British Ecstasy Dealer Sentenced To 7 Years Jail

[britmaveric]

Ecstasy=amphetamine

MDMA = methylenedioxy-meth[/]amphetamine

Anyways we'll have to disagree on this - we are like dogs chasing our own tails.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A common decision when people find thier arguments do not atcually stand careful scrutiny or discussion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ahhh a baiting tactic for those who like to argue for arguing sake..... your points hold no validity whatsoever. Got to love - posting a link to AMAZON Review - u write it?. I could debate all day with you, but you have yet to prove naught apart from your own experience with a narcotic.

More for you...

Ecstasy

* Clandestine laboratories operating throughout Western Europe, primarily the Netherlands and Belgium, manufacture significant quantities of Ecstasy in tablet, capsule, or powder form.

* Ecstasy traffickers consistently use brand names and logos as marketing tools and to distinguish their product from that of competitors. The logos are produced to coincide with holidays or special events. Among the more popular logos are butterflies, lightning bolts, and four-leaf clovers.

* Ecstasy-related emergency room incidents increased nationwide from 250 in 1994, to 637 in 1997, to 1,142 in 1998, to 2,850 in 1999.

* A 500% increase in Ecstasy use between 1993 and 1998 has been documented by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

* Researchers added to the agony of Ecstasy by reporting in the Sept. 27 issue of Science that, in monkeys, at least, even one night's indulgence in the drug may increase the odds of getting Parkinson's disease.

* Ecstasy is addicting. People build a tolerance for the drug over time, spurring some users to take increasingly more pills to achieve the same high.

* Many young people believe Ecstasy is a harmless fun drug. However, a growing body of recent research suggests that Ecstasy is harmful to humans and can have devastating consequences. Ecstasy has been linked to brain damage resulting in depression, memory loss and other learning impairments.

* Two weeks after individuals took Ecstasy, brain imaging showed a decrease in their brains' blood flow as compared to earlier imaging prior to use.

* Ecstasy is a lucrative business. Relatively cheap to make overseas, it can be sold for a substantial profit in the United States. Just one Ecstasy pill costs 15 to 25 cents to make in Europe but can be sold in the United States for $20 to $50. As a result, officials have seen an astronomical increase in Ecstasy trafficking. According to USA Today, in 2000, the DEA and other agencies confiscated more than 11 million pills, up from a few hundred thousand in 1995.

 

* Ecstasy is similar to mescaline and amphetamines in that it binds to the serotonin transmitters in the brain and destroys them. This affects the ability to regulate moods, appetite and sleep. Ecstasy users also lose the ability to regulate body temperature; they grind and clench their teeth, and their memory becomes impaired. When Ecstasy use is combined with a night of dancing in a packed, hot club, there have been instances of dehydration syndrome, a situation in which someone actually ‘cooks’ from the inside.”

http://www.drug-rehabs.org/

[LivinLOS]

Most of those points I dont dissagre with, they are after all factual (ecstacy is cheap to make, is made mainly in Holland and Belgium, its use has boomed, etc..)

The ecstacy 'related' emergency room admissions include all those who fell over, cut temselves, drove and had an accident, got mugged, anything of that nature at all.. gointo ANY A&E on a saturday night and look at the fight victims, stab wounds, drunk scrappers, car crash etc victims.. Look at a 80% or so (figure made up on the spot) domestic violence incedents reported..

Those all qualify as alchohol 'related' by that yardstick.. many many multiples of the ecstacy 'related' ones..

This was what I wanted to convey in the Amazon C&P.. The 100's of 1000's of alchohol related injuries, damage and sickness that society is quiet happy to accept..

As to the often quoted mid 90's serotonin research it seems academics dispute this data but that doesnt fit government agendas or get much airplay.

[Sphere]

Is he not aware of the 'drug dealer killings' when the government went on that frenzy awhile back?

The frenzy continues to this day:

Police yesterday closed an investigation into the suspicious group hanging of three drug suspects in custody at Muang Lamphun police station.

The officer also referred to a crime scene investigation report as saying that all three men – Palakawa Phattakam, 24, Boonchu Sujipat, 22, and Pajansuk Ornjong, 19 – could have hung themselves on their own – by climbing up and tying their shoestrings to the overhead bars of their detention cell.

-------------------

Yep... three simultaneous suicides, all by hanging, in their shared cell. Yep, nothing out of the ordinary or suspicious about that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where in Thailand could one get such long and strong shoe laces?

[LivinLOS]

Just found what I was looking for..

Much of the evidence of serotonin damage, brain damage, etc is based on the work of Dr. George A. Ricaurte of Johns Hopkins University

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?volum...ar=2005&hits=10

His work is still often quoted by those citing the obvious damage to humans based on chimp research. Whats rarely recorded mentioned, remebered or quote is the following

From the NY Times.

