--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00001Date: 07/18/97 From: ALEX VASAUSKAS Time: 10:36pm \/To: JASON HUFF (Read 1 times) Subj: Marijuana & prohibition Jason Huff wrote in a message to Alex Vasauskas: AV> JH> I don't understand why people are locked up so long for possession AV> JH> of a controlled substance. Just for using drugs (and getting AV> JH> caught) you can get more time than murder, rape and an assortment AV> JH> of real crimes AV> So, at its simplest the answer to your question is not AV> completely, but very much: money and power. JH> okay, i see where the power comes in from locking up possessors, JH> but what about money. all i see is that it costs money to lock JH> them up. could you explain a little further on that point for me? It costs YOU money. But, that money is being paid TO someone else. It is that someone else who is being paid with your money in the name of prohibition who is financially benefiting from prohibition. Prisons to lock up the prohibition-prisoners bring in state and federal money to local areas where the prisons are located and create prison jobs. Police agencies justify the need for more cops and equipment (and the money to pay for this) based upon the need to interdict drugs, and so they get more tax money allocated to them for this. They also often get to keep whatever property is forfeited by those accused of drug possession or sale. The military gets to maintain or increase its size and equipment in the cause of advising drug interdiction in foreign countries and assisting in it here. Money is being made by drug testing labs. Money is being made by those who organize and sell programs like DARE. Money is being made by mental health programs where people convicted of drug offenses are ordered by the courts to seek rehabilitation counseling -- even though the only drug problem many of these defendants have is being arrested in the name of prohibition. It IS costing alot. But, on the other side, someone is getting the money that you are paying. Prohibition is costing tax dollars, and this money is going to feed bigger govermnet -- and every government agency likes to get as much money in its budget as it can. Instead of decreased taxes or allocation of what there is to reducing the national debt, or helping to fund better schools and libraries or other institutions or programs that help people improve themselves or better their lives, we are paying for government to get bigger and gobble up more money wageing prohibition, locking up people, and destroying lives. Discovering who benefits from prohibition is like solving any crime or mystery: watch where the money goes and see who benefits. In this case the money and the benefits are going to more police, more military, and bigger government. It would be much less expensive and decrease government to legalize all drugs, possibly put a tax on them equivalent to the cost of treating those who have problems with them, and deal on an individual basis with those who have or create problems. But, those who benefit from the current status quo would fight this kicking and screaming all of the way because they like their jobs, their money, and their power -- and they would keep telling you how it is all for your own good, and that adults shouldn't have a problem being treated like irresponsible children because the government employees know best which decisions you should be permitted to make about your life and which ones they are better able to make for you. So, of course, they are worth the money that is taxed from you. BTW, it looks like we have really gotten away from alternative medicine here. If you are interested in more information and discussion regarding prohibition and the politics of prohibition, you should try the Fidonet NORML echo if it is available to you. There are many knowledgable people there who can answer your questions and provide you with information or, if you like, debate. --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00002Date: 07/18/97 From: ALEX VASAUSKAS Time: 11:37pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 Jane Kelley wrote in a message to Mark Probert: MP>JK>I've told you several times to go look it up in the official manual MP>JK>of mental health in this nation, the DSM IV. MP>Jane, the degree of "addictiveness" of any substance is NOT cited in MP>either the DSM III or IV. That is not the function of the DSM. JK> HAVE YOU GONE AND LOOKED ANYTHING UP LATELY? Had you done so, you JK> would know that cocaine is now listed as being addictive, that the JK> symptoms of addiction to various drugs are also listed, and that JK> among those are the information concerning marijuana. Wrong Jane. Mark is right about DSM IV, and you have obviously either not read it or understood it. The word addict or addiction is not used relative to marijuana. I haven't checked the part about cocaine, but I doubt that DSM IV uses these terms relative to any drug -- as Mark has accurately pointed out, defining, determining, and evaluating the "addictiveness" of any substance is NOT within the scope of DSM IV. Notwithstanding this, DSM IV recognizes that marijuana does not "generally" cause "physiological dependence". (It is not apparent what DSM IV means by "generally" here because it nowhere provides any information regarding any studies demonstrating that cannabis EVER causes physiological dependence.) Furthermore, DSM IV points out that there is no reliable evidence that stopping marijuana use results in withdrawal symptoms. See page 216, Jane. Ask the reference librarian at your library to show you where to find the book. --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00003Date: 07/18/97 From: ALEX