Ecstasy

[lankeela]

Not being wordly wise, can anyone tell me what Ecstasy actually is, and what was its original use, i.e. is it used to treat anything? Who decided it was a good idea to take it if you have not got anything wrong with you?

[jno]

it used to be used in psychotherapy, apparently. Seems to have started the night job in Dallas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylenedioxymet hamphetamine

[lankeela]

Now I know. Still can't understand why anyone would want to take it.

[gelda]

Why would anybody take any of these life threatening drugs?

[Quinlad]

Why would anyone drink alcohol or smoke fags?

Same reason.

[jake-the-peg]

There are actually very few deaths from extacy one of the reasons that the suggestion was to downgrade the drug.

It's not going to happen (at least at the moment for political reasons).

The government has nothing to gain in doing so and everything to lose.

Ironically the moment they start imposing regulations on alcohol and tobacco there's a huge cry of "nanny state".

[The Sherman]

lankeela i havent taken it but i have at least 20-30 friends that have and the reason they take it is casuse its fun!
it gives you a high just like alcohol gives you a high!

i've been with mates when there on it and while there not best company to me when not on it they always have fun!

[andy-hughes]

The taking of Ecstacy is a similar concept to playing Russian Roulette - yes the chances of you coming to harm are small - but the harm you can come to is a fatality.

As with any street drug, you never know the strength and composition of the drug you buy, so what may give you a nice buzz one Saturday could fry your synapses to wazoo and back, giving you a fatal heart attack on the way, the next.

The notion that the fatality statistics make an argument for lowering its classification is as facile as working out how many children get killed playing 'chicken' on railway lines, and then saying that in view of the low fatality rate, it's an acceptable way for children to pass their free time.

You do have to wonder how these people are trusted to be out on their own without supervision, never mind making opinions that influence government legislation.

[Quinlad]

Not quite sure your argument stacks up there, Andy.

Low fatality rates are often acceptable justification for recreational activities. Otherwise we'd be banning all sort of things beause of the small risk of fatality.

A higher proportion of people die from sky diving, rock climbing, playing rugby or fishing than using ecstasy.

Furthermore, the strength and composition issues that you rightly say lead to death by ecstacy are a direct consequence of its prohibition.

Bringing children into the argument might score emotive points, but I wouldn't let kids go sky diving either.

[The Sherman]

Andy everything in your argument is flawed!

playing russian roullette?
Yes i'll admit that whilst in the hands of illegal producers of the drug there is a chance that the dosage might not be right. (And indeed its why I think they should be legalised) however:
the fatalities from actual bad pills is considerably lower than people who die as a result of hyponatremia, mixing drugs, over dosing etc.
second its not in any dealers interst to kill his clients! thats bad business sense!
if you compare the effects of the drug with oh i dont know alcohol every study i've ever seen places alcohol as a far more dangerous mind altering substance.

Youa re far more likely to die from a drunk idiot picking a fight with you than you are taking a pill.

[poltergeist]

Quinlad top answer

[tamborine]

Uppers & downers were past names for these drugs. Judy Garland & stars of same era used them to fulfil their contracts around the world.