It sounds like he’s using bipartisan rhetoric to justify funding a reasonable strategy. Knowing how many people are taking which psychoactives is important for making policy decisions.
… An accurate monitoring system is needed to prove the effectiveness of different harm-reduction strategies. People lie on self-surveys.
…I’m fairly certain monitoring waste waters to determine the rate of drug use is a common and widely used procedure. Like, it is happening and it has been happening for a while now.
If these conclusions are backed by science, then they are based on the collection of DNA. A scientist would need to sequence the genomes of thousands-maybe tens of thousands-of random people from all across the country. The more populous the country, the more random samples would need to be collected to derive meaningful results.
…this imposes limitations on which countries could be analyzed. Smaller countries would be easier, and they’d need to be of some economic or scientific interest to justify the cost. In a country like North Korea, only the government would be allowed to collect this data. If they were willing to spend the money, I doubt they would release even anonymized results.
I don’t think funding is the problem. Colleges receive alot of money, but I feels like the resources are spent on people that probably shouldn’t be in school.
I’m a pretty smart dude, but the fact that I qualified for a full scholarship with housing in 7th grade says alot about the state of our education system. If a teacher is teaching a hundred students that probably aren’t benefiting from it, their time and resources are spread thin.
…I don’t think it was possible to fail most of my classes as long as I showed up.
Once you have a 1000 circuit boards, it makes sense to extract it on your own. These sort of procedures scale well. The more circuit boards you have, the less time it takes per gram of gold.