Transcription
Hello everyone, and welcome to the latest episode of "Bo Yin." This month, we're continuing our all-star lineup by inviting back our guest, Teacher Dai Shenfeng.
Thank you, thank you, Bo En. Thank you, everyone. We've already had a long chat before recording, for about ten minutes, no, more like half an hour, and it felt so good. Today, we're going to discuss a topic that I'm not sure how to talk about safely, or if you can tell, I'm very nervous. I'm super nervous because this topic, when brought up, will likely elicit a strong reaction from most of our listeners, who will say, "Wow, you dare to talk about this?" I believe everyone's reaction will be intense.
Would you like to introduce today's topic?
Okay, today's topic is drugs. I've always felt that in Taiwan, drugs are somewhat demonized or portrayed unrealistically. For example, the appearance of drug users. Exactly. And I really want to know, because Teacher Dai has actual contact with some people who are trying to help them.
Yes, yes, yes. I want to know what it's actually like.
Okay. Well, let's first talk about the word "drug." If we look at it from an English perspective, people might think "drug" is like "poison" or "toxic." But actually, the term "drug" varies by country. Most commonly, it's "drug," and specifically "illegal drug," meaning unlawful medicine. So, if you start from this concept and move forward, you'll better understand that these things called drugs, in their original invented state, or natural state, actually function as medicine.
For example, have you ever seen the story of Guan Yu scraping his bone to heal his wound? Have you heard that story? It's said that the divine physician Hua Tuo had him hold something in his mouth, so he wouldn't feel pain and could have his bone scraped. Did that piece of something reduce Guan Yu's pain? In other words, that's the concept of anesthesia now.
This means that these medicines, whatever they were, because our historical records don't precisely identify them with current drugs, clearly changed our perception of pain. It was gone. Or, for example, mental state. People are more familiar with this. For instance, there's a fun song by Ms. A-mei, "Three Days and Three Nights." Many people say, "Wow, what can make you dance for three days and three nights?" Where did Ms. Zhang get her inspiration? How did she come up with "Three Days and Three Nights?" Actually, that's the effect of the music. After listening to it, I felt like I could dance for three days and three nights. So, it's a change in mental state. Otherwise, human stamina has its limits. Dancing non-stop for three days and three nights is difficult, right? So, in a way, it changed your mental state.
And these kinds of things, whether physiological or psychological, or even through practices like meditation or mindfulness, change our mental state. Humans have enjoyed doing this since ancient times. Perhaps you've heard of something called Ayahuasca, Bo En? Have you heard of it?
Yes, I've heard of it, but I don't really know what it is.
Right, right. Actually, in Central and South America, especially in the Amazon basin, it allows people to have more spiritual experiences. Exactly, exactly. That kind of situation, perhaps you can relax. So, spiritual feelings often arise when we are under a lot of stress in our daily lives, and our consciousness is very cautious and careful. If we have a bit of a hazy feeling, then you relax. And after relaxing, people feel different from usual and feel like they can fly.
I think this "flying" is an interesting point. Many of these, let's call them relaxing or anesthetic drugs, dissociative drugs, make you feel like you're flying. These things, added together, detach people from the reality of their lives. Suppose everyone is living like Robinson Crusoe on a desert island. What you take is your own business. You won't harm anyone. But in our current highly communal society, we need social norms, interaction between people, assistance, work, and interaction. We cannot change our mental state too much.
Our mental states need to maintain a certain level of alertness, a sense of boundaries in interpersonal interactions, and so on. When these factors are considered, the danger of these drugs emerges.
Okay. So, the type and dosage of this substance or drug. It's a bit difficult for me to judge why some things are Schedule I, some are Schedule II, some are Schedule III, and some are not drugs. For example, coffee. I'll always remember the first time I drank coffee. I didn't drink much coffee before graduate school. In graduate school, simply put, I felt that my classmates in neuroscience, who might have majored in biochemistry or basic sciences in college, were far ahead of me. So, I needed a lot of mental energy and time to study, and that's when I started drinking coffee. The first time I experienced coffee, it was very effective.
Yes, very effective, right? Why didn't I live my life like this, activating my brain, in my earlier years? Actually, when I first drank coffee, it was also incredibly effective. But you're quite impressive. Many graduate students' first encounters are not with coffee but with cigarettes and alcohol. They become "smoke and alcohol students."
Like you just mentioned, the effect is very strong the first time we encounter it. Caffeine is legal. Caffeine is legal. But why? Alcohol is also legal, right? Yes, yes. Alcohol is also legal now. So why are some illegal? This is because of Taiwan's characteristics, Taiwan's laws. We have a law called the Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control Act. This law was actually renamed recently. In the past, it was called something else, like "Tobacco and Alcohol," and many other early names.
If we look at the evolution of drug policy in Taiwan's modern history, let's start with what we remember most vividly, which is taught in history textbooks: the Opium Wars. Of course, historically, that was an event of the Qing Dynasty. The Great Qing Dynasty at that time had the Opium Wars. And the Opium Wars led to the perception of China as the "Sick Man of East Asia." Opium was made to seem terrible. So, the first concept is that this absolutely cannot be done.
In reality, at that time, the Qing Dynasty, frankly speaking, opium was not everywhere. It wasn't like cabbage or cauliflower, right? So, at that time, the prevalence of opium in the Qing Dynasty was mainly concentrated among the nobility. Yes, among the wealthy, the upper-middle class. So, you see, in the historical textbook photos, the opium beds they lay on are very high-end. I actually know someone who has an opium bed at home.
Opium beds, incredibly luxurious, right? Made of red cypress, or hinoki cypress. Only very wealthy families had them. You didn't just lie on the ground and smoke. It wasn't like the widespread nature of drugs today.
Here, I want to clarify a concept for our listeners. Bo En, when you studied history, during the Opium Wars, a large amount of opium was seized. How did your teacher teach you about what happened to it? How did we deal with it? Didn't Lin Zexu go to the seaside and destroy it all? Destroy it. How did your teacher explain how it was destroyed? Do you remember?
Burning it at sea? Ah, yes, yes. When you mention burning, I want to tell you this, really. Dear history teachers, please try harder. It's unlikely, right? If you burn it, and I move to live nearby, wouldn't I get it for free? Yes. Yes, have you thought about that? Yes, yes. When I was in junior high history, my first reaction was, "Wow, I should quickly buy a house nearby." That criminal mindset appeared. I wouldn't get it for free, and there was so much of it! It's said that the smoke eradication took three months.
Actually, it wasn't burned. It was mainly buried in the sand. Then, when the tide came in, it reacted with the opium smoke, solidifying it so it couldn't be used. That concept is quite clever. It was destroyed, the smoke was eradicated. But everyone thinks the simplest way is to set it on fire. This led to our current "June 3rd No Smoking Day." June 3rd No Smoking Day. Everyone sees that our government needs to promote our determination against drugs. They throw boxes and boxes of drugs into incinerators to burn them.
My mind also conjures up the image: "Yes, then I might as well live next to the incinerator." Beito housing prices would skyrocket. Actually, our current methods of drug destruction are very diverse, depending on the type of drug. Of course, some parts, which do not cause secondary pollution, can be burned for symbolic purposes, representing our absolute refusal to let them revive. But the vast majority of drugs are destroyed in various ways. Usually, they are dissolved and hydrolyzed, which is more of a chemical process.
