Two Israelis Arrested With 23,000 Ecstasy Pills

[teatree]

Well that's just it isn't it? If you don't want to do drugs, don't do them! I don't see why those who want to do them shouldn't be able to.

There are dangers with anything. If people have a natural tendency to psychosis then they should stay away from cannabis (the limited research into cannabis does point to this). Some people should stay away from beer, some should eat less, some should quit smoking. Let's all be individuals and exercise some freedom of choice and do what we want to do.

[gburns57au]

Well that's just it isn't it? If you don't want to do drugs, don't do them! I don't see why those who want to do them shouldn't be able to.

There are dangers with anything. If people have a natural tendency to psychosis then they should stay away from cannabis (the limited research into cannabis does point to this). Some people should stay away from beer, some should eat less, some should quit smoking. Let's all be individuals and exercise some freedom of choice and do what we want to do.

Hahaha.....back to that old chestnut again....say no more.....hahaha

[howtoescape]

Crack is coke

Try both then come back to me and say they are the same.

[Ricardo]

Tobacco on its own is a plant...the commercial ciggies do have chemicals in them....most noticable is phosphorus.....the chemicals is what causes the addiction to them not the tobacco leaf. but once again controlled process and levels. If the tobacco leaf was smoked on its own then it would be less addictive and less dangerous.

I used to work in the industry, and would point out that many commercial tobacco products do not have extra chemicals added, in fact adulteration used to be illegal in the UK, under quality-laws similar to the German ones for beer-making. British-manufactured ciggies used to achieve their flavour by blending tobacco from many different countries, but one plant, hence the emphasis on 'pure Virginia tobacco' in their advertising. But not by adding extra chemicals to the natural 'cut-rag' leaf.

However one effect of the drive for low-tar-but-fuller-flavour was that, having blended milder tobaccos, some producers in other countries then needed to add flavour back in ! A bit of an 'own-goal' really !

Many smokers liked 'mentholated' products, however this was achieved by impregnating the foil-paper, not the tobacco itself, because that was illegal in the UK, as I have already pointed out.

Another ploy was to use micro-holes in the cork-effect filter-paper, so that machine-testing caused some smoke to bypass the machine & produce a lower T&N-reading, but when real smokers used the product, their lips covered the holes and a 'low-tar' cigarrette thus gave a 'satisfying' smoking-experience. If only this level of ingenuity could be applied to solving global-warming or poverty !

The general result of all this was, that British cigarrettes enjoyed a good reputation, for the quality of their tobacco, compared to for example French cigarrettes such as Gauloises, let-alone poorer-quality products produced locally in the 3rd-world, or in countries which didn't have laws against adulterating the natural tobacco. British cigarrettes were therefore exported successfully throughout the world.

The addiction is therefore caused, not by added chemicals as erroneously stated above, but by the chemicals produced by burning the tobacco itself, and of course especially by nicotine, as we now know more certainly.

All of which is regretably but I thought it might interest or enlighten some readers of this thread.

[bina]

emporor thud, i was quoting for israel as they are listed in the illegal drug laws but i cant give u the quote sa it is in hebrew; ; the point was about the original news item not whether i consider them bad or not, or illegal; and then the second news item in the ma'ariv that i found lst friday on page 12 that had a blurb about catching some dealers with bright green smiley faced ecstasy here in israel and finding that it was adulterated with pesticide, and posting to warn potential users that that batch was poisonous to the user. in addition, the ma'ariv mentioned that mdma was not on the list of illegal drugs but after i checked in hebrew for the laws, it is on the list, and actually high up with the 'hard' drugs....

read back and dont take things out of context... and i dont really care what the brits do or dont do... the whole article was about two israelis caught in the act, and whether or not it was an international operation /mafia style so i went to have a look...

i personally couldnt care less. my kids are more teetollar then i am (wasnt but dont do anything now, health wise etc); i asked the older one, the one who is exposed to this stuff every weekend at the pubs etc; she says its very common, she doesnt do it, and doesnt like to deal with people when they are on it, and its their own problem if they keep using it and its a waste of money and time... but for her, alcohol and ciggies are also on the nono list. also for my son and youngest... and its not from me harping at them... i smoked dope in the states; drank the weekend evening drinks here; smoked for two years ... decided each time to stop, and that was it. the only thing i cant (dont want to i guess) stop is drinking my four cups of nescafe a day...

argueing about drugs is like argueing about god or religioun in general; it becomes very polarized... and in the long run, useless arguements cause both sides feel they are right, and both sides can find articles that more or less prove their own point...

so its gotten boring..

bina

israel

[Ricardo]

Then you wouldnt know if these fundamentalists are also the same ones who are funded somewhat by drug money to be able to afford to carry acts of terrorism.

Weren't the CIA allegedly part-funding themselves, by the S.E.Asian drugs-operations (Air America etc), at one time ? But of course they would never ever commit acts of terrorism, to further the political aims, of their masters.

I guess the important words are "Allegedly"....and ..."themselves" and the other important question is....did they commit acts of terrorism?

Would plotting to assassinate the Head of State of a neighbouring country (Castro in Cuba), or overthrow the governments of other countries by force (Cuba or Chile ?), count as terrorist acts ? Possibly to the citizens on those countries - whose lives would be threatened.

I'm not saying that the CIA weren't just doing their jobs. Which is to defend the interests of the USA.

Rather that terrorism can be terror as perceived by the people affected by it. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom-fighter.

