Tag: Nixon

Silicon Valley Is On LSD, And The Government Is Holding Them Back

By Mason Mohon | United States

That guy who made iPhones? Yeah, he was a good for nothing druggy who would go trip like a degenerate in the woods on psychedelic drugs with his friends.

That’s probably how you’re going to conceive of Steve Jobs when I tell you that he tripped on acid a lot in college. If that is your conception, though, your conceptions may very well be wrong, and you may have a prejudice against anything characterized by the word drug like the old south had a prejudice against those characterized by the word “negro.” Open up a little bit, and let your conceptions be shaken, because it may very well be the case that nearly every modern silicon valley innovation may be coming from the depths of drug-induced flows.

The Rolling Stone reported back in 2015 that lots of people in San Francisco are hacking the world by hacking themselves; they’re microdosing LSD, psilocybin, and other psychedelics. Microdosing is the practice of taking a very small amount of a psychoactive drug such to boost performance, decrease stress, and increase creativity. Typically, it will be about 10 micrograms of LSD or half a gram of psilocybin mushrooms.

The reports come from all over the world, but Fadiman says there’s a steady, consistent stream originating in the San Francisco area. The typical profile there is an “übersmart twentysomething” curious to see whether microdosing will help him or her work through technical problems and become more innovative. “It’s an extremely healthy alternative to Adderall,” says Fadiman, referring to a drug popular with programmers.

Ken, the fake name for the real 25-year-old Stanford graduate working a tech startup, is just one profile for this growing innovation trend. Wired profiled Lily (another fake name) who will take a small amount of magic mushroom with her morning tea. They had the following description of microdosing:

In small amounts, say, a tenth of a full dose, users don’t experience a consciousness-altering “trip”, but instead report improvements in concentration and problem solving, as well as a reduction in anxiety.

Ok, cool, so these young people are taking drugs, great, but these internet companies just have a few profiles – that doesn’t say anything about the broader topic of the effectiveness and safety of improving labor through the use of drugs.

Where’s The Science?

We cannot base any conclusions off of a few internet profiles. We need to stick to the well studied and credible scientific data to know whether or not what they are doing is a good idea. We should break down the data and look at the actual aspects of whether or not this is safe of effective.

Obviously, drugs are illegal. In the 70’s, then-President Nixon declared the war on drugs, causing various substances to be listed as schedule one. Today ’s most popular psychedelics are on that list. Because of this, it has been incredibly difficult to study the effects of microdosing, but it has been done.

Jim Fadiman is the world’s leading researcher on the effects of psychedelics on general productivity. Right now, he is working with hundreds of people who microdose every four days and keep a journal of the effects.

In keeping with the received wisdom, those taking LSD microdoses reported a remarkable increase in feelings of determination, alertness, and energy, as well as a strong decrease in feelings of depression. Interestingly, however, Fadiman noted that microdosing LSD didn’t seem to work out as well for those who entered the study on the basis of anxiety alone—microdosing LSD actually seemed to increase their anxiety. However, those participants who cited anxiety and depression, rather than just anxiety, noted an overall increase in their feelings of mental wellbeing.

Of course, we cannot rely solely on data entirely based on self-report research. Luckily, Fadiman has been at this for a while. All the way back in 1966, the government funded his psychedelic problem-solving experiment. People from various fields were brought in to take tests and work to solve a problem in their field, which could range from mathematics and architecture. The results are in, it would boost concentration, creativity, and limit anxiety.

The only real criticism it has received is that the mescaline (another psychedelic) used in the experiment was used in conjunction with methamphetamine. Regardless, the effects of LSD have remained undisputed.

You can read about Fadiman’s ‘66 experiment here and here.

Clearly, it produces the desired results. The programmers and artists aren’t stuck with a placebo productivity spurt, but at what cost. How safe is microdosing?

Our knowledge of the downsides of LSD as a whole is limited. What we do know is that those who have pre-existing mental ailments such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder are at risk for HPPD, a disorder that can cause “flashbacks,” and a mixture of LSD with drugs like marijuana or alcohol can create what is known as a “bad trip.”

Adding even more mud to the murk is sites like Drug Free World, which I have personally termed “Source Free Information” because of the lack of any citations on the entire site. They publish sensational articles and scary videos, arguing that there are loads of adverse health effects. Doing this helps nobody, for it becomes harder to know what the facts really are.

The Government’s Role

The state has not been much help when it comes to finding out what is going on here. Before the seventies, LSD was being studied quite a bit, but once the war on drugs came along it has become incredibly difficult for scientists in the United States to research this.

There are two scenarios facing those that are microdosing today. The first is that what they are doing is dangerous and that the costs outweigh the benefits. The other, though, is that they are truly onto something and they have hacked life.

If it is true that these people are in danger and we do not know it, then the government is not helping one bit by keeping it illegal. As long as psychedelics are illegal, research into the harmful effects cannot be done, and the people using microdoses are at more risk day after day.