So, from these perspectives, we were first very afraid of these things after the Opium Wars. However, during the Japanese colonial era, the concept of drugs shifted slightly. It was a bit like Taiwan's early tobacco and alcohol monopoly system. They sold it, but the government managed it. So, during the Japanese colonial era, opium was indeed semi-officially recognized, with limited circulation in a semi-legal state, and it was distributed professionally and in specific locations.
But if I recall correctly, wasn't there also racial discrimination? Japanese people were told not to touch opium, while Taiwanese people could. Actually, that was the case in the propaganda at the time. Yes. The reason for this was that many immigrants from mainland China at the time brought the habit of opium with them. However, if opium is strictly prohibited and completely eradicated, the withdrawal symptoms are very severe. Afterward, social functions completely disappear.
So, it was a bit like our current harm reduction concept. We now use methadone for harm reduction, replacing heroin. In the early days, the concept of methadone harm reduction hadn't been developed yet. Perhaps they would dispense a small amount, or allow it to be used under controlled conditions so that social functions wouldn't completely disappear. Therefore, during the Japanese era, they introduced the concept of rehabilitation centers. This is why Taiwan currently has four rehabilitation centers.
What is the logic behind rehabilitation centers? It's like Jiang Taigong fishing. If you encounter drugs yourself, and you really can't stand it, and you want to quit, what do you do? Welcome to a government agency to quit. In the Japanese era, rehabilitation centers did indeed have many people sent by their families to quit, or people who couldn't stand it anymore and went to quit. All these scenarios existed. But there were also some who were ordered to quit under the laws at that time.
After coming to Taiwan, our rehabilitation centers still exist, but their image has gradually changed in recent years because the types of drugs have also changed. Especially our Ministry of Health and Welfare, they have done an excellent job. We now use methadone harm reduction therapy. This has allowed us to gradually control the problem of drugs, especially heroin, by substituting it with methadone. We are indeed gradually seeing a trend of decline. So, we are truly looking forward to a day when, perhaps for our younger listeners, it's possible within your lifetime to see Taiwan control heroin. Yes, we can make such a bold effort.
I just heard a strange number: four rehabilitation centers in Taiwan. I can't judge if that's a lot or a little. At first glance, it seems quite small.
At first glance, it seems small, right? Yes. So, I'd like to ask, what is the current drug use situation in Taiwan as a percentage of the total population? Is it a serious problem?
Actually, it should be said this way: drugs are divided into two main concepts, just like crime. Taiwan's crime situation, as we mentioned in the first episode, is actually very safe compared to other countries. Public order is very good. However, the point is that these people in prison, Taiwan's inmate population is relatively high. We have about 23 million people, and our inmate population is around 54,000 to 55,000. This proportion is on the high side. The biggest reason for this is drugs.
Because of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control Act and the Criminal Code, the use of Schedule I and II drugs also necessitates imprisonment. Heroin and amphetamines, or combinations of Schedule I and II drugs. Now, marijuana is a Schedule II drug. And there's something else everyone must pay attention to: etonitazene, the active ingredient in "zombie" vape cartridges. That's now also classified as a Schedule II drug. So, if you are caught using these things, you go to jail.
And these drug users, while serving their sentences in prison, we find that their physical and mental states, and whether their drug use is equivalent to criminal behavior, are questions in everyone's mind. This is a common phenomenon we observe. Yes, yes. So, they don't regret their drug use?
Basically, they do regret it. But this regret is not based on the concept of illegality. These inmates, the ones who are solely using drugs, will tell me, "Teacher, I'm just unlucky," rather than, "I am criminal." Many drug users will ask us this: "Teacher, I've ruined my body by using drugs. You're arresting me and putting me in jail. What's the point? It's all my own doing. I haven't killed anyone with a knife, I haven't set anything on fire. I haven't done anything. Why aren't you arresting murderers and arsonists? Why aren't you arresting drunk drivers?" Their minds harbor this doubt.
These topics are not something every drug-using inmate dares to discuss with us from the beginning. It's quite interesting. We've done research and found that drug-using inmates in prison are very well-behaved. We call it a kind of social expectation. Their impression management skills are excellent. What is impression management? It's acting like a good person. They are excellent actors. They attend classes diligently, participate actively in rehabilitation programs, and even help with work within the correctional facility.
Our prison guards, or correctional officers, also need administrative assistance. So, they have "laborers." Among these "laborers," drug users are quite favored members. First, they are generally younger and have more physical strength. Second, since it's impossible to get drugs in prison, the drugs actually don't stay in the body for too long. After all, we have a liver and kidneys. Within about a month, the body flushes out all the drugs. Nothing remains in the body. So, without drugs, they are normal. Their work capacity is fine, their interpersonal relationships are fine. They are just upstanding, good citizens. And they act even more upstanding. This combination makes it impossible to tell that these drug users are drug users in prison.
This makes me quite curious. I suspect that when people first use drugs, it might be due to certain environmental factors, such as their social circle, their personal circumstances, or encountering unhappy or happy events. So, when I hear that they are the most well-behaved group in prison, it makes me wonder why they started using in the first place.
Yes, yes. We must make it clear to our listeners. In our research, drugs are concerned, there's always a first time using drugs in life. That is, the first time using any drug. We call this the "first pill." Whether the "first pill" leads to continuous drug use is not a direct equation. So, let's first look at what the "first pill" is. Everyone's fantasy is like this. Many public service announcements we heard as children would say that to attract teenagers' attention, drugs are packaged into cute little bags, like Kumamon or QQ bears. Is that really true?
Yes, it is. I went to the Dihua Street night market with my family during Chinese New Year. I thought our anti-drug education was really good. As we walked along, we suddenly saw a stall with QQ bears displayed. Then, my son pointed at a QQ bear and said, "Dad, our teacher taught us that these QQ bears are filled with ketamine." The stall owner was furious, you know. "No, no, children, don't..."
We connect it this way: to attract teenagers' attention, QQ bears are filled with ketamine. To be honest today, if I were to put ketamine into every QQ bear, the cost would be too high, and it would be a waste of time, right? How much can one ketamine QQ bear sell for? So, actually, the so-called later-stage drug packaging is done by the very end of the drug chain, by the "drug bees."
These fear-based education campaigns, for example, my son sees QQ bears and is afraid, so he won't come into contact with such imagined things. He won't touch them. So, our fear-based education is successful.
Okay, the point is, some people want to be happier, some want to rest. When this motivation arises, if there are also auxiliary products around them that can make them happier or help them rest, then the opportunity arises. For example, in graduate school, you drank coffee and found it effective. I believe, just like you took a cup of coffee when you came in. Yes. You drink it every day. Yes. Why is it continuous? Because it's effective.
So, the first concept is here. Many people first think that a person's "first pill" is a teenager, a young person, lost, ignorant, foolish, and then sees a candy on the table, pops it in, and gets hooked, and then starts using drugs. That's not the concept. The most common scenario is that when a person has a proactive need, meaning they want their emotions to change or their mental state to change, they will search online or ask people in their social circle and receive this information. Through coincidence or by someone with ulterior motives, they get involved. Who is this person with ulterior motives? Many people say drug dealers. People say drug dealers are wicked people. It's one thing to use drugs yourself, but it's even worse to sell them to others, and even worse to pass them on.
