The ecstasy and the agony

If the government makes it impossible make pure MDMA, is it really surprising when dirty MDMA hits the market?


Curtis Gregory Perry/Flickr

In recent weeks, it seems, adulterated ecstasy (MDMA) has left Alberta and B.C. with a sizable heap of young corpses. A tragedy has thus come home to roost in the West: namely, the tragedy of policy that incentivizes adulteration of drugs that, if manufactured in the open and checked for purity, would kill hardly anybody. Pure MDMA has a larger “therapeutic index”—a wider safety margin for overdose—than alcohol. It would probably make a pretty reasonable substitute for alcohol in many settings if we were to sit down and rebuild a drug culture from scratch. But over the past ten years or so, both Liberal and Conservative governments have worked to increase penalties for and monitoring of the flow of “precursor chemicals” used in the manufacture of MDMA.

It has been their goal to make pure MDMA more difficult to manufacture; when precursors are seized it is hailed as a triumph. But illicit drug factories never do put out the follow-up press release announcing that they’re putting less MDMA in their “ecstasy” and replacing it with other party drugs that have much smaller safety margins, or with drugs that interact dangerously with MDMA. And when rave kids die as a result, the RCMP chooses not to pose imperiously alongside the body bags giving a big thumbs-up. They are eager to take credit only for the immediately visible results of their work.

The medical examiner in Alberta said she was surprised to find methamphetamine and other meth analogues in the remains of some of the victims she saw. As this monograph on the history of ecstasy explains, however, adulteration of ecstasy with precisely this class of substances is a known result of intensified legal pressure on ecstasy markets—and that, in turn, has made it harder for researchers to measure the harm from chronic use of MDMA, as such, in the wild. It’s the circle of drug-war life: hysteria begets ignorance, and vice versa.

The debate over “harm reduction” in Canada has, for the past year or so, revolved around the Insite clinic in East Vancouver. That debate has been fraught with as much confusion and misinformation as drug moralizers could possibly create, but the core message, I think, has gotten through to Canadians, and certainly to the gatekeepers of their media. The message is this: we have only meagre power to stop people from abusing heroin if they are determined to do that. We do have, however, significant ability to protect people from the problems of a poorly-titrated or actively adulterated supply of heroin. The morbidity and mortality burden from the actual addiction itself, compared to the burden resulting from the drug’s illegality, is both modest and intractable. Insite is basically designed to yield the benefits that allowing heroin to be issued by prescription would bring.

Canada is apparently too under-equipped with libertarians to see that the logic extends to ecstasy, which about a million adult Canadians have used at least once. Yet rave-scene users have already been implementing “harm reduction” philosophy on the dance floor for decades. They react as best they can to adulteration risks by sharing information about dealer reliability, and they mitigate the most important medical peril of MDMA—the possibility of hyperthermia, i.e., internal overheating—by making sure ravers have access to cool rooms and plenty of fluids.

Drug prohibition makes all of this more difficult, though in practice the cops look the other way. They’re interested, they’ll tell you, in the synthesizers and traffickers. That approach sets off a cascade of adulteration that lands on the heads of young people outside the bounds of an established consumer-safety culture—the ones who will buy “ecstasy” out of a truck because it’s cheaper than booze. (Which, by the way, the Alberta government wants to make more expensive.)

Ecstasy is synonymous with raves, but none of the five Calgarian youths who have died seem to have taken it in that setting. A couple were reported to have taken alarmingly large numbers of pills, prompting the Calgary Herald to accuse them posthumously of “extreme drug use” before it became clear that they were not victims of MDMA at all. The Herald was given a pretty strong clue by the death of Daniel Dahl, a young graffiti artist whose death the paper attributed to “toxic” MDMA—even though he had been thrown out of a bar for fighting the evening he got sick. That’s not the behaviour of someone who’s taken ecstasy. It’s the behaviour of somebody who thinks he’s taken ecstasy and has ended up with a liver full of meth and other junk.

Maybe Dahl (who had gulped seven tablets) and the others weren’t drug-crazy idiots who overdid it; maybe they had just adapted to a supply of “ecstasy” tablets largely consisting of caffeine and cough medicine, and were taken by surprise when they flooded their organs with paramethoxymethamphetamine instead. It’s prohibition that makes that possible—indeed, makes it virtually certain to happen on occasion. When Daniel Dahl’s mother says “I feel like they’ve murdered my son,” there are an awful lot of people who could be included in that “they”.


