The NASA website includes a prominent antidrug message, called Explore Space Not Drugs. It can be found from the NASA home page by following the links NASA for Kids or Educational Resources.

This doesn't seem particularly odd. Antidrug messages show up in all sorts of places. (They're springing up like weed!) What surprised me was that NASA is required by law to include the antidrug message. This was a provision of the 2000 NASA authorization (PL 106-391). Sorry, that was a typo, it should be "weeds".

Also interesting is that all Federal agencies were required to include antidrug messages on their websites, by the Children's Health Act of 2000 (PL 106-310). Despite this, the two government websites that I use most often - the Food and Drug Administration and the Patent and Trademark Office - have no such messages.

So it appears that NASA is doubly blessed. They have a specific obligation not imposed on any other individual agency, and the general Federal obligation is apparently not enforced. There must be some political history behind this. Does anyone have any insight? If not, does anyone have a good conspiracy theory? What could NASA be doing pertinent to its mission with the resources used on the antidrug message?

The laws cited above are codified at 21 USC 801. Public Laws and the US Code are available online through the Government Printing Office, which also does not have an antidrug message.

- Tom

Wow, that NASA antidrug message changed my life! I was thinking about taking drugs, but then I saw their banner and decided to explore space instead.

But then I found out that it takes years and years of studying math and physics to become an astronomer.

And to be an astronaut you have to be in great health, have perfect eyesight, and be lucky enough to get selected from scads of applicants.

Then I thought, well, I'll just explore space on my own. I went out and shopped for telescopes at the store... man! They're not giving those things away!

So I dropped acid.

Thanks, NASA!

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

I think this obligation is punishment that stems from the several failures NASA had on projects associated with Mars. Somebody figured out that in order for a project to run for five years with one team to be working in metric units and the other in ancient Outer Mongolian, and nobody noticed(!) they all had to be on drugs.

Having been cought with their noses in the "candy bag" so to speak, they had to agree to some pretty sophisticated punishments. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

How's that for a conspiricy theory??
[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

__________________
It's just one of those damn things of which there are many few. -- Dan Blocker

To prevent the use of drugs is not the role of NASA. The use of drugs is a private issue.

I get very annoyed (and worried) by the attempts of governments to get deeper and deeper inside our private affairs, nowadays.

I'm warning: if you were to compile all the efforts currently being done by governments agencies to control our lives (censoring Internet, pressing upon drugs and tobacco users, intercepting communications, forbidding branches of scientific research)you'd get to the conclusion that we're about to enter a gloomy totalitarian era. I really don't like what I see looming on the horizon.

Tune in.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Argos on 2002-12-17 06:07 ]</font>

IIRC, Gene Kranz wrote in his book that the things that kept Mission Control running were caffeine and nicotine... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Harald

Instead of using a rather cryptic statement by Buzz Aldrin, an open word about his alcohol problems would have looked more honest.

Harald

I agree with Argos. Governments of the wold still haven't learned that you cannot legislate morality. It must come from the individual.

I know I stand on a very controversial platform on this point. IMHO all drugs should be made totally legal. Everything that has been captured to this point should be set out on tables at the post office, for anyone to pick up as they please.

Some things I've learned from the prohibition of the 20's & 30's here in the USA.

The number one benefit of this would be to take all of the money out of the drug business. Prohibition experience shows that would at least slow down people killing each other over the vast somes of money now in the system. Second, it'd get most of the people stupid enough to consume the stuff out of the gene pool and out of the prison sytem.

I know this is a hard and harsh stace to take but sometime tough love is what is required.

__________________
It's just one of those damn things of which there are many few. -- Dan Blocker

You fools! Don't you see? Substances like marijuana, peyote, and psylocibin must be bad for you because they are illegal, while substances like alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine are obviously good for you because they're perfectly legal! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

Remember kids: Don't do drugs. Get drunk and smoke yourselves to death instead.

Scotland has a couple of quangos set up to promote drug awareness and other health issues where. Government agencies, corporations and individuals can pledge support to these groups without having to go to the expense of setting up their own anti drug schemes.

Far be it from me to try to dictate policy to another government (at least until I am Ultimate Dark Overlord - he he he!) but it might be a better use of resources if NASA and other agencies offered their support to a central anti drugs body. At least this way the message that is delivered would come accross in a commmon format.

P.S - QUANGO = QUasi Autonomous Non Governmental Organisation - for those who don't follow UK politics (but who does?!?!?)

NASA: Hey there, don't take drugs! Why don't you explore space instead?

(some guy on (insert name of funky stuff here)): Whoa, what you think we're doing?

(sorry, couldnt keep it)

Uh, I've to check my "Yes, Minister", but IIRC, the books opinion about QUANGOs isn't that good... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: kucharek on 2002-12-18 08:51 ]</font>

ME: Because it still costs about $10,000 per pound to send me into low Earth orbit, and no one but astronauts and a few super-rich tourists ever get to go there anyway! Duh!

I heard something about Carl Sagan advocating the use of cannabis...

__________________
Thank god for cancer.

That's not a typo, That's a Freudian slip. :wink:

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

Well, it'd be kind of weird if the Food and Drug Administration had an anti-drug message...

Yes. I was just reading a book that quoted him directly... but unfortunately, I left it on the coffee table of our cabin in California on my vacation last week. :/

The gist of this particular Sagan quote was that when you get high and write an idea down, the fact that it seems absurd in the cold grey light of dawn is a failure of perception. In other words, he thinks any and all stoned nonsense is profundity itself. I'm no enemy of marijuana, but I do think that's a bit silly. I, for one, don't do my best thinking in such a state.. .

__________________
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

I used it in youth (saying it better, when I was younger. ), and I should say that it really gave me important insights on some things. Some ideas I had under its influence even made me earn money. There are drawbacks. The most noticeable (and harmful) of them is the lazyness that takes on the user (ok, I don´t thing your lungs appreciate it that much). That could ruin carreers. But I never had major problems with it.

And I think the debate on Cannabis is severely affected by non-scientific premises, authority arguments, prejudices, etc. It is the poorest debate (on an important issue) currently taking place on the planet Earth.

Are you familiar with the anti-hemp from early 1900's? I forget the specs, but the oil companies had a problem with people using hemp. I will look for it, but it is almost time to go home.

Mary Jane got all tied up in the hemp (haha) "problem" due to variations in the plant.

Just don't go saying that hemp would solve all our problems, is all.

Wait a minute... at $10000/lb, why not send GRASS into orbit? You could still make a profit if....

All right, all right. But the message thing is just too stupid, anyway.

"Kids, when I'm flying the Shuttle I don't need a messed-up head! And YOU don't need one either! Stay sober when you pilot your spacecraft!"

I don't know about NASA, but I think Microsoft is one company that needs some sort of anti-drug campaign.

Get on Xbox Live for a few minutes and you're likely to see dozens of people named after drugs and once you get in a game (and thus have voice communication) most people spend their time talking about getting high than talking about the game.

I weep for the future sometimes...

__________________
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.