The Real Reason Pharma Companies Hate Medical Marijuana (Spoiler Alert: It Works)

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

Former Federal Judge Nancy Gertner was appointed to the federal bench by Bill Clinton in 1994. She presided over trials for 17 years. And Sunday, she stood before a crowd at The Aspen Ideas Festival to denounce most punishments that she imposed.


Among 500 sanctions that she handed down, “80 percent I believe were unfair and disproportionate,” she said. “I left the bench in 2011 to join the Harvard faculty to write about those stories––to write about how it came to pass that I was obliged to sentence people to terms that, frankly, made no sense under any philosophy.”


She went on to savage the War on Drugs at greater length. “This is a war that I saw destroy lives,” she said. “It eliminated a generation of African American men, covered our racism in ostensibly neutral guidelines and mandatory minimums… and created an intergenerational problem––although I wasn’t on the bench long enough to see this, we know that the sons and daughters of the people we sentenced are in trouble, and are in trouble with the criminal justice system.”


– From the post: Federal Judge of 17 Years Repents – Compares Damage Done by “War on Drugs” to Destruction of World War II

Whenever an irrational and inhumane law remains on the books far longer than any thinking person would consider appropriate, there’s usually one reason behind it: money.

Unsurprisingly, the continued federal prohibition on marijuana and its absurd classification as a Schedule 1 drug is no exception. Thankfully, a recent study published in the journal Health Affairs shows us exactly why pharmaceutical companies are one of the leading voices against medical marijuana. It has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with corporate greed.

So is it a war on drugs, or a war on cheap medicine. Decide for yourself.

The Washington Post reports:

There’s a body of research showing that painkiller abuse and overdose are lower in states with medical marijuana laws. These studies have generally assumed that when medical marijuana is available, pain patients are increasingly choosing pot over powerful and deadly prescription narcotics. But that’s always been just an assumption.


Now a new study, released in the journal Health Affairs, validates these findings by providing clear evidence of a missing link in the causal chain running from medical marijuana to falling overdoses. Ashley and W. David Bradford, a daughter-father pair of researchers at the University of Georgia, scoured the database of all prescription drugs paid for under Medicare Part D from 2010 to 2013.


They found that, in the 17 states with a medical-marijuana law in place by 2013, prescriptions for painkillers and other classes of drugs fell sharply compared with states that did not have a medical-marijuana law. The drops were quite significant: In medical-marijuana states, the average doctor prescribed 265 fewer doses of antidepressants each year, 486 fewer doses of seizure medication, 541 fewer anti-nausea doses and 562 fewer doses of anti-anxiety medication.

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 1.39.37 PM

But most strikingly, the typical physician in a medical-marijuana state prescribed 1,826 fewer doses of painkillers in a given year.


The tanking numbers for painkiller prescriptions in medical marijuana states are likely to cause some concern among pharmaceutical companies. These companies have long been at the forefront of opposition to marijuana reform, funding research by anti-pot academics and funneling dollars to groups, such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, that oppose marijuana legalization.


Pharmaceutical companies have also lobbied federal agencies directly to prevent the liberalization of marijuana laws. In one case, recently uncovered by the office of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), the Department of Health and Human Services recommended that naturally derived THC, the main psychoactive component of marijuana, be moved from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 of the Controlled Substances Act — a less restrictive category that would acknowledge the drug’s medical use and make it easier to research and prescribe. Several months after HHS submitted its recommendation, at least one drug company that manufactures a synthetic version of THC — which would presumably have to compete with any natural derivatives — wrote to the Drug Enforcement Administration to express opposition to rescheduling natural THC, citing “the abuse potential in terms of the need to grow and cultivate substantial crops of marijuana in the United States.”


The DEA ultimately rejected the HHS recommendation without explanation.

