The Daily Show: Ears Edition - ICYMI - Carl L. Hart on "Drug Use for Grown-Ups"

Episode Date: April 12, 2021

Neuroscientist Dr. Carl L. Hart discusses his book "Drug Use for Grown-Ups," which addresses misconceptions about drug use and calls for regulation to offset ignorance and racist stigmas. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to Comedy Central. When 60 Minutes premiered in September 1968, there was nothing like it. This is 60 Minutes. It's a kind of a magazine for television. Very few have been given access to the treasures in our archives. But that's all about to change. Like none of this stuff gets looked at. That's what's incredible. I'm Seth Done of CBS News. Listen to 60 Minutes, a second look on Apple podcasts starting September 17th. Dr. Carl Hart, welcome to the Daily Social

Distancing Show. Thank you for having me, Trevor. Good to see you. Great to see you. Always good to see you because you are one of those people who I chat to where you make me question my to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the thi. thi. thi. thi. thiii. thiiia. thia. thiia. thiii. thi. thi. thi. I listen. Listen. Listen. Listen. Listen. I to see you again. Great to see you. Always good to see you because you are one of those people who I chat to where you make me question my fundamental belief in the world, which is a very difficult thing to accept as a human being. Because I believe certain things, because I've been taught certain things. And then you meet people book out that's got everybody talking. Drug use for grown-ups.

Now just to set the stage, you are a tenured professor at Columbia, right? You are an established and respected neuroscientist. You are not some dude who's just like selling bankies, like little baggies of weed or whatever. This is like we're talking to a doctor here. First things first. First things first. What is the biggest misconception around drug use? Because when people say like drug use for grownups,

people might be like, wait, you're talking like, vicarin? What do you mean by drug use? Yeah, so when I'm talking about, when I'm talking about the fun drugs that people take cocaine, Mdema, those types of drugs.ee, that's, thuuu, that's, thu, thu, thu, thu, thu, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, to to to too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, too, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, the the the thi, the the the the the theee.e. the the the thee. the the theee. the theee. the theeean, too,ilicimen, those types of drugs. That's what I'm talking about. And the biggest misconception is that most people who use these drugs are addicted.

The vast majority of people who use drugs are not addicted. 70, 80% of those people who use drugs don't have problems like addiction. They are responsible individuals. They are responsible people. they're professionals. And that's their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their of their families, they pay their taxes, responsible people, they are professionals and that's one of the reasons that I wrote the book so to clear some of those misconceptions. Yeah I mean what you've done here is you've shaken up the status quo because you're

going against everything that I was taught in school, you're going against everything that parents teach their kids. I'm going their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their is their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their misc-I is, their misc-I is, their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their miscoe, their miscon, their their miscon, their their their their their theaugheatseatsheaqqq whole life I've gone. Like, if you take drugs, you are a waste in society, you're destroying yourself, you're destroying your family, you are setting yourself up for the ultimate end, which is death. Your book argues the opposites. Well, the thing that concerns me is that when we focus on the drug, we're not focusing on the relevant behaviors. Like, are these people good people? Do they behave appropriately? That's far more important than what they put in their bodies. And then by focusing on the drug, what we do is we inadvertently vilify people who use drugs. And that decreases the likelihood that they will come to us when they need help. And so I'm trying to get us to focus on the relevant the relevant the relevant the relevant the relevant to focus to focus the relevant to focus to focus the relevant to focus on to focus on the relevant the relevant to focus on to focus on the relevant the relevant to focus on the relevant to focus on the relevant to focus on to focus on to focus on the relevant to to to to the the to to to to to to to to to to to to to their. to to to to their. to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to their. their. to their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. the the the the the the. the the the the the the the the. the the toooooooooooooooo. toe. to. that they will come to us when they need help. And so I'm trying to get us to focus on the relevant behaviors.

So let's break it down into two parts for this conversation. We'll talk about the drugs themselves, and then I want us to talk about addiction afterwards. So let's talk about the drugs themselves. For most people out there, if somebody uses cocaine, it means they're running around sniffing the whole time, and they say crazy things to people and they lose their minds. If you use heroin, then you cannot see straight, you cannot live straight. If you use crack, you're going to sell your family if you can't.

