• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

(NYTIMES) Molly: Pure, but Not So Simple aka MDMA is now hip!

Status
Not open for further replies.

ponpo

( ≖‿≖)
It's only -now- seen as popular enough to write such articles about it? ┐(´ー`)┌

Also in tao lin's new book he's pretty much on MDMA the entire time. Hipness confirmed.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
The stigma surrounding MDMA is really disheartening. It's an amazing chemical that I highly recommend to everyone. If done responsibly (once a month at most, no alcohol intake at the same time) it does no harm to the body. Any effects of the drug are reversed over time. It's a perfectly safe and profound drug, and is one that saved my life.

How exactly did it save your life?
 
MDMA and Ecstasy always felt like lies to me. I'm glad I had those experiences and it has its place, but after multiple uses I felt like I began to "figure the drug out". At which point it began to seem insincere. In my opinion, there is much more useful information to glean from other drugs such as psychedelics or disassociates (at just as great a risk, let me caution).

I find the point the article makes about a new generation raised on being picky about what they eat and what clothes they wear fascinating and hilarious.
 

Raiden

Banned
I stopped doing drugs some time ago. But MDMA is the only thing i'll take from time to time. It is the most amazing thing. And i can totally sleep on it as well.
 

Sol..

I am Wayne Brady.
What's with America acting like Ecstasy / MDMA is some kind of new thing?

We invented the abuse of it then forgot about it because it was SO lame. Now, it has become cool again partially to mock Europeans for being so lame and late to the party in the first place.
 

Izayoi

Banned
Not sure about that. I heard that high usage of extacy can lead to depression.
It can, so it is not "harmless," you're correct. It can also cause nasty side-effects with high dosages, up to and including death (death is extremely rare, though, and I'm not sure any deaths from just MDMA alone have been reported, it's almost always when used in combination with other drugs - something that nobody should ever do).

On the grand scheme of things, however, it is a lot less harmful than alcohol - and nobody seems to have a problem with that.
 

Newline

Member
people also have bad experiences on alcohol. no one is saying things like this are OMGTOTALLYHARMLESS but demonizing drugs does more harm than good. just look at the insane, nonsensical laws around marijuana.
Can't really compare weed to E.

Also I was just wondering if other people have had bad experiences on the drug and are not saying it. When I first posted in the thread I completely forgot about my bad experience because well when I think about it my experience overall with E has been great. But when I think about it, the bad experience was kinda fucked. I guess I wouldn't recommend the use of drugs to anyone, what works for me doesn't necessarily work for others. My views are probably as liberal as they come though so imo do w.e the fuck you want. But if someone wants to demonize the drug from their own experience without telling someone not to take it, then I think thats rather interesting to hear, no?
 

sans_pants

avec_pénis
That article read like a commercial for Molly.

I don't think Molly is it, but someone needs to find (or create) a safe, legal drug to replace alcohol. The statistics are beyond grim.
Its called weed and molly. Both are leagues safer than alcohol and a lot more enjoyable without the hangover
 
They have. They weighed it up and responsibly using MDMA > responsibly using alcohol.

The Guardian said:
Alcohol is the most dangerous drug in the UK by a considerable margin, beating heroin and crack cocaine into second and third place, according to an authoritative study published today which will reopen calls for the drugs classification system to be scrapped and a concerted campaign launched against drink.

Led by the sacked government drugs adviser David Nutt with colleagues from the breakaway Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, the study says that if drugs were classified on the basis of the harm they do, alcohol would be class A, alongside heroin and crack cocaine.

The new paper updates a study carried out by Nutt and others in 2007, which was also published by the Lancet and triggered debate for suggesting that legally available alcohol and tobacco were more dangerous than cannabis and LSD.

