I remember my father talking about people getting sick and going to the hospital during prohibition. He also mentioned the names of a few people that he knew that died. Been talking to my brother to see if we can jog our memories for more of what Dad used to say about it. I do remember that Dad used to say that a lot of people got sick, and there were a number of them that died around Detroit. That was where he was living back then, and where he met my mother.

 

Again, Windy.... I'm not saying it didn't happen. I guess "made it up" was a bad choice of words as far as Blum goes. My point was that no one was talking about it until SHE wrote a book about the advent of Toxicology and forensic science in New York in the 20's. I haven't had time to check her resources concerning her "claim" that the gov't intentionally increased the toxicicity for the purpose she claims.

What is interesting is the fact that she just released the book recently, and based on a few reviews, the blogoshere has gone "viral" with this CLAIM that shows how evil our government can be. And YOU just happened to have read about it... in the last few weeks.... cuz it only got attention AFTER (or contemporaneous with) Stack's attack on the gov't.

You and your brother may have heard about this when you were younger.... but THAT is not what made you mention it here. You may have done a little googling.... more likely, you received it in an email or "alert" from some blogsite you subscribe to. This is the same thing I've said about GMAN. You even USED the words, "cut and paste!"

Just wondering... does it ever occur to you to question this type of info before you "cut and paste" it??

There is NO doubt in my mind that, during prohibition, MANY alcoholics would drink anything they could get their hands on! I'm sure much of it would make them sick. The gov't MAY have increased the chemical structure to make sure they got "sick" and not just a "bitter taste," cuz.... a bitter taste just wasn't enough to keep SOME from drinking it.

 

I don't know that it was intentionally killing people. More a matter of, you don't eat rat poison or drink anti-freeze because you know it will kill you. By making it lethal, it would fall into the same catagory. But, when it was killing people, they didn't stop it. That product is still lethal today. The only reason you don't hear about it killing people today is that real "potable" alcohol is available.
Actually, it did not come via email. It was a news item. I catch up on the news of the day on the internet. Sites like MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. My wife constantly has things on TV like "Cold Case Files" and I've had my fill of that. So, news and weather information comes from the internet. That's where I came across it.
The effect might be something like:
You have a stream or river running through your property, and it opens up into a nice, wide sandy area. People are continuously going there to swim and sun-bath. You don't want the liability in case someone gets hurt on your property, so you set up a shooting range. With bullets flying over that area, people will be discouraged from swimming there. You find out that every time you use that shooting range, someone dies at he swimming hole. Instead of stopping, you keep it up.

In effect, that is what the government did with alcohol. And, when people started dying, they didn't stop it. In the case of the hypothetical shooting range, you've gone from Manslaughter to a Serial Killer because you don't stop when someone dies. Now, who in the US Government gets charged with that? At least, Conduct Without Regard for Life. The plans to spray the fields in Mexico also says there was no remorse.

But, what I think is funny now, with the spraying of the fields in Mexico, is the fact that I know a few places where "the weed" grows wild in this country. As long as it is not being cultivated, the fed doesn't bother the farmers about it. Before my uncle died, he used to say he didn't know what it was about Pot, but he'd plow it under and it sure made the corn grow like nuts.

Since moving here from WI, I've met a number of people that smoke it regularly. They tell me that normal "wild" pot isn't any good. When it's cultivated, there are chemicals added to the soil to give it more "kick". Including poisons. One guy grew it in his house until he got caught. What he said he added to it is a pretty scary list. So, what the government was going to spray over Mexico would have little, or no, effect on the smokers. I can't help thinking that had far more to do with the government's choice not to spray it than the public outcry against it.