Yes, this DEA…

DEA Agents Caught Having Drug Cartel Funded Prostitute Sex Parties Received Slap on the Wrist; None Fired

The DEA Strikes Again – Agents Seize Man’s Life Savings Under Civil Asset Forfeiture Without Charges

DEA Agents Wrongly Jailed Student for 5 Days Without Food or Water Until He Had to Drink Own Urine; Nobody Fired

In what may be the most concerning finding for the pharmaceutical industry, the Bradfords took their analysis a step further by estimating the cost savings to Medicare from the decreased prescribing. They found that about $165 million was saved in the 17 medical marijuana states in 2013. In a back-of-the-envelope calculation, the estimated annual Medicare prescription savings would be nearly half a billion dollars if all 50 states were to implement similar programs.


One limitation of the study is that it only looks at Medicare Part D spending, which applies only to seniors. Previous studies have shown that seniors are among the most reluctant medical-marijuana users, so the net effect of medical marijuana for all prescription patients may be even greater.

Naturally, any sane society would immediately declassify marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug. Unfortunately, we do not live in a sane society.

Meanwhile, since we’re already on the topic of the disastrously idiotic “war on drugs,” let’s examine another egregious example of how it’s abused in order to unnecessarily ruin countless lives across America.

What follows are excerpts from a recent New York Times article covering “$2 Roadside Drug Tests” (I strongly suggest reading the entire thing):

Prepare to be outraged.

The officer asked Wilson to step out of the car. Wilson complied. The officer leaned in over the driver’s seat, looked around, then called to his partner; in the report Officer Duc Nguyen later filed, he wrote that he saw a needle in the car’s ceiling lining. Albritton didn’t know what he was talking about. Before she could protest, Officer David Helms had come around to her window and was asking for consent to search the car. If Albritton refused, Helms said, he would call for a drug-sniffing dog. Albritton agreed to the full search and waited nervously outside the car.


Helms spotted a white crumb on the floor. In the report, Nguyen wrote that the officers believed the crumb was crack cocaine. They handcuffed Wilson and Albritton and stood them in front of the patrol car, its lights still flashing. They were on display for rush-hour traffic, criminal suspects sweating through their clothes in the 93-degree heat.


At the police academy four years earlier, Helms was taught that to make a drug arrest on the street, an officer needed to conduct an elementary chemical test, right then and there. It’s what cops routinely do across the country every day while making thousands upon thousands of drug arrests. Helms popped the trunk of his patrol car, pulled out a small plastic pouch that contained a vial of pink liquid and returned to Albritton. He opened the lid on the vial and dropped a tiny piece of the crumb into the liquid. If the liquid remained pink, that would rule out the presence of cocaine. If it turned blue, then Albritton, as the owner of the car, could become a felony defendant.


Helms waved the vial in front of her face and said, “You’re busted.”


Albritton was booked into the Harris County jail at 3:37 a.m., nine hours after she was arrested. Wilson had been detained for driving without a license but would soon be released. Albritton was charged with felony drug possession and faced a much longer ordeal. Already, she was terrified as she thought about her family. Albritton was raised in a speck of a town called Marion at the northern edge of Louisiana. Her father still drove lumber trucks there; her mother had worked as a pharmacy technician until she died of colon cancer. Albritton was 15 then. She went through two unexpected pregnancies, the first at age 16, and two ill-fated marriages. But she had also pieced together a steady livelihood managing apartment complexes, and when her younger son was born disabled, she worked relentlessly to care for him. Now their future was almost certainly shattered.


She heard her name called and stepped forward to the reinforced window. A tall man with thinning hair and wire-rim glasses approached and introduced himself as Dan Richardson, her court-appointed defense attorney.


Richardson told Albritton that she was going to be charged with possession of a controlled substance, crack cocaine, at an arraignment that morning. Albritton recalls him explaining that this was a felony, and the maximum penalty was two years in state prison. She doesn’t remember him asking her what actually happened, or if she believed she was innocent. Instead, she recalls, he said that the prosecutor had already offered a deal for much less than two years. If she pleaded guilty, she would receive a 45-day sentence in the county jail, and most likely serve only half that.


Albritton told Richardson that the police were mistaken; she was innocent. But Richardson, she says, was unswayed. The police had found crack in her car. The test proved it. She could spend a few weeks in jail or two years in prison. In despair, Albritton agreed to the deal.


