Homepage of the Drug War Philosopher, Brian Quass
blog icon orange rss icon with stylized radio waves bird icon for twitter bird icon for twitter substack icon


back navigation arrow forward navigation arrow


The Make-Believe World of Modern Healthcare

A look at the hypocritical research interests of the staff at the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics

by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher

February 15, 2026



Imagine the bizarre pass to which drug-war "logic" has brought us in the year 2026. We are now fighting for the right of the depressed to assisted suicide, without even mentioning, let alone denouncing, the drug prohibition that keeps them depressed in the first place! How do you parody a situation that itself is the parody of all proper ways of thinking about life and the world!

Imagine, the psychiatric field has been ignoring all outlawed psychoactive medicines all these years, pretending that they do not exist -- or worse, that they are copouts. Yes, anything is a copout for which the psychiatric industry does not get a cut.


Line of people passing condemned building for 'Beneficial Drugs' -- continuing on to building for Assisted Suicide instead.
Modern drug attitudes are beyond parody. Depressed westerners demand that the state use drugs to kill them, but they don't demand their right to the drugs that could make them want to live.




Our "professionals" in the healthcare field live in a land of Christian Science make-believe, a psychologically naive world in which so-called "drugs" have no positive uses for anyone, anywhere, at any time, for any reason, in any dose, ever.

To illustrate what I mean, let's look at some of the "research interests" of the staff at MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics as listed on the website of the University of Chicago. I will be polite and not mention names, but the first on the list is a certain MD/PhD who focuses on "ethics education." Imagine that! Ethics education! The entire healthcare establishment owes its size and power to its totally unethical support and promotion of drug prohibition, which made them the only game in town for healthcare.

Then we have a combined MD and MA who focuses on "vulnerable patient populations." Hmm... Vulnerable populations? How about the depressed who are going to kill themselves because we have denied them medicines that could cheer them up in a trice?

Next, we have a PhD who claims to be interested in "patient autonomy." What a joke! If we had healthcare autonomy, most of us would not be patients in the first place! The healthcare establishment owes its power and size to the outlawing of just two drugs: namely, opium and coca.

Here's a PhD interested in "moral psychology." If only there were such a beast. The healthcare industry is blind to common-sense psychology because of its penchant for drug prohibition and behaviorism. Humph! Moral psychology in an age when we are working hard to keep laughing gas and coca from the depressed -- when we are working hard to keep brain-focusing drugs from those with dementia! If these are ethics, they surely are so only in the Machiavellian sense of that word.

Here is an MD who professes an interest in "Decision making capacity in Alzheimer’s and related dementias." Why is no MD interested in the fact that drug prohibition has outlawed all the medicines that can sharply focus the brain? Why? Because we have demonized them based on our hatred of the sorts of people that we think are using them.

The first thing you notice about the Medical Ethics Center is that it is obviously an extremely expensive high-rise. The money comes, of course, from the hundreds of millions of disempowered who have been turned into patients for life by drug prohibition. This is the Mount Olympus whence the gods of medical science purport to tell us what is ethical? Please!


Picture of the expensive MacLean Center of Clinical Medical Ethics.
Any real center for medical ethics should be all about ending drug prohibition, which denies us the right to take care of our own health.




My letter to Director Peter Angelos, MD, PhD

Good day, Dr. Angelos,

With respect, the most unethical thing about modern medicine for me is its refusal to push back against the drug prohibition which denies us the right to heal and which turns us into "patients" in the first place.

As a 67-year-old chronic depressive, I have spent a lifetime now on Big Pharma drugs that are far harder to kick than heroin 1, all because drug prohibition denied me the right to take care of my own health as I saw fit. So I have difficulty understanding why any group devoted to medical ethics is not screaming out for drug re-legalization, by pointing out that there are far more stakeholders in the drug debate than the white American young people whom we refuse to educate about safe use.

We have now reached the point where the depressed are demanding the right to assisted suicide!!! Surely they should instead be demanding their right to take care of their own health, to use the kinds of substances that could make them want to live!

Drug prohibition also outlaws drugs that can help people focus their minds. We would rather have dementia patients suffer than to use drugs. That's as unethical as it gets.

I consider drug prohibition to be nothing less than a crime against humanity for denying me the right to heal as a depressed person

If any of this means anything to you, I invite you to read more of my hard-earned thoughts on this subject: No one would need assisted suicide if we ended drug prohibition: what Claire Brosseau's case tells us about the warped mindset of the west when it comes to drugs

Best wishes,
Brian

PS I am trying to create a nonprofit called "Depressed Americans for Ending Drug Prohibition," to put politicians on notice that there are millions of silenced stakeholders in the drug debates.



Author's Follow-up:

February 16, 2026



This is not an attack on individuals, nor is the MacLean Center any different than hundreds of other medical behemoths which owe their very existence to drug prohibition. Yet I scorn to soften "my tone" insofar as I am pointing out a grave injustice. I am standing up for a vulnerable population: the hundreds of millions of human beings who go without godsend medicine (and hence their sacred right to heal) thanks to the drug prohibition whose downsides are completely ignored by the medical ethics industry. In other words, the medical ethics industry itself is fundamentally UN-ethical in the age of drug prohibition. That industry is part of the problem insofar as it is helping to normalize drug prohibition by pretending that it does not exist.

