MDMAReconsidered , ! ". · ' '7

I'

! ·

ROBERT LEVERANT*

On May 17and 18, 1986, the Haight AshburyFree of a generationof young people." ' ._- Medical Clinic sponsored a national conference on the This statement, distributed under the aegis of an :_._ drag MDMA. One population that was very much in informed agency (The Haight Ashbury Free Medical .... attendance, the informed lay user, seemed to have been Clinic) and written by its director of training and educa- intentionally excluded from presenting papers and thus an tion, is as inflammatory and value embedded as the com- · ' important point of view was absent from the conference, ments of Spanish friars four centuries ago on Psilocybe The aim of this article is to present material from the point mushroom use among native populations (Ott & Bigwood of view of this population, which in the 1960's was 1978) and the testimony of Christian missionaries in the dubbed the recreational user. Despite efforts by health 1850's and 1860's against use by members of the ';-i professionals and the law to change this use pattern, (Flattery & Pierce 1965). psychedelic are and have been largely employed For the most part, other speakers exhibited this same in "unsupervised" settings by lay users (Stafford judgmental attitude toward lay users, but in subtler ways .... 1985: 220). This article will explore MDMA within the For instance, the word anecdotal was used to describe ; _, context of psychology, history, politics, sociology and reports of nonsupervised MDMA use and the connotation .. spirituality. This broad context and the implications that and nuance of this terminology discounts and trivializes arise from such a perspective are usually considered to be the validity of such use. This seemingly minor etymolog- unimportant, if not irrelevant, todruguseissues by scien- ical point reveals an attitude by health professionals _.::" fists, doctors, therapists and abuse specialists. How- toward the lay user that is reminiscent of the stance of a '; ever, they are of deep and abiding interest to the lay user. priestly class; an attitude that is prevalent in the When attending this conference. 1had high expecta- psychedelic literature (Anderson 1979; Masters & Hous- tionsthat both the obvious and the hidden issues surround- ton 1966). Thus, at a conference focused on a drug that i,. ',% lng MDMA would be addressed: not only because it was has been described as inviting gentleness and empathy hosted by a prestigious organization and that the present- toward others, there seemed to be little in the way of an c;s were on the leading edge of research, but because this I-Thou attitude on the part of the professionals toward the particular psychoactive substance--as described in the lay user. Rather, the prevailing attitude seemed to be literature--invites honesty, unbiased assessment and Us-Them. Hopefully, as many of the speakers at the ,.4,-. risk-free dialogue. My hopes for this were notably damp- conference expressed, if the mistakes of the 1960's are not i ened when I came across this line, written by one of thc to be repeated with this substance, then this stance needs ,':: t conference hosts, in a book (Seymour 1986: 77) that was to be changed. i distributed to each participant: "In general terms, LSD This thrust was particularly evident in the frequently ?' represents the drug that got loose and poisoned the minds expressed view that when self-administered for self- *P.O. Box 756,Sebastopol, Caliibrnia95472. therapy by lay persons. MDMA usc is improper if m)t (

Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 373 Vol. 18(4) Oct-Dec, 1986 }',

I"i

'"I LEVERANT MDMARECONSIDERED

with a trained profi2ssional. Only one presenter, Joseph experiment. This would be a gross instance of Downing, spoke to the contrary (during a panel discus- Heisenberg's principle wherein the observer's I..1).//,! ha,'nffulsion) andasstatedct)mparedthat hetofeltits that"usc an .an. withadjunctilet topropertherapyset psychotherapypresence inlluences,being conductedif not changes,as a double-blindthe outcome

self-administered. People can do self-healing. That's psychological insights that can be statistically _j j andwhat'ssettinggoing andon somenow anywaycommonassense,a resultMDMAof the canDEA'sbe ofproventhe experiment.in the empiricalFurthermore,sense. At besttherethereareis onlyfew

i:. :! scheduling:The therapistunder-the-counteris only the personifiuse. ''_cation of the heal- scorroborativeubjective experience.evidenceAsof aeachresult,person'sthe scientificunique