By Donald G. McNeil Jr.

Source: New York Times 

NIDA In September, the journal Science issued a startling retraction. A primate study it published in 2002, with heavy publicity, warned that the amount of the drug Ecstasy that a typical user consumes in a single night might cause permanent brain damage.

It turned out that the $1.3 million study, led by Dr. George A. Ricaurte of Johns Hopkins University, had not used Ecstasy at all. His 10 squirrel monkeys and baboons had instead been injected with overdoses of methamphetamine, and two of them had died. The labels on two vials he bought in 2000, he said, were somehow switched. The problem corrupted four other studies in his lab, forcing him to withdraw four other papers.

It was not the first time Dr. Ricaurte's lab was accused of using flawed studies to suggest that recreational drugs are highly dangerous. In previous years he was accused of publicizing doubtful results without checking them, and was criticized for research that contributed to a government campaign suggesting that Ecstasy made "holes in the brain."

Dr. Ricaurte, a 50-year-old neurologist at Hopkins since 1988, is probably the best-known Ecstasy expert in the war on drugs. He has received $10 million from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, more than any other investigator of the amphetamine analogs known as designer drugs, club drugs or diet drugs, including MDMA, better known as Ecstasy, and its close relative MDA.

He vigorously defends his work, saying much of it has been confirmed by other researchers, and arguing that he is often unfairly attacked by scientists who minimize the dangers of designer drugs because they want to use them in research.

Johns Hopkins stands behind him. "The institution has every confidence in his ability," said Gary Stevenson, a spokesman. Of the primate study, he said Dr. Ricaurte "made an honest mistake, then discovered it and revealed it."

But other scientists, and two human research subjects of Dr. Ricaurte's who came forward after the retraction, say they see a pattern of shaky research supporting alarmist press releases.

It is hard to find impartial observers in the highly politicized debate over illegal drugs. But even three scientists whom Dr. Ricaurte cited in his own defense said that while his high media profile had made him a "whipping boy" for those favoring Ecstasy research, some of his best-known work has nonetheless been "sloppy" or "not as methodologically rigorous as you might want."

Longtime critics are harsher.

"It's hard to trust George," said Dr. Julie Holland, a professor of psychiatry at New York University who has edited a book on Ecstasy and wants to test it in psychotherapy. She accused him of "playing games with his data" to win more federal grants by making the drugs look bad.

Dr. Richard J. Wurtman, a prominent clinician at Harvard and M.I.T. who has clashed with Dr. Ricaurte, accused him of "running a cottage industry showing that everything under the sun is neurotoxic."

For 20 years, Dr. Ricaurte has produced studies saying the amphetamine analogs may cause the tremors of Parkinsonism, depression and memory and sleep problems. But the consensus among many amphetamine researchers, Dr. Ricaurte included, is that there is no proof thus far that Ecstasy causes permanent human brain damage. In animal studies, very high doses have destroyed serotonin-pathway nerves, which convey pleasure and affect memory and appetite.

Just last month Dr. Stephen J. Kish of the Center for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto published a review of all Ecstasy research, including Dr. Ricaurte's, and concluded that there was no evidence that Ecstasy caused the tremors of Parkinsonism or any other brain damage "with the possible (but as yet unproven) exception of mild memory loss."

Some heavy users have memory problems, but no studies prove the loss is permanent, or that it is caused by Ecstasy rather than other drugs in the mix that virtually all heavy users take.

Ecstasy — invented in Germany in 1912 by Merck Pharmaceuticals in its search for an anti-bleeding drug — has been outlawed in the United States since 1985, a decision that Dr. Ricaurte has taken partial credit for. Since about 1970, when it was called Adam, some psychiatrists had tried giving low doses to trauma victims; in 1985, they stopped, fearing arrest.

Dr. Holland says it relieves anxiety-provoking memories like a sedative, but as an amphetamine, it does not induce sleep. Patients "want to talk things through."

As a potent painkiller, she said, it also may help the terminally ill.

The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a study in traumatized crime victims who have failed to respond to antidepressants. A study of rape victims is under way in Spain, and another one in the United States is proposed for depressed patients with terminal cancer.

When Dr. Ricaurte's 2002 primate study was published, his critics said he could not possibly have given "typical recreational doses" if 2 of 10 animals died and two others collapsed of heatstroke.

According to an annual federal survey, almost 10 million Americans have tried Ecstasy. Few have died.

"Those dead animals should have sent up a red flag," said Dr. Charles R. Schuster, a former director of the national drug institute whom Dr. Ricaurte has called a mentor. "The better part of valor would have been to not publish until it was repeated."

