Further Reply


Thanks for your latest. I was waiting on getting a bit more info about the programme before forwarding your details. I've got quite a few email addresses on file. They wouldn't all reply (and in any case I donít suppose they would all be suitable) but if it's only to be a ten minute slot then I guess you wouldn't have time for too many. I stay in touch with only a handful. To be honest, I wonder what the silent majority has made of Salvia (if anything at all). Iíll post a general notice on my web-site and I'll select a few to send on your details to if youíre particularly interested in speaking to people in your region. If you were looking for arguments to be made for Salvia divinorum, I wouldn't mind contributing in some capacity; I feel as well qualified as anyone. Of course, I would say that wouldnít I, but my web-site is an expression of my position, so that gives you an opportunity to familiarise.

I have my reservations too. My opinion of the media, particularly in its over all treatment of topics such as these, leaves a lot to be desired. Even from areas where one might have hoped for higher standards of reporting, serious coverage can be sadly lacking. For example, the Sunday Times article (see Media Stories section). Thus you'll forgive me for this possible over-reaction, but when you say of yourself, "I am anxious that the item must not be one-sided", what do you mean? I need to understand what 'other-side' is being presented. For example, if the item is being presented in the context "Should Salvia divinorum be banned?" rather than simply "What is Salvia divinorum?" then that's something that I need to consider.

Like I say, I take your willingness to try Salvia for yourself to be an indication of your intent, so I'm reassured somewhat on that front. If your first Salvia experience is imminent, then obviously I'd be interested in hearing what you made of it (as soon as you're ready).

I'll leave it there for now. ~ R