[ force directly from time to time, why not? If by ingesting a particular individual, and can only do so in- ' MDMA, a person can put on a therapist's thinking cap for asmuch as a given person resembles other people; i a t_w hours and see him/herself with new vision that is hence the drive to make individuals resemble i ;} presumably empathetic to him/herself, why not'? Interest- scientific models of people. !I ·I ingly,lng :'tspectFreudwithinwaseachin favorperst)n'of layIl'antherapyindividtlalandc;wanted_tntap thisto 3. approachPsychotherapyis not ableis idiographictOdescribe theanduniquedealsnesswithOf

"i' (Bettelheim 1983). In fact, he envisioned a profession of have ever occurred at all, except in the mind) and ,: secular ministers of the soul, perhaps akin to Ph.D.'s, thus can neither be replicated nor predicted, while Jt{l! M.F.C.C.'sprotect analysisand fromM.S.W.'s.both physiciansOne can onlyand surmisefrom priestswhy theeventssciencesthat neverare nomotheticrecur in theandsamerequireformverifica-(if tbey

jili' i ofthethelbunderhands ofofpsyphysicianschoanalysisand priests.wanted Oneto keepreasonhis childrelevantout sistionloras thewellpredictionas mathematicalof futureandevents.statisticalThe appar-analy- to the drug issue is that Freud often said that all he did was ent purpose of the sciences is the control of nature; reorganize in a different format the profound insights into hence the attempt to understand and control hu- the unconscious of artists, such as Goethe, Nietzsche, man nature through the medical model of be- !:i Dostoevsky. Shakespeare and the Greek tragedians, haviorist psychology and controlling mecha- .i Artists are part of the class of persons (the lay user) who nisrns, such as psychiatric drugs. i!' traditionally have derived much benefit from 4. Most probably, if a statistical survey was under- rl_ psychedelics and whose use of these substances has been taken of the overall results of allopathic

t disparagedttnauthorized byandtheillegitimateclergy and. 2medical professionals as wouldmedicine--thebe similarmodelstatisticalthat Bakalarresults asused--therethe current _ PSYCHOTHERAPY AND surveys of psychotherapy, which purportedly Jlj show its failure as a healing modality. Most physi- ,i!iili THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES clans admit, if they are candid, that neither they

: befbre MDMA and similar drugs are classified as legal for lng depends on the patient's attitude and the pa- iii! psychotherapeuticOne of the presenters,use, psychotherapyJames Bakalar.needsproposedto be morethat n°rtient'stheirfaithmedicinesin the healerd° theinhealing'conjunctionand thatwithheal-the

internal consistency with regard to statistical results and 1985). In medicine, as in psychotherapy, the ther- i verifiable according to the double-blind experiment. This apeutic alliance is the basis of cure (Frank 1973). :i! seems to be two steps backward and none forward on 5. Thc methods of the experimental sciences, while l !!ii scientificseveral counts:in its methodology, more empirical by having healinguseful tools,force areof theinappropriatepatient (Becker&for the studySeldenof

MDMA. The studies that need to be carried out because the controlled experiment in human psy- ought to compare the results of psychotherapy cholog 3. unlike animal psychology for creatures

i] norms,with andsuchwithoutas enhancedthe use egoof MDMAstrength,alongcapacitycertainto ofwhotim"doImmanas theyspecies,are told,"it isnegatesscientificallythe uniquenesscorrect, ii: ,j I. love,The issuespontaneity,at handabilityis notot forgive,psychotherapywillingnessbut humanyet humanlyconsciousness,wrong. Theincludingqualities therapy.of being Thumanhis is

J} others,tofeelandexpressemotions,isolation, nearness to selfabilitytolistentoand nearness to complexity,include unpredictability,autonomy andvariability,multidimensionalitycreativity,

'}j}[lJ 2. theThemeaningclient-therapistof life.alliance, irrespective of par- choose.'as well asTothedenyfreedomthese intoorderthink,to toconformbe andtotoa norm up essence being Ill ticular therapeutic stance, mitigates against fabricated is tooffer the of Journal of PsychoactiveDrugs 374 Vol. 18(4) Oct-Dec, 1986 !

