New at Reason
In a review from reason's April issue, Jacob Sullum reveals how a drug becomes a "bad drug," in the mind of the public—and attacks the damage that the process has wrought.
Comments to "New at Reason":
Episiarch | March 20, 2008, 9:28am | #
What matters is the spell scrawled by a government-appointed medicine man who can transform demons into angels with the stroke of a pen.This is the crux of it: state control.
I get a prescription for my pain for Vicodin from my state licensed doctor (and pay him) and then buy the Vicodin from a state-licensed pharmacy (and pay them), I'm a good person.
If I buy Vicodin from somebody on the street to alleviate my pain, I'm a criminal. And the doctor didn't get his cut, and the state didn't get their cut.
LarryA | March 20, 2008, 9:43am | #
Although it is not always easy to decipher Califano’s meaning in this overwrought, carelessly written, weakly documented, self-contradictory, and deeply misleading anti-drug screedAw, tell us what you really think. ;-)
J sub D | March 20, 2008, 10:19am | #
“Today’s teens’ pot is not their parents’ pot,” he explains. “It is far more potent.…The average levels of THC jumped from less than 1 percent in the mid-1970s to more than 7 percent in 2005.”Every sigle fucking time I hear this monumemental pile of diarrheitc shit, I want to slap the mouth that is spewing it. My response to that overused and never documented claim is Bullshit, Bullshit, Lying Bullshit!
Now that that is out of my system, excellent article, Jacob. Can we make it required reading for drug warriors?
Didn't think so.
Sam Grove | March 20, 2008, 10:29am | #
I managed to get high quite a few times while I was in prison on marijuana charges.The only drug problem I saw there was when some guys managed to get hold of some grain alcohol and became violent.
P Brooks | March 20, 2008, 10:32am | #
There must be something wrong with me. Every time I read something like this, I think, "Well, that should convince somebody, somewhere, that the war on drugs is totally irrational and pointless."But it just doesn't seem to work that way. People still run around in a panic and try to ban anything and everything. Instead of trying to think rationally about why the jails need to be full of essentially harmless drug users, they spend their time trying to raise (tax) money to build more jails.
People are morons.
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 11:00am | #
JsubD,that overused and never documented claim is Bullshit
I don't know.
Shouldn't market forces lead to innovative improvements in the product.
My impression while I smoked pot (haven't touched the stuff in decades) was that the trend towards better weed was obvious and widespread.
I would be surprised if the trend didn't continue.
Mike Laursen | March 20, 2008, 11:00am | #
People have an immediate negative emotional reaction to information they don't like. Some are listening, though, and will process the new information later, after they get over the initial reaction -- unless someone keeps pushing on them, keeping the initial reaction going.Mike Laursen | March 20, 2008, 11:01am | #
In other words, give them the info and walk away for a while. A lot of people will eventually come around on their own time scale.Rhywun | March 20, 2008, 11:05am | #
What an infuriating article. Infuriating because people actually think like this. Argggghhh! The damage done by evil frauds like Califano is incalculable. But it seems to be human nature to look down on drug (ab)users, so I'm not holding my breath waiting for any sanity on this issue from those in power.R C Dean | March 20, 2008, 11:08am | #
The average levels of THC jumped from less than 1 percent in the mid-1970s to more than 7 percent in 2005Number 1, I don't think this is true based on personal experience.
Number 2, since they are also telling us that marijuana smoke is full of carcinogens, wouldn't stronger pot, requiring fewer tokes, reduce the cancer risk and be a good thing?
Dave W. | March 20, 2008, 11:17am | #
A lot of people will eventually come around on their own time scale.A good message to the Mike Laursens Of The World!
J sub D | March 20, 2008, 11:20am | #
My impression while I smoked pot (haven't touched the stuff in decades) was that the trend towards better weed was obvious and widespread.I was thinking about that after I posted. The type of folks I smoked with, the kind of stuff we smoked, are hardly staistically valid samples.
Is it possiible in that from '74-'82, sailors had access to significantly better weed than, college students, white collar workers, et al? With extremely rare exceptions, we were not importers, but bought on the same market as everyone else. As a group, we may have been more discriminating due to travel experiences, but in the states we procured ounces, pounds, and kilos in town.
The potency of what I was smoking then was, at a minimum, as THC laden as what I can get in Detroit today. I am no longer as involved with the scene as I was then so that needs to be considered. That all said, I deny that you can find reefer that is even twice as potent as the good stuff from my youth, or seven times the average stuff.
BC | March 20, 2008, 11:35am | #
“This undertaking demands the kind of attention we have committed to keeping chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons out of our nation. Marijuana, cocaine, heroin, Ecstasy, and other illegal drugs have demonstrated a far deadlier capability for mass destruction.”So this asshole is implying that drugs are worse than a nuclear attack. This has got to be the single biggest dumb fuck argument I've heard in my entire life. This man is utterly fucking batshit insane.
Angry Mike Laursens of the World | March 20, 2008, 11:38am | #
A good message to the Mike Laursens Of The World!Hey, what the @#&* do you mean by that?! (Oh, sorry. Overreacted. We've calmed down now.)
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 11:53am | #
JsubD,Like I said, I haven't touched the stuff in decades...but in the spirit of discussion.
That all said, I deny that you can find reefer that is even twice as potent as the good stuff from my youth, or seven times the average stuff.
The average stuff from your youth could be more than half as potent as the average stuff today and that would not refute the claim (which when made should include a citation, if it is based on any reality).
7% THC may not be subjectively 7 times as potent as 1%.
