On one hand, I think anyone should be able to say what ever they want. Especially if it's true. On the other
hand, I'm always for the protection of kava from the government's eye. I've certainly made allusions to other
substances every once in a while though, but I usually try not to for this very reason. Sometimes, however, there
are only so many descriptive words you can use until a direct comparison can more aptly convey your idea.
Herbal, Schmerbal...a psychoactive substance is a psychoactive substance whether it's all natural or it's
synthetic. There are plenty of ethnobotanicals/entheogens that can fuck your ass up, poison you, get you high
etc...sometimes even worse than synthetics. Heck, even Nutmeg can get you high and destroy your liver. I think the
biggest threat to kava's status is health issues. Most likely due to poly drug use and/or tudei's, either out of
carelessness or simply being uninformed. The careless types will always be out there tryin' to get wrecked on
whatever they can. In the future, if kava's popularity started taking noticeable cuts out of the alcohol industry,
I could see alcohol lobbyists being the next likely thing to draw real negative attention to kava. I'm personally
worried about those two things much more than a sentence on the internet that says 'kava kinda feels like a benzo
buzz', ...or the word krunk being thrown around.
I'm actually quite pleased with the DEA evaluation. Outside of a couple minor qualms, I really expected a lot
more ridiculousness, it was a pretty fair assessment. The main thing that they need to always be clearly aware of
is, no matter what pleasant or mildly inebriating effects can be attained by kava; it isn't physically addicting,
it leaves the user's decision making intact, it has legitimate medical uses, it doesn't increase violence or theft
and is relatively safe for the body. These are things that keep you off the schedule list.
But, yeah...In general, I'm all for trying to keep kava's low profile by way of reducing any glorification of it's
possible drug-like or inebriating attributes.
hand, I'm always for the protection of kava from the government's eye. I've certainly made allusions to other
substances every once in a while though, but I usually try not to for this very reason. Sometimes, however, there
are only so many descriptive words you can use until a direct comparison can more aptly convey your idea.
Herbal, Schmerbal...a psychoactive substance is a psychoactive substance whether it's all natural or it's
synthetic. There are plenty of ethnobotanicals/entheogens that can fuck your ass up, poison you, get you high
etc...sometimes even worse than synthetics. Heck, even Nutmeg can get you high and destroy your liver. I think the
biggest threat to kava's status is health issues. Most likely due to poly drug use and/or tudei's, either out of
carelessness or simply being uninformed. The careless types will always be out there tryin' to get wrecked on
whatever they can. In the future, if kava's popularity started taking noticeable cuts out of the alcohol industry,
I could see alcohol lobbyists being the next likely thing to draw real negative attention to kava. I'm personally
worried about those two things much more than a sentence on the internet that says 'kava kinda feels like a benzo
buzz', ...or the word krunk being thrown around.
I'm actually quite pleased with the DEA evaluation. Outside of a couple minor qualms, I really expected a lot
more ridiculousness, it was a pretty fair assessment. The main thing that they need to always be clearly aware of
is, no matter what pleasant or mildly inebriating effects can be attained by kava; it isn't physically addicting,
it leaves the user's decision making intact, it has legitimate medical uses, it doesn't increase violence or theft
and is relatively safe for the body. These are things that keep you off the schedule list.
But, yeah...In general, I'm all for trying to keep kava's low profile by way of reducing any glorification of it's
possible drug-like or inebriating attributes.
Last edited: