“Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behaviour and information processing. They open you up to the possibility that everything you know is wrong.”
I was indeed fortunate to grow up in northern California in the 1970's.
Seems like they believe that such a thing as half-tripping exists. Once you realize that time is merely a construct of convenience, what else is there to discover?
Our political landscape is horrible enough sober; I'm trying to imagine viewing the same monkeyhouse while high. There's the chance it could be hilarious. There's also the chance it could trigger the ultimate bad trip.
We're getting closer to THX-1138-4EB all the time.
I am always thankful that I took my psychedelics in the 1960s - and we thought times were bad then, what with Nixon and so forth - but when I look at the 21st century, I'm appalled to think that young people have to endure the present on them.
Timothy Leary taught us about "set and setting": "set" is your mind-set: what you bring into the experience (and don't go if your mind is not right). "Setting" is what is going on around you, and that's what's so f*cked-up now.
I can still remember being at an outdoor rock concert in Columbia, MD and looking around thinking, naively, as it turned out, sure, things are messed up now, but when we all take over everything is going to be different. I hadn't counted on the Bill and Hillary Clintons among us.
One thing to note: there were/are many people for whom ingesting psychedelics have been the tripping point (sorry for the pun!) for their mental illness to appear. My sister took psychedelics in the late '70s and was experiencing signs of schizophrenia shortly after. It's pretty sick, to me, to begin to hear the pharma corps now pushing the same drugs to alleviate mental illness. I don't buy it.
These a$$hole corporations have had decades to come up with alternate treatments. But, funny that mentally illness is always the last physical malady to receive funding even though our modern world's stressers have been increasing the number of people affected by it.
And finally, we can thank Reagan for decreasing funding, effectively throwing the mentally ill to the streets.
Families cannot get help for addict and/or mentally ill members. Why? because Libertarians seem to believe it should be fully volunteer. We would treat dogs better. To leave mentally ill and addicts to there own agency is ludicrous.
The science says psychedelics can trigger latent schizophrenia or bipolar, but they don't create these things in people who weren't predisposed, and if used wisely they can and do improve mental health for a lot of people.
The science also says that people who are predisposed to mental illness, but also ingest psychedelics, their mental illness can be much, much worse that had they not ingested them.
Give up, people still want to romanticize drugs -- like they are so edgy. I remember all the narcissistic POS arrogant pricks bragging out how enlightened and advanced they were. LMAO. All of them, losers today.
Now we are using GABA, Glycine, 5 HTP, Theanine, Melatonin to help addicts and to fix brain chemistry imbalances. They are developing tests for deficiencies.
And what does pot do? makes you eat a lot of junk food and coffee.
I'm sorry about your sister. I knew another young woman in the 60s who took a lot of drugs and became schizophrenic, too. But I know that schizophrenia often appears in the person's early twenties, too. Possibly that was the last trigger to bring out an underlying condition.
Statistically - even though your personal experience is painful - you have a study including one person. By contrast, there were thousands who took psychedelics and were fine if not better.
In Capitalism, BigBucks eventually ruins anything and everything, including the planet that hosts it. See Joel Kovel's The Enemy of Nature, a review at
My analysis overcomes the mystery and logical difficulty of attributing to "set and setting" the entire range of psychedelic effects. An intermediate neurological/psychological effect/operation provides the bridge between the simple and reproducible effect of psychedelic chemicals on the neuro-receptors, and the astounding array of changes in consciousness that so far have been thought of as "psychedelic effects".
None of the usual suspects - the official echelons of psychedelic research - pays any notice to the theory, for it threatens the accepted paradigms that guide and support current research including using psychedelics for therapy. One notable exception was Jim Fadiman, who wrote:
"Peter Webster has done the whole field a great service to finally, clearly and with technical accuracy - and with only the mildest sarcasm - expose the fundamental weakness of the current excitement about changes visible in the brain when using psychedelics.
"There's a Sufi story about a man looking for his key underneath the lamp-post. When a kindly stranger starts to look with him, he asked the man where he might've lost it. The man replies that he lost it several blocks away."
"Then why are we looking for it here?"
"Because there is more light here," the man answers.
"In a similar fashion, the fact that we can notice, measure, and display changes in the brain has taken us only very slightly closer to what is actually going on.
