2 ms·
You must misunderstand what I said if you think the article says the same thing. As someone already mentioned to you, the article says “cocaine was being used i
by IAmGraydon 2y ago
You must misunderstand what I said if you think the article says the same thing. As someone already mentioned to you, the article says “cocaine was being used in the 17th century by literally no one” when using cocaine is literally exactly what they were doing. It’s just the same as someone saying “no one was using caffeine in the 17th century…they were just drinking coffee.” You honestly don’t understand why that is blatantly wrong?
- Clamchop 2y agoIf this were a passage in a reading comprehension exam, I think you would be expected to read "cocaïne didn't exist" as "cocaïne in the form we think of when someone 'does cocaine' didn't exist". You would be expected to read it this way because the article explicitly elaborates on how cocaine hydrochloride is isolated from leaves (that alone should have stopped you from trying to "inform" anyone), and uses that to drive the main thesis about the industrialization and democratization of drugs. And that's an entirely self-contained pathway to the correct reading, nevermind what you already knew going into the exercise. The caffeine analogy is useless because there is no common sense of people using caffeine to very different effect the way there is for cocaïne.