The ecstasy and the agony

  1. Thanks for your sensitive and thoughtful article into the scam known as The War on (some) Drugs. Surely there is a better way.

  2. And when rave kids die as a result, the RCMP chooses not to pose imperiously alongside the body bags giving a big thumbs-up.”

    Biting, but justified criticism.

  3. For God’s sake Colby, stop making sense…you’re making the usual suspects sound like fools.

  4. Great great article, very forward thinking and logical

  5. Legalization sounds so reasonable, after all tobacco, which has no benefit what-so-ever is.  I have yet to see someone put forth a complete business plan for say pot.  Would it follow the same general framework as tobacco?  Would it not invite the same abuse as say FN ‘smokes’ to undercut the high taxes?

    As for MDMA, being able to buy from a safe source sounds good too.  But would there not always be those that come up with a way to create a “cheaper” version/immitation and have a market for it?  According to Drug Safety Canada the fourth leading cause of death in Canada and the US is prescription drugs taken as prescribed.

    A couple of years ago I worked with about a dozen teens (16-19).  All they talked about after a weekend were the parties, clubs, etc. and of course the amount of drinking/drugging that went on.  Very common to hear several comment how the pot/(__) they bought made them feel “weird” or actually sick.  I finally had to ask “Where did you get it from?” – answer was always “some guy”.  My suggestion that perhaps they should know the person before accepting and paying for something that had the potential to kill them went right over their head. 

    In my day we had our “go-to-guy” who we all knew and trusted for that mickey of lemon-gin, hash, dexies or purple micro-dot.  There wasn’t the cheap, addictive nasties like meth and crack, cocaine and heroin was something you read about celebrities using or ODing on.

  6. Finally some constructive critical thinking in light of all the recent drug deaths! It’s time people realized decriminalization and legalization are not the same thing. This issue is not black and white as Albertan/Canadian conservatives have built it up to be. 

  7. Your argument seems logical except that this recent rash of esctasy deaths has scared the crap out of my 17 year old daughter and her friends.  They are very leary of trying any drugs because they can’t know what they are cut with. People are dying and they aren’t willing to take the risk because they are not addicts.  If I am correct, neither with the ravers at parties.  Are you saying the ravers are so stupid that they would take ecstacy if it had rat poison in it?
    Harm reduction at Insite is about an entirely different group of individuals….people who are going to use Heroin no matter what the cost to them.  That is why that program is necessary.  

    • There are all kinds of degrees within the harm reduction schema. It’s not just about heroin addicts. Part of the strategy involves giving truthful information to teens about the risks associated with drug taking. This doesn’t include the DARE model or Nancy Reagan-type invocations to “Just say now.” It’s more about “Just say know.”

      • Just read an article the other day how somes teens who had gotten the HPV vaccine thought it was now OK to have un-ptotected sex.

        • And no one bothered to clear up the confusion before hand? That’s not the vaccine’s fault. That’s pretty well on par with telling teens to cross their legs when they get horny.

        • If any teen thinks that then their parents are doing a very poor job of educating them.  However, the Catholics aren’t encouraging their teenagers to get the vaccine as they believe it will lead to promiscuity.  I guess they don’t realize that even married women can get HPV from their husband who had other “experiences” prior to getting wed.

      • Yes that is what I am asking about…”the all kinds of degrees”.  Are we going to start arguing for providing the products for making drugs like methamphetamine where the production process is easy but very dangerous and the drug is so addictive that all the addict does is sit around and smoke all day while their body falls apart?
        In regard to ecstacy, we are not talking about addicted people who are living on the streets here.  We are talking about intelligent people who have jobs, go to university and participate in a certain type of entertainment on the weekends.  I have another daughter who is 23.  She has friends who take ecstacy.  They aren’t addicts.  They are looking for a good time.  If the word is out that the drug is dangerous, they’ll find something else to party with.

        • So they want to have a good time using recreational drugs? No problem, we already allow that with our most lethal drugs, alcohol and nicotine. The least we can do is allow adults to use a product of known purity and potency. We currently allow 21st century equivalent of bathtub gin and Al Capone to run rampant because the War on (some) Drugs is a scam.

          • The knowledge that other smart people exist in this world is extremely comforting.

          • Thanks.

