(re-posted from a friend of mine’s blog, the first essay is written by me)
I actually just wanted to post a mini-essay that a friend of mine wrote on the legalization of acid. She knows that I’m in strong opposition for the drug, and wanted me to write a rebuttal, so, like the artist I am, I complied. Herre it goes:
LSD: Challenging Perceptions
The War on Drugs has long been waged by the government to protect impressionable youth from the devastating effects they can have on individuals and communities. With that intention, the public has held a negative view of recreational drugs and has tainted the character of those who use them. Out of this comes the issue of society casting a uniformly negative light on all drugs that are not uniformly detrimental in their effects, lysergic acid diethylamide or LSD, emerging as possibly the most oversimplified in its characterization out of all illegal drugs. While protection from potential dangers is important, society should reconsider its negative perception of LSD and weigh the capabilities of the drug fairly against its dangers because unlike other drugs, LSD is known for quite profoundly providing the user with valuable life changing intellectual awakenings, but is not an addictive drug, nor does it cause any known medical side effects, and has been
shown to be successful in treating some mental disorders.
A user’s experience on LSD, or an acid trip, can cause profound understanding and enlightenment. Albert Hoffman, the Swiss chemist that first serendipitously discovered LSD and accidentally consumed it described the drug as “medicine for the soul” (Smith 1). The drug was popular in the 1960s and was a pilot for the agenda of the hippie generation. It was part of a movement that sought self-enlightenment as an opposition to materialism and the status quo of mainstream American ideals. The drug quickly became the fad of the generation, but the experiences are still held in high value by those that used it. Steve Jobs, Apple CEO, described his own LSD experience as “one of the two or three most important things” he has done in his life (Rothstein).
What differentiates LSD from other powerful mind altering drugs, is that it is not addictive, nor does it cause any long-term medical side effects. Acute physical effects are minimal and may include dizziness, but LSD use causes “no dangerous physical reactions” (Pharmacology). LSD’s relative safety poses an important question about the role the drug could have in medical research. Researchers who studied the drug’s effect on patients with mental disorders have noted some of these benefits. Albert Hoffman, discoverer of LSD, attested that “[LSD] was used very successfully for 10 years in psychoanalysis” (Smith 2). It has also been successful in treating some forms of schizophrenia and had notable effects on terminally ill cancer patients. (Anderson)
What keeps many held in their convictions against LSD is the fear of psychosis, or schizophrenic-like disorders that can be triggered by the drug, and flashbacks to “bad trips”. Under closer investigation, it was shown that “those who have strong family histories of major psychosis or psychopathology are more vulnerable than those who do not” (Anderson). Bad reactions to the drug depend almost completely on the user themselves and should be moderated by those individuals with greater risk. Flashbacks, or memories of negative and positive aspects of ones “trip”, are sometimes erroneously associated with LSD use despite the fact that 70% of users reported never having one, and those who have are usually psychiatric patients (Abrahart Ch. 1).
LSD use came under attack by the establishment that the counterculture movement was opposed to. The self-awareness and medical benefits that came with the drug were thrown out with the recklessness of the politically radical culture, undermining the potential of the drug that could have been harnessed responsibly to make a difference in the lives of those needing it most.
And my rebuttal:
A Rebuttal
Unfortunately, it is very difficult to seek out and determine ‘those who need’ LSD in this day and age. As a society, we have evolved with an emotional and mental state that is so desensitized and disassociated, there is little evidence as to why anyone would need to take LSD in the first place (Bullshit). As disenfranchized westerners, it’s particularly imperative to us to distance ourselves from the ‘eye-opening, enchanting’ world of hallucinogenics and focus more on the important things that are plaguing this world, like African infanticide, the crime rate of our sprawling cities, and the Twilight DVD release.
More importantly, the drug LSD has been shown to react very badly with antidepressants, such as those containing Lithium and tricyclics (Wikipedia). And, as reported on CNN.com, one in ten American women are on antidepressants drugs like Prozac and caffeine, with numbers growing by the minute. What chance are we taking as a population if we choose to legalize drugs that, with other drugs, become whole different kinds of drugs?
It’s a risk we can not take. And so, despite all the deeply moving arguments to clear LSD off of society’s black list, it is essential to our race as humans to cease this argument from continuing. Like the plot line of I,Robot so effectively shows, we as human beings are fickle and stupid. If LSD as a drug is able to harm individuals predisposed to psychotic episodes, it would be unwise to legalize something that people would actually have to make sure they’re healthy enough to take. No one does research anymore (Research). In addition, LSD has been shown to do damage to the mammalian uterus, by stimulating futile contractions and damaging needed child-rearing tissue. So, unless we want a generation of ‘pie ladies’ to trapeze across our great state, we as Americans need to place LSD back on the shelf next to Heroin, Miley Cyrus, and the rest of the things our society is just too retarded to abuse properly.