Police officers arrest more than 1.2 million people a year in the United States on charges of illegal drug possession. Field tests like the one Officer Helms used in front of Amy Albritton help them move quickly from suspicion to conviction. But the kits — which cost about $2 each and have changed little since 1973 — are far from reliable.


Think about the insanity of this. 1.2 million people...for possession. This is beyond unethical since there’s no actual victim in the case of drug possession. If there’s no victim, how can there be a crime? It’s preposterous.

The field tests seem simple, but a lot can go wrong. Some tests, including the one the Houston police officers used to analyze the crumb on the floor of Albritton’s car, use a single tube of a chemical called cobalt thiocyanate, which turns blue when it is exposed to cocaine. But cobalt thiocyanate also turns blue when it is exposed to more than 80 other compounds, including methadone, certain acne medications and several common household cleaners.


There are no established error rates for the field tests, in part because their accuracy varies so widely depending on who is using them and how. In Las Vegas, authorities re-examined a sampling of cocaine field tests conducted between 2010 and 2013 and found that 33 percent of them were false positives. Data from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement lab system show that 21 percent of evidence that the police listed as methamphetamine after identifying it was not methamphetamine, and half of those false positives were not any kind of illegal drug at all. In one notable Florida episode, Hillsborough County sheriff’s deputies produced 15 false positives for methamphetamine in the first seven months of 2014. When we examined the department’s records, they showed that officers, faced with somewhat ambiguous directions on the pouches, had simply misunderstood which colors indicated a positive result.


By 1978, the Department of Justice had determined that field tests “should not be used for evidential purposes,” and the field tests in use today remain inadmissible at trial in nearly every jurisdiction; instead, prosecutors must present a secondary lab test using more reliable methods.


But this has proved to be a meaningless prohibition. Most drug cases in the United States are decided well before they reach trial, by the far more informal process of plea bargaining. In 2011, RTI International, a nonprofit research group based in North Carolina, found that prosecutors in nine of 10 jurisdictions it surveyed nationwide accepted guilty pleas based solely on the results of field tests


We found that more than 10 percent of all county and state felony convictions are for drug charges, and at least 90 percent of those convictions come by way of plea deals. In Tennessee, guilty pleas produce 94 percent of all convictions. In Kansas, they make up more than 97 percent. In Harris County, Tex., where the judiciary makes detailed criminal caseload information public, 99.5 percent of drug-possession convictions are the result of a guilty plea. A majority of those are felony convictions, which restrict employment, housing and — in many states — the right to vote.


When Albritton pleaded guilty, she asked Franklin to explain the situation to her bosses at the rental-property firm, but Franklin decided it was safer to say nothing. She was going to be fired in any case, he reasoned, and alerting an employer about the drug felony would only hurt her future prospects. Albritton had managed the Frances Place Apartments, a well-maintained brick complex, for two years, and a free apartment was part of her compensation. But as far as the company knew, Albritton had abandoned her job and her home. She was fired, and her furniture and other belongings were put out on the side of the road. “So I lost all that,” she says.


Albritton gave up trying to convince people otherwise. She focused instead on Landon. Using a wheelchair, he needed regular sessions of physical and occupational therapy, and Albritton’s career managing the rental complex had been an ideal fit, providing a free home that kept her close to her son while she was at work, and allowing her the flexibility to ferry him to his appointments. But now, because of her new felony criminal record, which showed up immediately in background checks, she couldn’t even land an interview at another apartment complex. With a felony conviction, she couldn’t be approved as a renter either. Doug Franklin allowed Albritton and Landon to move in with him temporarily, and Albritton took a minimum-wage job at a convenience store.


In 1972, the Department of Justice published a training guide for forensic chemists in the nation’s crime labs, emphasizing that they were “the last line of defense against a false accusation,” but 40 years later, that line had largely vanished. A federal survey in 2013 found that about 62 percent of crime labs do not test drug evidence when the defendant pleads guilty. But the Houston crime lab, for all its problems, would not be among them.

Absolute insanity.

