Ecstasy research gets $1.7 million grant Hmm, this sounds promising: The National Council on Drug Abuse awarded The University of Arizona College of Pharmacy $1.7 million for a nearly five-year study of the long-term adverse effects of the street drug ecstasy. Terrence J. Monks, head of the UA's department of pharmacology and toxicology, is a specialist in the study of drug toxicology, or the "bad" effects of drugs. He will be the principal investigator on the newly funded project. "Most research on ecstasy focuses on the pharmacological, or nontoxic effects of the drug," said Monks. "My interest lies in learning how the drug negatively affects the brain." I rely on the more educated members of our audience to clue me in as to how "most research" into this substance has focused on "nontoxic effects" of Ecstasy given that researchers seem to be literally stumbling over each other to announce so-called negative effects from the drug. But thank goodness someone is willing to spend over a million dollars looking into this; after all, as Terrence Monks notes: I rely on the more educated members of our audience to clue me in as to how "most research" into this substance has focused on "nontoxic effects" of Ecstasy given that researchers seem to be literally stumbling over each other to announce so-called negative effects from the drug. But thank goodness someone is willing to spend over a million dollars looking into this; after all, as Terrence Monks notes: "A number of adverse effects are associated with the use of MDMA," Monks added. "MDMA use and abuse therefore has the potential to give rise to a major public health problem." Ahhhh... let's see, after approximately, um, thirty years or so in which MDMA use has been relatively prevalent, it just might possibly have the "potential" to create a "major public health problem" and it's only the valiant, altruistic efforts of the likes of Terrence Monk (as funded by the National Council on Drug Abuse) that could prevent some horrible epidemic. Because, as is apparently obvious to the grantors at the National Council on Drug Abuse, hospital wards and psychiatric departments are crammed to the gills with the early waves of shell-shocked MDMA victims who could have benefited from Terrence Monk's brave and politically risky research. Ahhhh... let's see, after approximately, um, thirty years or so in which MDMA use has been relatively prevalent, it just might possibly have the "potential" to create a "major public health problem" and it's only the valiant, altruistic efforts of the likes of Terrence Monk (as funded by the National Council on Drug Abuse) that could prevent some horrible epidemic. Because, as is apparently obvious to the grantors at the National Council on Drug Abuse, hospital wards and psychiatric departments are crammed to the gills with the early waves of shell-shocked MDMA victims who could have benefited from Terrence Monk's brave and politically risky research. What... ever. What... ever. Meanwhile, here's a completely unrelated tidbit of interest: apparently, in the UK at least, if you think you're snorting cocaine, you might actually be snorting Ecstasy! Oh noze! Meanwhile, here's a completely unrelated tidbit of interest: apparently, in the UK at least, if you think you're snorting cocaine, you might actually be snorting Ecstasy! Oh noze! Hospitals are facing an influx of drug users who have overdosed on MDMA -- the main ingredient of ecstasy -- because they thought they were snorting cocaine. Professor David Nutt, incoming chairman of the Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, said drug users were buying white powder but did not know what it was. "If you are buying white powders from someone, how do you know if you are getting MDMA, methamphetamine or cocaine? It's potentially very dangerous," he said. You see, this is the real issue that needs research: what is the appropriate amount of street Ecstasy that can actually be snorted without causing a hospital visit? I like how Professor Nutt's equivocation - "It's potentially very dangerous" - means that there's inherently an amount of at least one of these white powders that isn't actually dangerous. Whee, let's boogie! You see, this is the real issue that needs research: what is the appropriate amount of street Ecstasy that can actually be snorted without causing a hospital visit? I like how Professor Nutt's equivocation - "It'svery dangerous" - means that there's inherently an amount of at least one of these white powders that isn'tdangerous. Whee, let's boogie! » more at: www.abc15.com Posted By Scotto at 2008-11-19 00:07:14 permalink | comments Tags: ecstasy MDMA » More ways to bookmark this page





Comments (10)