Scan barcode
sagegreen19's review
4.0
i’m not fully convinced by all his claims, particularly the idea that legal access and proper mental healthcare will solve drug addiction. but he does make a strong case for refuting many of claims used to justify current drug policy as outright bs or poorly researched. I would highly recommend this book for anyone interested in drug regulation and overall policy.
somelitreference's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
3.75
Informative book! I do wish he delved deeper into any of scientifically-backed negative side effects of different drugs or what actually are the actual markers of addiction. However, I understand that this book's purpose to portray the positives of different drugs. The most beneficial part of this book is guide of sorts on how to parse through sensationalist studies and articles to see if evidence was obtained ethically, logically, and within the scope of scientific process. His personal antidotes mostly were illuminating. Some he should have edited it out since previous antidotes already provided the same information or contextualization.
rkcobb's review
5.0
Deescalating the overblown and misguided culture of drug use across the globe, Dr. Carl Hart cleanly and objectively uses his expertise in the field of psychopharmacology and lived experience as a drug user to dispel racial rhetoric and harmful policies that affect disenfranchised peoples overwhelmingly. Taking chapters to briefly chop up the histories of specific drugs and their use in culture, Hart makes sure to cover every base of what constitutes the correct perception of drug use going forward and how we as a society and humanity as a whole can do to fix the problem we dug ourselves into. It’s time for change and transparency in regards to drug use, staying in the closet only hurts everybody.
ddillon154's review
3.0
The book is fine, but repetitive. Hart largely reiterates well worn arguments, using common observations about racialized drug enforcement, and occasionally peppers in criticism of shoddy science or contributes something from his research career. Mildly informative. Likely an exercise in preaching to the choir.