November 29, 2022
The author cordially invites you to keep following Vincent Rado. Nothing he is tweeting is 'wrong,' as far as Brian can see. However, Vincent does emphasize elements of the truth that Brian considers a little off-point at this moment in history, given the Drug Warrior's insistence on demonizing substances. For instance, when we attack the claims made for demonized drugs, Brian thinks that we should ideally do so in a nuanced way that does not give fuel to the Drug Warrior, who is liable to say: "See? Even opponents of the Drug War say that the claims for psychoactive medicines are nonsense!"
In Brian's view, psychedelics have a well-established history of working miracles, and that fact should not be obscured simply because the news media, as always, likes to err in the direction of hyperbole by suggesting that what works for some will work for everybody. For psychedelics, as we know, are not like physical medicines. You cannot just "take them" and wait for something to happen. To promote a successful experience, you need the right set and setting, ideally with the help of an empathic guide who knows something about the psychedelic experience. That said, some people are ready for the experience without even knowing it. In the documentary "Fantastic Fungi," Paul Stamets describes how the whimsical consumption of a few mushrooms in his youth brought about the end of his childhood stuttering, by separating himself FROM himself for just long enough so that Paul could see what he was doing to himself, as it were, and to determine once and for all to stop it.
Er, but now onto the essay proper!
I am tempted to part ways with Vincent Rado on Twitter. That could be a mistake on my part. It could be that I'm just misunderstanding where he's coming from. After all, he lists himself as a founder of the DC Psychedelic Society, so I would think he would be on the same page as myself.
But his latest post seems to be saying that psychedelics do not have any particular potential when it comes to healing, and that's a position that seems strange to me for someone with such a bio. What's more, that stance does not accord with history. As I mentioned in response, we know that Plato got his philosophy of the afterlife from the psychedelic ritual at Eleusis and that the Vedic-Hindu religion was inspired by a psychedelic plant med or fungus1.
Yet, Vincent mocks me for these allusions, asking me if I am a Hindu and if I was in attendance when Plato partook of a psychedelic. Vincent wants to know why I keep harping on these cases.
The reason I bring these things up is because no one else does, Vincent. That's the problem with the Drug War. No one discusses anything but the down sides of psychoactive medicine. That's why I take issue with Vincent's posts which seem to downplay the potential of psychedelics.
They have one benefit right out of the starting gate, in that they are not addictive -- in stark contrast to the Big Pharma meds on which 1 in 4 American women are addicted for life.
I know there are hucksters in the world and that they're going to try to profit from any newly offered medicine or therapy, but let's be cynical about the hucksters, not the medicines, unless we have reason to believe that they really do not work as promised. I also realize that there are no panaceas -- and yet we can't conclude that psychedelics will not be useful for the depressed simply because modern users do not always see their depression lifted. Modern use is typically uninformed use, where folks take psychedelic like a magic pill and want to sit back and have something happen to them. That's not how the magic comes about. That's how bad trips happen.
I have personal experience with psychedelics that also makes me reject the cynicism that Vincent seems to have on this topic. I was delighted by the insights I received as a teenager from a psychedelic substance and it expanded my expectations about the amazing growth potential that psychoactive drugs in general could have under the right situations -- an incredibly greater value than the mind-numbing tricyclics I was taking at the time. That's why it bothers me to see claims about psychedelics being denounced -- even tho, again, I agree that hucksters will always exaggerate. Just because a flatterer says that I am 6 feet tall does not mean that I should not still insist that I am 5'6". I am under no obligation to tell folks that I'm 5'4" just because someone else exaggerates.
I think psychedelics are extraordinary for another reason. My experience with peyote presented my mind with a slide show of Mesoamerican imagery. From a philosophical viewpoint, that tells me something about reality and consciousness, that life is far more interwoven than we may think. It tells me something about ontology, the true fundamental reality in which we dwell. That's extraordinary to me, and so, again, I recoil from attempts to claim that psychedelics are nothing special.
Maybe Vincent wasn't trying to say that -- but that's just the message that I get from reading his posts. The reason that bothers me is because it plays right into the Drug Warriors' hands, who have been censoring all positive mention of such substances for over 100 years. That's why I will play the Hotspur to Vincent's Worcester and keep saying Plato, Plato, Plato, chiefly because I'm the only one who dares mention the fact that psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian mysteries lasted 2,000 consecutive years and inspired a who's who of the western philosophy and history. That's something that needs to be said when Drug Warriors are telling ourselves and our kids that such substances are "junk" and "dope."