Actually, if we look at drug dealers from another angle, they are just merchants, selling illegal goods. Most merchants in Taiwan, merchants don't deceive people. Merchants only exaggerate the efficacy of the drugs. Their reputation will be damaged. Yes, their reputation will be damaged. For example, I'm writing my thesis as a graduate student and need a stimulant. If you sell me a sleeping pill, I'll fall asleep directly. My meeting the next day will be a disaster, right? So, basically, merchants will only sell you drugs that match your desired effect.
So, this is the most terrifying aspect of the "first pill." We call it the "danger triangle" of the "first pill." First, someone who wants to seek the drug's effect, whether a teenager or an adult. Second, someone who sells drugs and sells them well, a drug dealer. One more thing is missing: the drug itself is very effective. Yes, the drug is very effective.
Now, let's talk about it. Of course, the drugs we currently classify as illegal are absolutely not to be touched. But if we look at them from a pharmacological perspective, their effects are all very good. Exactly, right? Otherwise, why would we use morphine for surgery? If morphine couldn't relieve pain, surgery would be excruciating. So, all our drugs must have their effects. For example, amphetamines were originally developed to help people focus and take action.
Let's take a more famous example in our industry, developed after the war: ecstasy. It's also a central nervous system stimulant. It can have a very strong appetite-suppressing effect. So, when it was first discovered in Germany, it was used as a diet pill, and it was very effective. At that time, many new mothers who had just given birth took ecstasy and lost weight. Of course, they became addicted. However, the addictive sensation of these central nervous system stimulants is not as painful as that of depressants. So, their withdrawal symptoms are not as severe. Otherwise, they would have just mentioned Schedule I.
So, to some extent, people think, "It's over, I don't need it anymore. And I've lost weight. No need to worry too much." After a wild party, it's over. And usually, after sleeping for a day, my energy is restored, and it's fine. However, at that time, we found that the prevalence of these drugs in European countries led to more terrible phenomena later on, such as an increase in domestic conflicts and maternal emotional instability. When tracing back these cases, it was found that many mothers in these cases had records of seeking medical treatment after childbirth, having taken these drugs.
Could there be a connection? After starting research, it was discovered that indeed, these drugs have long-term effects on our mental state. Some cases may lead to schizophrenia-like symptoms, possibly causing hallucinations. These hallucinations can very likely lead to aggression or impulsive behavior. This makes everyone think about one thing: drugs, substances, are very dangerous. And when these three things are complete: a willing drug user, a drug dealer who sells well and honestly, versus a very effective drug. Then you're caught.
Let me use myself as an example. But this example is a failure. What kind of example? My first cigarette. Bo En, we're sitting so close. You see, I don't smell of smoke. There's no smell of smoke on me. I smoked one cigarette in my life. When? This was a bit against school rules. But at that time, I was preparing for the high school entrance exam, and no one was supervising me. I was fifteen years old. I remember the day after the vocational high school entrance exam. My good friend and I squatted outside the wall of what was then Shijian Junior College, now Shijian University. That friend, who was usually good to me. We need to apologize to the Ministry of Education at that time for a moment. The exam papers were placed a little to the side. I don't know if he looked at them or not. He said, "Hey, let's chat." He came out and said, "Thanks, thanks. At least you're willing to put it aside a little." He took a cigarette out of his bag. "Dai Shenfeng, this is for you." He offered it to me. He said, "This is good stuff. And it's not a long-life cigarette, it's some foreign brand." He said, "You, take a puff, and you'll become an adult. You'll grow up." For a fifteen or sixteen-year-old boy, growing up is quite attractive. So, I decided to try it. My original idea of growing up was that if I smoked one cigarette, I would appear cool, manly, and strong in front of everyone. Of course, that's impossible, right? So, I took my first puff. I inhaled, of course, not into my lungs, but swished it around in my mouth and spat it out. He hit me on the head. "Idiot, what a waste. You have to inhale into your lungs." The second puff. I immediately choked. I never touched it again in my life.
Why? That choking feeling. The uncomfortable feeling. So, I believe cigarettes have their effects. And my friend who encouraged me to smoke, yes, yes, he also said it correctly. It makes you look like an adult, right? But that's not the effect I wanted. So, it was gone. That thought didn't even have a chance to sprout. So, actually, the effectiveness of fear-based education lies here. Because most people think these drugs are terrifying, ineffective, bad things. This breaks the first thought of the triangle. Yes, the first one is broken. So, our fear-based education, to this day, why is it that although people talk about drug prevalence in Taiwan, drugs are still a restricted criminal phenomenon? We have something called the "drug lifetime experience rate." This means that if you don't actively seek drugs, the probability of encountering drugs in your life is not high. Among countries worldwide, we are considered excellent students.
If we look at more dangerous situations, we usually find that in some European and American countries, their children are incredibly exposed. Yes, very easily exposed. Every weekend, at gatherings, etc., the streets are filled with that smell. You can see it. Or, perhaps, if you go to some major American cities, you'll see many images sent back, looking like half the population are zombies, or the smell in nightclubs. Like last year, when we went to Thailand for research, when marijuana was still legal there, the smell was present right outside the airport. We could smell it on people. LAX, it was all that smell. We were staying in a district called Asok. The whole city smelled like that. This is called the drug lifetime experience rate. And this is actually very low in Taiwan because we are afraid of drugs. The "first pill" part is broken. So, our risk is not high.
The horror lies in this. How does our law view it? If, today, the law sees you taking your first puff of marijuana, you are actually breaking the law. Of course, for first-time offenders, there might be some lighter penalties. We call it the "three-strike rule." The three-strike rule means the first time might be treatment, the second time is compulsory rehabilitation, and the third time is imprisonment. In the eyes of the law, the first time you encounter drugs, you are already connected to the law. You are breaking the law.
In reality, in our understanding, the first puff of drugs is still a long way from addiction. How far? It depends on the changes in your physical and mental state. That is, if the first puff wasn't what you wanted, then it's over. That's called a usage experience.
So, the "second pill" is where the terror begins. Because if the "first pill" was the effect I wanted, and they sold it to me, and this pill was also very effective, then I took a fantastic pill. You will definitely experience something: an unparalleled drug effect. Whether it's for sleep, rest, escape, or if you want happiness, excitement, or energy, this pill gives it all to you. It's almost five to ten times more potent than you can imagine. You might think, "I want to go to a concert today, I want to be happy." But then you take something, and wow, you're not just happy for a moment, you're happy for ten moments. Your brain remembers that you were once happy. The saying "once you've seen the sea, other waters are just rivers" appears. At this point, the "second pill" comes into play. Last time was so happy. Suddenly, another concert comes, and I want to dance again. So, I go looking for the same pill.
So, Teacher Dai has planted a seed here. What is it? Actually, today's drugs don't make people look for drugs as soon as they wake up. Not anymore. Today's drugs, especially stimulants, emphasize cue retrieval and linkage. If you don't have this imagination, this cue, you won't use them. You have a cup of coffee today, Bo En. This coffee is for me to record, to have energy. You wouldn't drink coffee at ten o'clock at night, right? What if you can't sleep? So, basically, we don't have this linkage. That is, when the linkage appears, I want to use it. The "second pill" is when the linkage appears.