LEVERANT MDMA RECONSIDERED _',7_'

human on the sacrificial alter of science; a sacri- one time approved medical practice utilized , lice that is no different than that of ritual sacrifice, , marijuana and , but now due to political anywhereat anytime, pressureand notto medicinalorpharmacologicalproper- ! A correlate of this is that as long as ties, these medicaments have been cast out of the J psychotherapy is talk, it is subject to personal pharmacopeia--much to the chagrin of some practi- t 5-- choice, variety, complexity, spontaneity and the tioners (Trebach 1982). As for peer review, in a climate of unfolding of the unknown within each person's fear this safeguard isnot effective. Fearing loss oflicense, P " ' heart. When psychiatry becomes drug specific, it opprobrium from colleagues and the effects on their fami- _'' "/' tolerates no argument or variety, and it mirrors (if lies and lifestyles, few professionals are willing to public- not enjoins)the theology of the dominant Western ly state what they really think about the utilization of '-_-_ culture, the ideology of mental health as being psychedelic drugs (Grinspoon & Bakalar 1983). Thus the _ _: adjustment to the norms of society (Schrag 1979). view presented by the drug control apparatus is lopsided, ?:_ At the conference, reductionism in human and psychedelics remain classified as dangerous psychology was taken to its logical extreme by with no known medical value. This is despite the fact that ? Enoch Callaway who suggested that for psychol- they are not addictive (McGIothlin & Arnold 1971), de- ogy to be a "real science," all psychological spite millennia of use in native cultures to the contrary ",, behavior needs to be reduced to biological and (Emboden 1979; Schultes & Hofmann 1979), and despite ":¢ neural responses to pharmaceuticals in particular the findings of Western researchers about their healing loci in the brain. Furthermore, he indicated that value for alcoholics (Osmond 1969), severe neurotics the day may not be far of:f when psychoactive and traumatized individuals (Bastiaans 1983), convicts drugs could bedesigned to modify behavior in any (Leary 1969; Leafy & Metzner 1967-68), preterminal _('"". direction for any length of time. As a lay person cancer patients (Kurland 1985; Grof & Halifax 1977) and !,-,_: who is already concerned about social control, I autistic children (Mogar & Aldrich 1969; Bender, Cob- thought,"God helpus. This newscience, when rink & Siva Sankar 1966). ._' coupled with genetic engineering, will surely Another supposed safeguard is informed consent. make the thscists, behaviorists and puritan.x hap- When it comes to public mental health in the United py, il' no one else." States, there is little, if any, infbrmed consent. Elec- , It is unfi)unded to claim that this apotheosis of the troshock, chemical and physical lobotomies are routinely behaviorist approach will be objective. Certainly a ma- carried out without the informed consent of most patients :-' chine will record the data (e.g., that serotonin has just (Breggin 1983; Frank 1978). Who is to safeguard that --, been released in such and such a quantity at such and such psychedelic drugs, which have great potential for mind _/"i a locus in the brain), but someone is going to have to control, would not be similarly used by zealous mental ,-. interpret what this response means from the inside. Some- health workers perhaps in conjunction with electroshock'? one is going to have to make a value judgment and be Contrary to their Hippocratic oath, allopathic physicians subjective, at least the first few limes, befi_re the text- are first and foremo_;t servants and guardians of the doral- books and licensing tests are written. (After that ex eryone nant culture, and not the patient. This has been highlight- will be able to ch)se their eyes. stop thinking, utter the ed recently in the advice of the attorney of the American part)' line and conform to how its .VUlVn_sedto be. ) Who is Medical Association (AMA) counseling physicians that going to be this judge'?-Who is going to appoint this in certain cases of drug use the obligation of the physician arbiter? On what basis will these so-called objective to safeguard patient confidentiality should be overridden: observations be made? Anti who will it be _ood for th s to They should set aside doctor-patient confidentiality and happento? tell police and other authoritiesabout patients who "threaten public safety" because of drug abuse (Un- THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT signed 1986). 4 ttistory reveals that to be obi('ctivc in scicnce and The substance testing safeguard of the Controlled medicine is relative and often means whatever the doral- Substances Act also appears specious to the lay user. : _._,i nant culture dictates. This becomes problematic xxi_en one Standard practices for testing psychoactive drugs produce considers the supposed safeguard value ol' Iht various skewed results in favor of who is underwriting the test L'u' stipulations m thc Controlled Substances Act. For in- _usually the Establishment) or if the test results are politi- stance, one condition of the Act states that for a drug to be tally unfavorable they may be downplayed. In addition, u?'"' legally prescribed by physicians, it must be xxithin the the effects of potent drug extracts (e.g., THC t'rom marl- framework of "approved medical practice." However, at juana) that are often used in these tests to prove its risk and C

