How Government Literally Makes People Go Insane
By Joe Jarvis - May 07, 2017

The most effective way to change the world if you have kids is to treat them right. Everything could change in one generation if there were a radical shift in parenting.

Unfortunately, some indicators suggest things are getting worse. For instance, there has been an increase in kids hospitalized for attempted suicide or suicidal indicators.

Now we can just hope that parents are becoming more alert to the warning signs and are therefore properly identifying them early in order to prevent suicide.

But the most concerning thing is that these incidents tend to be concentrated at certain times of the year. One of the most likely times for a kid to need a hospital visit because of suicidal tendencies or attempts is in the fall when school starts back up.

There are two probable reasons for this. One, being ridiculed and bullied by their peers makes kids feel like social outcasts, and transitioning to a new school year could increase that. Evolution has programmed the human mind to want acceptance of the group for survival reasons, so being ostracized can make you literally feel like you are going to die because if this was 10,000 years ago, you probably would.

And then there are the drugs. You know, the legalized forms of cocaine and heroine that we give to kids to make them alert, focused, or calm, and manageable. There are all sorts of side effects to the drugs, and based on the spiking and dropping levels of dopamine and other chemicals in the brain, this can cause erratic behavior.

But either way, the school system seems to be the root of the problem, whether it is exposing kids to negative people they don’t need in their lives, drugs to help them function “normally” in an abnormal school environment, or just the unnatural environment itself where one is trapped, caged, and coerced in order to prepare them for an equally coercive society afterwards.

Coercion is Ruining Society

It turns out coercion is a serious problem that can lead to mental health issues. Coercion might even cause most of the ills we see in society today. The same thing that makes a teenager lash out and act erratically in opposition to strict rules is what makes people do crazy things in a society dominated by arbitrary and oppressive government edicts.

According to Bruce Levin, PhD, in his article, Societies With Little Coercion Have Little Mental Illness:

Coercion—the use of physical, legal, chemical, psychological, financial, and other forces to gain compliance—is intrinsic to our society’s employment, schooling, and parenting. However, coercion results in fear and resentment, which are fuels for miserable marriages, unhappy families, and what we today call mental illness.

It Starts With Your Kids

Most parents have their kids’ best interests at heart when parenting, yes some still treat their child like a wild animal that must be broken. So many people in our society would have no idea what to do with freedom because all they have ever known is oppression. It starts in childhood, and evidence suggests that a more free child leads to a happier adult.

Levin points out that some cultures see very little mental illness, and he suggests it is because of the way the children are reared.

For many indigenous peoples, even the majority rule that most Americans call democracy is problematically coercive, as it results in the minority feeling resentful. Roland Chrisjohn, member of the Oneida Nation of the Confederacy of the Haudenausaunee (Iroquois) and author of The Circle Game, points out that for his people, it is deemed valuable to spend whatever time necessary to achieve consensus so as to prevent such resentment. By the standards of Western civilization, this is highly inefficient. “Achieving consensus could take forever!” exclaimed an attendee of a talk that I heard given by Chrisjohn, who responded, “What else is there more important to do?”

Among indigenous societies, there are many accounts of a lack of mental illness, a minimum of coercion, and wisdom that coercion creates resentment which fractures relationships.

How could we expect coercion to yield results as positive as agreement? All interaction should be voluntary; you cannot have positive ends if you do not use positive means to achieve those ends. I am not a parent, and I don’t expect perfection from anyone, but parents should at least try to solve issues with their kids without being so forceful and coercive.

Let kids be who they want to be, with the steady hand of your guidance, not an iron fist. Clearly, a child cannot always get what they want, and I am not advocating giving in to any random whim. Just realize how important freedom is for children in order to grow and learn.

This is why the public school system is horribly damaging to a large percentage of children. That is not the only nor best way to learn, and in fact really just teaches obedience to authority. Public schooling sets children up to be mindless drones in the work world, where they will be used to the coercion, but not happy about it.

