• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

Study Study On Treating Ptsd With Mdma

Status
Not open for further replies.
LSD was also used in therapeutic settings 'back in the day'. I think that more and more therapists are revisiting why MDMA and LSD were yanked as therapeutic aids (inability to patent, general misuse etc). maps.org has been doing some really key studies on these modalities for 30 years or so and have proven they work. They beat the brain deadening big pharma list of meds that cause crazy side effects as listed below:

Patients taking Prozac may experience a host of side effects, including sexual dysfunction, dry mouth, nausea, headache, diarrhea, nervousness, restlessness, agitation, increased sweating, weight gain, insomnia and drowsiness.

Although antidepressants like Prozac are not technically considered to be addictive, at least in the sense of inducing cravings in patients, doctors say they do make users dependent. Drug dependency means that the body has adapted to a chemical to the point that it requires steady doses to normally function. Because of this, patients who abruptly stop taking antidepressant drugs are likely to experience withdrawal symptoms such as nausea, headache, dizziness and lethargy. Patients are warned to wean themselves off antidepressants slowly and under a doctor’s care.

High doses of SSRIs often increase the severity of side effects, and one particular side effect can be fatal. The onset of Serotonin Syndrome, a condition in which too much of the mood elevator is present in the brain, can occur within minutes, producing high blood pressure, hyperthermia, high body temperature and an increased heart rate that can lead to shock. Serotonin Syndrome can arise when SSRIs act alone or in conjunction with other medications.

Prozac Suicide Warning
Prozac is one of the few antidepressants approved for the treatment of depression in youths. Unfortunately, however, studies on children have linked the drug to increased suicidal thoughts and behavior. As a result, the FDA issued a public warning in October 2004, and two years later extended the advisory to include young adults as old as 24.

In 2007, the FDA took an even stronger stance. The agency required antidepressant manufacturers to update existing black-box warnings about the increased risks of suicidal thoughts and behavior during initial treatment, which the FDA defined as the first one to two months.

An FDA black-box warning is the most stringent precaution a drug can carry before it is pulled from the shelves. It takes its name from the black border that surrounds the warning information on the drug’s packaging. The agency often requires pharmaceutical companies to include a bold warning on drug packaging and patient instruction sheets if serious or life-threatening risks are associated with the drug’s use.

Prozac and Pregnancy
Pregnant women managing their depression with Prozac often face a difficult decision – either continue taking the drug and risk potential harm to their unborn children, or grapple with the potential dangers to mother and child if the depression is left untreated during pregnancy. SSRIs have largely been assigned a “C” grade for safety during pregnancy by the FDA. Drugs in this category have been known to harm animals in large doses, but the effects on unborn humans are not proven.

When taken during the last half of pregnancy, some research links Prozac to a rare but serious lung problem known as persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN). This condition arises when a newborn’s circulatory system does not properly adapt to breathing outside of the womb. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, a study of pregnant women published in 2009 found that the use of certain antidepressant medications may also increase the risk for premature birth. Heart defects of the septum have also been reported in newborns.

Researchers are not only investigating physical birth defects that SSRIs have on fetuses, but the long-term neurological effects as well. In July 2011, a case study from the Archives of General Psychiatry linked the use of SSRIs during the first trimester of pregnancy to an increased risk of the baby developing an autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

In response to these and other studies, the FDA issued a December 2011 advisory stating that, “There are no adequate and well-controlled studies of SSRIs in pregnant women.”

Patients are encouraged to speak with their doctors and carefully consider whether taking Prozac is in their best interest. SSRI antidepressants certainly have an important role in treating depression, but their use does not come without risks. It’s up to the individual to learn as much as possible about Prozac and make an informed decision.


How is this better? Why do we buy into these drugs when these warnings or worse are on the label of these meds? I don't get it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do we buy into these drugs
You've given the warning info on Prozac. Don't generalize by saying "these drugs".

