One of my relatives is a psychiatrist who sees a lot of drug abusers in his practice. He has come up with a Paleo meta-rule: If your heritage has no evolutionary history of using [fill_in_recreational_drug_here], don't do it.
As he treats an Amerindian population with a propensity for severe alcohol abuse and has seen the horrific damage first-hand, his quote to me was:
Man, these folks should be doing peyote or whatever drug it was they were doing before the Europeans showed up, because alcohol's ill effects are magnified by a orders of magnitude versus what you see in people of European heritage.
Make sense to you? Or total BS?
BTW what this implies -- IF true -- is that inverse would also would be true. European-Americans might be well-served from partaking in drugs such as peyote, marijuana, tobacco as those are unlikely to have been present in their evolutionary history. Maybe they should stick to alcohol...
The answers are devolving into a discussion about how the Amerindians suffered terribly (to say the very least) at the hands of European colonists. This is without question: true and lamentable.
However, this is not the topic of the question. The question is, can one create a meta-rule about recreational drugs and people's heritages such that it leads to better outcomes?!
and flip to page 83.