You would think that this subject has been covered extensively in our bookstores and libraries, by the way. But you would be wrong. Most non-fiction authors censor themselves when it comes to drugs and so never connect the dots between drug policy and American capitalism. Take George Tyler, for instance. In 2016, he published "Billionaire Democracy: The Hijacking of the American Political System.14" That's a very promising-sounding title in this context! And yet the reader of that book will search in vain for references to drug prohibition. Tyler fails to note that the unprecedented outlawing of the human being's birthright to Mother Nature was brought about by the billionaires' control of the media. It turns out that the billionaire's power to control our minds through propaganda on this subject is so thorough and effective that it has rendered drug prohibition invisible, even for authors like George for whom the topic is so glaringly relevant. 
Judging from research articles, they do not even teach the many obvious benefits of drugs in med school.
I will gladly respect the police once we remove them from Gestapo duty by ending the war on drugs. Police should also learn to live on a budget, without deriving income from confiscating houses and dormitories, etc.
The press is having a field day with the Matthew Perry story. They love to have a nice occasion to demonize drugs. I wonder how many decades must pass before they realize that people are killed by ignorance and a corrupted drug supply, not by the drugs themselves.
The New York Times gets it wrong again. Yes, kratom, like all drugs, has downsides. The problem is not kratom, it's drug prohibition which limits choice. Nor are young people the only stakeholders in the debate, as the Times always assumes.
Researchers insult our intelligence when they tell us that drugs like MDMA and opium and laughing gas have not been proven to work. Everyone knows they work. That's precisely why drug warriors hate them.
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.
People say shrooms should not be used by those with a history of "mental illness." But that's one of the greatest potential benefits of shrooms! (They cured Stamets' teenage stuttering.) Some folks place safety first, but if I did that, I'd die long before using mother nature.
Why don't those politicians understand what hateful colonialism they are practicing? Psychedelics have been used for millennia by the tribes that the west has conquered -- now we won't even let folks talk honestly about such indigenous medicines.
In a free world, almost all depressed individuals could do WITHOUT doctors: these adult human beings could handle their own depression with the informed intermittent use of a wide variety of psychoactive substances.
William James claimed that his constitution prevented him from having mystical experiences. The fact is that no one is prevented from having mystical experiences provided that they are willing to use psychoactive substances wisely to attain that end.
(up)