The average can move up due to less bad shit without the quality of the good shit changing.
Also, pot smoking is one of those funny things.
Your body doesn't really develop tolerance for the intoxicating effects, but your mind does. Because dope has such a long half-life (days long instead of hours), people who smoke pot regularly are essentially a little bit high all the time. The more they smoke, the more their baseline high moves up, and the more they need to make it feel like they are getting high.
Whether or not the claim about more potent dope is true, of course, is beside the point.
Neu Mejican,
Professional Dope Smoker (retired).
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 11:58am | #
JsubD,The point about the subjective tolerance wasn't clear.
Because the frequency of usage significantly changes your subjective experience of the dope's potency. It makes that subjective judgment very difficult to rely on for evaluating the potency of the dope.
zig zag man | March 20, 2008, 12:04pm | #
If IThere, fixed it to match my situation.
J sub D | March 20, 2008, 12:18pm | #
Meu Mejican,Yeah, I admiited I'm not a statistically valid sample. I suspect there is NO statistically valid sample on reefer potency variations over time. I stand by my statement
I deny that you can find reefer that is even twice as potent as the good stuff from my youth, or seven times the average stuff*.
* Average stuff (for me) being "columbian". I didn't smoke "dirt weed".
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 12:21pm | #
JsubD,I suspect there is NO statistically valid sample on reefer potency variations over time.
Actually, I would be surprised if the DEA doesn't do regular testing on the dope that they seize. It should be a fairly representative sample of the market.
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 12:24pm | #
* Average stuff (for me) being "columbian". I didn't smoke "dirt weed".So JsubD is really just The Dope Commonsewer?
I suspect dirt weed is closer to the average than what you smoke. Who knows if dirt weed is substantially stronger than it used to be.
Not me.
Fred | March 20, 2008, 12:25pm | #
If IYou are required to dispose of it when no longer needed, if you take it years later you are a criminal. People should not be self medicating, an MD should evaluate your need for meds.
Misuse of drugs is imoral, freedom is drug free, let freedom ring!
Neu Mejican | March 20, 2008, 12:27pm | #
You are required to dispose of it when no longer needed, if you take it years later you are a criminal. People should not be self medicating, an MD should evaluate your need for meds.That is a statement screaming for a citation.
I am gonna go out on a limb and call bullshit until I see a link or text of a specific statute.
Isaac Bartram | March 20, 2008, 12:33pm | #
Neu MejicanI think Fred was trolling satirically or, maybe, satirically trolling.
TallDave | March 20, 2008, 3:23pm | #
overwrought, carelessly written, weakly documented, self-contradictory, and deeply misleading anti-drug screed,LOL Don't hold back, dude. Tell us what you really think!
Not that I disagree.
Quixote | March 20, 2008, 11:02pm | #
Those who falter and those who fall must pay the price. I will not rest until they are all behind bars.....Elyse | March 21, 2008, 3:12pm | #
Nice article.Maybe Califano wants to explain how I got A+s on my last (university) exams, cause, you know, I went to class stoned, studied stoned, and even took the test stoned. Awwww my poor memory and concentration skills! I think it impaired my emotional development, too.
Haha....how can impaired "emotional development" be a short-term effect? Propaganda bullshit.
Douglas Gray | March 21, 2008, 8:50pm | #
The root of demonization is this:I recently spoke with a man whose son started taking illegal substances when he was 14; the boy is now 21 and still struggling. This man can't admit that his son is messed up; it is all the drugs fault, the boy would be happy, successful and well adjusted if not for the drugs.
This reaction still persists in a lot of people.
There is only one serious accident for every 17 million miles of driving. It is that safe, but bad things do happen. Same with drugs. There are a multi-million drugs uses, legal and illegal, every day. In a few cases, bad things happen, but even then the drugs are not the sole cause.
People don't get it. Bad outcomes are often the result of multiple causes, but only one is often singled out.
The other war, the war on drugs, is taking too long to go away. Califano is one reason why. The old fraud keeps on writing books and getting fed funds. His CASA says it all. He is only about ABuse. There can be nothing else. Columbia U should erect a memorial fountain in his name. Shape it like a urinal and fill it with left over urinalysis samples. His phonyscience has left quite a legacy for us to laugh at in the future.
J Golden Rockwell | March 22, 2008, 10:52pm | #
"If the devout are less inclined than the doubters to use mood-altering drugs, how is it that mostly Mormon Utah leads the country in antidepressant prescriptions?"Jacob, next time don't mistake a headline for research.
Utah leads the country in per-capita use of prescriptions anti-depressants because Mormons generally don't SELF-medicate.
Most non-Mormons happily slug themselves up with booze, dope and just about every herb that they can chew, burn or boil. We don't. It's against our religion to do so. We don't even drink coffee or tea, much less use so-called "recreational" drugs as alcohol or tobacco.
Since we don't drown our sorrows like most people, prescriptions are our only option when some kind of medication is needed. The same studies that show Utah at the top of the Pharmacy Phrequent Phlyer list also show us at the BOTTOM of per-capita rates of ABUSING prescription drugs, and we tend to get off of anti-depressants faster than folks in other states.
I would also point out that only 60% of the people here are Mormons. A lot of the people on mood drugs are non-Mormons.
Al Francher | March 23, 2008, 9:39am | #
Did somebody try to slander the Mormons again? You said "generally don't SELF- medicate", well then ,medicate,they still do. A doc"s script makes it different? Sounds ,to me, that you drank the kool-aid of self delusion. But then ,such is life in a theocrazy.