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