Yes, anti-depressants, mood stabilizers, and anti-psychotics (as well as other drugs that have off-label applications in mental health) do not come without side effects, some of those quite serious. Others of them benign compared to what the drug does.

This is a PTSD site, and I can't speak to whether or not pharmeceuticals are over-prescribed for PTSD. But, I have to say that for people suffering from the clinically diagnosable levels of the rest of the mental health spectrum, drugs can be life-savers.

Am I thrilled that I don't know what some of my meds are doing to my body, long term? No. I also wouldn't be alive without them. So, there we go.

I think the most important thing to remember is that there's a lot that medical science doesn't know yet, and information is emerging all the time. We have to educate ourselves about what is out there. Binary thinking (drugs bad, alternative treatment good - or vice versa) can't be imposed on the situation of any one individual.

I wish MDMA would be right for me; but it doesn't seem to be warranted in my case. That doesn't mean it isn't right for others.
 
You've given the warning info on Prozac. Don't generalize by saying "these drugs".
Ah, @joeylittle, I have missed our sparring. ;-) Yes, you are given the warning, and I agree that these drugs do help (I was on clonazepam and it did help me but I was also put on seroquil and it almost killed me. Nobody warned me of the side effects and after I got the first one in me I had no wherewithall to research. It was hell.

Listen, my doctors would prescribe me meds and I would have to go home and research them to see what the side effects were because I was told when I asked the doctor about them 'no side effects will be worse than what you are going through right now'. I almost committed suicide on two of them!

MDMA assisted psychotherapy is not street drugs, is pharmaceutical grade MDMA, not Ecstasy itself, and is completely non-addictive and done purely within a therapeutic controlled environment with short-term effect

Right. This after 30 years of maps.org working their butts off to prove that it was a reliable means of treatment. 30 years? They wouldn't even allow them to test the efficiency of the drug! I get that it doesn't call to you @joeylittle - but what if it calls to me? Why should a government agency tell me that I am not allowed to use something that works? Why should a government agency dictate that a drug that MAY be helpful through this nightmare cannot be tested to see if it can help someone?

How many people didn't have the choice to make the decision to have therapy with this drug? 30 years is a lifetime to some. What right does anyone have to take this choice away from those who are suffering?
 
I get that it doesn't call to you [DLMURL="https://www.myptsd.com/c/members/25135/"]@joeylittle[/DLMURL] - but what if it calls to me? Why should a government agency tell me that I am not allowed to use something that works?
Me too (re: sparring ;)) - and no, I don't disagree with you on this point. My only intention in posting was to point out that Prozac is just a drug, and there are actually many drugs - and, that there is often a calculated risk with anything used to treat or manage mental health.

But I agree, people should be given as many choices as possible. I think there's a general mis-perception about MDMA though, would you agree? It's not a maintenance drug or a "fix-it" drug, it has a therapeutic application specifically for aiding trauma processing, in that it allows the patient to have a more secure emotional state/distance from the trauma that they are processing; the goal is to keep the patient from being re-traumatized by the act of talking about the trauma, or to make it even possible for them to disclose aspects of the trauma.

It's not actually parallel to Prozac, in that any of the SSRIs are intended as maintenance drugs for a period of 1-5 years, during which (in theory) the underlying sources of the depression are addressed - and/or the brain has been sufficiently "healed" to produce a correct chemical balance on its own. (That's an incredibly loose description of the intended use of an SSRI).
 
I think there's a general mis-perception about MDMA though, would you agree?
I absolutely agree @joeylittle . But I have to ask - why is there a general mis-perception when it has been proven that it can help those in need if it calls to them?

My goal when I chime in on these MDMA postings is to have people challenge what they 'think' they know. To dig deeper than mainstream media hyperbole about how horrifying MDMA is. There are studies to prove that it is not for many people.

