MDMA and the Media
                       By David Hershkovits
                  from HIGH TIMES, November, 1985

  
Unbeknownst to the food and Drug Administration, the DEA or any
of the multifarious government agencies whose job it is to
monitor these things, a group of medical professionals - primarily
psychiatrists and psychologists - had been quietly having great
success using Ecstasy (MDMA) to treat their patients.  Outside of
the therapy circuit, private consumers were also enjoying
Ecstasy experimentation.

Wary of letting the news get out for fear that it would spur
public interest and attract federal watchdogs, Ecstasy
proponents and users kept a consciously low profile.  A few
years ago, the only research article evaluating the drug's
experimental treatment was circulated hand-to-hand in manuscript
form among colleagues engaged in its use.
A consciousness-affective drug often (and mistakenly) compared to
LSD, Ecstasy was prone to being lumped in as a "psychedelic," a
word that has taken on pejorative connotations, according to Rick
Seymour of the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic.  "From the point of
view of the general public (and the government)," he said,
"psychedelic drugs are considered to be dangerous substances."

The lessons of history with regard to LSD use in America have
not been ignored.  Once legal and administered by medical
professionals, LSD became a widely-abused recreational drug due
largely to the efforts of a few evangelical acidheads who
advocated its use to a growing flock of converts.  As it became
more popular, the government declared it illegal and listed it in
the same category as heroin  and opiates.  Once there were
hundreds of research projects being done with LSD, now there is
only one.

The great fear of the medical professionals was that (LSD)
history would repeat itself with Ecstasy.  And it did.  an
underground market developed for the drug that was legal until
this past summer.  The sense of well-being and oneness with the
universe that users have reported insured that word would
spread.  The name Ecstasy - apparently a marketing ploy of the
happy chemist who first synthesized and distributed the drug -
suggested pleasure  beyond belief.  Others called it the Love
Drug, erroneously planting the suggestion that a dose would make
men and women into the world's greatest lovers - at least for a
couple of hours.  As feared by the medicos, a coterie of
advocates - not kids but men and women in their 20s and 30s -
emerged who swore that MDMA was the wonder drug that would
save the world.  In Brazil its use became so widespread that TV
news reporters filed interviews with New York pharmacologists to
help understand the phenomena.  In France, California and Boston,
MDMA enyoued widespread use.  In Texas alone some 30,000 doses
were reportedly being manufactured (and sold) per month.

What was once a closely-held secret became the topic of conver-
sations, cover stories, network news reports and Congressional
hearings. New York Magazine, Newsweek, Life, USA Today, and
the Donahue Show all did stories about Ecstasy.  As the news
(much of it ill-informed) spread, interest among the curious grew
proportionately.
One of the great advocates of MDMA (the Pied Piper of Ecstasy if
you will) is Rick Doblin, a wealthy 31-year old who has formed a
foundation and hired lawyers and public-relations agents to
defend Ecstasy from the onslaught of negative publicity, thereby
splitting the Ecstasy community into two main factions.  Doblin
and his followers want to make the substance available to as
many people as possible; the medical professionals accept
controls but they want to be able to administer and experiment
with MDMA free of the bureaucratic roadblock that goes up when a
substance becomes listed as a Schedule I drug.  The medical
people want to keep a low profile on Ecstasy; Doblin wanted to
tell the world.

Today the world knows.  Today Ecstasy is illegal and those who
use it are outlaws.  "At this point the essential damage to
research and treatment has been done," says Rick Seymour.  "Now,
I think it's a question of trying to do what can be done to
develop a realistic (government-controlled) system for dealing
with experimental drugs."