|
Re: Medical information!
| quote: | Beyond the K-hole: A 3-year longitudinal investigation of the cognitive and subjective effects of ketamine in recreational users who have substantially reduced their use of the drug.
Morgan CJA; Monaghan L; Curran HV. Addiction 99(11): 1450-1461, 2004. (47 refs.)
Rationale: Ketamine is a dissociative anaesthetic that is also a drug of abuse. Previous studies have demonstrated persisting episodic and semantic memory impairments in recreational ketamine users 3 days after taking ketamine. However, the degree to which these deficits might be reversible upon reduction or cessation of ketamine use was not known. Objective: To follow-up a population of ketamine users tested 3 years previously and examine whether impairments observed 3 days after drug use are enduring or reversible. Methods: Eighteen ketamine users and 10 polydrug controls from studies conducted between 3 and 4 years earlier were re-tested on the same battery of cognitive tasks and subjective measures. These tapped episodic, semantic and working memory and executive and attentional functioning. Subjective schizotypal, dissociative, mood and bodily symptoms were also examined and a drug use history recorded. Results: The ketamine users had reduced their frequency of use of ketamine by an average of 88.3%. Performance of ketamine users on tasks tapping semantic memory had improved and this improvement was correlated with their reduction in ketamine use. On tasks tapping episodic memory and attentional functioning, ketamine users still showed deficits compared to polydrug controls. Higher levels of schizotypal symptoms and perceptual distortions were exhibited by the ketamine group, although dissociative symptoms were similar to controls. Conclusions: These findings indicate that semantic memory impairments associated with recreational ketamine are reversible upon marked reduction of use; however, impairments to episodic memory and possibly attentional functioning appear long-lasting. In addition, schizotypal symptoms and perceptual distortions may persist after cessation of ketamine use. Ketamine users, or potential users, should be aware of the enduring effects of this drug on aspects of memory and subjective experience. |
Waste of money. First of all, the sample size is too small. 18 users 10 control? Give me a break, they should know better than that.
Second of all, it doesn't control for biases in test groups - are ketamine users more likely to have used other drugs as well than the control group? Yes, of course.
Also, the data analysis is very shallow and the information presented very weak. The test methodology for memory and perception is left unstated, and since no percentage is cited as the average "impairment" of the ketamine user, I can only assume that either no objective measurements were used, or the difference was so insignificant that citing it would weaken the results of the study.
Furthermore, this investigation fails to control for the dosages of ketamine used by the subjects. It should be common knowledge in the industry by now that different dosages may or may not meet a "threshold" at which point damage starts to occur. This study seems to completely disregard this fundamental principle and combined with a plethora of methodological failures it fails to meet even the most liberal standards of scientific efficacy.
| quote: | Residual neuropsychological effects of illicit 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in individuals with minimal exposure to other drugs.
Halpern JH; Pope HG; Sherwood AR; Barry S; Hudson JI; Yurgelun-Todd D. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 75(2): 135-147, 2004. (75 refs.)
Background: A substantial literature suggests that users of illicit 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphet-amine (MDMA or "ecstasy") display residual cognitive deficits. Most MDMA users, however, use other illicit drugs as well, so it is difficult to be certain that these deficits are due to MDMA, as opposed to other drug use or additional confounding factors. Methods: We administered a battery of neuropsychological tests to 23 young MDMA users who reported minimal exposure to any other drugs, including alcohol, and to 16 comparison individuals equally involved with the rave subculture, but reporting no MDMA use. We compared the groups by regression analyses adjusting for numerous potentially confounding variables. To test for a possible dose-response effect, we also performed a median split of 12 moderate MDMA users (22-50 lifetime uses) and 11 heavy users (60-450 uses), and compared these subgroups with non-users. Results: MDMA users as a whole performed worse than non-users on most test measures, but these comparisons rarely reached statistical significance. This picture changed markedly in the subgroup analysis: although moderate users displayed virtually no differences from non-users on any measures, the heavy users displayed significant deficits on many measures, particularly those associated with mental processing speed and impulsivity. These differences did not appear explainable by differences in family-of-origin variables, verbal IQ, levels of depression, or time since last MDMA use. Conclusions: The presence of residual cognitive deficits, even among unusually "pure" frequent users of illicit MDMA, analyzed with adjustment for confounding variables, augments the evidence that MDMA itself, rather than some associated factor, is responsible for the deficits observed. |
This study is better, but still ultimately meaningless. The sample size is still too small to draw any compelling conclusion out of the results. The data collection methods are still vague and therefore may not be reliable. Once again no concrete numbers are provided to support the conclusion, and the results are presented in an overly simplistic manner.
Furthermore the study fails to account for possible impurities in the MDMA taken by test subjects, as well as possible inconsistencies in the impurities across the test group and within the lifetime of each subject. This oversight alone would be enough to throw this one into the trash bin where it belongs and send the imbeciles who threw this study together back down to school to study business or something where their stupidity won't be so readily apparent.
| quote: | Accidental ecstasy poisoning in a toddler.
Melian AM; Burillo-Putze G; Campo CG; Padron AG; Ramos CO. Pediatric Emergency Care 20(8): 534-535, 2004. (9 refs.)
A child of 14 months accidentally swallowed a portion of an Ecstasy pill. Forty minutes after ingestion, he started a generalized convulsion. He also presented hyperthermia (38 degrees C), hypertension, tachycardia (130 bpm), ventricular extrasystoles, tachypnea (50 rpm), and mydriasis. At the hospital 5 hours later, the urine levels of amphetamine/methamphetamine were >16 mg/L. He was treated with general support measures and benzodiazepines intravenously and admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit. During the first 12 hours, he continued with hypertension, tachycardia, and long periods of trigeminy, without hemodynamic repercussion. He was discharged fully recovered. Gas chromat-ography/mass spectrometry analysis (8 hours after ingestion) showed a serum level of 3,4 methyl-enedioximethylamphetamine (MDMA) of 0.591 mg/L. The 3 cases described in the literature have shown a good evolution of Ecstasy poisoning in toddlers and infants, despite an initial critical situation. Regarding adults, the toddler intoxication seems to present symptoms sooner (20 to 30 minutes), having as an initial manifestation convulsions. However, great care must be taken on accidental ingestion of these attractive design pills. |
This is just common sense. Most OTC drugs would be seriously harmful to a very young child at significant dosages. Not sure if there's any point to this or not - but I'm leaning towards "not."
I'm not sure what the point of this thread was but it's a good example of the kind of "junk science" which has unfortunately become the accepted norm for clinical research. Anyone with genuine interest in science and medicine needs to be very careful to analyze any and all research with the eye of a skeptic. Remember that there are thousands of studies which contradict each other, so they can't all be right. As a result it's up to the individual to decide what he or she will put stock into. I advise against putting stock into hack jobs like these.
|