"Let’s face it: brain scans showing lots more color under psychedelics are delightful. That they are part of the picture is undeniable. What Webster makes clear is that they are, at best, a remarkably unimportant, if graphic, aspect of what many of us are trying to understand.
"Webster has made I, believe, an equally significant contribution by presenting a theory of salience that is more robust and is certainly more useful then the physiological materialistic brain models he so artfully dismantles. Certainly, as one aided by ingesting a psychedelic can be overwhelmed with the pleasure of seeing the natural world radiant and fully connected, reflecting on that inner experience as related to meaning seems more fruitful than determining what portions of the brain display more or less connectivity.
"I do not fault the neuroscientists for their discoveries, only for their extrapolations that are not justified by indirect physical measurements. Webster has returned our focus to the reality of the inner events, not their shadows on the cave wall."
Profit is the only motive for social change of any kind, positive or negative. If one is angry that corporations will come along and engage in any new breakthrough endeavor for humanity purely to make a dime off it, then one should not be angry at the corporations but rather at the fact that innovation is currently only spurred by profit. There is no 'hypocrisy' there because corporations don't owe us anything to begin with. Without them, we wouldn't have much of the conveniences or necessities of contemporary life. Socialism would fix this not so much by destroying corporations but rather by rationally organizing their drive for profit into an intentional force for societal transformation. The profit motive has been very useful historically, and the wealth of the modern age owes itself to it completely. It may stick around even after the transition to socialism. Really, though, corporations fill the vacuum that the working class has left wide open ever since 1848. So don't blame the corporations or the governments. They're doing what they're supposed to, i.e., crudely and incompletely do the job that the working class is historically supposed to do. Don't blame the workers, either, for at present they largely don't know or care about their historical role. Instead, blame the Left for not advancing this kind of analysis clearly and cogently. If corporations run amok, it is truly the Left's fault and no one else's. Let the corporations patent and market the psychodelics, fine. But urge the Left to rebuild itself and dialectically grasp both the wastefulness and potential of a globalized corporate economy - that is the only long-term fix.
I totally disagree! Social change has always come from below, when the people stand up and demand it. They don't do it for profit; they do it because their lives depend on it.
You're giving too much power to corporations. OF COURSE they are only going to make changes if they are profitable, because they only do anything if it is profitable.
Recall, LSD was a part of the psych-ops program. Brave New World, here we come! Never expanded my mind or anyone I knew, All hype and so is befitting it is still hype, like pot. CA is a two crop state now, and the crops are destroying the environment in N. CA. N. Ca is turning into a cesspool. No utopia there. I do not romanticize any of this.
The Police Chief of my home town Toronto was strongly behind the war on drugs. Incarcerating casual users while bonding with the bike gang that controlled the herd drugs. He became the corporate head of Medical Marijuana sales. Rotten.
Though there is a lot of good stuff here, I definitely take issue with the title as the "Psychedelic Renaissance " was long underway before any financial actors or corporate interests showed up. Many people on the research side of it were doctors and scientists who had their work shut down in the 60s and 70s and were looking for a path the revive it with cultural legitimacy that someone like Timothy Leary couldn't endanger. And basically for the most part of 20 users non-profit groups like MAPS, Heffter, and Usona laid the ground work with the motives of legalizing and normalizing psychedelic use by tackling trauma and mental illness.
When the work was near completion, and these nonprofits had driven MDMA and psilocybin close to legalization through a medical pathway, a bunch of venture capitalists and for-profits like Compass Pathways started trying to patent and control the rights to even basic things like "set" and setting, attempting the poses the legal psychedelic within the "wellness" industry. This is obvious quite ominous, though it mostly pertains to psilocybin at the moment.
Silicon Valley types believe a lot of hype and sooner or later will discover that psychedelics don't do what they thought, and can't be controlled. Some may be set up to make money out of offering psychedelic retreats etc. But to say that the "Psychedelic Renaissance " is Entirely about corporate greed erases 95% of the scientific work and individual donations over the last 20+ years. I've heard the term used as far back as 2010, when zero for-prpfit interest existed. Its like saying Machu Pichu is entirely about corporate greed because like everything else, has become commercialized with tourism. The threat to even things like psychedelics is real that capitalism gobbles up anything that is good and turns it into a commodity. Will this spoil them, or will the psychedelics themselves turn out to be the stronger actor?
