BBSNews 2003

A Blueprint for Domestic Change from an Unlikely Source

BBSNews - 2003-01-29 -- Amphetamines for US fighter pilots came under increased scrutiny after a friendly fire incident which killed four Canadians, and injured eight others, some seriously, who were on a training exercise in Afghanistan. After nine days of hearings to decide whether Maj. William Umbach who was flight leader and Maj. Harry Schmidt should be court-martialed for actions during the mission, they made an apology to the families, but insisted they were not at fault."

Much of the testimony has focused on orders though and not amphetamines. Based on testimony in the case from a fellow member of the same squadron, Maj. John Milton, Reuters recently reported, "A U.S. fighter pilot who mistakenly bombed Canadian troops in Afghanistan never blamed Air Force-sanctioned amphetamines that his lawyers say were at fault."

The outcome remains to be seen but this editor does not think that amphetamines are going to be the deciding factor. And neither does the US military. There is a definitive guide that outlines in great detail what really happens in long combat missions when the US military, primarily the Air Force, is at war or near war with continuous mission conditions.

It is called the "Performance Maintenance During Continuous Flight Operations" issued January 1st 2000.

This is the guide that military medical personnel most likely consult when deciding to provide amphetamines known as "go pills" to pilots, especially over long recurring and uneventful mission scenarios. It includes the consent form that pilots must sign that clearly outlines the same dangers presented in ONDCP literature for non-military citizens and children outlining the dangers of currently illicit drugs.

Those "dangers" domestically are used to jail people at a phenomenal rate; so-called "meth labs" are supposed to be the greatest drug threat in the heartland and what we are learning by this episode is that there are many good reasons that individuals should be allowed to manage their own aspects of medical care. This includes self administering go drugs.

On page 12 the report makes an important note about the "importance of self-regulation." and explains, "As the final decision to use stimulants or sedatives is delegated to the aviator his understanding becomes key to the success of the protocol."

Showing there is an acceptance of drug use to extend human endurance or activity. And that individuals are capable of self administering drugs given the truth about the extent of the drugs action and how it would affect them.

Indeed, in a Desert Storm experience outlined in the same document, a commander required that pilots have the pills as a safety item. He neither encouraged nor discouraged their use. But the un-named commander said "you must give them guidelines and then let them self-regulate. If you can’t trust them with the medication then you can’t trust them with a 50 million dollar airplane to try and go kill someone."

So it's clear that the US military has found drugs can indeed be used responsibly to enhance ability or alter conciousness in ways that perpetuate the state. Both Ritalin and methamphetamine were under testing and mentioned in the guide as an alternative, "Other medications under investigation include demoline (Cylert), methylphenidate(Ritalin), methamphetamine, and modafanil."

Meth and Ritalin. The US military cannot be faulted for looking for performance enhancing solutions to war scenarios. No viable government would ignore such possibilities. Often military and other federal government solutions filter down to the private sector. And this should be the case for personal management of drugs. All drugs. The currently illicit ones must be brought under immediate regulation.

It's the only possible way to get close to the militarily pioneered way of responsible amphetamine use for all citizens. Body autonomy. It's a basic right. It's just not enjoyed by a large proportion of the US population. The US military has shown us a better way. Train well and let well educated people make good decisions based on real data. US drug policy as evidenced by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), could take that lesson to heart.