I for one have never seen anyone have a problem other than turning down offers of water.
There are both short and long-term risks associated with taking MDMA. It’s contraindicated in combination with various other drugs, including MAO inhibitors. Following harm reduction principles lowers the risk of things like hyperthermia or liver failure, but it’s nonetheless the case that there are idiosyncratic reactions and “single dose deaths” where nothing else is amiss – they’re just very rare. Epidemiologically, alcohol causes far more harm, but people don’t tend to die after they’ve had their first glass of wine.
A number of studies have indicated that sustained, regular use of MDMA increases the risk of problems with depression, sleeplessness, etc, and that these aren’t necessarily reversible. It’s interesting that the US safety site Rollsafe recommends three months (or at least six weeks) between experiences – which is not how a lot of people we know lived their lives for a while.
(Also interesting: Rollsafe recommends sourcing via the dark web – where there are ratings systems anyone can see – vs dealers.)
So it’s not harmless, just safer than a bunch of other things.
I think legal, regulated MDMA is a long way off, if it ever arrives, so it’s a tiny bit frustrating that all the media that’s followed my MoS story has ignored the real angle, which is that it saves lives if and when people know what they’re taking, and if the people who may have to provide medical treatment know too. There are steps we can take to make that better right now.
Meanwhile, the Science Media Centre has polled some actual experts – and even the most conservative of them say regulating MDMA is not necessarily a crazy idea.
As usual, Key has an opinion on everything, even when it’s not based in fact. This time it’s MDMA.
Sigh. "I don't know the first thing about this, but I'm going to tell you anyway."
And you didn’t come and visit? We are right next door!
Being a drug mule means no time for social niceties.
Yeah that’s the key. With no guiding hand getting rid the most derailing comments it would quickly devolve. I don’t believe Russell would have pulled that trigger if he wasn’t about to step away from the keyboard, not so quickly anyway.
No, I wouldn't have. This is a very sensitive area and I was concerned he was going to say something that would really cause harm.
But I was also concerned that the discussion was going to start revolving around kiwi_guy's declarations, and that that was going deter other people, women especially, who had something to bring to it themselves.
I don’t believe in communism
Think of it as enlightened self-interest, then. Every child whose education is hampered by hunger, or who suffers a poverty-related disease will be a drain on the public purse for decades.
In South Auckland, we're already facing a public-health time bomb that was set ticking in the 1990s when various "third world diseases" rocketed. This stuff does hurt us all.
She HAS got the right to decide – whether to hop in the sack with a guy or not, or use contraception aware that there is a very tiny risk it doesn’t work.
What's the guy in the sack doing?
Hey, look, no offence, but I have to go and make a TV show and I don't want it on my mind that you might be saying something harmful or really upsetting while I'm doing that.
Further, your shouty capital letters and selective moral judgement are probably already deterring women who might have some actual experience to bring to this discussion.
So, sorry, but I've blocked you.