![[quote]](http://static.biggie.co.nz/img/dis/message_quote.png "Quote message")
Sorry, i don't have the link so had to post the article as it was sent to me.
Scientists admit: we were wrong about 'E'
Experts who gave a dramatic warning that ecstasy led to brain damage based
their study on a huge blunder, reports health editor Jo Revill
Sunday September 7, 2003
The Observer
It was billed as the one of the most dramatic warnings the world has ever
received over the dangers of ecstasy. A study from one of America's leading
universities concluded that taking the drug for just one evening could leave
clubbers with irreversible brain damage, and trigger the onset of
Parkinson's disease.
The study, published in the eminent journal Science last September, had an
immediate impact. Doctors and anti-drug crusaders spoke of a 'neurological
time bomb' facing the young. Others suggested that taking one of the tablets
was the equivalent of playing Russian roulette with the brain, and demanded
tighter 'anti-rave' laws to deal with it.
But today, scientists are facing up to the humiliation of admitting that the
stark results they reported in the study were not a breakthrough but a
terrible, humiliating blunder.
The study was based on the fact that laboratory monkeys and baboons had a
severe reaction to the drug when it was injected in small doses. But it
emerged this weekend that the vials of liquid did not contain ecstasy.
Instead, the animals received a dose of methamphetamine, or speed - a drug
widely known to affect the body's dopamine system. The tubes had somehow
been mislabelled by the supplier.
In this week's Science, the scientists will publish a retraction of their
original study, reigniting the row over the role of those who investigate
ecstasy, as well as the real risks or benefits of the drug.
In academic circles, the mistake is a severe embarrassment to Johns Hopkins
University, in Baltimore, Maryland, which attracts millions of dollars of
research funding from both government and companies. Questions are already
being asked about whether the lead researcher, George Ricaurte, was
inherently biased against the drug.
The mistake only came to light when follow-up tests gave conflicting
results. The original study reported how two out of 10 animals died quickly
after their second or third dose. Six weeks later, the dopamine levels in
the surviving animals were down by 65 per cent, leading Ricaurte and his
colleagues to conclude that it could provoke the onset of Parkinson's, which
is linked to a loss of dopamine-producing cells.
He said at the time: 'It is possible that some of the more recent cases of
suspected young-onset Parkinson's disease might be related, but that this
link has not been recognised.'
When the study was published last September, a chorus of experts saw it as
evidence of drug damage. Professor Colin Blakemore of Oxford University,
soon to be the new head of the Medical Research Council, said it provided
further evidence that 'ecstasy can be toxic to nerve cells'.
Dr Alan Leshner, chief executive of the American Academy for the Advancement
of Science, which publishes the journal, went as far as to describe taking
ecstasy as playing 'Russian roulette' with brain function.
He added: 'This study showed that even very occasional use can have
long-lasting effects on many different brain systems. It sends an important
message to young people - don't experiment with your brain.'
Yesterday, Ricaurte was attempting to put a brave face on the calamity. He
is under attack from all sides, and has already been accused of rushing his
study into print because Congress was looking at a bill known as the
Anti-Rave Act, which would punish club owners who knew that drugs such as
ecstasy were being used on their premises.
Ricaurte has denied political bias. He said yesterday that his laboratory
made 'a simple human error', adding: 'We're scientists, not chemists.' Asked
why the vials of liquid were not checked before being used on the animals,
he replied: 'We're not chemists. We get hundreds of chemicals here - it's
not customary to check them.'
It is unusual for Science to have to publish a retraction, but that is
exactly the right thing to do, according to Joe Collier, professor of
medicines policy at St George's Hospital Medical School.
'People must realise that mistakes are made, even by scientists,' said
Collier. 'It is embarrassing - a lot of self-questioning will be going on
over there - but it's important we learn from this.'
Over the past five years, controversy has raged about the real dangers of
ecstasy, a drug which is taken by around a million clubbers in Britain every
weekend.
Some studies have suggested that ecstasy has no long-term impact on the
levels of the hormone serotonin in the brain, while others have suggested
that it leaves clubbers feeling depressed and unable to concentrate.
The controversy is not likely to go away quickly while the scientists
themselves are caught up in such a political and academic minefield.
science is not exact and lab testing only lines the pockets of clever gits who f**k with belief systems.