And why SHOULD they complain, after all? Drug prohibition is paying the bills.

And someone has to start screaming. Thanks to the absurd logic of drug prohibition, we have reached the point where psychiatrists are now defending assisted suicide for the depressed! Why? Because they refuse to even mention those substances that have been outlawed by xenophobic and racist politicians. We are, of course, meant to fear and hate those substances -- so much so, that we would now prefer that the depressed DIE rather than use them. So we have gone from "better dead than red," to "better dead than to use drugs."

This is the absurd pass to which the choplogic of drug prohibition has brought us, and yet we continue to follow the Pied Piper of Prohibition off the edge of the cliff.

One answer is to organize the many demographics that are overlooked stakeholders in drug prohibition -- the many who live diminished lives because we have decided to judge all psychoactive substances (with the usual hypocritical exceptions, of course) based on what we imagine to be their worst possible use -- as for instance the use of opium by the Chinese to ensnare our white females and so forth.

Drug Prohibition is really the triumph of stupidity. It is the abandonment of all principle in the name of prehistoric fearmongering. It amazes me that no one noticed, even back in 1914, with the effective outlawing of both cocaine and opium, that drug prohibition outlawed the basic right of human beings to take care of their own health as they saw fit. Were all Americans really too philosophically bamboozled to notice this fact and to tremble at the realization?











Notes:

1: Heroin versus Antidepressants DWP (up)




read more essays here





Ten Tweets

against the hateful war on US




Most psychoactive substance use can be judged as recreational OR medicinal OR both. The judgements are not just determined by the circumstances of use, either, but also by the biases of those doing the judging.

Every time I see a psychiatrist, I feel like I'm playing a game of make-believe. We're both pretending that hundreds of demonized medicines do not exist and could be of no use whatsoever.

There are plenty of "prima facie" reasons for believing that we could eliminate most problems with drug and alcohol withdrawal by chemically aided sleep cures combined with using "drugs" to fight "drugs." But drug warriors don't want a fix, they WANT drug use to be a problem.

The benefits of outlawed drugs read like the ultimate wish-list for psychiatrists. It's a shame that so many of them are still mounting a rear guard action to defend their psychiatric pill mill -- which demoralizes clients by turning them into lifetime patients.

Rather than protesting prohibition as a crackdown on academic freedom, today's scientists are collaborating with the drug war by promoting shock therapy and SSRIs, thereby profiting from the monopoly that the drug war gives them in selling mind and mood medicine.

The Drug War is the legally enforced triumph of human idiocy. We have rigged the deck so that our dunces can be right. The Drug War is a superstition. Indeed, it is THE modern superstition.

The whole drug war is based on the anti-American idea that the way to avoid problems is to lie and prevaricate and persuade people not to ask questions.

Getting off antidepressants can make things worse for only one reason: because we have outlawed all the drugs that could help with the transition. Right now, getting off any drug basically means becoming a drug-free Christian Scientist. No wonder withdrawal is hard.

It's always wrong to demonize drugs in the abstract. That's anti-scientific. It begs so many questions and leaves suffering pain patients (and others) high and dry. No substance is bad in and of itself.

The 1932 movie "Scarface" starts with on-screen text calling for a crackdown on armed gangs in America. There is no mention of the fact that a decade's worth of Prohibition had created those gangs in the first place.


Click here to see All Tweets against the hateful War on Us






back navigation arrow forward navigation arrow
Book Cover

Break the ice with a sledgehammer: place this book on your coffee table.

This book features 150 annotated images, designed to force brainwashed Americans to confront the fact that drug prohibition is wrong. Here is what author Richard Parrish II says of the book's compiler: "The drug prohibition philosopher provides first-hand, principled, persuasive, and insightful arguments against the current drug prohibition regime..."

Purchase Your Copy
Book Cover

Diary of a Drug Fiend

This is the only full-cast recording of Aleister Crowley's 1922 classic paeon to common sense. It is the first book -- and so far almost the only book -- to stake out a philosophy of drug use that is compatible with human freedom, one in which we learn to use drugs as wisely as possible for the benefit of humanity. This recording was produced by the Drug War Philosopher and your purchases help support his effort to push back against the tragically counterproductive policy of drug prohibition, in the name of human freedom and of humanity's right to heal.

Purchase Your Copy



No cookies, no ads paid for by amoral and immoral billionaires (or trillionaires).


Unless otherwise indicated, no AI is used in the creation of site content. These essays represent the original ideas of their author and not the ideas that the author SHOULD have based on an algorithmic parsing of existing data. For more on this subject, consider the AI-related viewpoints to which the author subscribes as delineated in the New York Times opinion piece entitled "What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity" by Rebecca Winthrop of the Brookings Institution.

The Partnership for a Death Free America is a proud sponsor of The Drug War Philosopher website @ abolishthedea.com.


Copyright 2026, Brian Ballard Quass Contact: quass@quass.com

tombstone for American Democracy, 1776-2024, RIP (up)