For myself the clonazepam worked, as you suggest, as a maintenance drug. The MDMA, on the other hand, helped me believe that I was NOT insane. That the reactions I was having (panic attacks, drop attacks, somatic responses) were happening for a reason. I saw things that were buried deep inside that I had no recollection of and yes, it allowed me to process those things in a 'hmmmph, yes, that makes sense' kind of way.

So before we all start damning those who were desperate enough to try or have an interest in having more knowledge about these 'alternative treatments' (I don't choose to call this alternative btw), in how damaging this drug is, please do your research. There are studies out there and people who have used this drug and it has helped them. I know, I am one of them.

And as far as people poo-hooing about how I dared to do this without a doctor? Trust me, if I had had the option of having a proper doctor care for me - I absolutely would have. As @anthony stated though, any doctor who speaks their mind on this stuff usually has the old 'the doctor should lose his license' issue thrown at him. Why should he or she lose their license? What happened to free speach and who will pave the way for open mindedness?
 
Last edited:
The doctor should lose their license in the cases of telling someone to take the drugs at the street level, or in an environment that isn't monitored.

Ecstasy and LSD are deadly, that is unequivocally evidenced over the past 30 years, which is relevant to street level drugs. Lets be honest here... how would you feel if someone went to their cupboard, popped a MDMA medical grade pill because they were anxious and symptomatic, jumped in their car and then killed your child as you drove them to school because they were in essence, high as a kite?

You would be advocating for all such drugs to be banned, at a rough guess. Implications stem further than you, me or any individual, but into society as a whole. Recommending someone take street level drugs is just dangerous and stupid. Prescribing such drugs that put a person in such a state of relaxation that they will open-up about their past, is pretty drugged, considering they can't achieve the same thing with pharmaceuticals... which implies the difference between popping valium and driving, feeling relaxed versus popping MDMA pill and be totally out of it, then driving. Huge difference... huge implications.

My personal recommendation for this is purely as described in studies, being within a psychotherapeutic environment only, where the person is monitored during and after, until safe to depart. Nothing more, nothing illegal, nothing street based, nothing that is going to increase the risk of others dying due to typical human negligence. We already have enough of that... why add to it.
 
The doctor should lose their license in the cases of telling someone to take the drugs at the street level, or in an environment that isn't monitored.
Yes. On that I agree. A flippant statement should not be being made.
Ecstasy and LSD are deadly, that is unequivocally evidenced over the past 30 years, which is relevant to street level drugs. Lets be honest here...
Not if monitored properly by professionals. That is what I am getting at here. There should be an option It should be a properly studied option as there are studies showing it relieves PTSD.
My personal recommendation for this is purely as described in studies, being within a psychotherapeutic environment only, where the person is monitored during and after, until safe to depart.
That is what I am advocating here for as well. Maps has gone through hell to even be allowed to properly study these drugs. Why? Because big pharma will lose money on 'maintenance drugs' as referenced above or are threatened somehow by MDMA and LSD?
 
That is what I am advocating here for as well.
I'm glad to read this - because it actually has been sounding to me like you are a strong advocate for forging ahead without supervision, and honestly and truly, that's not going to be safe for everyone.
There should be an option It should be a properly studied option as there are studies showing it relieves PTSD.
They are studying it. Unfortunately it takes a stupid long time, sometimes.
Just to bring some data into the conversation: this is an unbiased and reliable description of LSD:
http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/lsd/index.htm
And for MDMA:
http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/ecstasy/index.htm
EDIT TO ADD: I've been corrected, these sites aren't the best info. Thanks, @Simply Simon
Because big pharma will lose money on 'maintenance drugs' as referenced above or are threatened somehow by MDMA and LSD?
I just learned as I was poking around that MDMA was developed by the pharmaceutical company Merck in 1912. There's no direct relationship to the pharmaceutical companies of today - but I think it's important to remember that, to those people, drugs are drugs are drugs. As soon as there are enough studies justifying the clinical, therapeutic use of these drugs, the pharma companies will quickly grab hold of the synthesizing and dosing, and I don't believe there is anything at all that would preclude someone taking out a patent on the therapeutic-use MDMA pill that will eventually exist. They can't claim invention of MDMA itself, but they can create whatever time-release or buffer or fill-in-the-blank that will address some issue on some study.