What does it link to? I was happy last time. To pursue happiness, I take the "second pill." But at this point, the brain is damaged. What does that mean? Let me tell you an interesting story from an inmate. It's a bit risqué, but I'll tell you. You'll know the feeling after listening. Once, we asked a big brother, "Hey, big brother, why are you taking this stuff? You're getting arrested again for taking it, what's the point?" He said, "Teacher, you don't know if you haven't tried it." I said, "Of course I haven't tried it. How would I know about this stuff?" He said, "Let me tell you, when you take this stuff, it's like you and your favorite partner, naked, sleeping together." I said, "What's the big deal? What adult hasn't had that experience?" He said, "No, no. It's like your favorite partner, a hundred of them, sleeping next to you, naked, sleeping with you." Wow, that happy. Oh, so happy. A hundred of them? That's amazing. But if you want to pursue those hundred people, you take the same pill again. After taking it, you'll suddenly realize something. Those hundred people are now eighty. Oh, because of tolerance. Tolerance has emerged. You'll think, "Why are there twenty fewer?" You'll be unhappy. Unhappy.
The horror is the "third pill." With the "third pill," you'll definitely try to find those hundred people again. You'll take a little more. And taking a little more will increase it, but it might go from eighty to eighty-five. It's a little better, but not enough. And this "third pill" is the most dangerous part. Because it does increase the pleasure a bit, but it can't return to the original high level of pleasure. So, you'll have an imagination. This imagination leads to the possibility of drug misuse.
I'll take more with the "fourth pill" to get back to a hundred. But it will never come back. So, for example, the "first pill" is a hundred. The "second pill" drops to eighty. The "third pill" brings it back to eighty-five. The "fourth pill," even if you take more, might be eighty-six. You take more, it becomes eighty-seven. It can never return to the original hundred. And the second cycle begins. At this point, you'll quickly want to find those hundred people again. Because you've misused drugs. Drug abuse has occurred.
From the example just now, I heard something about the "second pill" dropping to eighty. This means that, as I remember, addiction is divided into psychological addiction and physiological addiction. Physiological addiction is the increase in receptors, right? Is it that after the "first pill," the body immediately says, "Oh, we need to replenish these receptors"? If it's a stimulant, the body's reaction is indeed very fast. Because I was happy before, and to tolerate more happiness, I will reuptake, or the effect of downregulation will change. This is indeed a very important function of stimulants. It causes us to change very quickly. But more importantly, it's the imagined hundred percent pleasure in my mind. So, it's equivalent to saying that after you use it for the first time, it's effective, it's happy, and then psychological addiction secretly plants a seed, and it starts to sprout. But the key is that this hundred-point psychological addiction will never return. Let's not say it appears every time, it will never return.
Friends, it will not return. It will not return. You use a lot of drugs, a lot of drugs, use, use, use, use, use, use, use. And then you abuse the drugs. At this point, it's no longer about usage principles. At this point, it's guaranteed to be illegal, right? You've used it many times. If you have this kind of situation, we encourage you to actively seek medical help. Medical intervention can truly help you. But at this point, people are very afraid. Will the hospital report me? Will something happen today? These things are indeed dangerous.
But here, we ask everyone to pay attention. Under the revision of our laws, we are largely exempted from these reporting obligations. The police do have a reporting obligation. We still hope to focus on treatment. If you seek medical attention today, the doctor can use some harm reduction methods or cognitive behavioral therapy to help you gradually move away from drugs. However, many friends make a decision at this point: "I've decided to quit drugs." All drug users have told us, "Teacher, I've quit. I've quit." Bo En, do you think they've quit?
I really want to ask that too. This is why I really want to ask this episode. The success rate of quitting drugs is very, very low. Actually, I'm quite pessimistic. Regarding the recidivism rate of all former criminals, I subconsciously think it must be very high. Or quitting drugs and succeeding must be very rare. Is that really the case?
Then let's go back to that. They've decided to quit drugs. And this decision to quit drugs, frankly speaking, many people will say, of course, they can't openly hold a press conference and say, "Dear reporters, I'm quitting drugs." They make a firm decision in their hearts. At this point, we often see interesting things. Like my cases all say, "Teacher Dai, let me tell you, I started crossing out the dates on the calendar." Like when we were in the military, crossing out days. Yes, they start crossing out days. The most powerful thing about quitting drugs is this: when you first decide to quit drugs, drugs give you a very pleasant honeymoon period.
Actually, quitting drugs is not as exaggeratedly uncomfortable as imagined. It's not that physically and mentally painful. Of course, heroin and similar drugs do have a period of extreme discomfort during withdrawal. But if we talk about the drugs commonly used by teenagers today, or those with relatively lower addiction potential like marijuana, their withdrawal symptoms are not that uncomfortable. Perhaps you can still go to work. At most, you might feel a bit mentally unfocused or a bit sluggish. But it's not severe.
So, all drug quitters will tell us, "Teacher, I've succeeded." So, our cases say this: "Professor, let me tell you, I haven't used drugs for half a year and eleven days." They're still counting days. Yes, still counting, so they're still in that mindset. That line is still there. So, when they're still counting, they're still bound by drugs. So, even if we're not using drugs, we all have the experience of heartbreak and breakup. If you're still counting days after a breakup, it means you haven't forgotten them. When do you forget them? When you hold hands with someone new, you forget them. Yes, that is, when a new thing replaces it, the old cue is broken, and it's over. But when everyone is still calculating the old cues, I'm sorry, your addiction recovery is called "willpower-based addiction," meaning it's controlled by willpower. And willpower is very weak.
I must tell all listeners about this case. This case is one I counseled at the Taichung Women's Prison. She was a middle-aged mother. She was very unlucky. She married a husband who was a heroin addict, a drug trafficker, and distributor. Misguided by the idea that love is great, she said, "You're not allowed to use drugs. If you do, I'll use them with you. If you love me, don't use them." Her husband then gave her heroin. "Try it," and she was hooked. The husband was arrested shortly after. The woman found out she was pregnant and didn't dare to abort, so she gave birth. But because she was already addicted, she used a small amount of drugs to raise her daughter. She continued like this until her daughter entered elementary school.
