> different hallucinogenic compounds, mainly nicotine, tryptamines and tropane alkaloids have been chemically documented in Prehispanic artefacts from the Americas, and psychoactive compounds of Cannabis in archaeological wooden braziers from China.
> The alkaloids ephedrine, atropine and scopolamine were detected, and their concentrations estimated [in human hair]
> The results furnish direct evidence of the consumption of plant drugs and, more interestingly, they reveal the use of multiple psychoactive species.
Basically, we have long discovered "drug paraphernalia" and other adjacent materials, suggesting drug use (namely cannabis, tobacco, various psychoactive mushrooms, opium, various stimulants like areca and ephedra, deliriants like Datura, and of course alcohol). But we haven't known for sure that these meant the drugs were consumed recreationally/medicinally. This gives direct evidence the drugs were in fact consumed deliberately.
tl;dr - Homo sapiens got high.
Since hunter gatherers naturally passed along knowledge of the safety of edible plants, at what point did they figure out how to get high and start passing that along too? It's entirely plausible that our species and immediate ancestors have been getting high for millions of years! Since we have to eat anyways, we might have discovered our first high before our first stone tool!
Kinda puts the war on drugs in an even worse light.
People had no aspirin, no painkillers, multiple parasites, diseases, rotting teeth, etc.
While getting high may have been part if it, for some, it may have been relief.
Wait what? Nicotine is hallucinogenic? What sort of ungodly dose do you need for that.
In Wickard v. Filburn, a farmer grew grain on his farm. He did not sell this grain, whether across state lines or otherwise; he merely fed it to his own livestock on the same farm. SCOTUS ruled that this could be regulated via the Commerce Clause because, if he grew his own grain, he could be expected to buy less grain on the open market, which could indirectly affect interstate commerce. By that logic, virtually anything can affect interstate commerce, and be regulated as such.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bil...
I have always thought Wickard v Fillburn was wrong decided, though.
It just says that any mere omission shouldn't be construed to mean anything. The lack of an enumerated right to privacy doesn't forbid the courts from deciding we have one.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_Proper_Clause
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause (technically an enumerated power, but the broadest and vaguest one by far)
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Probably because most people want regulations and enforcement around pharmaceuticals. If we decide that the government has no power to pass laws surrounding drugs we'd be hurting ourselves.
This isn't how we do things and to some these ideas seem like madness, but it's hard to argue that our existing system doesn't harbor its own brand of lunacy. Putting everything in the hands of an central government is a path we've chosen, but it's not the only path.
The war on drugs would have never gotten off the ground. We would have whole above board industries for recreational drugs which would just be "agriculture" instead of black markets and cartels. Government couldn't touch birth control, PrEP, or whatever bs de jour they want to ban. People wouldn't have to worry about living with chronic pain because they get labeled as a drug seeker.
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/6/5/18518005/prohibit...
https://time.com/5501680/prohibition-history-feminism-suffra...
>The analysis showed the presence of atropine, scopolamine and ephedrine in the three replicated hair samples (Fig. 5) at the following concentrations: 6.7, 9.2, and 10.7 (mean = 8.9) pg atropine/mg hair, 384, 423 and 504 (mean = 437) pg scopolamine/mg hair, and 295, 328 and 367 (mean = 330) pg ephedrine/mg hair.
Drug use in the broadest sense.
Atropine and scopolamine are no fun drugs as deliriants they require extraordinary skill. In this case the ratio of atropine:scopolamine could be indicative of Datura stramonium [0] growing in the region.
Most recreational drug users who try to experiment with Datura et al. quickly realize after "waking up" ~ 24 hours or so totally disoriented in questionable disposition with little to no memory with what had happened that it is nearly impossible to put them into "good use" and leave it be at some point. Regular use is mostly documented by highly experienced shamans (i.e. experienced in different forms of altered state of consciousness).
[As a note aside: In 1934 Bill Wilson a struggling alcoholic and later founder of AA had a transformative experience under the heavy influence of atropine and scopolamine ("Belladonna Cure") after which he became sober:
>At Towns Hospital under Silkworth's care, Wilson was administered a drug cure concocted by Charles B. Towns. Known as the Belladonna Cure, it contained belladonna (Atropa belladonna) and henbane (Hyoscyamus niger). These plants contain deliriants, such as atropine and scopolamine, that cause hallucinations.
It was while undergoing this treatment that Wilson experienced his "Hot Flash" spiritual conversion. While lying in bed depressed and despairing, Wilson cried out: "I'll do anything! Anything at all! If there be a God, let Him show Himself!" He then had the sensation of a bright light, a feeling of ecstasy, and a new serenity.] [1]
Ephedrine on the other hand is a stimulant (methamphetamine analogue with a hydroxyl group at the β position), now mostly used by bodybuilders in much higher doses (an order of magnitude higher than measured in the hairs above) to effectively burn fat.
[0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datura_stramonium
[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Alcoholics_Anonym...
I loved his books when I was a kid - but with serious grains of salt, obviously.
