First of all, let me apologize for my tone last night. Drinking and posting is hazardous to one's credibility. Let's talk about circular logic. From your article: Ecstacy is illegal because it's dangerous, yet one of the reasons for stating that it is dangerous is because it is illegal. Does this make sense? If I was 15 and read that I'd imediately dismiss the whole article. I never stated that X was dangerous because it is illegal. The article I posted refutes your charge. Very clearly, you did not take notice that my first post stated that there are some real dangers. Go back and read it again. As far as talking out of my ass, I suggest we compare college transcripts. If the total number of neuroscience classes you took is even half of mine, I'll gladly admit talking out of my ass. As far as evidence, here's some. Your class record is irrelevant to this discussion. Facts and ideas earn respect regardless of their messenger. Whether you are a Doctor or a high school dropout, your argument is fair game for constructive criticism. In regard to "On the State of the Public Health", your article shows that MDMA is not an important danger to the lives of the drug's users. The Orange County Register, Saturday April 28, 2001, ran a headline stating that <i>"Teen deaths from Ecstasy rise along with popularity"</i>. Who is correct here? Can you be sure? More importantly, your article fails to address is the long term health hazards that MDMA produces. MDMA may not kill you, but there is significant evidence to show that X can cause brain damage, liver damage, and heart attacks. Read this article for more information on the subject. http://www.ohsinc.com/Ecstasy_MDMA.htm How about the following from the Institute of Mental health- <i>The effects of long-term MDMA use are just beginning to undergo scientific analysis. In 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health conducted a study of a small group of habitual MDMA users who were abstaining from use. The study revealed that the abstinent users suffered damage to the neurons in the brain that transmit serotonin, an important biochemical involved in a variety of critical functions including learning, sleep, and integration of emotion. The results of the study indicate that recreational MDMA users may be at risk of developing permanent brain damage that may manifest itself in depression, anxiety, memory loss, and other neuropsychotic disorders. </i> Your second article is interesting but inconclusive. I can go on. I am sure you can, but so can I, and therein lies the problem with your argument. The health hazards of MDMA are highly controversial. At best, anybody who uses X is taking a serious risk with their health. I agree that our government has not been forthcoming with its citizens about the effects of some drugs, especially mar1juana. I strongly disagree with you though, that promoting the use of MDMA is responsible behavior. This includes coy remarks about one's desire to use X on a public message boards. I have said my piece, and I will attempt to be more civil in the future.
too much fat in ones diet leads to more deaths than XTC... now where is that ignore button for cmrockfan...
You are free to ignore me, and your analogy is poor. Medical research shows that you can use X for a week, and you may suffer permanent brain damage. The effects of eating hamburgers and fries for a week is reversible.