I remember the middle-aged woman told me, in a very quiet voice, feeling embarrassed to say it, "Teacher, I owe my daughter the most. But I also thank my daughter." I asked, "What happened?" She said, "That day, she took her daughter to elementary school for enrollment. Elementary school enrollment is in late August or early September. The weather was still very hot. But because she used heroin, her arms were covered in needle marks, and her skin was爛爛的 (làn làn de - festering/rotting). So, she had to wear long sleeves. She saw that she had used drugs the day before, still sneezing and with a runny nose, wearing a mask. Her daughter had no signs of drug withdrawal. Her daughter was healthy and lively, going to school. She saw other parents, looking radiant, taking their children to school. She felt ashamed. She didn't want her child to have a mother like this. So, on the day her daughter enrolled in elementary school, she had a change of heart and decided never to use drugs again. She decided to quit drugs that day and worked hard selling noodles at a noodle stall to raise her daughter. Six years of elementary school, three years of junior high, three years of high school, four years of university. For sixteen years, she didn't touch drugs. Was she still counting? She wasn't counting then. But many people are still counting. She said, "Teacher, it's really been sixteen years." Actually, she's still counting. I haven't used drugs for sixteen years. And how did this cue connect? Her daughter's graduation ceremony. When her daughter graduated, because her grades were excellent, she passed the civil service exam and had a stable boyfriend. At this time, her daughter, of course, wearing her university gown, brought her boyfriend to tell her mother, "Mom, thank you for raising me for these sixteen years. You've worked hard. I've grown up. I have a good boyfriend. You can relax now." Oh my god. Those four words, "relax now." The mother suddenly felt the burden lifted. Her "relax now" back then came from that injection. These four words completely connected her. Instantly, she was reconnected. So, she used the means available to her. She privately asked, or whatever, and started trying to reconnect with the social circle related to heroin use. "Nothing is impossible for a willing heart." She found them. After finding them, she couldn't come back. After multiple uses, she naturally became a high-risk individual. The police often caught her, and she went to jail. So, her self-state in prison was very poor. Because she felt, "I'm just a loser. I couldn't even last sixteen years. How many sixteen years are left in my life? Why couldn't I last?" This is what ordinary people think about quitting drugs. Actually, in prison, I speak very bluntly. I tell them, "When you go out, don't tell me you're not using drugs. I won't believe you. I'm not the kind of person who gives you beautiful pink fantasies." I once told them, "When you go out, take bus number 100 or 110 to the tallest building in Taichung, and jump off. That's society's biggest expectation for you. Because we don't want you back. We don't want you back. You use drugs, come back and use drugs again, what's the point? Your self-control is so poor, your restraint is so poor." So, what we need to educate them with is that once they return to society, temptations will be there, stress will return, and your frustration will definitely follow you. So, every time, at the very end, of course, I can't beg them tearfully. I can only say, "Please, please, make a promise with Teacher Dai. After you're released, don't go home first. Don't go looking for those things. First, restore your National Health Insurance eligibility. Go see a doctor quickly. Seek medical help. Because society, we don't know you're using drugs at first. So, you come back, okay. Anyway, we'll do what you should do. But if you feel that you've learned a lot of skills after being in prison for so long, and you can be an anti-drug angel, and quit after release, that's very, very difficult. Don't put so much pressure on yourself. You need a doctor's help. You need professional help. At this point, it becomes the final stage. She quits drugs. Quitting drugs. Think about it, sixteen years still failed. So, those who have been in for three years and ten months, most of them might relapse under certain cues. And this relapse is the most terrifying. I believe none of us who don't use drugs have a problem. We all have experience with dieting. All diets fail when? When you're close to success, you think, "Forget it, let's eat fried chicken." Or have a cup of cola. And you gain weight back. Once you regain weight, your confidence is gone. "It's over. Yes, I'm the kind of person who can't control my mouth." "Forget it, eat wildly. Be happy." It's the same with drugs. When we find that this friend who has tried to quit drugs, has worked hard, and hasn't used drugs for a while, but perhaps due to uncomfortable withdrawal symptoms, or cue retrieval connects them again, they relapse. Their self-perception is shattered. "I'm just so bad. I can't even control drugs. Am I still human?" "Forget it, let's hide in drugs."
The whole story just now, I'm a bit unsure how to interpret it. Because sixteen years of this makes me think willpower is still effective. We think so, right? But the final twist is that willpower is actually not effective. That is, in the early days, we called it quitting drugs. Now, we are gradually seeing new terms, like "detoxification," meaning you need to stay away from drugs. Stay away from drug-related social circles, drug-related stressful environments, drug-related retrieval cues. Stay away from these first, and you'll be further away from drugs. And then start developing new connections in the brain's dopamine reward circuits. For example, you might give yourself small rewards. Or some people say, "Eat a dessert." Although sugar isn't really good for you, and it does have some harm to the body, in a way, at least first, it's legal. Second, the sensation it brings won't make the person feel like their self-concept is shattered again by using drugs.
Taiwan has been trying since 2016. We use cognitive behavioral therapy to help drug users in prison. We were quite bold at the time. We had small classes, only 20 to 25 people per class, and we ran three to four classes a year. In one prison, we served about 100 people at most. Their recidivism rate has indeed decreased. Compared to early methods like listening to the radio, lectures, or watching TV programs for anti-drug promotion, this in-depth individual counseling model has relatively delayed their relapse time. The longer the time is extended, the higher the probability of staying away from drugs, and the greater the chance of success. However, the cost is too high.
The mention of sugar just now reminded me of an experience. I was going to the Netherlands once. Besides marijuana, they also have magic mushrooms, which are also legal. I really wanted to try them. My friend had tried them before and told me, "Be careful of a 'bad trip.' If you really have a bad trip, remember to buy a large bottle of cola and drink it down. Use sugar to counteract it." So, I was surprised. Why is it always sugar? Because sugar has a strong binding capacity. I thought, from what I've heard, sugar's role is in the dopamine reward mechanism, making you happy. But in my case, it's probably not dopamine. It's directly linked to the drug.
So, it should be said this way. I believe this might be a pharmacological aspect that we in the professional field may not fully understand. I think there's another function. That is, the feeling of happiness that sugar brings. This feeling of happiness can, to some extent, alleviate the damage to one's self-concept. Many drug users want to ask the public a question, and I'm asking it on their behalf: "I use drugs, I use my own money, I don't steal or rob. If I'm very rich, frankly speaking..."
Let's talk about money first. That's interesting. Does drug use lead to financial ruin? I guess so, because it's very expensive. Yes, drugs are expensive. We've asked in Taiwan. Most common users have several types of usage. They call it the "Number One Set Meal." What is the "Number One Set Meal"? Heroin plus amphetamines. You're dazed, then you wake up a bit, then you're dazed again. For heroin or amphetamines, I've heard the most outrageous prices, reportedly up to 100,000 a day. Wow. Yes. And I've also heard of cheaper ones, around 60,000 to 80,000 a day. This guarantees financial ruin. A middle-class person cannot sustain this. But if you are a business owner, frankly, 100,000 a day is negligible. It's only 36.5 million a year. That's a lot. If you're a business owner, who would think like that? No wonder people on Wall Street are perceived as such.
Let's go back to the previous topic. Today, I'm not spending your money. If I'm using my own money, well, you say my body will be ruined. My body is being ruined. You say I'm causing social harm. I don't drive, I don't drink. Today, I just use drugs and sleep at home. Especially heroin users like to say this: "I use drugs at home. You're not harmed. I'm at home. You're arresting me and putting me in jail. Who have I harmed?" They don't have this sense of criminal consciousness. But the public feels, "You're terrifying. After you use drugs, what happens, what happens?" We go bankrupt, we become infamous, or we attack our neighbors. These are all subsequent disinhibited behaviors, illegal behaviors. But in the initial stage, most drug users have this concept. Yes, it's hard for me to think of the reason why. I sometimes wonder why it can't be like drunk driving, where we impose heavier penalties for subsequent behavior. If you cause harm, we impose heavier penalties. But in the initial stage, it's like this. I don't care. Because, for example, if you cut yourself, it's not a public assault charge. Yes, yes. It's your suicide. Yes. So, in a way, these drug users' thought processes, their legal perspectives, are somewhat different from the principles of determining drug harm prevention in Taiwan's Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control Act. Basically, it's about harmfulness, addictiveness, and social harm.
