The claimed neurotoxicity was based on flawed study that has since been retracted [1]. They mistakenly used methamphetamine instead of MDMA.
When your brain becomes dependent on a drug that fries your brain temporarily with serotonin you will not feel as good without the drug if your brain and body becomes dependent on it to trigger normal serotonin production. Doesn't sound like a fun time to me.
https://dancesafe.org/drug-information/is-mdma-neurotoxic/#1
Bizarre we have gotten to the point where the default is "take powerful drug because no scientist has proven not to in a century long twin study!!"
In absence of a century long twin study, I'd weigh the opinions of millions of people who've taken it a few times, over the secondary source of someone who read something off some random Internet forum (reddit?) from people who are seriously abusing it (like Thursday, Friday, Saturday every weekend).
Because this is such an incredible oversimplification of what goes on in the brain. SSRIs also dramatically increase the overall serotonin flux, to the point where if you quit suddenly, the brain is left in a deficit, the effects of which can be quite unpleasant. And contrary to the "serotonin is happy chemical, more serotonin = more better" myth, the net result of all this serotonin is that 5-HT receptors actually downregulate. Ultimately, the result of all these changes is an increase in neuroplasticity.
Blasting 5-HT receptors (eg by LSD, psilocin, etc, and to an extent MDMA) is also shown to increase neuroplasticity.
Neurotoxicity and psychopharmacology are extremely complicated. It's beyond reductionist to say "drug floods brain ergo bad".
[1] Hatzidimitriou, McCann, and Ricaurte, “Altered serotonin innervation patterns in the forebrain of monkeys treated with MDMA seven years previously: Factors influencing abnormal recovery”, The Journal of Neuroscience, June 15, 1999, 19(12):5096-5107. Abstract.
The same Ricaurte that 'accidentally' gave excessive methamphetamine to monkeys intsead of MDMA. The same study.
I recommended nothing, and I didn't say there were no negative side effects. See HN guidelines please.
And no there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from long term users who never feel the same after frequent use, even after stopping. But again by your logical reasoning because there's no peer reviewed study on humans that sufficiently backs this up people should ignore that.
> And no there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from long term users who never feel the same after frequent use, even after stopping.
People who use one drug often use others, and often concurrently. People with a history of mental health are also drawn to drugs. We use science to disentangle confounders like this.
I have no problem with people advising caution in using powerful drugs, and advising against them fully if they have a family history of mental health issues. I do have a problem when people try to use flawed science to give this caution a false sense of authority, or that elevate anecdotes to the level of general scientific advice.
Aging is a thing. Most adults don’t “feel the same” after the passage of a “long term” span of time, regardless of their level of substance use.
Whatever the serotonin generation issues are (and I definitely had them, and that's why I stopped taking it), they seem to recover over time.
What's next, internet discussion forums? Is anywhere safe??? :)