COMMENTS: 47
America's Love-Hate Relationship with Drugs
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Personal Health headlines via email.
Author and science writer Michael Pollan observed the following about Americans' illegal-psychiatric drug hypocrisy: "Historians of the future will wonder how a people possessed of such a deep faith in the power of drugs also found themselves fighting a war against certain other drugs with not-dissimilar powers. ... We hate drugs. We love drugs. Or could it be that we hate the fact that we love drugs?"
When we recognize that psychotropic prescription drugs are chemically similar to illegal psychotropic drugs, and that all of these substances are used for similar purposes, we see two injustices. First, we see the classification of millions of Americans as criminals for using certain drugs, while millions of others, using essentially similar drugs for similar purposes, are seen as patients. Second, we see a denial of those societal realities that compel increasing numbers of Americans to use psychotropic drugs.
In the history of psychiatry, there has been a revolving door in which a "medication" becomes an "illegal drug" -- and visa versa. Sigmund Freud used cocaine as medication to treat his own and others' depression and despair. In the 1930s amphetamines were prescribed to treat depression; later amphetamines were prescribed for weight loss; while today amphetamines such as Adderall and Dexedrine are prescribed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Alcohol was a recommended treatment for anxiety as late as the 1940s; and in the 1950s and early 1960s, psychiatrist Oscar Janiger treated the neuroses of Hollywood stars and other celebrities with LSD. Ecstasy was used in marital counseling during the 1980s, and today researchers are studying it as a possible treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.
It is politically -- and economically -- incorrect for the corporate press, dependent on Big Pharma advertising revenue, to compare psychiatric drugs with illegal drugs. However, the psychiatry drug textbook A Primer of Drug Action notes that individuals who have used cocaine have difficulty distinguishing between the subjective effects of cocaine and dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine) when both are administered intravenously. The amphetamines Dexedrine and Adderall, besides being prescribed for ADHD, are used by many college kids, truck drivers, and others to pull all-nighters.
Both cocaine and amphetamines enhance the neurotransmitters norepinephrine, serotonin, and dopamine. The antidepressant Effexor enhances norepinephrine and serotonin, and the antidepressant Wellbutrin enhances dopamine; and it is not uncommon to be prescribed Effexor and Wellbutrin at the same time. Effexor in combination with Wellbutrin enhances the same neurotransmitters as cocaine (you won't likely feel the same, mainly due to the quicker impact and shorter half-life of cocaine). And selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs) such as Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, Lexapro, and Luvox enhance the neurotransmitter serotonin. Ecstasy also enhances serotonin, although by a different mechanism (you won't likely feel the same using SSRIs as you would using Ecstasy in part because Ecstasy has a quicker, shorter-lasting pop).
The Speed Culture, coauthored by psychiatrist Lester Grinspoon in 1975, astutely predicted: "Drug companies probably will continue to produce increasingly sophisticated and disguised amphetamines, and these 'new' drugs undoubtedly will be greeted with initial enthusiasm by the medical establishment until it is recognized that any drug with amphetamine-like CNS [central nervous system] stimulating properties almost invariably is just as toxic, potentially addictive, and therapeutically limited as Benzedrine or Dexedrine."
While many people use mood-altering drugs recreationally, many others believe that they need their psychotropic drugs -- prescribed and illegal -- to function. Eric Schlosser in Fast Food Nation, investigating the meatpacking industry, discovered this: "The unrelenting pressure of trying to keep up with the line has encouraged widespread methamphetamine use among meatpackers. Workers taking 'crank' feel charged and self-confident, ready for anything."
In 2004 Miami Dolphins running back Ricky Williams announced that he had found marijuana to be "ten times more helpful than Paxil" for his anxiety and depression. What made Williams's declaration difficult to ignore was that he had been a celebrity spokesman for GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturer of Paxil.
Neuroscientist Pankaj Sah notes, "It's worth considering that people who constantly use cannabis may be doing it for other reasons than just to 'get high' -- perhaps they are experiencing some emotional problems which taking cannabis alleviates. Much the same way as some people drink alcohol to relieve anxiety."
Marijuana and other illegal psychotropic drugs can, according to Ethan Nadelmann, founder and executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, "represent a form of self-medication against physical and emotional pain among people who do not have access to psychotherapy or Prozac." The Drug Policy Alliance (an outgrowth of Nadelmann's Lindesmith Center, a drug policy institute created with the support of George Soros) "advocates for drug policies grounded in science, compassion, health, and human rights."
The illegal-psychiatric drug hypocrisy in the U.S. is an ugly triumph. It is a triumph of marketing over science. It is a triumph for pharmaceutical corporations and America's ever-growing prison-industrial complex. It is a triumph for those comfortably atop society who would rather Americans view their malaise as exclusively a medical rather than a social problem. And ultimately, it is a triumph of injustice and greed over human rights and a sane society.
Stay up to date with the latest Personal Health headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 9, 2008 1:08 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, Ecstacy (mdma, or methylene - dioxy - methamphetamine) is more closely related to Adderall (dextroamphetamine) and Ritalin (methylphenidate) than to the SSRIs like Paxil and Prozac. (Knockoffs of Ritalin include Focalin and Metadate).
