Round-Up Ready Coca Plants 478
goneutt writes "Wired reports that an herbicide resistant breed of the coca plant has been found in Columbia after years of government spraying. It also appears that the process happend via selective breeding rather than gene manipulation, but it's an outside possibility that it was engineered. What does this mean about drug control policy and the extensive use of one herbicide repeatedly. Does this point the way of the future for other weeds?"
Is it.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Is it.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is it.. (Score:5, Informative)
I'll give this one "funny", but certainly not "insightful".
Glyphosate has very close to no effect in humans, acting by inhibiting EPSP synthase (which mammals do not have).
Or, put another way, you can safely use it to kill weeds in your vegetable garden.
Bad gardening advice.... (Score:3, Informative)
I think you mean, "...you can safely use it to kill weeds in your roundup-ready[TM] vegetable garden."
Re:Is it.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it.. (Score:3, Funny)
PS: Coke and pot do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for me.
Re:Is it.. (Score:3, Insightful)
> ..just as, ehm, potent?
If they've crossed it with the "plant that yields up to four times more cocaine than existing plants and promises to revolutionise Colombia's drugs industry" [scotsman.com] which they came across this summer, then yes.
To quote:
A toxicologist, Camilo Uribe, who studied the coca, said: "The quality and percentage of hydrochloride from each leaf is much better, between 97 and 98 per cent. A normal plant does not get more than 25 per cent, meaning that more drugs and of a higher pu
Re:Is it.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Canis familiaris (Score:5, Funny)
Starsky and Hutch surrender.
Re:Canis familiaris (Score:2)
Dunno if dogs can smell the leaves though.
The great irony in the article, to me, is that legitimate crops get wiped out by the spraying and that causes farmers in sprayed areas to grow the one thing that will grow even tho it's sprayed - coca.
Re:Canis familiaris (Score:2)
Quick! (Score:5, Funny)
Just imagine all the lost revenues.
Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:5, Insightful)
One'd have thought someone would have learned something of the whole antibiotic resistance problem we've developed after years of abusing them without control. This kind of thing was not in any shape or form unpredictable or unexpected.
Re:Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:5, Informative)
To my knowledge, most herbicides are effective for years, and glyphosate (Round-up) has been no different. In fact, I've only heard of one other putative instance of naturally developing resistance to Round-up. With all that's sprayed in the US to control our annual herbaceous weeds, I find it unlikely that resistance developed naturally in a comparatively slow reproducing plant such as coca.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if someone created GMO coca. There is enough money in the crop to support such efforts.
I'm a plant pathologist, however, and my experience is with fungicide resistance, so take this as you will.
This is different (Score:3, Interesting)
To my knowledge, most herbicides are effective for years, and glyphosate (Round-up) has been no different. In fact, I've only heard of one other putative instance of naturally developing resistance to Round-up. With all that's sprayed in the US to control our annual herbaceous weeds, I find it unlikely that resistance developed naturally in a comparatively slow reproducing plant such as coca.
But this is differnet than using roundup because there is no reason to try to cultivate plants which are resista
Re:Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not the case here, where they were spraying left and right in massive quanitites to completely destroy the coca crops. "Collateral damage" to the plant population of the area was not even considered. The same is happening now with GM crops that are resistant to herbicides, their ideal use would be simply to lessen the side effects of the pesticide when used the same way we've been using them before, but instead they're just the perfect excuse to use tons of the stuff to kill all the weeds, not just "many".
Just like DDT, it can be very effective, but if you put excessive selective pressure for anything that makes the organism resistant to your favourite poison, you will eventually select the resistant ones and you'll be fucked. (Less likely, of course, the longer the cycle of the organism is, as it's a race between the killing rate to make it extinct and the mutation rate to become resistant, but Coca becoming extinct is not going to happen, so guess where we will end up...).
Of course, I'm only a molecular biologist, so I'm not an expert in the particular field. But seems to me that we're about to make the same dumb mistakes we've been making for a long long time. The reperirion of the pattern is so clear it almost makes you weep.
Re:Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:5, Informative)
I hate to say RTFA, but RTFA. The author specifically went to Colombia to determine whether this resistant plant existed and to try and determine whether it was genetically-modified. He did find what appeared to be Roundup-resistance coca plants and had them tested at a DNA lab.