For overall harm, the other drugs examined ranked as follows: crystal meth (33), cocaine (27), tobacco (26), amphetamine/speed (23), cannabis (20), GHB (18), benzodiazepines (15), ketamine (15), methadone (13), butane (10), qat (9), ecstasy (9), anabolic steroids (9), LSD (7), buprenorphine (6) and magic mushrooms (5).

source


They say a lot of what people are taking isn't pure MDMA, and many times is not MDMA at all. Which is true, and why people need to make sure they know where theirs comes from, or at least have some trust in the person providing it.

If you plan to do it, just be careful. Be aware of what is around you, and stay hydrated. Don't go drinking tons of alcohol, and doing Molly, then wondering why it may cause problems. When you wouldn't do the same for other drugs you buy at a drug store, with the big warning labels.

True, that or dat. People will always have vices, many of which are worse than a temporary chemically induced altered state - it should be about harm reduction: better education, decriminalization of possession, treatment for addiction - maybe even legalization trials for tax and purity reasons. And base it all on the evidence of independent research. Ha, ha.

apt

Unfortunately, political ping-pong based on private interests, populist policies and the reactions to, will always trump logical conclusions from critical reasoning based on numerous empirical studies. That goes for either side of the Atlantic.

Imho, it goes: commission study to appease one demographic/party/etc >>>> completely ignore results of study to appease another/suit agenda/etc, repeat ad infinitum.

The landscape eventually changes but requires a blood sacrifice - lots of. Same deal with religion, really. It all depends on the economic climate, invested interests and the direction of the wind on Jupiter.

For instance tobacco. Well, energy but same deal:

Scientists' Report Documents ExxonMobil’s Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science
Oil Company Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create Confusion.


WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 3–A new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists offers the most comprehensive documentation to date of how ExxonMobil has adopted the tobacco industry's disinformation tactics, as well as some of the same organizations and personnel, to cloud the scientific understanding of climate change and delay action on the issue. According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.
source

24 out of 37 Exxon Mobil lobbyists in 2012 have previously held government jobs.
source

Chairman of the House Budget Committee:Paul Ryan

It's all pretty disgusting and it's the majority who always end up suffering sooner or later. Round and round we go.
 

sans_pants

avec_pénis
Neither one are legal though. You can't go down to the local 7-11 and pick up a six pack of Molly and a carton of weed cigarettes.
Yes, and that's the problem. We don't need to invent a new legal drug to replace them, just legalize them outright. Make molly legal and you can forget about all the black market bullshit that comes with that legal status and you'd no longer have worry about getting a dose cut with something dangerous
 

Polari

Member
Fuckin 1989 called and wants its drugs back. Was MDMA ever not good? No. So what the fuck.

Also "Molly" sounds dumb as hell.
 
I have insanely negative physical reactions to any drugs harder than alcohol (i.e. weed, MDMA, salvia) so I really dislike people encouraging others to try drugs just because its a good time for them.

And I really can't take anyone seriously who says that drugs changed their word view. I watched that joe rogan DMT documentary and you sound as crackpot as those people.
 

sans_pants

avec_pénis
I have insanely negative physical reactions to any drugs harder than alcohol (i.e. weed, MDMA, salvia) so I really dislike people encouraging others to try drugs just because its a good time for them.

And I really can't take anyone seriously who says that drugs changed their word view. I watched that joe rogan DMT documentary and you sound as crackpot as those people.
Don't understand it, never tried it, refuse to accept others experiences of it


You sound like a blast to hang out with
 

zsswimmer

Member
I love me some MDMA. Its great for social anxiety, it completely removed all inhibitions for me when I was on it. I've never had a bad time while taking some MDMA
 

Fiftyeight

Neo Member
People like you are exactly my problem. "we can't be friends or have fun unless you want to do illegal drugs with me"

And you're doing the same thing the opposite way. Pot, meet kettle.

Choosing not to do it is one thing. Being blatantly ignorant about it is another.
 
I have insanely negative physical reactions to any drugs harder than alcohol (i.e. weed, MDMA, salvia) so I really dislike people encouraging others to try drugs just because its a good time for them.