Not sure about the other groups you mentioned, but the LA Times article I linked reports that "MAPS will have sole manufacturing and distributing rights for medical MDMA for years" if it gets FDA approval.
Sort of correct. Blame the LA Times for lumping them all together, but MAPS is non-profit that was formed specifically to legalize psychedelic therapy. Notice they aren't grouped with any of the corporations venture capitalists etc throughout the article. They are the only ones who went through the FDA process, and the US government is not handing out blanket access for legal MDMA. Its similar to how the abortion pill ru486 was created, through non-profit funded development that was approved by the FDA. Monopolizing MDMA to get rich is definitely not what they are trying to do. MDMA itself has been off patent for decades.
I'm saying this as I personally know the founder and a number of people within the organization, have attended conferences etc. I've also been a readers of yours for a number of years and enjoy your work. I have strong feelings about this because I know the groups involved fairly well and I dont think the categorization of them is accurate at all.
The bottom line is that it is not at all a corporate project, about greed, or greasing the wheels of the machine.They spent decades struggling to put together the first MDMA studies since it was outlawed in 1985 with a shoe string budget. MAPS was literally born out of a legal battle on the behalf of therapists to prevent the DEA from outlawing MDMA in the first place.
I recommend checking out their organization, website, and talks. Rick even did an interview with Michael Tracey a few years ago. You might take issue with their organization on some things, but it is good to know what they are about. The question of incorporating psychedelics safely into the society that exists today is a big one.
Going a step beyond this, I do not think that psychedelics or MDMA can be neatly harnessed, and for those seeking them for individual healing the tradeoff may be realizing that it is impossible to fully heal one person in an unhealthy global society. Part of the awakening that comes along with resolving personal issues can actually be very frightening, to become aware of what the state of our planet really is. For some, it might be easier that they not know, but to turn our culture it is necessary to see life as it is, and how much suffering is out there. These are deep rabbit holes that are anything but an easy exit.
Something along the lines of, you can't make this stuff UP? They force you to feed, care for, teach rich folks' kids; deliver slave-built Pelatons, in snow or hurricane, chronically PASC without health insurance, sick days, overtime, PPE or any way to avoid infecting loved-ones. Then call you anti-vax Bubba! If Joe Heller, Naomi Klein or Rudolf Hess understood they'd written COOKBOOKS, would they've added footnotes to alert we the peons, to not try this at home (or just call it, The Space Merchants?)
If they can figure out how to make billions off it, they will coopt and package it. We already did the hype for cannabis and psychedelics they needed. Brave New World is here, folks.
We'd ALWAYS looked at fantasticant dope (sins - LSD25) as ajudicant anti-psychotic therapy (famous con-men Albert Ellis, Andy Worhol & Gertrude Stein were from my town.) Sandoz had Hoffmann write his own PR pitch for LSD trauma treatment (einsatzgruppen had disturbing dreams?) And I'd been at a MadMen style, focus group about GE bacteria produced THC & terepenes in the 1970s, which resurfaced (no, they're not worried about herbicide, fungicides or water use; it's all to save on labor). I'm guessing, it's far more Anthony Burgess, Pohl & Kornbluth than Aldous Huxley or HST?
“Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behaviour and information processing. They open you up to the possibility that everything you know is wrong.”
I was indeed fortunate to grow up in northern California in the 1970's.
“Psychedelics are useful not for the hallucinations they provide but for the hallucinations they remove.”
Very well said.
I think I'll have to steal that quote!
Seems like they believe that such a thing as half-tripping exists. Once you realize that time is merely a construct of convenience, what else is there to discover?
Our political landscape is horrible enough sober; I'm trying to imagine viewing the same monkeyhouse while high. There's the chance it could be hilarious. There's also the chance it could trigger the ultimate bad trip.
We're getting closer to THX-1138-4EB all the time.
I am always thankful that I took my psychedelics in the 1960s - and we thought times were bad then, what with Nixon and so forth - but when I look at the 21st century, I'm appalled to think that young people have to endure the present on them.
Timothy Leary taught us about "set and setting": "set" is your mind-set: what you bring into the experience (and don't go if your mind is not right). "Setting" is what is going on around you, and that's what's so f*cked-up now.
Noooo, I wouldn't take them now!
