Posted on 09/02/2002 10:16:14 AM PDT by Texaggie79
But it's illegal...so it's baaaaaaaaaaaaad even if there are fewer deaths!
Uh, yeah, it does. Not only does X cause the release of serotonin and dopamine, but it also acts as an SSRI. Look it up before making blanket statements.
Hey, I go to a Christian Bible teaching church that has an awesome Rock N Roll band. My kids actually like going to services with me....
Personally, I believe anyone should be able to choose what they eat or drink. However, as a taxpayer I don't want to fund the federal and state sponsored programs for those individuals who claim that drugs screwed their lives up.
How many drug treatment programs are there in this country that rely on taxpayer $$$'s? I'll support your right to use any drug you want as soon as all state sponsored drug treatment programs are defunded.
Really?
Really! Legalise all drugs. We have a need for a "slave" class in America who will willingly endure working at menial tasks just as long as they make enough money to smoke the best pot or take the latest designer drug. Religion used to be the opiate of the masses. Now, opiates are the opiate of the masses.
We need a complacent populace of stoned indiduals in order that the freedoms granted us by God are taken from us by a benevolent government. As long as we are allowed the "freedom" to ask for better drugs and fewer drug laws we have Paradise!
Seems tha CNN and NY Times and public school is doing quite the adequate job, don't you think?
Damned public schools!
I don't drink.
My comments WERE on topic, as you would have seen if you had taken any care in reading my comments.
I am not homophobic -- I don't fear sodomites -- I am repulsed by their behavior and their attempts to force validation of their lifestyle from others -- especially amongst the children in schools.
So keep your unrequested freeking advice to yourself...
Semper Fi
To the Editor: Judging from the content of Mr Vastag's Medical News & Perspectives article,1 it appears that he missed the big-picture message from the 60 researchers who presented the latest science findings on MDMA (methylenedioxymethamphetamine; "ecstasy") at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The overarching message from this international conference with over 500 attendees was that MDMA is quite dangerous both in the short term and in the long term.
There is substantial scientific and clinical evidence to show that MDMA damages brain cells, which may account for the long-lasting behavioral effects that users report, such as memory loss and mood changes. Admittedly, there is still much that is not known about the consequences of using this drug; however, the conclusion from this NIH conference is that ecstasy is clearly anything but benign. Because of its stimulant properties MDMA can dangerously increase heart rate, blood pressure, and body temperature. Scientific experts at the conference have confirmed that it damages brain cells, even in occasional users. This is a message that the public needs to hear.
There is no disputing that MDMA use is increasing and that effective prevention messages must be matched with the appropriate population. The NIH will continue to support and disseminate research on this important topic as the science continues to unravel the consequences of this drug.
Alan I. Leshner, PhD
National Institutes of Health
Washington, DC
MDMA is the son of MDA, crank. The data on crank is in. A nono for neurons.
Its my understanding that alcohol dosn't damage brain cells but kills them. If this is true, which is worse, alcohol or ecstacy?
LOL....I suppose if you enjoy incoherent rants it was well said?
I have no actually knowledge of the amount of money put into "drug treatment," but I'll agree with you here. If one wants to imbibe, then they should pay for any necessary treatment that comes a long with their freedom.
I didn't accuse LindaSOG of being a drunk, pothead, sodomite or anything else, I simply pointed out that following the advice of "Three leading psychologists" may not be a prudent act --- yet she immediately accused me of being a ranting homophobe.... Jeeeze, I believe some doth protest too much..
Hell, maybe that's it --- perhaps LindoSOG is a psychologist! Perhaps that's why she made an immediate attempt to psychoanalyze me as a homophobe....
Or, it may be as simple as her having had a bad experience with a plumber... I suggested a plumber would be a better source of information on the hazzards of the homosexual lifestyle than a psychologist.
--- Semper Fi
The difference between MDMA and MDA is a single methyl group and niether is "crank". "Crank" is a generic term applied mostly to "dirty" methamphetamines (as opposed to the crystal variety). MDA and MDMA are amphetamine derived, but neither is "crank".
I think crank refers to crystal methamphetimine. MDMA and MDA are both refered to as ecstasy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.