The forensic scientists in Miller’s lab keep untested samples in Manila envelopes locked in cabinets below their work benches. Some sat there for as long as four years, lab records show. Albritton’s evidence stayed locked up for six months. On Feb. 23, 2011 — five months after Albritton completed her sentence and returned home as a felon — one of Houston’s forensic scientists, Ahtavea Barker, pulled the envelope up to her bench. It contained the crumb, the powder and the still-unexplained syringe. First she weighed everything. The syringe had too little residue on it even to test. It was just a syringe. The remainder of the “white chunk substance” that Officer Helms had tested positive with his field kit as crack cocaine totaled 0.0134 grams, Barker wrote on the examination sheet, about the same as a tiny pinch of salt.


Barker turned to gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis, or GC-MS, the gold standard in chemical identification, to figure out what was in Albritton’s car that evening. She began with the powder. First the gas chromatograph vaporized a speck of the powder inside a tube. Then the gas was heated, causing its core chemical compounds to separate. When the individual compounds reached the end of the tube, the mass spectrometer blasted them with electrons, causing them to fragment. The resulting display, called a fragmentation pattern, is essentially a chemical fingerprint. The powder was a combination of aspirin and caffeine — the ingredients in BC Powder, the over-the-counter painkiller, as Albritton had insisted.


Then Barker ran the same tests on the supposed crack cocaine. The crumb’s fragmentation pattern did not match that of cocaine, or any other compound in the lab’s extensive database. It was not a drug. It did not contain anything mixed with drugs. It was a crumb — food debris, perhaps. Barker wrote “N.A.M.” on the spectrum printout, “no acceptable match,” and then added another set of letters: “N.C.S.” No controlled substance identified. Albritton was innocent.

Her life was ruined, and for what?

If Albritton’s case is one of hundreds in Houston, there is every reason to suspect that it is just one among thousands of wrongful drug convictions that were based on field tests across the United States. The Harris County district attorney’s office is responsible for half of all exonerations by conviction-integrity units nationwide in the past three years — not because law enforcement is different there but because the Houston lab committed to testing evidence after defendants had already pleaded guilty, a position that is increasingly unpopular in forensic science.


Crime labs have been moving away from drug cases to focus on DNA and evidence from violent crimes. In some instances, the shift has been extreme. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s forensic laboratory analyzes the evidence in, on average, just 73 drug cases a year, internal records show. Nearly all of its 8,000 annual possession arrests rest exclusively on field-test results.


The United States Department of Justice was once among the leading voices of caution regarding field tests, and encouraged all drug evidence go to lab chemists. But in 2008, the Justice Department funded a program developed by the National Forensic Science Technology Center, a nonprofit that provides crime-lab training, to reduce drug-evidence backlogs. Titled Field Investigation Drug Officer, the program consisted of a series of seminars that taught local police officers how to administer color field tests on a large scale. In its curriculum, the technology center states that field tests help authorities by “removing the need for extensive laboratory analysis,” because “the field test may factor into obtaining an immediate plea agreement.” The Justice Department declined repeated interview requests.

The Department of Justice, why am I not surprised. The DOJ seems interested in all sorts of things; unfortunately, justice isn’t one of them.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD's picture
LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD (not verified) Jul 21, 2016 2:43 PM

Being too stoned to know that you're sick does have its advantages.

Slave's picture

lol it does not work. I smoke and I can feel all my pains more during it. Only if I get super high can I not feel anything. But people who use regularly can't get that high anymore. It's just an excuse to legalize, not that I'm against.

hedgeless_horseman's picture






Is your life fucked up?  

Why self-medicate when you can pay to have a professional prescribe something that will fuck you up?

Mind altering substances...the easy answer to all of life's problems!

PleasedToMeatYou's picture

The "Dr." was walking in with a blunt, wasn't he? 

hedgeless_horseman's picture


"Swallowing half an hour before closing time, that second dose of soma had raised a quite impenetrable wall between the actual universe and their minds."


-Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley


hedgeless_horseman's Revolutionary Call to Arms:

4.  Read Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley

5.  Make a commitment to not use mind-altering substances for 90 days.  If you fail, go to an AA meeting and restart the 90 days.


