Here’s a question for you:
So asks the New Scientist in its latest editorial. I think you know the answer, don’t you?Imagine you are seated at a table with two bowls in front of you. One contains peanuts, the other tablets of the illegal recreational drug MDMA (ecstasy). A stranger joins you, and you have to decide whether to give them a peanut or a pill. Which is safest?
Now it’s true that some research suggests there may be some ill-effects* associated with ecstasy use; but it’s also the case that even these effects are, so far, so marginal as to have, in general terms, no meaningful impact upon users’ ability to remain functional members of society. As the New Scientist argues in an article accompanying its excellent leader:You should give them ecstasy, of course. A much larger percentage of people suffer a fatal acute reaction to peanuts than to MDMA.
Enough time has finally elapsed to start asking if ecstasy damages health in the long term.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in