Dr. Ricaurte said such arguments "do not hold water," since animal deaths are common in amphetamine research, and two is too few to compare to human death rates. Dr. Nora Volkow, the new director of the national drug institute, declined to pass judgment on his whole body of work, but called his latest error "crying wolf and losing your credibility." Because of it, she said, she spent a weekend checking the agency's Web page on the dangers of Ecstasy "to make sure it was not overstated."

The agency had already removed all current references to another well-known study from the site, one from 1998 by Dr. Ricaurte and his wife, Dr. Una McCann. Dr. Volkow described it as using "methodologies that were not optimal."

Pictures from the study — PET scans of the brains of Ecstasy users — were used on a famous postcard from the drug agency, "Plain Brain/Brain After Ecstasy." The postcards were distributed to thousands of teenagers and implied that Ecstasy users had shrunken brains with holes in them.

The study had nothing to do with holes, but with serotonin levels, which Dr. Ricaurte found drastically depleted in 14 subjects who had taken Ecstasy 70 to 400 times.

Dr. Marc Laruelle, a Columbia University PET scan specialist, called the work so technically flawed that it was "something to put under the rug." He cited a recent German study showing that serotonin decreased only modestly and returned to normal within six weeks. The Hopkins team, he said, presented its data in logarithmically compressed graphs that seemed calculated to mask the fact that it had found impossible results: its 15 "control" subjects had serotonin levels 50 times normal.

Dr. Ricaurte defended the study, saying his recalculation technique was common when results from two groups varied widely, although he said he no longer used it.

Of the photos, Dr. Ricaurte said he had no control over what the national drug institute did with his work, but he had asked an agency official to fix their "poor quality."

In the 1990's, Dr. Ricaurte was involved in a dispute over the danger of dexfenfluramine, another amphetamine analog sold in Europe as a prescription diet drug.

In 1994, a company founded by Dr. Wurtman, director of clinical research at the Harvard-M.I.T. health science division, sought F.D.A. permission to market it in the United States.

Dr. Ricaurte released a study saying it caused brain damage; that was immediately disputed by an Environmental Protection Agency study that found it did no permanent harm.

In September 1995, Dr. Mark E. Molliver, a Hopkins colleague who frequently published with Dr. Ricaurte, presented slides to an advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration showing Alzheimer's-like brain tangles.

Dr. Wurtman, who contacted The New York Times after the Science article retraction, said that Dr. Molliver, with Dr. Ricaurte in the audience, misled the committee by implying the damage was done by dexfenfluramine.

In an interview, Dr. Molliver called that "a blatant lie," and asserted that he had clearly said he was showing damage done by similar drugs. Dr. Ricaurte agreed.

But transcripts of a follow-up hearing in November 1995 provided by Dr. Wurtman show that several panelists and the F.D.A.'s expert were confused and believed that Dr. Molliver had been showing dexfenfluramine damage. Ultimately the drug was not approved.

For a week in 1996, Greg M. was one of Dr. Ricaurte's lab subjects.

At the time, he said, he was using large amounts of Ecstasy, marijuana, LSD, cocaine, amphetamines and heroin.

After seeing the retraction of the primate study, he contacted The Times, and persuaded a friend who had accompanied him to call, too.

The two revealed their names and occupations but declined to be fully identified for fear their former drug use would hurt their careers. Greg is a graduate student in chemistry at a leading university. His friend, who said he used to follow Grateful Dead tours selling up to 10,000 doses of LSD a month, now works at a West Coast law firm and is in line for a federal job.

Curious to see if they had damaged their brains, and enticed by a promise of $100 a day and a free East Coast trip, they enlisted.

Although the two used many drugs, the research assistant who interviewed them by phone told them what not to admit to her if they wanted to be in the study, Greg said. They were instructed to avoid all drugs for three weeks to avoid tainting the study; Greg says he had used heroin five days earlier.

They and other Ecstasy users flown in from the West Coast took memory tests while still jet-lagged, they said.

Then after lumbar punctures to check serotonin levels, neither was given the usual night's rest to prevent fierce headaches. They had to carry their backpacks across campus and be wired up for a sleep study, which Greg argued could not reflect normal sleep patterns because they were in pain.

Both had subsequent tests after shots of morphine and a drug, mCPP, that causes the same eyeball twitching and teeth-grinding as Ecstasy, but none of the euphoria. Then they had PET scans.

Dr. Ricaurte said his research protocols are approved by university committees. He acknowledged testing sedated or jet-lagged subjects, but argued that he had always noted that limitation in his published papers, and switched to testing in early mornings when jet lag was minimal. Test subjects who get lumbar punctures are warned about headaches, and given rest and painkillers, he said.

To weed out subjects who confound results by using other drugs, Dr. Ricaurte said, his staff quizzed volunteers and did blood and urine tests. His papers acknowledge that hair tests, which can show many drugs taken even months back, would have been more accurate. (Dr. Laruelle, who does PET scans of Ecstasy users, rejects subjects with hair less than an inch long.)

Told that Greg had used heroin without getting caught, Dr. Ricaurte said that was "unfortunate." But like all drug researchers, he said it was impossible to find heavy Ecstasy users who used no other drugs.

His papers, he said, always warn that poor performance by heavy Ecstasy users may have been caused by other drugs.

His critics say that such fine-print disclaimers are not enough, that all mental tests on multiple-drug users are pointless and cannot be used as evidence that one particular drug damages the brain.

Greg's friend reiterated that he had been badly treated and said he felt the research was skewed to prove he was brain-damaged.

"Most of the people I used to do drugs with are pretty screwed up," he admitted. "But if Ricaurte's studies are true, Greg and I should both be dead. We ate grams a night of pharma-grade stuff."

Nonetheless, he said: "We're fairly intelligent, rational guys. We had a stretch of three or four years where we really blew ourselves out. But we're still smart and ambitious. Some of their assertions about long-term brain damage are way off."

Source: New York Times (NY)

Author: Donald G. McNeil Jr.

Published: December 2, 2003

Copyright: 2003 The New York Times Co.

Contact: [email protected]

Website: http://www.nytimes.com/

Reason its quoted rather than linked (sorry for those not interested) is its part of the NYT subscription site and gaining access to more than the first 50 words is hard

Edited October 7, 2005 by LivinLOS

[LivinLOS]

This is the man who has said that a single dose of exstacy can cause brain damage and Parkinsons.. The mans a Gov funded joke..

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c...15/DD179310.DTL

When it comes to liht that he gave the animals the wrong drugs he is quoted as saying "We're scientists, not politicians," he said, and later: "We're not chemists. We get hundreds of chemicals here. It is not customary to check them. "

These are the people that the anti drug lobby pay and who you get your data from.

[steveromagnino]

LivinLOS

I respect that you have taken drugs and have no issue with that; start stop when you want. Your experiences however hold little statistical validity, and for every survey saying how safe this stuff is, there is another one saying how unsafe it is. ######, they can't even agree on cigarettes, so science is well stuck on how to deal with these other drugs. This debate seems to keep referring to Ecstacy, and this is usually where the pro drug group start; ecstacy and pot.

I know a few heavy users, they show some odd aspects of personality I wasn't aware of (laziness, mood swings, slight paranoia in some cases) as a result of one or either or maybe they were screwed up anyway...but nothing that much. For me, I wouldn't really care that much about legalisation of these two with heavy taxation and massive penalties for dealers of illicit versions. BUt I feel very differently about heroin, coke, speed and so on; having lived with an addict and seeing several people around me lose their lives basically through addiction...well these are bad drugs that a lot of people seem unable to cope with. Of course, much like your experience, I cannot project this to the population as my sample is not significant.

The argument "we have tried prohibition and it doesn't work, so let's legalise" just doesn't hold water. Murder is illegal, it still goes on, so should we legalise that too? In NZ they have legalised prostitution, thinking that it would encourage legitimate business people to get into that trade and force the gangs out. From what little I know, instead it has opened the doors to more open business and the same gangs and dodgy business practises are now basically legal and cannot so easily be shaken down. Last time I went to NZ I was amazed; the casino is now surrounded on all 4 sides by prostitutes; mostly illegal immigrants apparently... wasn't legalisation supposed to let market forces sort this out?! So if that is what happens with prostitution, are we to believe that big legit businesses are going to be lining up for a piece of action when they legalise selling E?

Holland is the second argument... the only problem is that all the Dutch people I know living outside Holland generally complain about the very permissive approach as the reason why they left. But of course that is a skewed sample too; however can we really directly compare Thailand and Holland? I don't have an answer for that, but I do know that there is no way that Thailand can regulate and restrict the supply of drugs coming in from Burma in the way Holland might be able to. Same as USA with South/Middle America....and some of the stuff flowing is not ecstacy and pot, it is a bit stronger..... so are you suggesting we legalise it and allow anyone to have a hit on the yah bah pipe for less than 50baht as it was before the war on drugs a few years back? That is some bad stuff.....

As far as I understand, much of the problem with criminals and drugs is not that they take the stuff (which is of course illegal) but it encourages them to often engage in illicit activities to fund their addiction. e.g. theft, prostitution. If we legalise the drug, and the price drops super low, are you suggesting that they will now be able to hold down regular jobs and thus no longer need to steal or rob or sell their bodies? For some of the speed addicts I've met they don't seem like the type of person I would want as say a surgeon or taxi driver :-) And if there is demand increasing as the price drops; well how many lazy people sitting around smoking pot can the economy sustain? Or wound up speed addicts? At least now maybe the higher illicit price restricts demand because people cannot afford it.

The next argument of the pro drug crowd relates to who does the selling, if the price slumps then rolex dealer crowd will be replaced by legit business men. You mean the same ones you are attacking now who sell legit drugs, alchohol and cigarettes? This is a dirty business, and I cannot see that decent business ppl will be lining up to do it. Besides which the economies of say yah bah here are such a low price of manufacture that a fairly inefficient dealer network can still be probably competitive.

So now you would, in Thailand, basically be handing the power of a legit business to sit alongside the world of vice and gambling and all other manner of illegal things that some of these drug baron guys (a few of whom I have the dubious pleasure of knowing) do. They would be as happy as the gangs in NZ are, to be able to not have to set up restuarants and strip clubs and stuff as a cover up anymore.

Besides which, the many Thai voters have nothing to do with illegal drugs, they are hardly likely to vote for legalisation and thus I see that this is a bit of a pointless debate, but very interesting nevertheless.

[LivinLOS]

Steve, thats a well reasoned post and many of the points you make are spot on.. I admit I am guilty of simplistically taking a 'pro' v 'con' approach to this discussion as the previous postings were of the 'hang em high' veriety..

The points you raise are correct, I do not for one moment think that there is a magic bullet slutions and personally I think in general intoxicants accross the board are a problem for mankind.. One stat is that EVERY society and group on the planet except the eskimo's have an intoxicant that they take.. Whether thats smokable, funny fungi, tree bark up the nostil, chewing leaves, or brewing yeasts. that tells me that somehow this desire to get intoxicated is something thats part of the hman condition.

Once we get to that notion (and I realize here I might be a tribe of one) I would think that the clever thing for society to do is to manage that desire to have intoxicants within the framework of societies control with the least harm accross the population. Do I agree that sending a young person for an extended time in a jail, possibly ruining his chances of eduction or early carrear and changing his whole lifes direction , simply because he was caught with a few days worth of a smokable plant, or a handfull of uppers or downers even, do I see that as the right way forward ???

Would making him serve some time compulsory working with addicts be more educational and benficial ?? Perhaps if he had the skills or aptitude he could be a junior assistant in some way in an A & E where the effects of intocicants are made obvious being forced to see the relationship between intoxicant use and intoxicant abuse and the detrimental effects of that abuse seems to me like a better way to control this problem ?? Simply forcing him to be witness to the events in an A&E room night after night or the incoming desk sargents job at a city police station ??I would guess that doing this in the west would make enourmous savings in the incarceration industry..

My Dutch friends told me about what happened while they were in school.. While the government does provide methodone programs and other assistance to addicts it also used this issueing of drugs to do some good. They made someone who had been along term hard substance abuser come to the school to talk to the kids about this as a condition of getting his script.. When a guy who looks a shambles and is wrecked (and I agree wholeheartedly that crack / meth / ice / pcp and slightly less so coke and smack cause large physical and mental damage) when someone who looks like that, twicthes, slurs and is obviously damaged and 'not cool' tells impressionable children about his drug abuse they remember it far far more than 'just say no'..

I also remember coming from the UK where nearly everyone in the 16 - 20 bracket were regular E / Speed and LSD users even in small country towns, coming into holland and speaking to ther teenagers in coffee shops in Holland it became very clear that they have managed to sucessfully seperate the harder drugs from the tolerated drugs.. Most teens I spoke to in Holland didnt take chemicals, most late teens in the UK did, yet they were the ones with the coffee shops and the 'tolerant' attitude..

I realize I havent addressed specific points in you post (the reality is I agree with you mostly) but let it just be that i think far more can be done through eductaion and risk management the outlawing huge sections of society.

Edited October 7, 2005 by LivinLOS

[StateSix]

It is naive to say that it is a ridiculous sentence because all parties involved were willing participants so there is no victim. Because drugs are illegal only criminals sell them. This guy is small fish and no threat to anyone but he has to buy them from someone else, who buys them from someone else. The higher up the chain you go the more dangerous are the people involved.

As an example, if you buy a couple of pills from a guy in a club. No problem you are not harming anyone. However that money goes up the ladder and ends up funding criminal gangs who DO create victims. Look at Manchester in the UK for example. the ecstacy market there was pretty much controlled by a gang from Salford who ran riot and controlled most of the clubs and a lot of areas in Manchester. They decided they wanted to control the supply of drugs in a club, so they did it. If anyone complained they severly beat or shot them. Look what happened to the Hacienda. Look at the Salford/Moss Side/Cheetham Hill shootings in the late 80's and early 90's. All related to controlling the drugs trade in the area. Similarly buying a line of coke is viewed as nothing heavy, but you are funding the South American drug cartels and we all know what good honest guys they are.