          • I have never encouraged the use of nicotine.  As for alcohol….I work in psychiatry with addicted people, I am not encouraging people get drunk.  Why do people have to get totally blasted to have a good time?  You act like that is necesssary…well that is the attitude of drunks and addicts so now we should encourage it.  I am not anti-cannibas and pro alcohol.  I am telling you that all these substances of abuse have risks.  Over-indulging is dangerous.  What are we going to do….run around and make sure that we don’t step on anybodies toes so that the drug-dealers can continue to produce a steady supply to keep everybody high?  How is that even possible?

          • Cannabis a drug of addiction….do you honestly believe that? Psychological dependence, maybe. I’m an RN, who does not use but sure knows many who do, both patients and friends etc. I’ve never seen anyone go into DT’s from not smoking pot, have you? As a social drug, cannabis is a hell of a lot less harmful than alcohol. Even in “social” settings, how many 13, 14, 20 year olds for that matter have you seen brought into the ER with alcohol poisoning. Now I realize less people are using cannabis than alcohol, but when was the last time you even heard of someone with a THC overdose? As for MDMA, the whole therapeutic window thing is insightful. An actual overdose, again with pure product, is pretty difficult to do.

          • I don’t judge “why people need to get blasted to have a good time” , I don’t really know why. Some people just get their jollies this way. Why do people feel the need to jump out of airplanes? Couldn’t tell, it doesn’t appeal to me….  Why do you need to moralize about what others do with their recreations? Over-indulging is dangerous? Perhaps but not always. Why do you feel the need to generalize? I think part of the idea behind “harm reduction” is to reduce the impact of criminality on society. Let’s take dealers out of the loop. Let adults grow their own cannabis. Let adults buy LSD, mushrooms, MDMA and MDA from a source of known strength and purity. I get the feeling that you believe that Prohibition is a regulatory scheme when in fact, Prohibition cedes the marketplace to organized crime. You appear to be happy with that. I’m not!

          • gtrplyr – you mistake me….I am not moralizing.  I work in healthcare and I know that cigarettes are a cancer delivery system in a stick and alcohol is a liver cirrohsis/throat cancer delivery system in a drink.  Why do people over-endulge…often times it is to self-medicate.  They aren’t that happy in their lives and they look for an escape.    I am not judging them.  I am just saying that substance abuse is costly to our society and not just in dollars and sense.  It tears families apart.  I guess it might be a good idea to legalize and sell more of these substances,  Then we can tax all of them and use that money for the much needed individual and family counselling that is in short supply right now.  It personally makes me sick that had cigarettes entered the market now, they wouldn’t make it on the shelf…given that 1 in 3 people who smoke and destined to suffer a major illness or death due to the product.  People believe that cannabis has no risks but there are those in the population who risk becoming psychotic and end up being diagnosed with schizophrenia.  I’m sorry but pharmaceutical companies cannot realease medications that have risks of being harmful and have no benefit but the government is goiing to legalize even more drugs that fall under that category?  Why not just sell narcotics over the counter?

          • gtrplyr – you mistake me….I am not moralizing.  I work in healthcare and I know that cigarettes are a cancer delivery system in a stick and alcohol is a liver cirrohsis/throat cancer delivery system in a drink.  Why do people over-endulge…often times it is to self-medicate.  They aren’t that happy in their lives and they look for an escape.    I am not judging them.  I am just saying that substance abuse is costly to our society and not just in dollars and sense.  It tears families apart.  I guess it might be a good idea to legalize and sell more of these substances,  including narcotics without prescription.  We can tax all of them and provide substance abuse counselling for individuals and families that are in short supply.  Hell, if that happens we won’t have to worry about big pharma…who cares if a drug isn’t beneficial as long as it isn’t harmful and makes you feel good…no more prescriptions.

          • We are a society who self-medicates, in all kids of ways.  No amount of preaching about the risks is going to change that.  We can however not facilitate the production of things that kill people in a moment of silliness.

        • ” If the word is out that the drug is dangerous, they’ll find something else to party with.”

          Just so we’re clear: you’re suggesting that this recent spate of bad news will cause potential E users to look elsewhere, since the E might be polluted.

          What other drug would they turn to? A street drug always bears the risk of contamination. This is a direct result of its being produced illegally at high risk and expense.

          Seriously, if we make the assumption that your daughter’s friends want to get high and party, what drug should they turn to for a good time?

