Now I know this topic has been discussed before, but it rears it's ugly controlling head again by virtue of the fact that the NIDA has presented its 2008 budget request in which this gets considerable column space. They like to refer to all of these strategies of prevention as "noninvasive". Now I know this term refers to a medical procedure that does not break or penetrate the skin or cavity, but it sure as hell is invasive in a whole host of other ways.
Don't even get me started on calling these approaches vaccination.
Be afraid swimmers, be very afraid for we are swimming upstream and the current is growing stonger.
This from the Drug Policy Alliance website:
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Vaccines for Coke and Weed are Coming to a Child's Arm Near You!
These days there's been a lot of fuss in the news over the HPV cervical cancer vaccine. Parents all over the country are anguishing over whether or not they should oppose efforts to make the HPV vaccination mandatory for girls.
But I'll tell you something right now. The squabbling over HPV ain't going to be nothing but a drop of piss in a bucket compared to the shit storm that is looking to be on its way.
NIDA is working on developing vaccinations for cocaine, nicotine and methamphetamine. Yes, you heard me right. VACCINATIONS. The kind of prick in the arm (or ass) that will instantaneously rob a "vaccinated" person of their cognitive liberty, and inherently violate that person's own sense of privacy, liberty and their inherent worth and dignity as a human being. Okay, so the person may not be aware of all of these reasons to refuse the "vaccination(s)" because they could still be wearing diapers.
Not only will the sting that a 2-year old feels when they are vaccinated against nicotine mark the moment when that child is forever denied the free will to choose whether they want to experience both the pleasures and consequences of smoking. This moment will epitomize a new chapter to the government's insatiable quest for a "drug-free America."
Imagine it. Your child must get vaccinated against drugs before they can enter school. It's tragically ridiculous to think about. It's sort of like the health department telling a parent they must get their kid vaccinated against sugar or salt - the concept is the same.
After all, drugs are objects - inanimate substances, pills, powders. They don't move. They don't choose to be in a human body. And they don't choose to cause harmful effects. They just sit there. Viruses and bacteria, on the other hand, are alive. They move. They invade a host, multiply and divide, incubate and attack when the moment is right.
Why would the government stoop so low as to waste limited resources on developing vaccines to ward off inanimate objects that don't cause any harm unless someone decides to ingest that object? HELLO?! What about AIDS? What about EBOLA? What about BIRD FLU?
It's clear that extremists will go to any length to stop what cannot be stopped - the decision by human beings to ingest drugs. Bureaucrats and control freaks will stop at nothing to advance their hypocritical anti-drug agenda. Even if that means robbing entire future generations of the basic human right to have freedom of choice and sovereignty over their bodies and minds - this is really scary stuff.
The development of these vaccines is actually old news, and the government contends that their purpose is to help people enrolled in drug treatment who desire a means of preventing relapse. Yet, a report by the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics on the emergence of these vaccinations warns that "the tremendously politicized nature of the 'drug war' raises substantial concerns that in addition to those who choose to use such medications, some people will be compelled to use them." And the race to vaccinate against disfavored drugs might not stop with meth, coke and nicotine; the weed may have its own vaccine one day, as NIDA is handing out money for "medications that can be used to treat individuals who have become dependent upon marijuana."