The argument to that is that drugs should be legalised so they are taken out of the hands of criminals. In an ideal world that would be a good idea. However unless the whole world decides to legalise then it isnt going to happen. If the UK or Thailand decided to legalise all drugs, then yes, the synthetic drugs such as amphetamines, ecstacy etc could be taken out of the hands of criminals, cannabis could be grown. But what about cocaine? You would still have to fund cartels to be supplied with that. And lets face it, politically it would be suicide for any government to legalise drugs. The pressure other countries would put on them would be immense.

Anyway tobacco in the UK is legal but smuggling and black market fags is a huge market.

I do agree that E, while it can be dangerous, is not as bad as people make out. The majority of E related deaths are actually caused by overheating or drinking far too much water. This is an education problem. When I used to work in a club we had Lifeline (a drugs advisory group) advisers there with leaflets to educate users on the need to take regular breaks and drink water, but not too much. We also had First Aiders on site and a private ambulance. The problem is that you can never be sure of the strength of the pill you are taking, or what substances it is mixed with. You may regularly take 2 pills at a time, but suddenly get very potent ones and you can be in trouble.

At the end of the day it all boils down to the fact that selling certain drugs is illegal. The guy in this case got caught selling a drug where the maximum sentence is death. He got 7 years. That is a fair sentence relative to what he could have got. The debate about the morality of making drugs illegal is a seperate issue. The fact is they are and if you commit the offence you know you will be punished.

[Maejo Man]

I value experience more than facts.

I have taken nearly every illegal and legal drug commonly known.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sure your parents were real proud of your accomplishments too I know you've impressed every member of TV with your amazing drug taking prowess Well done! You get my vote for dummy of the year award

Edited October 7, 2005 by Maejo Man

[slim]

How'd you like to have your daughter raped by some punk with the help of "ecstasy"?

Without doubt the post of the year.

One of the known and undisputed effects of ecstacy is its disabling effect on the male organ.

Not only does it cause it to shrink temporarily (like it does when you've been out in the cold ) but achieving and more to point maintaining an erection is nigh near impossible.

Far too many people in this thread have strong opinions on a subject they clearly know nothing about. Like all the people who are quoting reports on MDMA and using this as a justification to condemn Ecstacy.

Ecstacy is not MDMA and MDMA is not Ecstacy. Ecstacy contains MDMA just as whisky,wine and beer all contain alcohol.

Comparing Ecstacy and MDMA is like saying drinking a pint of beer has the same effect as drinking a pint of Whisky.

Edited October 7, 2005 by slim

[StateSix]

How'd you like to have your daughter raped by some punk with the help of "ecstasy"?

Without doubt the post of the year.

One of the known and undisputed effects of ecstacy is its disabling effect on the male organ.

Not only does it cause it to shrink temporarily (like it does when you've been out in the cold ) but achieving and more to point maintaining an erection is nigh near impossible.

Far too many people in this thread have strong opinions on a subject they clearly know nothing about. Like all the people who are quoting reports on MDMA and using this as a justification to condemn Ecstacy.

Ecstacy is not MDMA and MDMA is not Ecstacy. Ecstacy contains MDMA just as whisky,wine and beer all contain alcohol.

Comparing Ecstacy and MDMA is like saying drinking a pint of beer has the same effect as drinking a pint of Whisky.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think he meant that the girl is slipped ecstacy so that she loses control, in the same way as Rohypnol is used.

Ecstacy does not necessarily prevent male sexual performance. Smaller doses can enhance it (although 'finishing' can be delayed) and higher doses will certainly inhibit it. Shrinkage is usually associated with amphetamine use. So if a tablet has been cut with amphetamines then it could cause that effect.

MDMA is the active ingredient of the drug known as ecstacy (or should be). The problem with using ecstacy, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is that you can never be sure of the dosage of the MDMA in it (or what else it has been cut with). So your analogy about the pint of beer and pint of whisky is correct. The problem is you are never sure if you will be drinking a pint of beer or whisky. That is a problem with it.

[meemiathai]

Hunter S. Thompson - another great writer and drug user (hallucingens)

Suicide Note:

"No More Games. No More Bombs. No More Walking. No More Fun. No More Swimming. 67. That is 17 years past 50. 17 more than I needed or wanted. Boring. I am always bitchy. No Fun -- for anybody. 67. You are getting Greedy. Act your old age. Relax -- This won't hurt."

LivingLOS - perhaps you were lucky one and I applaud you, but I've read countless deaths from teenagers popping X. Simply put its a dangerous narcotic and you keep justifying its use by comparing alcohol + fags to it. (apples/oranges)

I would say LivingLOS knows exactly what he is talking about.(fully agreed with his posts) And no, he is not necessarily being lucky. And I think he has explained already about the deaths.(impurity of the drug and overdose)

I know plenty plenty plenty plenty of adults (and mature, 20-40) here in HK who goes to discos and have Es and Ks. And they all have ordinary jobs and look pretty healthy. I myself also do it once every 2 or 3 months although I only take half an E and never K, which gives me two three hours of high and go home.