I can still remember being at an outdoor rock concert in Columbia, MD and looking around thinking, naively, as it turned out, sure, things are messed up now, but when we all take over everything is going to be different. I hadn't counted on the Bill and Hillary Clintons among us.
One thing to note: there were/are many people for whom ingesting psychedelics have been the tripping point (sorry for the pun!) for their mental illness to appear. My sister took psychedelics in the late '70s and was experiencing signs of schizophrenia shortly after. It's pretty sick, to me, to begin to hear the pharma corps now pushing the same drugs to alleviate mental illness. I don't buy it.
These a$$hole corporations have had decades to come up with alternate treatments. But, funny that mentally illness is always the last physical malady to receive funding even though our modern world's stressers have been increasing the number of people affected by it.
And finally, we can thank Reagan for decreasing funding, effectively throwing the mentally ill to the streets.
Families cannot get help for addict and/or mentally ill members. Why? because Libertarians seem to believe it should be fully volunteer. We would treat dogs better. To leave mentally ill and addicts to there own agency is ludicrous.
The science says psychedelics can trigger latent schizophrenia or bipolar, but they don't create these things in people who weren't predisposed, and if used wisely they can and do improve mental health for a lot of people.
The science also says that people who are predisposed to mental illness, but also ingest psychedelics, their mental illness can be much, much worse that had they not ingested them.
Give up, people still want to romanticize drugs -- like they are so edgy. I remember all the narcissistic POS arrogant pricks bragging out how enlightened and advanced they were. LMAO. All of them, losers today.
Now we are using GABA, Glycine, 5 HTP, Theanine, Melatonin to help addicts and to fix brain chemistry imbalances. They are developing tests for deficiencies.
And what does pot do? makes you eat a lot of junk food and coffee.
Oh, right, the old "responsible drug use" excuse.
That's right.
I'm sorry about your sister. I knew another young woman in the 60s who took a lot of drugs and became schizophrenic, too. But I know that schizophrenia often appears in the person's early twenties, too. Possibly that was the last trigger to bring out an underlying condition.
Statistically - even though your personal experience is painful - you have a study including one person. By contrast, there were thousands who took psychedelics and were fine if not better.
No, there are many 1000s who did not do fine or better. You are projecting your own experience and fantasies.
I know way way too many people who turned into Jesus Freak Fundies because of psychedelics.
https://www.schizlife.com/late-onset-schizophrenia/
What was the name of the drug used in Brave New World? Because they've found it.
In Capitalism, BigBucks eventually ruins anything and everything, including the planet that hosts it. See Joel Kovel's The Enemy of Nature, a review at
https://peterwebster.substack.com/p/the-enemy-of-nature
an excerpt at
http://www.psychedelic-library.org/THS/Kovel%20-%20The%20Enemy%20of%20Nature.pdf
And for a new view of how psychedelic drugs actually work
https://peterwebster.substack.com/p/psychedelic-elephant-part-1
and parts 2 and 3
Or download the entire essay at
http://www.psychedelic-library.org/Psychedelic_Elephant.pdf
My analysis overcomes the mystery and logical difficulty of attributing to "set and setting" the entire range of psychedelic effects. An intermediate neurological/psychological effect/operation provides the bridge between the simple and reproducible effect of psychedelic chemicals on the neuro-receptors, and the astounding array of changes in consciousness that so far have been thought of as "psychedelic effects".
None of the usual suspects - the official echelons of psychedelic research - pays any notice to the theory, for it threatens the accepted paradigms that guide and support current research including using psychedelics for therapy. One notable exception was Jim Fadiman, who wrote:
"Peter Webster has done the whole field a great service to finally, clearly and with technical accuracy - and with only the mildest sarcasm - expose the fundamental weakness of the current excitement about changes visible in the brain when using psychedelics.
"There's a Sufi story about a man looking for his key underneath the lamp-post. When a kindly stranger starts to look with him, he asked the man where he might've lost it. The man replies that he lost it several blocks away."
"Then why are we looking for it here?"
"Because there is more light here," the man answers.
"In a similar fashion, the fact that we can notice, measure, and display changes in the brain has taken us only very slightly closer to what is actually going on.
"Let’s face it: brain scans showing lots more color under psychedelics are delightful. That they are part of the picture is undeniable. What Webster makes clear is that they are, at best, a remarkably unimportant, if graphic, aspect of what many of us are trying to understand.
