yes, and that means party goers don't do any of them at parties.

I would define "adult" as being old enough to understand that actions have consequences beyond ones own self.

The same can be said for most anaesthetics, a good number of prescription medications, shellfish, peanuts, etc. MDMA is no more inherantly toxic than most compounds we consume in our daily lives. I certain wouldn't recommend people take it daily, or even weekly for extended peiods of time, but as an occasionally used substance, the risk of harm is minor (if, as you said, it is taken sensibly) and anyone who does probably has some underlying psychological problems they need sorting out.

Also, in most fatal cases involving MDMA, the concentration of the drug in the bloodstream were anbormally high; well above the level expected from people taking the drug recreationally.

Yes. The first aid tents at our parties mostly treat people for dehydration. For anyone with common sense, this will be the worst they face, since if they're not experienced enough to recognise the symptoms coming over them themselves (and the drug doesn't make you out of it enough to not be able to notice the signs if you know what to look for), they will be with at least one sober person who CAN recognise these symptoms.

Anyone who doesn't take sensible precautions with drugs is an idiot, just like someone who doesnt take sensible precautions with firearms, or with motor vehicles. These idiots are the ones you read about in the paper, and who bring down a bad image on everyone else. Similarly you don't read about all the thousands of sensible drivers in the paper, you read about the hoon who had a 150Km/hr head-on-collision while dragging with his mates, or you read about the gun owner who leaves a loaded handgun in a draw within reach of the toddler who manages to shoot themself in the head.

Pot isn't particularly habit-forming, as many studies have shown. Amphetamines (speed, meth, P, etc.) certainly are. In fact they're very addictive, but they're not common party-drugs around here. I was referring to LSD (acid), MDMA (extacy) and THC (pot).

Psychological dependance is not so cut-and-dried however. It isn't the drug, per se, that the dependence is based on, but the "escape" from reality. Take the drugs away, and the person will turn to gambling, or some other from of mental addiction unless the underlying reason for their need to escape is met. Blaming the drug for this is like blaming the gun for a murder.

I certainly wouldn't disagree with that at all. However I was discussing party drugs, which is why I neglected to mention the big nasties like amphetamines and opiates. These are certainly present at raves (moreso amphetamines than opiates), but take a back seat to the hallucinogens.

When I was 18, and failing to come to terms with living with AD (I didn't know I had it), I went for the "big escape". I spent a good deal of time homeless (by choice), moving from one group of druggies to the next. I watched a lot of friends succumb to their vices over the years. Some died, or killed themselves, some quite literally went insane. So yes, it's fair to say I've seen the results of meth use (though, the worst off were the junkies).

Incidentally, of those of us still around (we're in our 30s now), about half of us still take drugs recreationally.

Oh, and I was (as I assume you were) referring to heavy use. I've known people who have been taking meth for decades (once, maybe twice a year), with no noticable effects.

Well according to the wiki, MDMA has not been conclusively shown to cause brain damage. Extra high doses for prolonged periods of time in rats causes serious damage due to increased free radical damage in the brain. This, however, is with "extra high doses", "prolonged periods of time" and in rats. The experiments were designed to study these effects specifically and therefore do not speak to the potential for these effects in normal, controlled use in humans. i.e. it is unknown if these values scale down as you suggest. You can't assume that it's "killing them slower" at lower dosages. It could just as easily have no ill-effects at all.

You do realize things like that stack right? One day brings you one day closer to death, and one dose of some poisonous drug brings you another (at least) day closer to death.

Yes, but guess what, not everyone thinks that living up to a 100 years is good per se.
Life is a continuous sequence of choices which have repercussions, as long as you're aware of the consequences there really is nothing bad you can do.
Some people like to gamble, they know the risk but nontheless they do it.
Some people like getting high with alcohol every once in a while, they know the risks but decide that the dubious -0.001% to life can be bargained for the experience.
Who are you to judge what is good for them? Maybe it's you being a bit too closed minded?

[edit]
And, philosophical babble aside, i believe this to be quite correct:

When I said the drug, I meant the drug we were discussing - which was meth - not any drug.

They've been studying the effects of amphetamines for decades. The neurotoxic effects have only been shown in high dosages (and that was in rodent tests). You're actually more likely to die inderectly through the drug use - lack of concentration can cause accidents, as can sleep deprivation.

Doing meth every day isn't light drug use.

Well, I haven't taken meth at that high a frequency for almost 10 years.

It isn't the hard-drug use that is the problem so much as hard drug-use. And that inludes alcohol.

Your opinion is duly noted doctor.

I Can't deny that. Though there are ways of greatly reducing the chance of ODing.

I like chocolate

Or put another way, If you need a harmful substance to feel good, something is very wrong

Don't argue with druggies. They never are addicted. They can stop whenever they want. It doesn't harm them. They are in total control. Everyone should do drugs, it makes us stronger people.