Hacker News Reader

Comment by wutwutwat | Hacker News Reader

It's interesting seeing all of the support in this post about MDMA, while methamphetamine has such an ugly stigma associated with it.

Yet folks often don't even realize the "MA" in "MDMA" is in fact, methamphetamine. Meth is just a stimulant, while MDMA is a psychedelic, making you trip. It's weird that the stimulant has such a bad reputation, but not the one that literally will cause you to see and experience things that do not exist, which has that big ole junkie drug meth in it even!

Not defending meth, or any drug for that matter. I'm just pointing out the weird bias we have with things. For some reason meth is an outcask, yet many "acceptable" drugs include meth and people don't even really know that. Take meth to a party and get kicked out or be looked at like a junkie. Take MDMA to a party and you're a hero. Even with drugs, we find a way to create a pecking order

View on HN

> It's interesting seeing all of the support in this post about MDMA, while methamphetamine has such an ugly stigma associated with it.

That's because having similar names does not make them similar in any way. "M D M A" isn't a list of ingredients, it doesn't contain methamphetamine. They have some chemical similarity, but their effects are very different. Once you understand this, you can see that people chastising meth but liking mdma aren't being hypocrites.

> That's because having similar names does not make them similar in any way.

Well yes, but actually no. Right answer, but the work to get there is a little off.

MDMA is MethyleneDioxy MethAmphetamine. And MethAMPhetAmine is n-methyl alpha-methyl phenethylamine (chemists love portmanteaus). So it's literally a methamphetamine core with a methylenedioxy bridge. That structural similarity gives MDMA some similarity in activity to MA, which itself works due to its similarly to dopamine and epinephrine.

Structural similarities give you a good guess but you really have to test the binding affinities on their own. There are substituted phenethylamines which have barely any activity.

MA itself has found therapeutic uses in treating ADHD and narcolepsy. Side note: this is why NO drug should ever be "Schedule I - no medical uses". How can you ever predict a lack of future medical uses? Cannabis, psilocybin, LSD, MDMA, ibogaine, these have all found therapeutic uses, yet are sched I.

This is a dangerous analogy because single atom differences in a molecule can change it from a medicine to a poison. While all drugs are not problems in themselves, only in how they are used in individuals and society, it would not be wise to extrapolate from a positive MDMA experience that consuming methamphetamine is a sound course of action.

Do your research folks!

Just to pile on, change in chirality can also result in wholly different chemicals.

This is the same old busted argument that people use to describe methylphenidate (Ritalin) as meth and pretend everyone with the mental illness ADHD is just a junkie.

I’ve never heard a single person claim people with adhd are all junkies. My son has damn near debilitating adhd, he’s not a junkie, and not once has anyone viewed him in such a way.

Ritalin is completely different than methamphetamine so your comparison makes zero sense.

Methamphetamine is amphetamine with a methyl group added. That’s what gets it across the blood brain barrier and why it’s so strong. The body metabolizes it to regular amphetamine after that, which is literally exactly what adderall is. And in rare cases actual methamphetamine is prescribed for adhd. I know many people who self medicate for their adhd with meth, because they can’t get a script for adderall or can’t afford to pay for it.

I’m not defending meth, or not trying to on purpose. I’m trying to call out that mdma has meth in it which is where it’s stimulating effect comes from and all I’m doing is pointing out the extreme bias and stigma one has, yet people have no issue with a different drug, comprised of the one everyone talks shit about. That logic is a thing I don’t understand. One is bad but not the other one that contains the bad one. How does that compute? That’s like someone who is allergic to fish not being allergic to fish tacos. You’re still putting fish in your body!

Whilst your point about lateral violence is valid, your reasoning is ignorant. MDMA might be molecularly similar to meth, they are different drugs with different effects. Also, the term "junkie" is stigmatizing.

That’s a very strange argument.

When was the last time you heard of MDMA-fuelled crime sprees?

I’ve known plenty of folks who used mdma, has a “bad trip” and attacked a friend or loved one, violently.

People on meth doing crimes are just shitty criminals. Meth is a stimulant. It doesn’t alter your reality or change you into someone else. If you’re doing shady stuff on meth, you’re just a shady person period, drugs or not. Sleep deprivation is a different beast though, and that will screw with people. Meth naturally can cause sleep deprivation. But if properly rested, doing meth is the same in terms of effects as cocaine, just stronger and lasts much longer. Stims don’t make you hallucinate or trip. Not meth, amphetamine, coke, caffeine. All varying strengths and durations for the same thing, a central nervous system stimulant, none of which have the ability to make a person do something they don’t want to do. Do we blame coffee for crimes if the criminal had a double espresso before robbing a bank? The bias is thick. Meth will not suddenly make a person go from never doing crimes to doing crime sprees from consuming it. That’s not how the drug works and it’s weird so many people have this view.

It’s weird but Fritz Haber pioneered the use of a chemical weapon that people just casually flavor their food with. Table salt has Chlorine in it, guys!

Table salt has sodium in it. You’re proving my point. Sodium is in both table salt and chemical weapons. Different things but if you consume sodium chloride you’re still getting the sodium before you kick the bucket.

MDMA has meth in it along with the other stuff. When you consume it, you’re in part consuming meth. This isn’t complex. Alloys have different types of metals in them. They form a new end result, but the different metals are still there. I’m confused why folks are saying what they are

> 3,4-Methyl enedioxy methamphetamine (MDMA), commonly known as ecstasy (tablet form); and molly or mandy (crystal form),[15][16] is a potent empathogen–entactogen with stimulant and minor psychedelic properties primarily used for recreational purposes

It’s literally in the name. It’s listed as an effect of the drug (stimulant)

> MDMA is structurally similar to mescaline (a hallucinogen), methamphetamine (a stimulant), as well as endogenous monoamine neurotransmitters such as serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine

> MDMA is a substituted amphetamine structurally, and a monoamine-releasing agent mechanistically

Having used both: they may be structurally very close, but their effects are vastly different. H2O and H2O2 are just one oxygen atom apart!

I’m not claiming the effects are the same. I even said they do different things. But both have amphetamine. When you do mdma the stimulating effect is from the same exact thing as what stimulates you when doing meth. That’s all I was saying was the stigma is weird. And everyone commenting calling meth users junkies and criminals yet not talking shit about mdma which contains the same thing is just proving my point

Reply on news.ycombinator.com