prevent some horrible epidemic. Because, as is apparently obvious to the grantors at the National Council on Drug Abuse, hospital wards and psychiatric departments are crammed to the gills with the early waves of shell-shocked MDMA victims who could have benefited from Terrence Monk's brave and politically risky research.

What... ever.

Meanwhile, here's a completely unrelated tidbit of interest: apparently, in the UK at least, if you think you're snorting cocaine, you might actually be snorting Ecstasy! Oh noze!

Hospitals are facing an influx of drug users who have overdosed on MDMA -- the main ingredient of ecstasy -- because they thought they were snorting cocaine.

Professor David Nutt, incoming chairman of the Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, said drug users were buying white powder but did not know what it was.

"If you are buying white powders from someone, how do you know if you are getting MDMA, methamphetamine or cocaine? It's potentially very dangerous," he said.

You see, this is the real issue that needs research: what is the appropriate amount of street Ecstasy that can actually be snorted without causing a hospital visit? I like how Professor Nutt's equivocation - "It's potentially very dangerous" - means that there's inherently an amount of at least one of these white powders that isn't actually dangerous. Whee, let's boogie!

Posted By Scotto at 2008-11-19 00:07:14 permalink | comments
Tags: ecstasy MDMA
Facebook it! Twitter it! Digg it! Reddit! StumbleUpon It! Google Bookmark del.icio.us technorati Furl Yahoo! Bookmark
» More ways to bookmark this page


drizzy473@yahoo.com. : 2011-05-09 04:13:29
im an x e-tard and exstacy ruind my life i use to snort x everyday and now i have severe mental problems i have multiple personality disorders severe depression and am skitsofrenik and am agoraphobic and i cant spell very well as you can tell by reading this i used to be able to spell almost any word correctly and now cant even spell simple words i need a phsyciatrist but because of my mental issues it stops me from trying to get help if any doctors or therapist are reading this or if anyone wants to ask me questions my email is drizzy473 @yahoo.com
friendly joe. : 2008-11-21 14:12:20
Monks usually studies formation in animals of metabolites of MDMA that attach to glutathione and become neurotoxic. Probably this grant is more of the same.
bricoleur. : 2008-11-20 02:38:37
JM, and so it should not! The $1.7m should go to the group that looks into a 'nearly five-year study of the long-term effects of the street drug ecstasy' and reports on its findings, whether positive or negative.

Keep politics out of science.

bricoleur

JM. : 2008-11-19 16:48:47
How about a 'nearly five-year study of the long-term positive effects of the street drug ecstasy'? Funnily enough, I don't see that one getting $1.7 m for some strange reason...
Brandon. : 2008-11-19 10:34:38
Hey Kids, you can read">[link] the grant abstract here.

I think probably what the guy meant is that no one really noze why exstacy causes neurotoxicity

Sheldon. : 2008-11-19 09:46:33
betcha if they don't find any substantial negative effects the results will be buried, just like all the inconvenient studies that ended up saying get over marijuana and legalize it already.
josep yao. : 2008-11-19 09:37:06
i think that was either the most appropriate or inappropriate use of "Oh Noes!" that i have ever seen.

"if you think you're snorting cocaine, you might actually be snorting Ecstasy! Oh noze!"

Anonymous. : 2008-11-19 08:19:58
Well, if you're desperate to see something positive:

"MDMA use and abuse therefore has the potential to give rise to a major public health problem."

That's the first time in memory that I've seen the term "MDMA use." most of these so-called scientists would have just said "MDMA abuse therefore has the potential to give rise to a major public health problem."

I know, it's pretty feeble.

Illogic. : 2008-11-19 06:54:13
Anything you abuse have the potential to cause major health problems, so this just seems like stating the obvious really.
kilrari. : 2008-11-19 02:10:22
What is most disturbing to me is that from the brief look I've taken of this study so far, is how blatantly political it is, rather than scientific. it seems that with the renewed efforts for MDMA and psychedelic studies for medical use, which are neutral in the sense that they provide effective health benefits but don't aim to legalize all drugs or anything of that nature, this study is a political move to be waved around to the public with probably faulty methods and even faultier interpretations.

Seriously, the pseudo-scientist makes it a point to say, "MDMA use and abuse therefore has the potential to give rise to a major public health problem."

Scotto notes the obvious fact that MDMA has been out there for a long time and is already very illegal. I agree that proper long-term studies are still needed, but this Monks fellow clearly has some other motives.

The comments posted here do not reflect the views of the owners of this site.

HOME
COMMENTS
NEWS
ARCHIVE
EDITORS
REVIEW POLICY
SUGGEST A STORY
CREATE AN ACCOUNT
RSS | TWITTER | FACEBOOK
DIGG | REDDIT | SHARE