benzyme wrote:
what makes you think that low doses of MDMA aren't neurotoxic? because you don't feel a crash?
if anything, that is pseudoscience, because it's a subjective observation that says nothing about the physiological effects of MDMA at the fine axons in the raphe nuclei even at low doses, which is well documented. fortunately, elasticity repairs the damage at low doses so you don't notice it.
i welcome criticism. thank you benzyme!!
i have my opinions, sure, but i'm also capable of detaching from them enough to appreciate your views.
though, to be fair, i don't feel i've even said the things you've said i have to begin with.
i never said low doses of MDMA aren't neurotoxic, as you've suggested i have.
if you read through my posts (and read the title of the post) you'll see that i've only talked about half-doses causing "
significantly less toxicity,"
i've said nothing about
negating toxicity.
if you read carefully what you have quoted me saying...
"i feel that anyone who tries a half dose of MDMA/MDA with a non-toxic psychedelic like mescaline or 2c-b will experience drastically reduced feelings of bodily/mental toxicity. anyone can prove this to themselves, we don't need pseudo-science to spell out what is blatantly obvious through the fires of actual experience."
...i've only said that if someone takes a half dose of MDMA they will experience "drastically
reduced toxicity."
not negation but reduction. is the above claim really capable of being argued against?? let me know if it is...i see no possibility.
half = less. this seems like mathematics to me.
on the other hand i'm not saying that i think half-doses of MDMA
are toxic in humans.
i just plain don't know, and neither does anyone else for that matter.
all studies that are done on animals do not necessarily apply to humans, period.
no amount of belaboring the point of animal studies can actually
prove anything, regardless of degree of education or intellectual prowess.
it can suggest, but it can't prove.
the study that was quoted talks about "MDMA users." look into what that term means in these studies....
i say "MDMA users" because when these studies are done they
usually (no blanket statements
) take poly-drug users who take "Ecstasy pills" containing who-knows-what substance with God-knows-what other compounds in no-one-knows what doses every single weekend for a long time!) i wouldn't be surprised to find damage either.
what do these multi-drug/mystery-drug user studies have to do with humans taking measured doses of pure MDMA irregularly?
i have seen no
proof of human toxicity with low doses yet.
as usual with science there are too many variables to say things like this with certainty.
but ya know, if these studies, as non-proving as they are, didn't make me question these things, as they are making you question, benzyme, then why would i have even bothered to write about how to take less MDMA, less frequently, in the first place.
these issues are near to my heart also, and i've made no blanket statements outside of the realm of common sense.
if i have then feel free to tell me.
but harm-reduction is a more enlightened game than scare tactics...
people will take these molecules in absurd doses no matter what studies are done.
i'm curious about a few things though, benzyme, concerning your quote above:
are the physiological effects of MDMA at the fine axons in the raphe nuclei (even at low doses) well documented in humans or animals?
and...
when you say, "fortunately, elasticity repairs the damage at low doses so you don't notice it" isn't that agreeing with the what i'm saying about less harm or less lasting harm being done?? it almost seems like this agrees with the original intent of the post in the first place...
thank you for getting my gears turning!! i appreciate everyone's input!
