*Update* The Most Taboo Issue In Society: Psychoactive Drugs That Aren't Marijuana (Reflection of Miami Incident)Submitted by Delysid on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 10:24
The truth has emerged from the coroner that the perpetrator of the cannibalistic assault in Miami was NOT high on "bath salts." The hoax by the media was obvious to anyone with at least a basic understanding of pharmacology. Ironically the only drug they found in his system is marijuana. I publicly called it weeks ago.
This is a post I've been intending to write for a long time. The mass hysteria being generated by the media over the incidents of cannibalism and "bath salts" is the disturbing catalyst I needed to finally voice my opinion. I am disgusted by the unscientific, superstitious, anti-intellectual witch hunt on psychoactive chemicals taking place. Despite the progress made by the medical marijuana movement in combating senseless oppression by the Federal government, the War on Drugs is still expanding as the media whips the public into a panic over less popular, less understood drugs. Pseudoscience myths regarding illegal drugs are so ubiquitous in our society that opposition to the relentless propaganda campaigns conducted by the media for drugs other than marijuana is practically non-existent. Prohibitionists succeeded terrifically at convincing the public to be afraid of what they haven't experienced.
It is no secret that I not only advocate the full legalization of all chemicals, but openly promote experimentation with psychotropics, for scientific progress and personal enlightenment. The backlash I receive when I share this perspective with people is mind-boggling. The general public, of course, is completely ignorant to almost all intellectual and scientific arguments regarding psychoactive drugs and immediately rejects any idea that contradicts anti-drug propaganda, but even (many) intelligent libertarians abandon logic and reason when the topic arises. The typical reply I get from these libertarians when I bring it up is "well I support your right to do drugs so let's leave it at that." If I push it a little further I usually hear a few standard DARE talking points and it is end of discussion. Many people are so uncomfortable at the thought of psychotropics that they can't even discuss it. Some people can't even talk to me after I disclose my frank opinions to them! How did this happen? How are so many free-thinking people who have escaped from the matrix, so to speak, still so conditioned by anti-drug propaganda? How did drugs become so taboo that their usage can't even be debated? How can someone who grew up on a steady diet of anti-drug propaganda break away and smoke cannabis, realize that they had been horribly lied to, then turn around and repeat identical propaganda about drugs they are unfamiliar with? (This is a rhetorical question, as I did this exact thing for years.)
Countless people have experimented with various psychotropics, yet few people dare to speak the truth about their experiences in public. A few daring individuals like Joe Rogan and Bill Hicks have broken through the curtain of silence, but they are exceptions in a society ruled by superstition and fear. What are we doing?
The recent incident of cannibalism in Miami and the subsequent public outrage against "bath salts" epitomized the absurdity of the drug prohibition movement. Despite the impossibility of knowing what chemicals, if any, the perpetrator had ingested, the media and spokesmen for the police quickly pinpointed "bath salts" as the cause of the man's deranged behavior. This accusation is a serious ethical, scientific, and practical fallacy. It is a perfect reflection of the prevailing mindset in our society.
The only possible way to know with certainty of a person's intoxication to a particular chemical is to watch it being administered. If a psychotic person is brought to a hospital, doctors can look at physical signs such as dilated pupils and suspect intoxication of sympathomimetic drugs, but there is no way to know for sure unless it is confirmed by the patient (or witnesses) or through medical tests. It is beyond irresponsible to start treating before diagnosing the problem. Some medical situations are more obvious than others, of course, like alcohol intoxication, but even then confirmation tests are needed before serious action is taken. Cops don't just pull over a suspected drunk driver and immediately place him under arrest. They go through the relatively scientific process of checking sobriety by testing coordination and BAC. Cops can also use periphery evidence to reach their conclusion, such as alcohol containers in the car. This is logical, evidence-based thinking.
In the situation in Miami, the alleged perpetrator was naked and shot from a distance. There were no reports of any drugs found at the scene. No witnesses came forward and confirmed that he had consumed "bath salts." The only evidence the media had to go on was his deranged behavior. Since the beginning of humanity, certain members of society have behaved psychotically. Insanity preceded "bath salts" by eons, yet magically, with no hard evidence (or any evidence for that matter), the media magically pinpointed "bath salts" as the cause for the incident. This diagnosis presented to the public should be psychologically painful to everyone who still utilizes common sense.
This brings us to another huge problem- what are "bath salts?" The term is an ambiguous, umbrella term for a variety of chemicals. Most journalists reporting the story never even bothered to clarify what they meant by bath salts. (The few who did were far off base). One would think that if there is a chemical so dangerous that it causes violent psychotic episodes, the media would at least inform the public of the specific chemical. I liken it to these analogy... If there was a high profile incident of violence associated with a certain type of food, would the public settle for the simple explanation that "dangerous food causes violent episode?" No, the public would likely demand to know what specific food caused the dangerous incident and what other factors were involved, as demonizing food as broad and ambiguous is absurd.
Different logic applies to psychoactive drugs. The generic, meaningless term "bath salts" invokes so much fear that the general public accepts it as truth. Countless people in news forums talk about using "bath salts" as if the consequences are self-explanatory! They don't even know, literally, what drugs they are talking about. They are simply parroting the propaganda told to them and basing their opinions on gibberish.
For those interested in hearing the truth, the drugs referred to as "bath salts" are best classified as the phenethylamine chemical family. Some phenethylamines are legal and widely prescribed, like amphetamine, which is marketed as Adderall. It's analogue, methamphetamine, infamous in our society thanks to the media, is also legal in certain situations. A little discussed fact is that methamphetamine is prescribed to children for attention disorders and marketed as Desoxyn. Our society prescribes methamphetamine to children, but if an adult gets caught synthesizing or ingesting the exact same chemical, they go to prison. The hypocrisy is mind-numbing.
Another infamous phenethylamine is MDMA, commonly called ecstasy. Early in its history, MDMA was demonstrating outstanding medicinal potential and becoming popular as a drug in social settings (and rightfully so, as euphoria and a sense of intimacy are desirable effects people chase routinely with ethanol). "To protect the public from this dangerous drug [sarcasm]," a brutal anti-drug propaganda campaign was launched by the government and media. They successfully terrified the docile masses, just as they had done previously with opium, cannabis, LSD, and other drugs. MDMA was banned and deemed a hazard to society. Government officials in their infinite stupidity decided that MDMA is unsuitable for scientific study, medical application, or recreational use. Taking their infinite stupidity to even more ridiculous levels, government authorities then banned the most important chemicals used in the synthesis of MDMA and structurally related analogues. Entire families of biologically active chemicals were essentially outlawed. This means that drugs that have not even been discovered yet by mankind are illegal.
Let this sink in for a moment please.
Our government outlaws medical discoveries before they even occur.
Amazingly, ingenious chemists somehow figured out how to bypass the draconian drug prohibition laws and synthesize phenylamines that aren't explicitly illegal (I don't know the details). These MDMA analogues are the drugs that are ingested as "bath salts." The most common chemicals are mephedrone, MDPV, ethylone, and methylone. Unfortunately, very little scientific data exists on the pharmacological properties of these drugs, as our government bans them as quickly as the authorities discover them. What is known is that they have very similar psychological and physiological effects to MDMA.
They do not cause deranged cannibalism.
Do not believe any of the tabloid, anti-intellectual, unscientific lies of the media or the government.
If you don't believe me, find out for yourself.