And I really can't take anyone seriously who says that drugs changed their word view. I watched that joe rogan DMT documentary and you sound as crackpot as those people.

By just about every metric, Alcohol is "harder" than weed, MDMA, etc. The only thing worse is probably heroin and crystal meth. MDMA and cannibis have no addictive properties. Alcohol withdrawal on the other hand can be fatal.

So like most drugs, prohibition is what led to the most dangerous aspects of it. No oversight, impure stuff rampant, etc.

pretty much, yeah. The worst thing about MDMA is that someone might adulterate it with other substances to increase their profit margin.
 

gwarm01

Member
Let me see if I understand this. Molly is now the new preferred nickname for MDMA instead of ecstasy, so people think it is a new drug? This has been around forever.
 

subrock

Member
People like you are exactly my problem. "we can't be friends or have fun unless you want to do illegal drugs with me"

I've never done any drugs, hell, I didn't even have a drop of alcohol until I was 30, and I think you are being a little close-minded. Being okay with drug use isn't about being constantly high and fucked up. You should be able to recognize that there is a positive side to exploration and experimentation. It doesn't mean you have to do it all the time. Live and let live.
 

Ripclawe

Banned
And you're doing the same thing the opposite way. Pot, meet kettle.

Choosing not to do it is one thing. Being blatantly ignorant about it is another.

Some people don't need drugs to have a good time plus this article as someone said does seem like a nice advertisement for the drugs to be used.
 
Let me see if I understand this. Molly is now the new preferred nickname for MDMA instead of ecstasy, so people think it is a new drug? This has been around forever.

exactly. Though the article says that molly is "supposed" to be the pure form- consumed as a powder and not a pill. Of course, there is literally no way to verify this for anyone actually using it, and "pure" MDMA has been around forever. there just wasn't a separate name for it.
 
Don't understand it, never tried it, refuse to accept others experiences of it


You sound like a blast to hang out with

Yeah, I specifically said in my post that I have tried it, did experience and do understand it. I had a bad reaction every time to these drugs (except weed for the first year I smoked) and thus am skeptical of promoting it to everyone. Not saying my experiences are by any means universal but it certainly didn't do anything positive for me.

By just about every metric, Alcohol is "harder" than weed, MDMA, etc. The only thing worse is probably heroin and crystal meth. MDMA and cannibis have no addictive properties. Alcohol withdrawal on the other hand can be fatal..

I'm not trying to sound political or make some negative case here, I just don't react to alcohol in a negative way when small amounts of every other drug I have tried effected me more than other people and in a negative fashion. I'm not talking about addiction or abuse or anything else. I'm talking about the drug changing your state of mind.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
The Guardian said:
Alcohol is the most dangerous drug in the UK by a considerable margin, beating heroin and crack cocaine into second and third place, according to an authoritative study published today which will reopen calls for the drugs classification system to be scrapped and a concerted campaign launched against drink.

Led by the sacked government drugs adviser David Nutt with colleagues from the breakaway Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, the study says that if drugs were classified on the basis of the harm they do, alcohol would be class A, alongside heroin and crack cocaine.

The new paper updates a study carried out by Nutt and others in 2007, which was also published by the Lancet and triggered debate for suggesting that legally available alcohol and tobacco were more dangerous than cannabis and LSD.

For overall harm, the other drugs examined ranked as follows: crystal meth (33), cocaine (27), tobacco (26), amphetamine/speed (23), cannabis (20), GHB (18), benzodiazepines (15), ketamine (15), methadone (13), butane (10), qat (9), ecstasy (9), anabolic steroids (9), LSD (7), buprenorphine (6) and magic mushrooms (5).

source


Science is correct. Yet alcohol is legal, hydrocodone (!!) is the most prescribed drug in the United States at over 130 million prescriptions per year, and MDMA is Schedule I alongside heroin:

wikipedia said:
During DEA hearings to schedule MDMA, most experts recommended DEA Schedule III prescription status for the drug, due to beneficial usage of MDMA in psychotherapy. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) overseeing the hearings, Francis Young, also recommended that MDMA be placed in Schedule III. The DEA however classified MDMA as Schedule I.

