The majority of society does not know what MDMA is, but it is the chemical compound that is supposed to be marketed as ecstasy or "Molly". Most people have had a negative perception of methylenedioxy-methamphetamine, most commonly referred to as MDMA, since it's illegalization in 1985.  (Schwartzbach) This accompanied with biased or inaccurate research, bad publicity, and ignorance makes up the negative image of MDMA today. Unfortunately, this has tarnished the reputation of MDMA and instead of being known for giving its users a euphoric and empathetic psychedelic experience, it is seen as severely detrimental to one's health. With MDMA being illegal it prevented further research or unbiased research to continue due to the fear of imprisonment. (Pentney) MDMA was wrongly categorized as a Schedule I, the same category as heroin, by the Drug Enforcement Administration and must be legalized. MDMA causes no harm to an individual who appropriately doses themselves, nor does it provide its users with aggressive behavior. Furthermore, its illegality uses taxpayer money for funding, has created a lucrative black market selling at times dangerous adulterants, and increases the already astounding prison population of the United States. Finally, the illegality of MDMA infringes on an individual's freedom of choice, and prevents any medical use or any unbiased and helpful information concerning MDMA to reach the public.

Much of today's negative perception of MDMA is due to the fact that MDMA is categorized as a Schedule I drug. This is due to the fact that, " ... the DEA administrator recommended that MDMA be placed on Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act." on July 27, 1984 because of the drug's open accessibility at bars in Dallas and Austin.  (Pentney). The desired scheduling of the DEA was protested by psychiatrists and other healthcare professionals because it was believed that this scheduling would prevent any research into the medical potential of MDMA. In response to this protest, three hearings were to be held on June 10, 1985 in Los Angeles, on July 10-11, 1985 in Kansas City, and on October 8-11, 1985 in Washington D.C. As the media got word of MDMA, news stories of its usage and abuse spread throughout the United States, causing MDMA manufacturers to feel pressured to produce and distribute as much MDMA as possible before a potential scheduling for its illegality was made. As the DEA noticed the increase for demand and unlimited supply of MDMA they decided to use the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 to battle what seemed to be an " ... out of control market," (Pentney). "This act allows the attorney general to place any substance posing an imminent hazard to public safety onto Schedule I for a period of one year while the final scheduling process is under way." (Pentney).

Ten days before the hearings were supposed to happen, the DEA implemented the Emergency Scheduling Act and declared July 1, 1985 as the start of MDMA's temporary Schedule I placement. Interestingly enough, the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 was intentionally designed to, " ... arrest the production of designer drugs, or barely legal synthetic derivatives of existing controlled substances." (Pentney). According to Dr. Alexander Shulgin, renowned chemist for his work with MDMA, the term "designer drug" has too loose of a meaning. He states, " ... one would be hard put to find a structure of any drug, anywhere, which could not be argued by some person, somewhere, as being in some way structurally related to a Schedule I or a Schedule II drug." (Pentney) After the hearings took place the judicial recommendation was that MDMA be categorized as Schedule III rather than Schedule I. The difference is that under Schedule III, MDMA would " ...  be classified as having an accepted medical use, and a low potential for abuse, enabling research and therapeutic sessions to continue."  Whereas under Schedule I, MDMA would be considered to have " ...  a high potential for abuse, no currently acceptable medical use, and a lack of safety for use under medical supervision." (Pentney) Even with this new ruling, the DEA maintained the categorization of MDMA as a Schedule I drug and became permanent on November 13, 1986.

If anyone were to have the slightest interest in trying MDMA recreationally then they should be aware of the possible dangers surrounding MDMA and how to prevent them. Unfortunately, the perception of MDMA is so negative that the majority of people do not want to seem as if they are advocating the usage. Therefore, no one witnesses any sort of a public service announcement warning people before they ingest MDMA. Even though MDMA is illegal it doesn't stop people from trying it either from curiosity or boredom. But the ignorance of this drug is what can make it dangerous and it is the government's responsibility to make sure that people are educated on this topic. If it were to be legalized, then more people would be able to witness and/or experience the effects and realize that responsible usage virtually causes no damage. There would also be more warnings or advisories considering the fact that it would now be legally okay for people to consume it hopefully preventing any deaths or injuries.

