Xref: utzoo alt.flame:894 misc.legal:3064 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!princeton!udel!berryh From: berryh@udel.EDU (John Berryhill) Newsgroups: alt.flame,misc.legal Subject: Re: Hey, you anti-legalization dudes got an answer yet? Message-ID: <785@louie.udel.EDU> Date: 9 Dec 87 20:36:52 GMT References: <26903COK@PSUVMA> Sender: usenet@udel.EDU Reply-To: berryh@udel.EDU (John Berryhill) Organization: University of Delaware Lines: 44 The UofD is one of Uncle Sam's official document repositories, but the way they have things set up here, it is tough to find something unless you already know exactly what you want. Is the Mescaline document that you refer to a NIDA, NIH, HEW (before the split), or what? If you have the exact reference (like DoJ K-8374-mumble-8347) I'd really appreciate reading it. I have been reading alt.drugs on and off, so forgive me if you posted it already. I was able to find a NIDA document on Psilocybin that sounded much the same. However, whenever they report on a drug that isn't really all that bad, they throw in a standard bullshit section that says something like, "it MIGHT cause birth defects, genetic damage, hairy palms, etc." Of course, studies on these effects haven't been done, but they thought they'd throw it in anyway because they didn't have anything else bad to say. Anyway, I'd like a copy of a US doc. that actually doesn't have something bad to say about a particular illegal drug. Thanks in advance, # | John Berryhill berryh@udel.huey.edu | 96 E. Main Dept. of Electrical Eng. | Newark, DE 19711 Newark, DE 19716 | (302)453-1261 (302)451-8091