N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) hedgeless_horseman Jul 21, 2016 3:21 PM

Alcohol included?

That alters my brain quite a bit.   I actually turn into a socialist when I'm drunk, I like everybody.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

Liking everybody does not make you a socialist.  It make you a libertarian.

I like just about everybody.  No substances involved. Libertarian.  It's cause every individual's route to happiness is INDIVIDUAL.

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) DownWithYogaPants Jul 21, 2016 4:18 PM

Ok,  well, I not only LIKE everybody I want to intrude into their lives and help them.   It's a mind altering experience.  

fauxhammer's picture

I smoked in order to read this article but now I'm scared ZH is taking names

juangrande's picture

Wow! This article is only about 30 yrs too late! Pot was made illegal, initially, in order to remove hemp from competing with petrochemical/ timber/ cotton industry. Later, the pharms enterd the game. The war on drugs was nothing but a political ploy, used to keep people scared and voting neocon/lib. It also had the benefit of funding international black ops., a burgeoning legal /incarceration industry and police departments. Win Win!

WhackoWarner's picture

Anyone who actually wished to understand the ban on pot and hemp needs to look back into the history f why it was banned and made a substance akin to heroin.

But people are lazy.

The classic film Marijuana Madness??? is such a giggle,


The ban on pot was a prequel to Monsanto lobby.  Pot was a threat. Opium was a tool used to bring down 2 societies.


Pot was banned due to a baby, try to influence gov. lobby.  And has sent innocent people to jail ever since.

I get a huge laugh every time I see a new commercial, for a newly invented disease by pharma, when 45 seconds of the 60 second info-grab involves the side-effects.

Remember the drugs a few years ago that said they may cause "oil leaks out of assholes?"  Only assholes here are the pharma.

Now we got this "You got no tears?  We will give it a name and sell a drug."  Or all these vultures preying on people in need by raping the costs higher and higher,

Buying patents and jacking up costs 1000%....inventing conditions to fit some new result out of a lab?

Taking a condition like Hep C and making the "cure" out of reach.  Got a friend with Hep C.  Cost of drugs?  $75K or more?  Cost to the pharma co.?????


Stainless Steel Rat's picture
Stainless Steel Rat (not verified) WhackoWarner Jul 22, 2016 12:01 AM

But, but, but... we need marijuana prisoners to fuel the prison industrial complex, spread HIV and tuberculosis, and to increase gang recruitment.  And if there wasn't a black market infrastructure for marijuana, how would we be able to sustain the black market for harder stuff...  The hard stuff would start making up 99.9% of the drug distribution arrests.  Plus it eats into alcohol sales...

Indelible Scars's picture

The film was actually called 'Reefer Madness' but, hey, technicalities being what they are.

PT's picture

We must have a sick society.  All through my teens and early 20s, every Friday and Saturday night so many people were "self-medicating" ...

Trogdor's picture

CBD oil worked for my dad's cancer.  After they'd burned him, poinsoned him, and chopped on him ... and his "ATM" was empty .. the "Medical Professionals" sent him home to die.  I got him some oil and convinced him to take it - 3 months later, he was cancer-free.  Doesn't work for everyone - it's not a magic bullet - but when you realize that the Cancer Industry makes an average of $250K per patient, and is a multi-billion dollar industry, you can see why they use their influence to make sure people can't grow a cure in their back yard.  Add to that the crazy profits of the for-profit prisons, cool new guns and shit for the LEO's, jets, helicopters, and machine guns for the DEA, and the crazy profits made by the "legal system" .... and it's pretty obvious why they demonize it so heavily.

ScalarX's picture

Hi all, my first comment; thanks for letting me lurk here.

My little brother, from the time of his birth would have to go into the ER once to twice a year to save his life as his airways would close up from asthma attacks that were so bad, tears would stream down his face from the pain and terror that comes from not being able to breathe.

Until that one day in the '80's when I was 16 and a pal passed that homemade bong to my 13 yo bro while my back was turned. Although my brother does not use pot, from that day on he has never had to suffer an asthma attack again.
My folks never really knew why he stopped having attacks; I finally let them in on it some years later.

