
If you want to see how thoroughly the law enforcement approach to drug use has compromised the health of young people, try binge-watching "Deadline: Crime" with Tamron Hall1, a series about homicide in the suburbs. You will find that every other episode has at least one character who is said to have had a "problem" with drugs. Every other episode. There are almost no episodes in which drugs have any direct role in the featured homicide, but there always seems to be at least one cousin of the victim of the day or one red herring of a suspect whom we're told had drug-related issues or struggles, etc. This drug-related factoid is always presented as a dramatic revelation, as if the viewers were supposed to think: "My God, if the principals in the case are involved with drugs, God knows WHAT'S going on here!" This is how America derives entertainment value out of the ruined lives that its own drug policies have brought about.
There are times when it is clearly WRONG to deny kids drugs (whatever the law may say). If your child is obsessed with school massacres, he or she is an excellent candidate for using empathogenic meds ASAP -- or do we prefer even school shootings to drug use???
Until we legalize ALL psychoactive drugs, there will be no such thing as an addiction expert. In the meantime, it's insulting to be told by neuroscience that I'm an addictive type. It's pathologizing my just indignation at psychiatry's niggardly pharmacopoeia.
Almost all talk about the supposed intractability of things like addiction are exercises in make-believe. The pundits pretend that godsend medicines do not exist, thus normalizing prohibition by implying that it does not limit progress. It's a tacit form of collaboration.
To oppose the Drug War philosophically, one has to highlight its connections to both materialism and the psychiatric pill mill. And that's a problem, because almost everyone is either a Drug Warrior or a materialist these days and has a vested interest in the continuation of the psychiatric pill mill.
There is something wrong with a country that thinks it can decide what human beings around the world are allowed to ingest.
I don't have a problem with CBD. But I find that many people like it for the wrong reasons: they assume there is something slightly "dirty" about getting high and that all "cures" should be effected via direct materialist causes, not holistically a la time-honored tribal use.
We might as well fight for justice for Christopher Reeves: he was killed because someone was peddling that junk that we call horses. The question is: who sold Christopher that horse?! Who encouraged him to ride it?!
Being a lifetime patient is not the issue: that could make perfect sense in certain cases. But if I am to be "using" for life, I demand the drug of MY CHOICE, not that of Big Pharma and mainstream psychiatry, who are dogmatically deaf to the benefits of hated substances.
America legalizes alcohol and then outlaws all the drugs that could help prevent and cure alcoholism.
The DEA outlawed MDMA in 1985, thereby depriving soldiers of a godsend treatment for PTSD. Apparently, the DEA staff slept well at night in the early 2000s as American soldiers were having their lives destroyed by IEDs.

(up)