Severeal of Ricaurte's studies were withdrawn from because he "accidently" used methamphetamine instead of MDMA. Additinaly the doses he uses in his studies are many times greater than the dose a human would take (relative although this is common in research). See: http://www.maps.org/mdma/studyresponse.html
Furthermore any study that has evaluated "MDMA" users is confounded by the fact that these individuals were polydrug users as well as that they were taking E pills not pure MDMA. It is impossible to establish what chemicals this individuals have actually ingested. Such as the one you posted "Effects of dose,sex,and long-term abstention from use on toxic effects of MDMA (ecstasy) on brain serotonin neurons " and "Chronic 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) use: effects on mood and neuropsychological function?" and anything with Raucartes name on it should be used as toilet paper as that is all it is good for. Also the fact that some individuals with problems may exhibit a higher propensity to ingest MDMA is hard to control for.
With long term chronic use there may be some damage associated with psychological deficits however they seem to be partially reversible. Occasional use is very unlikely to cause any real changes. However again what did these longterm ingesting individuals really ingest? Many E pills have amphetamines present as well as a host of other psychoactive including PCP, ketamine, DXM, BZP, TFMBZP. What caused the changes? Synthetic by products from impure product? These things are a result of prohibition and are almost impossible to control for under the current hysteria.
Regarding the toxicity in animals there are also species specific effects of any drug this is widely known and accepted in science. Example: Caffeine and theobromine is excessively toxic in many non-human mammals however not at all in humans. Also the doses used tend to be much higher than a recreational dose. This will definitely have an effect on the results.
While some studies have established changes from MDMA use others have shown (I will find and post it) that these changes (NOT DAMAGE) are reversible. I am not saying MDMA is non-toxic or safe. I just think that the dangers were exaggerated and only time will tell how serious occasional recreational use really is.
See: Gouzoulis-Mayfrank E, Daumann J.Neurotoxicity of methylenedioxyamphetamines (MDMA; ecstasy) in humans: how strong is the evidence for persistent brain damage?
Addiction. 2006 Mar;101(3):348-61.
Consider methamphetamine appears to be more neurotoxic in vitro and in vivo and it is an FDA approved drug?
I have no idea how many times Shulgin took it although I know he was not into taking a single chemical often maybe he made an exception. Also I do not consider 20 or so times a lot ( a just made up this #) which could be reasonable given the language used so maybe it just depends on what we think a lot is.
Furthermore any study that has evaluated "MDMA" users is confounded by the fact that these individuals were polydrug users as well as that they were taking E pills not pure MDMA. It is impossible to establish what chemicals this individuals have actually ingested. Such as the one you posted "Effects of dose,sex,and long-term abstention from use on toxic effects of MDMA (ecstasy) on brain serotonin neurons " and "Chronic 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) use: effects on mood and neuropsychological function?" and anything with Raucartes name on it should be used as toilet paper as that is all it is good for. Also the fact that some individuals with problems may exhibit a higher propensity to ingest MDMA is hard to control for.
With long term chronic use there may be some damage associated with psychological deficits however they seem to be partially reversible. Occasional use is very unlikely to cause any real changes. However again what did these longterm ingesting individuals really ingest? Many E pills have amphetamines present as well as a host of other psychoactive including PCP, ketamine, DXM, BZP, TFMBZP. What caused the changes? Synthetic by products from impure product? These things are a result of prohibition and are almost impossible to control for under the current hysteria.
Regarding the toxicity in animals there are also species specific effects of any drug this is widely known and accepted in science. Example: Caffeine and theobromine is excessively toxic in many non-human mammals however not at all in humans. Also the doses used tend to be much higher than a recreational dose. This will definitely have an effect on the results.
While some studies have established changes from MDMA use others have shown (I will find and post it) that these changes (NOT DAMAGE) are reversible. I am not saying MDMA is non-toxic or safe. I just think that the dangers were exaggerated and only time will tell how serious occasional recreational use really is.
See: Gouzoulis-Mayfrank E, Daumann J.Neurotoxicity of methylenedioxyamphetamines (MDMA; ecstasy) in humans: how strong is the evidence for persistent brain damage?
Addiction. 2006 Mar;101(3):348-61.
Consider methamphetamine appears to be more neurotoxic in vitro and in vivo and it is an FDA approved drug?
I have no idea how many times Shulgin took it although I know he was not into taking a single chemical often maybe he made an exception. Also I do not consider 20 or so times a lot ( a just made up this #) which could be reasonable given the language used so maybe it just depends on what we think a lot is.