"Webster has made I, believe, an equally significant contribution by presenting a theory of salience that is more robust and is certainly more useful then the physiological materialistic brain models he so artfully dismantles. Certainly, as one aided by ingesting a psychedelic can be overwhelmed with the pleasure of seeing the natural world radiant and fully connected, reflecting on that inner experience as related to meaning seems more fruitful than determining what portions of the brain display more or less connectivity.
"I do not fault the neuroscientists for their discoveries, only for their extrapolations that are not justified by indirect physical measurements. Webster has returned our focus to the reality of the inner events, not their shadows on the cave wall."
Profit is the only motive for social change of any kind, positive or negative. If one is angry that corporations will come along and engage in any new breakthrough endeavor for humanity purely to make a dime off it, then one should not be angry at the corporations but rather at the fact that innovation is currently only spurred by profit. There is no 'hypocrisy' there because corporations don't owe us anything to begin with. Without them, we wouldn't have much of the conveniences or necessities of contemporary life. Socialism would fix this not so much by destroying corporations but rather by rationally organizing their drive for profit into an intentional force for societal transformation. The profit motive has been very useful historically, and the wealth of the modern age owes itself to it completely. It may stick around even after the transition to socialism. Really, though, corporations fill the vacuum that the working class has left wide open ever since 1848. So don't blame the corporations or the governments. They're doing what they're supposed to, i.e., crudely and incompletely do the job that the working class is historically supposed to do. Don't blame the workers, either, for at present they largely don't know or care about their historical role. Instead, blame the Left for not advancing this kind of analysis clearly and cogently. If corporations run amok, it is truly the Left's fault and no one else's. Let the corporations patent and market the psychodelics, fine. But urge the Left to rebuild itself and dialectically grasp both the wastefulness and potential of a globalized corporate economy - that is the only long-term fix.
I totally disagree! Social change has always come from below, when the people stand up and demand it. They don't do it for profit; they do it because their lives depend on it.
You're giving too much power to corporations. OF COURSE they are only going to make changes if they are profitable, because they only do anything if it is profitable.
Get over capitalism.
We can only get over capitalism when we become as revolutionary as it already is.
Sheldon Kopp, the psychotherapist :
"It is not possible to know how much is just enough, until we have experienced how much is more than enough."
Recall, LSD was a part of the psych-ops program. Brave New World, here we come! Never expanded my mind or anyone I knew, All hype and so is befitting it is still hype, like pot. CA is a two crop state now, and the crops are destroying the environment in N. CA. N. Ca is turning into a cesspool. No utopia there. I do not romanticize any of this.
The Police Chief of my home town Toronto was strongly behind the war on drugs. Incarcerating casual users while bonding with the bike gang that controlled the herd drugs. He became the corporate head of Medical Marijuana sales. Rotten.
Though there is a lot of good stuff here, I definitely take issue with the title as the "Psychedelic Renaissance " was long underway before any financial actors or corporate interests showed up. Many people on the research side of it were doctors and scientists who had their work shut down in the 60s and 70s and were looking for a path the revive it with cultural legitimacy that someone like Timothy Leary couldn't endanger. And basically for the most part of 20 users non-profit groups like MAPS, Heffter, and Usona laid the ground work with the motives of legalizing and normalizing psychedelic use by tackling trauma and mental illness.
When the work was near completion, and these nonprofits had driven MDMA and psilocybin close to legalization through a medical pathway, a bunch of venture capitalists and for-profits like Compass Pathways started trying to patent and control the rights to even basic things like "set" and setting, attempting the poses the legal psychedelic within the "wellness" industry. This is obvious quite ominous, though it mostly pertains to psilocybin at the moment.
Silicon Valley types believe a lot of hype and sooner or later will discover that psychedelics don't do what they thought, and can't be controlled. Some may be set up to make money out of offering psychedelic retreats etc. But to say that the "Psychedelic Renaissance " is Entirely about corporate greed erases 95% of the scientific work and individual donations over the last 20+ years. I've heard the term used as far back as 2010, when zero for-prpfit interest existed. Its like saying Machu Pichu is entirely about corporate greed because like everything else, has become commercialized with tourism. The threat to even things like psychedelics is real that capitalism gobbles up anything that is good and turns it into a commodity. Will this spoil them, or will the psychedelics themselves turn out to be the stronger actor?