[sbk]

emporor thud, i was quoting for israel as they are listed in the illegal drug laws but i cant give u the quote sa it is in hebrew; ; the point was about the original news item not whether i consider them bad or not, or illegal; and then the second news item in the ma'ariv that i found lst friday on page 12 that had a blurb about catching some dealers with bright green smiley faced ecstasy here in israel and finding that it was adulterated with pesticide, and posting to warn potential users that that batch was poisonous to the user. in addition, the ma'ariv mentioned that mdma was not on the list of illegal drugs but after i checked in hebrew for the laws, it is on the list, and actually high up with the 'hard' drugs....

read back and dont take things out of context... and i dont really care what the brits do or dont do... the whole article was about two israelis caught in the act, and whether or not it was an international operation /mafia style so i went to have a look...

i personally couldnt care less. my kids are more teetollar then i am (wasnt but dont do anything now, health wise etc); i asked the older one, the one who is exposed to this stuff every weekend at the pubs etc; she says its very common, she doesnt do it, and doesnt like to deal with people when they are on it, and its their own problem if they keep using it and its a waste of money and time... but for her, alcohol and ciggies are also on the nono list. also for my son and youngest... and its not from me harping at them... i smoked dope in the states; drank the weekend evening drinks here; smoked for two years ... decided each time to stop, and that was it. the only thing i cant (dont want to i guess) stop is drinking my four cups of nescafe a day...

argueing about drugs is like argueing about god or religioun in general; it becomes very polarized... and in the long run, useless arguements cause both sides feel they are right, and both sides can find articles that more or less prove their own point...

so its gotten boring..

bina

israel

Well posted Bina, seems you are the only one who actually remembers the original topic

[sbk]

Actually, I think bina's claim was that they are listed as a dangerous substance according to Israeli law.

Anyway, anyone heard what happened to these guys? Are there any more updates?

[bina]

well thud, i stick with the american studies, and also, apparently a majority of kids i know must be unstable to be so affected by the stuff (i consider alcohol and valium as dangerous substances also, but so is driving a car... but then again, living is dangerous and then u die as my ex monk husband reminds me often.... )

NIDA InfoFacts: MDMA (Ecstasy)

PDF Version [336K]

Printer-friendly Version

En Español

MDMA (3,4 methylenedioxymethamphetamine) is a synthetic, psychoactive drug chemically similar to the stimulant methamphetamine and the hallucinogen mescaline. Street names for MDMA include Ecstasy, Adam, XTC, hug, beans, and love drug. MDMA is an illegal drug that acts as both a stimulant and psychedelic, producing an energizing effect, as well as distortions in time and perception and enhanced enjoyment from tactile experiences.

MDMA exerts its primary effects in the brain on neurons that use the chemical serotonin to communicate with other neurons. The serotonin system plays an important role in regulating mood, aggression, sexual activity, sleep, and sensitivity to pain.

Research in animals indicates that MDMA is neurotoxic; whether or not this is also true in humans is currently an area of intense investigation. MDMA can also be dangerous to health and, on rare occasions, lethal.

Health Hazards

For some people, MDMA can be addictive. A survey of young adult and adolescent MDMA users found that 43 percent of those who reported ecstasy use met the accepted diagnostic criteria for dependence, as evidenced by continued use despite knowledge of physical or psychological harm, withdrawal effects, and tolerance (or diminished response), and 34 percent met the criteria for drug abuse. Almost 60 percent of people who use MDMA report withdrawal symptoms, including fatigue, loss of appetite, depressed feelings, and trouble concentrating.

Cognitive Effects

Chronic users of MDMA perform more poorly than nonusers on certain types of cognitive or memory tasks. Some of these effects may be due to the use of other drugs in combination with MDMA, among other factors.

Physical Effects

In high doses, MDMA can interfere with the body’s ability to regulate temperature. On rare but unpredictable occasions, this can lead to a sharp increase in body temperature (hyperthermia), resulting in liver, kidney, and cardiovascular system failure, and death.

Because MDMA can interfere with its own metabolism (breakdown within the body), potentially harmful levels can be reached by repeated drug use within short intervals.

Users of MDMA face many of the same risks as users of other stimulants such as cocaine and amphetamines. These include increases in heart rate and blood pressure, a special risk for people with circulatory problems or heart disease, and other symptoms such as muscle tension, involuntary teeth clenching, nausea, blurred vision, faintness, and chills or sweating.

Psychological Effects

These can include confusion, depression, sleep problems, drug craving, and severe anxiety. These problems can occur during and sometimes days or weeks after taking MDMA.

Neurotoxicity

Research in animals links MDMA exposure to long-term damage to neurons that are involved in mood, thinking, and judgment. A study in nonhuman primates showed that exposure to MDMA for only 4 days caused damage to serotonin nerve terminals that was evident 6 to 7 years later. While similar neurotoxicity has not been definitively shown in humans, the wealth of animal research indicating MDMA's damaging properties suggests that MDMA is not a safe drug for human consumption.

