Posted by scott-d-o on March 2, 2004, at 9:03:59
In reply to Re: h in e: truth., posted by PsychoSage on March 1, 2004, at 18:13:06
> However, either way I would not be so keen in using the positive aspects of the experience of using it when discussing it as a tool for PTSD people. I think the energy behind any excitement for it as a therapeutic tool comes from the alleged harmlessness of using the drug occasionally in the recreational setting.
>
> Ecstacy would have a very tiny limited market if it were used in therapy in the beginning. Otherwise, it will become as mishandled as the prescribing of antidepressants by primary doctors if it were used for other therapy issues or mental conditions.
>
> i can envision an MDMA-like substance finding its way into the lives of mental health patients, but it would be analgous to the way amphetamine is given to children for productivity and symptom control. It would not be for fun or for a party night or a club/rave. It would be strictly for theraputic purposes, so the connotations with communing experiences and pleasurable massages and dancing til dawn should go out the door.
>
> There should and would not be any moral imperative to remove any reprehension that exists now for taking E and therefore, allow a child/teenager to take E in the future as a rite of passage and necessary experience for any young American since it has a meritorious use in theoffices of therapists. I think that if it finds its way to the market then a lot of people will think that it was a good thing all along, and it is as harmless as beer. Anyone who gets excited over the widespread sanctioned, free-flowing use of ecstacy has issues of drug use stigma and very little sincere support for PTSD people who could benefit from this.
>
> I guess I mean to be a joykill here, but i am skeptical of the value of MDMA for therapy. I would hate to see it become something that big corporations profit from the same way they profit from alcohol, cigarettes and many pharm drugs that are only partially effective.
>
> One experience might create a way to get in touch with feelings and events from the past, but long-term healing is something that can not happen in one trip. I think many patients would be too eager to want to do the experience again just like many recreational drug users would want to do a drug again because they would think it's their life or death right to break further ground. Where do you draw the line? Who cares? Doctors, therapists, and pharmaceuticals would make something out of this if 60% took it succesffully and 40% did not. That is how things seem to work these days. Many drug users eventually figure out that a drug that adds an experience to their life yields nothing utilitarian.
>
> Mentally and emotionally humans don't exist on the ecstacy plane of experience on a daily basis. The drug creates a product that is bound by that trip. The memory of the session in therapy is bound by that trip as well. How would a PTSD person be able to deal with talking and remembering on a non-ecstacy state of mind still?
>
> Let us take this idea: It's easy to admit things when you are drunk, but when you are sober you realize that the admission doesn't have as much weight because it doesn't have as much transformational power as a breakthrough while sober does.
I don't entirely agree with this sentiment. Many people use benzodiazepines for phobias and after continued exposure to these previously feared situations, many are able to taper off without a relapse of symptoms. Given, this occurs over the long-term and doesn't work if the individual is attributing the success entirely to the compound.Of course, MDMA could not be used in this way since tolerance develops so quickly (some people claim they only feel any different at all during their first trip.) However, I would argue that for people with a disorder like PTSD, the experience of being able to access certain areas of the brain, even for a brief time, which were previously unavailable even to themselves could be a life-changing experience. I think there is a possibility that MDMA or other psychedelic drugs could liberate the individual in this respect.
I express some apprehension in MDMA specifically however, because I wonder what utility the amphetamine/stimulant aspects of the compound could serve. I don't have much personal experience with psychedelics but I wonder if mescaline would be better suited since it is a chemically related phenethylamine minus the stimulant.
In the few experiences I've had with MDMA, I have never forgotten anything that has occured, and though a "breakthrough" while sober may have more "transformational power" than one while under the influence of a substance, that doesn't mean that experience carries no weight at all; and I'm sure there are many patients out there who will *never* be able to achieve that breakthrough in a sober state.
I'm not even going to get into the politics involved in all of this and why it will surely never happen, at least not in the USA. I could ramble on for hours but will refrain from doing so.
scott
poster:scott-d-o
thread:318258
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20040228/msgs/319313.html