Showing posts with label drug. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drug. Show all posts

Thursday, February 27, 2020

Ibogaine and 18-MC: Hallucinogenic Plant from Africa Synthesized into Anti-Addictive Drug

     The synthetic chemical 18-MC (18-methoxycoronaridine) is derived from a West African hallucinogenic plant called tabernanthe iboga.

     Its root bark is harvested and ground up to make ibogaine.



     Ibogaine is used in Bwiti religious ceremonies, and it forces the user to confront his addiction-related demons.

     Ibogaine is currently illegal.

     Ibogaine is illegal because it is a powerful hallucinogen and because it causes withdrawals - as well as difficulty walking and body tremors - so the patient must be watched by a nurse (or trained shaman).
     But when ibogaine is synthesized into 18-MC, there are no hallucinogenic/psychedelic effects. It has been tested on rats and it has been effective in reducing dependency on a wide variety of addictive substances.

     18-MC is now being considered for treatment of opioid addiction.





Composed and published on February 27th, 2020


Tuesday, October 4, 2016

Take Marijuana Off the Schedule I Narcotics List


Originally written on September 28th, 2016
Edited and Expanded on October 4th, 5th, 10th, and 19th, 2016
 
 
 
            On June 20th, 2012, Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO) asked Drug Enforcement Administration Chief Michele Leonhart whether heroin, crack cocaine, and methamphetamine were greater health problems than marijuana is. Leonhart refused to comment, and declined to admit that hard drugs pose a greater health problem than marijuana does. Years later, Polis commented that she was "terrible at her job".

            Of course, marijuana and its byproducts should not be classified as Schedule I narcotics. This is, first, because the term "narcotic" has several definitions. One definition is simply a vague label for any illicit or prohibited drug. Another definition refers to any substance that affects mood or behavior, and has nonmedical purposes. Yet another definition implies that "narcotic" applies to opiates and sedatives, pain relievers and painkillers, and drugs with analgesic and anesthetic effects.


            While it is true that marijuana is illicit and prohibited, and has non-medical purposes (including its effects on psychology and emotions), it would be misleading to describe it as a narcotic. Marijuana is not a narcotic; rather, it has stimulant and depressant effects, both of them mild. Marijuana is certainly not an opiate; in fact, alcohol is more chemically similar to heroin than either alcohol or heroin is to marijuana.

            Secondly, marijuana does not belong on the Schedule I narcotics list, because drugs are supposed to be put on Schedule I only if they have no scientifically demonstrated medicinal benefits. Of course, marijuana does have medical purposes. The most active psychoactive ingredient in marijuana - Delta-9-THC (Delta-9-tetrahydracannabinol) - facilitates the growth of neuronal stem cells into adult neurons, and untangles the tau protein that agglomerates in neurons. This protein probably causes, or at least contributes to, a host of neurodegenerative disorders, possibly including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and Tourette's. Whole-plant marijuana - which can be eaten; it doesn't have to be smoked - has even been shown to reduce seizures, even more so than concentrated synthetic marijuana-based compounds that have had the psychoactive ingredients removed. THC is found in cannabis sativa, and is responsible for the "head-high" effects that some cannabis gives.

            Although marijuana has some mild depressant effects, it is not a narcotic in the sense that that term means sedatives or opiates. It does, however, have pain relief effects. CBD - cannabidiol, which is responsible for the "body-high" effects in some cannabis, and which is found in cannabis indica - is the type prescribed to medical marijuana patients. It has been used to relieve joint pain and glaucoma, to expand the alveoli of the lungs (increasing lung capacity), and to stimulate and regulate the appetite.

          Vaporizing marijuana at 190 (instead of smoking it) ameliorates nerve cancers, while avoiding the lung cancer caused by inhaling combusted material. Congress should either repeal unconstitutional federal laws against drugs, or else it should enact drug policy via a proper constitutional amendment. Until that occurs, the states have every right to nullify those laws, and interpose the federal government if it tries to enforce them.
     Either way, marijuana and its byproducts should come off of the Schedule I narcotics list. Additionally, governments should legalize and normalize the production of hemp, which is only toxic if consumed in amounts which are impossible to ingest by creatures of our size. Removing marijuana from Schedule I would legalize the testing of new cannabis strains which is needed to officially show that the drug is not harmful when ingested properly.
     Until we adopt D.E.A. and F.D.A. policies supporting legal testing - and a drug education policy that seeks to enlighten, not frighten - we will continue to be plagued with problems like addicts being in the shadows, addicts being driven to a life of violent crime, and people overdosing because they don't know whether their dose will kill them.

     Additionally, we will still have to face problems associated with young people trying drugs for the first time, not knowing simple things about how to take drugs safely (for example; that they shouldn't hold-in marijuana smoke, because more than 99% of THC is absorbed by the lungs upon inhalation, and holding in the smoke does not increase the drug's effects, but only leaves tar on the user's lungs).
     Lack of knowledge regarding safe drug use can lead to overdose deaths, as well as deaths resulting from ecstasy users dying from water poisoning because they incorrectly believed that they needed to drink as much water as possible while on the drug. Moreover, the risk of (non-fatal) overdose extends to marijuana as well; in my opinion, marijuana prohibition has resulted in a shift from smoking to edibles; because ingesting cannabis in foods allows users to more easily conceal its scent. Few marijuana users seem to be aware that the risk of non-fatal overdose (including disorientation) is higher for edibles as opposed to smoking cannabis; I believe that normalizing the smoking of cannabis will help reduce non-fatal overdoses from edibles. 

