MDMA Is Not Ecstasy: The Production of Pharmaceutical Safety through Documents in Clinical Trials.
Medical anthropology quarterly March 1, 2021 Peer reviewed DOI: 10.1111/maq.12548 via PubMed
Summary
Nonprofit efforts to develop MDMA as a prescription pharmaceutical reveal that the drug's safety is not inherent but produced through clinical trial documents. Researchers distinguish pure MDMA from the street drug Ecstasy, but the difference hinges on safety, not substance. Safety emerges from managing which bodies can absorb the drug and which bodily events count as effects, achieved through interconnected documentary practices in clinical trials.
Study at a glance
| Design | ethnography |
|---|---|
| Population | MDMA researchers |
| Key finding | The difference between pure MDMA and Ecstasy is not a distinction in substance but a distinction in safety that must be produced through clinical trial documents. |
Abstract
Nonprofit efforts to develop ±3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)-better known as the street drug Ecstasy-as a prescription pharmaceutical provide the opportunity to examine recent theorizations of pharmaceuticals as fluid objects transformed in new informational and material environments. Drawing from ethnographic research, this article interrogates MDMA researchers' own distinction between MDMA and the street drug Ecstasy. While researchers maintain that pure MDMA is distinct from Ecstasy, this article argues that the difference between the two hangs not on a distinction in substance, but on a distinction in safety that must be produced through the trial. This article tracks the production of safety through the inter-connected work of clinical documents, which manage both which bodies are allowed to absorb the drug and which bodily events count as effects. MDMA's safety emerges from the careful management of relations through these documentary practices.