Drugs

The boom in “Himalayan Viagra”

The sudden popularity of a rare fungus plunges Nepal into danger and violence

  • more
    • All Share Services

The boom in Yarsagumba aka "Himalayan Viagra" (Credit: Thomas Kelly)

CHAME, Nepal – In a dim, dusty stockade in this small Himalayan town, Krishna Lama contemplated his ruined life – a dead father, a college career cut short and criminal charges, all because of a potent fungus that promises the vigor of youth and sexual prowess for men.

A devout Buddhist, Lama was a 20-year-old college student home on holiday in 2009, when he was compelled to join a posse protecting the lucrative fields near his home village of Nar, at altitude 13,450 feet and a steep two-day trek from the Annapurna trail in the Manang district.

What ensued was one of Nepal’s most gruesome mass killings – over the fungus called yarsagumba.

Fearing their fields had been poached by interloping yarsagumba pickers from Gorkha, a mob from Nar beat two men to death and threw their bodies into a deep crevasse. They rounded up the five other men and savagely beat them to death with sticks and stones. To conceal their crime, they cut the corpses into small pieces, wrapped them in plastic and threw them into a glacial torrent. The killers, 65 men and boys, swore an oath never to tell anyone what happened, not even their wives. 

“Yarsagumba brings a curse,” Lama said. “Our entire village has had to suffer. Even my father had to face that fate.”

Two years before the massacre, Lama’s father had died. He, too, was beaten to death with sticks, though the exact circumstances of his murder remain unclear.

Lama’s story – that he was among the last to arrive on the scene and didn’t witness the killings – is corroborated by police, but as he awaited trial, he had no idea whether the court would accept his version of events or if it would be enough to get him acquitted.

The murders have torn the tiny village apart. Interviews with several of the accused in their stockade in Chame and their families in Nar reveal that they are more fearful of the punishment of their souls in the afterlife than of any judgment meted out by a court of law.

“I am cursed,” Lama said. “I have no hope.”

Lama’s story is just one from a gold rush in the Himalayas. Fortunes are being made – and lives are being ruined – not over gleaming metal nuggets, but in the reckless pursuit of yarsagumba. A rare hybrid of caterpillar and mushroom that grows only in the high alpine meadows of Tibet, Nepal and India, it has been prescribed by traditional healers in Asia for centuries to treat lung and kidney diseases, build up bone marrow and stop hemorrhaging. But it is prized above all for its reputation as a powerful aphrodisiac, earning it the nickname “Himalayan Viagra.”

Yarsagumba – also known by its scientific name, Cordyceps sinesis – was unknown in the Western world until 1994, when two female Chinese athletes at the Asian Games in Hiroshima, Japan, set new world records for mid- and long-distance running.

The astonishing times they posted gave rise to suspicions that they were using illegal performance enhancers such as anabolic steroids, but post-race drug tests revealed no trace of illegal substances. The runners’ controversial coach, Ma Junren, told foreign reporters that the women got their championship edge from daily doses of Cordyceps.

Thus began the yarsagumba boom. It is difficult to find an accurate estimate of the total production of yarsagumba, owing to the high degree of cross-border smuggling to avoid paying taxes and bribes. But according to Daniel Winkler, a botanist specializing in the fungus, it quickly has become the most expensive herbal remedy in traditional Chinese medicine.

Winkler estimates the annual yarsagumba harvest at between 85 and 185 tons, and in some areas, the crop represents the most significant source of income for residents, even greater than mining and industrial production. One official in Tibet’s Dengqen County estimated that 37,000 of the area’s 60,000 inhabitants had participated in fungus collection, Winkler reported in a recent scholarly journal.

“Among the wealthy and powerful in China,” Winkler wrote, “Cordyceps has come to rival French champagne as a status symbol at dinner parties or as a prestigious gift.”

The explosive growth in the yarsagumba market beggars the most extravagant superlatives: In 1992, a pound of the stuff sold for $3; today, the same quantity retails for around $9,400.

Nathan Lee, an apothecary in Hong Kong, said he has customers who spend thousands of dollars a month for daily doses of yarsagumba. “They give their children three to seven pieces a day, to promote good health and help them study,” he said. “They mix it with their breakfast cereal.”

The lucrative trade in the mushroom has transformed the economy of the Himalaya region. An ancient, yak-based culture that survived for centuries in one of the most extreme environments on earth is now unraveling in a tragic collision with the global marketplace.

Tibet is the main source of Cordyceps, but the trade may be having its most profound impact on Nepal, where extreme poverty and decades of political instability have led to deepening social entropy.

Rural economies, which had largely converted to tourism in the early 1990s, languished with the steep decline in foreign arrivals after a Maoist insurgency provoked civil war in 1996. That sent adventurous herb hunters into new terrain in search of the golden mushroom.

Harvesting the exotic fungus

Yarsagumba is the result of a bizarre parasitic relationship between fungus and insect. Spores of the Cordyceps mushroom invade and consume the larvae of the Himalayan bat moth, which live underground at altitudes of 10,000 to 16,000 feet for as long as five years, feeding on roots before they commence their metamorphosis into moths.

After the fungal spores have killed and mummified the larvae, they send up a spindly brown stem, a tiny knob-headed mushroom – and then they are very likely to be picked.

There have been many attempts to farm yarsagumba, but none has ever succeeded. The only way the precious fungus can grow is by the fortuitous concurrence of spore and larva in alpine atmospheric conditions – and brave collectors must be willing to risk their lives to collect it.

On a visit to the Annapurna district of Nepal during the midsummer weeks of the prime harvest season, ancient villages stood nearly deserted as most of the able-bodied population headed up to the picking fields. Schools shut down as students dropped out en masse – with the teachers themselves joining in the rush to find instant wealth.

Some 300 men and women, mostly from the Gorkha and Dhading districts, converged on a spectacularly picturesque place called Ice Lake, surrounded by snow-mantled mountains, more than 13,000 feet above the Annapurna trekking trail. Ice Lake is a relatively new collecting site.

“The collection of yarsagumba around here began eight years ago,” explains Karma Gurung, the 27-year-old manager of a tourist guesthouse in the village of Braga. “Before that, the yaks got it all. A few local people noticed that the yaks up on the mountainside were more active and started collecting it, but it was still small scale. Now, 90 percent of the people collect yarsagumba.”

The pickers, ranging in age from 15 to 40, with the majority males in their teens and early 20s, set up a temporary tent town as the base for their fungal prospecting.

Few of the collectors were well off enough to bring a proper tent; for most of them, sheets of industrial plastic anchored by rocks would serve as their home for the six to eight weeks of the harvest season. They rose at first light in near-freezing temperatures and ate rice, dal and boiled stinging nettles. By 8 a.m., they were climbing the steep incline to the yarsagumba fields.