There are certain things that are attached to these drugs. However, in the book, you go tha tha, you tha, tha, tha, tha, tha, thii. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. the, the, thate, the, the, the, the, the, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. T, thi. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. Ta. They tha. They they they they're they're they they say they say, they say they say they say they say they say they say they say they say tha. They say tha. They say tha, you go through on a scientific level and you argue against these ideas. My question to you then is, if this isn't the truth of the drugs, then where are we getting this from? Well, we're getting these sort of dramatizations, the sensationalism from movies, from the me-a- These dramatizations and sensationalized accounts are really important for our movies because they keep us into the film. They're important for our media coverage because then it increases the likelihood that you read it.

And so many people are benefiting from this sort of false characterization of drugs. That's why it continues. And also one of the things that happens is that it increases police budgets because then now we have to put more money in their budget. It increases the budgets of scientists like me. So a number of people are benefiting. That's why this thing continues. But in the book, you basically argue that the drug itself is not bad and and I'll never do it justice. That's why I hope people will read the bookthe drug itself is not bad. And I'll never do it justice.

That's why I hope people read the book is because you break it down. You know, you talk about how the drugs, them not being regulated doesn't help. The fact that, you know, you don't know what's in your drugs. People are taking what they think is cocaine, but now they're the fence, it's that this, there's rat poison, there's this, everything that's being cut in the basing and all of these things. You, you speak from experience. I mean, I remember how shocked people were when you said, oh, I use heroin, I use heroin, everyone was like, wait, wait, wait, wait.

Yes. So let's let's let's let let th. Let's talk, let's talk, let's talk, let's, let's talk, let's talk, let's talk, let's, let's, let's talk, let's talk, MDMA use. I acknowledge all this drug use in order to dramatize the fact that most people who use these drugs are not addicted. So I wanted people to see somebody who's responsible, somebody who writes books, somebody who meets their obligations, so they can understand that, see we've been misled. Instead, they don't want to believe that. But one of the major concerns when we think about the drug them themselves, let's think about a drug like fentanyl. Fentanyl has been approved in the United States in medicine since 1960s.

So we use fentanyl in medicine safely, not a problem. But when you think about somebody like Prince, for example, Prince died about five years ago, almost till the day. He died in part because he had fentanyl in a drug in a pill that he thought was oxycodone, a percocet. He didn't know. Fentanyl is a lot more potent than oxycotin. So if the same amount that you take of oxycotin,

then you take that same amount of fentanyl can kill a person. And so if Pritz knew what was in his drug, he might still be with us today. So in the book, I'm arguing, we need to regulate these things. We need to make sure we have drug-checking facilities. So people will know what's in their substance. So it decreases the likelihood of the likelihood ignorance, not knowing what's in their substance. Shouldn't we go the opposite way?

There would be people who would argue, well, why risk anybody losing their lives? Why don't we just get rid of all cocaine and just get rid of all weed and all everything? Just get rid of every single drug. Wouldn't that be a better option? Why would you argue against that? Well, it's not going to happen. It's unrealistic and I'm trying to be realistic. And so I'm a parent. So I know that my kids or children will engage in certain behaviors, even though I may not want them to. And so what I do is try and equip them with the information so

that in case it happens, here's what you do. Because I know people are not perfect and people do not live by logic alone. And so I'm th thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi. I'm thi. I'm to to to thi. I'm thi. I'm to to to to that that that I'm that I'm that I'm that I'm that I'm that I'm that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that that th. I th. I th. I th. I th. I th. I'm to to te. te. te. te. te. te. te. te. tel. tel. tel. tel. tel. tel. tel. I'm tel. I'm te. I'm te. by logic alone. And so I'm trying to think about the data. The data tells us that we have 30 million Americans who use drugs regularly every year. And I'm not going to be ignorant about that sort of thing. And so the best way to do it is to make sure we have these safety nets. How do we enhance the safety of this activity as well as other activities? When you say that, when you say we have 30 million people who use drugs every single year,

