Russel Brown over on Hard News has some comments on yet another victory of the scared, led by Health Minister Jim Anderton, over the sensible.
The social scene in this country, always heavily involved in drugs of the legal kind (ie alcohol) has taken an interesting twist in the last few years with the introduction of ‘party pills,’ or ‘herbal highs’ or just ‘herbals,’ most of them based on the chemical N-benzylpiperazine or BZP which has stimulant effects. These are basically drugs that are legal, cheaper than ‘real’ drugs, and available without having to duck down dodgy alleyways or risk being chased by mobsters and/or their dogs.
The latest one it seems is a drug called Ease which was being commercially trialled as a replacement for Ecstacy. Looking at the research behind it is interesting:
Like ecstasy (MDMA), methylone works by triggering serotonin release in the brain. Unlike ecstasy, it is selective and does not release the monoamines dopamine and noradrenalin, which are responsible for the amphetamine-like effects of ecstasy.
In practical terms, the effect is one of elevated mood, empathy and sociability, without the out-of-it-ness of ecstasy, the intensity of physical effect, or the hangover. As a friend of mine put it, “ecstasy for grownups”. There are quite a number of experience reports at Erowid. (To answer the obvious questions: yes, I have tried Ease and I am not the only journalist to have done so, and, yes, I found it highly effective.)
But the monoamine dump triggered by ecstasy is also linked to its neurotoxicity: depending on dosage, frequency and recovery time, ecstasy really can hurt your brain. With its more selective effect, methylone would seem to lack ecstasy’s neurotoxic effects, even at high doses. This is the argument Bowden made in the ministerial advisory, also suggesting that it lacked the mechanisms to cause addiction or acute hyperthermia, which is the main cause of (very rare) ecstasy deaths.
So what you’ve basically got is a drug that delivers the niceness of E without the mess.
The trial’s been pulled because the officials at the Ministry of Health who made the decisions have made an about-face, so it seems. They approved the trial last year, but now they have changed their minds. The question becomes, which decision was the right one?
This whole saga makes me very sad. Our bodies are our own, and our minds are our own, and what we do with them and to them should be our business. There are other drugs that are far more socially and bodily damaging — alcohol, something I’ve already blogged about, to name New Zealand’s worse culprit. Why not look properly at the health risks of that?