The collectors spend much of their day on all fours, crawling over the sparsely vegetated plain for a close view. An American visitor spent a good 15 minutes staring intently at a few square feet of turf and saw nothing; then a young man wearing a Chicago Bulls hoodie came to his side and pointed out the tiny stem of a mushroom and carefully excavated it with a spoon.

Once the wrinkly caterpillar carcass was extracted, the man, Padam Bahadur, cleaned away the clinging bits of earth with a toothbrush. The best collectors at Ice Lake might get a dozen to 15 pieces in the course of the day.

At day’s end, having eaten nothing since breakfast except a few dry crackers, the exhausted collectors straggled back to camp. As they neared the settlement, they spotted an itinerant herb dealer coming their way.

A compactly built man in his 30s, Prem Ashok sat on his haunches as the prospectors gathered around him to sell the week’s harvest. Each collector waited in turn as Ashok expertly assayed their haul, wrapped up in paper sacks or instant-noodle packages. Ashok gave them a quick glance, an expert sniff and squeeze.

After rejecting broken or rotten pieces and sorting the ones he wanted to buy according to size and freshness, he paid the collectors from a fat wad of bills in his knapsack.

It was all over quickly. Bahadur was paid 21,000 rupees for a week’s harvest, nearly $300. A hard-working yarsagumba picker can earn as much 200,000 rupees, about $2,500, or more in a season – this in a country where the average annual income by some measures is just $500.

“Some of the collectors use the money to pay for school or give it to their parents to start a little shop,” Bahadur said.Yet he conceded that many young collectors take their money to Katmandu and go on a spree – like gold prospectors everywhere. As the sun set, the collectors were too tired to celebrate their payday. After another meal of rice, dal and nettles, with a pot of boiled potatoes, they relaxed around the fire singing and telling stories until they crept into their makeshift tents to sleep.

Pickers face harsh environment, greed

The camp at Ice Lake shows the yarsagumba boom in Nepal at its most beneficial, a peaceable group of poor people literally scratching a good living from the earth.

Yet it is hard, dangerous work. In 2010, 16 yarsagumba collectors were buried alive by a snowstorm in the Dolpo region while they slept at a camp like the one at Ice Lake.

In May, six yarsagumba pickers died after an avalanche at a high alpine lake called Surma Sarobar, in the Bajhang district. In the same week, a 25-year-old collector fell to his death from a cliff on Mount Churen Himal in western Nepal; the body of a 21-year-old collector who had succumbed to altitude sickness was discovered in the Mugu district. In June, three students in their teens were buried by another avalanche in Dolpo.

Yet the most notorious fatalities in the yarsagumba trade are the result of greed, at the hands of other collectors. In the grisly massacre that ensnared young Krishna Lama, the seven victims were murdered after they were found poaching.

On June 9, 2009, a herder from Nar who was searching for a lost yak spied the intruders from the neighboring Gorkha region, most of them still in their teens, sneaking into yarsagumba fields that were considered as being under the exclusive control of Nar. The herder ran to the village to spread the alarm.

The elders organized a posse to apprehend the poachers – or claim jumpers, in gold rush vernacular. By the communal law that rules rural Annapurna, one man from each of Nar’s 60 households was required to join in the defense of the village’s collective wealth. Because Lama’s father had been murdered two years before, the young man, as head of the household, was compelled to join the posse.

At dawn, a force of the fittest youth stormed the Gorkha camp and attacked the interlopers. The plan had been to capture the intruders, but the violence quickly got out of control.

The men from Nar kept their secret for a month. When relatives of the victims arrived at the Manang district capital of Chame and reported them missing, the police went to Nar and found the decomposing bodies of the two victims in the crevasse.

They arrested most of the adult male population of the village and marched them to Chame. It was the first violent crime to be reported in the district, and Chame did not have a jail; the district education office was converted to a stockade to confine the accused. Many of them were released on parole, but by midsummer of this year, 27 men were still awaiting trial, two years after they were charged.

In June, on the second anniversary of the massacre, the village of Nar postponed the start of the yarsagumba-collecting season to perform a weeklong puja, or purification ceremony.

All the residents who were able to read Tibetan, the language of their religion, convened in a lamasery to chant rituals seeking forgiveness for their collective crimes. A lama danced in a trance for hours, then led a boisterous parade of musicians banging drums and blowing on conchs to dispel evil influences, as the lama blessed the women of the village, who came out to kneel at the crossroads.

Finally, on Nov. 15, sentences were handed down by the court in Chame: The six men who committed the murders were given life imprisonment, and 13 more were convicted as accomplices and sentenced to time served. The rest – including Lama – were acquitted.

The Nar case is now closed, but it reveals the extent to which yarsagumba is entwined with every aspect of life in Nepal – including the nation’s chaotic political situation.

In the 1990s, the Maoist insurgency bankrolled its military operations with the burgeoning yarsagumba trade. And then in July 2009, after the accused murderers were confined in their improvised jail, a delegation from Gorkha descended on Chame, demanding restitution in cash. The Gorkha district is a Maoist stronghold, while the Manang district generally supports the Katmandu government.

They demanded compensation from the Annapurna Conservation Area Project, a quasi-governmental agency that charges foreigners to hike the Annapurna trail. According to Lal Prasad Gurung, director of the agency, the demonstrators grew rowdy and threatened the defendants’ lone lawyer with violence. Eventually, the Maoist-backed Gorkha families won their unprecedented claim for 1 million rupees, nearly $14,000, for each murder victim, which was paid in cash.

The shocking circumstances of the Nar massacre brought international scrutiny. Johan Olhagen, an observer from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, supported the defendants’ claim that “they were forced confessions;” while avoiding the word “torture,” he claimed that “the Nepali police were rough with the accused.”

Olhagen said the 36 defendants shared one lawyer, who was denied access to his clients until the case went to trial. The Brooklyn, N.Y.-based International Legal Foundation also sent a representative to Chame.

Since the Nar killings, the police have sent patrols to the collecting fields to avert violent disputes, yet reports of crimes in the highlands continue to emerge.

On June 18, a collector named Satya Raj Bohora was thrown from a cliff on Laki Mountain in the Bajhang district, murdered for his haul of the fungus. It’s impossible to assess accurately the scale of crime committed in rural districts. The Nar murders may have been the first to be reported to the police, but according to Karma Gurung, the guesthouse manager in Braga, “people were killed here before that for poaching yarsagumba, but it was kept secret. It was up to the village to impose justice.”

The perils of the yarsagumba business extend beyond the picking fields to every level of the trade. In July, a gang of bandits held up three herb traders at gunpoint and stole their seasonal take of 5 million rupees, about $70,000, and a large quantity of yarsagumba. Itinerant dealers like Ashok are forced to pay “tax,” a euphemism for a shake-down, to as many as 20 groups, mostly political parties and corrupt local officials in the districts through which the harvested fungus is transported. The trade in Cordyceps is legal, but permits are required at every level of bureaucracy, creating an ancillary gold mine of opportunities for corruption.

