No worries, glad to have cleared that up. I'm a bit miffed that I only noticed the debate three days later, because I would have something to add, but oh well. I'll limit myself to saying that I have a medical degree, and

1. the amount of overmedication I have seen during my studies and in hospitals
2. the lack of understanding of both the nervous system and the way our drugs interact with it (to be clear, this applies more broadly to pharmacology, you can see unexpected side effects pop up in many other fields)

has made me view pharmacological substances (in general, not just psychoactive) as a sometimes necessary evil. They can help people function, save lives even; but you should always think before you prescribe them. I think that's where a lot of the disagreement in this thread stems from. Me and some other people saw the text linked and thought "great, reducing unnecessary prescription is exactly what we want (in principle, RFK is not a great source)" while you and some other people thought "oh no, RFK's gonna try to take away access to needed medication".