Author's Follow-up: November 27, 2022
Victor is probably right: my responses did not directly address the Tweet that he had posted about Time magazine flaunting the wonders of psychedelics in fighting depression. Had I been a little less headstrong, I might have fashioned a more diplomatic response. But the Tweet in question suggested that the power of psychedelics to overcome depression was "BS," and I think it's far too early to draw such conclusions -- just as it may be far too early for Time to announce a psychedelic victory over depression.
But my support for the power of psychedelics in this regard must be seen in light of the new paradigm that I am calling for in treating mental conditions, one wherein a pharmacologically savvy empath 2 combines talk therapy with the use of any and all substances, in combination or not, at various doses, to elicit change according to 1) what is likely to work best for a given client and 2) what the client's goals are in undergoing shamanic treatment, again using any substance or substances available on God's green earth or Humanity's white lab rooms.
In other words, I picture a world full of Alexander Shulgins, the famous pharmacologist who tested over 200 psychoactive medicines in order to determine efficacy in improving the mental status of the user. There's a man who knew what the problem was with "drugs" -- it wasn't "drugs" themselves but "the overpower of curiosity with greed," in other words the instinct to turn a buck off of such medicines.
Because of Shulgin's pharmacological genius, the DEA let him be for the most part, but when folks began sending him drugs to taste for safety, the DEA swooped in and fined him $25,000, as if the last thing the DEA wants is for someone to use such drugs safely.
Related tweet: November 29, 2022
Hey, Vincent. Maybe it's a difference in emphasis. I don't expect any drug to do the job, but my emphasis is on the fact that psychedelics have worked miracles that Big Pharma 34 could never boast.
Author's Follow-up: December 1, 2022
Speaking of psychedelic benefits, check out the work of Alexander Shulgin.
Check out the conversations that I have had so far with the movers and shakers in the drug-war game -- or rather that I have TRIED to have. Actually, most of these people have failed to respond to my calls to parlay, but that need not stop you from reading MY side of these would-be chats.
I don't know what's worse, being ignored entirely or being answered with a simple "Thank you" or "I'll think about it." One writes thousands of words to raise questions that no one else is discussing and they are received and dismissed with a "Thank you." So much for discussion, so much for give-and-take. It's just plain considered bad manners these days to talk honestly about drugs. Academia is living in a fantasy world in which drugs are ignored and/or demonized -- and they are in no hurry to face reality. And so I am considered a troublemaker. This is understandable, of course. One can support gay rights, feminism, and LGBTQ+ today without raising collegiate hackles, but should one dare to talk honestly about drugs, they are exiled from the public commons.
Somebody needs to keep pointing out the sad truth about today's censored academia and how this self-censorship is but one of the many unacknowledged consequences of the drug war ideology of substance demonization.
The real value of Erowid is as a research tool for a profession that does not even exist yet: the profession of what I call the pharmacologically savvy empath: a compassionate life counselor with a wide knowledge of how drugs can (and have) been used by actual people.
The drug war is being used as a wrecking ball to destroy democratic freedoms. It has destroyed the 4th amendment and freedom of religion and given the police the right to confiscate the property of peaceful and productive citizens.
The "acceptable risk" for psychoactive drugs can only be decided by the user, based on what they prioritize in life. Science just assumes that all users should want to live forever, self-fulfilled or not.
In the 19th century, poets got together to use opium "in a series of magnificent quarterly carouses" (as per author Richard Middleton). When we outlaw drugs, we outlaw free expression.
Over 45% of traumatic brain injuries are caused by horseback riding (ABC News). Tell your representatives to outlaw horseback riding and make it a federal offence to teach a child how to ride! Brought to you by the Partnership for a Death Free America.
AI is like almost every subject under the sun: it takes on a very different and ominous meaning when we view it in light of the modern world's unprecedented wholesale outlawing of psychoactive medicine.
Big pharma drugs are designed to be hard to get off. Doctors write glowingly of "beta blockers" for anxiety, for instance, but ignore that fact that such drugs are hard -- and even dangerous -- to get off. We have outlawed all sorts of less dependence-causing alternatives.
Antidepressants might be fine in a world where drugs were legal. Then it would actually be possible to get off them by using drugs that have inspired entire religions. In the age of prohibition, however, an antidepressant prescription is usually a life sentence.
I'm told that science is completely unbiased today. I guess I'll have to go back and reassess my doubts about Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
If there is an epidemic of "self-harm," prohibitionists never think of outlawing razor blades. They ask: "Why the self-harm?" But if there is an epidemic of drug use which they CLAIM is self-harm, they never ask "Why the self-harm?" They say: "Let's prohibit and punish!"
The real value of Erowid is as a research tool for a profession that does not even exist yet: the profession of what I call the pharmacologically savvy empath: a compassionate life counselor with a wide knowledge of how drugs can (and have) been used by actual people.