Home Drink & Drugs
Come and join our Support Circle, every Tuesday, 8 - 9:30pm! Limited spaces available! Sign up here

Why am I not surprised?

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
Sorry this is a long one but you have to greister to use the new york times and I thought this was easier

I have just found the observer link

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1037007,00.html
______________________

Report of Ecstasy Drug's Great Risks Is Retracted
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.

A leading scientific journal yesterday retracted a paper it published last year saying that one night's typical dose of the drug Ecstasy might cause permanent brain damage.

The monkeys and baboons in the study were not injected with Ecstasy but with a powerful amphetamine, said the journal, Science magazine.


The retraction was submitted by the team at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine that did the study.

A medical school spokesman called the mistake "unfortunate" but said that Dr. George A. Ricaurte, the researcher who made it, was "still a faculty member in good standing whose research is solid and respected."
The study, released last Sept. 27, concluded that a dose of Ecstasy a partygoer would take in a single night could lead to symptoms resembling Parkinson's disease.

The study was ridiculed at the time by other scientists working with the drug, who said the primates must have been injected with huge overdoses.
Two of the 10 primates died of heat stroke, they pointed out, and another two were in such distress that they were not given all the doses.
If a typical Ecstasy dose killed 20 percent of those who took it, the critics said, no one would use it recreationally.

In an interview yesterday, Dr. Ricaurte said he realized his mistake when he could not reproduce his own results by giving the drug to monkeys orally. He then realized that two vials his laboratory bought the same day must have been mislabeled: one contained Ecstasy, the other d-methamphetamine.
Dr. Ricaurte's laboratory has received millions of dollars from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and has produced several studies concluding that Ecstasy is dangerous. Other scientists accuse him of ignoring their studies showing that typical doses do no permanent damage.

At the time Dr. Ricaurte's study was published, it was strongly defended against those critics by Dr. Alan I. Leshner, the former head of the drug abuse institute, who had just become the chief executive officer of the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, which publishes Science.

Dr. Leshner had testified before Congress that Ecstasy was dangerous, and Dr. Ricaurte's critics accused him of rushing his results into print because a bill known as the Anti-Rave Act was before Congress. The act would punish club owners who knew that drugs like Ecstasy were being used at their dance gatherings.

Dr. Ricaurte yesterday called that accusation "ludicrous."
His laboratory made "a simple human error," he said. "We're scientists, not politicians."
Asked why the vials were not checked first, he answered: "We're not chemists. We get hundreds of chemicals here. It's not customary to check them."

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They were adminsitering 'high' doses of what they thought was MDMA, which was probally above 200mg, the dose range for meth is about 50-100mg, its not fucking surprising that they fucked the monkeys.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Why am I not surprised?
    Originally posted by hobbs


    Dr. Ricaurte yesterday called that accusation "ludicrous."
    His laboratory made "a simple human error," he said. "We're scientists, not politicians."
    Asked why the vials were not checked first, he answered: "We're not chemists. We get hundreds of chemicals here. It's not customary to check them."

    Ha ha that made me laugh, bet they we given millions of dollars to investigate this "research"
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Re: Why am I not surprised?
    Originally posted by Crazyredeyes
    Ha ha that made me laugh, bet they we given millions of dollars to investigate this "research"

    CRE! hola babe.. thought you had already buggered off to OZ, missed you when i was offline trying to sort my life out :p mwaa!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah , i am not surprised at all.

    Most of us that use E , know what it is really like, and how to handel it.

    Glad the truth is comming out!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The problem is that research should be done, yes most of us know how to 'handle' it but do we really know what its doing? Well not really no.

    I personaly really want to see proper research done into the short and longer term risks. With so many people using it, we need to know, and we also need this type of research if it is ever going to be made legit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    regardless of the results of any research people aren't going to stop using, honestly who can say that if the government came up with research showing it's bad...would you stop it?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It depends on the research, I use so infrequently that I recon I would cut it out if there was convincing research. But apart from the holes in my brain I've not heard anything that would make me stop.
Sign In or Register to comment.