Jour.al of Psychoactive Drugs 375 Vol. 18(4)Oct-Dec. 1986 !"Pi'& O

at · J,, ,,,, , , a,rT, - "w_rt_"v '11 _ '"-'-(TIT"" C'""J "1_1'f'' lit_'l" _ ,d_,( t i LEVF_.RANT ]MDMARECONSIDERED _[ danger are interpreted as the normal range of effects that MDMA does not. Hallucinations are taboo in Western ' occur when the substance is prudently used in its unmod- technological society. Thus many scientists and health ified state. Moreover, the effects of one compound, such professionals who attempt to diminish the high of LSD as as MDA, are used to ban a related but different com- being false because it is drug induced and temporary, do _ pound, MDMA (Ricaurte et al. 1985). Lethal doses of a not do so with the high producedby MDMA, which is also , drug, such as MDMA, are frequently used as the determi- drug induced and temporary. The reason for this is the nant of its safety. These deadly doses are administered to mmhallucinogenic quality of the MDMA experience: One rats, for example, at 150 times the accepted therapeutic never leaves normalcy and thus there is no question of } level (Goad 1985) and the results are taken to predict the what is real. t _? effects on humans. The test results on rats-- But what are hallucinations? The answer to this ques- i acknowledged by testing researchers, such as Lewis tion is relative and depends on one's criteria (Siegel 1986; ! Seiden (of the University of Chicago), to be of dubious Van Dusen 1981' Ruck et al. 1979). Visions of death and . value in predicting the effects on humans--are used in the rebirth, hells and heavens, strange people and worlds that scheduling of drugs as if they were equivalent to the are common to some First and Second Wave psychedelics

!Iii, effects in humans, Normalcy,aredubbedhallucinationsthat whichisbyperceivedmentalhealthby theprofessionals.sensesand ENTACTOGENS AND PSYCHEDELICS intelligible to the rational mind, is called real. The ques- !_ The word entactogen was used at the conference to tion being raised by the "sledgehammer LSD"5 (as Rick describe an entirely new drugclass. This term was coined ln_rasci labeled it) is, What is real and what is a ; by David Nichols to describe a substance that produces hallucination? When one gets to the very bottom, peels

gently within." MDMA is an entactogen, and because of mind of the mystics, as Sandoz LSD allowed some to 1 empathy andand sympathysympathy, arewhichbenignallowsqualitiesthe userthatto are"touchpre- do,the lastthe notionlayer ofofthebeingonionbornand(i.e.,glimpsesbeing thea separateliberatedpersonstate i! sumably desirable to everyone, work is being done to doomed to die)is perceived as the ultimate hallucination, make MDMA leo,al. Behind this move is the clear desire the ultimate cookie. So there is a paradox. From the 4 to separate MDMA from the older psychedelics, althomzh so-called normal state of mind, the liberated state that has

ili alsosome affordof them--dependingthe user empathy,on set,sympathysetting andanddosage--to touch frombeen theachievedso-calledby someliberatedmysticsstateisofa mind,hallucination;the ego isanda : gentlywithin, hallucination--afictionalidentitythatisheldtogetherby _ Why then search for a new dru_ class'? The first concepts such as "l.'"'me" and "mine"(Nisargadatta reason, which has political implications, is to prevent 1973).

i MDMA from suffering the same type of undeserved bad In this sense MDMA is a repressive substance in that i press from the scientific and medical communities as well it reinforces Western technological society's belief sys- as the general public that psychedelics (the drug group.in terns. Through its limited spectrum of response it inhibits which MDMA is now classified) have received. The what Western society wants kept out of view, namely the i message has been that psychedelics are extremely danger- fiction of the ego that gives rise to the fiction oi' the world ii} OhSbecause they drive people insane, and all the talk (Lodzer 1971). It is not desirable tor this fiction to be seen about their potential tbr creativity, personal growth and as such because it is the foundation on which all of religious experience is just a lot of hocus-pocus. In the Western civilization is built. If a user glimpses that s/he is 1960's and 1970's, the medical establishment and the the Supreme, an insight that given the proper set and :_ media unknowingly promulgated as fact the disinforma- setting has a 90 percent probability with the stronger '_ tion promoted bythe ClAandthe military about LSD(Lee psychedelics (H. Smith 1968), then the question arises as & Shlain 1985), and this distorted perception governed to what has all the striving, killing, judging, profiting, 't the major policy deciskms enacted by the drug control starving and scapem)ating_ been for? [ apparatus, including the curtaihnent of legitimate re- The stronger psychedelics shatter a dualistic world of ii_ search. It is worthwhile to note that since the late 1970's separation between humanity and God, and replace it with 'I there have been efforts to call some of the psychedelics one in which humanness is divine and one with God and , which means "becoming God within" all life. This secret of secrets can drive the unprepared to (Ruck et al. 1979). madness.The mysticsguardeditforcenturiesbyexplain- A second reason for a new name is to address the lng it through abstruse symbols and sharing it only with issue of hallucinations. Psychedelics (which are also those who are prepared through long trials to receive it and called ) may produce hallucinations, but use it for the uplift of suffering humanity. Substances that

