Pubdate: November 15, 1999 Source: Peak, The (CN BC) Copyright: Copyright 1999 Peak Publications Society Contact: Website: http://www.peak.sfu.ca/ Note: Simon Fraser University's student newspaper Author: dee hon THE HEIGHT OF ECSTACY In recent years there has been a considerable increase in the recreational usage of the psychoactive drug ecstasy. Its increasing popularity has been due in large part to its association with rave and club culture, where it has long been the intoxicant of choice. Lately, the headlines of local newspapers have been dotted with stories related to ecstasy. There have been reports of overdoses at raves, and drug busts large and small. Earlier this month, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency officers seized 104,606 tablets of ecstasy at the Vancouver International Airport. According to CCRA communications officer Faith St. John, "This is the largest seizure of ecstasy that customs has ever made, not just for Vancouver, but in all of Canada. We have had several smaller seizures of ecstasy, but this is certainly the largest." Corporal Scott Rintoul of the RCMP Drug Awareness Group reports that there has definitely been an increasing trend in ecstasy seizures by the RCMP. But amidst all the hype, it can be easy to lose perspective about the facts on the drug. BCTV's news coverage of a recent ecstasy seizure featured an interview with an unidentified man claiming simply that ecstasy was one of the most toxic substances known to man. Despite this marvel of exemplary journalism, many ecstasy users and non-users alike are often unclear about important details pertaining to the drug. The drug most people refer to as "ecstasy" is usually 3,4-methylendioxymethamphe-tamine (MDMA) - a ring-substituted derivative of amphetamine. It was first introduced in 1914 and patented as an appetite suppressant. Later, it was realized that MDMA could be a useful adjunct to psychotherapy. It facilitated interpersonal communication, enhanced insight, increased self-esteem, and actually decreased the abuse of other illicit substances. However, the increasing popularity of MDMA use as a recreational psychoactive substance eventually prompted the law to step in. In Canada, ecstasy is a Schedule III controlled substance. According to Corporal Rintoul, a person charged with possession of it can receive up to a year in jail and up to $2,000 in fines. Penalties, especially for first offences, are typically less than that - no jail time, just a fine. Regardless of how lenient the penalty may be, any conviction results in a criminal record; and that can cause a number of difficulties for someone seeking to travel, or obtain employment in certain fields. There are more severe penalties if one is convicted of possession for the purposes of trafficking. The distinction between the two charges isn't merely a function of the quantity of drugs in possession. "Circumstances dictate the offence, not the quantity," says Corporal Rintoul. A person going to a rave with 10 capsules of ecstasy is probably not going to use them all that night, whereas a person with three likely could. Identical quantities found under different circumstances could result in different charges being laid. The two individuals arrested in connection with the record airport seizure are facing the prospect of even stiffer penalties. Charged with importation of a controlled substance, they could each receive up to 10 years in jail - this according to Constable Ian Slaney of the RCMP HQ Drug Section. So what is it about ecstasy that is causing an increasing number of people to risk an inauspicious meeting with Constable Slaney and his colleagues? "E [ecstasy] accentuates all five senses . . . especially touch. You get really empathetic - you can totally understand what other people are feeling and bond really deeply. It really varies from person to person, but you feel really happy, and movement is very natural and fluid, and you really want to move. Especially, in my case, to dance music," claims SFU student Adam Gomez*. Or, as Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design student Chundrit Jugjev* succinctly puts it, "It's fuckin' rad!" Their claims are more or less corroborated by the scientific literature regarding this topic. Four to eight hours after ingesting MDMA, subjects typically feel increased closeness to people, increased sensory activity, a feeling of openness to new ideas, increased depth of emotion and decreased appetite. This is in addition to the aforementioned therapeutic benefits of the drug. However, there appears to be some costs associated with all this happiness. One of the most prominent debates in the scientific literature regarding MDMA has centred around the drug's apparent neurotoxicity. Numerous studies on non-human subjects have suggested that significant doses of MDMA can result in damage to neurons that contain the neurotransmitter serotonin (5-HT) and there is the distinct possibility that the drug can have similar effects in humans. The serotonin system is thought to be integral in the regulation of most, if not all, complex behaviours. The functional consequences of such lesions currently remain unknown. However, some researchers believe that these lesions are responsible for the widely reported feelings of depression and memory loss experienced by ecstasy users several days after using the drug. A study published in the journal Addiction indicates that users of ecstasy report feelings of depression some time after coming down from taking ecstasy. Initially, their depression scores rated similarly to the depression scores of alcohol drinkers after a night of drinking. Later in the week however, their depression scores were higher than those of the drinkers. Even so, the author of the study - Valerie Curran - admits that "there was enormous variation." Mr. Jugjev, for example, reports when experiencing the after effects, he "feels good. It's like an afterglow that lasts for several days." There is also preliminary evidence suggesting that sustained ecstasy use could lead to hepatotoxicity (liver damage). The liver is largely responsible for processing any potential toxicants which may be ingested. More disconcerting are the reports of deaths associated with ecstasy use. Corporal Rintoul expressed considerable concern that the increase in ecstasy use in Vancouver could lead to fatal consequences. He reports that although no deaths have occurred here yet, Vancouver emergency room doctors are quite alarmed by the number of people admitted after taking ecstasy. In Britain, where ecstasy use has been more prevalent than in Canada, the New Scientist estimates that perhaps six people have died after taking ecstasy over the past decade. A study published in the medical journal Lancet examined the circumstances surrounding