[Jared] Diamond, in The World Until Yesterday (2012), reports how laissez-faire parenting is “not unusual by the standards of the world’s hunter-gatherer societies, many of which consider young children to be autonomous individuals whose desires should not be thwarted.” Diamond concludes that by our society’s attempt to control children for what we believe is their own good, we discourage those traits we admire:

“Other Westerners and I are struck by the emotional security, self-­confidence, curiosity, and autonomy of members of small-scale societies, not only as adults but already as children. We see that people in small-scale societies spend far more time talking to each other than we do, and they spend no time at all on passive entertainment supplied by outsiders, such as television, videogames, and books. We are struck by the precocious development of social skills in their children. These are qualities that most of us admire, and would like to see in our own children, but we discourage development of those qualities by ranking and grading our children and constantly ­telling them what to do.”

Bravo to home-schoolers and free range parenting. They are ahead of the curve by going back to the basics.

Then It’s Your Job…

I don’t believe the reason so many hate going to work is not the work itself, but the fact that we cannot act like ourselves when at work. We feel coerced in one way or another into not being who we want to be. This is a mild form of coercion, one that often doesn’t go beyond venting over a beer after work, or every once in a while both middle fingers and: “I quit!” screamed at the boss.

But is the quiet desperation of a 9-5 you hate–saving for retirement, but probably drinking yourself to death before you get to enjoy it–really the way to live? What if we couldn’t afford cable, couldn’t afford a new car, or a perfect house–but were happy?

Critics of schooling—from Henry David Thoreau, to Paul Goodman, to John Holt, to John Taylor Gatto—have understood that coercive and unengaging schooling is necessary to ensure that young people more readily accept coercive and unengaging employment. And as I also reported in that same article, a June 2013 Gallup poll revealed that 70% of Americans hate their jobs or have checked out of them.

Unengaging employment and schooling require all kinds of coercions for participation, and human beings pay a psychological price for this. In nearly three decades of clinical practice, I have found that coercion is often the source of suffering…

In all societies, there are coercions to behave in culturally agreed-upon ways. For example, in many indigenous cultures, there is peer pressure to be courageous and honest. However, in modernity, we have institutional coercions that compel us to behave in ways that we do not respect or value. Parents, afraid their children will lack credentials necessary for employment, routinely coerce their children to comply with coercive schooling that was unpleasant for these parents as children. And though 70% of us hate or are disengaged from our jobs, we are coerced by the fear of poverty and homelessness to seek and maintain employment.

In our society, we are taught that accepting institutional coercion is required for survival. We discover a variety of ways—including drugs and alcohol—to deny resentment.

And the government is perfectly happy with the arrangement because it is easier to control–and tax–“normal” people who just go to work every day.

Government Enforces and Exacerbates the Problem

We cannot even live on a piece of land without being coerced by government to earn some money in order to pay the property taxes. But we have to earn more than the amount owed in property taxes because we are taxed on our earnings as well. We are taxed on the vehicle and gas that gets us to work, which require more work to pay off–earnings, again, that must go above and beyond what we need because it will be taxed.

Could this be the overlooked factor that makes America more violent than some other developed nations? Has the American government piled so many laws, regulations, and statutes on top of each other that American citizens can’t just go through life without being told perfectly normal, non-violent behavior is wrong?

I think this highlights the problem with mass shootings that many have been pointing out. Whoever the shooters feel they are being oppressed by, they are correctly identifying that they are being coerced. Of course, their response is insane, and probably related to the drugs they take (some of which we also give kids), but there would never be a need for drugs if a coercive society had not reared them.

The hopelessness felt when being forced to spend money, behave a certain way, or not do something you want to do, is one of those gut wrenching deep feelings of despair that grow inside some people until they burst.

But now imagine that the government has taken everything from you. Imagine if they took your car as a civil asset forfeiture? What if your tax burden is 50%? What if you give up on that business you want to start because of the pile of paperwork and extra costs required by the government?

What if they take your kids because they are home schooled, or shoot your dog for no reason whatsoever? All these things happen, unfortunately relatively regularly, in America.

Many of us are baffled by why someone would become a terrorist, especially a suicide bomber. Again, this is the coercion the Middle East is smothered in by the USA. Imagine losing your childhood because you could not go outside because of the American drones. Imagine family members having been murdered by laughing soldiers. Imagine all your hopes and dreams bombed away in the blink of an eye. Again, this is the unfortunate reality for many people today.

