I've done both, and I think that MDMA is far worse than speed. I've tried speed about three times, and felt sort of weird for the next two days on each occasion. I did E once, and had massive mood swings for the next month or two. Massive mood swings aren't fun when bipolar disorder runs in your family.
Guess I lose that bet. However, keep in mind that speed is not neccessarily meth. Generally, meth doesn't just make you feel weird for a few days, it keeps you awake for a few days. There are many forms of speed, with varying potencies. I wouldn't reccomend any of them to anybody with any mental problems of any stripe, but some are worse than others.
In many ways, lab results are misleading simply because you never know what exactly you're buying through the black market. They're still important, of course, but mean little to the actual users. People are using crank some fool mixed up in a bucket using lye and ephidrine all over the US, and it's unlikely lab results will tell us much about the long term effects this stuff has. There won't be any human studies using such crap, I hope.
In most cases, one time use of either meth or E won't do much or any damage. It's the effects of long term use that are important. Have there been studies on the addictive nature of "uppers"? Is caffiene more likely to hook someone than E, or vice versa? How does legality and availability determine the likelyhood of a casual user becoming an addict? We need more real world studies using black market substances... though it would be difficult to pull off.
Perhaps subjecting street drugs from various sources in an area to chemical analysis, and obverving the effects on the people who willingly use them would be a start. It would require that researchers gain the trust of the people engaging in this illegal activity, of course. That's a tall order when it comes to a subculture that's generally quite paranoid. Sorry if I've veered a bit off topic. |