Not sure about the other groups you mentioned, but the LA Times article I linked reports that "MAPS will have sole manufacturing and distributing rights for medical MDMA for years" if it gets FDA approval.
Actually, just check out the Joe Rogan interview with Rick Doblin.
Sort of correct. Blame the LA Times for lumping them all together, but MAPS is non-profit that was formed specifically to legalize psychedelic therapy. Notice they aren't grouped with any of the corporations venture capitalists etc throughout the article. They are the only ones who went through the FDA process, and the US government is not handing out blanket access for legal MDMA. Its similar to how the abortion pill ru486 was created, through non-profit funded development that was approved by the FDA. Monopolizing MDMA to get rich is definitely not what they are trying to do. MDMA itself has been off patent for decades.
I'm saying this as I personally know the founder and a number of people within the organization, have attended conferences etc. I've also been a readers of yours for a number of years and enjoy your work. I have strong feelings about this because I know the groups involved fairly well and I dont think the categorization of them is accurate at all.
The bottom line is that it is not at all a corporate project, about greed, or greasing the wheels of the machine.They spent decades struggling to put together the first MDMA studies since it was outlawed in 1985 with a shoe string budget. MAPS was literally born out of a legal battle on the behalf of therapists to prevent the DEA from outlawing MDMA in the first place.
I recommend checking out their organization, website, and talks. Rick even did an interview with Michael Tracey a few years ago. You might take issue with their organization on some things, but it is good to know what they are about. The question of incorporating psychedelics safely into the society that exists today is a big one.
LMAO. It had always been well on its way. Look at what all the hype about hemp has created!
Going a step beyond this, I do not think that psychedelics or MDMA can be neatly harnessed, and for those seeking them for individual healing the tradeoff may be realizing that it is impossible to fully heal one person in an unhealthy global society. Part of the awakening that comes along with resolving personal issues can actually be very frightening, to become aware of what the state of our planet really is. For some, it might be easier that they not know, but to turn our culture it is necessary to see life as it is, and how much suffering is out there. These are deep rabbit holes that are anything but an easy exit.
Thanks! Couldn't remember the name of it: soma.
Just make sure you do not replace it with a counter-lie
Something along the lines of, you can't make this stuff UP? They force you to feed, care for, teach rich folks' kids; deliver slave-built Pelatons, in snow or hurricane, chronically PASC without health insurance, sick days, overtime, PPE or any way to avoid infecting loved-ones. Then call you anti-vax Bubba! If Joe Heller, Naomi Klein or Rudolf Hess understood they'd written COOKBOOKS, would they've added footnotes to alert we the peons, to not try this at home (or just call it, The Space Merchants?)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/11/coronavirus-drug-ridgeback-biotherapeutics/ (year old WaPo screed, against our next Fauci approved, miracle COVID cure).
If they can figure out how to make billions off it, they will coopt and package it. We already did the hype for cannabis and psychedelics they needed. Brave New World is here, folks.
And how is the virtual reality crap any different. It is not. It is like Clockwork Orange coming to a neighborhood near you.
PS: https://www.openculture.com/2017/04/watch-the-bicycle-trip-an-animation-of-the-worlds-first-lsd-trip-which-took-place-on-april-19-1943.html
I'd actually tried Amanita Muscaria, DMT from acacia, a lettuce based opioid, and a lottawholebuncha Sasha & Ann style research
https://screenrant.com/business-drugs-alexander-shulgin-dea-raid-after/
https://erowid.org/culture/characters/shulgin_ann/shulgin_ann_biography1.shtml
We'd ALWAYS looked at fantasticant dope (sins - LSD25) as ajudicant anti-psychotic therapy (famous con-men Albert Ellis, Andy Worhol & Gertrude Stein were from my town.) Sandoz had Hoffmann write his own PR pitch for LSD trauma treatment (einsatzgruppen had disturbing dreams?) And I'd been at a MadMen style, focus group about GE bacteria produced THC & terepenes in the 1970s, which resurfaced (no, they're not worried about herbicide, fungicides or water use; it's all to save on labor). I'm guessing, it's far more Anthony Burgess, Pohl & Kornbluth than Aldous Huxley or HST?