In the 1970s, prior to the domination of the biopsychiatry-Big Pharma partnership, many mental health professionals took seriously the impact of coercion and resentful relationships on mental health. And in a cultural climate more favorable than our current one for critical reflection of society, authors such as Erich Fromm, who addressed the relationship between society and mental health, were taken seriously even within popular culture. But then psychiatry went to bed with Big Pharma and its Big Money, and their partnership has helped bury the commonsense reality that an extremely coercive society creates enormous fear and resentment, which results in miserable marriages, unhappy families, and severe emotional and behavioral problems.


You don’t have to play by the rules of the corrupt politicians, manipulative media, and brainwashed peers.

When you subscribe to The Daily Bell, you also get a free guide:

How to Craft a Two Year Plan to Reclaim 3 Specific Freedoms.

This guide will show you exactly how to plan your next two years to build the free life of your dreams. It’s not as hard as you think…

Identify. Plan. Execute.

Yes, deliver THE DAILY BELL to my inbox!


Your $50 Ticket to the “$100 Billion Pot Stock Bonanza”

The $100 billion marijuana industry is dominated by penny stocks…

With legalization sweeping the country, these penny stocks have already begun skyrocketing in price…

Take action TODAY, and you have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to turn a tiny $50 investment into an absolute fortune.

Click here to find out how.

Biggest Currency Reboot in 100 Years?
In less than 3 months, the biggest reboot to the U.S. dollar in 100 years could sweep America.
It has to do with a quiet potential government agreement you’ve never heard about.

Tagged with: , ,
  • Shea

    And don’t forget the numerous vaccines that are forced upon children. The first one, the hep B, is given the day the child is born. This vaccine is totally unnecessary.

    • LawrenceNeal

      Vaccines are part of Population Reduction.

      • Al Bundy

        More like financial control. “Money” has seemed to take “humanity” out of mankind.

        • LawrenceNeal

          Humanity is still there, underfoot. The psychopaths always rise to the top.

          • Sheila

            Like scum.

      • Sheila

        Um, sadly, that is true.

    • Marten

      Does Agenda 21 sounds a bell?????

  • David H. Smith

    Very well written. And unfortunately, all too true. As an educator of several decades, and now a professional writer/analyst, I can attest to having witnessed much of what is discussed here. What’s amazing to me is the “resilience” of public education as it continues along its dysfunctional ways. My mistake a decade ago, was in thinking (while spending 7 years as an online educator at the high school and university levels) that the Internet would help bring about the transformation/dissolution of “the system”. Not only does it seem to be “stronger” (in continuing along its old ways) than ever, but much of this educational protocol now seems to have been “assimilated” by the online entities, into the very mindset and practice they once claimed to be addressing. Time to meditate…

    • Sheila

      I’ve heard similar stories about internet “education.”

      • David H. Smith

        Yes, they are probably true. Sad for the students…regardless of age.

  • Barney Biggs

    Kids are not the only ones. A buddy a month ago. 72, three relatives all in their 30s and a couple of others recently That is not to count the ODs recently Three in the last two months. Stop the world at the next stop we want off.

  • FalconMoose

    Outstanding read. The information was presented in an almost passionate manner, It read like a whodunnit.

  • paul crosley

    Well written article! The education system was set up to produce mindless drones for big business. We can start by taking away it’s lunch. Stop funding any aspect of Government or big business and banks. Block chain and crypto currency is a hopeful start.

  • Whyfor

    Good article. Thanks.

    I think the first thing we have to teach kids is that freedom is not a right. Freedom is a duty that never ends. Maybe we could start with first teaching adults that.

  • autonomous

    “evidence suggests that a more free child leads to a happier adult.”
    Absolutely wrong. For the past three or more generations this wrong-headed belief system has been dominating education of America. What has been the result? Students have come to be undisciplined resulting in sending them back into totally depravity. Uncivilized brutes now prey on each other. Rousseau’s ‘noble savages’ do ignoble acts to themselves and each other. Suicide has become a welcome escape from a brutal existence. This is the inevitable result of equating discipline with coercion.

    It’s long past time for education to investigating ways to instill values without coercion, to battle abuse both at home and in school, in work and at play. It won’t come through government, for the essence of government in coercion. It won’t come from the study of animals or precivilized culture. It can’t come from a philosophical foundation of mankind as just another animal.