For drug users in their withdrawal process, psychological reconstruction is important. Today, we are discussing simple use. Because if you are manufacturing, transporting, selling, or transferring, I'm sorry, these are criminal offenses. We won't discuss these. These have victims. Yes, these have victims. Today, we are simply discussing if you are a simple user. Many countries are also considering this issue. So, various stages of argumentation and theories are emerging. First, the furthest extreme, which we can't imagine now, is too incredible: drug decriminalization. This is something we can't imagine now. Decriminalization. It's not even a crime. But I'm very liberal. I can imagine drug decriminalization. Yes.
The second part, moving a bit more conservatively, is drug de-penalization. Meaning, we don't imprison them today. De-penalization. And then, moving even more conservatively, is drug medicalization. Meaning, at least it's a disease. Of course, the most conservative approach is our current state: drug criminalization, and the concept of drug criminalization. Taiwan is gradually starting to think from the liberal end you mentioned. Most of our experts, scholars, and even laws now agree on one thing: drugs are an addiction disease of the brain. So, it's a disease. Do you imprison a sick person or treat them? You know, imprisoning a sick person is strange. So, gradually, the concept of treatment is forming.
If we proceed with these four concepts, treatment is what we can currently consider. But de-penalization and decriminalization are indeed difficult to even mention in Taiwan without causing disputes. Yes, because I just had a sense of "The distance between us and evil," where people usually discuss whether a patient should be sent to the hospital or to prison. This always causes dissatisfaction. Yes, especially when discussing the causes of addiction. If there are physiological and psychological factors, I suspect the public is less likely to forgive psychological addiction. The feeling is that it can be controlled by willpower, right?
Actually, in reality, psychological addiction is not about willpower. Let's be honest. Psychological addiction is linked to external retrieval cues. So, when the cue is linked, you're hooked. That's the terrifying part. Cue linkage can be divided into several levels. The first level is the linkage to the drug itself. We find that at the beginning, seeing the drug makes them excited. For example, if they've used marijuana in Thailand and see it again, seeing the drug itself makes them excited. This is the first type.
What is the second type? It's the peripheral cues of the drug. Peripheral drug cues are more dangerous. For example, social circles, and what else? Environments. Some people even feel that when they walk there, their minds are filled with this. This is interesting. When we went to Thailand, because we were doing research, we interviewed street citizens there. And we happened to ask a tourist from Hong Kong. Marijuana was legal in Thailand, and this was his 11th trip to Bangkok. He kept going. Yes. It had only been legal for how long? Only 13 months, and he had been there 11 times. How many more times he went afterward, we don't know. It was only about half a year, and he had been there 11 times. Basically, it's like going every two weeks. He said, "Friends from Taiwan, why are you here? Because I saw the word 'Thailand' on television, and I wanted to come." That's it. The first thing he did was go straight to his usual shop. When these environmental cues are linked, the word "Thailand" itself makes him think of these.
The most terrifying is the psychological cue. We just discussed that men and women have different triggers for drug cues. We find that men are more likely to be triggered by external cues to seek drugs. For example, the drug arrives, the paraphernalia is seen, or they see the word "Thailand," and similar concepts. But women, compared to men, are triggered by their own psychological state. Wow, that's interesting. If they are happy, they think of it. Or unhappy, or feel lonely, or feel socially disadvantaged. Because women, in terms of their self-concept, are more easily influenced by the outside world. And after using drugs, the damage to women is very, very great. It can cause unexpected changes in their appearance. For example, their hair quality deteriorates, their skin becomes sallow, and so on. So, women feel even more afraid of these changes in their appearance. They are afraid of themselves, they hate themselves. It's funny. Men who use drugs say, "I'm a victim. It's the drugs that harmed me. I'm fine. As long as I don't use them, I'll go back to how I was." Women don't. Women feel, "It's my own fault that I used drugs." Men never say that. Men think, "It's not wrong for me to use drugs. Yes. It's fine. It's not a big deal. It's the drugs that are bad." They push it over there. "How could I be like this? How could I be like this?" From this perspective, women link their drug use needs to spontaneous internal psychological cues. And this linkage makes it harder for women. We truly feel that women have a harder time with addiction. The proportion of drug users in women's prisons is much, much higher than in men's prisons. And women have a very pitiful situation. Like in August this year, I interviewed long-term inmates at Kaohsiung Women's Prison, elderly grandmothers. It's truly pitiful. A 92-year-old grandmother was arrested for drug trafficking and imprisoned. If her sentence is completed and she's released, she'll be 105 years old. I encouraged her, "Do well. If you're not released on parole, the Minister of the Interior will present you with a certificate of longevity." She just smiled. But her logic is this: "Teacher, this is a wrongful imprisonment. I was sitting at home. I'm in my 90s, I'm 80 or 90 years old, I can't go out. I just answered the phone. I knew my grandson was selling drugs. My grandson was trafficking drugs. So, I gave him the phone. The police said I was trafficking drugs." In short, their concept is that it's easy to rationalize these things. In reality, in prison, drug use is basically the main focus for women. Before fraud became prevalent, drugs were the quickest way to get involved. Of course, fraud has now emerged as a strong contender. For women, the barrier to crime with drugs is low, and they are easily influenced.
At the beginning of our discussion, we talked about whether they are patients and whether willpower is useful. It sounds like a sociological explanation, suggesting that factors beyond their control are influencing them. This makes me think of a question: the dark figure of drug users, and I'm just curious to ask, are the ones actually caught and the drugs present in Taiwan also...
Yes, there are. Only some people get caught, and some don't. Yes. We can clearly tell you. The drug crime patterns we are currently presenting are all derived from correctional data or police data. The characteristic of correctional and police data is that it is public, meaning it has been detected. And we all know about the dark figure of crime. The dark figure of drug crime is definitely not low, especially for certain types of drugs that are extremely easy to evade. Imagine, imagine. Where do you think drug users smoke? Nightclubs. Nightclubs are easy to catch people in because police raids will catch everyone. That's for central nervous system stimulants. They are more exciting. "For fun, for high." In this case, police raids can easily reduce this dark figure. I found you. But for many depressants, at home. At home. Many times, like the heroin case, he told me, "Teacher Dai, let me tell you, you haven't tried it. Let me teach you." I said, "Teach me what?" He said, "If you want to use 'hao zi' (heroin), you must find a very comfortable bed, otherwise you will be very uncomfortable. Your lower back will hurt." The best investment in his home was the sofa in his room, because he could lie there.
I also went to eat mushrooms, and my friend told me the same thing. You need to find a very comfortable bed. So, do you notice why there were opium beds in the Qing Dynasty? Now it's called a sofa, the same concept. And it's hard to catch you at home. Relatively speaking, some types of heroin are quite easy to catch. The police and we have also been told this. Sometimes police trainees say, "Teacher, actually, those who use heroin are quite easy to catch because they hide in motels. They don't break in first. They wait until they've used it before arresting them. It's like catching a turtle in a jar. They can't escape. Their mental state is groggy, and they easily surrender." Overall, drug-related research suggests that the dark figure is definitely not low. And the actual data, we cannot give you a definitive answer because we have to be responsible in research. But overall, based on my personal experience and discussions with these inmates, I think multiplying by 10 is not a problem.