Hidden Risk: Drug Purity

Other drugs chemically similar to MDMA, such as MDA (methylenedioxyamphetamine, the parent drug of MDMA) and PMA (paramethoxyamphetamine, associated with fatalities in the U.S. and Australia) are sometimes sold as ecstasy. These drugs can be neurotoxic or create additional health risks to the user. Also, ecstasy tablets may contain other substances in addition to MDMA, such as ephedrine (a stimulant); dextromethorphan (DXM, a cough suppressant that has PCP-like effects at high doses); ketamine (an anesthetic used mostly by veterinarians that also has PCP-like effects); caffeine; cocaine; and methamphetamine. While the combination of MDMA with one or more of these drugs may be inherently dangerous, users might also combine them with substances such as marijuana and alcohol, putting themselves at further physical risk.

obviously both h. and t. (the two kids who were most problematic here amng the 200+ kids that i have daily contact with; over the age of 12 and under the age of 19... ) had a low threshhold for ths stuff; i suspect that i have very high threshold of reaction to things...

maybe the way the stuff is used among our kids is different than among brits or americans; our kids are users pre army and then after army when they are much more 'delicate' psychologically: pre army they are very nervous (understandably) and post army they are just waiting to break out in all directions and sometimes they fall apart.

h. still has memory lapses; still has depressions; has gained back his weight, is now a respected commander (whatever u might think thud, for us that is a good thing in of itself and since u dont live here, and experience what we do, u wont understand where i am coming from)... h.'s mother is a doctor and has done in depth research in this due to her son having so many problems with the stuff (he also has other problems in his life which probably added to his general feelings) who is probably much more in depth than any of us as she is obsessive about finding and synthesizing information. as an ex pot user also from the states she is not predisposed to claim drug users are all scum, all drugs are bad, however since it affected her son to the point of at least once being hospitalized with cramping headaches etc; and memory loss, behavioral changes etc, she has made it her business to find out all she can about the stuff in two languages....

the point was, how stupid can u be to carry that much thru an airport: and i dont think it was for personal use either... and how much these people make off of the weaknesses of others regardless...

btw just to make a point, my duagher gets ritilin. the pro and con arguements are about the same as for the use of X... addictive or not? long term affects or not? good points vx. bad points? appetite supressant so how to deal with weight control vx chemically induced anorexia in a teen age girl. will she become an addictive personality due to the fact that she gets a pill every day to 'help' her? i personally make it a point to remind her that the little white pill she gets is for a specific purpose and not a cure all for all her woes and stife in life...

anyway, it obviously was ho-hum news in comparison to whatever other news we have here daily, (the usual bombing in shderot, killing off palestinians in gaza, police corruption, price of bread going up, school strike finally over, etc...)so all but us on thaivisa have lost total interest in this as a news item...

now if they just made those darn pills in lavender....

bina

israel

[gburns57au]

I used to work in the industry, and would point out that many commercial tobacco products do not have extra chemicals added, in fact adulteration used to be illegal in the UK, under quality-laws similar to the German ones for beer-making. British-manufactured ciggies used to achieve their flavour by blending tobacco from many different countries, but one plant, hence the emphasis on 'pure Virginia tobacco' in their advertising. But not by adding extra chemicals to the natural 'cut-rag' leaf.

However one effect of the drive for low-tar-but-fuller-flavour was that, having blended milder tobaccos, some producers in other countries then needed to add flavour back in ! A bit of an 'own-goal' really !

Many smokers liked 'mentholated' products, however this was achieved by impregnating the foil-paper, not the tobacco itself, because that was illegal in the UK, as I have already pointed out.

Another ploy was to use micro-holes in the cork-effect filter-paper, so that machine-testing caused some smoke to bypass the machine & produce a lower T&N-reading, but when real smokers used the product, their lips covered the holes and a 'low-tar' cigarrette thus gave a 'satisfying' smoking-experience. If only this level of ingenuity could be applied to solving global-warming or poverty !

The general result of all this was, that British cigarrettes enjoyed a good reputation, for the quality of their tobacco, compared to for example French cigarrettes such as Gauloises, let-alone poorer-quality products produced locally in the 3rd-world, or in countries which didn't have laws against adulterating the natural tobacco. British cigarrettes were therefore exported successfully throughout the world.

The addiction is therefore caused, not by added chemicals as erroneously stated above, but by the chemicals produced by burning the tobacco itself, and of course especially by nicotine, as we now know more certainly.

All of which is regretably but I thought it might interest or enlighten some readers of this thread.

Explain the glow in the ciggies under black light.....and also the industry admissions that the commercial tailor made ciggies contain many chemicals...

[gburns57au]

Bina - we have already established what you have posted above - that despite the obvious scaremongering in that particular report Ecstacy remains a relatively unharmful drug.

We know already that Ecstasy is not physically addictive yet some users become psychologically addicted.

Interesting that you also completely disregard British studies which are at the forefront of illicit drug research yet happily accept the loose findings from this resource based on their opinion and speculation after testing on animals.

"Research in animals indicates that MDMA is neurotoxic; whether or not this is also true in humans is currently an area of intense investigation."

"Research in animals links MDMA exposure to long-term damage to neurons that are involved in mood, thinking, and judgment."

"A study in nonhuman primates showed that exposure to MDMA for only 4 days caused damage to serotonin nerve terminals that was evident 6 to 7 years later. While similar neurotoxicity has not been definitively shown in humans, the wealth of animal research indicating MDMA's damaging properties suggests that MDMA is not a safe drug for human consumption."

Bunkum, methinks.

Please explain "relatively unharmful"

Addiction is addiction....nearly all drugs cause a psychological addiction...

Can you define here what the difference is between Physical and Psychological addiction.

[gburns57au]

The only connection to Israel is that, that is where these guys are from....nothing says the drugs came from Israel....I believe the report states a European country....they were caught in Thailand with drugs destined for various countries none of which were Israel.

[gburns57au]

Please explain "relatively unharmful"

It is perfectly explained in the link to the PDF report given by the UK Medical Research Council I posted earlier.

I am looking at the term unharmful......why not use the word safe....is it because it is not a safe drug thereby saying that it is a harmful drug but relative so ???

You may say it is just semantics but the use of the term unharmful gives the connatation that it is indeed harmful otherwise the word safe would have been used.

And please your definition of physical addiction and Psychological addiction....I think you missed that one.

