Unquestioned Inconsistencies in the Perception of Controlled Chemicals:

Drugstore Cowboy

The Here Title Place Drug Column #3 – Note that we do not encourage reckless experimentation with illegal substances, but by all means go ahead and ingest vast quantities of alcohol and die an early death due to liver damage.

Canada's national drug policy is backwards, inefficient, and motivated primarily by self-interest, economics, and fear rather than out of safety and logic. Government has never had to make decisions based on scientific evidence, nor has it ever had to exhibit any inquisitive process beyond that demanded by the lowest common denominator. In examining the topic, the macrocosm of arbitrary choice and poor judgement on the behalf of the government is revealed. In some cases, the flaw in a methodology can only easily be exposed in extreme cases, as the effects are often subtle and subcutaneous, as tangible mistakes become corrected, appealing to the superficial animal layer of the human psyche. Who can we really trust if our elected officials don't follow a strict code of decision making, but instead, arbitrarily provide solutions for perceived problems? Should the legalities of controlled substances be concerned with whether they are being used to get high, or whether the substances cause actual physical or mental trauma? A standard view on the topic is that by entering an altered mental state you are playing with something that can never be predictable, and thus, might possibly cause a great deal of damage. We can't accurately predict earthquakes (or for that matter, the weather), yet science still attempts to understand these natural forces. Why are so many possibly beneficial chemicals given the shaft for an ignorant and unscientific reason?

Financial motivation is certainly a consideration in my mind, as is political fallout. It makes no good sense to any member of our government to raise an argument against the status quo, especially after having spent so many dollars on creating the assumption that all illegal drugs are damaging (and especially considering legal drugs make so much cash). The best thing we can do is examine the human element behind making these decisions, both in the public and in the private sector. Decisions are often made in haste, based on false assumptions, and in the end, poorly. Why do we as humans make these bad decisions, and foster these misinformed opinions?

Socrates' promotion of self-examination successfully infiltrated all levels of Athenian society, causing the public to reflect and question before acting. In today's society the standard code of behavior calls for assumption in nearly every regard. The most basic assumption that the populace makes is that there are always other entities capable of making better decisions than the individual, for the individual. People let the government, media, or other authorities regulate what they do, engaging in a stupefying pattern of blind faith. In the instance of controlled substances, a blanket disregard for curiosity reigns in the minds of many. This isn't to say such a subject should interest everyone; it is merely that those that have expressed an interest normally possess such a biased and misinformed opinion it is a wonder these people bother to process any basic information at all beyond hot and cold; light and dark. Tentative explorers of the chemical realm utilize a deplorable set of tools to measure the effects of their experiments. There exists a multitude of causes for these unsound practices, but all are the fault of a missing human characteristic: inquisitiveness.

It is often the first toke off a joint that instills a sense of betrayal concerning our nation's drug policy. For a great deal of people, we realize that the effects aren't inherently demonizing; sanity is not clouded over, and our judgement is affected only mildly. Often, this immediate sense that the status quo might have its flaws spreads to cover related issues. In this respect, the 'gateway' effect is observed: once one substance has been tried, others become more tempting and enticing. To separate myth from reality, however, it is no fault of any of these substances that others are tried; the initial falsehoods championed by the powers that be initiate a poor and misguided sense of curiosity. The real instance where our representatives in government have made a lapse of duty lies in the fact that they do nothing to explore the reasons behind increased drug use, and in some cases, addiction. They settle on all encompassing terms and regulations to cover substances with effects, side effects, addiction potentials, medical uses, and forms across the spectrum. Higher powers seem to be satisfied with a public that believes drugs all do the same things, which is as accurate as saying power tools are identical. To further the analogy, power tools in the wrong hands can easily cause injury, but look at the wonderful things that humans can do when they use them right!

As with any issue, the exploration of the chemical world often has its downfalls. Our society has created a festering environment in which a rigid social structure has evolved to include drug subcultures, and unquestioning youths often fall into the trap of these hierarchical social constructs. Several people make the irrational decision that they must participate in a shared communal lack of self-respect to engage in illicit activities. For this reason, marijuana is often associated with teenaged hoodlums and dope fiends. The very government that superficially seeks crime reduction and safety for the populace has initiated this pattern of behavior, and this tendency is as damaging as any groove that tempts the unwary. It is easy for users to slide into the niche of self-destruction and disrespect by not examining the existing trends in the drug subculture. Smoking is a good example of one of the traits exhibited by the social circles involved in this travesty: users admit to the cancerous effects and health risks associated with their habit, but comfort each other in this shared lack of self respect. Other social drug users adopt the worst of behaviors associated with their substance of choice, such as the overpowering helplessness of meth addicts or the imitated dullness of potheads (an effect not inherent to a healthy relationship with marijuana). And yet, the reason for these seemingly irrational habits parallel the reasons people unconditionally reject controlled substances as evil: without using their brain! People do not use healthy investigation techniques to examine their own behavior in whatever denomination they include themselves in, whether they are an upstanding citizen or a tripped-out druggie.

