Author: admin

We know that the far-reaching collateral consequences of drug prohibition have harmed millions of people … but what about animals?

 

It turns out that even birds are feeling the devastation of forcing drug markets underground and into the hands of criminal enterprises.

 

A recent study in Nature Sustainability revealed the unintended consequences of international drug prohibition policies on biodiversity, specifically in Central American countries such as Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala.

 

Efforts to intercept drugs have pushed narcotic traffickers into some of the most pristine, biodiverse forests on our planet. These areas, crucial for the survival and breeding of forest birds, are being degraded at an alarming rate due to deforestation driven by trafficking activities.

 

How does this happen? I’m glad you asked! The deforestation is driven by actions like creating roads and airstrips for transporting drug shipments, as well as money laundering through cattle pastures, which expand into and destroy forested areas.

 

I had no idea that over half of the global populations of certain migratory bird species reside in these affected areas. It’s hard to wrap my mind around the fact that the habitats they depend on are being degraded by…drug prohibition. The destruction of failed policies reaches even beyond human communities.

 

The researchers call for more comprehensive strategies that not only address drug trafficking but also strengthen community governance and land rights, to help protect these vulnerable areas. Last year, I wrote a short blog about why warring with drug cartels won’t solve the issues we’re facing — and now, we’re seeing that nature is paying a price too.

 

It’s crazy to think about just how deep the effects of prohibition go. Whether you’re interested in addiction, recovery, crime reduction, incarceration, family stability, overdose — or even birds — we need you at the table. 

Multiple times this summer, I’ve been talking to people at conferences and was told some variation of, “Fentanyl is just so deadly. I mean, you can die just from getting it on your skin!” 

 

That’s terrifying…but also a myth.

 

Zach Siegel was recently the lead author of a report released by The Center for Just Journalism that examines the claims surrounding “fentanyl exposure.”

 

I think many of us have seen headlines about police officers or first responders experiencing symptoms of fentanyl exposure — or even overdosing — after touching the drug. But are these experiences actually the result of fentanyl? Or something else?

 

The report, called Fentanyl Exposure: Myths, Misconceptions, and the Media, not only debunks common misconceptions but also challenges us to consider how these beliefs shape public policy and personal safety. I found it incredibly interesting and wanted to share some key highlights with you.

 

The myth that touching fentanyl can be lethal originated from a 2016 video by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). This video, which has since been removed from their website, claimed that mere contact with fentanyl could be deadly. This is simply not true.

 

Despite being debunked by medical experts, this narrative gained traction, heavily influenced by initial police endorsements and widespread media coverage without much scrutiny.

 

So, what are first responders really experiencing? 

 

Many first responders report symptoms like dizziness and rapid heartbeat, which they attribute to opioid overdose. However, medical experts suggest these are more consistent with panic attacks — induced by the fear of fentanyl, not by fentanyl itself. This phenomenon, known as the “nocebo effect,” occurs when the expectation of harm manifests physical symptoms.

 

“When police officers think they are overdosing and describe symptoms such as heavy breathing, a pounding heart, dizziness, and numbness, and being able to tell someone that they are overdosing, this is a sign that they are not describing an actual overdose. They are describing a panic attack.” — Hope Smiley-McDonald, research sociologist, director of RTI International Center for Forensic Science Advancement and Application

 

The belief that passive contact with fentanyl is deadly remains widespread, largely influenced by sensational media stories.

 

The report shared that out of 326 articles about fentanyl exposure published from 2018 to 2023, only 12 percent expressed ANY doubt regarding the danger of passive fentanyl exposure. They also found that 252 articles quoted the police, and only 35 cited actual medical experts.

 

This lack of skepticism has allowed the myth to persist unchallenged. 

 

Yes, unregulated fentanyl being purchased by consumers on the illicit market IS responsible for tens of thousands of overdose deaths each year. It’s heartbreaking what’s happening because of the lack of quality control and accurate dosing from the underground market, but those deaths are a result of someone ingesting the drug in a way that enters their bloodstream — not from touching it.

 

The exaggerated fear of being in the presence of fentanyl can lead to delayed or inappropriate responses to actual overdoses, misallocation of resources and unnecessary stress among first responders.

 

If you want to learn more, I encourage you to read the full report. It’s written in plain language and can help all of us debunk the myth when we hear it, stopping the downstream harm that’s happening from a perceived risk that doesn’t exist.

 

In other news, our team was just at FreedomFest in Las Vegas having many conversations with people who haven’t considered the ideas we support.

 

My favorite was a man who spent a long time explaining to me why I was wrong, and then asked for a copy of Curious because he really wanted to learn more. Openmindedness is a beautiful thing! 

 

If you’d like to see some photos of the conference, check out the slideshow on our Facebook page!

Sixty years ago, the Surgeon General’s Report on Smoking and Health marked a huge moment in public health, significantly impacting smoking rates in the United States. It was a groundbreaking report. Adult smoking rates then were 40 percent of the population — it’s about 12 percent today. 

 

What’s lesser known is that a year prior, Consumer’s Union (CU) had published a report titled Smoking and the Public Interest, which laid the groundwork for the Surgeon General’s findings.

 

In 1972, at the dawn of the War on Drugs, CU decided a similar report was needed for drugs and published Licit and Illicit Drugs — using the same lead author and researcher from their smoking report.

 

Unfortunately, it never influenced the federal government the way their smoking report did. That might be because the government wasn’t ready (and still isn’t) for the conclusions they shared. 

 

Here are the main recommendations in the report:

• Stop emphasizing measures to keep drugs away from people.
• Stop publicizing the horrors of the “drug menace.” 
• Stop increasing the damage done by drugs.
• Stop misclassifying drugs.
• Stop viewing the drug problem as primarily a national problem, to be solved on a national scale.
• Stop pursuing the goal of stamping out illicit drug use.

 

In short, they knew back then that a punitive approach to drugs was not going to be effective, and would cause more harm in the long run. 

 

Today, we have even more evidence that shows this to be true.

 

As we continue our mission to reshape the conversation and policy around drugs and addiction, it’s helpful to understand the historical context that has gotten us to where we are today.

 

Many thanks to my friend Robert Legge for bringing this part of drug prohibition history to my attention. He writes a weekly drug policy roundup newsletter, and if you’d like to receive it, you can email him at rob9leg@gmail.com.

 

Robert writes his newsletter as a volunteer because he has a passion for ending the harm happening to so many people from faulty drug policies. Everyone has influence. Where might yours be?

 

Sharing a social media post of ours, sharing Curious, sharing a conversation with a friend about better ways to approach addiction — all of it helps to reshape our culture, and ultimately, our policies.

I want to recognize and celebrate a significant milestone in the movement toward a better approach to drug policy. Maryland Governor Wes Moore recently signed an executive order pardoning 175,000 cannabis convictions! Click here to read more about it.

 

This historic action represents the largest pardon for misdemeanor cannabis possession charges by any state in the country.

 

While this is a big step forward, it’s crucial to note that these convictions have been pardoned but not expunged — which can be a costly and time-consuming process. Until they are expunged, the convictions still appear on individuals’ records, which can continue to create barriers to employment, housing, etc.

 

Expungement would remove these barriers completely, which would be another huge step forward. A step other states have already started taking, which is amazing!

 

Michigan’s Clean Slate law, implemented last year, is a good example. Certain low-level offenses were automatically expunged, impacting nearly 10 percent of the state’s population. That’s stunning!

 

All steps forward should be celebrated, so we love what Maryland did, even as we look toward the next step and the next one. Change happens one step at a time, and we love celebrating these wins!