They found no evidence of any tampering. They specifically looked for evidence of the gene and the process used to develop Roundup Ready soybeans that we use in the U.S. They said that while it was possible that another way had been found the modify the plant, it was highly unlikely given an already known method.
The author's ultimate conclusion was that the plants had been selectively bred. Colombian farmers apparently often sell and trade clippings from the hardiest plants and have created a large, ad hoc breeding network.
So yeah, you're probably right. This probably couldn't have occurred naturally. But that's not what this article is about.
And no, I'm not a plant pathologist or a geneticist, just some guy who read the article. For whatever that's worth.
tp
Re:Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, this is an incredible poorly written article. It is basically a big tease, based on the premise that the plants might be genetically engineered, which it turns out they aren't. Also he keeps comparing farms to p2p filesharers, as if the farmers are taking a hint from 14 yr olds in the US. Selective breeding and distribution of new strains is not a new tech.
In all it is an annoying article that is full of speculation, short on facts, and proves nothing. I was pretty disappointed.
Re:Sheesh, history likes to repeat itself (Score:3, Interesting)
Colombia (Score:5, Informative)
Here's what it means (Score:5, Interesting)
As long as there's a market, there will be farmers producing drugs. Not only do the farmers get more money from growing drugs, if they refuse, they will be forced to do it.
Spraying, yanking or what have we will not make a difference.
(This is where I'd place a political rant, but there's been enough political BS on slashdot already. Besides, you all know the drill)
Re:Here's what it means (Score:3, Interesting)
Quoted from this article [antiwarcommittee.org]:
These spray campaigns have destroyed small farmers' food crops, contaminated water, and made children sick. While Colombian farming villages suffer severe consequences from the spraying, the campaigns produce little to no effect on the drug trade...
Yes you can-- in colombia (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd be willing to bet that you dont really know much about the war on drugs in colombia other than that they are growing drugs and the US doesnt want them to. However, its much more multifaceted than that. The drug war in Colombia, at least to Colombians, is more focused around the guerilla groups and narco-trafickers mutual supporting each other. Colombia has seen much more terrorism than the US ever has, probably along the same magnitude as Israel or Ireland back in the day (I say probably because i dont have the numbers).
The "drug war" in colombia is breaking this cycle and getting rid of one of these two groups which will also play a large role in breaking the other. It can be successfully accomplished-- look at the Sendero Luminoso extermination in Peru. Let's not forget, Colombia used to be a non-factor in the war on drugs. Peru was the drug capital of South America and produced an overwhelming percentage of coca. Colombia, IIRC, was not a major player (like less than 10% of coca production) until the 1990's when Peru took a hardline stance against the Sendero Luminoso antisurgents and Escobar and the Cali cartel rose.
True, if Colombia is able to rid the country of its insurgents, the drug dealers will probably move elsewhere (Southern Panama, Ecuador, Venezuela with Chavez in power). However, the drug war in Colombia IS winnable. The general drug war, on the other hand, is a different story.
Another interesting thing about these widespread coca sprayings and focus on cocaine is that many colombian farmers are moving towards growing opium. Heroin is actually much more profitable than cocaine and is steadily increasing in its importation. Im willing to bet that in 10 years, heroine is the new cocaine.
Re:Here's what it means (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't win the "war" on drugs (Score:5, Insightful)
IMHO, drugs should be legalized and regulated like alcohol and tobacco, simply because the budgetary and social cost of "crimes of financing" are exceeding the what the budgetary and social costs would be, if regulated. Simple, pragmatic economics.
Blast from the past, even praise for Richard Nixon:
In 1968 Richard Nixon ran at least partly on reducing Crime. After election, he felt it necessary to deliver on his promises. Crimes of finance for drugs were felt to be a large part of the problem, so they were going to attack drugs. He was all set to go on a law'n'order, source-interdiction based drug policy, but his advisor(s) (Name forgotten, but there was a key one, here.) told him that it would never work. He had to work on demand reduction.
They put in place demand reduction, largely in the form of drug treatment. It worked, at least within the timeframe and measurements they used. They reduced crime.
By the 1972 race Viet Nam was the big issue, and everyone had forgotten about crime. After the election, they quietly dismantled the drug treatment programs, and the approach has largely lain fallow, since.