Edited December 18, 2007 by gburns57au

[mikethevigoman]

What a load of sanctimonious pr**ks! How many of you illiberal morons smoke and get pissed up on Thai wiskey? I doubt if many of you actually know what the effects of ecstasy are. Its just a 'drug' to you, a term that triggers a viscerally rabid reaction. Heroin, cannabis, cocaine, LSD, etc are all very different and deserve individual consideration.

Stop drinking beer! It makes you slow and stupid and docile - its what your government wants you to drink so that you just accept them pounding you up the rrrrrrr's.

Ecstasy is a drug that produces a feeling of friendship and love. I think the late great Bill Hicks sums up how much of a danger unconditional love can be to society:

Hicks, speaking of psilocybin mushrooms:

“I’m glad they’re against the law, cos you know what happened when I took ‘em? I lay in a field of green grass for four hours going ‘My God… I love… everything.’ The heavens parted, God looked down and rained gifts of forgiveness onto my being, healing me on every level – psychically, physically, emotionally. And I realised our true nature is spirit not body, that we are eternal beings and God’s love is unconditional and there is nothing we can ever do to change that. It is only our illusion that we are separate from God or that we are alone. In fact, the reality is that we are one with God and he loves us.Now if that isn’t a hazard to this country. You see my point. How are we gonna keep building nuclear weapons, you know what I mean? What’s gonna happen to the arms industry when we realize we’re all one? Ha ha ha ha ha. It’s gonna fuc_k up the economy. The economy that’s fake anyway. Which would be a real bummer, you know. You can see why the government’s cracking down… on the idea of experiencing unconditional love. Isn’t it interesting that the two drugs that are legal – alcohol and cigarettes – the two drugs that do absolutely nothing for you whatsoever. And drugs that grow naturally upon this planet, drugs that open your eyes up to make you realize how you’re being fuc_ked every day of your life. Those drugs are against the law. Wow! Coincidence? I don’t know. I’m sure their motives are pure.”

Sounds like he got instant paranoia to me.

Remember all the doped up hippies walking around in the 60's with a joint hanging from between their lips going "peace man" and preaching love etc....they claimed that dope was a harmless natural thing....well they were right...it is.....till you smoke it!!

Now we know the effects of it in the long term.

Nobody denies the damage that alcohol and ciggies do...the government recognises it too. These were socially acceptable long before anyone realised the dangers...I guess the reason why the others are illegal is because most of the governments of the world dont want to make the same mistake again.

BTW....Tobacco is also a naturally occuring plant and alcohol is generally made from natural products...the same cant be said for ecstacy.

Not paranoia, I just have the ability to think outside the box that most people are confined to. Hey, smoke some weed and maybe you'll see what I mean.

And, actually we don't know the long term effects of cannabis because no long term tests have been done. What effects are you talking about?

BTW.. the ingredients of beer have to go through some kind of Frankenstien process before they become beer and cigs have loads of chemicals added to them. Weed on the other hand is simply picked of the plant, dried and then consumed. Peace.

P.S. have you ever even tried any of the illegal drugs you rant about?

"BTW....Tobacco is also a naturally occuring plant and alcohol is generally made from natural products...the same cant be said for ecstacy." Cocaine ?

[mikethevigoman]

Not paranoia, I just have the ability to think outside the box that most people are confined to. Hey, smoke some weed and maybe you'll see what I mean.

And, actually we don't know the long term effects of cannabis because no long term tests have been done. What effects are you talking about?

BTW.. the ingredients of beer have to go through some kind of Frankenstien process before they become beer and cigs have loads of chemicals added to them. Weed on the other hand is simply picked of the plant, dried and then consumed. Peace.

P.S. have you ever even tried any of the illegal drugs you rant about?

To answer your last question first....like most people my age I have tried some forms of illicit drugs but I didnt care for the effect they had on me so I didnt take them anumore, No I was not a heavy user. And I am not ranting about them, you are....I am ranting against them.

I didnt say beer, but that falls into the same genre...Beer is made up of Hops, Yeast, Sugar and water allowed to ferment and siphoned off, Commercial beer has some preservatives but very minimal and within acceptable levels. The brewing process is usually well controlled.

Spirits are distilled...once again usually in a controlled process....use of preservatives is also minimal if any.

Tobacco on its own is a plant...the commercial ciggies do have chemicals in them....most noticable is phosphorus.....the chemicals is what causes the addiction to them not the tobacco leaf. but once again controlled process and levels. If the tobacco leaf was smoked on its own then it would be less addictive and less dangerous.

Ecstacy...and other amphetamines....ephederine based....Toluene or Xylene and Iodine and ammonia used in the cooking process...other unknown ingredients depending on the manufacturer....no controls or limits in place...usully made in unhygenenic conditions with unhygenenic utensils.

Cannabis.... Grown, dried and cut.....no added ingredients...THC levels can vary...How ever as it has been around for centuries, extensive testing has been done on the long term effects....these effects include mental health issues such as schitzophrenia, loss of long term memory, bi polar disorders, manic depression and decrease in motor skills and while it is not proven that weed on its own leads to hard drug use, it has been shown that because of the sub culture surrounding it, exposure to hard drugs is common.

Personally I dont mind people that can think outside of the box, I am quite the lateral thinker myself...I just dont need drugs to do it though.

Does that answer all your questions....

Do you drink ?

[sgunn65]

Bina - we have already established what you have posted above - that despite the obvious scaremongering in that particular report Ecstacy remains a relatively unharmful drug.

We know already that Ecstasy is not physically addictive yet some users become psychologically addicted.