          Take it from somebody who has tried it all (except heroin, I’ll admit): your daughter and her friends are much, much, much safer sticking to E and risking PMMA exposure than turning to coke, ketamine, meth, etc. They must never take more than 2 pills, but 2 pills’ worth of PMMA won’t be deadly.

          • I don’t know how to reply….good luck and best wishes with the future.

        • “If the word is out that the drug is dangerous, they’ll find something else to party with.”

          OMG, that’s funny.  And pray tell, how does the word get out that a drug is dangerous?  From Health Canada?  Or perhaps it’s from people watching the first one of their friends (or someone else’s group of friends) try it out. Hey look, Jimmy is passed out on the floor! Everybody get the word out. OK, next time Jack will be the guinea pig.

          • I don’t know maybe the news reporting that people are DEAD from using it including a 15 year old kid at a house party in Calgary.

          • Exactly.

        • E has been considered dangerous for a long time – but kids are still taking it.  We can’t rely on that.  And the attracton of doing dangerous things is part of being young.

    • I don’t understand what your objection to the piece is. Your daughter is making a good decision under the circumstances. That doesn’t bring back the users who have already died (who, as I pretty carefully pointed out, weren’t ravers). And in time the scare will end and there will be a different group of 17-year-olds around.

      • Can you think of any politcal types running for the most “powerful office on earth” who echo your sentiments Mr. Cosh? There doesn’t seem to be much coverage of that fellow up here.

        • I wrote about Ron Paul a little bit three weeks ago. Quite sympathetically, I thought, too, but his supporters were mad anyway.

          • Many consider Ron Paul to be a whacky fringe candidate (at least from his past attempts to run for President) but he seems to be the only candidate willing to have an adult conversation about Prohibition.

          • sorry, I didn’t see your piece…will go read it. That said Libertarianism, like socialism, is a great idea, until you start adding human beings to the equation.

      • Did I object to the piece?  I just questioned the assumption that non-addicts cannot make good decisons to not take a risk on taking a drug that may very well may contain a substance that will end their life.  I made the comment knowing that one of the kids that died was a 14 year old in my community.  I accept your assertion that in time the shock of the recent deaths will pass. 

    • “Are you saying the ravers are so stupid that they would take ecstacy if it had rat poison in it?”

      Well, yeah!  Most people who do drugs have absolutely no idea what’s in them.  They buy them on a street corner or from some guy they met in a bar.  And that’s all they know.  They have no idea what’s in them, but that doesn’t stop them.

    • Your kids may sneak out to things despite what they are telling you.  Don’t think that nice kids from the burbs don’t attend raves or end up in places where there are drugs. 

  8. Clearly – drug prohibition , in its present state , is more a source of problems than solutions  .

  9. Colby, you can’t see me, but I’m standing on my chair applauding.

    After 10 years in raves and clubs, with loads of ecstasy experience, I can tell you you’re bang on. A relatively safe drug is made dangerous when paired with dehydration and hyperthermia, or when contaminated by an illegal producer operating under dangerous and risky conditions.

    After several deaths in the Toronto rave scene, I saw harm reduction efforts ramp up. At first it was just good air conditioning and free running water. Then active security patrols and on-site paramedics. Eventually I started to see booths that allowed discreet testing of pills for contamination before consumption. These harm reduction techniques could have saved the lives of these young people.

    It used to drive me crazy when police reported a death due to “overdose of ecstasy” with no mention of surrounding circumstances or contamination. At this point, I believe it is simply too useful to police forces to drive fear and ignorance rather than nuanced understanding of the nature of individual drugs. We will probably have to wait for the boomers to start to die before we can get over Nancy Reagan’s lunkheaded legacy. Heck in Canada we’re regressing on the decriminalization of pot and building prisons.

    I’m now a father, a progressively-employed middle management guy and a mortgage-holder. Haven’t touched drugs in years. But I would be much more comfortable knowing one of my kids tried ecstasy rather than the alternatives. Unfortunately our political and law enforcement leaders seem determined to tar all drugs with the same brush and make it impossible for our children to make informed decisions.

    • It all reminds me a lot of Daniel Okrent’s great recent book about Prohibition, Last Call. Authorities often required businesses that made industrial alcohols add highly toxic substances to their products, to discourage anyone from drinking it. Of course, bootleggers would do what they could to get around this or reverse it, and then sold the stuff anyway – and then the feds blamed everyone else, ignoring that it was their rules that set all the dangers in motion.

