|
Well their study needs to be verified by independents before it has any validity whatsoever, but assuming it's true, it really doesn't mean a whole lot. Generally these "studies" involve giving the animals mega-doses of MDMA in association with their body weight, the animal ends up consuming more mdma in a month than a user would in their entire life.
The pronunciation of said genetic mutation is obviously quite low if it even exists at all in humans as all the ecstasy and cocaineusers from the eighties (and for coke, earlier) would be dying of cancer right now or at least have an abnormally high occurence rate, and so far as I can tell, that isn't happening.
To polish this pathetic article off, it's obviously quite sensational, citing MDMA as an addictive drug. hah.. yeah....... right. All the statistics they gather on drug use increase are pretty much guesses (based on seizures?). I.E. not accurate.. when was the last time somebody polled you to see if you were taking e's? ( I realize all the bullshit about taking only a "small slice" of the universe you're polling etc etc but i'm rather certain their methodology is somewhat less than scientific in this manner if they even poll clubbers at all).
In short, believe what you want, but most of these experiments start out *intending* to "discover" some new negative effect of a drug.
___________________
| quote: | Venus: And there are troops of savage giraffes whose necks are on fire, like
the starry ejaculations of fireworks in the very pale sky of childhood
...
Venus: Enter, enter here - men of all kinds and races, victims of reality!
You who have the thirst for dreams.
...
Venus: You, on life's bitter road, drenched in hard sunlight who have the
thirst that once more the dark marvel of dreams... |
|
