http://thedea.org/
---
Researchers fail to find signs of any lasting harm to heavy "Ecstasy" (MDMA) user's brains. (3/12/03)
In another blow to early theories that human users of the drug "ecstasy" are damaging their brains, researchers working for the German government's version of the FDA have published the results of one of the largest, most sophisticated studies ever done on the brains of heavy ecstasy users in this month's Journal of Nuclear Medicine.
The study compared the brains of three groups: 30 people who were currently using "ecstasy" and had an average lifetime usage of 827 tablets of ecstasy; 29 people who no longer used ecstasy but had in the past used an average of 793 tablets; and 29 people who had never used ecstasy.
Using PET brain scans, the scientists measured the density of SERT, a protein that is part of serotonin neurons. If the ecstasy users had destroyed parts of their serotonin system (as some researchers have suggested), then the SERT proteins on the serotonin neurons would be missing as well.
The results: Current heavy users of ecstasy did in fact have fewer SERT proteins than non-users. However, the difference was very small, on the order of 3-5%, and when the former heavy ecstasy users were examined, even that small difference vanished: The former user's brains were indistinguishable from the brains of people who had never used illegal drugs. The small differences seen between the brains of current heavy ecstasy users and non-drug users were apparently fully reversible upon quitting use, a trend seen repeatedly in previous research. (Visit Neurotoxicity for more information on previous studies.)
These results were particularly interesting in that they dramatically contradict an American study done by George Ricaurte (funded by the US government) which used similar brain scan techniques and ecstasy users with a similar level of lifetime use, but which claimed to have found massive (as much as 90%) loss of SERT. This huge discrepancy is both unexplained and troubling, as Ricuarte's claims were used both to justify outlawing ecstasy in the US and as justification for sentencing increases (in some cases making a dose of ecstasy ten times more severely punished than a dose of heroin.)
---
Researchers fail to find signs of any lasting harm to heavy "Ecstasy" (MDMA) user's brains. (3/12/03)
In another blow to early theories that human users of the drug "ecstasy" are damaging their brains, researchers working for the German government's version of the FDA have published the results of one of the largest, most sophisticated studies ever done on the brains of heavy ecstasy users in this month's Journal of Nuclear Medicine.
The study compared the brains of three groups: 30 people who were currently using "ecstasy" and had an average lifetime usage of 827 tablets of ecstasy; 29 people who no longer used ecstasy but had in the past used an average of 793 tablets; and 29 people who had never used ecstasy.
Using PET brain scans, the scientists measured the density of SERT, a protein that is part of serotonin neurons. If the ecstasy users had destroyed parts of their serotonin system (as some researchers have suggested), then the SERT proteins on the serotonin neurons would be missing as well.
The results: Current heavy users of ecstasy did in fact have fewer SERT proteins than non-users. However, the difference was very small, on the order of 3-5%, and when the former heavy ecstasy users were examined, even that small difference vanished: The former user's brains were indistinguishable from the brains of people who had never used illegal drugs. The small differences seen between the brains of current heavy ecstasy users and non-drug users were apparently fully reversible upon quitting use, a trend seen repeatedly in previous research. (Visit Neurotoxicity for more information on previous studies.)
These results were particularly interesting in that they dramatically contradict an American study done by George Ricaurte (funded by the US government) which used similar brain scan techniques and ecstasy users with a similar level of lifetime use, but which claimed to have found massive (as much as 90%) loss of SERT. This huge discrepancy is both unexplained and troubling, as Ricuarte's claims were used both to justify outlawing ecstasy in the US and as justification for sentencing increases (in some cases making a dose of ecstasy ten times more severely punished than a dose of heroin.)
Vastaukset
Vanhimmat
Ei vielä vastauksia
Aloittaja odottaa vastauksia. Kerro oma näkemyksesi ensimmäisenä.