>> Overall, it is difficult to see how prohibition of psychedelics can be justified as a public health measure” > This is activism, not science. As I said above

>> Overall, it is difficult to see how prohibition of psychedelics can be justified as a public health measure” > This is activism, not science. As I said above, I actually support drug legalisation – but it’s far from appropriate to include this kind of thing so prominently in what’s supposed to be a neutral, factual scientific analysis. Scientific studies that ingesting chemicals like THC are one of the reasons we have things like the Rockefeller drug laws. Activism from some in the scientific community is one reason people are rotting in jail for selling marijuana (while tobacco companies donate to politicians and in return get trade deals where it is illegal to have a law requiring warnings on cigarette packs. People can be arrested for ingesting mescaline from peyote plants like Native Americans used to, scientific studies and activism is one reason for this, but scientists asking for people not to be imprisoned for getting mescaline from a cactus is not "appropriate". (I have never tried mescaline but don't want to be imprisoned if I ever do)