Retraction of the Month

The Baltimore Sun reports:

Researchers who studied the effects of the drug Ecstasy on animals are retracting their report in a major scientific journal after discovering a labeling mix-up caused them to use a different drug.

Comments

[James]

The irony is: black market purchases of an illicit vice often leads to an unpure product or something else entirely. Here we have a study on an illicit vice that was something else entirely.

[Plutarck]

That's gotta be embarrassing.

[joe]

No biggie. That happens all the time.

[R.C. Dean]

Quebec, at any rate, needs no help in creating its own little internal quagmire. New Hampshire is, I believe, importing its political problems from Boston and New York in the form of displaced leftists. Much like Vermont.

[clark]

At least he didn't drag Vermont into quagmires in New Hampshire or Quebec.

[James]

If Dean gets medical MJ into the USDA for review, it could forever be stuck in a quagmire!

[SteveInClearwater]

Too bad it's too late to reverse legislation passed in light of the original study conclusions, which moved Ecstasy to Schedule One and mandated lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for both possession and sale at federal level and in many states.

The amount of pills seized each year (literally millions) tells us that upwards of ten times that many are consumed in the same time period and for some reason the DEA can't explain, only a handful of truly adverse use reports come out each year. And those upon closer examination always involve use of other drugs and/or improper dosing, lack of proper water and cooling etc.

You know, those common sense safety tips that drug warriors discourage your kids from reading about on the dreaded Internet.

ruefully,

Steve

[Phill]

As long as they find something wrong with these substances, what difference does science make?
And Steve, they are likely to control/outlaw/schedule any drug that can give you a buzz if enough people are doing it to annoy the FEDS.