I can imagine a lot of people at home going, well if you caulize it, wouldn't that become 70 million? Wouldn't that become 200 million? Now the whole of America is a crack. Now America's losing its mind going to China. You're th, I'll do anything if you give me more crack. That's what a lot of people are thinking right now. But you're arguing that the drug itself, inherently the drug, is not inherently bad. So then let me ask you this. What is the good side of crack or heroin or cocaine? Can there be a good reason to use it? Yeah, when we think about parties, just think about going to a party, people have alcohol, they have other psychoactive substances because drugs facilitate social interactions. They can enhance euphoria, they can make people feel good.

All of those are good things because when people feel good, they're less likely to treat other people poorly. So you want people to feel good. It's just that you want to make sure that people engage in this behavior in the safest sort of ways that are possible. So pleasure, happiness, all very good things. That's why people take drugs. Let's talk about addiction now, the other side of the drug. So I understand, I understand the arguments and it's really illuminating when you look through the book and you go, okay, so we have bad, let's call them drugs, let's call them them them them them them th....... their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, their, pleasure, their, pleasure, their, their, pleasure, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, pleasure, pleasure, their, pleasure, their, pleasure, their, pleasure, their, their, pleasure, their, pleasure, pleasure, their, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, their, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure, their, pleasure, call them drugs that have been cut badly, poorly. It's the same way like buying illegal alcohol. You could die because somebody put too much alcohol in the drink. That's why it's regulated. You argue for the same thing with drugs.

And I understand that completely. Let's talk about the addiction side of it now. As you said, 80% of the people are fine. They're using the drugs, and they they're they disagree with you because my mom taught me to disagree with this idea fundamentally and my school did, I go yeah if everyone who took drugs just couldn't manage then we would see the effects. The whole country would fall apart because a lot of people use drugs. But then let's talk about the addiction. Yeah. Is it not worth making sure there are no drugs because of how high the risk of that addiction is? So so you know you you th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi thi thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi, thi, thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, th. th. th. th. th. th. thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi. thi. thi. thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, to thin, to thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin. I thin. I thin. the risk of that addiction is. So, you know, if somebody's addicted to cigarettes, is that as bad as being addicted to crack?

Are the effects of certain drugs not worse than other drugs in the addiction? Yeah, so let's think about that. We can think about people who are addicted to alcohol. And then if they abruptly discontinue their alcohol use, they can die. The same sort of thing is less likely with something like heroin. So alcohol withdrawal can kill people. So when we think about the severity of addiction, alcohol is one of the sort of worse. But we manage to deal with that okay in our society, although we still lose people

every year from alcohol withdrawal. But the point is, is that is, it's an important point here. If the majority of people who use any drug are not addicted, it tells you that you have to look beyond the drug itself. There are other factors that are important for drug addiction. Other factors like psychosocial factors, psychiatric factors, like people who have co-occurring psychiatric illnesses are far more likely to be addicted to a drug than somebody who doesn't. And so it tells you that you want to make sure you get those people treat it and the help they need. People who are who recently lost some social status, they are no longer gainfully employed. They're more likely to meet criteria for addiction. All of these sort of factors are important. So, that, their, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, far, far th th th thi th th thi thi, far, far, far, far, far, far, far th th thi, far thi, far thi, far thi, far thi, far thi, far thi, thi, thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi th gainfully employed, they're more likely to meet criteria for addiction.

