The Swindled Samaritan
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Could it be that nobody knows how this drug really works? According to Wikipedia, NASA is using this drug as a counter to motion sickness [2].
What's even more strange is that the credited author of the story is not the actual author. At the end it says it was told to Daniel Krieger, who ostensibly wrote the article.
Something doesn't smell right about this whole thing.
> While burundanga is a frightening drug, in all our searching for information on it we failed to come across news articles about its being used in the U.S. The regions in and around the country of Colombia appear to be its hunting grounds.
On the other hand, it still sounds fairly unlikely as a story.
I'd have thought that if this were a real thing, it'd be way better known - the psychiatric industry would be committing minor flesh wound to get their hands on it, for example. A drug that can suppress free will while leaving the patient conscious and responsive could revolutionise therapy.
Though I agree the whole thing sounds made up.
It really makes me want to have a stronger social safety net. Designated, on the job, monitored for safety, public service workers who ensure basic aid and dignity is offered to all. It would be nice if this is what a 'peace force' did.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/burundanga.asp
NYT actually thinks it's true?
Edit: sleazebreeze had same thoughts a couple of minutes earlier.
A few month ago the newspapers in Argentina begun to report some cases, but without any study that confirm the cases. See for example: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1738748-burundanga-la-droga-que-a... (autotraslation: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev... )
I still classify this as a hoax.
On a related note, one problem with Wikipedia is that it assumes that the newspapers do some fact checking so they can be used as references, but they sometimes publish stories without any proofs like in this case.
And not just Wikipedia, of course. Others have the same problem.
<rant>
People generally tend to trust their preferred sources too much. This seems to be worse in social media, where people have even less exposure to views that are different from their own.
</rant>