I am in no way asking/persuading anyone here to change their views or to think that taking drugs is good. But I would say breathing Bangkok air is bad for lungs too. Soccer, volley ball and distance running so on is bad for the joints and can get oneself injured. One can fall to death in mountain climbing or parachuting.

I hope that day doesn't come when the people in charge find the above activities too inappropriate and illegalize them.

[meemiathai]

How'd you like to have your daughter raped by some punk with the help of "ecstasy"?

Without doubt the post of the year.

One of the known and undisputed effects of ecstacy is its disabling effect on the male organ.

Not only does it cause it to shrink temporarily (like it does when you've been out in the cold ) but achieving and more to point maintaining an erection is nigh near impossible.

Far too many people in this thread have strong opinions on a subject they clearly know nothing about. Like all the people who are quoting reports on MDMA and using this as a justification to condemn Ecstacy.

Ecstacy is not MDMA and MDMA is not Ecstacy. Ecstacy contains MDMA just as whisky,wine and beer all contain alcohol.

Comparing Ecstacy and MDMA is like saying drinking a pint of beer has the same effect as drinking a pint of Whisky.

I think he meant that the girl is slipped ecstacy so that she loses control, in the same way as Rohypnol is used.

Ecstacy does not necessarily prevent male sexual performance. Smaller doses can enhance it (although 'finishing' can be delayed) and higher doses will certainly inhibit it. Shrinkage is usually associated with amphetamine use. So if a tablet has been cut with amphetamines then it could cause that effect.

MDMA is the active ingredient of the drug known as ecstacy (or should be). The problem with using ecstacy, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is that you can never be sure of the dosage of the MDMA in it (or what else it has been cut with). So your analogy about the pint of beer and pint of whisky is correct. The problem is you are never sure if you will be drinking a pint of beer or whisky. That is a problem with it.

That is exactly the problem caused by its illegality nature.

I remember watching a tv program showing that there was a voluntary organisation in the US who will set a table outside those rave party venues. And they would use chemicals to test the purity of the drugs people brought along with

so that those teenagers won't get poisoned.

[bkkmadness]

How'd you like to have your daughter raped by some punk with the help of "ecstasy"?

Without doubt the post of the year.

One of the known and undisputed effects of ecstacy is its disabling effect on the male organ.

Not only does it cause it to shrink temporarily (like it does when you've been out in the cold ) but achieving and more to point maintaining an erection is nigh near impossible.

Far too many people in this thread have strong opinions on a subject they clearly know nothing about. Like all the people who are quoting reports on MDMA and using this as a justification to condemn Ecstacy.

Ecstacy is not MDMA and MDMA is not Ecstacy. Ecstacy contains MDMA just as whisky,wine and beer all contain alcohol.

Comparing Ecstacy and MDMA is like saying drinking a pint of beer has the same effect as drinking a pint of Whisky.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think he meant that the girl is slipped ecstacy so that she loses control, in the same way as Rohypnol is used.

Ecstacy does not necessarily prevent male sexual performance. Smaller doses can enhance it (although 'finishing' can be delayed) and higher doses will certainly inhibit it. Shrinkage is usually associated with amphetamine use. So if a tablet has been cut with amphetamines then it could cause that effect.

MDMA is the active ingredient of the drug known as ecstacy (or should be). The problem with using ecstacy, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is that you can never be sure of the dosage of the MDMA in it (or what else it has been cut with). So your analogy about the pint of beer and pint of whisky is correct. The problem is you are never sure if you will be drinking a pint of beer or whisky. That is a problem with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is exactly the problem caused by its illegality nature.

I remember watching a tv program showing that there was a voluntary organisation in the US who will set a table outside those rave party venues. And they would use chemicals to test the purity of the drugs people brought along with

so that those teenagers won't get poisoned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fully agree with LivinLos and meemiathais posts, I too and most of my friends used E alot in the UK, non of us have died or been raped yet. In fact it was a great time had by all.

I believe they wanted to set up 'testing' stations in the UK for Es but they were banned. The idea is to make the drug use as safe as possible, as god knows you'll never stop it.

Brit, what do you think is the correct imprisoment term for E dealing, as the Thailand penalty is higher than the UK penalty. Do you think the Thai justice system is fairer and better thought out than the UK justice system when it comes to drugs?

[gburns57au]

30+ Ecstacy tablets would have scored him a similar head sentence here in West Oz......as that is a trafficable amount of that narcotic....he would have also had his assets confiscated and been listed on the Drug Dealers list.

[gburns57au]

Most of the guys in the 'hilton' for drug offenses are innocent too BTW.

I work with prisoners here in West Oz and our jails are full of innocent people....just ask them.....