All of these sort of factors are important. So it tells us as a society, we have to be better, we have to treat people better, we have to do better, we have to make sure we have social safety nets. All of these things will radically decrease the amount of addiction that we see in a society. But when we focus on a drug, then we're not focusing on the most important aspects of addiction. What terrifies me, though, on a completely uninformed level, I don't claim to be an expert at all. I just go, as a layman on the street who is proud to be an idiot and trying to learn, I go, I look at the stories, I go, man, Whitney Houston, you know, and I go like,

I don't know what happened or didn't happen, but I know that something involved crack possibly, and that's, that's, we lost Whitney Houston. And then Dmx, and they go like, what happened? And he's, he's in a coma? And you like, it's because of, th............... the, the, th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to th. th. to, to, to, to that that that that that that that that that that that that that that to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. to th. th. th. to to th. to th. to to to the. to to to to to the. to to to to to to to to to to to to to legalizing drugs, but I don't want to keep losing people. Is there something that I'm missing when I think like that? Yeah, let's think about Whitney. Oftentimes you see the headline, she had cocaine in her system, and it probably had nothing to do with her death. She died in a bathtub because she fell asleep.

She also had antihistamines in our systems, which you can get over the counter. She had benzodiazepines in her system that she was prescribed. She fell asleep in the tub. So if anything, you know, you want her to be awake, cocaine keeps people awake. And so people need to understand that the headlines are often wrong. Let's think about DMX. I don't know what happened with DMX yet. We don't know, but there are a number of people who are speculating. And it would be nice to know, but that's why we're trying to get the right information out. So if there was a drug involved, and he may have hidden what he was doing because it's stigmatized, we help, they can seek help, or they can seek information information information information information information information information information information information information information information information information information about information about their their the of the shadows and they can seek help or they can seek information

about doing their activity more safely. So we don't lose people. When 60 Minutes premiered in September 1968, there was nothing like it. This is 60 Minutes. Very few have been given access to the treasures in our archives. But that's all about to change. Like none of this stuff gets looked at. That's what's incredible. I'm Seth Done of CBS News. Listen to 60 Minutes a second look on Apple podcasts starting September 17.

So if I understand correctly and reading through this book, this seems like your argument, you go, in society, there are people who will be addicted to certain things. You know, so some people will be addicted to sugar. They can't stop eating sugar. Some people addicted to food. Some people can't stop drinking alcohol. Some people, their addiction might be running marathons. It's just a different thing. but your addiction will just will just will just will just will just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just just to be th. th. thi thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi thi thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii thi thi thi but your addiction will just be tied to something else. My question to you then is with drugs, how is it

that all of us are so wrong then? Like how did this happen? How did we all just get it so wrong? Because I know for myself personally, if you said to me six years ago, hey Trevor, weed, should it be legal? And I'll be like, that is the devil. People are going to smoke the weed, and it's a gateway drug, and it's going to kill them all. Because that's what I was brought up to believe in my school, in my community, in my life. Now I look and I go like, man, I was an idiot. I can't believe I even thought that. The first thing people have to understand is in the United States, drugs are not banned because of pharmacology or science. Drugs are banned because of racism.

We banned all of these drugs originally because of their association with despised group. The opioids we banned because of our hate of Asian Chinese folks, cocaine because of our hate of black people, marijuana because I hate Mexican Americans and black people. And so when we understand why drugs are banned in the first place, then we can start to look behind a sort of curtain and see some of the, what the reality really is. Like you said with marijuana, you can no longer fool people because more than 50% of adults have used marijuana in their life.

So it's harder to fool them, but with something like cocaine or crack, it's still easy to fool people because most people haven't used that drug. It's still easy to fool people about heroin because most people haven't tried heroin. And so as we increase the number of users with these drugs, it becomes more difficult to fool people. Or when you have people like to them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them them to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to fool to number of users with these drugs, it becomes more difficult to fool people. Or when you have people like me and other scientists who speak up, it will become less likely that we mislead the public. But you have to remember, Trevor, there is a lot of money in misleading the public

about drugs, in science, in law enforcement, all of these sort of industries that have popped up around prisons. So there's a lot of money in this. And I just want to leave you with this also is that people have to know and remember that drug trafficking, the illegal drug trafficking business is a multi-billion dollar industry. And that industry is supported primarily by middle class and upper class people, white people. But when we think about drug users, we don't think of them as being the users. So there are a number of people in our society who know that drugs are not the boogiemen and not the devil that we've been told.

But they are comfortable doing the activity for themselves, but they don't want anybody else doing this activity. Right. Right. Right. Before I let you go, let's talk a little bit about a case that is in the news that will be one of the most defining cases in American history, and that is the case of Derek Shauvin in, I think it's Minneapolis. And it's the officer who took George Floyd's life. And that trial is going on right now.

And one of the issues that's coming up is drug use. You know, the defense is now claiming, oh no, you know, he didn't die because this man put his knee on his neck for over nine minutes. He died because he had a drug overdose. Now, we know that George Floyd's records have come out. I know that you've taken a look at that. What are some of the misconceptions around that story that we need to acknowledge?

And so I wrote an op-ed in the New York time back in June, because I knew this defense was coming. They were, the defense is that George Floyd had taken drugs beforehand, drugs like fentanyl, methamphetamine, and so George Floyd was eventually gonna die anyway, whether Schaubman put his knee on his neck or an op-ed saying that this is bogus. And it's bogus because it's important for people to understand that no matter what, how much the drug,

how much drug is in someone's system. That doesn't tell you precisely what, how the person is the person is the person is the person is the person is the person is to the person is to the person is to the person is to to look to the person tell you precisely how the person behaves. It's important for you to look at how the person is behaving. And what we saw is that George Floyd was alive before the knee was put on his neck. That's the most important thing. George Floyd was interacting with Derek Shelvin in an appropriate manner. He was trying to be compliant. That's the most important thing, but the defense is trying to say that,

oh, he was gonna die anyway. It's nonsense and that, and that's, we've seen this throughout history. We've seen this with LeQuarran McDonald in Chicago, in 2014. the today, the police. in Chicago in 2014. We saw this with Terrence Crutcher in Tulsa, Oklahoma in 2015 when he was shot by the police. So we see this throughout history. Drugs are used to scapegoat some bad behavior of police officers. When we look at the legalization journey, it's opening up all over America.

I mean, just recently, New York announced, now people can smoke weed in public wherever you can smoke cigarettes and it's decriminalized and now they're going to open up stores I guess by 2022. Marijuana slowly, all over America, cannabis, weed, whatever people want to call it, it is now opening up. And to your point, we've seen with the uptick of white people using it publicly, it has become a more socially acceptable thing. Once the minivan moms were doing it, it was like, yeah, why you should use it. We seem the same thing with psychedelics. You know, mainstream therapists saying like, oh, we use micro-dosing LSD and we're using

these things to help people withto is when the money figures out how to formalize making money of the drugs, that's when the drugs will become legal? Yeah, so people need to understand that we banned alcohol from 1919, I mean, from 1920 to 1933. And the reason why we overturned alcohol prohibition was the promise of getting rid of the income tax. And so we said that the money generated from alcohol tax revenue will, that will make it no need for an income tax. So America said, yeah, let's do that, let's overturn it. And now with Canada, it's the same thing.

We see the promise of tax revenues, and in a capitalistic society like America, money trumps all. And so when we figure out how to make money the money thaaauololol, the money the money the money to make to make to make to make to make the money to make to make to make to make to make the money money money money money money money money money money money money money money moneytrumps all. And so when we figure out how to make money from it, it will become legal. But it's really about the money. Oh, one last thing. I have to ask you for earlier. How do you know if you are addicted or not? So you use heroin, and then because of the stigmas in society,

I would even be like, wow, I mean, but can you stop using heroin, Dr. Hart? How do you know if you're addicted or not? How does anybody know if they're addicted? What is the true definition of addiction versus somebody using a thing? Because everyone will say, I drink and I'm fine. Someone go like, no, you're addicted. How do you know whether or not you're addicted? Again, you keep the focus on relevant behaviors. If you are having psychosocial disruptions, that is you're not meeting your major obligations, work, family, education, all of those sort of things, you're having these disruptions

and you are disturbed by them, then that is the definition of addiction. And so if people are not meeting these obligations, yeah, they may have a problem. But if people are meeting these obligations and they are enjoying themselves, why do we have a problem? Why do we care what they put in their bodies? It's interesting you say that because, you know, I know I've got to let you go, but this is something that I find fascinating about your book and your argument is how it breaks so many people's minds and the arguments that they've already pre-made