Stuff seems okay to me.

eurogold's picture

You speek the truth, that's why  this fight must go on.

I will never understand how the powers that be can hate the people so much in this regard.

trader1's picture

we are all addicted to something.

and everything is toxic; it's the dose that makes it a poison.


Citxmech's picture

You guys saying it doesn't work are using the wrong shit.  The high CBD stuff is what you want to reduce body aches - it doesn't really get you very high either, btw.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

I can't do the high tech hothouse weed it gives me an instant head and belly ache.

However I can speak to street weed of yester year.  My observations:

-1- for the hyperactive / hyper adrenaline driven personality it helps you chill out

-2- indeed when you are sick it helps a bit with aches and pains

-3- helps with allergies due to supressing a bit of the adrenaline that adrenaline driven personalities have too much of and indeed create inflammation

-4- weed is bad to smoke on an everyday basis because it screws with your sleep to a degree.  Thus I never allowed myself to do more than every other night on and ongoing basis.

Those against weed are just as silly as those who think you should smoke 24 / 7.    Weed should be legal and the government in no manner involved in it. Not even to tax it.

Rentier88's picture

-5- it has been known to cause ED in guys with extended use...

consider me gone's picture

I smoked gobs of weed for 30 years and ED was never an issue. Ugly women can cause ED. This I will attest to.

Tall Tom's picture





Beautiful women can cause ED as well due to nervousness.


But onto a side effect of Marijuana


Gynocomastia is a problem as Cannabis imbalances  hormones..


Unfortunately because of the current laws repeatable experimentation is not allowed.


But there is other evidence.


This demands further study as it also may affect fertility and Sperm Count. (They do want you to quit breeding after all.).

consider me gone's picture

That's funny you mentioned allergies. I smoked-alot-for 30 years and never had allergy problems.Ever. I quit ten years ago and my allergy problems have become a nightmare. But I am told that pollen counts have been reaching record levels in the last few years. So I just can't say definitively what the cause is. I do like weed. It's the only drug that performs as advertised. All the rest suck, including alcohol.

4freedom78's picture

Like everything you have to take the right quantity, drug are bad because abused ( same issue with guns ) we have to learn how to use it, we should have the guts to decriminalize all of it.

Crash Overide's picture

That fact that we are forced to pay tax to a government that ruins lives over a plant that saves lives and grows in nature is absurd.

Tunga's picture

There are no implementing enforcement regulations for Pot. The federal government has absolutly no authority to procecute anyone for marijuana. 

cornedmutton's picture

Still waiting for someone to show me where in the US Constitution the Federal Government was given the authority to regulate any food or drug....

Here.  I'll make it easy for all the retards out there:

The 10th Amendment

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

sun tzu's picture

Since the surpeme court says the commerce clause allows the federal government to force people to buy a specific type of health insurance, they can use the commerce clause to regulate and ban anything they want. If you like your freedoms, you can keep your freedoms. Next, they will use the commerce clause to force you to buy junk bonds. No worries, you will be able to select what type of junk bonds you want. 

toady's picture

Everybody's got something to hide, except for me and my monkey. 

AchtungAffen's picture

Or maybe read Handmaid's Tale, for those puritan tastes of yours...

conscious being's picture

Hedgeless, if you over react, you come off sounding like a scene from Reefer Madness. Look at this.

"As for smoking, I know of no significant communication among the Founders extolling their “great weed.”
But in one of his meticulous agricultural journals, dated 1765, Washington regrets being late to separate his male hemp plants from his females. For a master farmer like George, there would be little reason to do this except to make the females ripe for smoking." -

You don't consider the FFs a bunch of slackers do you?

SixIsNinE's picture

read Huxley's book ISLAND and then read his widow's book "This Timesless Moment" for her description of administering LSD to Aldous as he died according to his wishes for a better understanding of why psychedelics are SO INCREDIBLY NECESSARY for humanity right NOW -

thanks for your service HH, and we DO appreciate all that you do even if you are still under Big PHarma induced trance regarding the War on Consciousness and Some Plants and Molecules

Love Ya HH !