Even more ridiculous are the newly patented ADHD drugs like Vyanse That drug breaks down to release dextroamphetamine after it's been ingested.
Compare those to Desoxyn - pure methamphetamine. It's marketed as a '"subsititute for kids who have become tolerant to Ritalin".
It's meth - pure speed - crank, crystal meth, ice - the demon drug of rural America, subject of endless horror stories in the press - and they give it to little kids to keep them quiet. Unbelievable - but it's a multibillion-dollar market for Big Pharma, so politicians keep quiet about it.
Furthermore, the pharmaceutical drugs often have binders or slow-release agents - leading to the slower onset - which all drug users know can be defeated by grinding the drugs up and snorting them.
These amphetamine derivatives are largely indistinguishable in the actions. Pills sold on the street as Ecstacy may actually be methamphetamine, ritalin, adderall, or some combination thereof.
What does this mean? Giving a child Ritalin every day is really no different than giving a child Ecstacy every day - and that's a fact.
According to the FDA's MedWatch program, from 1990-1997 there were 160 Ritalin-related deaths, around 600 hospitalizations, and around 125 heart disorders reported (on a voluntary basis - so those are underestimates). Similar numbers of deaths have been reported for Ecstacy use - yet Ecstacy is demonized, while Ritalin is heavily promoted and marketed by pharmaceuticals and child psychiatrists.
How many people died from cannabis use in that same time period? Ah - zero reported deaths with cannabis as the primary cause That excludes cannabis-related deaths- such as driving while intoxicated (around 300 in ten years - far, far lower than drunken driving). How many people have died from tobacco and alcohol use in that period? In the U.S. alone, at least half a million a year. Viagra, for comparison, killed several thousand people.
Many law enforcement officials are now pushing to legalize, tax and regulate all drugs - because they know the Prohibition model only fosters violent crime and police corruption. For example, see LEAP - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
These are people who have seen the total failure to stop illegal drug traffic, even in police states like Soviet Russia and Stasi East Germany. There's only one way to deal with the issue - treat it as a public health issue, legalize, tax and regulate, and encourage moderation.
Who is against such a plan? Around five sectors: the pharmaceutical industry, the alcohol industry, the tobacco industry, the private prison industry, and a lot of seriously misguided and brainwashed members of the public, who actually believe all the lies about "The War on Drugs" disseminated by the DEA.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Nice to see the truth being more widely recognized
Posted by: Lauren
» Real liberals and progressives would fight to ABOLISH THE DEA.
Posted by: maxpayne
» I agree with some of your points but..
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Comments are closed-
Posted by: heid on Jan 9, 2008 3:52 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watch out, too, for the move to make nutrients illegal. It's right around the corner in the form of Codex Alimentarius and "harmonization" of international trade. Vitamins, herbs, and supplements are now on the verge of becoming illegal unless prescribed by doctors.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» On the contrary.....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: On the contrary.....
Posted by: daniel347x
» RE: On the contrary.....
Posted by: mjabele
» What difference does it make. . .
Posted by: heid
» RE: What difference does it make. . .
Posted by: mjabele
» Anamita mushrooms & Angel Trumpets
Posted by: gellero
» RE: Anamita mushrooms & Angel Trumpets
Posted by: LordFoom
» RE: Anamita mushrooms & Angel Trumpets
Posted by: heid
» RE: nutrients
Posted by: jtellerelsberg
» Why regulate Prozac and not St. John's wort?
Posted by: heid
» Ah, let's go back to aspirin...
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Itsthewater on Jan 9, 2008 4:10 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When Harry Anslinger lost his job (justification) post-Prohibition, the gummint approved funding for Reefer Madness in order to continue the relevance of that office.
The proximate issue at hand, as the author alludes to, is who is selling the product.
Mexican meth=Bad
Adderall=Therapeutic
Migraine meds from Big Pharma=Good
Cocaine=Bad
Easy, huh?
The ultimate issue is that it is impossible to lock down a patent on a naturally occurring substance. This is why aspirin (benign) gave way to Vioxx, Celebrex, Bextra (deadly).
The efficacy of herbal and herbal derived formulas that have been used for thousands of years by various cultures is unquestionable.
Willow bark for inflammation (aspirin)
Cannabis for depression, pain and social lubrication.
Coca for stamina and altitude sickness, depression.
Tobacco as an insecticide and mental toner.
All impossible to patent.
Add to this equation the many new problems that have arisen from polluting our environment and social patterns.
Do you work all the time, never communicate in a relaxed way with people who comprise your affinity group? You need Prozac, Efexor, Zoloft, Lexapro—not social change.
Are you continually inundated with diesel fumes, coal smoke, and industrial effluents like DDT and dioxin?
You need an asthma medication—not protection of your environment.
Can't sleep because of the above?
You need Ambien, Lunesta, etc.—not a good orgasm and some wine.
I susubscribe to the "thousands rule": if it has been used for 1000s of years, it is most likely OK. If it has been cooked up in a Pharma Phactory, not so much.
Salud! Hey-you got a smoke?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Follow the money
Posted by: PJAW
» Aspirin is a good drug, but I wouldn't be so quick to say it's "benign"...
