Sir

In the News article “Agony for researchers as mix-up forces retraction of ecstasy study” (Nature 425, 109; 2003) the 'agony' of the embarrassed researchers was dwarfed by that of their primate subjects.

From an animal-welfare standpoint, the affair was tragic. From a scientific standpoint, it was pointless. After all, the researchers themselves have noted that extensive evidence from animal studies already shows that methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, or ecstasy) is dangerous. If more proof of its recreational effects is needed, scientists should focus on the many humans who use such drugs.

Ethical and non-invasive studies are easily conducted and, in fact, are already being carried out to allow scientists to detect early signs of Parkinson's disease or other neurological effects in drug users. In research currently being conducted by J. H. Atkinson at the University of California, San Diego, human users of methamphetamine (speed) — the drug accidentally used in the 'ecstasy study' — are examined for neurological and cognitive function and other clinical features. A similar strategy would apply to the study of MDMA.