The United Communist Party of Nepal, the political arm of the Maoists, is a leading collector of illegal “donations.”

Nepal’s most wanted criminal is Kali Bahadur Kham, a member of the party’s central committee, who was charged with the 2008 torture and murder of a businessman in Koteshwor, a suburb of Katmandu.

In July, police raided Kham’s house in the capital, seizing “a huge cache of arms, cash and illegal yarsagumba,” according to police reports. In a viral video, Kham taunted the police and claimed, “The yarsagumba the police exposed to the media was legal, but they have destroyed the documents (in an attempt) to prove it illegal.” Kham remains at large.

Prem Namdu Lama, a wholesaler of herbal products, said: “Here in Katmandu, it is also dangerous to keep large quantities of yarsagumba at home.” At harvest time, he said, he hires young men with guns to protect him.

As reputation grows, so does demand

The aura of danger that surrounds the yarsagumba trade only adds to its golden glamor. The fabulous prices paid for the mushroom by wealthy consumers are the direct result of the most familiar principle in retail economics: rapidly rising demand and shrinking supply.

Beginning with the publicity arising from the performance of Chinese athletes on a yarsagumba regimen and continuing with international news reports about the Nar murders, the awareness of Cordyceps – and particularly its status as an aphrodisiac to boost male sexual performance – has raised the demand exponentially.

In the West, dietary supplements containing trace amounts of inferior-grade Cordyceps and Cordyceps extract have capitalized on the growing notoriety of yarsagumba. But these supplements do not have anything approaching the potency of the premium-grade fungus purveyed by traditional Chinese apothecaries. There are no restrictions on the importation of yarsagumba to the United States, as it has no psychoactive properties and no significant side effects.

The fungus’s reputation is powered by the anecdotal reports of consumers as much as by ancient tradition: In other words, it appears to work. And medical research has backed up claims for its efficacy. A study at Stanford University’s medical school found an increase of 17-ketosteroids in the urine of men taking daily doses of yarsagumba, which indicates an increased production of androgen and other sex hormones in the adrenal gland and testicles.

Controlled animal tests offer credible evidence that regular yarsagumba use decreases recovery time between orgasms and increases the volume of semen production. In another blind trial on human subjects, 65 percent of Cordyceps eaters reported an enhanced sex drive.

Yet despite local prospectors’ informal exploration of the Himalayas for new collecting fields, the available supply is steadily shrinking. Prem Namdu Lama estimated that the total harvest had declined 20 percent over the previous year. Some conservationists claim this is the result of overharvesting, though neither Cordyceps sinesis nor the moth host of yarsagumba appears to be in any danger of extinction.

Prem Namdu Lama believes that the contracting supply is the result of changes in the weather. “The reason for the decline is there was no snow, no rain,” he said. “If the snow falls, the yarsagumba will come back.”

 

Jamie James writes for the New Yorker, the Atlantic Monthly and other publications.

Lessons from a celebrity rehab clinic

As a recovering addict working at a posh center, I realized the prescription of pampering wasn't helping anyone

  • more
    • All Share Services

Lessons from a celebrity rehab clinic (Credit: slava296 via Shutterstock slava296 via Shutterstock slava296 via Shutterstock slava296 via Shutterstock)
This article originally appeared on The Fix.

the fixI’d been sober a little over a year when I got the job. That was the minimum requirement: You had to at least have a year clean if they were going to hire you. I had achieved a year clean off IV crystal meth and heroin, and I saw the job at the posh rehab in Malibu as basically the best opportunity I was gonna get. After all I was just 21 at the time — a college dropout who’d already been in and out of four different rehab programs. My last job had been working at the juice bar of a funky, not-too-clean health food store in one of the sketchiest neighborhoods in L.A. They’d paid me whatever minimum wage was back in the early 2000s and, believe me, it wasn’t enough.

But the chichi treatment center in the Malibu hills promised to pay more than twice that salary, and, besides, it would afford me a certain kind of cachet — one lacking in the kitchen of the health food store I had recently abandoned. I mean, I was gonna be working at this rehab full of celebrities. That was something I could tell people with pride when they ask the first question everyone always asks in L.A., “So, what do you do?”

“I’m a Residential Technician at **** in Malibu,” I could say.

Well, at least it sounded cool.

In terms of what a “Residential Technician” actually did, if anything it was more like being a glorified baby sitter. You had to keep tabs on all the clients at all times, search their rooms and their persons, get ‘em to pee in cups for you, pass out medication, drive ‘em around to the gym or 12-step meetings, and, because these are the rich and famous we’re talking about, basically do whatever it is they ask.

I’d been to different county and hospital and low-end private places that seemed to operate on the philosophy that you had to be broken down before you could be built back up: There were always countless chores to be done, rules to follow, and punishments to be doled out.

But not so at ****, a tony facility nestled in Malibu that charged upward of $50,000 for a 28-day stay. For that kind of money, patients were understandably reluctant to do chores — or anything else they didn’t want to do. We did the chores for them. And as far as the rules went — well, they were really more like suggestions. There were no punishments. No one had to make their own bed or respect time limits on the phone or even cancel any appointments they had in the outside world. If some strung-out actor had a meeting with their agent — well, it was our job to drive ‘em there. If they wanted to barge into the office and use one of the counselor’s computers to check the security cameras at their house ‘cause they were convinced someone was breaking in, we had to let them do that, too. Basically, we weren’t allowed to ever say no to them. And, honestly, after a few months of working there, I was beginning to wonder if the whole thing wasn’t just some sort of scam — more like a resort with bonus clemency than a place where people actually learn how to change and face their feelings of self-hatred and inadequacy.

Because, in my mind, that’s what addiction really is — people trying to blot out the pain of being human with chemicals that inevitably just make the pain even worse. And what group of people as a whole could possibly be more insecure and hate themselves more than a bunch of actors and trust-fund kids? Both my parents were celebrity journalists, so believe me when I tell you that most actors live for attention and external ego stroking. And most trust-fund sons or daughters are constantly in need of validation that they are good enough and that people like them — really like them! — for who they are. Because how could they ever know? If you’re the child of a celebrity, how could you ever have confidence that the girl or guy you’re dating is with you for who you are or for who your parent is — and the access they get by proxy to fame and privilege? Believe me, these are some seriously fucked-up people. And that’s coming from the perspective of a seriously fucked-up person.