Interesting that you also completely disregard British studies which are at the forefront of illicit drug research yet happily accept the loose findings from this resource based on their opinion and speculation after testing on animals.

"Research in animals indicates that MDMA is neurotoxic; whether or not this is also true in humans is currently an area of intense investigation."

"Research in animals links MDMA exposure to long-term damage to neurons that are involved in mood, thinking, and judgment."

"A study in nonhuman primates showed that exposure to MDMA for only 4 days caused damage to serotonin nerve terminals that was evident 6 to 7 years later. While similar neurotoxicity has not been definitively shown in humans, the wealth of animal research indicating MDMA's damaging properties suggests that MDMA is not a safe drug for human consumption."

Bunkum, methinks.

Please explain "relatively unharmful"

Addiction is addiction....nearly all drugs cause a psychological addiction...

Can you define here what the difference is between Physical and Psychological addiction.

I think I can answer your questions.

Relatively harmful means just what it says. The harm is relative to other factors. In the case of E's I would look at the harm relative to usage. For instance as I quoted in a previous post. Currently approx 500,000 tablets are taken every weekend in the UK. That is 26 million a year. Last year 20 people died who had taken E. I put this in bold because the cause of death may not have been the actual drug but other factors. That aside you could argue that they would still be alive if they had not taken E. I will not argue this point as the more important point is that you have less than a one in a million chance of dying if you take E. That makes it relatively less harmful than eating peanuts, taking paracetamol or crossing the street in Bangkok!!!

Further, relative to other drugs E is less likely to cause any form of addiction and it is not normally used as a gateway drug (using leads you to take other drugs).

A person who has found that they are using problematically is likely to find stopping much easier relative to most legal and illegal drugs.

Nearly all drugs do NOT cause psychological addiction. Most drugs are taken legally for short periods of time. Most illegal drugs are used occasionally and most people who use them do not form any dependency at all, and this includes users of Cocaine Sulphate as well as E. There will always be people who, for one reason or another, become dependent on a drug. And this has nothing to do with addictive personalities or any other nonsense of this kind. It is usually due to socio economic or emotional factors. For instance if you are brought up in care you are four times more likely to come to the attention of drug services in the UK.

Finally the differences between physical and psychological addiction are obvious in most cases (although psychoilogical addiction can lead to psycho symatic pains). But certain drugs create physical addiction most notably alcohol benzodiazipines (valium etc) and heroin. If you try and give up alcohol or valium without medication you run a real risk of fitting and dying.

[mikethevigoman]

Bina - we have already established what you have posted above - that despite the obvious scaremongering in that particular report Ecstacy remains a relatively unharmful drug.

We know already that Ecstasy is not physically addictive yet some users become psychologically addicted.

Interesting that you also completely disregard British studies which are at the forefront of illicit drug research yet happily accept the loose findings from this resource based on their opinion and speculation after testing on animals.

"Research in animals indicates that MDMA is neurotoxic; whether or not this is also true in humans is currently an area of intense investigation."

"Research in animals links MDMA exposure to long-term damage to neurons that are involved in mood, thinking, and judgment."

"A study in nonhuman primates showed that exposure to MDMA for only 4 days caused damage to serotonin nerve terminals that was evident 6 to 7 years later. While similar neurotoxicity has not been definitively shown in humans, the wealth of animal research indicating MDMA's damaging properties suggests that MDMA is not a safe drug for human consumption."

Bunkum, methinks.

Please explain "relatively unharmful"

Addiction is addiction....nearly all drugs cause a psychological addiction...

Can you define here what the difference is between Physical and Psychological addiction.

I think I can answer your questions.

Relatively harmful means just what it says. The harm is relative to other factors. In the case of E's I would look at the harm relative to usage. For instance as I quoted in a previous post. Currently approx 500,000 tablets are taken every weekend in the UK. That is 26 million a year. Last year 20 people died who had taken E. I put this in bold because the cause of death may not have been the actual drug but other factors. That aside you could argue that they would still be alive if they had not taken E. I will not argue this point as the more important point is that you have less than a one in a million chance of dying if you take E. That makes it relatively less harmful than eating peanuts, taking paracetamol or crossing the street in Bangkok!!!

Further, relative to other drugs E is less likely to cause any form of addiction and it is not normally used as a gateway drug (using leads you to take other drugs).

A person who has found that they are using problematically is likely to find stopping much easier relative to most legal and illegal drugs.

Nearly all drugs do NOT cause psychological addiction. Most drugs are taken legally for short periods of time. Most illegal drugs are used occasionally and most people who use them do not form any dependency at all, and this includes users of Cocaine Sulphate as well as E. There will always be people who, for one reason or another, become dependent on a drug. And this has nothing to do with addictive personalities or any other nonsense of this kind. It is usually due to socio economic or emotional factors. For instance if you are brought up in care you are four times more likely to come to the attention of drug services in the UK.

Finally the differences between physical and psychological addiction are obvious in most cases (although psychoilogical addiction can lead to psycho symatic pains). But certain drugs create physical addiction most notably alcohol benzodiazipines (valium etc) and heroin. If you try and give up alcohol or valium without medication you run a real risk of fitting and dying.

spot on,. i cant help thinking that most ignorant ( and i use that in the nicest possible term ) comments will be coming from people that drink and or smoke on a regualar basis,.most will never tried anything else and think all drugs are like heroin or something and with one fix you want to fly off a multi story building ! ,..

[gburns57au]

"BTW....Tobacco is also a naturally occuring plant and alcohol is generally made from natural products...the same cant be said for ecstacy." Cocaine ?