The public should be susceptible to this information just like how everyone is given advisories on alcohol and tobacco use. Unfortunately, this is not the case, but there are a few organizations such as Drug Policy Alliance whose goal is to educate the public with unbiased information on drugs and any questions concerning them. "In order to stay safe, we need to understand both the effects of drugs and the policies that surround them." (Drug Policy Alliance) One can die from MDMA use but overdosing is rare and is more common to happen if an individual takes an adulterant that is marketed as MDMA or has preexisting health problems. One of the two common forms of death that stem from MDMA use is hyperthermia due to overexertion such as dancing for hours non-stop in hot environments like clubs or concerts. The other one is hyponatremia, where users either drink too much water before or during MDMA ingestion in an attempt to prevent dehydration. (Drug Policy Alliance) 

A responsible dose for recreational use is 80-125 milligrams, lasting between three to six hours. Users have described the experience as feelings of euphoria, acceptance, confidence, empathy, and connectedness. The effects of MDMA are aroused via sounds, touch, smells, and visuals. While taking MDMA one's pupils will dilate causing sensitivity to light with the possibility of nausea the first forty-five minutes after consumption, " ... jaw-clenching, tooth-grinding, muscle tension, faintness, chills, and sweating." (Drug Policy Alliance) After effects have worn off it is possible for users to experience feelings of, " ... sadness, anxiety, depression and sleep problems." due to the depletion of serotonin levels. (Drug Policy Alliance) Fortunately, if someone does experience these problems they are reversible and usually go away within a week. Depending on the dose and the frequency of usage the recovery of serotonin levels can be prolonged or cease. (Drug Policy Alliance) To avoid irreversible or prolonged damage one should only consume MDMA once every two to three months so that serotonin levels can recover back to normal.  

What is even more dangerous than legal MDMA is illegal MDMA. The illegalization of any drug, such as alcohol prohibition, creates lucrative black markets where drugs that are sold are not regulated or mandated by a governmental jurisdiction. That being said, many people who are looking for an MDMA high are much more likely to be ingesting some sort of adulterant. This can result in serious injury or even death depending on what is ingested. It's even quite likely that what is thought to be MDMA virtually has no MDMA at all. In most cases these adulterants are aspirin, caffeine, bath salts, and methamphetamine. (Peters) 

According to Drug Policy Alliance sometimes these adulterants are ketamine, which is a horse tranquilizer, and dextromethorphan, or DXM which is found in over-the-counter cough medicines.  "A Reason You Shouldn't Panic About the Club Drug "Molly", and a Reason You Should"  by Justin Peters is an online article in response to two people dying in the summer of 2013 to what was thought to be an MDMA overdose. In the article it discusses an experiment conducted by a couple of friends who bought was marketed as "molly" arbitrarily in both New York City and Miami three times. Their result from Miami was a pill containing bath salts and an MDMA/methamphetamine mixture and in New York they received a pill mixture of cocaine, methamphetamine, and some kind of opiate. There is no concern for the consumer's health because of the lack of regulation and mandating certain health standards with appropriate advisories. Along with the fact that black markets flood the streets with adulterants, the other damage they do to society is through street violence. Not only is there an increase of crime with the illegalization but there is an increase of violent crime, particularly concerning rival gangs for control of drug turf.  

Even if one were to try MDMA, they still put themselves at risk with law enforcement. In 1914 the United States government enacted the Harrison Narcotics Act, the same year that Merck, a German pharmaceutical company patented the drug as a chemical intermediate for a stypic medication. ("The Early History of Ecstasy"). Initially meant to end the public distribution of both cocaine and heroin, this would set a precedent for Congress for they would enact " ...  dozens of laws controlling drug distribution." (Schwartzbach) One of these laws would be the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Prevention Control Act of 1970 which set federal regulations of drugs. Within this act is Title II, the Controlled Substances Act, which used five different "schedules" that categorized drugs. In MDMA's category, "Schedule I drugs have no recognized medical use, have a high potential for abuse, cannot be used safely even under medical supervision, and carry the most stringent criminal penalties." (Schwartzbach)

The United States Sentencing Commission enacted the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in 2001 to implement rougher sentences related to MDMA. The penalties related to MDMA are now harsher than cocaine's mandatory minimum sentences. An example of the severity of these guidelines was the increase in the average sentence for MDMA traffickers from thirty-four months to seventy-three months. (Kay, Supra, at 2168.) But it wasn't until 2005 when the Supreme Court ruled that the sentencing guidelines are advisory not and not mandatory in the case of the United States v. Booker. The sentencing guidelines for conspiracy to possess and distribute is between sixty-three and seventy-eight months. But because these guidelines were now defined as advisory, sentencing can range from either twenty-six months like a federal judge ruled in New York or to a 192 month sentence imposed by a federal judge in Texas. Even at the state level, drugs are still categorized in the same or similar scheduling process as the federal level, placing MDMA into the most severe category. (Schwartzbach)

In the past 40 years, federal, state, and local governments have spent collectively over one trillion dollars of taxpayer money in attempts to enforce the war on drugs. There were originally only 50,000 Americans imprisoned in 1980 and now there are more than half a million Americans incarcerated. The United States' population only makes up for about five percent of the total world population, yet we harbor about a quarter of all inmates worldwide. In 2012 the national average to house an inmate was $31,286 per year according to the Vera Institute of Justice. (Black's Law Dictionary and The Law Dictionary) This high demand for funding requires less funding to go to more important and more beneficial programs such as health services, education, infrastructure, " ... social service and public safety programs ... " (Drug Policy Alliance) Of course the availability of drugs is still prevalent and little has gone into treatment programs for drug users. 