VASAUSKAS Time: 08:28am \/To: JASON HUFF (Read 1 times) Subj: Darwin Jason Huff wrote in a message to Alex Vasauskas: AV> If I recall correctly, Darwin's description of natural selection AV> involved survival of the "fit". The fittest may have the most AV> influence, but as long as one is fit enough to procreate, one's line AV> will also survive. JH> survival of the fittest is those best able to survive...smarter, JH> stronger, faster, better camoflauged, whatever it takes. JH> at the most base biological level the whole point to life is to JH> pass on your genes My point is that one only has to be "fit" and not necessarily the "fittest" to survive. "Fit" means that you are smart enough, fast, enough, strong enough, camoflaged enough, and whatever else to procreate and have your children do the same. There is only one "fittest" organism, while there are many fit ones. You need to go no farther than to look at the humans around you to see this in operation. --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00004Date: 07/19/97 From: AL FEYEN Time: 08:26am \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Re: Lazy & Stupid -=> Quoting Jane Kelley to Jerryl Evanee <=- JK> After extensive reading in this area, I am convinced that those who JK> use mind altering drugs do so because they are too blasted lazy and JK> ignorant to learn what has been known for centuries by those who have JK> the wisdom to know the difference. JE> And I tend to agree. There are rituals that ancient peoples used JE> to use to train the mind and body to use its full powers. These JE> rituals sometimes used herbs and ingested aids to reach that JE> state - but it was closely monitored for a specific purpose, JE> usually to heal the body or work out a certain problem. JE> Drugs for "entertainment" alone is a horrible twist. JK> Something died along with the use of these rituals. A good portion of JK> our inheritance should be the combined wisdom of thousands of years of JK> known history. We deprive our young of that in every possible manner, JK> beginning with the lack of discipline and structure for the very JK> young. Hi, I just had to jump in here, and let you know that such rituals, and mind training, are not dead in todays world. There are plenty of us out here who do these things. We are labeled New Agers, Neo-Pagan, Wiccans, and just plan "NUTS." There are books on the subject, that explain how to do this, with and with out herbs, or other substances. +-----------+ Send all E-mail to: | EagleStar | +-----------+ eaglestar@compuserve.com ... Meditation is not what you Think. ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.21 [NR] --- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10 * Origin: CorpSoft BBS - (815)886-9388 (1:115/886) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00005Date: 07/19/97 From: MARK PROBERT Time: 02:38pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: A.d.d JANE KELLEY was thinking about A.d.d and keyed into cyberspace: JK>The following paragraph was NOT written to you, Mark. JK>P>JK>Thanks for your post. It should inspire some other parents to JK>MP>JK>try alternative methods of treatment for their ADD children JK>MP>JK>instead of meekly slugging them down with Ritalin for what is JK>MP>JK>called "administrative convenience", mostly of the school JK>MP>JK>system. JK>MP>Now, there's an old wives tale if I ever heard one. Doctors have JK>MP>to write the prescription, Jane. Most have a reason. Like the kid JK>MP>has it. JK>I'd say more young wives tale today. It is the younger ones who have JK>the guts to stand up to the so called experts and find things out for JK>themselves. They are "so called experts" only in the minds of those who reject research and understanding. You reject studies done at NIMH, NIH, Harvard medical School and Massachusetts General. You would rather believe a salescritter than a professor. JK>Incidently, I've supplied you personally with reference after JK>reference which you insist upon twisting around and perverting to JK>suit your own set of firmly set in granite ideas on this and other JK>subjects. There is no room in them for what the young folks are JK>finding out today. No, Jane. I have not twisted the references. They just do not support your position. JK>My latest excursion into the net on ADD was yesterday, reached JK>http://www.nici.com/nutrition/reference.htm which you really should JK>take the time to check out. The first one on the list was from the JK>prestigious British journal, listed under "Food sensitivities and JK>AD/HD:" JK> J. Egger. Controlled trial of oligoantigenic treatment in JK> hyperkinetic syndrome. LANCET, March 19, pp. 540-45. What did the article say, Jane? Did you read the article in the original? BTW, the "reference" at the end is inadequate to find the article, as it does not cite the volume or year of publication. Hmmm. I wonder why? Could it be that the article says something contrary to what you would have us believe? JK>The rest of the list is from equally prestigious medical journals. JK>Don't be among a dwindling minority of individuals whose information JK>dates back too far to be of much use in the diagnosis and treatment JK>of this condition. Hey, I am the first on my block to try just about anything within reason. As for the diagnostic methodology and criteria, I am in regular contact with a group who are re-writing the standards for DSM V. ===>The Voice of Reason<=== mark.probert@juno.com --- * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * Origin: PC BBS : Massapequa, NY : (516)795-5874 (1:2619/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00006Date: 07/19/97 From: MARK PROBERT Time: 11:34am \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 