It is a straw man to assert that physiological addiction trumps any considerations of culture? Once again, how do you argue that humans are immune from mind-altering narcotics because of culture? In what universe does that make any sense?
This is an utterly nonsensical exclusion of the role of nonphysiological factors in drug addiction.
It is nonsense to suggest that there ARE any other factors. Physiological addiction is the ONLY FACTOR. This is not some religion or fad we are talking about. This is direct chemical manipulation of the decision making process of the human mind.
After some huffing and puffing, you concede the point.
After some creative editing, you torture the sentence into saying what you want. I should not be surprised, because if you won't be honest with the facts, why would you be honest with what other people said?
There is no evidence that addiction was growing.
Where do you get these ideas? If there is no evidence that addiction was growing, HOW DID IT COME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE GOVERNMENT? If it wasn't growing, why didn't it remain quietly below the radar? Beyond that, this idea is completely demolished by looking at the evidence of China. Oh, but wait, you said that was all because they had a different culture, and not because Opium has a direct chemical lock with receptors in the human brain.
Here is your "No Evidence" that addiction was growing.
How am I even supposed to argue with you? You espouse notions that are patently absurd from my understanding of history and logic. You believe things that look to me like utter nonsense, and I simply don't see any common grounding of facts from which to carry on a discussion.