just when you thought it was safe to go back into the insane asylum...
by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher
July 11, 2023
Letter sent to: Michael Gordon Voss, publisher of Science News
I am a 64-year-old chronic depressive whose uncle's brain was scrambled by ECT.
As such, I am horrified by the fact that Science News is championing invasive electrical therapy for the depressed while simultaneously ignoring the fact that we have outlawed hundreds of godsends that could treat depression without such risks.
Merely chewing the coca leaf daily could fend off the majority of depression in America, as the long-lived Inca could have told us. Laughing gas has obvious uses, though reductionist scientists refuse to see them. MDMA 1 and its hundreds of cousins have the power to elate and inspire without addicting. Even addictive drugs can be used non-addictively to cheer and inspire, though modern Drug War ideology insists otherwise.
Yet Science News continues to publish articles like this that imply that the drugs that we have outlawed do not even exist! This is Christian Science, not science, and it lets the Drug War off the hook for the way it is clearly censoring science -- and causing scientists and authors (like Laura Sanders) to self-censor their work.
The Drug War DOES exist. Prohibition DOES exist. And it is having a profound effect on what Science News will even report or consider.
SN should begin adding a disclaimer to all articles on topics like depression, stating that many options for treatment have been ignored in conformance with Drug War prejudices. Until that happens, your articles on subjects like depression belong in a magazine about Christian Science, not science.
Euthanasia and Shock Therapy in the age of the Drug War
It is bizarre that we should have "the right to die" in a world that outlaws drugs. That means, in effect, that we have a right to die, but we do not have the right to use drugs that might make us want to live. Bad policy is indicated by absurd outcomes, and this is but one of many absurd outcomes that the policy of prohibition foists upon the world -- and yet which remain unaccountably invisible to almost everyone, including almost all proponents of the aforesaid euthanasia.
Alexander Shulgin is a typical westerner when he speaks about cocaine. He moralizes about the drug, telling us that it does not give him "real" power. But so what? Does coffee give him "real" power? Coke helps some, others not. Stop holding it to this weird metaphysical standard.
All of our problems with opioids and opiates could have been avoided had the busybody Chicken Littles in America left well enough alone and let folks continue to smoke regulated opium peaceably in their own homes.
Psychedelic retreats tell us how scientific they are. But science is the problem. Science today insists that we ignore all obvious benefits of drugs. It's even illegal to suggest that psilocybin has health benefits: that's "unproven" according to the Dr. Spocks of science.
The DEA stomped onto Thomas Jefferson's estate in 1987 and confiscated the founding father's poppy plants in violation of everything he stood for, politically speaking. And the TJ Foundation helped them! They sold out Jefferson.
Richard Evans Schultes seems to have originated the harebrained idea (since used by the US Supreme Court to suppress new religions) that you have no right to use drugs in a religious ritual if you did not grow up in a society that had such practices. What tyrannical idiocy!
Scientists are not the experts on psychoactive medicines. The experts are painters and artists and spiritualists -- and anyone else who simply wants to be all they can be in life. Scientists understand nothing of such goals and aspirations.
Governor Kotek is "dealing" with the homelessness problem in Oregon by arresting her way out of it, in fealty to fearmongering drug warriors.
The best long-term treatment for OUD would be to normalize the nightly smoking of opium at home, not to addict the user to government-supplied drugs that render them impervious to the benefits of the poppy plant.
The front page of every mycology club page should feature a protest of drug laws that make the study of mycology illegal in the case of certain shrooms. But no one protests. Their silence makes them drug war collaborators because it serves to normalize prohibition.
In response to a tweet that "some drugs cannot be used wisely for recreational purposes": The problem is, most people draw such conclusions based on general impressions inspired by a media that demonizes drugs. In reality, it's hard to imagine a drug that cannot theoretically be used wisely for recreation at some dose, in some context.
Alexander Shulgin is a typical westerner when he speaks about cocaine. He moralizes about the drug, telling us that it does not give him "real" power. But so what? Does coffee give him "real" power? Coke helps some, others not. Stop holding it to this weird metaphysical standard.