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


Withdrawing from antidepressants in the age of the Drug War

how drug prohibition makes it virtually impossible

by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher

August 29, 2025



Drug prohibition has destroyed all pretense of healthcare freedom for the depressed and anxious. To appreciate this fact, we have only to consider my current attempts to get off of Effexor 1 . I see the drug as hellacious because it has turned me into a ward of the healthcare state, with all of the expense of time and money that such a transformation entails. My psychiatrist, on the other hand, views the drug as a godsend. What exactly is going on here?

I am looking at the drug from the standpoint of a would-be autonomous individual who has been turned into a child by drug laws. I am looking at the drug in light of the fact that drug prohibition has outlawed all viable alternatives. I am looking at the drug in light of its hideous withdrawal profile.

The psychiatrist, on the other hand, has a patient for life thanks to Effexor. He ignores all alternative medicines and never thinks to advocate their use. My psychiatrist pretends, for ultimately self-interested reasons, that the niggardly pharmacopoeia of the Drug War is somehow good in and of itself and that drug prohibition has no downsides, this despite the fact that it deprives me of the kinds of drugs that have inspired entire religions. As for the hideous withdrawal process, my psychiatrist sidesteps that issue entirely by telling me it is my medical duty to never get off the drug in the first place! What hypocrisy! By this same logic, we should stop requiring opiate habitues to give up on opiates but rather ensure a safe supply -- but this is a corollary of our current drug policy that logic-challenged Drug Warriors will never notice.

I have yet to find a psychiatrist who considers it problematic that the psychiatric pill mill has turned me into a patient for life. They seem to find nothing demoralizing about that dependency. But then why should they? The situation is the opposite of demoralizing for them personally; indeed, the situation is highly remunerative for them.

I would never be a patient for life in a free world, because in that case, I would have access to medicines like coca and opium with which I could wisely transcend the downsides of antidepressant withdrawal through the common-sense tactic of "fighting drugs with drugs." This is surely one of the many reasons why time-honored natural medicines remain outlawed today, because the corporations know that the wise use of such substances would render dependence-causing Big Pharma meds irrelevant -- and even contraindicated insofar as they create dependency as a feature and not, like opiates and coca, as a bug or as a potential outcome of misuse.

These pharmaceutical companies have no interest in allowing the use of medicines wherewith their customers could easily get off of their dependence-causing drugs -- medicines like laughing gas and the inspiring phenethylamines synthesized by chemist Alexander Shulgin.

These are the same companies that sponsor "depression awareness" advertisements on prime-time television, with the goal of making as many Americans as possible dependent on Big Pharma 2 3 meds for life. Thus they take advantage of their prohibition-created monopoly on mind and mood medicine to turn their customers into wards of the healthcare state, shamelessly medicalizing and pathologizing human behavior as they go.

This is why we need a new philosophy of healthcare in the West, one in which we re-grant the individual their time-honored right to take care of their own mental health concerns as they see fit. But this is a right that Americans will have to claw back from a self-interested medical establishment. And the first step in doing that is for Americans to grow up. They need to understand the simple truth that all dangerous activities have risks -- whether we are talking about mountain climbing, drag-racing, or drinking alcohol -- and that the answer is education, regulation, and choice, not arrest. We need to learn the lesson from Turn of the Screw by Henry James: namely, that we place young people in harm's way whenever we go overboard in our attempts to protect them from life.

Meanwhile, we need to start holding prohibitionists responsible for the death and suffering that they cause: the 60,000 disappeared in Mexico's War on Drugs since 20064, the 67,000 killed yearly in America's inner cities by gunfire5. Indeed, the death toll attributed to the War on Drugs since 1971 in America alone has been estimated at half a million fatalities6 -- and this number does not include the countless people who go without godsend medicine for depression, anxiety and spiritual enlightenment, all because Americans wish to protect the white young people whom we refuse to educate about safe use. The death toll is no doubt much higher however. How many of the 49,000 American suicides each year7 are a result of the fact that drug prohibition has outlawed all drugs that inspire and elate?! We encourage suicide 8 when we outlaw all substances that could help the depressed feel comfortable inside their own skin -- especially when they're going through the hell of Effexor withdrawal.

PS As I write, I am in a critical stage of my attempts to renounce the drug. But the odds are against me -- for the simple reason that America has outlawed all the drugs which I might have used wisely to make withdrawal actually work and become sustainable. Say, for instance, I have a panic attack at 2 in the morning. Laughing gas, opium , coca, or phenethylamines when judiciously chosen and applied, could OBVIOUSLY get me over such rough patches -- but the hateful DEA tells me, "You're on your own" when it comes to withdrawal.

This is what amazes me when I look at online resources on this topic: everybody talks about the difficulties of getting off of antidepressants 9 like Effexor (Venlafaxine) but no one -- literally no one -- points out the fact that getting off Effexor NEED NOT BE A NIGHTMARE -- that drug prohibition has made it so by outlawing all the substances that could help us withdraw in a psychologically sustainable manner! I have said it many times in my essays and must say it again: we will never drive a stake through the heart of prohibition ideology until we begin holding prohibition responsible for the endless problems that it causes!