Wow, multiplying by 10 is not a problem. So, those who weren't caught, is it because they have more means of escape? This goes back to a peculiar point. What is the fixed impression people have of drug users? Many people think drug users should be like the image we see on American streets, or like the KK compound, or the Golden Triangle. That's not the case. All drug users, after using drugs, whether stimulants or depressants, when the drug wears off, they appear as normal people. Many instructors ask us, "Teacher, schools have improved a lot recently. There's no more drug use because students don't have runny noses, don't sneeze, don't yawn." Those are the effects of early drugs. But current drugs, like central nervous system stimulants, have different manifestations. So, we really ask everyone not to judge whether someone uses drugs based on their outward behavior or maladaptive behavior. If you really want to know if someone uses drugs, the most important thing is a blood test to determine the type of drug in their body.
Another thing is drug use. If you use stimulants, most of the users are people you wouldn't expect to use drugs: the middle and upper-middle class. Like we just talked about Wall Street. And the police won't bother people on Wall Street. So, they become part of the dark figure. But they use it. I used to hear rumors, maybe urban legends, that illegal parking in Xinyi and Daan districts is fine, and the police don't dare to catch them because they're likely to catch second-generation officials or business elites. So, I suspect drugs are similar.
Drugs, if used by the middle and upper classes, first, the venue will be closed and highly confidential, making them difficult to detect. So, these drug users are caught only when major harmful incidents occur. Let's take the W Hotel model incident that actually happened in Taiwan. That incident involved "Tuhao Ge" (rich guy), who came from a wealthy family. He hired sex workers, escorts, and other services. Then, he used new drugs, which caused the model to die on the spot. He had to call the police, and then the police found out what happened in the hotel. This incident also caused significant negative publicity for the hotel, directly labeling it as a "drug hotel." In reality, the hotel was also unlucky. I opened a hotel, and you come in and do something. Indeed, we find that this is a phenomenon in countries worldwide, like Japan. You see entertainers, and after who knows how long, it's exposed. So, the impression is that drugs are not just for the lower social strata, or "disreputable people." Often, it's a mental change that exists across all levels of humanity.
Let's move towards the liberal side. We just heard about de-penalization and decriminalization. Yes, yes. I've heard about marijuana being used to treat certain diseases. Yes, yes. The medicinal effects of marijuana. Or even, is it Chang Gung or VGH in Taiwan that conducted research saying ketamine can treat depression? Because the subjects for these drugs in treatment or usage must be limited. So, we can't openly use Schedule III or Schedule II drugs on humans in human experiments. So, often these are first, confined to animal experiments. So, from animal experiments, we may indeed find that their brain function has changed. Does the change equate to the human brain? First, we don't know. We haven't figured it out yet. Second, even if it equates to the human brain, it's a huge undertaking. Because we have the Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control Act, and the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act for legal drugs are separate. So, if we really want to make it a legal drug, it's a big deal.
I was just imagining a utopia, and this utopian imagination comes from a Dutch classmate I had in graduate school. The Dutch classmate said, "Basically, Dutch people don't touch marijuana or mushrooms. They find it boring. It's tourists who go for enjoyment. And because it's been legal since they were young, it's become similar to tobacco and alcohol. If you want it, you can have it, go for it on weekends, but you don't usually organize such gatherings." This imagination makes me think of, for example, the little devils in my mind hearing about methadone. Yes, yes, methadone. I was thinking, "What about people who are not addicted to heroin? Can they also use methadone? What would that feel like?" If there was a legal channel under controlled dosage, like medical-grade drugs, but it became a professional service. "You want to be happy for a while? I'll give you a super safe range of happiness." Above that safety, of course, it's fine. But why isn't there? Because I feel that if such a service were available, people wouldn't engage in dangerous activities. Right?
Here, we really need to give a very interesting example. This is not a counter-argument, but this example is from a European psychologist who conducted a study on children. On the children's table, he placed two cups of sweet water, the kind children like. And the psychologist told the children, "You can drink as much as you want from the cup on the left. You cannot drink from the cup on the right until the teacher returns." And then the children drank from the left. They kept looking at the right, wanting to drink but not daring to. Wanting to drink but not daring to. And then the teacher returned and said, "Okay, now drink a sip from the right." Actually, the dosage was the same. It was all sweet water. The sugar concentration was exactly the same. The physiological effect was completely identical. Afterward, the children were asked to judge which cup of water tasted better, the left or the right. All the children said the right one tasted better. That is, prohibition is the source of happiness.
The point is here. Isn't this an argument for decriminalization? Yes. But this also becomes an excuse to refute decriminalization. What is it? Because legal happiness is definitely less than the happiness of prohibition. That is, the concept of this sweet water. Why does the sweet water on the right taste better? If we equalize the physiology, then psychological prohibition becomes the reward. Yes, meaning, removing the punishment becomes the source of happiness. The happiness is actually insignificant. If the government were to provide heroin for free, and you just register with me, I'll provide it for free. I tell you, heroin would disappear from Taiwan in a day. It would be unprofitable. Who would come to sell heroin? Merchants would disappear. Then we could control the dosage of these friends through medical means and help them leave this suffering.
So, the point is, when the commercial model, the criminal model, the psychosomatic addiction model, and the drug toxicity model are all together, this thing becomes two words: "drug." Frankly speaking, what drugs need most is actually a source of profit. As long as you are not a simple user, whether you manufacture, transport, sell, or transfer, these four things are driven by money. So, how do you stop the money aspect? It's money. Only money can solve the problem of money. So, if we are really bold, let's imagine a small island for an experiment. Provide drugs for free, without charge. It's highly likely that the island would have no drug economic scale. It would naturally be centrally controlled. This is super interesting.
So, why don't we dare? I'm speaking of a super impossible utopian idea. But in reality, when we think this economic model is okay, people will think of strange things. It seems that way. In economic logic, it's like that. In crime prevention, it's like that. Even in some medical assistance perspectives, it's like that. But what other changes will the human heart undergo? Because this kind of thinking has never been experimented with in human society. So, we really don't know.
Taiwan is also experimenting. We have methadone therapy, harm reduction therapy. It's incredibly successful worldwide. Listeners, you might not know this. We do a lot of drug abuse prevention. Every year, we have significant time points and論文發表 (lùnwén fābiǎo - publish papers). Foreign scholars are very interested. They keep asking, "How did Taiwan manage to suppress heroin? What efforts did you make? You're not just good at semiconductors; you can even control heroin. It's incredible." But because we have a different medical logic, Taiwan is ahead of the world, ahead of the world, definitively executing, and executing very well.