JANE KELLEY was thinking about Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 and keyed into cyberspace: JK>MP>JK>I've told you several times to go look it up in the official JK>MP>JK>manual of mental health in this nation, the DSM IV. JK>MP>Jane, the degree of "addictiveness" of any substance is NOT cited JK>MP>in either the DSM III or IV. That is not the function of the DSM. JK>HAVE YOU GONE AND LOOKED ANYTHING UP LATELY? Had you done so, you JK>would know that cocaine is now listed as being addictive, that the JK>symptoms of addiction to various drugs are also listed, and that JK>among those are the information concerning marijuana. Jane, you are sequitur challenged. ===>The Voice of Reason<=== mark.probert@juno.com --- * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * Origin: PC BBS : Massapequa, NY : (516)795-5874 (1:2619/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00007Date: 07/19/97 From: MARK PROBERT Time: 02:43pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 JANE KELLEY was thinking about Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 and keyed into cyberspace: JK>MP>JK>I've told you several times to go look it up in the official JK>MP>JK>manual of mental health in this nation, the DSM IV. JK>MP>Jane, the degree of "addictiveness" of any substance is NOT cited JK>MP>in either the DSM III or IV. That is not the function of the DSM. JK>HAVE YOU GONE AND LOOKED ANYTHING UP LATELY? Had you done so, you JK>would know that cocaine is now listed as being addictive, that the JK>symptoms of addiction to various drugs are also listed, and that JK>among those are the information concerning marijuana. Jane, re-read VERY carefully what I carefully wrote. Do you understand what I was referring to? I'll use small words. You were talking about marijuana being addictive, etc. You were saying just how addictive it was. THen you referred to the DSM IV. THe DSM IV does not say how addictive something is. However, the ****degree*** of addictiveness is not in the DSM. You you looked, you would see that it does not say that crack cocaine is more addictive than regular cocaine, or that marijuana is more addictive than tobacco. It does not address the degree of addictiveness. If you still feel it does, give me a page reference, I will read it, and humbly apologize. JK>----- Operator Halted! How did your mail reader know that is our wish? ===>The Voice of Reason<=== mark.probert@juno.com --- * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * Origin: PC BBS : Massapequa, NY : (516)795-5874 (1:2619/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00008Date: 07/19/97 From: ADOLFO MEDINA Time: 09:05pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Marijuana & Addicti [1/3 AM>JK HI Jane!! I currently work in a residential drug and alcohol treatment facility and concur on everything you've commented on. I'm somewhat familiar with the DSM-IV. I have just passed the written requirement for the MFCC license. I was wondering re: pot masking the sx of alcohol... where is the research come from? I could certainly use it with the population that I work with...thanks in advance... JK>If you also consider that the use of pot masks the worst symptoms of JK>alcoholism in the early and middle stages of the disease then drops the JK>person abruptly into the chronic phase with a very severe physical JK>reaction, then I can also relate to that. --- QScan/PCB v1.16b / 01-0507 * Origin: The Electronic Grapevine [707] 257-2338 (1:161/910) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00009Date: 07/18/97 From: JANE KELLEY Time: 07:14am \/To: BOB MOYLAN (Read 1 times) Subj: A Drink Or 2 A Day BM> JK> I AM NOW FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT YOU ARE BOTH A RABBLE ROUSER AND BM> JK> SOMEONE WHO HAS ABSOLUTELY NO REGARD AT ALL FOR ANY IDEAS WHICH BM> JK> ORIGINATE OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN BRAIN. BM> Quite the contrary Jane. I have no difficulty with any original BM> ideas. You, on the other hand, seem to be incapable of any original BM> thought. You are not able or willing to answer any direct question. BM> You are not able to focus on one subject at a time. In fact you are BM> very consistent in your inconsistency. You persist in denying that BM> you have said something even when presented with the evidence of your BM> own words. Bob, this is the exact kind of diatribe I have been met with whenever I have furnished you with any kind of documentation or references. Go to wherever you are headed, Bob. I've just twitted you out of my existence. * SLMR 2.1a * All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here. - JetMail v1.20*6 - Unregistered QWK Mail Door for Spitfire --- FreeMail 1.10 alpha-3 * Origin: PEACHY KEENO INN BBS * Tacoma,Wa * (206)539-0804 (1:138/190.1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBP00010Date: 07/18/97 From: JANE KELLEY Time: 07:09am \/To: JASON HUFF (Read 1 times) Subj: expert witness JH>an expert witness is anyone the prosecution or defense can get to agree with JH>their case and has a little experienc, degrees, and/or written a book I've testified for both, and in one case had to shoot down written work by my own agency due to an intern getting sloppy. She inserted one word after her work had been approved and typed making the entire thing invalid. At that point a kid got scott free because of her mistake. That one knew everything when she came to us. Kinda hard to teach something to someone who knows everything. * SLMR 2.1a * My reality check just bounced. - JetMail v1.20*6 - Unregistered QWK Mail Door for Spitfire --- FreeMail 1.10 alpha-3 * Origin: PEACHY KEENO INN BBS * Tacoma,Wa * (206)539-0804 (1:138/190.1)