The real headline here is not so much that drug prohibition makes withdrawal difficult - - the real headline is the fact that I seem to be the only one in cyberspace who has realized this obvious fact! This is yet another sign of how thoroughly Americans have been bamboozled by the antiscientific Drug War ideology of substance demonization.

NOTE: I do not say that Effexor has no mood-elevating effect. It does for some of us. But so do hundreds of other drugs, including opium and coca. Effexor is a uniquely bad choice for fighting depression since dependency is a FEATURE of the drug, not a bug. A user can avoid becoming dependent on opium , a user can avoid becoming dependent on coca, a user can avoid becoming dependent on laughing gas 10 -- but a user cannot avoid becoming dependent on Effexor. That latter drug is meant to be taken daily -- FOR A LIFETIME! In a sane world, we would use a variety of drugs on a strategic basis, thus avoiding dependency all down the line.

Effexor, by the way, is harder to kick than heroin11. Meanwhile, the heavily demonized opium 12 can be smoked responsibly by the majority of users, notwithstanding our attempts to demonize the substance in the name of Drug War orthodoxy. Even should dependence develop, we can use drugs to fight drugs in a free world. We also have to distinguish between wanted dependency and unwanted dependency. Finally, dependency is not the worst thing in the world: the worst thing in the world is being unable to get things done and wishing one were dead. It is a mere Christian Science prejudice to pursue sobriety for sobriety sake.









Notes for essay entitled Withdrawing from antidepressants in the age of the Drug War: how drug prohibition makes it virtually impossible:

1: How Drug Prohibition makes it impossible to get off of Effexor and other Big Pharma drugs DWP (up)
2: Seife, Charles. 2012. “Is Drug Research Trustworthy?” Scientific American 307 (6): 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1212-56. (up)
3: LaMattina, John. n.d. “Why Is Biopharma Paying 75% of the FDA’s Drug Division Budget?” Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2022/09/22/why-is-biopharma-paying-75-of-the-fdas-drug-division-budget/. (up)
4: Mexico's war on drugs: More than 60,000 people 'disappeared' 2020 (up)
5: Gun Deaths in Big Cities Big Cities Health (up)
6: Prohibition Blunder (up)
7: National Institute of Mental Health. 2025. “Suicide.” National Institute of Mental Health. March 2025. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide. (up)
8: Why Americans Prefer Suicide to Drug Use DWP (up)
9: Antidepressants and the War on Drugs DWP (up)
10: Forbes Magazine's Laughable Article about Nitrous Oxide DWP (up)
11: Hall, Wayne, and Megan Weier. 2016. “Lee Robins’ Studies of Heroin Use among US Vietnam Veterans.” Addiction 112 (1): 176–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13584. (up)
12: The Truth About Opium by William H. Brereton DWP (up)




read more essays here





Ten Tweets

against the hateful war on US




I can't believe that no one at UVA is bothered by the DEA's 1987 raid on Monticello. It was, after all, a sort of coup against the Natural Law upon which Jefferson had founded America, asserting as it did the government's right to outlaw Mother Nature.

To understand why the western world is blind to the benefits of "drugs," read "The Concept of Nature" by Whitehead. He unveils the scientific schizophrenia of the west, according to which the "real" world is invisible to us while our perceptions are mere "secondary" qualities.

The reasons that people use drugs are psychologically obvious. Academics gaslight us on this topic and invent new diseases to explain away our desire to live large.

"Arrest made in Matthew Perry death." Oh, yeah? Did they arrest the drug warriors who prioritized propaganda over education?

There are no recreational drugs. Even laughing gas has rational uses because it gives us a break from morbid introspection. There are recreational USES of drugs, but the term "recreational" is often used to express our disdain for users who go outside the healthcare system.

Drug warriors do not want to end "addiction": it's their golden goose. They use the threat of addiction to scare us into giving up our democratic freedoms, like that once supplied by the 4th amendment.

"When two men who have been in an aggressive mood toward each other take part in the ritual, one is able to say to the other, 'Come, let us drink, for there is something between us.' " re: the Mayan use of the balche drink in Encyc of Psych Plants, by Ratsch & Hofmann

Drug warriors have harnessed the perfect storm. Prohibition caters to the interests of law enforcement, psychotherapy, Big Pharma, demagogues, puritans, and materialist scientists, who believe that consciousness is no big "whoop" and that spiritual states are just flukes.

Today's Washington Post reports that "opioid pills shipped" DROPPED 45% between 2011 and 2019..... while fatal overdoses ROSE TO RECORD LEVELS! Prohibition is PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE.

Had we really wanted to "help" users, we would have used the endless godsends of Mother Nature and related synthetics to provide spirit-lifting alternatives to problem use. But no one wanted to treat users as normal humans. They wanted to pathologize and moralize their use.


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)