If you had said that a small percentage were innocent I may have believed you

Edited October 7, 2005 by gburns57au

[LivinLOS]

I agree, jails are always full of 'innocent men'..

I am amazed that you would get 8.5 years in Oz.. Also I heard (but dont have a link) that the 7 (+ 1.5) was a 50% sentance after pleading guilty !!!

[Fast Eddie]

My experiences with Ecstasy, predominantly through the 1990's, mirror those of LivinLOS, meemiathai and Bkkmadness. It quite simply is nowhere near as bad as it has been portrayed by the government and the media.

LivinLOS has actually provided a lot of very good information on this thread about the drug, for anyone who wishes to re-educate themselves rather than just accepting the propaganda which most blindly believe. To lump it in with other class A drugs such as Heroin, Crack, and Cocaine is totally absurd.

Of course, some people will never be able to get out of the 'all drugs are evil' mindset, whilst they swallow a xanax 'just to take the edge off things', and crack open a bottle of Chang.

[britmaveric]

Seems yanks - get anywhere from 5-20yrs for distribution of class 3 narcotic.

[jrincon17]

play with fire here in Thailand and you get burnt , go by the rules and everything will be ok .simple

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you got a pointed head there

[Heiniken]

The guy should be happy they didn't tack on a life sentence penalty for not having a Work Permit  and proper visa while doing business in Thailand!!!!!!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right on

[Anon999]

Thai legal system still has a lot to learn before it can be classed as "developed" and "fair".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the UK it's OK to send an OAP to goal for refusing to pay part of her council tax, about £50+, but letting multitudes of criminals off without charging them or with suspended sentences, probation or community service is the norm!

Do you call that fair or equitable CarlBkk?

Edited October 7, 2005 by Anon999

[sanook1]

Phuket Gazette:

British Ecstasy dealer jailed

...

“Based on the large size of the bottle, I actually think he smuggled in about 1,000 pills. We also found a lot of other drug paraphernalia in his room,” said the officer.

Crosby today began serving his sentence at Phuket Provincial Prison, where he has been in custody since his arrest, the court having denied his attempts to get bail.

The time already served since his arrest more than 17 months ago will not be deducted from his sentence.

--Phuket Gazette 2005-10-05

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds like he had it coming to him. Id say this wasnt a newbie so he was probably not doing this the first time. Hope he enjoys his extended stay!!

[carlthailand]

but I've read countless deaths from teenagers popping X. Simply put its a dangerous narcotic and you keep justifying its use by comparing alcohol + fags to it. (apples/oranges)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It isnt apples to oranges.. Countless ?? compared to usage stats they are tiny.. of course 1 exacty death is huge news, 100's of alchohol deaths every week never gets press..

I suggest if you want to have an informed argument you read on the subject..

What is that famous quote.

One death is tragic. 1000 is a statistic.

C

[mogoso]

No sympathy here!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

None here either. Not withstanding my own views toward drug use, I'd legalize it for adults, and let them all overdose with free whatever they wanted. Darwinism at its best.

Death penalty to those that would supply minors, major time for driving under influence.

Those going to Thailand should know, that the penalties are harsh, and the Bangkok Hilton isn't up to the standards of the Ritz Carlton. So if you can't do the time, don't whine.

[ChiangMaiThai]

No sympathy here!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're cold hearted then. Why don't you read a little about ecstacy? Its only dangerous if you forget to drink water. Go back to your black label and Chang.

[ChiangMaiThai]

No sympathy here!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

None here either. Not withstanding my own views toward drug use, I'd legalize it for adults, and let them all overdose with free whatever they wanted. Darwinism at its best.

Death penalty to those that would supply minors, major time for driving under influence.

Those going to Thailand should know, that the penalties are harsh, and the Bangkok Hilton isn't up to the standards of the Ritz Carlton. So if you can't do the time, don't whine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your post simply demonstrates your ignorance. ALL DRUGS ARE NOT THE SAME. Alcohol is more dangerous than ecstacy. But that's easy to tax now isn't it? Wake up!

[richard10365]

I can't believe people are still talking about this. The man knowlingly broke the law and went to jail. End of story.

[dantilley]

I can't believe people are still talking about this. The man knowlingly broke the law and went to jail. End of story.

Yes, he did break the law and got the jail sentence he knew was waiting for him and that is indeed the end of that story.

But what people are still talking about is the pros and cons of drug legalisation, the harshness of the Thai legal system, etc. These are interesting topics (well, I find them interesting anyway!) and a lively debate has formed, So that is why the discussion is still going on.

[Maejo Man]

You're cold hearted then. Why don't you read a little about ecstacy? Its only dangerous if you forget to drink water. Go back to your black label and Chang.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I'd finished rolling around the floor laughing That's as good as saying that speeding in a car is not dangerous, only if you forget to break for the concrete pylon