Sunday, April 20, 2014

15 Reasons to Legalize Marijuana

Written on June 17th, 2011



1. Reduction of marijuana prices by 90%.
2. More expendable income for pot-heads.
3. More white-market spending.
4. Less hunger and poverty.
5. Less violent crime.
6. Less expensive criminal justice system.
7. More reasonable criminal justice system.
8. Less crowding in jails and prisons.
9. More government tax revenue.
10. Less border violence.
11. More rational immigration policy.
12. More positive public perception of immigrants.
13. More available sources of fuel.
14. More available sources of fiber.
15. More medical science research on glaucoma, nerve cancer, autism,
            Asperger’s, Alzhemer’s, Parkinson’s, and Tourette’s




http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-food-and-drug-administration.html
For more entries on justice, crime, and punishment, please visit:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/thrasymachus-support-for-justice-being.html

On Legalizing Heroin

Written on May 16th, 2011



   Keeping heroin illegal (1) raises its price, causing an increase in violent crime – and of theft and other illegal means by which such money can be obtained (such as prostitution, mugging, bank robbery, etc.), (2) increases rates of blood-borne illnesses arising from infection due to needle-sharing, exacerbated by the occasional outlawing of needle purchases without prescriptions, and (3) makes it more difficult for heroin users to know the potency of their heroin, which can lead to overdoses.

   If states realize this, and begin to understand that legalizing heroin would lower prices, decrease violent crime, reduce infection rates, and allow government to sell and tax heroin as well as provide information to consumers about its potency, I say the federal government should let the states do it. The people will be safer, healthier, and they will have more money to spend on food and utilities.

   Cheaper drugs means less ostracism of drug use, and a better chance that drug users will be able to afford homes inside which they will be able to use drugs privately, rather than outdoors where they can endanger the health of (and be seen using by) others.

   Not only am I willing to defend Congressman Ron Paul's position that federal laws restricting the use, purchase, sale, and distribution should be struck down; I am also willing to recommend that state and local governments strike down similar laws.




http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-food-and-drug-administration.html

For more entries on justice, crime, and punishment, please visit:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/thrasymachus-support-for-justice-being.html

Conversation with a Liberal on Taxing Marijuana

Written on April 9th, 2011
Edited in April 2014
Based on a real conversation



   Me: "I heard that taxes by governments make up 20% of the price of gasoline. That's more than oil companies make in profits. And the government doesn't even provide any service for the gasoline, except letting it come into the country."

   Liberal: "Well, government provides plenty of services. Health care for retired people, for instance. The public roads that we drive on. I mean, those taxes have got to come from somewhere."

   Me: "If you can name a problem and say the taxes for it have to come from somewhere, but where they come from can be totally unrelated to the causality of the problem, then you can justify taxing any random thing just because there are problems out there...
   "Say we decide to legalize and tax marijuana. When people smoke marijuana, it causes lung cancer. It has a health detriment. I have no problem with the government taxing alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana if they spend the tax money to address health problems caused by those substances. And they do, they spend tobacco taxes on children's health care. And the public roads, some of that money comes from tolls that the people who drive on them directly have to pay while they're using them. That kind of causality-based taxation makes sense to me."

   Liberal: "Well, okay, it would be fine if we legalized medicinal marijuana, and even recreational marijuana, if the government could tax it, and it would especially make sense if that tax money were spent on medical care."

   Me: "I agree, and some estimates say that if we did that, then the price of marijuana would go down more than 90 percent."

   Liberal: "Well, in that case, I would want the government to keep the price of marijuana artificially high, like, for example, the same price it was before. You don't want people who are disadvantaged to smoke a lot of marijuana."

   Me: "That's ridiculous. First of all, price-fixing is never a good idea, whether you're keeping the price artificially high or artificially low.
   "Second, if you allow the price of marijuana to drastically decline, drug dealers aren't going to be able to afford to make any money off of it, and they'll have to look for real jobs, which would eventually cause a decrease in unemployment.
   "Third, if government forms a price cartel on marijuana and makes marijuana dispensaries sell it at that fixed price, you'd still have pot dealers who are willing to use violence against their competition, which would then be government employees selling marijuana legally.
   "Fourth, lowering the price of marijuana is not going to significantly affect the amount of pot that poor people smoke; there aren't many people that really need more than an eighth a week.
   "And lastly, why would you want to keep it difficult for poor people to afford pot? Don't you think poor people would do better to spend $45 a week on food, instead of paying that money to the government in the form of a 900% vice tax?"

   Liberal: "I don't want to make it hard for poor people to afford drugs or food! How could you assume I meant such a thing!?"

   Me: "You basically said you don't want to make it easier for poor people to do drugs affordably. That's the obvious outcome of what you proposed."

   Liberal: "Well, that's not how I meant it."

   Me: "Oh, so you just want to impose huge taxes on whatever you can for the pursuit of whatever problem you personally feel exists. Well, at least you're consistent."
   "Do you suggest we use that tax money to beat up pot dealers who out-compete the legal dispensaries? I believe that qualifies as 'change we can believe in'."





http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-food-and-drug-administration.html

For more entries on taxation, please visit:

Links to Documentaries About Covid-19, Vaccine Hesitancy, A.Z.T., and Terrain Theory vs. Germ Theory

      Below is a list of links to documentaries regarding various topics related to Covid-19.      Topics addressed in these documentaries i...