Quote:
Originally Posted by susie123
Well I for one will be watching these programmes (there are two, one Wed and one Thurs), Keith Allen or no Keith Allen. It looks to me to be more science than sensationalism and as a scientist I shall be interested in the results and conclusion. I've never taken recreational drugs nor am I likely to but I'm still interested in learning more about the subject. It's all to easy to close the mind to such things but a few more facts can't be a bad thing before considering the evidence, even if it doesn't change one's mind.
I don't envy the participants if they have to spend too much time in a MRI scanner - not an altogether pleasant experience.
From the TV guide:
Two live programmes which follow volunteers as they take MDMA, the pure form of ecstasy, as part of a scientific study... The first live programme unravels the mysteries of MDMA, revealing how the drug affects the brain. The six-month long neuroscience study, designed by two leading experts on MDMA, uses functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine how MDMA affects the resting brain in healthy volunteers. The programme also looks at the potential side-effects and dangers of taking MDMA and includes a discussion with an expert who disagrees with the study and is sceptical about its purpose.
The second live programme investigates the implications of a scientific study of the effects of MDMA, including potential clinical uses such as whether it could offer a breakthrough in the treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. The programme discovers what recreational users can learn from the trial before discussing MDMA's classification as a Class A drug and possible long-term effects.
The Daily Mail is concerned that the programme may encourage drug use but I think it's a brave attempt by Channel 4 to throw a bit more light on the subject.
Drugs Live: The Ecstasy Trial: Pioneering science -- or a cynical new low from Channel 4? | Mail Online
Actually I'd have quite liked to have taken part... |
Very well said Sue.
What I don't get is why is finding out the facts about something so offensive to people like the Daily Mail? It seems to them it's OK to spread possible misinformation to put people off, rather than have a proper scientific investigation and clarify the facts.
MDMA was legal in the USA till about 1985 and in the late 70's and early 80's was used by hip Psychotherapists in that country and people reported miracle results in breaking down marriage problems etc. As the drug gets people talking in a way they would not without taking it. It was made illegal around late 85 and Psychotherapists were not allowed to use it anymore.
I havn't tried to get any, but from what I've picked up from the Internet and news reports etc - it's very hard to get pure MDMA now, the drugs dealers call it MDMA but it's not pure, it's cut with other things - which is actually more dangerous. Also the chemical MDMA is made from, is taken form trees that grow in the Rainforests of places like Brazil, Malaysia and the drug enforcement agencies are very successful at stopping gangs getting their hands on it. Either stealing it from legit chemists or they pay local tribes to break down the trees and extract the chemicals on site. Either way drug enforcement, are stopping the gangs who make the drug getting their hands on the raw materials. But that doesn't stop the gangs using other chemicals and calling it MDMA anyway.
You are right about the MRI scanner I certainly wouldn't want to spend 90mins in one, especially under the influence, when body movement is restricted.