Addiction is like an epidemic among those people, so a lifestyles of the rich and famous rehab would inevitably be a goldmine. That’s especially true in this day and age when a stint in rehab is touted as the answer to everyone’s problems — as if a 30-day treatment center could erase a lifetime of bad decisions. From cheating on your wife to erupting in a racist tirade, rehab seems to be the quick fix every disgraced celebrity is looking for. And if you’ve got to go to rehab, a place like this up on the hill in Malibu is definitely the way to go. With five-star chefs, tennis courts, equine therapy, a swimming pool, and a staff of friendly Residential Technicians just like me on hand to do your every bidding — well, rehab doesn’t have to be much different from a month at the Beverly Hills Hotel. And while working there, I couldn’t help wondering if I was actually doing more harm than good.

As I said, at every rehab I ever went to, there was a strict set of rules and guidelines you had to follow, all in the name of trying to foster some sort of humility in a bunch of selfish, self-centered drug addicts and alcoholics. And for me, honestly, it really did work. Having to do chores, being told no, and being stripped of my freedom definitely made an impression. But the rich and famous clients at this place didn’t get any of that. One time, this actor guy from an HBO series stuck a piece of pizza crust from that night’s dinner into the lock of the med room door and when the tech on duty went back up there 10 minutes later, the actor had broken in and was riffling greedily through the many bottles of painkillers and anti-anxiety medications.

Now, at any rehab I went to, an act like that would’ve had me out on the street in a second, but not so here. The philosophy was, I suppose, that rich and famous people are used to a certain kind of treatment and, if they don’t get it, they will simply leave. That’s why the goal, above all else, was to just get them to stay. They could be detoxing so bad off alcohol that their whole body was going through seizures, but if they wanted their dry cleaning taken care of, one of us had to run right out and make sure it got done — and that the cleaners didn’t use too much starch. One ex-”Saturday Night Live” comedian made me drive him to a meeting with a director at the Grill in Beverly Hills, but because all the nice cars were taken, I had to take him in my tiny red-tin-can, oil-leaking Mazda 323, and he made me drop him off three blocks away so no one would see him arriving in such a déclassé little vehicle. And, of course, when some actor guy from a TV show way before my time overflowed the toilet, guess who had to wade into the bathroom to clean his mess up?

At any rehab I went to, special requests were automatically denied and any chance for humiliation was considered character building and good for recovery. And it was true. As an addict, I was a self-entitled bastard. Being in rehab and having to scrub the toilets and follow the rules really did help bring me down to size. But the clients here weren’t getting that. I actually felt sorry for them — like they were being taken advantage of and throwing away their $50,000.

But, on the other hand, I have to admit, I found myself getting kind of jealous, too. I mean, there I was, over a year sober, supposedly doing everything right, and yet I was the one having to take out some adult trust fund kid’s dry cleaning, eating the clients’ leftovers only after they were at least one day old. I was the one making their beds and driving them out to go see Lakers games. Once, one of the clients offered me $10,000 to give him one Klonopin. I refused but — I mean, I’d never had more than $2,000 in my bank account in my entire life. Honestly, being humble and sober didn’t seem anywhere near as much fun as being rich and in rehab. And I wasn’t the only staff member who seemed to be getting a little star-struck and envious. Other techs and even counselors would gossip about the clients in hush-hush terms every chance they got. We all knew who was worth what and where their money came from, and we spread rumors about impending intakes.

“Did you hear Britney Spears is checking in tomorrow?” I was told about 10 times over the course of working there (though, in truth, she never came at all).

Even the head of the entire program got into the action, saying to a woman just coming in with a collection of Louis Vuitton luggage, “Oh, perfect, wait here. I’ll get my LV bags and bring them in to keep your LV bags company.”

And then she actually did.

Of course, we all tried to play it down, going on and on to each other about how hard it must be for the clients, never knowing whether people actually liked them for who they were or because of their famous names and money. We pitied the trust fund kids because they’d never be able to emerge in their own light from the shadows left behind by their more successful parents. We told ourselves they’d never get sober, being pampered the way we were instructed to pamper them. We laughed when they complained about the food the five-star chef had prepared for them. We were more than happy to eat the leftovers as we shared stories about the awful steamed hospital mush we’d had to eat in our county detoxes and sober livings.

And we, the techs, did try to band together. We used to secretly trade the expensive coffee we were supposed to serve the clients with the cheap Folgers in a can coffee we were supposed to brew in the staff room. So we’d be drinking high-end coffee from some small batch roaster in Venice while they drank bulk supermarket coffee; more often than not, they’d compliment us on how good it tasted.

At night, when we were alone in the office, we’d read the clients’ different case files — especially the six-page questionnaire they had to fill out when they arrived. We’d laugh at how out of touch their answers were. Like when the trust fund kids would write that they identified their “main problem” as being that the executers of their family’s estate were too uptight and wouldn’t give them enough money. I remember one woman (who wasn’t a kid anymore, by any means, but was, nonetheless, still a trust fund kid), who insisted that her lawyers and executers came to the family group on Sunday so we could convince them to give her more money.

Oh, man, and those Sunday family groups really were something else. It was like a “Who’s Who” of Hollywood elite all sitting around in plastic folding chairs trying to figure out why their son or daughter or brother or sister or husband or wife had been throwing away their lives on drugs and alcohol. And we all laughed at that, too. Because it seemed so obvious. They were these huge celebrities who’d all had their fucked-up personal lives splashed across the pages of glossy grocery-store gossip magazines. We knew that the couple there with the teenage daughter in rehab were both on their third marriage and probably so preoccupied with their own careers that the poor girl never had a chance. We told ourselves that we pitied her.

We told ourselves that we pitied them all.

But secretly, I mean, deep down, I’m pretty sure we all would have given just about anything to trade places with them. That HBO actor guy who stole all the meds was so sick during his opiate detox, we had to hold him sitting up just so he could go to the bathroom. In a delirium, he broke into one of the “druggie buggies” (a fleet of Yukon XLs) and attempted to drive it through the locked gates. He was sick and rambling incoherently. But, still, it’s not like he ever had any consequences for his behavior. If anything, we just had to coddle him more after a scene like that — afterward, a bunch of us had to stay with him literally 24 hours a day. And when his girlfriend (another famous actor) came to visit, the staff was more concerned with asking her to reenact a scene from her famous movie than in telling her what her boyfriend (and the father of her child) had been up to.

So, yeah, not only did I watch them let him get away with absolutely anything, but I also knew damn well that at the end of the 30 days, that guy had his hot celebrity girlfriend to go back to and a house in Malibu and an action movie to promote that spring. And me? Well, I had my Mazda 323, a $400-a-month room in an apartment with an old man permanently fixed to a caving-in chair in front of a boxy old TV set that only got around 30-something channels. I was living paycheck to paycheck, working over 40 hours a week, and having to pick out cigarette butts from the planters around the rehab’s main house.