If, as a matter of fact, the San Franciscans are truly onto a real scientific breakthrough, the argument has set itself out as to why these substances should be legalized. A safe, productivity increasing drug has the penalty of the law behind it. If this is the case, there is no good reason as to why these substances should remain illegal.

Either way, the state needs to get out of the way. The way that we schedule drugs in the U.S. has caused LSD, marijuana, and heroin to all be listed as equally “evil,” which has lead to another, and maybe even worse, problem.

Societal Stigma

I would put down money that the person reading this article is a drug addict, because 54% of American adults drink coffee every single day, the active substance of which is caffeine. The jury is settled on this, caffeine is a drug.  It has withdrawal symptoms, a potential for overdose, and chemically alters your mind, resulting in the brain chemical that increases sleepiness to be held at bay.

Get off of your high horse that you are above the world of drug use. Nicotine, sugar, caffeine, alcohol, and high fructose corn syrup all fit under the category of “drug.” What you are afraid of is illegal drugs, though, right?

If the line is “illegal,” you’ve got a bad line. The only real justification for that being a reason as to why drugs are bad is to avoid punishment from the government. What that means, though, is that you are not against the drugs themselves, you would rather just the consequences be avoided.

Not all schedule one drugs have the same issues, though, and that distinction should be made in one’s head. Heroin is much more dangerous than alcohol, which is much more dangerous than LSD. The government’s scheduling of drugs is the laziest and most useless way to feel the negativity of drugs in the real world.

The problem is people buy into this way. LSD, meth, and marijuana are now all the same in the mind of the average citizen. Tell someone you have used an illegal drug and their mind will immediately jump to the crackhouse junky who has six months if he is lucky. This is what I call the drug stigma; people have a preconceived negative notion about drugs (even though they themselves are probably an addict) so they don’t care to hear people out on their drug use, even to the slightest extent.

Some drugs are really bad. Those need to be treated and those people need care. There is a lot more going on in the mind of every addict than addiction to a specific chemical. It is wrong to treat a user of hard and dangerous opiates the way we do, and it sets up a dangerous way of looking at things to treat a psychedelic user the same way we treat an opiate user.

Steve Jobs should not be seen as a filthy degenerate because of his use of psychoactive substances, and you should not look at him that way. You should not look at any psychedelic user, whether they make “tripping” a habit or simply microdose that way. It is thoughtless, collectivizing, and ignorant.

And the government should get off their backs too.


Featured image source.

Advertisements

Trump’s Military Parade: Tomfoolery or Genius Strategy?

By Ryan Love | United States

Kim Jong Un has a nuclear button, we have a bigger one (and it works). Kim Jong Un has a military parade, and soon America will as well.

Recently, President Trump declared to the Pentagon and Secretary of Defense James “Mad Dog” Mattis that he wanted a grand military parade. Aside from Trump’s typical bombastic style and reality TV flair, I think there is a more nuanced strategy at play.

Trump wants to keep the pressure on North Korea and America’s competitors across the globe. For years, we have heard of the vast might of the US military. Of course, it is true that we outspend and certainly have the capacity to out-maneuver any other military. But as the old saying goes, seeing is believing.

In recent months, North Korea has threatened many countries with nuclear war. The Chinese have also increased their influence. Yet, the parade will serve as an easy way to remind both of them who the top dog really is. This type of brash behavior has actually been quite effective in deterring North Korea’s saber rattling.

After months of back and forth from both President Trump and Kim Jong Un, Un backed down. Just last month, he agreed to talks with South Korea for the first time in many years. President Moon of South Korea even credited President Trump with helping to bring the two sides together.

How exactly did Trump manage such a feat? After all, neither Obama nor Bush or even Clinton could manage to curtail the rise of the North Korean nuclear regime. The answer relies on a foreign policy strategy developed by Richard Nixon.

The madman theory postulates you should never allow anyone to fully grasp the reasoning behind your foreign policy decisions. Why tweet out about our nuclear button? Why a military parade? Where Obama was predictable, Trump is anything but. Un knew Obama would never risk conflict, but Trump, on the other hand? He can’t be too certain.

In the event of a war between the US and North Korea, North Korea knows it faces certain annihilation. The military parade will show Un exactly what America has to fight with, should he declare war.

The parade also has a particular affect when it comes to North Korea. North Korea, long known for their grandiose military displays, will find themselves in the odd predicament of seeing a parade far more grand than their own.

Likewise, China will be reminded that, although a rising power, they are nowhere near the military might of the United States. China may one day come to outpace the United State’s economically, but they are a long way off from even threatening the United States militarily. What better way to remind China of this fact than to show them the full weight of the United States military?

Ultimately, some may view the military parade as obnoxious, or even dangerous. However, the strategic benefit from the foreign policy mad man certainly outweighs this. Talk is cheap. Seeing is believing. The whole world will be watching, and President Trump knows this.