Journalof PsychoactiveDrugs 376 Vol. 18(4)Oct-Dec,1986 LEVERANT MDMA RECONSIDERED

within a matter of minutes invite glimpsing this truth dc,, difl_renee between the topics covered at the MDMA need to be controlled. There is a need for and wisdom in Conic'fence and a cont_rence that was hosted by David having drug control laws, but the critical question is who Smith in 1967 titled "The Religious Significance of should formulate and administer these regulations: the Psychedelic Drugs" (D.E. Smith 1968), t guardians of the soul whose charge it is to preserve the In light of this, one must conclude that XTC .... unknown and unfolding truth within each heart, or guard- (MDMA) is not ecstasy, it is . Euphoria is to tans of the dominant culture whose task it is to preserve the adjustment what ecstasy ix to liberation. The it of MDMA f ' ' known and established. The lamentable irony of the pres- is the It of est, not the mystics. Thus its by-product is i ent drug laws is that they keep these substances in the empathy and not compassion. This is why MDMA has hands of the unprepared who, by dint of immaturity and been dubbed the Yuppie drug. No one is going to contract unbalanced mental condition, would benefit least from amotivational syndrome on this substance and there is.just their use and keep them out of the hands of those who enough ufa stimuhmt effect so that the user will not waste would benefit, including researchers and those who wish any valuable time contemplating the Great Mysteries in to use them in a safe or professionally supervised setting one's hand, nature or an unknown neighbor's heart. Use for personal growth and healing. This development is of this substance will not engender any radical change in precisely the opposite of what the drug laws are designed one's dress, eating patterns or lifestyle. There will not be a to do. and lay users often question why these laws remain new aesthetic in art, literature, dance or music. There will in force. Who do they benefit'? not be acoming together of Whites, Blacks. Reds, minor- While MDMA needs to be considered a companion tries, poor, rich, HeWs Angels and preppies. This is a to stronger psychedelics in issues of drug control, it also drug of the status quo: It does not foster social change. !, !- needs to be seen as different and separate because unlike MDMA is just another way to say that the world is the stronger psychedelics it lacks the power to annihilate not psychedelic when it is. By psychedelic 1do not mean "",' the ego. Under its influence users are able to maintain the bizarre phenomena seized on and celebrated by the control and to steer. They do not experience the benefits of media, the AMA and other guardians of the dominant -' surrendering the ego (Blofeld 1968; Havens 1968). Thus culture to scare the public. Rather, it is an awareness that in life, as when under the influence of the drug, users m_thing is real and that Nothing is the Real. On the continue to gain freedom of the ego, rather than gain stronger psychedelics the celebrant is taken beyond the freedom from the ego. The value of MDMA for therapy is mwcissistic love of MDMA to the primordial and uncon- -.: in this direction: developing a coping strategy that ix dj{toned love arising from the nameless state, the Void out called adjustment, Adjustment, or getting one's life in ,_t'which love, emotions, thoughts, drives, fears, instincts order, is only a threshold for liberation, not liberation mad desires arise and fall like waves in the ocean of ,,,/_ itself (Kornfeld et al. 1979). Freud described the end point consciousness, the true Scl f. When the celebrant glimpses ' ' _.. of therapy as transforming "hysterical misery into ordi- Ibis place within him/herself that can be accessed by the nary unhappiness" (Brown 1959) and this is the first step ,_tronger psychedelics, s/he asks the big questions of lib- toward basic sanity, a very needful one in today's climate cra{ion: Who am I? Where did I come from? and Where of violence to self, others and all life (ak Rick lngrasci am I going'? These questions, central to solving the nays- sketched out at the conference). {cryand meaning of life, are not catalyzed by nor are their : However, while extremely usetul, it' not phcnom- answers glimpsed on MDMA. enal, for psychotherapy. 7 MDMA is deceptive for the spiritual therapy whose ends are complete freedom and CONCLUSION autonomy ak delineated by Buddhism, Hinduism and MDMA and most Western therapies tell us that we other mystic traditions. This necessitates the death of :_reasleep to {)ur egos, wbereas Ibc stronger psychedelics mind. Unlike a lobotomy, which moves a person back- and Eastern psychologies tell us that we are asleep to {)ur ward on the evolutionary scale by physically destroying true nature. We need awareness of both levels of the sell', a part of the brain, the spiritual death of tim mind moves one -rounding in tim world and in the transcendental reahns, a forward and achieves the end goal of the human lorm mature ego and freedom from the ego ii' we are to be '_,c,',' (Krishna 1970). One becomes the livino embodiment of whole, free and Iovino, rather than to be controlled by ()ur Satchitananda (consciousness, energy and bliss) ;ts shadow side that now threatens to destroy us all. attested to by the lives of saints the world over throughout As a lay person, my fear is that many professionals ,_. time. Unlike the stronger psychedelics. MDMA does not are prepared to trade the beneficent healing promise of the _:- encourage glimpsing this last development of Love's un- stronger psychedelics in order to get MDMA reclassified. lblding. An interesting comparative sign of this is the I would encourage them to use MDMA ;ts the first step in

Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 177 Vol. ]8(4) Oct-Dec, 1986 ,,_._O '5 i J-I ..... - - _ _- *ti i'* t ft$_'r · · w?_l$9,r _ :iii MDMA RECONSIDERED t LEVERANT

Ji rcclaimin- the {{round abdicated to the forces of unreason abuse, which is historically pervasive il' not of epidemic '_._ in the drug arena. Lay users applaud those professionals at proportions among pilots, was not even mentioned. tl the conference and elsewhere who have had the courage to This oversight has a parallel. In drug legislation

tion's (DEA) classification and work within the legal drug-related murder will be subject to the death penalty. ii stand up, challenge the Drug Entorcement Administra- recently proposed by Congress, those found guilty of a :_ structure to say, "No! Not this time. We need this healine Drunk drivers, who kill with their cars and are by far in ! substance in our pharmacopeia." greater number than those who kill while under the influ- i enceof illicitdrugs,wereomittedfromthe provisionsof

?_ FOOTNOTES this legislation.These omissions are due to the fact that I. The {)ne diagnosed case of an MDMA toxicity that the medical model is used for the addict (a good was presented at the conference (see Hayner & McKinney citizen gone astray and redeemable) and the !egfil-punitive 1986) could easily have occurred in a therapist's office model is used for the illicit drug addict (a latent criminal ! and with the same response on the part of a therapist- whose moral character is weak and thus irredeemable). observer as this unfortunate woman's friend. No doubt, This is part of the mutual accommodation that began in the

ii therapists! did, "Thankin the goodnessaudience mustit didn'thavehappensaid to tothemselves,me. What asa pharmaceutical1920's (King 1972)companies,betweenresearchers,organized government,medicine; or-the malpractice suit this would have been." This was prob- ganized crime and law enforcement (Grinspoon & Baka- ably the only time when professionals at the conference, if la{ 1976). I suggest that if a reclassification of MDMA is iii polled, would have expressed appreciation for a specific to proceed favorably, some positive words need to be lay therapy use. In addition, after hearing the details of spoken to the DEA by the AMA. this case, the person beside me mused, "If they are going 5. Whereas childhood traumas may need a lighter- to present this case in all its gory details, reminiscent of weight psychological hammer such as MDMA, strong official LSD scare stories in the 1960's, why not present repressions (such as the denial of death) may require a an example of a person's ecstatic release on MDMA in all sledgehammer. its sublime details." 6. Strictly speaking, all the objects hanging in 2. This is the downside of rescheduling MDMA: museums, words in books, imagesonTV and thecinema,