BTW, Clinton and Greenspan were aiming for a "soft landing" with the economy, breaking the boom/bust cycles. They felt they had just achieved their target, as the dot-com boom hit. Of course the boom was followed by a matching bust, and the soft landing goal has been forgotten, too.
Why not? (Score:2, Informative)
So a few sturdy plants survived, then mutated. Then the mutated plants thrived, and grew an adaption to the chemical.
I think scientists are really starting to get the "God" mentality -- Surely Nature would not fend for itself, after all! Nature couldn't have possibly done th
Re:Why not? (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, plants can mutate, but the article talks about how FAST they've mutated. In other words, they had help, and the help likely came from the farmers via an "underground" market for clones of the resistant plants.
Simple (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Simple (Score:3, Interesting)
Roundup tolerance (Score:2)
Stuff wants to live, but a lot of stuff died finding the winning genes.
Re:Simple (Score:2)
Evolution wants to be anthromorphized!
Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
If you work in an office, there's probably a pot of liquid crack around. And I'd wager there's also a sign with something like, 'if you drink the last cup, brew the next pot,' cause you know those adicts don't like to wait for a fix.
What's sauce for the goose (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, it worked for mosquitos, lice, tuberculosis and gonorrhea. Of course it will work for weeds!
Drug control policy (Score:5, Insightful)
So please leave Colombia alone. You can't even spell the country name.
Re:Drug control policy (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is you cannot control the demand either. It is a basic desire among humans to want to alter their perceptions. One of the earliest "games" children enjoy is spinning in circles until they are dizzy. The reason thrill rides are so popular is because of the adrenaline rush they provide.
If you look at the behaviors of
Re:Demand is a given (Score:5, Insightful)
>Drugs affect your mind to make you crave them
more than food, sex, and life itself.
Of course they do. That's why everyone I know who has ever tried drugs is now a slobbering mess who crawls on their belly from one crackhouse to the next.
>Drug usage is no longer a choice for those that have tried it.
Did you just get out of your DARE class, or what?
lab tests have been done (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately it would be considered offensive to
perform the tests on humans, but monkeys are the
next best thing:
Suppose you hook a monkey up, such that pressing
a button will give him cocaine. He'll like that!
Then, you make the button take two presses to
deliver the drug. Then 4, then 10, then 50...
Soon enough, you'll have the monkey pressing that
button tens of thousands of times to get the drug.
He won't be distracted by food or female monkeys.
He won't care
Re:lab tests have been done (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:lab tests have been done (Score:5, Insightful)
i like drugs. i use them sometimes. it's limited to marijuana and alcohol these days but i've tried most of them. if i had an unlimited supply and someone to feed me and clean up after me... maybe i'd do drugs all the time. but i live in the Real World where i have to feed myself and work for my drugs. i bet if you made it harder for the monkey to get the drugs the monkey would still do them BECAUSE THEY ARE FUN. seriously, these drug "studies" prove one thing -- drugs are better than nothing.
i'd suggest that if you put a slashdot reader in a cage and supplied 'it' with an unlimited supply of video games it would push those buttons until it's fingers were raw. because it's fun, because we are alive, because humans are big fans of fun.
i grew up in the suburbs. there wasn't a whole lot to do outside of play video games (but my parents wouldn't allow me to buy a game system) or play sports (i was always the last picked). then along come the police with their "DARE" program, telling me i have to say no to drugs. what the fuck am i supposed to do then? all the 'adventures' my parents experienced as children have been bulldozed, made flat and covered in asphalt.
if you want to keep kids off of drugs give them something fun to do and recognize that you've got to have different fun things for different people -- silver bullets are for warewolves. when i was 14 i would have loved to learn machine shop skills or electronics but there were no extra-curricular groups for that in my school. they were too busy building a new football stadium and gutting the arts classes.
as for the question: are drugs harmful? yes. but so are cars, computers, porn, sunlight, alcohol, couches and laser pointers... in the wrong hands. but all of those things are very helpful to many many people.
Re:lab tests have been done (Score:3, Interesting)
The alpha male was the first one to try the button and the first one to repeat it several times. But after some time only the beta males were running for the button and hitting it to get their th
Re:Demand is a given (Score:3, Insightful)
By forcibly limiting the supply, we ensure that few addicts will be willing to share with others.