I thought we were discussing ecstacy....not cocaine......

Some of the ingredients in commercial cocaine include.....lidocaine, ammonia, kerosine, Benzine to name a few.

[mikethevigoman]

"BTW....Tobacco is also a naturally occuring plant and alcohol is generally made from natural products...the same cant be said for ecstacy." Cocaine ?

I thought we were discussing ecstacy....not cocaine......

Some of the ingredients in commercial cocaine include.....lidocaine, ammonia, kerosine, Benzine to name a few.

Well im going to go out on a limb here and say that of all the drugs i have tried i disliked cigarettes and booze the most, however as booze is legal its the one we have to have ( usually ). when i smoked my first cigarette it made me sick, when i smoked my first joint it made me high ! but not the sort of high i like,.but i did see why people smoked cannabis, i still dont see why cigarettes are smoked ,.apart from they are addicted, booze gives me the worst next day feeling of any mind altering substance i have tried ,.i dont need any of it, but a choice wouldnt go amiss

[meemiathai]

Please explain "relatively unharmful"

It is perfectly explained in the link to the PDF report given by the UK Medical Research Council I posted earlier.

I am looking at the term unharmful......why not use the word safe....is it because it is not a safe drug thereby saying that it is a harmful drug but relative so ???

You may say it is just semantics but the use of the term unharmful gives the connatation that it is indeed harmful otherwise the word safe would have been used.

And please your definition of physical addiction and Psychological addiction....I think you missed that one.

Have you ever had sex? Sex is never 100% safe. Nothing is ever safe, some people die when they are asleep. You are more likely to die if you open your door and walk out everyday than staying at home. Do you wear a helmet when you go shopping?

Please answer me, I think you try to avoid even talking about it. What do you think about those who get caught in these countries carrying illegal drugs? You really think a life should be destroyed just because they made such a mistake? Can you see that some people are really forced to do such a thing? Some peoples' lives get messed up and they can't see any way out so they have to do it? I would say very few people do it due to greed. Unless these people are greedy and at the same time stupid. You really like to see these people suffer? I know! You are going to say the kids lose their lives too, right? But they do it voluntarily, can you not understand the difference? These kids asked for it, they go everywhere looking for drugs! It is bloody human nature! The correct way is to talk and discuss with children what reality is and what the consequences are if one is irresponsible, can you not understand that? A stick? <deleted>? You think a stick can teach kids?

One thing I would like to emphasize is, you think very few people get framed for illegal drugs? I say you don't even know which way the earth is turning. Be careful when you come and live in Thailand. Don't mess around with the wrong person!

[gburns57au]

I think I can answer your questions.

Relatively harmful means just what it says. The harm is relative to other factors. In the case of E's I would look at the harm relative to usage. For instance as I quoted in a previous post. Currently approx 500,000 tablets are taken every weekend in the UK. That is 26 million a year. Last year 20 people died who had taken E. I put this in bold because the cause of death may not have been the actual drug but other factors. That aside you could argue that they would still be alive if they had not taken E. I will not argue this point as the more important point is that you have less than a one in a million chance of dying if you take E. That makes it relatively less harmful than eating peanuts, taking paracetamol or crossing the street in Bangkok!!!

Further, relative to other drugs E is less likely to cause any form of addiction and it is not normally used as a gateway drug (using leads you to take other drugs).

A person who has found that they are using problematically is likely to find stopping much easier relative to most legal and illegal drugs.

Nearly all drugs do NOT cause psychological addiction. Most drugs are taken legally for short periods of time. Most illegal drugs are used occasionally and most people who use them do not form any dependency at all, and this includes users of Cocaine Sulphate as well as E. There will always be people who, for one reason or another, become dependent on a drug. And this has nothing to do with addictive personalities or any other nonsense of this kind. It is usually due to socio economic or emotional factors. For instance if you are brought up in care you are four times more likely to come to the attention of drug services in the UK.

Finally the differences between physical and psychological addiction are obvious in most cases (although psychoilogical addiction can lead to psycho symatic pains). But certain drugs create physical addiction most notably alcohol benzodiazipines (valium etc) and heroin. If you try and give up alcohol or valium without medication you run a real risk of fitting and dying.

Some points I would like to make....

Nearly all drugs.....we were discussing illegal drugs....

Most illegal drugs are used occasionally....nope......Users of a particular drugs may use occasionally...Some drugs that are highly addictive are used on a daily basis if not more frequently...yes some users are recreational users but usually to the less addictive drugs.

What I noticed in your post was....likely to, less likely to etc....can you not be definate....those terms indicate that there is some likelihood.....

I did mention that pot was not proven as a lead up to harder drugs and I accept the same with ecstacy...it may not be the substance that leads to harder drugs but rather the sub culture that surrounds it.

I accept your definition....it came from the wrong person....I wanted ET's definition....

[gburns57au]

"BTW....Tobacco is also a naturally occuring plant and alcohol is generally made from natural products...the same cant be said for ecstacy." Cocaine ?

I thought we were discussing ecstacy....not cocaine......

Some of the ingredients in commercial cocaine include.....lidocaine, ammonia, kerosine, Benzine to name a few.

Well im going to go out on a limb here and say that of all the drugs i have tried i disliked cigarettes and booze the most, however as booze is legal its the one we have to have ( usually ). when i smoked my first cigarette it made me sick, when i smoked my first joint it made me high ! but not the sort of high i like,.but i did see why people smoked cannabis, i still dont see why cigarettes are smoked ,.apart from they are addicted, booze gives me the worst next day feeling of any mind altering substance i have tried ,.i dont need any of it, but a choice wouldnt go amiss

Well that is you and I am I.....we are not others...Me and you together make up a small percentage of the worlds population....and I dont think that we could qualify as being representative of the worlds population.

