Thursday, March 10, 2005

In 1974, the Washington Post reported that the U.S. government commissioned a study by the U. of Virginia on the effects of THC, the active ingredient of cannabis (aka marijuana). Much to their chagrin, the scientists found that marijuana's psychoactive component, THC, "slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

The situation gets even more absurd. Specifically, subsequent studies have confirmed this and other studies by the government on cannabis have resulted in even more stunning results. Hit the link if you want to learn more.

How did I not know about this? Well, it's kind of simple, really. The people that I rely on to provide me with the facts -- traditional news media, tv, newspaper, internet -- haven't told me. In fact the only places I can find this information online are from news sites that are dedicated to the legalization of marijuana or sites you've never heard of. If I search Google with:

   [pot cures cancer mice "washington post"]

...the first five sites Google gives me are:

Hell, and a personal AOL website come up before any mainstream news sites. I stopped looking on page 6.

I mention this not necessarily to rant about how medical marijuana research is being systematically repressed, but because when I tell people that I don't watch TV in part because the news lies to us, I'm looked at like I'm a conspiracy nut. Isn't omission of the facts a lie? If not, what is it?

Is it absurd to think that research indicating that cannabis might cure certain types of cancer and boost lifespans by 37% is more important than, say, information on the Michael Jackson court case? Or the pope waving out a window?

If I suggest that giving Michael Jackson daily priority over a potential cancer cure from a medicine that simply cannot be overdosed on is irresponsible, am I being hysterical?

Every time I learn of some new media-lapse-induced societal reality disconnect, the Carrol/Matrix warning about learning precisely how far the rabbit hole goes pops into my head.

"This is it, right? I've learned how bad it is, right? It doesn't get any worse, right?"

I've only been able to free my mind, to "empty my cup" as it were, by avoiding television almost completely for about ten years now. After all, you don't ask for seconds when your plate is full, so why should you dig deeper when respectable media outlets tell you that something is true (or doesn't tell you at all)?

Well how do you know mainstream media is trustworty? Because they told you they are? Or because the people you know feel they're trustworthy? Oh, I ...think I get it. And why do they think the mainstream media is trustworthy?

Right. Because you think it is.

I don't think that our culture has a foundation of sand. I believe it's floating on thin fucking air.


Anonymous said...

Have you seen

Anonymous said...

NO, but I'm sure glad you mentioned it... -j