It is an ongoing cycle that almost seems as if it is designed on purpose. Over half of the prison population in the United States is drug related, most of which are considered to be non-violent offenders. The mental pressure of prison life and then life after prison is known to be mentally taxing, and one reason as to why people use drugs is to escape from negative emotions and negative environments. Surely some former drug users that are sentenced for drug use are bound to use again. Reputations, records, and resumes are all tarnished after serving a prison sentence for a felony. Sure enough employers are not looking to hire someone with a few years of jail time under their belt especially when the crime is related to a Schedule I drug.

Kevin Rio, the author of "MDMA-The Ecstasy" written in 2007, has a Ph.D. in cognitive science from Brown University describes himself as a " ... cognitive scientist, experimental perceptual psychologist, and quantitative user researcher." (Rio). His stance on MDMA is fairly negative and references a few scientific studies such as one conducted at John Hopkins University. He mentions, "Serotonergic damage was greater among MDMA users than in a control group, and the amount of damage was proportional to the number of times users had taken the drug." (Rio, "MDMA - The Ecstasy") The problems concerning this data are that the dosage of what they consider a recreational dose is never specified, nor does Kevin Rio mention the frequency of use and dosage of the MDMA users. Konstantine Zakzanis, the co-author of a study conducted at the University of Toronto declares, "For those who use ecstasy repeatedly, there is preliminary evidence to suggest memory processes can be impaired with continued use of the drug," (Rio) Again, this is another example of how the frequency of MDMA usage can be detrimental and must be taken seriously, but at the same time this study in particular does not provide anything new to a scientific community for this was discovered as early as 1999. 

Kevin Rio goes on to declare that even after one or two recreational uses, whatever that entitles, can cause irreversible brain damage. A report was presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America detailing that MDMA causes " ... decreased blood flow to certain areas of the brain and changes in cell architecture. It is still unknown whether these changes are permanent or not." (Rio) This report does not detail how much blood flow actually decreases during an MDMA high and whether or not it can be detrimental to one's health. It would appear that Kevin Rio is insinuating that the event of a stroke is possible and then goes on to mention that these effects are still not known to be reversible or not.  

Much of this data is unreliable due to several flaws within these studies. It is never mentioned that maybe the MDMA that most people think they are ingesting is either contaminated or is an adulterant that could make results go askew. Also, the majority of people who ingest MDMA are also known for consuming other drugs that have different effects on the brain. Fortunately, Dr. Rio mentions an article published by one of the United Kingdom's leading medical journals, The Lancet, which suggests that MDMA is safer than alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco. According to this article, "MDMA is one of the least dangerous illicit drugs for human consumption,". The definition of dangerous used by The Lancet was often criticized and questioned but this article's findings resulted from surveys filled out by doctors, law enforcement officials, psychiatrists, chemists, and lawyers, and pharmacologists, people who study the effects of drugs on one's body. 

The survey takers were asked to rank drugs by toxicity, aggressive or volatile behavior, and possibility of abuse and addiction. "To a police officer, MDMA would seem relatively harmless, it does not make users violent (like methamphetamine or cocaine) and it is not so exorbitantly expensive that its users must resort to crime to support their addiction (like heroin)." (Rio, "MDMA  --  The Ecstasy"). The perception of police officers is appropriate and important because of the amount of engagement with the public experience on a daily basis when they are out in the streets enforcing the laws legislature enacts. David Rose, the author of "Alcohol and Tobacco Cause More Harm than Ecstasy, Study Claims" was written in response to The Lancet's article which classified alcohol as only a little bit safer than drugs like cocaine and heroin. The main authors of The Lancet article are Professor David Nutt of the University of Bristol and Colin Blakemore who is the head of the Medical Research Council. This article was meant to construct a new drug classification system to spark debates that can possibly result in some kind of reform in the future. (Rose) 

This new method of rating these drugs is considered through the possibility of harm and/or death towards the user, determining a substance's addictiveness, social risks, and any other possible dangers. Interestingly enough, "Tobacco appears in the top half of a league table of 20 legal and illegal substances, well above the Class A drug Ecstasy," considering the fact that ninety percent of drug deaths are alcohol and tobacco related. David Rose goes on to speak about how the present classification system is meant to relate a drug's harmful potential and any risks that are involved but instead have, " ... evolved in an unsystematic way . . . with seemingly little scientific basis ... " (Nutt & Blakemore). These laws were implemented on a foundation of misinformation, lack of useful information, and bias instead of factual evidence. "A more scientific view is that these risks have to be assessed against their effect on the whole population," (Nutt). 