No, instead you get drug dealers and addicts desperate for cash for their fix. No social cost there, no sir...
is it really a weed (Score:2, Insightful)
A weed is a plant that doesnt grow native in a particular area.
Re:is it really a weed (Score:2)
Its always amusing when people classify plants they dont like as weeds...
Plants they don't like?
Re:is it really a weed (Score:2)
Crab grass has been growing natively in my front yard for years.
Re:is it really a weed (Score:2, Informative)
1 a (1) : a plant that is not valued where it is growing and is usually of vigorous growth; especially : one that tends to overgrow or choke out more desirable plants
Re:is it really a weed (Score:2)
A rose, growing in the middle of what you want to be grass, is a weed.
Re:is it really a weed (Score:3, Informative)
1.
1. A plant considered undesirable, unattractive, or troublesome, especially one growing where it is not wanted, as in a garden.
2. Rank growth of such plants.
2. A water plant, especially seaweed.
3. The leaves or stems of a plant as distinguished from the seeds: dill weed.
4. Something useless, detrimental, or worthless, especially an animal unfit for breeding.
5. Slang.
1. Tobacco.
2. A cigarette.
3. Ma
Re:is it really a weed (Score:3, Insightful)
from: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=weed
Seems like a reasonable classification to me.
it is really a weed, to some (Score:2)
want it to grow. Suppose I have a lawn, and I grow
sweet potatos. The lawn is a weed when it invades
the sweet potato patch, and the sweet potatos are
weeds when they invade the lawn.
Some want the drugs to grow. Some don't. Depending
on who you are, the drus plants may be weeds.
Waiting (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Waiting (Score:2)
Re:Waiting (Score:5, Funny)
Please mod parent +15 insightful!
Duh (Score:3, Funny)
Obviously it was the work of satan! God was busy working to get GWB elected.
Of course God did this (Score:3, Funny)
Where the money is (Score:2)
Not that uncommon. (Score:2)
That it has spread into cocaine is interested but expected since article about it have been around for over 2 years.
Slashdot 0wnz Wired (Score:2, Insightful)
Seems the recipe to karma whore would be:
1: Monitor Wired to post their magazine stories on their site
2: Be the first to submit to
3: Rinse, Repeat
It was bound to happen eventually. (Score:2, Interesting)
No doubt there will be some plants that will become resistant to existing forms herbicides. Afterall, we are already starting to deal with the horrors of germs (bacteria etc) that have become resistant to antibiotics and other medicines. It's just a natural process.
On the plus side, it means scientists will always
and an article on Herbicide Resistance in weeds (Score:2, Informative)
The real question... (Score:4, Funny)
The real question, imho, is will Monsanto [monsanto.com] try to collect royalties for the use of their genetic patent portfolio and IP?
It would be *really* funny if they sued the drug cartels for patent license violations.
I don't know who I dislike more, Monsanto or the Drug Cartels...
-davidu
Re:The real question... (Score:2)
What is there to dislike about drug cartels? Seriously?
The answer to foreign policy shift rests in ... (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Do all herbacides rely on the Round-Up active ingredients?
2. If not, is the herbacide in question something other than agent orange (or something similarly damaging to the environment/humanity)?
3. Can we use that instead?
Furthermore:
4. What weaknesses were created in the plant through this adaptation? Just because it has become impervious to Round-Up doesn't mean that at the same time other alterations to it's code didn't occur during it's adaptation. There's more than likely a chink in the armor (so to speak), and if this strain gets spread to 100% of the coca growing community, that chink in the armor could become a large puncture wound.
Another question I'm left with is with all that money, why the hell haven't cocaine cartels decided to invest in some genetic modification before now?
umm.. (Score:2)
IANAH(I am not a horticulturist), but people who grow another illegal plant [hightimes.com] already use selective breeding for specific purposes. Usually it's for appearence, taste, high, growing conditions. I haven't heard of a herbicide resistant maryjane, but this isn't exactly a new thing.
Oh, and Dave's not here... sorry, I had to.
Man vs. Nature -- Winner = NATURE (Score:2, Interesting)
The is only one more example that man can not, and should not stop the use of drugs.
