[Contents]
[Appendix 3][Appendix 5]
1970
1972
1982
1984
1985
The first opinion is that such a drug cannot be placed in any schedule. And if that is not acceptable to the administrator, then into Schedule III, IV or V, depending upon the magnitude of the less-than-high abuse potential.
[The chronology of the hearings was as follows:]
June 10, 1985: Los Angeles, California
July 10,11, 1985: Kansas City, Missouri
October 8,9,10,11, Nov. 1, 1985: Washington, DC.
February 14, 1986: (submitting briefs, findings, conclusions, and oral
arguments) Washington, DC.
1986
1987
1988
These reversals were based on the temporary scheduling status of MDMA. The vacating of the permanent scheduling Grinspoon v. DEA (1st Circuit 1987, 828 F.2d 881), coupled with these successful appeals of the temporary scheduling action, will certainly serve to allow further challenge to be made to any and all legal action that took place prior to the final and unchallenged placement of MDMA in Schedule I on March 23, 1988.
1990
1991
It was concluded that all that was required would be that the statute be reasonably certain, so that a person of common intelligence need not guess at its meaning. They found against the appeal
1994
Physiologically, all subjects experienced an elevation in blood pressure and pulse rate, with a peaking on the average at about one hour. At the sixth hour, most subjects were at or below their pre-dose levels, and at 24 hours all were within their normal ranges. Eye dilation was seen in all subjects, more than half had jaw clench and an increased jaw reflex, which persisted in one subject to the 24 hour point. Some neurological reflexes were enhanced (deep tendon) or equivocal (planter reflex), and there were signs of incoordination (finger-nose testing, gait) in some subjects, giving a strong warning against motor vehicle operation. One subject was nauseous, with vomiting, but there were no difficulties with either urination or defecation, and there were neither headaches nor insomnia. Appetite was suppressed in all subjects to varying degrees.
At the psychological level, all subjects reported a heightened sensual awareness, and three reported sexual arousal. It is concluded that MDMA produces remarkably consistent psychological effects that are transient, and is free of clinically apparent major toxicity.
The author has concluded that the visual effects of MDMA intoxication were typical of the intoxications from the classical hallucinogens such as mescaline with imagery characteristic of drug-induced hallucinations, as well as those induced by isolation and stress. These are mollified when attention is directed towards external events. There were, nonetheless, no abnormal profiles on the psychological tests. It is felt that the MDMA intoxication is neither uniformly controllable nor uniformly predictable.
The toxicology study showed MDMA to be one of the more toxic of the drugs studied, in most animals second only to MDA. The average LD-50's given were 97, 49 and 98 mg/Kg (for the mouse, rat and guinea pig, resp. - following i.p. administration), and 16 and 26 mg/Kg (for the dog and monkey, i.v. administration).
Behavioural studies in dog and monkey were made over the dosage ranges of 5-50 and 10-75 mg/Kg respectively. These levels evoked a broad range of motor activity, autonomic activity and CNS activity in both animals (the dog more than the monkey) but the ranges studied included the lethal dose levels. Interestingly the monkey showed behaviour interpreted as hallucinations for MDMA, whereas mescaline (an acknowledged hallucinogenic compound) produced no such behaviour at doses more than two times higher (200 mg/Kg i.v.). Structure-activity relationships are discussed.
Blood Urine Bile Gastric (total) MDMA 1.46 13.7 1.98 414 mg. MDA .03 (present)
Neither diazepam nor nordiazepam were found.