Then vs. Now comparison · thenVsNow/tnv-storm-08

MDMA After the FDA Rejection: A 1968 Pattern or a 2024 Delay?

Education, not medical advice. Drafts and study material from an independent research library. Citations on this page were checked on Oct 13, 2026; claims in the body text and organizational sources are still under review. What was checked.

Then (1987), Storming Heaven

MDMA After the FDA Rejection: A 1968 Pattern or a 2024 Delay?

Stevens's central argument: the first wave was killed not by scientific failure but by political decision. The MDMA FDA rejection of August 2024 raises the question: is the history repeating? Or is the 2024 rejection a genuine methodological problem requiring more science?
partially-confirmed
The 2024 FDA rejection of MDMA-assisted therapy application is structurally different from the 1968 scheduling. In 1968: the research was producing positive results; scheduling was a political decision motivated by countercultural association; no scientific advisory committee recommended scheduling. In 2024: the FDA's Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee voted 9-2 against approval on grounds of efficacy data quality and safety monitoring concerns, including unblinding (participants could tell if they received MDMA) and potential for therapist boundary violations. The concerns are genuine methodological problems, not political pretexts. The FDA requested an additional Phase 3 trial. The MAPS-affiliated sponsor is conducting it. The delay is real; the research is not stopped. The 1968 pattern was: research stopped by law. The 2024 pattern is: research slowed by methodology. Different in kind.

Sources