Those who might wish to use MDMA need to view drama on stage, and much of what goes on in churches are themselves aK sick. Allopathic medicine and psychiatry hallucinations--albeit societally approved ones that carry are based on pathology, not health or well being or Mas- positive labels, such as art, fiction, nonfiction, the Book

ii Iow's3.normsFor this(Maslowreason 1971).I appreciated Joseph Downing's of Revelations.7. It was lamentabletransubstantiationthat there andwerehistory.no somatic ther- '.I procedures that gave subjects some opportunity to interact apists who were invited to present at the conference. with his experiment. Perhaps MDMA's greatest potential in therapy is nonver- 4. The AMA counsel, ofcourse, was m)t referring to bal and through the body utilizing the attention, the legal drugs (such as alcohol), but illicit substances. The breath, sound, and hand pressure to open up and remove case prompting his statement concerned an airplane pilot the blocks that prevent contact with the life force within

: _ who.jeopardized his own lite from a cocaine overdose as and hinder the dian vital from flowing. Ill? ,co o,

REFERENCES

Abramson. H.A. _Ed. ). 1967. l'hc {.'se of LSD itt Psychotheral_y and childhood schizophrenia with LSD and UML. In: Rinkel, M. (Ed.). Ah'oludism. New York: Bobbs-Mcrrill. Biological Tre{mnent of Mental/I/ness. New York: L.C. Page. Anderson, E.F. It179. Peyote thc l)ivinc ('at'{us. Tucson: University of Bloleld. J. 1968. Consciousness. energy and bliss. In: Metzner, R. Arizona. [Ed.). The Ecslati(' Adventure. New York: Macmillan. Bastiaans. J. 1983. Menial liberation facilitated hx the usc of halluci- Brcggin. P.R. 1983. t'sv('hiatric Drugs: Hazards to the' Brai{t. New

nogenic drugs. In: Grinspoon. L. & Bakalar. J. teds.). P._3'('hedelic York: Springer. Rttlh,clionx. New York: Human Sciences Press. Brown, O. 1959· L!I}' Against Death: The Psychoanul)'tic Meaning of Booker. R.O. & Selden, G. 1985. l¥u, [lofty Electric: Electromugm'tixm His{o{3.. New York: Vintage. and thc ["otttld_ttion Of Id/}'. Ne,.',' York: William Morrow. Emboden. W. 1979. Phmts. New York: Collier. llcnelheim, B. 1983. I"rcudand MaWsSo{t/. Ney, York: Knopf. Flattery. D.S. & Pierce. J.M. 1965. Peyote. Berkeley: University of Bender, L.: Cobrink. L. & Siwl Sanka{. D.V. Itl6¢xThe trealment of California Monograpb Series.

Journal of PsychoactiveDrugs 378 Vol. 18(4)Oct-Dec, 1986 i,_ %.'