Flagit's picture

Just finished the 3rd week. Remind me again what the purpose of this is? I mean, other than achieving a zen-like state of hyper-criticism.

ACES FULL's picture

I think the most important thing to emphasize here for supposedly liberty minded folks on the Hedge...Marijuana,A FUCKING PLANT,is classified as a Schedule 1 drug that you go to prison for simply possessing.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Too much competition for the CIA, they had to make competition illegal...

Socratic Dog's picture

"Supposedly" liberty-minded is correct.  Hedgeless as a good example.  For some reason there's a blind spot in the individual-freedom glasses when it comes to the weed.  Beats me why the hatred.  The stats listed in the article on decreased prescriptions would seem to speak for themselves.

conscious being's picture

In defense of Hedgeless, he's not saying it should be banned and criminalized. He's recomending no mind altering substances. But everything you take in is mind altering. Right now, I'm drinking a cup of coffee. ZeroHedge is mind altering.

Free Spirit's picture

Yes, it may seem insane, but that's because You care more for liberty then for money ?  

The western alcohol industry is growing ONLY because the leading alcohol-producing countries (USA, England, France) has succeded in  its " war against drugs" to establish a drug MONOPOLY for the western drugs.  Without this war they would for example have no market in India, which is the industrys most important market for growth today. Nor would they have many clients in the established markets once less dangerous drugs like marijuana etc was legalized. Why would consumers then risk their lives by drinking alcohol ?

The victims of the war on drugs are seen as collateral damage.

See my point ? You simply do not understand the importance of profits and money and how worthless people in general are to the western oligarchs

zippedydoodah's picture

People say that marijuana is cool because it's a plant by-product.

Well alcohol should be cool too because it's just a fungus by-product. 

Fungi are even more elemental than plants.

DuneCreature's picture

Damn, hh, some people do drugs because they’re just plain fun!

Live Hard, Take Small Test Hits Until You Get The Hang Of It, Die Free

~ DC v2.0

logicalman's picture

A tad judgemental, don't you think?

I tried pot once - for 45 years.

61 and fitter than most 30 year olds - good for 50 miles on my mountain bike any day of the year.

I've had people comment on how good my memory is, so it doesn't seem to do much harm in that regard.

Likewise, lung function is unharmed.

No chance of OD - the only way pot will kill you is if a large bale drops on your head from a great height.

Seems pretty benign, to me.

The most dangerous thing about it are the 'laws' regarding it, which doesn't make any sense whatsoever.




conscious being's picture

Logicalman, same here. 61 too and I can out run, out jump, out fish, out f*ck, out fight, out think most people half my age. I never see a doctor. I am my own doctor. I'm going for 125. According to the Greeks with Alexander, that was the typical life span of the Brahmins they encountered in India in 326 BC. Which reminds me, my advice to the ZHedgies, learn to practice Yoga. Those ancient dudes knew what they were talking about.

Edit: ok, I lied about the fishing part, sometimes I get tangled up, but the rest of it is spot on.

logicalman's picture

I'm not looking for quantity, just quality.

Fit feels good!

Only seen doctors due to impact at high speed with terra firma. I've been known to mis-judge a bike trail or two!

I'll be still for a long time in the not too distant future - plan to keep moving while I still can.

I don't do yoga, but I do sit out in quiet places and meditate. I'm fortunate to have such places within cycling distance.

One big thing I would highly recommend... Ditch the TV ASAP.



conscious being's picture

Logicman I have no TV. I haven't had a TV since about mid 2002. I once caught a root while making a turn at high speed and my foot wouldn't come out of the trap. I sprung my collar bone. My friend said don't worry, you'll always have a place to hang your hat ... my near verticle broken bone. So yes, I have been to bone doctors too. But I mostly don't ride like that anymore.

Soundgardener's picture

Fit, hale and healthy, yet your reasoning ability and lack of credulity cause you to think Brahmins in India circa 326 BC lived to 125 years old ('typically').

Good luck with that.

conscious being's picture

Read "Alexander the Great" by Robert Lane Fox, an excellent read, and tell me I'm wrong.