In 2001, responding to a mandate from the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, resulted in an increase in the penalties for MDMA by nearly 3,000%.[160] The increase in penalties was opposed by the Federation of American Scientists.[161] The increase makes 1 gram of MDMA (four pills at 250 mg per pill's total weight regardless of purity, standard for Federal charges) equivalent to 1 gram of heroin (approximately fifty doses) or 2.2 pounds (1.00 kg) of cannabis for sentencing purposes at the federal level.[162]


We need to assess drugs empirically. More people are dying each year in the US from prescription drug OD/synergy than from car crashes, hydrocodone is handed out like candy despite the incredible harm potential (addiction, LD50, lethal synergy with alcohol/benzos/others), marijuana is one of the most potent painkillers available and nearly entirely harmless yet still not treated as a legitimate medical option by many. Sure, but heroin in pill form, no problem.
 

aku:jiki

Member
I have insanely negative physical reactions to any drugs harder than alcohol (i.e. weed, MDMA, salvia) so I really dislike people encouraging others to try drugs just because its a good time for them.

And I really can't take anyone seriously who says that drugs changed their word view. I watched that joe rogan DMT documentary and you sound as crackpot as those people.
You have "negative physical reactions" to entirely different chemicals and compounds that have nothing to do with each other? That doesn't make any biological sense whatsoever, dude.

Some people don't need drugs to have a good time plus this article as someone said does seem like a nice advertisement for the drugs to be used.
Neither do we. That's such an illogical assumption, too. Just because you like to movies, or whatever you like to do, does that mean that you need movies to feel good? Of course it doesn't. So why the hell would we need drugs to feel good? Such incredibly broken logic, if it can even be called that.
 

daviyoung

Banned
Yeah, I specifically said in my post that I have tried it, did experience and do understand it. I had a bad reaction every time to these drugs (except weed for the first year I smoked) and thus am skeptical of promoting it to everyone. Not saying my experiences are by any means universal but it certainly didn't do anything positive for me.

Physically, alcohol is a really hard drug, harder than weed and salvia at least. I don't think your negative reactions are physical.
 
Do it with a loved one. It'll make both of you brutally honest for a couple of hours and you won't stop talking. If everything's still good afterwards then you've got a keeper.
 
I'm not trying to sound political or make some negative case here, I just don't react to alcohol in a negative way when small amounts of every other drug I have tried effected me more than other people and in a negative fashion. I'm not talking about addiction or abuse or anything else.

Whether or not you "react" to alcohol negatively (or think you don't), by every measurable metric alcohol is extremely destructive to the body, and potentially addictive. So addictive that you cannot simply stop drinking it once that happens, it will kill you. This is not the case for cannibis or MDMA. the NYT article notes that there were a grand total of 2 deaths from MDMA between 2007 and 2010. There are none for Cannibis. Alcohol kills about 80,000 people per year just in the united states, about half of which are due to cirrhosis of the liver, alcohol poisoning, etc, and the other half are from drunk driving.

I understand you have opinions, and your reasons for them, but you are simply wrong here. Irresponsible messaging from DARE etc. have convinced a lot of people that marijuana etc are "hard" drugs for legal reasons, and alcohol is somehow safer because you can buy it anywhere. This is false, and the messaging does more harm than good.

We need to assess drugs empirically. More people are dying each year in the US from prescription drug OD/synergy than from car crashes, hydrocodone is handed out like candy despite the incredible harm potential (addiction, LD50, lethal synergy with alcohol/benzos/others), marijuana is one of the most potent painkillers available and nearly entirely harmless yet still not treated as a legitimate medical option by many. Sure, but heroin in pill form, no problem.

exactly. US drug policy is entirely nonsensical, and the classification of drugs as illegal, legal, schedule I,II,III, etc is done more for political reasons than anything else. Some of the hardest, most destructive drugs out there are completely legal. Cannibis is physically harmless but can land you in prison for 10 years if you're caught with it.
 