Honestly, however bad these rich folk had it, I gotta say, they didn’t really seem to have it that bad. And, besides, there was something glamorous about their self-destructiveness — something far more glamorous than what I’d thought would be my glamorous job working there. And, anyway, I hadn’t signed on to be the personal assistant to 20 or more spoiled rich people in the throes of chemical dependency. I’d thought I’d be working to help them, but after a few months, I was beginning to feel like we were just making things worse — both for ourselves and for the clients. What they needed from us was to tell them no. But, as it turned out, our jobs were just to add to their entourage of servile, sycophantic flatterers. We were like those plastic surgeons that continued to operate on Michael Jackson when it was obvious he’d already gone way too far. And, honestly, it came to wear on me pretty damn thin. I don’t have the figures or expertise to say how successful a treatment center like that one is at rehabbing its clients. All I know is that, for me, the environment grew to be about as toxic as they come. Living in LA is already a slippery slope to be negotiating for anyone trying to retain some form of sanity. But working there definitely pushed me right over the edge. Our collective idol worship brought me to dating an actress — the closest thing to a celebrity I could find — and the two us spent about six months shooting dope in her one-bedroom apartment in the Hollywood Hills. I lost my job, of course — or more like just stopped showing up — and found myself back in rehab again, but this time as a patient. And though the place I checked into wasn’t anything fancy, they definitely told me no a whole lot. They broke me down to build me up. And, honestly, I was grateful. Because I’d seen the other side. And for me, what can I say? It just didn’t work.

Continue Reading Close

Nic Sheff is a columnist for The Fix and the author of two memoirs about his struggles with addiction, the New York Times-bestselling Tweak and We All Fall Down.

I can’t go on. I’m overdosing

I try to hurt myself, I ingest household products, anything to stop the pain of being abused as a child

  • more
    • All Share Services

I can't go on. I'm overdosing (Credit: Zach Trenholm/Salon)

Dear Cary,  

When I was growing up I was abused. I feel like hurting myself badly, which many times I acted on … when I went to hospital a couple of months ago a nurse told me I should go hang myself, not in the hospital … it had a big effect and a psychiatrist too said the same thing in a separate incident. It feels like my life is over for good this time like there’s nothing to live for.  I had seen someone kissing today. For people it might seem normal but for me it hurt, it was like a knife in the chest. I wanted to hit my mum.

How much longer can I have, with these feelings rocking inside me?  I can hardly look people in the eye and I rarely make I contact with people. My life is spinning out of control and there’s nothing I can do about it. I overdose regularly and soon I shall start taking magic mushrooms. I’m addicted to any tablet that comes my way and from there I shall move on to drugs.

Usually I take paracetamols [aka acetaminophen, Tylenol, Panadol, Thomapyrin, etc.--ed.] as a way of coping. Also I take aspirin to cope but a lot more than the recommended dose.

I’ve been holding on for quite some time but I can’t  now.

I need to eat household products just to balance myself out so why don’t my feelings stop?   

Can’t Hold On  

Dear Can’t Hold On,

You’ve got to hold on. You have to.

I am writing to you and to all others who feel that things are out of control and that the only ways to cope are to ingest substances, self-mutilate, or strike out at others.

You have to hold on.

What you feel now will change. You will come out of this. Meanwhile it is important not to do anything that will cause your death.  Overdose with paracetamol, or acetaminophen, is, “by far, the most common cause of acute liver failure in both the United States and the United Kingdom.”

Death by such an overdose would be a slow and painful affair. It would be messy and ugly. It would not be pretty and glamorous.

If you have already taken too many paracetamols, go to the emergency room of your nearest hospital now.

Otherwise, since it sounds like you are in the U.K., contact the Samaritans, either through their website or by phone.

Ask for help. Talk it through. Find solutions. Stay alive.

What you are going through will pass. You have to hang on through this. You have to tough it out. I know you have gotten a raw deal. I know you have been abused. It is painful and nobody knows how much pain it caused except you. It is an existential pain. It is not simple. But you have to survive through this because it will get better.

You may want to do many things so that you can be whole. You may have a sex change, or you may want to find your own practice that allows you to integrate pain and power into your life. That is OK. Those are routes you can take that will not destroy your body. Those may be routes to wholeness for you.

But do not destroy your body. Then there is no hope.

If you have ever had any dreams of doing anything, keep those dreams in your mind. Think of those dreams. Remember those dreams. Remember the things you have wanted to do. Remember the times when you have felt good. Visualize times you have been happy. Just sit and be there.  You can be happy again like you were before all this happened to you. That person you were before you were damaged is still there. You can contact that person you were, that young and innocent child. That young and innocent child you once were is ready to come back.

You are scared and uncomfortable. That is OK. You can be scared and uncomfortable and tough it out. Please understand: What your head is telling you is wrong. Your head was damaged by the abuse. Do not believe what your head is telling you. You cannot solve this on your own. But if you survive and get help, you can be fine.

So get somewhere safe where you can stay while this passes. That means stay away from websites that encourage you to overdose and mutilate yourself. You are too fragile for those things. You need to be around strong people who know what you have been through and can help you.

Sit in a waiting room until help comes. Tough it out. It will pass.

It gets better. You don’t have to die.

A friend of mine called just yesterday to say a friend of his died from alcohol and drugs. His friend didn’t really mean to die. He was just doing things to numb the pain. But that’s what happens. Then you lose your chance to do whatever it is that’s going to make you happy.

So this is a time to be careful and conserve your life. Whatever emotional pain you are feeling, it may seem intolerable but it is not. You can bear it. It will pass. You can survive. We are animals, all of us. We will do anything to survive. We can survive this and much more.

So find some place where you can be safe. Find someone you can trust, a doctor or teacher or therapist.

There is hope. What you feel now will change.

You can get through this. You will see. Trust me. You will see.

Continue Reading Close
Cary Tennis

Cary Tennis writes Salon's advice column, leads writing workshops and creative getaways, publishes books, writes an occasional newsletter and tweets as @carytennis.

Join Cary's Online Writing Workshops

Reefer madness

Middle-school anti-drug campaigns have barely changed in decades. Are they too lame to work with today's preteens? VIDEO

  • more
    • All Share Services

Reefer madnessA still from "Pot, the Party Crasher"

It’s a middle-school rite of passage. One day, you’re sitting in class learning about Alexander the Great and wondering how to grab the optimum real estate in the lunchroom. The next, you’re getting the drug and alcohol awareness lesson. For my 12-year-old, that day just arrived. “We saw a movie in school today,” she drawled over dinner recently, eyes already engaged in full eye roll. “It was called ‘Pot, the Party Crasher.’” Then she made a familiar sputtering sound of contempt.

We live in a world that is changing at a breakneck pace. Yet drug awareness is still stuck somewhere around the “Saved by the Bell” era. And it was lame back then too.

Though “Pot, the Party Crasher” sounds like a lesser-known B-side by the Wiggles, it is in fact an educational film developed by Project Alert, a substance abuse prevention curriculum that also incorporates classroom activities and exercises. It was developed by the think tank RAND Corp. and boasts “measurable results” in reducing drug, tobacco and alcohol use that are “grounded in solid science.”

Science isn’t exactly art, though. Maybe that’s why the acting and dramatic resonance of “Pot, the Party Crasher” flat-lines at roughly the level of a local mobile home ad, and the score seems straight out of a 1979 video game. Did you know that teenage boys, crazed on their jazz cigarettes, still say things like “Chillax! Take a hit!” and “Quit being a buzzkill”? They do! Spoiler alert: The evening busts up when our heroine declares, “Nobody’s ordering any cheese bread because this party is over!” Take that, party-crashing pot.

It’s been a mighty long time since my own adolescence, right at the height of D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) and Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” campaign. Yet I’ve got to tell you, of all the reasons I ever turned down anything, wondering, “What would Nancy Reagan do?’ was never one of them. On the contrary, “Just say no” was a phrase most often bandied about jokingly, usually heralding the appearance of someone’s bong. But I also know that one little word is almost all it’s ever taken to decline an offer.

What’s surprising is how little drug awareness seems to have changed since we parents were rocking the acid wash. Why is D.A.R.E., with its ongoing efforts and successes, still as cheesy as its current campaign, “Keepin’ it REAL”? Sure, if by REAL, you mean something Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch might say. And if you want to get really absurd, behold the intense spots from the Scientology-front “Foundation for a Drug-Free World” or the “horrors” that the conservative Family Life International’s “Hugs Not Drugs” campaign is still cranking out.

And the success rate of these initiatives is unclear. Two months ago, a University of Michigan study found that teen alcohol use hit an all-time low in 2011, but that marijuana use was on the rise.

The reality of modern parenting is that most parents themselves have  experimented with drugs and alcohol — and may continue to. Frankly, as a nonsmoking social drinker who asks her doctor how to dispose of the Percocets she didn’t finish, I’ve never been one who particularly needed help resisting too many substances. But I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about the recreational habits of others. And I can certainly distinguish between the person running a meth lab in his basement and the cancer patient who uses some party-crashing pot for pain and nausea relief. That’s why I suspect I’m not the only parent who’s rolling her eyes as much as her kids at the profound unsubtlety of substance abuse campaigns, or the hard lines organizations like the Partnership at Drugfree.org often take on issues like medical marijuana.

Make no mistake: I’m glad my child and her peers are having conversations about drinking, drugs and smoking. My firstborn, on the cusp of adolescence, is entering a world fraught with vices and potential hazards, and she’s doing it with a family history of substance abuse on both sides. I want her equipped to deal with decisions and their consequences. I’m glad that their eminently artsy school, where the images of John Coltrane, Joey Ramone and John Lennon – men not exactly known to for their strict abstinence policies — adorn the walls, is preparing kids for how to deal with the choices that will be offered to them. But how we can teach kids reason and responsibility if the tools we’re using are so outdated and corny?

There’s no easy way to talk to kids about drugs and alcohol. But there’s got to be a better way. And in all the conversation about how to teach them, I wonder how much anyone is listening to the kids themselves. I wonder where all the humor and weirdness and spirit of authentic 12-year-olds is. Because it’s there, waiting to be tapped. I love that when my daughter’s teacher suggested everyone in the class pledge simply to not drink alcohol just for today, one of my daughter’s friends raised her hand and cracked, “Come on. I’m Italian.” Better still, I love that when one of her classmates was recently offered pot in the park near the school, the kid disdainfully directed the guy to “Go back to your mother’s basement.” It was simple, direct and effective. And, I’d wager, delivered with a hell of an eye roll.

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

What Whitney’s death should have us talking about

Despite its obsession with the star's demise, the press ignores the real issues behind America's deadliest epidemic

  • more
    • All Share Services

What Whitney's death should have us talking about (Credit: AP)
This article originally appeared on The Fix.

the fixJust minutes after Whitney Houston was found dead in a bathtub at the Beverly Hilton last Saturday at the age of 48, a caravan of network trucks began slowly encircling the plush hotel, morbidly eager to document her untimely demise. Since then, it’s been nearly impossible to turn on the TV or log on to the Web without witnessing a tribute to the singer, often including depressing video footage of her long, painful decline. Her memorial on Saturday had the pomp and pageantry of a state event—complete with dignitaries, crying onlookers and flags at half-mast.

But while speakers talked movingly about her battles, mention of the word “addiction” was curiously scrubbed from the event.

It’s no surprise that the singer’s death has struck such a chord in the country. Incredibly talented, beautiful and ambitious, Whitney Houston was a rare kind of legend who changed the face of American pop music. In her later life she also became an addict whose cruel struggle with the disease unfolded in full public view. That she lay dying for hours in a luxe bathroom suite while her bodyguards cooled their heels outside is a sad commentary on the state of modern celebrity. That it took less than 10 minutes for the press to begin broadcasting her death is an even more searing indictment of contemporary media culture.

Houston, of course, is not the only celebrity whose problems have received rapt press attention. Last month it was Demi Moore. The week before that it was Disney’s Demi Lavato. Meanwhile, the weekly travails of Charlie Sheen and Lindsay Lohan have been breathless fodder for fleets of paparazzi. And for over a year before her death last year, fans of Amy Winehouse received daily updates of her ups and downs. One British tabloid even went so far as to embed a pack of paparazzi at her favorite pubs.

As a longtime editor at several magazines over the past two decades, I’ve admittedly been an active participant in this game—keenly aware that for ordinary readers grappling with the mundanities of daily life, stars offer a few rare moments of transcendence. But their intoxicating effect on the American public also gives them outsize power to shape public perception. In the 1980s, Rock Hudson and Magic Johnson forced the media to finally pay attention to AIDS only after it had already killed an army of Americans. Michael J. Fox’s battle with Parkinson’s helped bring invaluable attention and funding to the disease, while prompting a debate on stem cell research that promises to have profound effects on the treatment of other illnesses.

But substantive stories about alcoholism and drug addiction remain largely outside the media purview—focused on the tribulations of A and C-list celebrities, they’re often ghettoized in gossip sites and channels like VH1. For all the daily hand wringing about celebrity overdoses and DUIs, there is precious little real reporting on the growing scientific understanding of the disease, the tragic lack of access to treatment or insurance coverage, or even the growing number of promising drugs that have begun to make real progress against this condition.