MDMA isn't a cure. It's a tool for healing. Big, big difference.
 
Last edited:
Just want to point out that any street drug gone straight edge (approved and marketed for medical use) will have just as long a series of possible side effects and interactions as any other mood & mind altering drug by prescription out there.

It's not that opium & heroin have fewer side effects than morphine/ codein/ oxycodone/ hydrocodone/ etc. It's that part of the process of scheduling medications includes codifying & listing all the suckers out!!!

Here's just a short list of common side effects of MDMA. If it were to be approved for use, the list would be -easily- 10x as long

Reported Undesirable Effects Effects (up to 1 week post-MMDA, or longer):
  • Anxiety
  • Restlessness
  • Irritability
  • Sadness
  • Impulsiveness
  • Aggression
  • Sleep Disturbances
  • Lack of appetite
  • Thirst
  • Reduced interest in and pleasure from sex
  • Significant reductions in mental abilities
Potential Adverse Health Effects:
  • Nausea
  • Chills
  • Sweating
  • Involuntary jaw clenching and teeth grinding
  • Muscle cramping
  • Blurred vision
  • Marked rise in body temperature (hyperthermia)
  • Dehydration
  • High Blood Pressure
  • Heart failure
  • Kidney failure
  • Arrythmia
Symptoms of MDMA Overdose:
  • High Blood Pressure
  • Faintness
  • Panic attacks
  • Loss of consciousness
  • Seizures
 
Holy cow.

a) It always amazes me when this pops up in new posts. I remember when it was started in 2012. Glad people are still joining the conversation though, I guess. I kinda dropped it like a hot cake because it's difficult to debate the medical potential of something with which contributors have only had recreational experiences.

b) @joeylittle Love your post content, but I completely disagree with the site you linked as being good information. There is no such thing as an LSD overdose in the classic sense. It will not shut down your body, but it may bring on a psychotic break, and it's impossible to tell how much will do that to a person. I could eat three sheets and have my body be fully functioning, but I may never come out of Oz.

LSD being called the most conscious-altering substance known to man? Mmm... I'm on board if they mean because the dosage is in micrograms, but that's really not a fair assessment. Dimethyltryptamine or ayahuasca are the most powerful in terms of completely altered consciousness, complete ego disintegration, that sort of thing, even though the dose has to be bigger. You can eat as much acid as you want. I doubt you will reach DMT-levels of altered consciousness. Frankly, I would hope not.

The link to the same site equates ecstacy with MDMA. Total myth/fallacy. Ecstacy sometimes contains no MDMA whatsoever. I've had it pure, I've had it cut with cocaine. Completely different animal. A true "bean" will have almost no or no MDMA in it and will be a cocktail of heroine, cocaine, adderol, pretty much anything some nasty dealer has on hand to cut up and pour into a capsule. And I do mean anything.

Footnote: If someone has an academic interest in hallucinogens, specifically LSD, I highly recommend reading Hoffman's LSD: My Problem Child.

c) No professional has ever recommended that I experiment with LSD, @cactus_jack. In fact, all three (and a half? ;) ) of the professionals I was consulting with in the summer of 2011 told me to stay away from hallucinogens. Too late. I had a completely unusual experience with LSD as a complex trauma survivor. It gave me the desire to live, a belief that life was good. I told these professionals this, and they sort of collectively shrugged and told me to be careful. But that was after the fact.

