Ecstasy for PTSD in Australia battle for minds

Pro drug trial

Ecstasy to relieve war stress

THE drug ecstasy could be used by war veterans to alleviate stress, says an Australian Democrats MP.

South Australian Democrat Sandra Kanck says the drug's key ingredient, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), could be used to alleviate post-traumatic stress disorders.

"This is not a new idea, it is being trialled in the United States and Israel for war veterans and in Spain for rape victims," she said in a statement.

"It's not a frivolous idea.

"Studies by the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2003 and 2007 have shown that post-traumatic stress is a real issue for veterans of the Gulf and Vietnam wars.

"Veterans, like other Australians, are already being prescribed powerful drugs like highly addictive morphine for pain relief and benzodiazepines for post traumatic stress disorder - both are potentially addictive and dangerous drugs.

"Most drugs can be dangerous but if they are used in a controlled way they can be medically beneficial."
go here for more of this
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,23907284-921,00.html

The really interesting part of this, is that two different Australian papers reported the same story with two totally different headlines but basically the same reporting done. A clear indication there is bias in both papers. So what's behind this? Is it what's in the best interest of the PTSD wounded Australian solders or what's in the best interest of the reporter's views?



Con drug trial

RSL rejects calls to use ecstasy on stressed war veterans
Steve Larkin
June 23, 2008 03:25pm

PROPOSALS to use the drug ecstasy on war veterans to alleviate stress have drawn a lukewarm response from the Returned Services League.

RSL national president Bill Crews said he was reluctant to support a call from an Australian Democrats MP to investigate using the drug on war veterans.
Major General Crews said the proposal was problematic.

"When you are talking about ingredients of illegal drugs in the process of mental health treatment, you are starting to raise quite some issues. Even if it was proven to be beneficial in some areas, how do you actually control it?" he said.

"It's a matter that would be best examined by those qualified to make a decision about its validity or otherwise.

"And until I heard the advice of those specialists and the reasons for that advice, certainly I would be somewhat reluctant to support it.

"We would not agree with a proposal until such time as it was thoroughly investigated scientifically and the specialists in this field, particularly psychiatrists, were confident that there was a case."
go here for more of this
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23908072-953,00.html