    • RJ O’Guillory

      …it is the use of violence in the development of children that has created the environment Mr. Jarvis so intelligently writes about. There is no need to use violence, anger or illegitimate verbal or physical coercion to develop a healthy child. Good communication skills, a non-violent-philosophy… backed up backed by calm, rationale direction…and displayed respect for the child…will all go towards developing a more mature, better developed and happier adult. People confuse the word…”discipline”…with the word … “punishment”. Discipline comes from the root-word, meaning …”to teach”. So just like any performance improvement conversation you would have, the ones with your child should be directed at identifying the inappropriate conduct, discussing why it happened, why it was inappropriate…and the consequences of repeating such conduct. Consequences should always be non-violent, and generally in the form of restriction on types of play, snacks, etc. While this is a form of “coercion” for the smallest of children, as your communications “bank-account” grows with your child, and they grow to respect and trust you, they will tend to listen much more closely to what you have to say. And they will learn to think for themselves. Thus you will need very little coercion as they grow to be teenagers. By the way…what do you think the children who have been beat…or humiliated their entire lives feel like when they realize that they are now bigger than their abusers? Think about it…eh?
      RJ O’Guillory

      • DonRL


        • Isefree

          You might try making sense yourself.

          • DonRL

            You are suggesting that corporal punishment is violence.
            This is not true. It can be if not administered in a specific and controlled manner. I have done so and none of my children are psychopaths or violent. They are all well adjusted adults contributing beneficially to society.

          • Isefree

            No, that wasn’t the point of my comment. I wanted to hear more than just “nonsense!!” from you.

            But I do think that corporal punishment, i.e. hitting, spanking, vs say physical restraint is violence when committed by an parent against his smaller, weaker child. I’ve had this conversation many times before: people are either for or against corporeal punishment. I have a child and grandchildren who have never been hit or spanked by me, and in the case of my grandsons, they have never been hit by their parents. And they are all kind and thoughtful people.

            Corporeal punishment works for you, but it would not work for me.

            So let’s just agree to disagree.

          • DonRL

            I don’t think we are actually disagreeing. RJ seemed to indicate that he thought all corporal punishment was wrong.
            I was merely saying that corporal punishment is not intrinsically wrong. Some children need it and others do not.
            I think the parent if the best to determine which is needed for their child.

          • Isefree

            In my last post I said I never hit my son. I did once, a swat on his butt, and after I promised myself I’d never do it again and I apologized to him.

            But we do disagree on the use of corporeal punishment. You’re for it
            but deny you’ve committed violence. I’m against it and admit that it is violence no matter how modest my use of it.

            By definition violence is
            “behavior involving physical force intended to hurt…someone”. Both of us intended to hurt our respective children, and we had our reasons. I imagine your violence was more modest than the violence of which you disapprove. I decided it was wrong for me to spank or hit my child who was so much less powerful than I. I did not want my son and grandsons to fear me and I did not want to hurt them in that way.

            Having said all that, I agree with you that parents, and by implication, not the state, should be responsible for the disciplining of their children.

          • DonRL

            I did not tell you anything that you suggest. You, due to your erroneous mind set, read those things into what I said.
            Your initial premise which seems to be that no physical punishment is good and always violent. This is an error.
            With that error in your mind you what I said you made these assumptions.
            Corporal punishment is not inherently violent. Some children need concrete reinforcement to understand when they have done wrong or have been rebellious. Young children do not understand abstract concepts such as guilt. Corporal punishment provides concrete reinforcement which they do understand.
            You were probably punished in a violent manner as a child or were very rebellious not wanting any authority over you. If you were rebellious you would want to divert attention away from your rebellion by accusing your parents or others in authority over you who disciplined you of violence. That mind set probably continues with you as an adult.
            Children need to mature by learning to work under and with the authorities over them and not be rebellious. Rebellion against proper authorities is always destructive.

          • Isefree

            I think you meant this response for
            R.J. O’Guillory.

          • DonRL

            I meant it for to whom it applies.

          • Isefree

            And who may that be?

          • DonRL

            if the shoe fits, wear it.

