The famous rave drug on its own is not responsible for the deaths of productive young people, argues Ted Leggett
The death of a young woman after her first experiment with “ecstasy” last weekend has brought the so-called “club drugs” to national attention.
The incredible variety of substances associated with the rave scene have led to a great deal of public confusion, and an alarmist media has done little to clarify the matter.
The number of deaths of ravers is actually amazingly low considering the overcrowded nature of clubs and the sheer number of young people consuming substances produced under dubious conditions every weekend.
The primary drugs of choice in rave culture are MDMA (ecstasy) and LSD (acid). Neither of these drugs are toxic in the quantities normally consumed in a club setting, so the deaths associated with them are generally tied to other drugs or other environmental factors.
While the neurological impact of MDMA is the subject of ongoing study, the most immediate physical effects of ecstasy use are an increase in heart rate and perspiration.
Among healthy people who have consumed no other substances, dehydration, heat stroke, or water intoxication are generally the cause of death.
Unfortunately, ecstasy and acid are not the only drugs consumed by ravers. In fact, many of the tablets taken as ecstasy are a cocktail of related substances (MDA, MDEA, MBDB) and other stimulants (amphetamine, ephedrine, caffeine).
According to the National Forensic Laboratories, of 1 765 tablets seized between August 1997 and August 1998, almost half contained substances other than MDMA.
The most common blend was a combination of amphetamine, MDEA, and ephedrine – found in 612 tablets seized in three different jurisdictions.
The National Forensic Laboratorieshas very sophisticated equipment for testing the drugs sent for verification. But the police and prosecutors are primarily interested in just one fact: is the drug the substance alleged in the complaint or not? Once this fact has been determined, the report is filed in the docket and the drug returned to the sender, lost for analysis.
If the government is serious about reducing the harm done by drugs in this country, then it should fund the creation of a national drug database. With few additional resources, it could impact on the drug scene in a very big way.
Chemical “signatures” could be determined for each seizure, allowing investigators to trace the distribution routes of controlled substances across the country.
Purity levels could be determined, providing a good gauge by which to evaluate the efficacy of enforcement efforts. And more careful tracking could avoid the “cutting” of seizures by corrupt officials along the chain of evidence. Most importantly, this information could be channelled back to the public. Drug consumers could be alerted to adulterated products and allowed to make their choices on an informed basis.
Like the young woman who died this weekend, most ravers are upwardly mobile and well educated. Many research the drugs they intend to consume through medical journals and the Internet. Some even utilise dietary supplements to reduce the negative impact of the drugs.
Currently, ravers are compelled to use themselves as guinea pigs, comparing experiences with different “brands” of pills on websites dedicated to this purpose. Most are aware that amphetamine, unlike ecstasy, is a dependence-producing substance.
In a survey conducted by Ravesafe, a volunteer group of peer educators, 77% of young people at raves in Durban and Johannesburg said they had taken ecstasy, but less than half said they had taken speed.
If the National Forensic Laboratoriesdata are representative, then the 27% who said they had taken ecstasy but not speed have almost surely consumed a dangerous substance unwittingly. It is this 27% that needs a national drug database.
Since these drugs can be synthesised in relatively simple labs, enforcement efforts aimed at reducing supply are likely to be circumvented by this highly educated group. A more intelligent approach would aim at reducing demand and minimising harm through education. The lives of many productive young people are at stake.
Ted Leggett is the editor of the University of Natal’s Crime and Conflict Quarterly