And just as an FYI, I am not just sputtering out what I have heard other people say. I have had to deal with the long term effects ecstasy has had on my son, and I don't care how many of you might say the media over hypes it , it is a very dangerous, dangerous and life destroying thing. Sure your teen might not die but they'll never be right again after prolonged use and it IS incredibly addictive!

Excuse me, but I have heard many young professionals and teenagers tell me that ecstasy is just fun. Well NO it isn't. It is dangerous and a very scarey thing. I can not stress this enough.......please stop encouraging.


Angie

Out of curiosity, if you don't mind my asking, is your company depending
on the bailout?

She'd block me if she didn't really find me entertaining logicseekers so fuck off

The initial findings of the study (which focused on people who had only used 'ecstasy' once or a few times) are rather interesting:

1. Symptoms of depression declined by 28% after they had used 'ecstasy'; their mental health appeared to be better after use than before.

2. Every test to look for the sort of brain injury that has been seen in lab animals failed to find any sign of damage in the people who had used 'ecstasy'. In the words of the researchers themselves, "we found no indications for structural neuronal damage after a low dose of ecstasy use in first time ecstasy users."

3. There were small differences in blood flow in some parts of the brains of the people who had used 'ecstasy'; the largest difference was 3.5% in one small region.

Recently there has been a small rash of news stories to the effect of 'new research shows using ecstasy even once unsafe'. They are referring to some of the early results from the NeXT Study, a massive research project by the government of the Netherlands to track potential 'ecstasy' users over time, regularly and thoroughly poking and prodding them with everything from psych evaluations to sophisticated brain scans to see how 'ecstasy' affects them. This study, the first of its kind, is expected to provide comprehensive, 'final word' evidence on what sort of harm (if any) is occurring as a result of 'ecstasy' use.

From this data, the total rate of ER visits among 'ecstasy' users is approximately 1 in 600 users per year. If we assume that the experience of the Netherlands is comparable to that of the US, we might assume a rate of actual emergency medical problems associated with 'ecstasy' use of approximately 1 in 6,000 users per year. Numbers alone don't really tell the whole story, however: Where things get interesting is not how many users encounter medical problems, but why they do. The distribution of injuries and deaths is not random throughout the user population; it is associated with specific risk factors and behaviors. (Read the rest of the Risks section for more information.)

That's from dea . org

In fact, I eatchildren, according to the statistics I looked up, hardly anyone ever dies from ectasy and there are NO documented cases of brain damage (something I didn't fully understand until now since I was used to the--"you'll get brain damage if you do it" line).

So anyway why doesn't the government outlaw cars? They cause astronomically more deaths than ecstasy?

I don't like ecstasy, but Ieatchildren, you are just falling prey to the American media's propaganda.

So Obama is going to close Gitmo down? Or is he just strongly alluding to the prospect?

Laura, when you come back, you should block Ieatchildren4fun. I know you like to have the whole "I'm so open-minded that I never block anyone" thing going on, but he is nothing but an extreme annoyance.