in society. So, I'll give you an the th a a thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, tho, thr-a thi, thr-a' tho, tho, tho, tho, thi, thi, thi, thr-a.... thi, thi,'ve already pre-made in society. So, I'll give you an example. I've seen a lot of conservatives get angry at the idea of your book. They go like, this is crazy, this black man wants to get everybody on crack and heroin and look at what it did to the black community. But the very essence of your book should be something that conservatives and, conservative slash libertarians should love, which is the book actually and because of that argument. And but you know, it's not a libertarian argument. It's the fundamental argument of the country.

It's like the second sentence in the Declaration of Independence, our founding document. It says that we have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As long as we don't bother anybody else or prevent them from doing the same the same the same the same the same the same the same the same the same the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As long as we don't bother anybody else or prevent them from doing the same, we're okay. That's in the Declaration of Independence. And so that's an American value. That is the American value. And that's what I'm trying to ask America to reconsider, to really live up to, make our practice, be consistent with our promise.

And then, what do you say to to to the communities to the communities to to the communities to the community to their their their to their their their their their their their their their the practice be consistent with our promise. And then what do you say to the communities out there, especially black communities, where mothers, preachers, whoever it may be, the elders in the community, would go like, Dr. Hart, what are you doing? We watch the crack epidemic destroy our communities. Why would you advocate for drugs? Yes, I'm not advocating for drugs, by the way. I'm just saying that if people are using drugs,

we shouldn't throw them away because of their drug use. We should look at their other behavior. That's what I'm saying, number one. And number two is that when we talk about the crack epidemic destroying the black community, it was just wrong. I mean, it's true that people had people that people that people that people that people that people thatue that people had problems, but when we think about things like unemployment, the highest unemployment rates in the United States in black communities was 1982. Crack didn't come on the scene until 1985, but yet crack is blamed for that sort of thing.

We think about violence. We had peaks in violence in 1933, 1980, 1991. Crack was on the scene in 85 for the 91 one, but we've had these periodic peaks in violence. That's how, that's how societies work. And so Crack was blamed for these things that were really caused by things like Reagan's economic policies. But crack was blamed. And so I'm trying to get people to understand that if you look beyond drugs,

then we might find some real solutions. Right. Well, I could talk to you for ages, but luckily, that's why you wrote the book. I hope people read it before they comment on it, because it's one of the most thought-provoking reads that I've had the pleasure of exploring in a very long time. Dr. Hart, thank you for taking the time. I appreciate you coming on and yeah, maybe in 10 years time people will be like, oh man we should have we should have listened to that guy when we're buying crack at like the local store when we're going to Whole Foods to buy some crack people. People be like, the doctor hard told us and to be like to to to to told told us, told us, told us, told us, and th, and th, and th, and th, and th, and the th, th, thi, their, thi, their, thi, their, their, to be to be like, thi, their, to be to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to their, and I I I I I I I I I I to to to to to to th, and I I I I I I I I I I I th, and I th, and I I th, and I th, and I th, and I thi, and their their thi, and thi, thi, thr. thr. I'm thr. to. to. thea, thea, thea, thea, thea, thea, thea, having me, man. I really appreciate you. Thank you so much. Always a pleasure. The Daily Show with Trevnoa, Ears Edition. Watch the Daily Show weeknights at 11th,

10 Central on Comedy Central and the Comedy Central app. Watch full episodes and videos at the Daily Show. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram and subscribe to the daily show on YouTube for exclusive content and more. When 60 Minutes premiered in September 1968, there was nothing like it. This is 60 Minutes. It's a kind of a magazine for television. Very few have been given access to the treasures in our archives. But that's all about to change. Like none of this stuff gets looked at. That that's all about to change.

Like none of this stuff gets looked at. That's what's incredible. I'm Seth Done of CBS News. Listen to 60 Minutes, a second look on Apple podcasts starting September 17. This has been a Comedy Central Podcast.