I have applied a superficial level of examination to the motivations behind the governments continued refusal to examine the falsehoods perpetuated in their drug policy. It is clear, and arguably reasonable, that the powers that be do not wish to disturb existing revenue sources, as exemplified in the tolerance of logging companies, industrial class chemical manufacturers, and most importantly, the tobacco industry. In the face of clear and present evidence to confirm the unhealthy nature of many of these industries, the government passively accepts their existence as a necessary evil. In my research, I have found strong evidence that contradictions have been obscured in order to allow the continued profit of companies that contribute large amounts of money to the economy (and the pockets of political parties, if you want to look at it that way). My proof lies in one of the biggest revenue sources of the pharmaceutical industry: cough syrup. The primary medicinal ingredient is Dextromethorphan HBr, a highly disassociative chemical similar to Ketamine and PCP. Psychedelic effects are evident at a small dose of 200mg, easily the contents of a 100mL bottle of ordinary cough syrup. Superficially, it causes effects reminiscent of LSD, Psilocybin, Mescal, and several other controlled substances. This poses the question, if cough syrup gets a person high, why isn't everyone a bunch of Robo junkies? And more relevant to the issue at hand, why isn't DXM illegal as every other substance of its class is? The answer is as simple as it is sinister: it turns a profit and steps on no toes. Canadian government, with the co-operation of pharmaceutical giants, have done their best to include additional chemicals in the brew that cause emesis (puking), make the taste bad, or cause death (in the case of Acetaminophen). For those of you who aren’t reading between the lines, this means that you can very easily damage yourself by experimenting with cough syrup, so if you want to explore the substance safely, look up some information on the net (search for DXM and Agent Lemon)! Clearly both sides of the fence (legal and illegal) have been chosen not on the merits set out in the narcotics laws, but by whether these chemicals turn a profit, threaten existing industries, or have evident and obvious health complications.

It wouldn’t be fair to blame these occurrences simply on the greed of big companies and the establishment. The simple fact that DXM is the only reasonably effective cough suppressant besides Heroine (heh heh heh) lends credence to the virtuous task of keeping it from being banned through fear. In fact, in this light, the government almost seems to be doing everyone a favour by appearing to stay within the established rules while still providing a chemical that, although can be used recreationally, does have many medicinal benefits. This is all fine and dandy, but why don’t other substances, most notably marijuana, become legal for medicinal purposes? Society seems to fear anything that leads to a high, in reality. DXM’s only saving grace has been its relative obscurity (and for that reason, I ask that you don’t take this the wrong way and go out and buy cough syrup to get fucked…). Most other illegal recreational drugs became banned because people can be really stupid and not know how to handle such substances. In questioning Canada’s drug policy, I don’t suggest that these chemicals become legalized and supplied to the public however they want it. I do suggest that, just as we regulate the use of a car through licensing, insurance, and informative lessons, we should create a scenario in which informed people can engage in psychedelic experiences with a variety of chemicals at their disposal. Simple chemicals like Alcohol and Nicotine suit the current system of blanket availability at a certain age combined with dubiously informative propaganda. The so-called harder drugs need more care in their introduction to the public, if such a happening was to occur. In truth, the government has misled the public on many of these issues, but the public's ignorance creates a scenario in which the establishment doesn't need to repair its errs. Legislatory mistakes remain tumors in our society, causing many people grief through jail sentences, fines, or criminal records. More harmful than this, however, are the people that are unnecessarily harmed by tainted substances that are only poor in quality because there is no government regulation beyond outright banning. The common perception remains unchallenged, however, as those with influence continue to line their pockets with the substantial 'campaign donations' from tobacco, alcohol, and pharmaceutical companies. Individual patterns of assumption and lack of foresight allow for people to enter the deadly human traps associated with the misinterpreted controlled substances, and the very same force serves to create an unwarranted prejudice against chemicals with great potential to really change the way we think. It is a tragedy that human curiosity in our society is most often aroused when victims realize those that they trust without forethought have victimized them. The epiphany that Santa Claus is fictitious makes us lose trust in the source of the myth, just the same as those that realize that marijuana doesn't live up to the negative hype begin to doubt even the worthwhile words of the society that spawned such propaganda. The opposing elements all at fault due to their lack of genuine interest and a battery of useful scientific methods for gathering and processing information.can be really stupid and not know how to handle such substances. In questioning Canada’s drug policy, I don’t suggest that these chemicals become legalized and supplied to the public however they want it. I do suggest that, just as we regulate the use of a car through licensing, insurance, and informative lessons, we should create a scenario in which informed people can engage in psychedelic experiences with a variety of chemicals at their disposal. Simple chemicals like Alcohol and Nicotine suit the current system of blanket availability at a certain age combined with dubiously informative propaganda. The so-called harder drugs need more care in their introduction to the public, if such a happening was to occur.

In truth, the government has misled the public on many of these issues, but the public's ignorance creates a scenario in which the establishment doesn't need to repair its errs. Legislatory mistakes remain tumors in our society, causing many people grief through jail sentences, fines, or criminal records. More harmful than this, however, are the people that are unnecessarily harmed by tainted substances that are only poor in quality because there is no government regulation beyond outright banning. The common perception remains unchallenged, however, as those with influence continue to line their pockets with the substantial 'campaign donations' from tobacco, alcohol, and pharmaceutical companies. Individual patterns of assumption and lack of foresight allow for people to enter the deadly human traps associated with the misinterpreted controlled substances, and the very same force serves to create an unwarranted prejudice against chemicals with great potential to really change the way we think. It is a tragedy that human curiosity in our society is most often aroused when victims realize those that they trust without forethought have victimized them. The epiphany that Santa Claus is fictitious makes us lose trust in the source of the myth, just the same as those that realize that marijuana doesn't live up to the negative hype begin to doubt even the worthwhile words of the society that spawned such propaganda. The opposing elements all at fault due to their lack of genuine interest and a battery of useful scientific methods for gathering and processing information.