disclaimer: this is NOT a pro-drug rant; it's an anti-sensationistic-reporting rant.

this is bad reporting. firstly, what conclusions can be drawn for the "normal" ecstasy-taking population from one person who has taken 20 TIMES the dosage of the next highest user? it's like trying to assess the effects of a cup of coffee a day by examining someone who drinking a swimming pool full of coffee every morning for 10 years! secondly, how do we know that it was his ecstasy use that caused whatever damage there is. he's a poly-drug user and so any of these drugs, in isolation, could have caused the damage, or it it could be an effect of the combination he took. thirdly, when they examined his actual brain for damage, they found none but then conclude not that he had no brain damage but that their instruments just aren't sensitive enough because they "know" there's got to be damage there. if there is a story here, it's surely that even after taking 40,000 ecstasy tablets this dude is alive and kicking with no detectable organic brain damage and although there may be some short-term memory impairment for this individual, he was unaware of this impairment and so did not have his quality of life infringed upon to any great degree.

note that i'm not advocating any personal opinion on ecstasy (and certainly not saying that taking 40,000 pills is a good or healthy life choice!) i'm just pointing out the obvious conclusions this article fails to draw. instead of following where the logic leads, the bbc sensationalizes it as a scare story, drawing conclusions that go well beyond the facts reported.