    • “leaders seem determined to tar all drugs with the same brush”

      And what would you propose?  Health Canada starts drug testing with animals?  Or they ask for volunteers to ingest the latest stuff that shows up on the street?

      I can just imagine:

      Health Canada report: if you sniff glue, then brand X is the safest, while brand Y will screw your brain a lot more and you may be unable to show up to work for a couple of days.  Party on!

      Health Canada report: drug Z has no therapeutic or medicinal benefits.  But we’ve determined you can ingest it anyway, because hey, why not?

      • MDMA has a lot of therapeutic and medicinal benefits. Tell me, whhat kind of benefits does ethanol provide other than reducing inhibitions and destroying the human body?

        • You’re trying to claim that ecstasy is good for you? Wow.

  10. These same arguments have been in print for well over 50 years. People able to see beyond their programming have always noted the harm these policies have inflicted on society.
    Statistics have always shown alcohol junkies are far more detrimental to society and cost far more in health care expenditures than all illicit drugs combined.
    If you think politicians are unaware of these facts, you are mistaken. The Canadian government has received consistent statistical results from inquiries dating back to the early 1970s showing these policies are not just flawed and antisocial, but are contrary to scientific data and fact.
    I won’t quote facts here allowing the programmed regurgitation of half truths and outright lies to be used as counterpoints.
    The facts are out there, do your own open-minded research, use facts instead of fear mongering fabrications to reach your own conclusions.

    Quite simple really, the only thing we need in place to clean up the political process and legal system in our country is one basic law… make politicians liable for their decisions.

  11. If they trusted their dealer then it’s on the dealer for not telling his customers what’s up. If the dealer didn’t know about the change in ingredients (which i doubt) then someone did, and they fucked with people. and thats wrong and thats on those fucking greedy cowards on the top of the supply chain. fuck them. Not the cops. The cops are doing their jobs. They can’t do their job half way, addicts can’t do their drugs half way, and dealers cant sell their drugs half way. It’s all gonna come to a head at some point. This is coming from an insite worker of 2 years and a social housing advocate for the dtes for 5 years. And besides you dont just pound 7 pills without accepting an overdose risk. thats the rules of the game. If you wanna change the game, then vote for change, or advocate, and educate people and raise awareness about the issues. FYI Most people don’t give a fuck about addicts or “ravers”. They think addicts and over dosed drug users are responsible for their own terrible fate and to hell with them. That’s what your up against.  Especially in a down economy. It’s tough. I know.  But blaming the cops and their bosses is counter productive. Work together with your neighbours,  the cops, your local politicians, the conservatives and steven harper and challenge their notions of truth. Tap into their sense of “doing the right thing” and channel it into something that to some may look “left leaning” from the outside, but is really just doing the right thing. Give them the sense that by choosing to ignore party lines, they have are being bold, courageous and being the best type of conservative there is, the “maverick” (not tied down to partisan obligations, basically just doing what you want all the time, but always doing the honorable thing as well,  like John Wayne or something). Blaming the cops for doing their jobs is not where you should start. Work with people, inspire them, don’t belittle and criticize them. Good things will happen. 

    • Sorry, but the cops are part of the problem. Most top ranking cops will hector and brow-beat politicians if they hear any politician musing about changing the status quo. Additionally, many cops participate in the DARE program (which has been shown to be virtually usleless in keeping teens from experimenting with drugs). The cops on the beat may have a different opinion but consider this most cops would rather bust a pot head than a drunk person because the potential for violence is virtually nil with someone stoned on pot. Low hanging fruit….

      • While some police, judges and other law enforcement types (mostly retired) have joined LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), I agree that on the whole, police are part of the problem.  I see 2 main reasons for this:
        1. Law and order types, who like power and see no issue telling citizens what to do are naturally attracted to policing.
        2. At senior levels, police rightly see their budgets at risk if prohibition were ended.  Gangs would have to downsize as their main source of revenue dried up.  There would be huge savings in policing, court costs and drug-related health problems.  The savings could be (and should be) channeled into social programs that might actually fix the problem instead of making it worse.

      • The D.A.R.E. comment made me laugh. I just finished watching an NFB documentary on the OxyContin crisis in Cape Breton (“Cottonland”). The most memorable scene: a closeup of a real-life addict preparing and injecting his Oxy … and the camera slowly panned back to reveal that he was wearing a D.A.R.E. t-shirt!