        • RJ O’Guillory

          ….When you strike a child,…(or constantly, verbally demean a child)… thus breaking the bonds of trust that should be present between parent & child…you can never fully repair that break. The child knows that situations can be dangerous to them as they get older, thus the…”fight-or-flight-syndrome”… that is inherent in all functional humans. However, a small child doesn’t yet have that sense fully developed, and instinctually trusts their parents…who are supposed to nurture and develop them…not beat them. Let me ask you…if someone came up from behind you, violently grabbed you by the arm and started to hit…or… “spank”… you, would you not consider that an assault? How would you like for someone to do that to you? Would you be listening to their… “lesson”… or would you be fighting back, angry and trying to figure our how to get away? Especially if you are too small to defend yourself against the person who is five-times-bigger than yourself? Why is that different than attacking the smallest, most defenseless humans among our species? Can you tell me why, as a society…we make violent acts towards animals illegal…yet we allow parents to inflict similar or worse acts upon a child? Then our society calls it… “discipline”..? That is wrong, silly and unnecessary. I have raised three kids, all adults in their mid-twenties now. I never raised my hand or voice to them. My oldest daughter is a Division Head at Kennesaw State University, my one son is a sound engineer and guitarist who works the West Coast entertainment swing with folks like Lady Gaga…and my other son is 25 years old, has a degree in Psychology, is a Lieutenant in the Army and an IT Specialist. They are happy, content, well-adjusted and mature beyond their years. In fact, when they all became adults, they finally told me that their nickname for me when they were growing up was…”The Never-Ending-Lecture”. I couldn’t be prouder of that. Especially if you read my childhood memoir. You are incorrect in your view towards the use of violence on children, and if you have not had kids yet, you should explore non-violent techniques for the proper development of your children.
          RJ O’Guillory

        • RJ O’Guillory

          ….that is a fairly sociopathic response. Are you telling me, as an informed, intelligent adult…if someone came to you and showed you ways of developing your child, without violence… that you would reject such techniques? Are you really saying that your first choice…would be violence inflicted upon a child, not to mention it would be your own child? Why the rush to violence? Are you unable to control yourself and the situation…without the use of violence? Are you telling me that a small, 4-5-6-7-8 year old child can outwit you…so you must resort to violence? Odd.
          RJ O’Guillory

  • Don Duncan

    “Evolution has programed the human mind to want acceptance…”? Or does it just seem that way in the society you were immersed in? From early childhood (4) I was self absorbed, rebellious, but not overtly. I listened to my parents’ instructions and did what I wanted. I “quit” 1st grade although I started with high hopes school would be my answer to extremely painful boredom. I left for school every day like all children, but stopped to climb into a treehouse and look at pictures of whatever pubs I could find. I was bored but it was better than the regimentation of school. I got my 3rd grade cousin to write excuses and sign my mother’s name. At the end of the year I failed and my attendance report was cited, which meant I had to confess my truancy.

    I was constantly in trouble at school, but not for the usual reasons. I asked questions, and kept asking when I didn’t get a non-contradictory answer. That got me dragged out of my chair many times, and taken to the principle’s office. In 3rd grade, I was expelled for not joining in the “Pledge”. My parents begged me to compromise and at least stand with the others and put my hand over my heart. I agreed and was reinstated, but did not put my hand on my heart, and the teacher ignored it. My behavior was so atypical that I was an outsider through college. And it hurt my grades, which pissed me off, but I could not shut up. I had to call out bullshit if for no other reason than I was curious and needed to make sure I was right. I wanted to be corrected if I was in error. That never happened.

    So why did I reject superstition and argue with the superstitious from the age of 8? Why was I so stubborn when I had no one on my side? Why didn’t I just give in or pretend to believe? I could have had friends. I had only one at a time, until I was in my thirties and I met other libertarians. Even then it was not easy to fit in. I did not believe a libertarian could be superstitious and be consistent, but some did.

    When I asked myself why I was so argumentative, so focused on understanding, even at the cost at alienating, my introspection revealed my primary value was truth, no matter what it cost, no matter the pain. But the pain was to subside as I aged and found others like myself. At 74 I realize I am fundamentally different from most. And I cannot, nor do I desire, to escape or evade myself, my uniqueness.

    • DonRL

      Using evolutionary phylosophy to make you point weakens your argument and makes what you say ridiculous.

    • real427 man

      If you cannot adapt you fail.

      • Col. E. H. R. Green

        If you adapt to a context wherein you are expected to be a mindless drone, a human sheep who does what he is commanded, and is rewarded for it, you fail yourself and you fail your legitimate individual rights, including your right to live as a sovereign human being with a life and mind of his own.