[sgunn65]

The vast majority of illegal drugs ARE used occasionally. Compared to the number of people who use drugs there are very few people who would be considered problematic. You are right that some drugs are used by some people daily but don't be too caught up in what you read about in the newspapers. Take Heroin. Most people see that as a totally evil drug, instantly addictive and the path to an early grave. Would it shock you to realise that there is a significant minority of heroin users who do use the drug recreationally and some who use daily who hold down responsible jobs. I have personally worked with 2 doctors and other professionals who use heroin daily.

My posts are full of "likely to" and "may" because we are discussing the human condition and the variable nature of illegal drugs. There are no hard and fast rules. I have spent many years working with drug users and have spent some time in schools teaching young people about drugs awareness and the fact is give me 10 people who take the same drug at the same time and I will show you 10 different reactions. Most drugs work on mind set and setting. What this means is that how you feel at that given time will affect how you react to the drug, where you are will have an effect and you will have an effect. The amount of body fat etc, tolerance. I could go on and on about this but the bottom line is that there are so many variables that you cannot say what any drug will do to you with certainty. In fact you cannot predict what the same drug will do to you the next time you take it. But you are likely to have a better idea.

The gateway phenomenon is an age old argument. One puff of a joint and you will be hooked on heroin. There is some credibility to it in the notion that you are joining a sub culture where drugs are available and, therefore, you have more access to drugs. But drinking a shandy is not generally considered the path to Tennants Super and the gutter, however the drunk on the street will have started with a shandy or similar.

The E sub culture is a dance culture and generally that market uses stimulants and there is no evidence of any gateway process linked to that (certainly in the UK). There is some anecdotal evidence that methamphetamine is being used in gay clubs in London which may be cause for concern. The gay scene is often at the forefront of fashion and fads look at house music. And those macho lads reading this thinking they would not have anything to do with gay stuff; next time you put your combat trousers on ask yourself how they became fashionable. And it wasn't the Army!!!!

[gburns57au]

Please answer me, I think you try to avoid even talking about it. What do you think about those who get caught in these countries carrying illegal drugs? You really think a life should be destroyed just because they made such a mistake? Can you see that some people are really forced to do such a thing? Some peoples' lives get messed up and they can't see any way out so they have to do it? I would say very few people do it due to greed. Unless these people are greedy and at the same time stupid. You really like to see these people suffer? I know! You are going to say the kids lose their lives too, right? But they do it voluntarily, can you not understand the difference? These kids asked for it, they go everywhere looking for drugs! It is bloody human nature! The correct way is to talk and discuss with children what reality is and what the consequences are if one is irresponsible, can you not understand that? A stick? <deleted>? You think a stick can teach kids?

One thing I would like to emphasize is, you think very few people get framed for illegal drugs? I say you don't even know which way the earth is turning. Be careful when you come and live in Thailand. Don't mess around with the wrong person!

I have answered...I havent avoided anything.

If you are caught doing anything that is illegal in a country then you should face the consequences that apply in that country.

Now I will agree SOME are forced into it....that is much more truthful than saying MOST are forced into it. But they still know the consequences and thereby accept the risk...therefore I dont have sympathy for them.

But you forget one thing....the big wigs in the drug trade are in it for the money...would you trust a druggie with a million bucks worth of the product he is addicted to....I dont think so. Most of the Bali nine were non users of the drug they were carrying....the two 16yo girls that were done recently were not users...The Asian/Aussie guy executed in Singapore was not a user. The Big Wigs stay away from the stereotypical user kinds...Two US Grandmothers were caught smuggling drugs into Oz, they were not users. Most do it for greed...but remember that greed doesnt mean thousands and thousands of dollars....sometimes it is a free holiday or some such thing....yes a smaller reward but done out of greed all the same.

Of course the kids do it voluntary ....no peer pressure at all....right??....No feeling that it must be done to fit in...right???...no pressure to be one of the crowd....right...??? The exact things that the street dealers target.

Did I not say that drug education begins at home...see I answered but people arent listening...right??

The stick was a metaphor.....I guessed you missed that.

Being framed....even the case quoted before stated that the investigation was flawed...that doesnt show that the guy didnt do it...it merely states that upon review....the case could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt....the very basis of law..good luck to the guy.

I know enough about Thailand to say, If you are nefarious in what you are doing then you put yourself in the position to be framed by unscrupulous characters...but if as a farang, if you are in that position then you probably should not be there in the first place. I also know enough about Thailand to say, if you pissed someone off that much....you are more likely to be dead than in Jail.

[gburns57au]

The vast majority of illegal drugs ARE used occasionally. Compared to the number of people who use drugs there are very few people who would be considered problematic. You are right that some drugs are used by some people daily but don't be too caught up in what you read about in the newspapers.

A very good reply.....and in some ways we have agreed....

I take into account your work with drug users which is why I have left this section of your post in my reply...

My previous work was in the courts where I have sat in on many drug trials...many assault trials...many Burglery trials and many sexual assault trials...where drugs have been a prime mover in the events that were before the courts.

This raises an issue that hasnt been tackled before...the so called love drug E....features quite a lot in sexual assault cases...Please can you tell me why this is so ??

My current job is a touch sensitive...I really cant discuss details too much...but suffice to say that illegal drugs raises its head virtually on a daily basis...

Do not think that I base my views on newspaper reports...I deal with drug users on a daily basis.

