JNM - The Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Clinical Investigations

Long-Term Effects of "Ecstasy" Use on Serotonin Transporters of the Brain Investigated by PET
Ralph Buchert, PhD1, Rainer Thomasius, MD2, Bruno Nebeling, PhD1, Kay Petersen, PhD2, Jost Obrocki, MD2, Lars Jenicke, MD1, Florian Wilke1, Lutz Wartberg2, Pavlina Zapletalova, MS2 and Malte Clausen, MD1
1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
2 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

Alterations of the serotonergic system due to ecstasy consumption have been extensively documented in recent literature. However, reversibility of these neurotoxic effects still remains unclear. To address this question, PET was performed using the serotonin transporter (SERT) ligand 11C-(+)-McN5652 in a total of 117 subjects subdivided into 4 groups: actual ecstasy users (n = 30), former ecstasy users (n = 29), drug-naive control subjects (n = 29), and subjects with abuse of psychoactive agents other than ecstasy (n = 29). Methods: About 500 MBq 11C-(+)-McN5652 were injected intravenously. Thirty-five scans were acquired according to a dynamic scan protocol of 90 min using a full-ring whole-body PET system. Transaxial slices were reconstructed using an iterative method. Individual brains were transformed to a template defined earlier. Distribution volume ratios (DVRs) were derived by application of a reference tissue approach for reversible binding. Gray matter of the cerebellum served as reference. SERT-rich brain regions—mesencephalon, putamen, caudate, and thalamus—were selected for the evaluation of SERT availability using volumes of interest predefined in the template. Results: Compared with drug-naive control subjects, the DVR in actual ecstasy users was significantly reduced in the mesencephalon (P = 0.004) and the thalamus (P = 0.044). The DVR in former ecstasy users was very close to the DVR in drug-naive control subjects in all brain regions. The DVR in polydrug users was slightly higher than that in the drug-naive control subjects in all SERT-rich regions (not statistically significant). Conclusion: Our findings further support the hypothesis of ecstasy-induced protracted alterations of the SERT. In addition, they might indicate reversibility of the availability of SERT as measured by PET. However, this does not imply full reversibility of the neurotoxic effects.

----------------------------------------

In other words. Seritonin levels in the group of current ecstacy users was unnaturally low. But, it shows that the former ecstacy users, after abstaining from the drug for about 3 monthes, seritonin function was somewhat lessened, but very minutely. maybe 4-5% below natural production.

In other words. The long-term effects of ecstacy are not what the us. gov't says. they base their findings on a very bad study by Dr. George A. Ricaurte of Johns Hopkins University. http://www.mdma.net/toxicity/research.html He is also the basis of the govt's campaign to persuade people that ecstacy is an extremely dangerous drug. Saying, one recreational use can cause parkinson's disease, "holes in the brain". they base these claims on the studies by Dr. Ricaurte.

The truth is, if u stop taking ecstacy for a relatively short time, your seritonin levels come back to practically normal levels. with my a 4-5% difference from before. ecstacy does not put holes in your brain, make u paranoid, give u parkinsons' disease or very rarely kills u.

The danger comes from dehydration, and overheating. not the drug itself. There was another study that out of 19,000 deaths in new york city in one year. 22 were related to ectasy. 19 had ectasy in their systems, and 3 died as a result of the MDMA itself. 3, out of the hundreds of thousands of pills taken every year in new york city.

another danger is of course the purity. some try to make an easy buck, and make fake pills. some are laced with far more dangerous drugs like coke and herione or lsd.
---------------

your thoughts

___________________

how the hell is this long term effects?

I guess in my mind long term effects are little longer than they should be.

My thoughts? MDMA is just like any other drug...when it's in your system it has effects that decay following a logarythmic function until it goes to nothing. I'm not sure anyone would think that taking a drug, that has a marked effect on an individual would somehow not cause some sort of chemical change in the body. That's what drugs do! I mean holy sh*t, acetaminophen reduces prostaglandin levels, so lets all stop taking Tylenol. Drugs have a chemical impact on our bodies, and its up to us to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks. And when the risk is a nominal decrease in seretonin levels 2 months after use, eventually returning to normal, I think the risk is rather small for any long term negative impact. Sh*t, half the world is on SSRIs, go get yourself a damn prescription and we won't have anything to worry about it anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono My thoughts? MDMA is just like any other drug...when it's in your system it has effects that decay following a logarythmic function until it goes to nothing. I'm not sure anyone would think that taking a drug, that has a marked effect on an individual would somehow not cause some sort of chemical change in the body. That's what drugs do! I mean holy sh*t, acetaminophen reduces prostaglandin levels, so lets all stop taking Tylenol. Drugs have a chemical impact on our bodies, and its up to us to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks. And when the risk is a nominal decrease in seretonin levels 2 months after use, eventually returning to normal, I think the risk is rather small for any long term negative impact. Sh*t, half the world is on SSRIs, go get yourself a damn prescription and we won't have anything to worry about it anyway.

well the one problem is we don't knwo the real long term effects since there aren't any longitudunal studies, and there are only a few people that actually qualify as long term users.

think of it as drinking, seems fine and dandy for a long time. Then you get cirrhosis of the liver. long term effects like that are unknown, and would be key in the arguement of making this legal or not.

another thing these studies need to control for is concurrent drug use. I am guessing a lot of these people don't just take mdma, so other drugs may be effecting the results.