Marijuana grows naturally almost anywhere in this planet, marijuana serves a thousand different purposes all of them positive. Making marijuana illegal is like...(this is for the faith-based votersr now)...saying that God made a mistake.
Not really (Score:2, Informative)
Except that according to the Wired article it wasn't an outside possibility since they didn't find any evidence of genetic tampering. The conclusion was that it was natural selection.
Patent suits and drug cartels (Score:2)
It'd
The War on Drugs goes to a new intensity (Score:2, Funny)
Resist THIS (Score:2)
Nuke it from orbit...it's the only way to be sure.
The True Impact... (Score:2)
Victory in the drug war is at hand. (Score:2)
What it really means (Score:3, Insightful)
And I expect that in another 10-15 years, we'll see another story about how now coca have been resistant to whatever our new chemical of choice is going to be.
Not to turn this into a "war on drugs" tirade, but the current administration, and it's directives, are so far off target, it's not funny.
By the way... While you're thinking about how much money has already been sunk into this, how many lives have been lost, and how many people in columbia we've hurt (or at least hurt their livelihoods, whether they were coca farmers or not), consider the $75 billion dollar proposal that Bush will submit in January to further the war in Iraq.
Now think about the positive changes that could be made here in the USA, which is where all of us funding these fiascos live, if we used the combined monies for these wars to improve our homeland.
If you can picture it (I can!), then you surely are not a politician, I'm guessing.
Who does monsanto sue??? (Score:3, Funny)
I mean, They gotta [slashdot.org] sue somebody! [bag.cbc.ca]
Herbicides only hurt non-coca farmers now (Score:5, Interesting)
The spraying is the initiative of the United States, which has been involved in Colombia's affairs ever since it stole the land for the Panama Canal from Colombia. Coca is grown in the north and the south, but the north is not sprayed - only the south. That is because the coca growers in the north are US-friendly and the coca growers in the south are in FARC controlled areas, a movement which among other things, wants the US out of Colombia's affairs. The south growing coca is a new phenomenom, for years FARC banned it, so all the coca grown and sent to the US in the 1970s was from the US friendly north. It only became a "problem" when the south began growing it. The US army colonel who supposedly was leading anti-drug efforts was actually involved in an operation to ship drugs to [salon.com] the United States.
Right now Phillip Morris is pushing the deadly tobacco drug on Chinese people. Can you imagine if China sent planes over to the US and began dropping herbicides on fields all over the US south? This is completely ridiculous, and whenever someone from south Colombia fights back against this, of course it's called "terrorism" and is used as justification for why this is necessary.
I don't think this whole thing is the US government being misguided, I think it is the US government being misleading, especially to the American people. Plenty of countries ship drugs to the US, if the product (such as marijuana) is not grown here already. But only Colombia gets this attention, only Colombia gets sent one billion a year to fight the FARC...uh, I mean, to fight coca farmers. Coca is the WMD's of Colombia - it is the excuse for doing what they *really* want to do.
Why is Colombia so important? Because Venezuela, Colombia (and from recent discoveries, Bolivia) have massive amounts of oil. The US powers-that-be want to control these natural resources. Arauca is one of the more oil-rich regions, and dozens of trade unionists in that region alone have been murdered [guardian.co.uk] this year. Hundreds of Colombian trade unionists are murdered every year, and the US sends one billion a year in military aid, crop destruction and so forth in order to add fuel to the fire. These policies are lobbied for by corporations like Occidental Petroleum, and I see only the most sinister motives behind their and the US's efforts in Colombia. Of course, the whole coca thing is a big WMD-like front for the real reasons, but if the US wanted to stop the global drug trade it should stop shipping tobacco to China. Hell, the US helped England invade China in order to push heroin on them over a century ago.
evolving coca or evolving coca dealers? (Score:5, Insightful)
It also appears that the process happend via selective breeding rather than gene manipulation, but it's an outside possibility that it was engineered.
Those are both the same thing: evolution by selection. By spraying coca with herbicide either we are selecting for coca which is resistent to herbicide, or we are selecting for drug producers who are capable of gentically engineering coca to make it resistant to herbicide. Anti-drug measures apply selective pressures to the entire system of production, not just the plant.