Newline

Member
Yeah, I specifically said in my post that I have tried it, did experience and do understand it. I had a bad reaction every time to these drugs (except weed for the first year I smoked) and thus am skeptical of promoting it to everyone. Not saying my experiences are by any means universal but it certainly didn't do anything positive for me.



I'm not trying to sound political or make some negative case here, I just don't react to alcohol in a negative way when small amounts of every other drug I have tried effected me more than other people and in a negative fashion. I'm not talking about addiction or abuse or anything else. I'm talking about the drug changing your state of mind.

I agree with you in some regards, worse than a boring old fogie that warns you about drugs is someone that comes into your life, convinces you do to a load of things that were great for them, those things end up fucking you over then they fuck off and carry on living their lives as before. To summate, Major Tom's suck.

All in all I just think it's best to simply relay personal experiences with the drug rather than harshly warning people or ranting and raving saying everyone should try it. A persons disposition before taking a drug is so integral to the observed effects of said drug.
 
The only problem I have with Molly is that noone has the 'pure' stuff anymore. Most of it is either partially filled with Tina or straight up Tina.
 

Timedog

good credit (by proxy)
1366687103899.gif
 

kai3345

Banned
Until you start sweating.

WOO!

Molly's the best drug around IMO. Assuming you're not a complete dumbass, Molly is basically harmless and rolling is one of the funnest things ive ever done.

I limit myself to one roll a month, although it usually ends up being one every six months since it depletes your brain's serotonin, but if it weren't for that one side effect, I'd be rolling all the time.

It's the good buzz from alcohol x1000, minus the sick feeling in your stomach, bad breath and hangover.
 
Cause they are late to the party.

I don't think that's even it. The article notes that Ecstasy was big in the 90s or whatever, but became less popular for various reasons. The article is about the drug making a comeback in a slightly different form with a different name, but it's still the same thing.

This is also mainstream news, which tends to be pretty late to the party and dumb things down for the 50+ audience that still gets their news this way.
 
Physically, alcohol is a really hard drug, harder than weed and salvia at least. I don't think your negative reactions are physical.

This seems kind of condescending. I've met other people who can't handle other drugs but drink alcohol (even though it is worse for you). I don't think it's super unusual.

You have "negative physical reactions" to entirely different chemicals and compounds that have nothing to do with each other? That doesn't make any biological sense whatsoever, dude.

Like I said, your mileage may vary, but I had a pretty bad time with them. Maybe I just phrased it poorly, I didn't mean to imply they were all chemically the same or anything just that they weren't good times for me. I'm just relating my experience, if that doesn't make sense I don't know what to tell ya. Maybe I'm a freak of nature!

Whether or not you "react" to alcohol negatively (or think you don't), by every measurable metric alcohol is extremely destructive to the body, and potentially addictive. So addictive that you cannot simply stop drinking it once that happens, it will kill you. This is not the case for cannibis or MDMA. the NYT article notes that there were a grand total of 2 deaths from MDMA between 2007 and 2010. There are none for Cannibis. Alcohol kills about 80,000 people per year just in the united states, about half of which are due to cirrhosis of the liver, alcohol poisoning, etc, and the other half are from drunk driving.

I understand you have opinions, and your reasons for them, but you are simply wrong here. Irresponsible messaging from DARE etc. have convinced a lot of people that marijuana etc are "hard" drugs for legal reasons, and alcohol is somehow safer because you can buy it anywhere. This is false, and the messaging does more harm than good.

I don't know how I can say this any more clearly, I am not making an argument here. I was trying to relate my experience on a purely mental and emotional level, I will freely admit I am very ignorant when it comes to biological effects on the usage of these drugs. I am speaking only to my experience and how I perceived it. Knowing that MDMA is safer for me than alcohol is not going to make me have a better time on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom