Remembered

That sounds more like a bad kid, or to be generous, a stupid kid.

Who would imagine bad things from randomly introducing chemicals into your body in a pursuit of meaningless temporary pleasure?

Also your 'blog' currently says "1 COMMENTS", in CLEAR violation of American English conventions.

My blog was clearly anticipating a second comment, which came only 2 minutes later.

And he was using ecstasy which almost never has adverse side effects, and drinking or eating of any sort can be considered introducing chemicals into your body in pursuit of pleasure.

There are others.

Food and drink are immutable requirements for life. There is no comparison between sustenance and chemical abuse.

To put it another way, drinking or eating of any sort can be considered <i> not dying</i>. Ecstasy, on the other hand, does not provide nourishment or hydration, and has a slew of effects besides euphoria.

drinking alcohol or eating incredibly unhealthy foods loaded in sugar, fat, cholestorel, and other goodies. these are not immutable requirements of life and yet they are generally accepted, and are activities that are engaged in for pleasure depite they're obvious negative consequences.

Ecstasy's primary neurological effect is the release of serotonin, the same nuerotransmitter that is released after eating a large, satisfying meal. It's side effects are fever, and an inability to detect thirst. This kid who died from it died of an allergic reaction most likely, which makes him no worse or more stupid than someone who died of any other allergic reaction.

Who is this anyways? Maybe we can continue the debate.

If I am against drugs what makes you think I'd be much more in favor of alchohol? Its really in the same class of frivolous-and-potentially-dangerous-consumables as far as I am concerned, and is certainly <b>not</b> what I meant by saying 'drink' above.

In addition, I have a bleeding-edge scientific plan for avoiding an allergic reaction to ecstasy -- not consuming ecstasy.

"Fever and inability to detect thirst" is a bit oversimplfied as far as dangers of ecstasy. For one thing, you're buying this from a dealer, not <b>Merck</b> or some other legitimate pharmaceuticals manufacturer, so it could be ecstasy or it could be <i>rat poison</i>, but <b>you</b> don't really know. MDMA (ecstasy) also doesn't just cause a "fever", it reduces your body's ability to control many of its internal systems, which can lead to overheating, dehydration, or water intoxication. It can cause mood swings and make pre-existing depression worse. It combines poorly with several legitimate prescription medications, and some people even completely lack the enzyme needed to remove this foreign chemical from the body.

Yeah, there's a reason it's illegal.

[Also, it seems I could easily provide identification if I felt like it, but I chose to use the Anonymous option. I don't really think that this weakens my arguments -- if anything it simply makes my ideas stand on their own.]

I won't press you to provide identification; it has nothing to do with your arguments or ideas. I was just curious about your identity since not many other than my friends read my blog, and I wondered how you stumbled your way here.

"If I am against drugs what makes you think I'd be much more in favor of alchohol? Its really in the same class of frivolous-and-potentially-dangerous-consumables as far as I am concerned, and is certainly not what I meant by saying 'drink' above."

I'm not really concerned with whether you're for or against alcohol, but I doubt you would label someone a "bad" or "stupid" person for drinking or experimenting with alcohol, despite alcohol arguably having much worse effects than Ecstasy. And what about fatty foods? Avoiding trying things for fear of allergy would seem to preclude a whole range of different foodstuffs, pharmaceuticals, and even environments, where different antigens might be present. To avoid everything that might trigger an allergic reaction you would need to live in a clean room night and day. The danger of an allergic reaction to MDMA is exceedingly small, and it is an exceedingly rare condition to have.

As to the actual dangers of the drug, I think the first point you bring is the best.
Yes, buying ecstasy on the street does run a very high risk of receiving a bad batch, sometimes it can be mixed with regular amphetamine, ketamine, or caffeine, or other street drugs. I doubt rat poison is ever used though, unless someone hates you. But that is exactly why I am in favor of legalizing ecstasy, so that you CAN buy it from Merck, and it can be regulated for safety, and even taxed.

Of the other side effects listed, only overheating is particularly serious or unique to MDMA. This can be counteracted by staying properly hydrated. A chance of mood swings or making [i]pre-existing[/i] depression worse, is not what I consider a serious side effect. As to mixing with other medications, this is also true of alcohol and of many other perfectly legal medications.

In all it doesn't make sense to me, why Ecstasy is illegal at all. None of its negative side-effects are any worse than those of alcohol, or are very serious at all. Especially for it to be classed as a Schedule I drug by the DEA, the same status as crack seems absurd.

YHBT, YHL, HAND.

[Even though I still think that I am right.]

don't feed the trolls.