Wow. You just mentioned that prohibition is actually the biggest factor for drugs, even more so than the drug itself. Yes, yes, yes, yes. The physiological mechanisms. Our current anti-drug propaganda, if it uses fear, isn't that a stronger sense of prohibition, making people want to try it more? Yes. But you also said our anti-drug efforts are among the best in the world. Our lifetime experience rate is very low. Yes. Indeed, it's very effective in prevention because it curbs one part of the triangle. Yes, the first part. But for those who are already using drugs, it becomes a heavier burden because of societal condemnation. This is contradictory, isn't it? Yes, yes. Very contradictory. And we can't think of a better way.
So, our propaganda worldwide is changing. Bo En, you must have seen this phrase: "Taking ketamine once, wearing diapers for a lifetime." Yes, you've seen it, right? Our listeners must have seen it. But have you noticed that it's gone recently? Yes, it's all removed. Instantly. Let me tell you, "Taking ketamine once, wearing diapers for a lifetime" is probably the most successful propaganda in anti-drug history. Let me give you an example of how drug users view anti-drug campaigns. It's so cliché. In the early days, we thought of "Say no to drugs." I'm here, since we're recording, this pose, right? "Say no to drugs." First year, we go out with this pose, right? "Say no to drugs." Guess what the drug dealers say? They don't call it "Say no to drugs." What do they call it? "Give me five packs." And we quickly change it, right? It became "Reject drugs, cherish yourself." This is not as famous. This is with the index finger and thumb together to avoid becoming five packs. "Reject drugs, cherish yourself." And then it immediately became, "Give me all the ones you don't want." How funny. It's like the concept of "one inch of righteousness is met by a foot of evil." So, they use this kind of teasing. Yes, this is very easy to do at an open mic. Yes, yes. I met a drug lord in a dark alley the other day, and I immediately did this. He immediately took out five packs. Yes, yes. In the earlier days of this propaganda, the most common question students asked teachers was, "Teacher, how long does it take to take ketamine to wear diapers?" That's really paradoxical, you know. First of all, how would we know? I don't know either. I haven't taken ketamine, and I don't wear diapers either. Is "once" once? I just smile and tell the students, "If taking ketamine once means wearing diapers, then please immediately withdraw all your savings and go bankrupt buying stock in diaper companies. You'll get rich. I'm telling you, taking ketamine once and wearing diapers. No, that's impossible." And what is "once"? How long? No one knows. It depends on the purity of the ketamine you take, how you use it, and the frequency. So, actually, the fact that ketamine causes diaper-wearing is a harm, but the greater impact of ketamine is on mental state. So, actually, diapers are just one of its many side effects.
So, we later removed "Taking ketamine once, wearing diapers for a lifetime." And even more strangely, the reason for removing it was that it was not effective. Its propaganda indeed had some issues. And it takes time for taking ketamine to lead to diaper-wearing. It actually encourages people to try it. "Oh, no. No." I can understand that mindset. Like the "one hundred" very likable girls dropping to eighty. Then I'd think, "But wait, after a while, shouldn't the receptors adjust themselves? So, it should be that if the interval between the first and second pill is long enough, there should still be a hundred girls." But you immediately want to pursue it. You really want to experiment. Yes, you just want to do it, do it, do it.
People who take ketamine. The students said, "You know, if you live to be 80 or 85 years old, will you wear diapers?" They were stunned. "It seems so. I'll wear them. Come what may. I've lived to 80-something, so I'll wear them." He said, "It's like that. And if you don't take ketamine, you'll still wear them. So, wearing them once doesn't matter. I'll just wear them earlier. What else can I do?" That's his logic. Yes, it makes sense. Their logic is really good. Their logic is basically, I'll tell you, in the future, I really want to publish a book called "Life Golden Quotes from Inmates." They are very rational and very precisely cut through all our evils. They cut them all open. Really, including the previous episode. Every time they say something, I find it hard to refute it immediately. I can't think of how to counter it. Right? So, actually, the logic worldwide is gradually becoming like this. We tell them that these things should not be used because they cause a certain degree of harm. But we should try not to exaggerate this harm, saying things like "financial ruin," "infamy." We should try not to talk about that part for now. And one thing is very important: self-responsibility for drug use. Why? Perhaps in the future, we may have to. I might be planting a seed here because this will happen in the future. Maybe one day we won't have to talk about drugs anymore because all drugs will disappear, but people will still be addicted. Addicted to what? Legal drugs. That's even more terrifying. Because the police won't catch you. We really can't promote it. The police can't catch you, and you're not committing a crime, but you can still enjoy that kind of thing. Wow, what then? That's the beginning of danger. So, we need to tell everyone now that drug use is a matter of self-responsibility and a burden. It's definitely not a concept like, "I take medicine and don't harm anyone. I don't curse anyone to death." It's the opposite. If you have the ability to take the "first pill," then you and the drug have a lifelong responsibility.
Hearing the latter part, it feels like the same concept as whether to eat healthy or not. This is also an interesting characteristic of drugs. Why has heroin declined? There are a few key points. First, heroin itself changes with a country's socioeconomic status. How so? Because after using heroin, it's a depressant, so people have less ability to work and engage in social activities. So, as a society moves forward, with a booming economy and people making money, who wants to lie at home? So, everyone, the decline of heroin represents that Taiwan still has a future. That's the logic. It means its economy is growing. So, I'll use stimulants. I need to work harder. So, stimulants are on the rise. Commonly seen, like we mentioned, why do so many people on Wall Street use cocaine? Because they need to stay awake to work on the US market in the morning, then the Japanese market, then the European market. They need to stay awake to do this work. So, they have a demand for cocaine. See, like today's market surge. Right? And if, "Oh, so happy!" After taking heroin, when you wake up, the market has plummeted. Your face turns green. So, the disappearance of heroin and economic growth can be imagined. Although they may not be directly linked, they can be imagined. Drugs will change. You arrest me for Schedule I drugs, and I'll escape to Schedule II. You arrest me for Schedule II, and I'll escape to Schedule III. You arrest me for Schedule III, and I'll escape to Schedule IV. People will always move towards cheaper options to avoid being caught. So, where will it eventually escape to? It will escape to where the law allows. But if you misuse it there, the problem is even greater. When all investigative hands can't reach, but the health of all citizens is still harmed, this is currently the most troublesome problem worldwide: the abuse of legal drugs.
Actually, etonitazene is like that. It was originally a good short-acting anesthetic, but now it can't be used. Many doctors are troubled. "What about short-acting anesthetics?" Here, we can talk about what will be popular in the future and say hello to everyone. What will be mentioned in Teacher Dai's new podcast? What is it? Humans are starting to use drugs meant for animals. Ketamine is like that. Ketamine was originally a drug for animals. These drugs are used on humans to achieve pleasure. These are legal for animals. What about humans? Should we designate them? Should we regulate them? These are all future issues.
Wow, finally, it's truly mind-blowing. The abuse of legal drugs feels like a more difficult issue to handle than the legality of drugs. Because it's legal. It's legal. Yes. So, this question is left for the listeners to think about: what should we do in the future? Yes, exactly. Today's episode was incredibly insightful. Thank you, Teacher Dai. Thank you, Bo En. And once again, we remind everyone: please stay as far away from drugs as possible. Yes, exactly. Be responsible for your own body and life. Yes, exactly. Be responsible for your actions. Thank you, Teacher Dai. Thank you. Today's episode of "Bo Yin" is recorded here. We'll see you in the next episode. Bye-bye.