What does this mean about drug control policy
The enforcers are likely to renew and concentrate their efforts on the point of adaptation within the adversary system, misunderstanding the scope of the problem which they confront, believing it to be a plant rather than a system of production which may adapt at any stage. My prediction: They will find a solution to the problem of resistant plants, apply it, and the system will evolve again, adapting at that point or some other.
They are playing wac-a-mole with evolution.
Re:evolving coca or evolving coca dealers? (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a somewhat cynical view, but I think you missed the most cynical part: the US agencies responsible for executing the war on drugs are run by pragmatic people who don't want to lose their jobs. The worst case scenario for them is that they actually win the war on drugs and they're out of a job. So instead, they're mostly in the publ
It makes no difference (Score:4, Interesting)
Once the biochemical pathway is known there are relatively few barriers to transfering it into a mass produced crop or yeast growing in a beer barrel in your basement.
The entire "kill off the crop" perspective probably has less than a ten year future. Beyond that one will be able to produce psychoactive substances in a variety of settings. It shifts from "lets eliminate the xxxyyyzzz crop" to lets test every single cornfield in America and/or lets invade every single basement to see if they have bioreactors (aka beer brewing barrels) that produce THC or Cocaine.
A real attempt to address this problem would not be focused on the production sources but would instead be focused on the causes for "demand". While it is important to limit the sources -- it ultimately isn't going to happen. (It is a task that is doomed to fail because technology advances *will* migrate around attempts to limit production.) Reduce the demand for the product and the sources of production will decrease as well. Simple economics.
Because I promise you, as someone who has studied microbiology, biochemistry and molecular biology, as well as having founded seveeral biotech companies, attempts to control the "source" are doomed to fail.
Re:One Word (Score:3, Funny)
Re:One Word (Score:2)
Re:One Word (Score:5, Insightful)
Thats a great idea. Of course it will be good for the soil and all the plants (including the coca) will grow back faster. Sure, we might kill a whole bunch of columbians, but... hey... they are columbians, not people right?
I think this is an example of what we like to call poetic justice
A few people with an irrational fear of plants, have gone around killing them, and the plants have grown resistant to their methods. Good for them.
This is proof that you really can't outlaw nature.
Maybe its time to rethink this strategy of flailing wildly at anything that we percieve as potentially bad, and consider leaving people be to grow and use the plants that they want to.
Then if there are problems with how people use those plants, we can deal with that. We can train doctors to deal with that (and we have) we can foster an environment where people feel safe telling their doctors about what they are doing, an atmosphere of open honest discussion will lead to healthier attitudes.
Harm reduction is the key. These attempts to defeat nature arn't working, and instead are just inflating prices and making criminal gangs filthy rich. Hell the cartels that produce cocaine are known to have built submarines for drug trafficing. A cost that is passed directly on to the users.
Is it really so bad that people who like cocaine use it? Wouldn't it be better to decrease its effect on their wallets so they don't need to resort to crime? Wouldn't it be better to foster openness so those with problems are easier to help? Wouldn't it be better to take the money out of the hands of criminal gangs and use it to fund education initives to help keep people from starting in the first place?
Why are we in columbia? The problem is here at home. We need to fix the problems here at home, and the answer to that is not fighting a war on plants in some other country. It means growing up and taking responsibility for our own peoples actions. It means showing them the error of their ways, and then letting them make their own decisions on the matter.
-Steve
Jurassic blow... (Score:3, Funny)
Or the drug smugglers.
Re:One Word (Score:3, Informative)
lets start fires in the jungles of columbia
Sure, we might kill a whole bunch of columbians, but... hey... they are columbians, not people right?
Carp, I agree with your post but why, oh why you people can't grasp that the country is called Colombia, with an "O", and the people are Colombians.
Cheers,
Carlos
Re:One Word (Score:3, Insightful)
Many drugs, including coke, are more expensive by the gram than gold.
Tylanol and Heroine can be produced at about the same cost. Heroin however costs a hell of alot more than tylanol for no other reason than the drug war. Risk in moving it, artifical difficulty in producing it caused by restrictions on chemical sa
Re:One Word (Score:4, Insightful)
Even when the price was 5 times what it is today, people still used it, it still flowed into this country.
