Prompted by comment in “Marijuana causes the universe to explode”: http://www.drugwarrant.com/2015/10/marijuana-causes-the-universe-to-explode
First (from the prompting piece itself) the apparent king of all idiotic anti-cannabis statements…
“Tobacco is a product that does a lot of damage — marijuana is infinitely worse…” (Stephen Harper — Canadian Prime Minister)
What’s infinitely worse (factually speaking) is prohibition. That infinity remains for as long as Certain Drug Prohibition (with all of the brutality against millions of non-violent citizens literally without any concretely proven public benefit) remains respectable through the mainstream media lens still largely apparently shaping public opinion (so keeping this mammoth scam alive and still largely destructively thriving).
The prompting comment in the prompting piece brings up that problematic media lens firmly against the scientific method.
The indicated studies aren’t just ‘challenged’, nor the scientific community ‘divided’ on the medical research. The studies were so bad they were D.O.A. Many journalists, and thus much of the public, never understands that in science there exists certainty, and in legitimate peer review and replication of findings there is always to be had a finality to a question. […]
Something is needed to educate journalists when they write about science…
My reply there…
Right, and strict precision regarding intake is also required by the scientific method.
If a study does not scientifically factor intake method (smoking vs. vaporization vs…), amount (hint: joints or such is not a scientific measurement), and the big elephant in the room too often leading to outrageous claims — strain differential (there are hundreds of strains capable of dramatically different results) — then that study is unscientific.
I haven’t had time to look deep enough, but I assume that no science involving psychological impact meets that requirement, so it’s all junk science deceptively (i.e. in blatant violation of the journalism code of ethics) spread through the mainstream media as otherwise.
What my groggy morning brain didn’t address was that “something” with respect to educating journalists.
The mainstream media (relying upon ample tragic events) has an unethically undisclosed relationship with our government (especially law enforcement) — the folks primarily and continuously supplying newsworthy information about tragic events.
That’s a major focal point for online activism competing against that clearly corrupt relationship. That focus is already working a lot, and the evidence is the relatively dramatic shift in cannabis legality dominantly coming from online expressions powerfully undermining the mainstream media’s propaganda machine.
Journalists seeking to honor their code of ethics have no choice but to figure out how to decouple tragic events from the people’s right to know, so they no longer rely upon government relationships (inevitably including supporting corrupt government preferences) to survive.
Information is like food, so everyone needs a healthy information diet.
If you think mainstream food is bad (the competition to out-sugar/salt/fat each other to secure taste buds), then check out the horrific societal damage from reason abuse (the poisonous food of information) and overwhelmingly dominant dessert news (e.g. tragic events that make people tune in stronger, but offers no educational nutrients).
Once neurologists understand the flow of energy in the brain, they will likely see the nasty physical impact of reason abuse. If humanity can survive the reason abuse onslaught, then chances are a generation will finally intelligently start the flow of reason use (if you will), and reason abusers will finally be publicly knowingly guilty of harm and face fitting consequences.
As responsible entertainers, we may be able to persuade enough people to demand their mainstream media outlets stop stuffing everyone with dessert news and poisonous reason abuse, and finally generate a healthy demand for vegetable news (or such).
A society dominantly gorging on dessert news and ample amounts of poisonous reason abuse dominantly forms the true essence of abuse — unhealthy stress.
Therefore, a society addressing unhealthy stress to reduce abuse naturally reduces violence (e.g. mass shootings) and destructive drug intake — all without a prohibition (the worst “solution” to any problem, because of its serious destruction and ineffectiveness).
However, to preserve the prohibition cash cow for their blatantly corrupt buddies in law enforcement (i.e. to ironically enable our judicial community to get their prohibition fix), nobody in the mainstream media cites unhealthy stress as the root of the drug (or violence) problem — just the lack of sufficiently tough laws with a mental wink to those buddies — because they’re guilty of serious media bias for several decades and counting to get their tragic news fix and they obviously don’t want to report that fact.
Good members of law enforcement and journalism (among the rest of civilization exhausted by the inundating abuses) need to properly promptly take ethical charge to address the true problem — too many cases of insufficient individual balance (so stability) from excessive unhealthy stress.
That includes the horrific elephant in the room forming excessive work ethic over relaxation ethic (a powerfully destructive imbalance). People keep believing work is progress and relaxation is taking a break from progress. The truth is a healthy work ethic must be balanced with a healthy relaxation ethic (that latter ethic a fantastic place for responsible psychedelic — e.g. cannabis — use) for actual progress. Without that key balance, too many people are suffering, and that’s the real problem involving the cycle of abuses.
Abuse in the land of the free can only be properly addressed with advancing effective education (including better access to stress management basics negating drug — including alcohol, etc. — abuse) and completely removing law from this obvious health (not criminal) issue.
Improving formal and informal (direct and indirect) education — in part by improving language and scientifically established certainty — is the infinite solution worth supporting.
It’s one thing to pathetically need to rely upon prohibition to prevent some murders (acts that are always rights-infringing), but a prohibition against holding a certain plant in your hand (and such) is nothing shy of abhorrent (if not demonstrable treason in the form of widespread and deep rights-infringement popularly covered up by the Big Lie technique all throughout United States history).
Do you agree?
I hope so, because society is counting on you to be a healthy part of the real solution.
Leave a Reply