the deaths of nine individuals in 1991 and 1992. For seven of the deceased individuals, heatstroke (severe hyperthermia and disseminated intravascular coagulation) was indicated as the likely cause of death. The other two deceased individuals died in a head-on motor vehicle accident. All of the fatal cases involving heatstroke were at crowded parties or clubs. The high ambient temperatures, inadequate fluid replacement and sustained physical activity which typify raves and dance clubs were thought to potentiate a direct effect of ecstasy on the body's thermoregulatory mechanisms. All these findings demonstrate that there is some cause for concern. But it is important to retain perspective when examining this data. A New Scientist editorial proposes that all scientific studies regarding ecstasy should be accompanied by the following warning: "DANGER! Hyping these findings can lead to intoxicating headlines and unhelpful bouts of moral panic." In light of the evidence about ecstasy's harmful effects, and in our current moral atmosphere, it can be very difficult to express sensible views about the drug. It seems that either you condemn ecstasy out of hand, or you risk being labelled as someone who advocates the deaths of young people. There have been considerable experimental difficulties in the studies involving humans, in addition to the inherent problems with the reliability of extrapolating non-human data to predict effects on humans. Controlled experiments involving humans are often unfeasible. There are numerous ethical problems associated with slicing people's brains open before they're finished using them. As a result, much of the human data relies on unreliable self-reported information on the part of users. One of the difficulties inherent in studying the effects of ecstasy on humans is that "ecstasy" tablets are not always what they purport to be. Corporal Rintoul believes that only about half of "ecstasy" tablets are actually real MDMA. A study published in Lancet corroborates his thesis. Questioning why most people take the drug regularly without significant harm while others die or experience severe toxic effects, the researchers examined the contents of "ecstasy" tablets acquired from locations throughout the UK. Some of the tablets had no hallucinogenic substances. Others contained a range of substances including amphetamines, ketamine (a dental sedative and veterinary anaesthetic), paracetamol, and methamphetamine. Some other substances known to be found in "ecstasy" include dextromethorphan hydrobr-omide or dxm (also found in the cold medication Benylin DM) GHB, PCP, and ephedrine. Because ecstasy is illegal, there is no quality control or legal recourse for individuals buying bogus ecstasy. This can lead to problems for users and researchers alike. Research about ecstasy toxicity doesn't necessarily reveal the true risks involved in taking it. Neither do reports about ecstasy-related fatalities. It is true that ecstasy or MDMA can have toxic, even lethal effects. But it is not commonly acknowledged that any substance can have toxic or lethal effects. Critically important factors relating to toxicity are dose, and route of administration. Much of the toxicity research on MDMA pertains to doses much higher than those experienced by typical users. Also, researchers have often administered MDMA to their subjects through routes which do not simulate those of real users (i.e. intra-venous (i.v.) or intra-peritoneal (i.p.) injections). Any information acquired from ecstasy research should be placed in a greater context. The results of toxicity studies, for example, have revealed that the LD50 (dose at which 50 per cent of test subjects are killed) for MDMA in mice is 97 mg/kg i.p.. On the other hand, the LD50 for legally available nicotine is 9.5 mg/kg i.p. for mice - nearly ten times as toxic per unit mass. And while six people in Britain are thought to have died each year from ecstasy, it should be noted that at least 500,000 people have taken ecstasy and around a million tablets are consumed in that country every week. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of Britons die each year from long-term alcohol and tobacco abuse. Approximately 600 Britons die each year in accidents caused by drunk drivers. Any deaths or injuries as a result of ecstasy are unnecessary and tragic, but overhyping ecstasy's dangers will only serve to exacerbate the gap in understanding between those who use the drug and those who don't. Presenting anything less than an a completely honest portrayal of ecstasy's risks and benefits can only break any strand of trust that exists between would-be educators and the users and would-be users of ecstasy alike. Already, ecstasy users are generally very cynical about any drug information presented to them. Currently, very little information exists as to the potential long-term effects of ecstasy use. Should any catastrophically important information be discovered, what good is it if it is received merely as another cry of "wolf"? Many users of ecstasy will continue to use it regardless of the potential dangers presented to them.There are ways of minimizing the risks, and there should be avenues open to communicate them to any person considering or using ecstasy. Corporal Rintoul suggests that vigilant security and first aid staff have been largely responsible for preventing fatalities at Vancouver raves. Persons wishing to avoid necessitating their services should keep a few tips in mind: Evidence suggests that hyperthermia is a significant factor in ecstasy toxicity. Keeping cool and maintaining proper hydration can reduce ecstasy's neurotoxic effects. Also, laboratory studies indicate that serotonin re-uptake inhibitors such as fluoxetine (Prozac) can block MDMA neurotoxicity without inhibiting MDMA's subjective effects. This suggests that MDMA's psychoa-ctive effects may be separate from its neurotoxic action. Many ecstasy users already use fluoxetine to chase or prevent the post-ecstasy blues. Now, it seems that it may prevent MDMA toxicity as well. Taking ecstasy is not without its physical and legal risks. Most users consider the short term risks to be relatively small - a perception that appears to be supported by available statistics. But it should be incumbent upon anyone even considering taking ecstasy to educate themselves on the potential dangers and benefits, as well as on ways to maximize their safety. No two individuals react in exactly the same way to the same substance - - a fact that people should keep in mind if they decide to take ecstasy. Or, they could follow Corporal Rintoul's advice and simply leave the drug alone: "You don't need it - period." *An asterisk appears adjacent to names of people who wished to be identified only by a pseudonym. - --- MAP posted-by: Derek Rea