MDMA (Ecstasy) neurotoxicity: assessing and communicating the risks

MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine) is an amphetamine analogue that produces euphoric and stimulant effects and a feeling of closeness towards others.1 and 2 For more than a decade, MDMA (colloquially known as “Ecstasy” or “E”) has been widely used by young adults as a dance-party drug. The usual recreational oral dose is 1-2 tablets (each containing about 60-120 mg of MDMA) a standard oral dose of 0·75–4·00 mg per kg in 60–80 kg people. MDMA is typically used once fortnightly or less because tolerance to the effects of MDMA develops rapidly. More frequent use requires larger doses to achieve the desired effects, but this increases the prevalence of unpleasant side-effects.3 A number of deaths have occurred as a result of malignant hyperthermia or idiosyncractic reactions to the drug, but these have been rare.4 MDMA is perceived by many users to be a safe drug.1 Few report the craving associated with opiates or cocaine3 and most MDMA users are aware of only mild and transient disruptions of functioning.3 and 5 AC Parrott and J Lasky, Ecstasy (MDMA) effects upon mood and cognition: before, during and after a Saturday night dance, Psychopharmacology 139 (1998), pp. 261–268. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (174)5 The perceived safety of MDMA is at odds with animal evidence of MDMA neurotoxicity, an increasing prevalence of hazardous patterns of use among recreational MDMA users, and emerging evidence of neurotoxicity among heavier MDMA users.

Challenge of reducing drug-related deaths

The public-health attention given to deaths caused by illicit drug use in general, and by drug overdose in particular, should be commensurate with their contribution to premature death. For too long these deaths have been regarded as an unavoidable hazard of illicit drug use, their neglect abetted by the implicit view that the lives of illicit drug users are less deserving of being saved than those of others. In its report published this week,1 the UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) has rejected these implicit assumptions. Its view is that “drug-related deaths can, will and must in the near future be radically reduced in number”. It points out that the effort that society expends on preventing premature deaths “should apply no less to drug misusers than it does to other classes of people”.1

The effects of the Cannabis Expiation Notice System on the prevalence of cannabis use in South Australia: evidence from the National Drug Strategy Household Surveys 1985-95

This study sought to examine the impact of the Cannabis Expiation Notice (CEN) scheme on the prevalence of lifetime and weekly cannabis use in South Australia. Data from five National Drug Strategy Household Surveys between 1985 and 1995 were examined to test for differences in trends in self-reported: (1) lifetime cannabis use; and (2) current weekly cannabis use, after controlling for age and gender, between South Australia and the other states and territories. Between 1985 and 1995, rates of lifetime cannabis use increased in SA from 26% to 36%. There were also significant increases in Victoria (from 26% to 32%), Tasmania (from 21% to 33%) and New South Wales (from 26% to 33%). The increase in South Australia was significantly greater than the average increase throughout the rest of Australia, but the other Australian states differed in their rates of change. Victoria and Tasmania had similar rates of increase to South Australia; New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia showed lower rates of increase; and the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory had high rates that did not change during the period. There was no statistically significant difference between SA and the rest of Australia in the rate of increase in weekly cannabis use. While there was a greater increase in self- reported lifetime cannabis use in South Australia between 1985 and 1995 than in the average of the other Australian jurisdictions it is unlikely that this increase is due to the CEN system, because similar increases occurred in Tasmania and Victoria (where there was no change in the legal status of cannabis use), and there was no increase in the rate of weekly cannabis use in South Australia over the same period.

The effects of adolescent cannabis use on educational attainment: a review

This paper reviews research examining the link between cannabis use and educational attainment among youth. Cross-sectional studies have revealed significant associations between cannabis use and a range of measures of educational performance including lower grade point average, less satisfaction with school, negative attitudes to school, increased rates of school absenteeism and poor school performance. However, results of cross-sectional studies cannot be used to determine whether cannabis use causes poor educational performance, poor educational performance is a cause of cannabis use or whether both outcomes are a reflection of common risk factors. Nonetheless, a number of prospective longitudinal studies have indicated that early cannabis use may significantly increase risks of subsequent poor school performance and, in particular, early school leaving. This association has remained after control for a wide range of prospectively assessed covariates. Possible mechanisms underlying an association between early cannabis use and educational attainment include the possibility that cannabis use induces an 'amotivational syndrome' or that cannabis use causes cognitive impairment. However, there appears to be relatively little empirical support for these hypotheses. It is proposed that the link between early cannabis use and educational attainment arises because of the social context within which cannabis is used. In particular, early cannabis use appears to be associated with the adoption of an anti-conventional lifestyle characterized by affiliations with delinquent and substance using peers, and the precocious adoption of adult roles including early school leaving, leaving the parental home and early parenthood.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and substance use disorders: is there a causal link?

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), characterized by restless, inattentive and hyperactive behaviours, is a relatively common childhood disorder that affects approximately 5% of the general population. There has been controversy about whether ADHD increases risks of developing substance use disorders. The available evidence suggests that, in the absence of conduct disorder, ADHD is not associated with an increased risk of substance use problems in males. There is only limited evidence on the role of ADHD in the aetiology of substance use disorders among females. While ADHD has traditionally been considered as a childhood disorder, it may also occur in adults; research needs to examine the extent to which ADHD in adulthood increases the risk of substance use disorders.