  12. Colby Cosh, thank you for writing this bit of wisdom and the link to safety indexes.  You needn’t be a wild-eyed anarchist or I-hate-government libertarian to understand that the government doesn’t have the right to tell people what to put in their bodies.  It’s wrong and it doesn’t work.

    The prohibition laws have caused and contributed to far more harm than the substances themselves.  What will it take before we get a mainstream politician gutsy enough to stand up and declare the emperor has no clothes?

  13. Pure, safe  LSD is what we need – such an incredible drug

  14. Wonderful and well researched article Mr. Colby. Prohibition is turning London Ontario into a war zone.

  15. A great piece, Colby. It was almost four years ago, while my son was at WEM Rock and Ride celebrating his 14th birthday that two of the young girls he grew up with overdosed. One of them didn’t make it. While her parents continue to this day to blame the child who sold them the drugs, I am more inclined to agree with you that these deaths are, largely, needless tragedies triggered by a futile war that will never be won. Thanks for the read.

  16. Kudos for this article. I am far from the only aging ex-raver in Vancouver who is just depressed and furious over the pointless circumstances leading to such unnecessary tragedy. 

  17. It’s nice to see a Canadian publication that knows the difference between Ecstasy and bathtub drugs. It’s frustrating when so many people conflate the two in an ignorant attempt to put an umbrella over drug use. Testing kits (marquis reagent kits) are the answer here.

  18. Well I am completely agreeing with that..but in 15 years in the rave scene I rarely see ppl doing 7 hits. Has Timothey Leary said, We also need to educate ppl who wants to get high. Its is basic knowledge that you should wait the base time of 1 hour between intakes if you didnt test a product before.

    And yes..Mdma SHOULD replace Alcohol because drunks like trouble and stoners like to hug.

  19. Excellent article.  I
    like Colby Cosh, a man largely akin to my own thinking.  One of the many reasonable pragmatic arguments
    in favor of legalizing drugs is quality control 
    (Leaving aside the deeper moral problem of the government assuming the
    right to tell people what they can or cannot ingest, whom to live with, or
    generally how to live their lives).  I can
    count myself, and many of my friends, lucky to have gotten away with all those
    years of ingesting various hallucinogenics with impunity, since it seems
    manufacturers back then were more scrupulous about what they put in them (maybe
    because they were ingesting them themselves!). 

    But there is also an irony in that there are organic drugs,
    such as peyote, legally availabe in Canada in their original plant form, unadulterated,
    simply because they have remained below the state’s radar.  Of course if the market for these legal
    hallucinogenics increased considerably, the government nannies & busybodies
    in Ottawa would soon become aware of them and likely pass more laws against them
    as well.

    I am somewhat heartened that the Liberals (who I predict
    will resurge mightily in the next election, not least because Harper’s Tories
    will have certainly worn out their welcome by then) said at their convention
    that they would like to legalize marijuana. 
    But I wish they had the cojones, and principles, to go the whole way and
    push to legalize all drugs and end this useless, wasteful, and morally
    reprehensible sham called ‘the war on drugs’.

  20. Nobody talked about the studies about the therapeutic values of MDMA. Serious medical studies. A lot of people including Steve Jobs said that LSD changed their lives. I heard the same regarding MDMA. I personally did a lot of drugs.And MDA and MDMA are synthetic drugs that can have powerful properties and value if we stop moralizing and don t only look at the deritualization of the use of substances in Occidental societies. Yeah, there s different kinds of rituals but raves are not shamanistic rituals controlled by a shaman. People get lost taking substances the wrong way. The same with cannabis. It shouldn t be used as a mean to cope with your problems. We call everything recreational what used to be related to spirituality. It s sad. 

  21. If that were true street people would have given up heroin years ago – how many deaths have there been there?  You seem so naiive for a mental health nurse.

  22. It’s not the boomers you have to worry about – we were the ones who started the grass smoking and LSD taking.  It’s the straight laced generation that is now 40- to 50, who seem to be the problem. 

  23. thank god there are some journalists out there who are actually are informed and educated about drugs!

  24. i was in Amsterdam a decade ago and if you wanted your H , coke and or E tested it was done at a site no questions asked .Perhaps this is our answer in Canada

Sign in to comment.