Silk Road forums
Discussion => Drug safety => Topic started by: Ktown99 on October 24, 2012, 10:32 am
-
Was on channel 4 in the UK.
"The show – billed by the broadcaster as one of its ‘boldest projects yet’ – saw 25 volunteers, including a vicar and author Lionel Shriver, take an 83mg tablet of MDMA – pure ecstasy – or a placebo.
Each then underwent a series of tests, including a brain scan, while changes to their mood, memories and emotions were monitored.
Jon Snow, who is hosting the two-part series, insisted the research was vital because ‘incredibly, no one knows how [ecstasy] works or how harmful it is’.
However, many viewers complained that instead of focusing on the science, producers instead merely wanted to talk about the volunteers’ experiences."
Clear net link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209535/Almost-2-million-watched-Drugs-Live-TV-lends-dangerous-air-acceptability-drug.html
If you saw it what did you think?
-
Was on channel 4 in the UK.
"The show – billed by the broadcaster as one of its ‘boldest projects yet’ – saw 25 volunteers, including a vicar and author Lionel Shriver, take an 83mg tablet of MDMA – pure ecstasy – or a placebo.
Each then underwent a series of tests, including a brain scan, while changes to their mood, memories and emotions were monitored.
Jon Snow, who is hosting the two-part series, insisted the research was vital because ‘incredibly, no one knows how [ecstasy] works or how harmful it is’.
However, many viewers complained that instead of focusing on the science, producers instead merely wanted to talk about the volunteers’ experiences."
Clear net link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209535/Almost-2-million-watched-Drugs-Live-TV-lends-dangerous-air-acceptability-drug.html
If you saw it what did you think?
yea i watched it and thought it was quite interesting and funny.it didnt really tell me anything i didnt already know from taking plenty of the stuff myself and also from the stuff iv read up about mdma.i didnt know there was complaints about it..my opinion tho is that professor nut and the other woman got good research from the experiment which there would of been no point in showing it on the show since it was prob way too far fetched for the average joe to grasp what i think the show was intented for the viewers wise was to show them what the effcts of mdma are.basicly what im saying is they made that show because they know they cant stop people taking mdma and the next best thing is to educate anyone who takes it or wants to take it,so its done as safely as possible...keeping the science to where science belongs in the lab.
-
Yeah I seen it.
I felt bad for the poor fellas who had to spend there come up in an MRI machine!
-
lol ya total waste sitting in fmri while coming up on X
-
you would def be tripping balls lying in it,im surprised no one went crazy to get out,first time i touched the gear i couldnt sit still
-
I thought it was a bit irresponsible, but without really having the balls to outright say "fuck it, it's fine."
Saying that MDMA is perfectly safe ...through the example of known doses in a controlled setting... When in reality most people take God knows what, with God knows what else, God knows where.
-
Good documentary - wish they had shown more of the scientific findings. Would also like to read the study findings and also that one professors reference material when he made claims about depression and memory.
Other than that, loved watching the participants chew their faces off and be like 'yeah, i think i'm on something, i feel really nice"
-
If you would like to read more about the research, here's a link to the published material from the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20643699
sdesu
-
Cool - I've just downloaded it and will check it out this weekend.
It's interesting to see a scientist so vocal in his support for drugs like ecstasy vs alcohol.
Thanks for the link sdesu
-
Yeah, professor Parrot was kinda funny, with the painful grimace steadily fixed on his face. He looked like he's TERRIBLY concerned about something all the time. :)
But despite all those various guests, pleasant and unpleasant experiences mentioned, and all the pro's and con's mentioned, I had a clear impression that the entire show was totally pro-ecstasy. How the host was insisting "This is something AMAZING!" when talking about the healing that occurred in the ordained priest as a consequence of the ecstasy experience. And, after all, he invited a professor named PARROT to oppose the two main guest, who were both clearly pro-ecstasy.... (Well I'm not sure how this is in English, but in my language someone called parrot is certainly funny.)
It is a pity they did not make a connection between the fact, that the ordained priest had the most significant and life-changing experience from all the subjects and the fact, that she was a spiritually connected and educated person.
Also, it made me laugh how one of the main guests (the big guy) tried to explain everything through showing what happens in the brain. "For the first time ever we have seen that there is heightened activity in the visual cortex in people on ecstasy. That explains why they see enhanced colors!" Hurray! My goodness, these scientists can be funny sometimes... What the heck is that supposed to say about why everything you look at is soooo lovely and beautifully colored on E...? lol
-
I thought it was a bit irresponsible, but without really having the balls to outright say "fuck it, it's fine."
Saying that MDMA is perfectly safe ...through the example of known doses in a controlled setting... When in reality most people take God knows what, with God knows what else, God knows where.
Well, that makes 'most' people stupid. It does not make MDMA unsafe because people are unsafe.
-
Yeah, professor Parrot was kinda funny, with the painful grimace steadily fixed on his face. He looked like he's TERRIBLY concerned about something all the time. :)
But despite all those various guests, pleasant and unpleasant experiences mentioned, and all the pro's and con's mentioned, I had a clear impression that the entire show was totally pro-ecstasy. How the host was insisting "This is something AMAZING!" when talking about the healing that occurred in the ordained priest as a consequence of the ecstasy experience. And, after all, he invited a professor named PARROT to oppose the two main guest, who were both clearly pro-ecstasy.... (Well I'm not sure how this is in English, but in my language someone called parrot is certainly funny.)
It is a pity they did not make a connection between the fact, that the ordained priest had the most significant and life-changing experience from all the subjects and the fact, that she was a spiritually connected and educated person.
Also, it made me laugh how one of the main guests (the big guy) tried to explain everything through showing what happens in the brain. "For the first time ever we have seen that there is heightened activity in the visual cortex in people on ecstasy. That explains why they see enhanced colors!" Hurray! My goodness, these scientists can be funny sometimes... What the heck is that supposed to say about why everything you look at is soooo lovely and beautifully colored on E...? lol
it was def pro ecstasy,that big guy you speak of is called professor david nutt.he was the uk's government lead drug expert,he done research on drugs to see how dangerous or in this matter not dangerous they are and told our prime minister that you would have more chance dieing from falling off a horse than you would taking mdma then he got fired for doing his job.so hes out to prove a point.
-
Hard to expect much more from a glossy TV show really. The DJ guy made MDMA users look like tools. And Lily Allen's dad didn't do the scene any favors either. The solider guy was a dick. The priest was the most honest about her experience.
I thought the MRI results were very interesting actually.
But I would've like to hear them actually describe how MDMA can be safe (infrequent use, vitamin C, not redosing large amounts, drinking enough water but not too much etc). There is more science out there about neuroprotection they didn't go into.
And for kicks.. why not put them into a car and see how they go against a drunk person! ;)
-
Haven't watched it yet but they should have compared a number of things (if they didn't already), such as:
average cost of a pill vs cost of alcoholic drink
number of pills needed to have a good time vs number of drinks needed
comparative cost across the evening
number of fights of people on E vs those drinking
E driving vs drunk driving
Cost to tax payers to manage both sets of people.
Any others?
-
And for kicks.. why not put them into a car and see how they go against a drunk person! ;)
[/quote]
this would have such a watch