For a long time, I regarded this kind of journalism as business as usual. But my own perspective began to change as I was forced to confront the fact of my own addiction. For most of my early 30s I fancied myself a young version of the late Christopher Hitchens, a literary legend rarely spotted without a drink who once bragged that he couldn’t write without a hangover. Alas, I soon learned that I possessed neither his talent nor his hardy constitution. As a result, I spent two years in a series of rehabs and sober living facilities, witnessing firsthand the ravenous toll taken by addiction and the abject failure of our medical and political system.

My first roommate was a 23-year-old violinist from Iowa who had cycled through five detoxes and five rehabs in just 11 months. At the same rehab, I befriended an ad executive whose proclivity for Absolut eventually landed her in a homeless shelter. I met an investment banker whose weekend crystal meth binges led to a lifelong HIV infection. At one sober living facility I played poker with a rum-loving Catholic priest who led one of the largest congregations in Nigeria. I met countless others who maintain publicly productive lives while suffering through their own private hell. You can be certain that none of them will ever show up on CNN. But neither will the pernicious behavior of the insurance companies and Big Pharma, who have often illegally profited off the scourge while accumulating blockbuster profits.

As someone who’s seen the effects of alcoholism close-up, I’ve grown increasingly frustrated by the failure of my colleagues to get beyond the superficial details of addiction, or to empathize with the lives of people who aren’t regulars on Perez or Page Six. Much of the mainstream media has been lazy—even downright derelict—when it comes to addressing the nation’s most pressing health crisis.

When I ask my journalist friends about their failure to take on the larger issues behind these stories, they usually reply that reporting on struggling stars is a teachable moment for many Americans. But that’s not much of an answer. It’s not really breaking news that drugs can be harmful and sometimes deadly. The real questions are: What can we do about it? And how exactly did we get here?

Ultimately, the torrent of coverage of the Whitneys and Winehouses of the world is little more than a distraction, a game of mirrors that deflects attention from millions of farmers, bankers and college kids who are also suffering and dying of drug-related causes at a record rate. It’s easier not to have to confront the reality of our drug-slammed towns, or jails full of untreated addicts, or high-school kids who swallow up to 50 Oxys a day. Entire regions of middle America have been decimated by poverty and crystal meth. America’s seemingly ravenous appetite for drugs raises questions that demand deeper explanations.

The fact is, while most major causes of preventable death in the U.S. are in decline, drugs—especially pharmaceutical drugs—remain a dramatic exception. A 2010 national survey by the Department of Health and Human Services found that over 22 million Americans suffer from alcohol or drug dependency. Drug overdose rates have more than tripled since 1999, claiming a life every 14 minutes. In fact, it’s hard to imagine a single person in the whole country who hasn’t been directly or indirectly affected. Rehabs and sober livings around the country have become a vast $20 billion business, many of them operating under woefully inadequate oversight. Many Americans under the age of 30 have become hooked on opiate painkillers like OxyContin and Vicodin, buying them on the street for prices as high as $80 a pill. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the abuse of these painkillers was responsible for close to half a million emergency room visits in 2009, a number that has nearly doubled in just the past five years.

Our nation’s seemingly ravenous appetite for drugs also raises problematic questions about the larger culture the media has helped create. Why is it that a nation that enjoys one of the highest standards of living in the world also suffers one of the highest rates of drug abuse? Why are so many of us driven to substances to obliterate reality? What does this continuing scourge say about the values and morals that underlie our society?

Given the expensive impact of drugs and alcohol on our medical and prison system and addiction’s massive impact on workplace productivity, the continued lack of serious discourse on the issue remains surprising. Certainly it’s not just reporters who are to blame. Though the Obama administration recently doled out extra funding for drug prevention programs, it still spends several billion more on a drug war than seems as unwinnable as Vietnam. To its credit, starting in 2014, Obama’s historic new health plan will mandate insurers for the first time ever to treat addicts the way they treat victims of other diseases, putting an end to decades in which desperately ill addicts were denied life-and-death treatment.

For their part, however, the Republicans have been uncharacteristically more restrained on the subject. Not long ago they could dismiss the drug epidemic as symptoms of urban permissiveness and decaying inner-city neighborhoods. But as drugs intrude deeper and deeper into the leafy middle-class suburbs and the wide-open ranges of America’s heartland, the law and order types at the GOP have become tongue-tied. During the season’s endless series of GOP debates, not a single candidate was quizzed about their policies on drugs or treatment. While Ron Paul has been an articulate advocate of drug legalization, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum’s websites devote not a word to their drug policies, even though Bain Capital, once run by Mitt Romney, is one of the leading owners of the nation’s 20,000 rehabs and sober living facilities. Newt Gingrich, a one-time pot smoker who has lately taken to extolling the virtues of AA’s Big Book, has maintained a hard-line anti-drug stance, even though he’s backed down on his former pledge to put drug dealers to death. Last year, in Florida, newly elected Tea Party Gov. Rick Scott mounted a crazy and ultimately doomed campaign against an effort to regulate the state’s pill mills, which produce the vast majority of the country’s illegal prescription painkillers. Not to be outdone, the Tallahassee Republicans recently voted for a bill that would dramatically slash funding for drug prevention in a state that has one of the highest percentages of drug abusers in the country.

In short, there’s no lack of important, compelling stories out there that could benefit from a little media attention. And while some enterprising reporters and bloggers have risen to the challenge, they’re the exception rather than the rule. What’s responsible for their continued reluctance? The continuing stigma around addiction undoubtedly has something to do with it. Even though decades of research proves addiction is a condition with complicated genetic and chemical roots, far too many journalists continue to see it as a sort of moral weakness. Their failure to actively report on the issue represents both a lack of initiative and funding. After all, covering Whitney’s last moments is a lot easier (and less expensive) than going up against the wrath of formidable lawyers and lobbyists employed by corrupt pharmaceutical behemoths. It’s also a lot more comfortable than venturing into the ravaged small towns of Iowa and Montana to witness firsthand the devastation wrought by poverty and crystal meth.

The senseless death of one of America’s most outsize talents is undoubtedly a cause for mourning. But tragic as her death may be, Houston is just another person lost to an epidemic that has also killed thousands more in just the path month. It would be a fitting coda to her impressive legacy if her death ended up providing a genuine “teaching moment” for America: one that would encourage the media and public to look beyond the scandals and personalities to the complicated causes and consequences of this miserable disease. But that’s probably wishful thinking. More likely, in a couple of weeks the hysterical pundits and satellite trucks will roll on to the scene of the next tragedy. As Truman Capote famously noted, “The dogs bark and the caravan moves on.” Meanwhile, the 22 million people affected by this disease will stay exactly where they are.

Continue Reading Close

Maer Roshan is Founder and Editor of The Fix. Previously he served as Founder and Editor-in-Chief Radar Magazine and Radaronline.com, Editorial Director at Talk, Deputy Editor of New York, and Senior Editor of Interview. He is also Founding Editor of the forthcoming I-Pad publication, Punch!