[Chris Lawrence]

My Background is 15 years working in drug and alcohol. All drugs are a problem. Alcohol is the oldest known drug to man. Fortunatly this can be imported and exported. Or unfortunatly for some.

E's smack, goee, ice, hrydro it doesn't matter what it is the fact that you intend to export or import these substances in most countries it is illegal. Why go to this extreme. Simple answer is that you can make a killing not only in the money stakes but also from a communty level. These drugs destroy as well as alcohol.

When we hear about people getting caught it is not because they have a few tablets half a cap or a joint in thier possession its baecaue they usually have commercial quantities, they are greedy and they want to profit.

Or do you want to hear a sob story haow ny sick aunt twice remove needs a change of sex operation to be normal. Give me a break. I am not that niave.

I met a young fellow transfering herion from Lebanon to Germany. He was bring back a truck load's of highly expensive sports cars as a result of his endeavours. Got caught and did time in a German Goal. Did not have a very good time being a young man.

Yes it is horriffic what happens. But is also horriffic to the person doing the crime in a goal system.

There is an old saying in the criminal world, 'If you can't do the time don't do the crime'.

Don't believe it, the person who got caught has made a caculating decision on what they are about to do. It really comes back to bad luck where you get caught.

A good read is a book by an Australian Warren Fellows who goy caught trying to export herion from Thailand. Its a sad read but it all comes back to the law of the land.

Just my thoughts.

[gburns57au]

This raises an issue that hasnt been tackled before...the so called love drug E....features quite a lot in sexual assault cases...Please can you tell me why this is so ??

Because it is sometimes used in conjunction with a 'date rape drug' to facilitate the submission of the victim.

Ecstasy on its own merely reduces the sexual inhibitions of the user and in most cases another drug is used to facilitate the rape.

Once again, in these cases Ecstasy remains "on the bottom scale of harm", and urine tests on sexual assault victims substantiates that alcohol, amphetamines, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cocaine, marijuana and opiates all are found far more regularly than Ecstacy.

Talking out of your hat old son....

Certainly alcohol is up there.....and so are date rape drugs such as ropys....

Any drugs that lowers sexual inhibitons can and does result in women being taken advantage of. I have never sat in on a SA trial where E's were used in conjunction with a knock out or date rape type drug. Alcohol yes, dope yes.

Amazing that amphetamines were on your list....ecstacy is an amphetamine....as in the name.....Methylene Dioxy Meth AMPHETAMINE....so when you say that amphetamines are found more regularly than ecstacy....how do you determine which group of amphetamines are being reported. A urine test will determine that amphetamines are in the system and the concentration....it will not distinguish between which amphetamine is in the system.

[meemiathai]

What loads of crap! Linking drugs to rape?

The main reason is women letting themselves shown in public view. It is the clothes, it is what they are wearing that is the problem! It is where they go that is a problem! There is a big problem in the world, in societies. Letting men and women go on a same bus is crazy, going on the same train is crazy. I think men and women should live in different cities. They should be seperated. And I think be it men or women, everyone should cover themselves up so no one will know who is a man who is a woman who is young who is old who is beautiful who is ugly. Men and women partying in clubs wearing almost nothing is just plain crazy! I hope governments will soon be advanced enough to understand what should be done.

Now I am sure those who think we need a safe environment for our kids will agree!

[gburns57au]

Here is your answer...

Methamphetamine is the stimulant drug known on the street as crystal, meth, crank, ice, glass and speed. In the body, anywhere from 4%-7% of the methamphetamine breaks down to amphetamine, so a urine specimen taken from a methamphetamine user would contain both methamphetamine and amphetamine.

Amphetamine is a stimulant drug often prescribed to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and obesity. The pharmaceutical names are Adderall, Benzedrine and Dexedrine. Most of the amphetamine available on the street is the result of someone selling his or her prescription or taking a prescription from someone else. A urine specimen taken from an amphetamine user would contain ONLY amphetamine (no methamphetamine would be present).

Most of the amphetamine on the street comes from home bake......when the availiabilty of this is restricted then people will buy prescription drugs from prescription holders or knock over Pharmacies to steal it. Why Home bake you ask ??.....usually it is because the home bake has higher concentrations and can be bought without any recording of use...it is also a lot cheaper to buy.

But as someone who conducts urine tests on a virtually daily basis I can tell you that the test results are not as specific as in the article you have posted which was a trial aimed at specific results and conducted under control circumstances...They do test for many of the things you have stated...but they do not test specifically for speed or Ecstacy....they test for amphetamine...if the person being tested is on a medication that would show a reaction such as the prescription ones then that is taken into account.

I am glad you can google to achieve the answers that appear to support your comments.....most of my answers come from listening to forensic experts in courts, talking to users and ex users and talking to dealers, my experience in current or related employment

[gburns57au]

What loads of crap! Linking drugs to rape?

The main reason is women letting themselves shown in public view. It is the clothes, it is what they are wearing that is the problem! It is where they go that is a problem! There is a big problem in the world, in societies. Letting men and women go on a same bus is crazy, going on the same train is crazy. I think men and women should live in different cities. They should be seperated. And I think be it men or women, everyone should cover themselves up so no one will know who is a man who is a woman who is young who is old who is beautiful who is ugly. Men and women partying in clubs wearing almost nothing is just plain crazy! I hope governments will soon be advanced enough to understand what should be done.

Now I am sure those who think we need a safe environment for our kids will agree!

I really cant think of an answer for this.....oh hang on...

Do you need a longer chain so your partner can go to the letterbox as well as the kitchen and bedroom ??

This gets my vote as the worst post on TV...ever !!