According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (another government agency that deals in lies and propaganda, but humor me) “An estimated 88,000 people (approximately 62,000 men and 26,000 women) die from alcohol-related causes annually, making alcohol the fourth leading preventable cause of death in the United States.” That fact was originally from JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association.
As noted in a report by the League of Oregon Cities: “In some cities, alcohol is involved in 80 percent of certain crimes, while liquor law violations, such as driving under the influence, can cost a city up to $2,500 per arrest.” What the government doesn’t want you to know, (and some of the folks on WB have learned a few things about research, so if they can find some data I would be glad to consider it) is how much money the government makes in fines imposed on citizens committing alcohol-related crimes. Alcohol is a booming industry. The government collects taxes on alcohol, and then sales taxes, and then arrests and fines for people committing alcohol-related offenses. It’s sort of a win-win pay-pay scenario. Alcohol attracts people to things like sports and entertainment, because alcohol is closely associated with entertainment. These revenue generators of fines and taxes make no mention of the defense lawyers who make money defending people with alcohol-related offenses. From the farmers who sell the grapes or grain to make the stuff, to the trucks that haul it, to the stores and venues that sell it to the judges and courts who impose fines, alcohol is a major part of the U.S. economy. It kills people as well, but we think it is worth it. After all, with the billions involved, a few deaths are, well, acceptable.
I know all too well that we tried to make alcohol illegal and that it was a social, political and legal disaster; Americans love their booze. One of the things I would love the government to do, and it never will because they simply don’t want anyone to know, is to publicly post how much revenue in fines and court costs each city, county and state court makes from people paying fines because of alcohol offenses. The average cost of a DUI is $10,000, and depending on where you live, could be much higher. There have been solutions for some time now. It’s just that no one making money, no municipality, county or state, and no attorney making money, wants things to change a great deal. There’s too much money involved. They all feel sorry for your mistake, and yet they all insist that you pay, pay, pay. They have jobs because people drink; not serving or providing the entertainment aspect of alcohol, but the misery and expense of it. On top of the cost of the booze, mind you.
Enter the picture, RO15-4513. No name, just letters and numbers. I discovered it outside of the assigned reading in my neuroanatomy class. It is hard to pin down when it was discovered, but awareness of the drug has existed since the 1980s. It is in the benzodiazepine class, whose popularity has soared since the 1960s with Valium. It was discovered that it blocks the effects of alcohol, making the person sober, at least until it wears off. There are very unpleasant side effects to it, and I make no promises that the extreme anxiety or convulsions might come along with the drug. But then, alcohol has bad side effects too, doesn’t it?
One scenario is that a person at the local bar has a few, and then takes the drug to ensure a safe and sober drive home. After waiting for about thirty minutes, he is walking out of the bar. While strolling out he meets a friend that is coming in to the bar. The friend invites him to come back into the bar and share a drink. But now, since the drug has taken effect, he has no idea how much the additional alcohol will do, and under the influence of the drug, literally drinks himself to death, ingesting a lethal amount of alcohol because the drug subdued the effect of the alcohol in terms of what he could feel. Negating the alcohol does not remove the toxicity, it just makes you feel sober, even if you aren’t. The next of kin discover that the victim had taken an alcohol relieving drug and sues the drug maker for offering a product where a person could not determine the effect of the alcohol and drank a lethal dose of the poison.
Another recently discovered drug is Dihydromyricetin (DHM), recently discovered as a hangover cure and intoxication blocker. DHM is the “natural extract of the Oriental Raisin Tree” and is said to negate alcohol. It appears that DHM is available via the internet. Both of these have the effect (RO15-4513 proven) of negating alcohol. Of course, the police state men in blue would not be able to generate revenue by waiting for some poor shmuck to leave the bar after a few drinks on Friday night if these drugs existed and were available.
It’s all about money. The drug companies are afraid of an accidental overdose. The definition of intoxicated would have to be reconsidered if intoxication could be reversed with a simple pill. All of this means that people will not get pulled over. The men in blue will not be able to rack up DUI arrests. The courts will not be able to rack up fines. The defense lawyers would lose income defending the poor schmucks who got pulled over and charged with DUI. This rates pretty well with a conspiracy. Too many people have too much to lose to let this alcohol inhibitor make it to the market, even if the safety of people that have a drink and drive would be greatly improved. There is too much to lose. The police state wishes to control as many aspects of the citizens’ lives, and this remedy to legal problems and denier of revenue cannot stand, and will not make it to the market. In all of the evolution of science, chemistry and medicine, this drug was inevitable, and yet the corrupt powers will not allow it on the market, even under the premise that it can save lives. I welcome any and all to look into this. I have only scratched the surface. Having posted essays online for four years, this is finally the moment to unleash this piece of information.
Keep in mind the “plausible deniability” excuse by the government. They can claim it is not now nor has ever been in the mainstream of science. But I found it, reading outside of the assigned reading, and the objections of the overdose scenario were made clear. The question is if the alcohol poisoning possibility is strong enough to outweigh any other risks that might be taken. I say it’s the money. There is too much to lose. I have never known any court to publicly announce how much revenue is generated by DUI cases, and, let’s face it, with today’s technology that wouldn’t take more than an hour of programming to pull the number from the accounting files and post it on the internet. It won’t happen, and we all know why.
So here is your conspiracy theory, and a quite plausible one. Nothing buried under the Sphinx. No one hiding information, it is all accessible, and no “key people” are dead, at least not yet. No “secret manuscript” that the Vatican won’t release. No “government files” hidden somewhere under the Pentagon. There are excuses, but I’m not buying that explanation. Just before the self-driving cars take over and make DUI disappear forever, let’s consider the drug that has existed for decades, and never made it to any reasonable application to remedy a problem that everyone wanted solved. Let me correct that, everyone not making money off the problem wanted solved. The folks collecting the money were fine with it. They still are, for obvious reasons. It’s all about the money.