How Americans really feel about drugs

A NYT op-ed uses "moderate" double-speak to deny the truth: Most people want marijuana legalized

  • more
    • All Share Services

How Americans really feel about drugsMarijuana activist Carrie Sandoval at a protest in Denver on Wednesday, Sept 22, 2010 (Credit: AP/Kristen Wyatt)

Almost exactly eight years ago, I wrote an essay for the Nation magazine looking at how terms such as “centrism” and “moderate” were beginning to be deftly manipulated to shape the parameters of America’s political discourse. In almost every policy debate, these words were being used in with-us-or-against-us fashion to delineate what was — and what was not — acceptable. Through such linguistic propaganda over the last decade, America was gradually taught that anything called “centrist” or “moderate” was Good and Serious because it supposedly represented “mainstream” thinking in America — even as “centrism” was being used to describe policies and politicians that, based on empirical data, increasingly diverged from the actual center of our nation’s public opinion. By contrast, anything positioned in opposition to that branding was wild-eyed “leftist,” “extremist,” “ideological,” “fringe” — and most of all, Evil and Unserious.

As dishonest as this kind of agitprop is, it unfortunately — but predictably — continues unabated. This is, after all, the golden era of agitprop — a moment in which wars are no longer wars, corporations are people, and top New York Times scribes are given a national platform to declare that a key architect of the Republican Party’s infamous K Street Project “is not a representative of the corporate or financial wing of the party.” And so when it comes to who is a “centrist” or “moderate,” the distortions persist without so much as a peep of editorial protest.

The latest example of this insidious framing comes in the form of a Monday New York Times Op-Ed. The piece is written by Kevin Sabet, formerly one of President Obama’s top drug policy officials. Titled “Overdosing on Extremism,” he employs the “centrist” and “moderate” code words to criticize those pressing for reforms that, for purposes of law enforcement, would treat currently outlawed drugs such as marijuana just like far more dangerous yet legal drugs such as alcohol. With the possibility of these reform proposals roiling the presidential race and appearing on statewide ballots in 2012, a breathless and hysterical Sabet sounds an old fear-mongering alarm, writing (emphasis added):

Unless we change the tone of the debate to give drug-policy centrists a voice, America’s drug problem will only get worse.

Indeed, moderates have historically been key contributors to both the debate and the practice of effective drug policy. In 1914, Representative Francis B. Harrison, a New York Democrat, worked with Republicans and President Woodrow Wilson to pass the first major piece of federal anti-drug legislation, in response to a surge in heroin and cocaine use.

Other moderates, from Theodore Roosevelt to John F. Kennedy, made drug policy an important part of their domestic agendas. President Bill Clinton worked closely with Bob Dole, the Republican Senate majority leader, on sensible measures like drug courts and community policing…

So where are the moderates now? … A few tough-on-crime conservatives and die-hard libertarians dominate news coverage and make it appear as if legalizing drugs and “enforcement only” strategies were the only options, despite the fact that the public supports neither

There is no magic bullet for America’s drug problem. The magnitude and complexity of our drug problem require us to constantly refine and improve our policies through thoughtful analysis, innovation and discussion.

Moderates should lead that conversation. To remain silent not only betrays widely shared values of compassion and justice for the most vulnerable. It also leaves policy in the hands of extremists who would relegate a very serious and consequential discussion to frivolous and dangerous quarters.

If ever a college taught a class in how modern political propaganda works — and how it proceeds without any connection to a shred of fact — this article should be required reading because it is such a pure example.

Mere weeks after Gallup’s new poll showed a majority of Americans support full legalization of marijuana, Sabet insists that it’s a “fact” that the public doesn’t support legalization. And mind you, it’s not just Gallup’s surveys that show public support for legalization — in state-based polls in politically diverse states like Massachusetts and Colorado, it’s essentially the same thing: widespread public support for pot legalization.

This, of course, says nothing of the fact that the very man Sabet earned his official government title from, Barack Obama, was elected to the Senate promoting marijuana decriminalization and then overwhelmingly elected to the White House after a campaign in which he pledged to respect states’ decisions to reform their drug laws. It also says nothing of the rise of Ron Paul, an oft-ignored candidate who has been able to overcome media scorn to wage an unexpectedly spirited race for the Republican presidential nomination thanks, in part, to his push to end the Drug War.

None of these facts about public opinion and the drug war are all that surprising; after all, in a recent national television ad campaign, Sabet’s own Office of National Drug Control Policy has deemed marijuana “the safest thing in the world.” Yet, Sabet says it’s a “fact” that the public doesn’t support any form of legalization.

How, you ask, can he justify such an assertion? How can he defend his claims considering those poll numbers, the results of the 2008 presidential election, or the rise of anti-drug warrior Paul in the traditionally “just say no” party’s presidential primary? He can’t, but he doesn’t need to in an era where facts no longer matter.

Instead, he (and the New York Times editors and headline writers who published his piece) wholly ignores the indisputable facts and simply deems the millions of Americans in this pro-legalization majority as “extremists” — that is, he pretends that the position in the actual center of public opinion is on the extreme edge of that public opinion. He then asserts that true “centrists” and “moderates” are those who do not support legalization — even though those voices are empirically the extremists whose positions put them far away from the mainstream center of public opinion. And, just for good measure, he employs a bit of ad hominem, suggesting it’s just “a few …  die-hard libertarians” who support legalization — ignoring not only the American majority, but the scores of top law enforcement officials who are fighting to end the drug war.

Taken together, Sabet’s goal in his Op-Ed is obvious: He’s a committed drug warrior with a vested (and, based on his Times billing as a “drug policy consultant,” possibly financial) interest in marginalizing those trying to end the drug war. To do that, he’s employed the most tried and true instruments of marginalization — the newly redefined notions of “centrism” and “moderate” policymaking. And he’s employed them even though the actual facts show that, in comparison to the mass public, he’s the fringe extremist.

Now sure, it’s certainly true that polls showing strong — and growing — support for legalizing marijuana cannot be fully equated to Americans’ views of policies for all drugs. However, marijuana-themed polls and election results are also hardly wholly unrelated to that conversation — and at the very least, those polls and election results should mean that the burden of proof is on someone like Sabet when he declares that being for legalization is the definition of “extremism” and the opposite of “centrism.”

But that burden of proof is nowhere to be found because in the 21st century, “centrism” and “moderate” still have nothing to do with the center of any political debate, or the moderate middle of any policy discussion. They remain political weapons deployed by attention-seeking fabulists against the real centrists and moderates in the American majority.

Continue Reading Close
David Sirota

David Sirota is a best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.

Page 2 of 70 in Drugs