        Apparently, you have adapted to existing–not living–in such a context. You want more company in your collective, you are in favor those in government–your “masters”–forcing people into it, because you “think” that no one has a right to live outside of it.

        • real427 man

          I am more free & live much better than most, I do not join, but live & do all I ever wanted. I have no masters, you have to fight but its worth it in the long run. I get no gov money have always made it on my own. I am just a lot smarter than most.

  • MountainMan


  • georgesilver

    I always think of the government (any government) as a mentally challenged rabid 400 lb. gorilla. You do what it says but best avoided whenever possible.

    • Col. E. H. R. Green

      Better to give those gorillas the Ceaucescu treatment than do what they command. No one is their slave, and they are no one’s masters.

      “Oh ! I can’t do that ! I’d end up dead !”

      So be it.

      Fighting in defense of one’s legitimate individual rights is risky business. If you are murdered while defending them, you die on YOUR terms, not on your killer’s terms. Afterward, your killer has your corpse, but not your obedience.

      • SnakePlissken

        “They can take our lives… but they cannot take our FREEEEDOM!”

  • jacob

    Wow ! Some truths are exhilarating. This article is brimming with truth, smelling like the woods after a hard rain. Reminds me (again) that freedom isn’t free. It requires standing up for it and defending it. Kudos to all truth tellers who stand up and defend it. You keep oppression at bay.

  • real427 man

    Much true but in life you have to learn certain things or you will fail, as most do. You must learn to deal with the system as you cannot change human traits. I have succeeded where most have not, by thinking of ways around the system thus being much more free to run my life as I want. You only have life use it to your benefit.

  • dsaulw

    Another factor must be considered: the increase in exposure to EMF’s, including WiFi at the schools and elsewhere.

    Medical doctor and epidemiologist Samuel Milham, in his book Dirty Electricity, makes the compelling case that the so-called diseases of civilization which increased markedly during the 20th century (which include heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and suicide) were in fact a result of electrification.

    So it is quite possible that at least a significant portion of the ADHD and other psychological disorders that are now rampant among kids are a result of the ubiquitous electromagnetic noise.

  • Praetor

    Their not only making people go insane, thanks to the ‘Great Reagan’, they through over half the insane people out on the streets. This one action by the government, has done untold damage to society and continues to damage this country in incremental ways.

    Crazy insane people have been know to find themselves ruling nations and our government is crazy insane.

    The preamble of the Constitution should be the battle cry of the revolution: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish JUSTICE, “insure domestic TRANQUILITY”, Provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, ans secure the Blessings of LIBERTY to ourselves and our POSTERITY.

    This preamble, it is exactly the opposite what our government is doing.!!!

    • Except or that “General welfare” clause.

    • Col. E. H. R. Green

      Many of the patients in those government-owned nut houses were likely driven crazy by the coercion and drugs that their government shrinks, nurses, and attendants inflicted upon them. Given that reality, many were likely better off living on the streets, or with charitable relatives and other compassionate people, than remaining in those hellish places.

      Government has absolutely no business operating clinics, hospitals, half-way houses, or Anything else, least of all at everyone’s forced expense.

  • gary hillerich

    talking about the government making their goyim slaves go insane…
    take the amount of mercury IN THE FREE FLU SHOTS injected directly into your bloodstream bypassing the liver as well as other organs which would attempt to neutralize some of it before it hit the brain[blood barrier in the brain..
    the CDC states 2 parts mercury per BILLION is a safe dose and ANYTHING OVER THAT IS DANGEROUS!
    how about 50,000 parts mercury per BILLION?
    pretty unsafe ey?
    the shots are it #1 – because the government loves their slaves so much? or #2 because our juice rulers and banksters are collectively destroying the brains of Americans so they lose the ability to reason,think,or function NORMALLY!?
    can you say “MAD AS A HATTER”?!!
    look it up on WIKIPEDIA if your not old enough to remember the solvent that was once used to clean hats[that was loaded with mercury] or you are unfamiliar with Lewis Carroll’s fantasy adventure in the LSD psychedelic mushroom induced la-la land of “Alice in Wonderland”

  • SnakePlissken

    This is why the gubmint puts fluoride in the water. It is an anti-depressant. The Nazis gave it to prisoners in concentration camps during WWII to keep them calm. Do you really think that the gubmint cares about your dental hygiene?