 |
|
Pen Points
Letters to Gay Today |
|
Ecstasy: What's in 'The Love Drug' ?
Classified as a hallucinogenic-amphetamine, Ecstasy has combined euphoric and stimulant-like properties making it a very alluring substance to individuals en route to danceclubs or the notorious all-night-into the morning dance festivals known as "raves". Most of the Ecstasy-using community report that the substance elicits higher levels of energy, enhanced sensuality and sexuality, increased sociability, and a state characterized as euphoric. However, hospital emergency room reports describe a tale of a much different sort, one involving psychological after-affects, devastating organic complications, and sometimes even death. So—just why is it that with all the hype surrounding the drug Ecstasy--relatively little is actually known about it? I have researched the drug for the past decade. My extensive literature searches, interviews, epidemiological investigations and individual case reports have culminated in the recently published book entitled The Love Drug.
One of the most common myths propagated by the mass media is that Ecstasy is a "designer drug" and made-up of a concoction of drugs including cocaine and heroin. In actuality, Ecstasy is a compound in and of itself with no admixture or conglomeration of drugs. Its chemical configuration is 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). In my book The Love Drug, I trace the drug back to its original patent in the early 1900s all the way up to its use at the ever-so popular dance parties knows as raves. I carefully composed the book so that it answers most if not all of the questions people may have with regard to the drug, including some of the real adverse symptomatology that may occur shortly following its ingestion. While I feel that the book is well researched and well referenced, readers have mainly praised me for my neutrality in my writing style. This is what I think is most important as an educator. I truly don't believe in scare tactics. But, I do believe that we as a society have an obligation to not only educate, but to properly educate and candidly report to the community and potential drug users. When we start using scare tactics or incorporating slogans (i.e. "just say no"), or even broadcasting commercials of frying pans with eggs suggesting the image depicts one's brain on drugs—we start to lose the very rapport we are supposed to establish with young people. In The Love Drug, I do not sternly discourage people from experimenting with Ecstasy, but rather provide an impartial reference book in which people have the opportunity to thumb through the book, learn about the drug, and with their newly incorporated knowledge--make their own well-informed decision. Of course, I do not recommend that people experiment with Ecstasy or any other drug available on the underground drug market. I am not a drug user, proponent, or raver for that matter, but I do find the erratic reports that have been cascaded to be inappropriate. If we ever want to stop drug use, we must be honest with the drug-using community. Let's face it—scare tactics do not work. There are only so many times we can tell people not to drink and drive…There are only so many times we can tell people to wear their seatbelt…There are only so many times we can tell people to practice safer sex…There are only so many times we can tell people to "just say no" to drugs. But, there is never too many times to educate or responsibly inform people about risk-taking behaviors. Only with factual knowledge about drug use and providing people with accurate lists of potential resultant consequences can we ever hope to establish a rapport and pathway of communication with individuals. Unfortunately, we are only now just beginning to do that with regard to the drug Ecstasy. Richard S. Cohen (Richard Cohen is a practicing psychotherapist in New Jersey. He is the author of The Love Drug: Marching to the Beat of Ecstasy Haworth Medical Press: NY. He has recently appeared on Fox Television on 'Good Day New York'.) California's Proposition 22: Democracy & Ignorance
The people of California have never been much concerned with whether ballot propositions are constitutional or not. It only takes a relatively small number of signatures (some percentage of the number of people who voted in the last gubernatorial election) to get a proposition on the ballot. Then, if the prop passes but is ruled unconstitutional by the courts, its supporters complain that the courts are thwarting the will of the voters.
When I first moved here, Lyndon LaRouche kept getting props put on the ballot that would require mandatory AIDS testing and would quarantine anyone who was positive. Fortunately, these measures aways failed, so no challenge in the courts was required. However, the Knight prop looks like it is going to pass. If the courts rule it unconstitutional, there will be all kinds of howling from its supporters. The whole California proposition process, while once a way to circumvent a legislature controlled by the railway industry, has turned into a way for one interest group to harrass another. It bypasses legislative controls and debate and takes issues directly to the people, many of whom are ill-informed and have no idea what their voting for. Avatar |
Will it bring passion, or will it bring grief? This is a question
that more and more people keep asking themselves nowadays as the drug
Ecstasy continues to reach epidemic proportions worldwide.
© 1997-2000 BEI