I am not ready for drugstoe heroin yet either. I think we need to not lose the spirit of experimentation here. The drug war was an experiment. A hypothesis was made that use of our police to enforce prohibition could fix the problem. That has, for the past 60 years, proven false time and again. It proved false for alcohol, its proving false for heroin, its proving false for coke, its proving false for marijuana.
We need to declare this experiment over and try a new one.
We should regulate these things. Maybe make heroin available with a doctors prescription, so at the very least you need to go see a doctor and tell him you want heroin and talk with him before you can get it.
As it is now, they can't even prescribe it for what it is medically good for: chronic pain. There are many terminally ill people who could benefit, and THEY can't even get it, because we have decided we need to keep it out of the hands of other people.... people who we have failed to keep it from.
Its time to try something different.
-Steve
Re:One Word (Score:3, Funny)
"Hi Doc...listen, I've always wanted to look like Keith Richards but, I'm afraid of plastic surgery...can you help me out?"
"Sure son...here's a prescription...."
Re:One Word (Score:3, Informative)
For the fascinating history, read "Opium: A History", by Martin Booth. Morphine was developed to cure opium addiction, and heroin was developed to cure morphine addiction...
It's my understanding that heroin is considered so powerful a pain reliever that it is not considered medically useful. Morphine sulphate is difficult enough to control.
Anyway, I very much agree with you about the
Re:One Word (Score:5, Funny)
I, for one, welcome our new leafy overlords....
Re:One Word (Score:2)
It also appears that the process happend via selective breeding rather than gene manipulation, but it's an outside possibility that it was engineered.
Just _why_ would someone want to introduce such GM/GEd stuff?
Re:Please spell it correctly (Score:2, Offtopic)
Sorry, you blew your point with this aside.
Re:Please spell it correctly (Score:2)
Re:Please spell it correctly (Score:2, Troll)
Anyone who thinks a mis spelling is a reason to hate a whole country shows astounding ignorance. Anyone who thinks like that hated way before they heard us say 'columbia'. But thats fine, keep telling us Americans why everyone in the world hates us. I know I really care, no really... no really.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wrong agent (Score:2)
Re:It means that. . . (Score:2)
If it weren't illegal, it would no more destroy countries than coffee does. It's only through the ridiculous markup on illegal drugs that causes them to be fought over.
Re:It means that. . . (Score:2)
Re:It means that. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but I have watched more than one crack adult waste away and die. One of them was a beautiful little girl from my neighborhood, and a good family, that I watched grow up.
I've watched many more lives destroyed by another plant derived drug far more common than crack and quite a few die from it. Terminal cirrhosis of the liver isn't pretty. The drug can be derived from any plant and can be purchased over the counter at any convienient store.
It isn't the plant's fault, and you simply can't destroy them all anyway, at least not without destroying ourselves as well.
This isn't just some plant god gave us to smoke.
Actually, if we just smoked the plant there would be little problem.
. . . and ruins whole country's.
No, it is the fruitless attempts at interdiction that ruin whole countries. Colombia used to be one of the prime tourist spots of the world, and they've been 'doing coke' for millenia.
By the way, I've found an interesting, herbicide free, way to deal with dandelions in my lawn (another plant that some people take offense at for some reason. I was speaking of plants, remember?)
I eat them.
KFG
Re:It means that. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Interdiction is a modern phenomenon. Before interdiction there were no drug cartels and no drug related crimes as we know them. The one is the cause of the other. Where do the drug cartels stand if all you have to do to get a bit of coke is to buy a Coke?
You don't see a lot of 'rum runners' around these days, do you? Just honest convienient store, liquor store and bar owners.
Aside from the drunk driving/angry drunk abuser issue the most serious crime now directly associated with alcohol is a bit of obnoxious panhandling.
Where there is no black market there is no black market crime.
KFG
Re:It means that. . . (Score:5, Funny)
The mythology of crack babies (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It means that. . . (Score:3, Informative)
The Daturas (which is a category that typically includes the flowering Datura plants and the woody Brugmansia bushes) are absolutely gorgeous plants with beautiful, large flowers. Datura contains high levels of several psychologically active alkaloids called tropanes, of which the most common are atropine, scopolamine, and hyoscyamine.
Tropanes