in either case, I am not satisfied with any side of the story.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono My thoughts? MDMA is just like any other drug...when it's in your system it has effects that decay following a logarythmic function until it goes to nothing. I'm not sure anyone would think that taking a drug, that has a marked effect on an individual would somehow not cause some sort of chemical change in the body. That's what drugs do! I mean holy sh*t, acetaminophen reduces prostaglandin levels, so lets all stop taking Tylenol. Drugs have a chemical impact on our bodies, and its up to us to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks. And when the risk is a nominal decrease in seretonin levels 2 months after use, eventually returning to normal, I think the risk is rather small for any long term negative impact. Sh*t, half the world is on SSRIs, go get yourself a damn prescription and we won't have anything to worry about it anyway.

the only adverse effects on an individual would be low levels of seritonin for a time, until the body replentishes the supply.

when people die, or go to the hospital, its rarely is because of the drug itself. its always a number of factors such as dehydration, exhaustion (from not resting), and overheating.

that is why they say to have a bottle of water with you, and to rest at least once every hour.

___________________

I really don't buy the "long term effects" arguement though. The world dives into many drugs and procedures without studying long term effects (i.e. the effects on an individual throughout a lifetime). Look at the so called "roux-en-y" gastric bypass or laser eye surgeries. These techniques are only 10-15 years old, and millions of Americans have gotten them. Do we have any idea of what it could do to the individual after 50 or 60 years? No. The same this holds for drugs such as viagra, lipitor, etc. It's all a personal call. If you read the facts that we have available, and make up your own mind as to the risks, then it's your responsibility. But saying that people shouldn't do it because of the long term effects is a little hypocritical considering there are so many drugs and procedures done everyday that we have no idea what the "long term effects" may be. Why should people hold off on MDMA for the long term effects when we don't with "legal" drugs?

I agree though, other drug interactions probably do play a part in altering the effects of MDMA, but I would guess that THC would probably be the most benign of the recreational drugs.

all these studies are making me grow a distaste for research scientist. I hope at least some of my own research does not fall victim to the same shit these are.

i think half the problem is the media and public. They usually will accept teh word of a scientist as fact, or take part of the words of a scientist and construe it to their liking. it can be a very bad thing.

Yes. Well. Welcome to the world of Grant-based research

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Yes. Well. Welcome to the world of Grant-based research

I can't wait to piss off grant providers.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono I really don't buy the "long term effects" arguement though. The world dives into many drugs and procedures without studying long term effects (i.e. the effects on an individual throughout a lifetime). Look at the so called "roux-en-y" gastric bypass or laser eye surgeries. These techniques are only 10-15 years old, and millions of Americans have gotten them. Do we have any idea of what it could do to the individual after 50 or 60 years? No. The same this holds for drugs such as viagra, lipitor, etc. It's all a personal call. If you read the facts that we have available, and make up your own mind as to the risks, then it's your responsibility. But saying that people shouldn't do it because of the long term effects is a little hypocritical considering there are so many drugs and procedures done everyday that we have no idea what the "long term effects" may be. Why should people hold off on MDMA for the long term effects when we don't with "legal" drugs? I agree though, other drug interactions probably do play a part in altering the effects of MDMA, but I would guess that THC would probably be the most benign of the recreational drugs.

i never said dont take MDMA because of the long term effects. i never even said, "dont do it". my entire point was that the US gov't is hugely exagerating the effects of ecstasy, based on the faulty research of only one doctor.

and the long term effects of ecstasy are known, and i think long-term is classified as more than a year. i saw a documentary on MDMA on ABC a while back. they were making the point, that the gov't tells u, that if u take ecstasy, your brain will lose 50-75% functionality of seritonin. but, the reality was, the many millions of users who have taken ectasy since the 1980's. not one of them has said, i cant function, im always depressed, i dont feel like i used to, before i started taking MDMA. they all say, im still the same way i was, before i started taking MDMA.

one of the people on there was a very long-term user, who said he's taken MDMA over 1000 times in the last 10 years. he DID seem a little weird, but maybe thats because he had taken the drug very recently before that interview.

___________________

how bout u do it and find out hainz what the effects are..

and let us know

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On OOKA-OOKA ME NACHOS ME PRESS KEYS ON COMPUTER GOOD

quote:

Originally posted by Heinz i never said dont take MDMA because of the long term effects. i never even said, "dont do it". my entire point was that the US gov't is hugely exagerating the effects of ecstasy, based on the faulty research of only one doctor. and the long term effects of ecstasy are known, and i think long-term is classified as more than a year. i saw a documentary on MDMA on ABC a while back. they were making the point, that the gov't tells u, that if u take ecstasy, your brain will lose 50-75% functionality of seritonin. but, the reality was, the many millions of users who have taken ectasy since the 1980's. not one of them has said, i cant function, im always depressed, i dont feel like i used to, before i started taking MDMA. they all say, im still the same way i was, before i started taking MDMA. one of the people on there was a very long-term user, who said he's taken MDMA over 1000 times in the last 10 years. he DID seem a little weird, but maybe thats because he had taken the drug very recently before that interview.

seems like a big undershot saying long term effects are 1 yr+.

yeah there are a few qualified long term users, but it is just guess work at what else he has done.


the best way to do it is setup a longituduanl study keeping track of seratonin levels and any other flucuating levels over a long periood of time, not just one year, but a decade or two.

of course being able to administer mdma to people for 10 years, and getting funding would be pretty mjuch impossible, but it is our best shot at getting to the heart of the matter.


just think, all you E users could be my guinea pigs