Scientists from America’s Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine have claimed that taking ecstasy ‘significantly increases the risk of developing sleep apnea’, after comparing sleeping patterns of 71 young MDMA users with 62 users of other drugs.

The potentially life-threatening condition, where people experience episodes of not breathing when sleeping, also sees sufferers struggling with ‘excessive daytime sleepiness’ and ‘problems with memory and concentration, feeling tired, and experiencing personality changes’, WebMd.com explains. Johns Hopkins’ chief researcher Una D. McCann, M.D issued a triumphant statement announcing the link, declaring; “we know that abusing drugs can have numerous harmful effects. Our findings show yet another reason not to use ecstasy.”

However, the Johns Hopkins School remains notorious for producing politically slanted studies due to the efforts of Dr George Ricaurte, who in 2002 published a damning report claiming that using ecstasy just once caused ‘severe’ brain damage. His findings were used by Congress to justify America’s notoriously draconian Rave Act, and resulted in hundreds of thousands of tax dollars being spent on ‘public service announcements declaring that one hit of ecstasy can destroy your brain’ (Salon.com).

Some 12 months after the original claim Ricaurte sensationally retracted his study, admitting that the monkeys he tested with ‘MDMA’ had been ‘accidentally’ injected with high doses of methamphetamine instead. The Rave Act, however, remained in place without amendment. “It is unknown whether the materials were switched intentionally, whether it was an accident of Ricaurte, or whether the supplier from Research Triangle Park (which was overseen by the DEA) either switched the test materials accidentally or intentionally,” says Wikepedia’s entry on Ricaurte’s error.

“All sides deny responsibility and the results of an investigation are still pending. Rick Doblin, director and founder of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, suggested after the incident that all Ricaurte’s work was politically motivated and should be re-evaluated,” Wiki adds.