Psychedelic Research Paper Help

alright guys, i'm researching a controversial topic for a persuasive speech for school and i'm having a hard time deciding on a thesis statement. my subject is psychedelic drugs, and i am trying to change people's generally negative views on psychedelic drugs and educate them about the many many misconceptions regarding them in most propaganda. anyway, i can't decide how to state that in a thesis statement without being too vague, but then again maybe that is the best way. hmm... i wonder if i've somehow answered my own question with this explanation... anyway, input is  very much welcomed and appreciated! thank you

Headed by Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, MKULTRA was started on the order of CIA director Allen Dulles on April 13, 1953, largely in response to Soviet, Chinese, and North Korean use of mind-control techniques on U.S. prisoners of war in Korea. The CIA wanted to use similar methods on their own captives. The CIA was also interested in being able to manipulate foreign leaders with such techniques, and would later invent several schemes to drug Fidel Castro.

Experiments were often conducted without the subjects' knowledge or consent. Experiments included administering LSD to CIA employees, military personnel, doctors, other government agents, prostitutes, mentally ill patients, and members of the general public in order to study their reactions. LSD and other drugs were usually administered without the subject's knowledge and informed consent, a violation of the Nuremberg Code that the U.S. agreed to follow after WWII.

In Operation Midnight Climax, the CIA set up several brothels to obtain a selection of men who would be too embarrassed to talk about the events. The men were dosed with LSD, and the brothels were equipped with one-way mirrors and the "sessions" were filmed for later viewing and study.

Some subjects' participation was consensual, and in many of these cases, the subjects appeared to be singled out for even more extreme experiments. In one case, volunteers were given LSD for 77 consecutive days.

LSD was eventually dismissed by MKULTRA's researchers as too unpredictable in its effects. Although useful information was sometimes obtained through questioning subjects on LSD, not uncommonly the most marked effect would be the subject's absolute and utter certainty that they were able to withstand any form of interrogation attempt, even physical torture.

>>2

wow. sauce plz?

>>3

wikipedia

Thesis statement: marijuana should be legal. It's focused. It's persuasive. And there are plenty of scientific studies that can support it.

Marijuana is classified as a hallucinogen and not a psychedelic drug. I don't know how much freedom you have in your topic but the two are related. Psychedelics are a part of the broader hallucinogen class.

Psilocybin Cubensis: It's FUN for the whole family!!

>>1
lrn2420chan

>>1
The standard rhetorical move when you're trying to overturn an opinion that's accepted as obvious and eternal is to place that opinion in a historical context. 

For example: opium used to be considered a "nasty habit" rather than a horrifically addictive and illegal and horrible drug.  It was outlawed mostly to put pressure on the Chinese population that was the primary consumer of it.  Marijuana was actually included in the U.S. Pharmacopeia until 1945 or so, recommended for treating nausea and minor pains; it was legal and commonly used while alcohol was still illegal during prohibition!  Amphetamines used to be used as an over-the-counter decongestant, for christ's sake.  The list goes on; virtually every drug that is illegal today had some level of social tolerance or medical use at some point.  Pick your drug, place it in a historical context and trace out the linguistic and social history of it.  Point out that the legal status of these drugs isn't some divine writ, but a social and political construct.

Question the assumptions behind the language used to describe the drugs; every word like "intoxication", "dope fiend", "addict", "junkie" has a history and a context and is an argument: a specific attempt to frame the debate. 

Come back to the point of what these drugs actually DO to people.  Is there really no medical use?  Is the effect the same as or worse than alcohol, or caffiene, or nicotine?  What social context does the illegal status force on the drug, making the terms you're questioning a self-fulfilling prophecy?

If you really dig deep on your research, you can fill up an hour of speechifying really easy.

Drugs are bad, mmm'kay?

>>7
Listen to this man, 420chan will hook you up.