Posted by: mjabele
» Who said that Vioxx or Celebrex were good drugs?
Posted by: mjabele
» You pointed out that Vioxx and Celebrex were created. . .
Posted by: heid
» I think the basis of many of your statements is unsupported...
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: I think the basis of many (apples and oranges)Follow the $$
Posted by: Itsthewater
» No smokes.....
Posted by: mjabele
» Stuff and nonsense!
Posted by: heid
» Your reference doesn't seem to back up your statement at all...
Posted by: mjabele
» Setting up a trap - good for you.
Posted by: heid
» No trap - here's a direct quote from what YOU said...
Posted by: mjabele
» My last statement.
Posted by: heid
» Ah, but I never said that I "blindly believe in the honesty or safety...
Posted by: mjabele
» Arthralgia?
Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 9, 2008 6:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» So What ....
Posted by: gellero
Comments are closed-
Posted by: carbon-based on Jan 9, 2008 10:30 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe pharm execs should be locked up with other dealers!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Christian Science
Posted by: gellero
Comments are closed-
Posted by: patsmart on Jan 9, 2008 12:29 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: patsmart
Posted by: peacefullaim
Comments are closed-
Posted by: redceres on Jan 9, 2008 1:47 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I tend to be anxious and over-stressed, a perfectionist, and a bit of a "dark-sider" when it comes to world view. I started taking Paxil in 1994 as part of the original drug studies and took it all the way through 2005. During that time, every time I tried to go off Paxil, I would get nauseous and snappy. I would go back on because I thought the Paxil made me feel better. When I started taking the drug again, I stabilized and didn't feel sick all the time.
In 2005, I got to the point where I couldn't afford it anymore--not if I was going to put aside money for my daughters' college education.
When I was trying to get off it, I was suicidal. Mind you, I have never been suicidal in my life or even really depressed--just a little tensed out. During my withdrawals, my daughters were scared of me because of my temper. I felt like I was going to die, and I couldn't sleep without the most horrible dreams.
But it went away.
I toughed it out for about two months before I started feeling better. Now, I can look back and honestly tell you I am better off. I am NEVER nauseous anymore, which is a real bonus after the thousands of dollars I spent while on that damned drug to figure out WHY I was nauseous and why I had no energy. My doctor--a stooge for the drug companies--never even suggested to me that it might be the Paxil.
He also never managed to find anything else wrong with me.
I can't say that I'm not anxious anymore--but I learned to tell people NO and to protect the sanctity of my own down time. I learned to tell corporate America that yes, I have a problem with stress, but the answer is NOT to take a drug and buy a bunch of crap to deal with the stress. It was to eliminate the sources of stress as best I can.
I am a control freak. That's who I am. I am also more in control WITHOUT the Paxil than I ever was with it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I was on Paxil
Posted by: heid
» RE: I was on Paxil
Posted by: A. Servant
» RE: I was on Paxil
Posted by: DianeJ
Comments are closed-
Posted by: seaseal on Jan 9, 2008 4:25 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have more people in prison than any other country.
Why? Because the prisons are being privatized. Why? Because there's big money in running prisons. Why? Because we can put people in prison, for life, because of chemical substances that on the other side of the counter are sold as prescription drugs. Why? Because of the $$$.
Big pharma spends more on advertising and "outreach" than they do on research! Tell you anything?
Another major crime is the mental health system where people are prescribed drugs and if they refuse to take those drugs (usually because of the horrific effects called "side effects", they are dropped from the MH system, losing their housing, their incomes, and their support system.
How did we in America get this way?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gonzoskismet on Jan 9, 2008 5:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we would all be as clean as the Baby Jesus by now.
If anybody out there knows of a nation that is more in denial than this nation is, I want to here about it. This is why the Government wanted to get rid of the Mafia. So they could become the pushers. Anybody notice how the drugs of choice have changed over the years from the more optimistic 'up' drugs like LSD, mushrooms, mescaline and pot to drugs that are down and dead ends like smack and downs? Now, cough syrup has made a big comeback amongst young people. This is dread, man. Truly dread.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: shoplifter on Jan 9, 2008 7:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Herbal supplements don't get you high (unless you are one of those crazy datura kids). It's a very subtle change but they do work. A lot of European countries will prescribe herbals before they do pharmas. Actually, Europe has a great system for this - in some countries, to get OTC medicine, you have to visit a pharmacy. You can't buy Tylenol where you buy your groceries. A small reminder that medicine is for treating illness, not to supplement daily life.
Isn't it more disturbing that so many people are preferring altered reality to reality?
The heroin problem in Afghanistan is understandable (what do you do when you lose all hope) - but it's freaky to see that it's also a huge problem in highly affluent countries.
There's something really wrong there.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: garry minor on Jan 9, 2008 7:15 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But, we are going to win!
Kaneh bosm!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: liberalibrarian on Jan 10, 2008 10:09 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Could Your Cell Phone End Up Killing You?
The Overuse of Antibiotics in Livestock Feed Is Killing Us
One of the Most Common Chemicals Used in Modern Life Is Now Being Seen as a Health Threat




