Neither of us have any idea of the side-effects of undefined "frequent", "long-term" use, that's my point, and contrary to what you claimed. No serious harm is apparent from the sparse evidence we do have though.

Bizarre logical reasoning. So because no one has completed a 100 year study on a powerful drug the default should be to feel safe using it long term instead of not using it?

And no there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from long term users who never feel the same after frequent use, even after stopping. But again by your logical reasoning because there's no peer reviewed study on humans that sufficiently backs this up people should ignore that.

What's bizarre is how you repeatedly misconstrue someone pointing out that your claims of harm from MDMA are not supported by evidence, into claims that it's perfectly safe to use with no qualifications.

> And no there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from long term users who never feel the same after frequent use, even after stopping.

People who use one drug often use others, and often concurrently. We use science to disentangle these confounders like this.

I have no problem with people advising caution in using powerful drugs, and advising against them fully if they have a family history of mental health issues. I do have a problem when people try to use flawed science to give this caution a false sense of authority.

> And no there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from long term users who never feel the same after frequent use, even after stopping.

Aging is a thing. Most adults don’t “feel the same” after the passage of a “long term” span of time, regardless of their level of substance use.

Do you have any evidence that it does? Sounds like you're trying to straw-man people because you have zero evidence that isn't just straight up fraud.