After all, these are laws that are impacting everyone's lives and can have an even stronger negative impact. Professor Nutt comments that "Drug misuse and abuse are major health problems," and that "Our methodology offers a systematic framework and process that could be used to assess the harm of current and future drugs of abuse." Professor Blakemore added: "Drug policy is primarily aimed at reducing the harm to users, their families and society. But at present there is no rational, evidence-based method for assessing the harm of drugs. We have tried to develop such a method." (Rose). Unfortunately, both Professor Nutt and Professor Blakemore are involved in a topic that doesn't gain enough attention in the scientific and legislative communities. Not only are they trying to clarify the dangers of certain drugs but they also seek to minimize addiction, reduce harm towards user's loved ones, and ultimately society through educating the public with unbiased information of drugs, particularly MDMA. They want to clarify the fact that certain substances are known for their addictive qualities but there are " ... no reports of subjects who take large amounts of MDMA for long periods of time, indicating that the drug is not addictive," (Pentney).

If there is anything that should be considered or at least talked about it would have to be about the medical benefits of MDMA. Specifically, in the last ten years, a surge of research on the medical benefits has been discovered and is being further studied. One of the organizations responsible for advocacy of MDMA legalization is the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, or MAPS, is a nonprofit organization that was founded in 1986, a year after MDMA's illegalization. They serve as an organization for researching and educating that creates cultural, legal, and medical, " ... contexts for people to benefit from the careful uses of psychedelics and marijuana." (MAPS). The goal of MAPS is to legalize these drugs with medical benefits so that everyone can receive the best treatment that they deserve. Out of all of their projects this is considered to be their top priority with the majority of funding going towards making MDMA legal. MAPS stated, "We are studying whether MDMA-assisted psychotherapy can help heal the psychological and emotional damage caused by sexual assault, war, violent crime, and other traumas. We are also studying MDMA-assisted therapy for autistic adults with social anxiety and MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for people with anxiety related to life-threatening illnesses." 

According to MAPS, preliminary studies have already shown that MDMA-assisted therapy can help individuals suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, overcome their mental terrors. It is also possible that MDMA may be able to overcome other mental problems, seeing as how MDMA is known for elevating feelings of trust and compassion towards others. In addition, "MDMA has been implicated in the treatment of depression, substance abuse, relationship problems, premenstrual syndrome, autism, and several other psychiatric disorders." (Pentney) Most medications for mental illnesses are to be taking daily for years or for the rest of one's life but MDMA-assisted psychotherapy only happens a few times. The MDMA the MAPS organization uses is pure and, "In laboratory studies, pure MDMA has been proven sufficiently safe for human consumption when taken a limited number of times in moderate doses." (MAPS) By 2021, MAPS is trying to get MDMA into a Food and Drug Administration approved prescription medicine through a $20,000,000 plan. 

Much has yet to be done before MDMA will be legal for both recreational and even medicinal use in the United States. On the contrary, countries like New Zealand are now experiencing a much more liberal attitude towards the advocacy of MDMA legalization, ranging from the general public to health professionals. In an article titled "Should MDMA be Regulated? New Zealand has the Answer" Not surprisingly, the Prime Minister of New Zealand John Key stubbornly holds a negative image of MDMA and prohibits the legalization saying that, "Anything I've seen in relation to this drug has been deeply negative, so I can't see why it would be,". John Key is simply another byproduct of the lack of information and understanding of MDMA who unfortunately has a large role in New Zealand's legislature. One may notice the topic of legalizing MDMA has already started to happen, but of course research funded by government and pharmaceutical companies allows for biased information to permeate the public's thinking.

One appeal has been made to change MDMA's categorization such as the one proposed by Lester Grinspoon, M.D., which removed MDMA from Schedule I on December 22, 1987, but was reinstated by the DEA on March 23, 1988. (Pentney) As Dr. Alexander Shulgin discusses, the act of applying and obtaining grant money for research on drugs is " ... associated with the ability to craft the request in a way that implies that the findings will be of use to the provider of the money. There a few professional prostitutes that will provide what is needed, but will not publish any findings that are positive." (Pentney). With that being said, one can only hope that the government will openly accept this information, allowing for the public to express their freedom of choice, while the medical benefits can help those who are need of treatment that only MDMA can deliver.