Same thing with MDMA, although really, I mean, I guess I can see how it could be used in therapy, but really, it makes you want to listen to terrible techno and tell people you love them mostly. It gives you a great sense of calm and peace and the ability to talk the tough stuff, yes, but... outside of a structured, supervised therapy session, I really don't see that happening, and I don't recommend trying to make that happen. Plus, MDMA will fry your brain's ability to make its own happy chemicals. Who among us needs that? Aaand... it's highly freaking addictive. I mean, in pure form, less so, but let's be real, people. It has a serious potential for addiction. No good.

Someone asked me last week if I would recommend someone trip on acid to have a religious/spiritual experience with no preparation, and I said absolutely not. My minimum requirement of prep time for someone who wanted me to trip sit for them was two weeks. Minimum. Daily preparation. I'm not a professional, but if I'm going to enable someone by agreeing to watch them, and I know they're going to do it regardless, I feel obligated to attempt to ensure they are somehow prepared, including studying up on the drug (I know a neurologist [PhD] who sends me academic resources about LSD), its stages, and preparing them to cope for the risk involved. And if I don't think they're ready/in a good place to be doing that, I will beg them to wait. And I wouldn't do this sort of thing for just anyone--only my closest friends, whom I know extremely well and whose backgrounds I know, and who are going to do this regardless of my blessing or supervision.

Again, in case I'm not being clear... I really do not recommend that people play with any hallucinogens, especially LSD or DMT, and I do not recommend trying to go out and find pure MDMA. It's no easy task, and it's near impossible to be sure. And if you do, that's what you're doing. You are playing. Don't play psych doctor here. These are serious substances that can have serious and unforeseen consequences.

If you want a legitimate therapeutic drug, stick to scripts by a psychiatrist you trust as a professional. You know, the kind you can fill at a pharmacy, not a music festival.

Disclaimers all said and done--thank you, Hoffman. Your bicycle ride may have saved my life all those years ago.
 
Last edited:
As per @Simply Simon's post, above: I'd love you to take a look at these and see if they are better.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/hallucinogens-lsd-peyote-psilocybin-pcp
Link Removed

interesting side note: it's very difficult to google up unbiased information about these drugs. frustrating, really.
The link to the same site equates ecstacy with MDMA. Total myth/fallacy.
I found this, which seems to summarize it best:
MDMA is found commonly in pill form (pressed powder, usually combined with fillers, binders, and/or other adulterants), and is notorious for being pressed into in a variety of different shapes, colors, and sizes (some "famous" pills include "Pink Dolphins" or "Red Playboys") as well as being adulterated. It is impossible to know whether a pill contains MDMA, how much it contains, or what other substances it may contain...the only way to know what is present in a pill (or a powder for that matter) is to analyze it chemically
(from [DLMURL]https://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showwiki.php?title=MDMA[/DLMURL] - this website might be the drugs version of MyPTSD, and if you want a completely thorough documenting of MDMA, it's history, it's chemistry, etc, you should check out this page.)

I cannot find a good single source to cite, but what I think I've learned is that the name "ecstacy" really does refer to a large group of drugs (chemically speaking) that emerged on the market in the late 1980s after MDMA was declared a schedule 1 drug (meaning it became very, very illegal). In the process of continuing to manufacture an MDMA effect without needing mass quantities of MDMA, "ecstacy" became MDMA plus other drugs, and then sometimes a drug with no MDMA in it whatsoever.

What we call "molly" is marketed as a purer drug, with guaranteed MDMA and very few additionals, but really, who knows?

Absolutely pure MDMA straight from a lab is what has been used in all the clinical experiments, going back to the 1970s. And absolutely pure MDMA is not at all typical to find as a street drug.

I think it's important to know these things if you are going to consider using them. Or talk about them.

/end research paper
 
@joeylittle Way better... and I wasn't trying to jump on your links. I just think it's important everyone knows, like you said, it's mega hard to find any reliable information about these drugs. (Sidenote: especially LSD. My professor showed me graphs illustrating how little we understand about LSD through actual, reliable studies relative to just about every other street substance. It is crazy how little is understood about it compared with something like cocaine.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom