Image via Wikipedia
This story is quite brief, but it does make me wonder about the use of herbs and the regulations that invariably come into play when such remedies are applied. In this case, Dr. Dr. Gabor Maté – who looks disturbingly like a wood carving in the story’s picture – was using a hallucinogenic Amazonian herb called ayahuasca to treat his patients for drug addiction, and apparently, once his practices were reported, health officials in Canada forbade him to continue using the herb, claiming “active ingredients” in it are “restricted.”
I wonder why those “active ingredients” are restricted, and what are they? The story does not elaborate, nor does it answer a more important (in my estimation) question: does ayahuasca do any harm?
Serious drug addiction does do harm; few will doubt that conviction. According to CBC’s report, cure rates using ayahuasca at a clinic in Peru were “many times the average in North America and Europe.” Ayahuasca essentially saved addicts from harm by facilitating the end of their addictions, and Dr. Maté, apparently observing this, wanted to treat addicts with similar success in his Canadian practice.
Again, the stories are brief; but it seems that Dr. Maté had nothing material to gain by using this herb with his patients; in other words, his motives appear pure. But what about the motives of the Canadian health authorities? It is tempting to question their interest in people’s welfare, although they may operate under this guise. There was no evidence mentioned in the stories to indicate that ayahuasca caused any harm to patients using it, and there was significant evidence pointing to its positive effects. Why would the use of ayahuasca be forbidden?
Perhaps the authorities acted on the possibility that the herb could cause harm, or maybe they simply were following the letter of the law regarding those “active ingredients.” Whatever the reason or reasons, this incident does incite me to consider carefully and clarify my views on herb legality.
Advertisement