(Image from cnn.com)

The Root of America’s Drug Problem

By Mason Mohon | USA

Drugs are a critical issue in contemporary American society. Last month the drug problem in America made headlines once again with Trump’s declaration of the opioid crisis as a health emergency. Drugs are a serious issue, and it is widely known and accepted within libertarian circles that the war on drugs is a complete failure, yet many, including those libertarians, fail to see the heart of the issue, which is an addiction to dangerous substances.

There is a widely held assumption that drug addiction is the sole result of chemical hooks within drugs like heroin or morphine. People go under a few times, and boom, they’re addicted. Many assume that one who would take heroin 20 times over the course of 20 days would be heavily addicted by the 21st day, but that is not always the case. Chemical hooks are not the sole cause of addiction, and alone they are not a substantial enough to cause a drug addiction. Many people who suffer from substantial injuries are met with heavy sedatives for the reduction of pain, which are often more pure versions of the same dulling and numbing drugs one can purchase from dealers in back alleys.

This is a misconception. Addiction to drugs is overwhelmingly misunderstood, which is the reason so many have failed to suggest a proper antidote. In the 70’s, a few experiments were conducted that consisted of rats in cages that were offered two options: cocaine or heroin water, and regular, undrugged water. An overwhelming majority of the rats (nearly 100%) drank the drugged water until death. What should be taken from this seems obvious: humans, like rats, will drug themselves til overdose if the option presents itself. Some saw a very clear issue in this experiment, one of which was Psychology professor Bruce Alexander.

Bruce K. Alexander was a Canadian professor of psychology who was responsible for the Rat Park Study, which was conducted in the late 70’s and released in 1981. The issue he saw with the previous rat experiment was that the rat was alone, and its only options in its entire existence were to drink water or drug water. Alexander conducted another experiment, where he constructed a park for rats. This park included many activities for rats, which included food, friends, tubes to run through, and just about anything else to provide rats with a functioning social environment. Within this park was also the jug of water containing the drugs, which happened to go untouched. The conclusion drawn was that the opposite to addiction to drugs is not sobriety, but rather a connection to the world around the rats. The rat friends played a critical role in keeping them from the drugs, and this connection seems to be something our society is missing.

The experiment, though, has received criticism, particularly from UCLA and California State University Lecturer and Psychology Ph.D. Adi Jaffe. He wrote in Psychology Today that human addiction cannot find a solution from this situation, for we do not have some sort of director to create a utopian park where we can indulge ourselves to our heart’s desire without the need of drugs. Along with that fact, humans are profoundly more complex than rats and have a lot more going on. Jaffe is right, we do not have a solution within this study, but we can definitely identify a problem: a lack of inter-human connectivity.

Moreover, this experiment was not solely conducted on rats. The same experiment seemed to manifest itself in humans even earlier in the 70’s. That is, during the Vietnam War. Investigation during the war’s 16th year, 1971, lead the U.S. government and public to discover that 20% of current servicemen within the war were addicted to heroin, while 40% of troops had at least tried it. Along with heroin, other drugs were rampant. Post World War 2 research was light in the realm of the effects of drugs on a soldier’s performance, yet the U.S. government happily provided the military with drugs anyway. The suggested amount was 20 mg of dextroamphetamine for 48 hours of combat readiness, but that was barely followed, and the soldiers would be handed drugs like children being handed candy on Halloween night. A vast array of drugs were employed for these soldiers, leading the Vietnam War to be considered one of, if not the first pharmacological war.

The number of heroin users in the military force was expectedly alarming, and Nixon hastily declared the war on drugs to prevent drug use at home. When the now-veterans returned home, though, the results were absolutely astounding. One study, in particular, reported that when the soldiers returned to the United States, 95% of the veterans were able to eliminate the addiction completely almost overnight. This was not the result of Nixon’s drug war, though, because the regular heroin addiction train remained on track, with a 90% post-rehab relapse rate continuing to exist.

This phenomenon was because of the phenomenal environmental change, from one of the most brutal warscapes America has ever taken part in, back to the U.S.A. where the soldiers could spend time with friends and family once again. This was just like the case with the rats, except for the fact that the rats had no war to fight. The rats and soldiers alike bent towards drug addiction when put into a negative or lacking environment, but when surrounded with general positivity (a return home to friends) they were not subject to the same issues of addiction.

The root of addiction is not the drug itself, full of “chemical hooks” with minor effect. It is much larger; it is a lack of connectivity between humans. Drug addiction itself is not a problem, but rather, the problem is the distancing of humans from one another, perpetuated by a technological revolution allowing humans to “connect” across the cloud without connecting the way we have been biologically engineered to. Humans don’t love life, so they try to escape through things like drugs, pornography, binge watching of television, or overeating. These are all the consequences of a disconnected society. The state cannot force us to connect, but it sure is not helping that they continue to use the force of law against addicts while seeming to ignore the root cause of the problem itself.

The problem is not a simple one that can be solved by a statist’s government or an anarchist’s spontaneous order. It is one that is going to need to be solved by increasing human to human interaction in your own life, rather than the increasing isolation of the human in today’s world.