LEVERANT MDMA RECONSIDERED .-

Frank. J.D. 1973. Per.suasion attd Healing. Bahinlore: Johns Hopkins McGIothlin. W.H. & Arnold. D.O. 197 I. LSD revisited: A ten-year Univcrsily. follow-up of medical LSD use. Archives ol'Gcm'ral Po'chialrr Vol. ;, Frank. L.R. (Ed. ). 1978. Ttu' Hi.¥tory o/'Shock Treatment. San Francis- 24: 35-49. co: LeonardRoy Frank. Mogar.R.E. & Aldrich.R.W. 1969.Theuseofpsychedelicagentswith '_ GrinsF,{_m. L. & Bakalar. J. 1976. Cocaine.' A Drug and Its Social autistic schizophrenic children. P._vclu,delic Review Number I0: j Evolution. New York: Basic Books. 5-13. Goad, P.T. 1985. Preliminary report on the acute and subacute oral Nisargadatta. 1973. I Am That. Volumes I & 2. Bombay: Chetana. _,· ._ toxicity of MDMA in rats. Project EMD-AT-(X)I. In: Doblin, R. Osmond, H. 1969. Alcoholism: A personal view of psychedelic treat- t fF,d.I. A Propo,¥al for Orphan Pharmaceuticals. Itt('. P.vvchedeh'c men(. In: Hicks. R. & Fink, P. feds.). Psychedelic Drugs. New ' 'x Medicine t'harmaceutical Corporation. Sarasola, Florida. York: Grune & Stratton. Graf, S. & Halifax. J. 1977. The Htomm Etwounter With Death, New Oil, J. & Bigwc_)d, J. feds.). 1978. Teonanacoll. Hallucinogenic t York: E.P. Dutton. Mu,¥hroom,¥of North America. Seattle: Madrona. "--- Havens, J. 1968. Psychiatry vs. God. In: Metzner, R. (Ed.). Tit(' Ricaurte. G.: Bryan. G.: Strauss. L.: Selden. L. & Schuster. C. 1985. I Ecstatic Adventure. New York: Macmillan. Hallucinogenic selectively destroys brain serotonin ,: Hayncr. G. & McKinney. H. 1986. MDMA: The dark side of Ecstasy. nerve terminals. Science Vol. 229: 986-988. Journdl of Psychoactive Dt'tt.g._Vol. I8{4). R uck. C.A.P.: B igwood. J.: Staples, D.: Oft, J. & Wasson, R.G. 1979. King, R. 1972. The Drug Hat g tp' America's F_l?y-Year Folh'. New Entheogens. Journal o/' Psychedelic Drugs Vo . I l( I-2): 145-146. York: Norton. Schultes. R.E. & Hofumnn, A. 1979. Phmts o/'the Gods.' Origins of ;. Kornl_21d. J.: Miyuki. M.: & Sasaki. J. 1979. Psychological Halhwim)genic Use. New York: McGraw-Hill. %. adjustmen! is not liberation. In: Lerner. E. led.). Zero. Volmne I1. Schrag. P. 1979. Miml Comrol. New York: Delta. Los Angeles: Zero Press. Seymour. RB. 1986. MDMA. San Francisco: Haight-Ashbury Publica- Krishna. G. 1970. Kundalini, The Evohttioncn2vEnergy tn Man. Ber- tions, t keley, Calilornia: Shambhala. Siegel. R.K. 1986. LSD hallucinations: Fromergot toelectric kool-aid. Kurland. A.A. 1985. LSD in the supportive care of the terminally ill Journal qt'P.¥ychoactive Drug._ Vol. 17(4): _47-._56. cancer patient. Jottrl eI _)fPYy('hoactive DrII,ILx Vol. 17(4): 279-290. Smith. D.E. (Ed.). 1968. Psychedelic Drugs and Religion. Journal t_f' !_ ' k'. Leary. T. 1969. The effects of consciousness-expanding drugs on pris- Psychoactive Drugs Vol. 1(2). oner rehabilitation. Psvchedeli(' Review Number I0. Smith. H. 1968. Dodrugs have religious import?In: Solomon. D, (Ed.). f_ _';- Leary. T & Metzner. R. 1967-68. Use of psychedelic drugs on prisoner LSD: Tit(' Consciou._ne.¥x Expanding Drug. New York: G.P. rehabilitation. Briti,dl Journal _?/'Scwiolo,q,vVol. 2. Pumam. _ Lee. MA. & Shlain. B. 1985. Acid Dream.¥.' Tit(, CIA. I,SI) and the Stafford. P. 1985. Re-creational uses of LSD. Journal ot'Pxychoactive t Si.uie._ Rebellion. New York: Grove Press Dru_,,s Vol. 17(4): 219-228. Lodzer. I. 1971. Psychedelics ami kabbalah. In: Sleeper. J. & Mintz, A. Trebach. A.S. 1982. The Heroin Solution. New Haven, Connecticut: feds.). Thc New Jews. New York: Random House. Yale University Press. Maslow. A. H. 1971. The Fartlwr Reaches _?/'Human ,Vaturc. New Unsigned. 1986. Doctors told to turn in some patients. San Francisco 5 York: Viking. Chronicle September 24. Mastcrs. RE.L. & Houston. J. 1966. l/w t/dl'i('lit'3 of ['_vchedt, h'c Van Dusen, W. 1981. The Nalurtl[ Depth of Man. New York:

l:uwricm'e. Ne'.', York: Itolt. Rinehart & Winston. Swedenborg Foundation. !j/:

F_

3?

i 'fk('

'%.'

[z.-

t Journal of Psyclumctive Drugs 379 Vol. 18(4) Oct-Dec, 1986 ;">_'b ,3 '5;

'h