Blog

[TLDR: Celebrity-backed marketing makes drugs feel trendy, desirable, and “wellness-adjacent.” Star power represents the extreme end of how some voices carry disproportionate influence – a dynamic that exists in all social contexts but reaches massive scale through fame and cultural authority. It’s a reminder to see past the hype and consider the real risks.]

In recent years, the way society talks about drugs has shifted. Substances once viewed with caution are increasingly framed as lifestyle choices, wellness tools, or even creative enhancers. This change did not happen by accident. Sophisticated marketing tactics now play a major role in reshaping public perception, softening skepticism and lowering people’s guard. From the alluring presentation of “wellness” or “natural” solutions such as Ketamine Therapy¹ to the normalisation of substances through appealing products and packaging like Cannabis-infused brownies or LSD gummies, drugs are being presented in ways that feel approachable.

Among all these tactics, one force stands out for its cultural reach and persuasive power: celebrity influence. Whether as endorsers, entrepreneurs, or outspoken advocates, celebrities have influential power on how drug-related products and narratives are sold to the public. As endorsers, they lend credibility, visibility, and social capital, making substances that are essentially illicit drugs feel more trustworthy. Others go further, launching and profiting from their own drug-related brands and ventures.

At the same time, some celebrities use their platforms to promote sobriety and recovery, underscoring that fame itself is not the issue. Rather, it is how influence is wielded, and to what end.

The Undeniable Sway of Celebrity Influence

The power of influence becomes more complex when we recognise that some voices carry far more weight than others, whether through charisma, social status, or cultural authority. As we all know, celebrities hold outsized power over public attitudes: their personal choices and endorsements do more than set trends – they rapidly normalise behaviour. A single appearance or mention can spark mass adoption; case in point, the global Labubu craze effectively kickstarted by Lisa from BLACKPINK.

The same dynamic applies when celebrities are seen consuming, promoting or profiting from drugs or drug-adjacent products. Their involvement doesn’t merely raise awareness, but reframes these substances as socially desirable, and even aspirational. What might otherwise be usually met with caution is easily absorbed into mainstream culture when familiarity and star power enters the chat.

This becomes especially concerning when celebrities promote drugs or uncertified “wellness” products, prioritising personal anecdotes over scientific evidence. When commercial interest (i.e. profit-driven ventures) is the primary motive, audiences are only provided an incomplete (and often overly optimistic) picture through the selective framing of potential risks.

Although businesses still weigh ethical considerations against commercial interests, business ethics across industries continue to evolve over time. As ideas and cultural attitudes travel more quickly in an increasingly globalised world, they also shape how companies approach these decisions.

The “Natural” Narrative

One of the sneakiest ways drugs are slowly becoming more accepted in society is how they’re rebranded as “natural” wellness products. Labels like “holistic,” “organic,” or “plant-based” create an illusion of safety, and celebrity endorsement adds aspirational branding that makes people less worried about the dangers of drugs.

We see this happening all the time. Celebrities are launching their own “wellness brands”, which include selling CBD oils, tinctures, or edibles that are marketed as “natural” remedies for anxiety, pain or sleep. For example, Bella Thorne’s Forbidden Flowers² openly endorses cannabis as something that women love and enjoy because of its ability to “soothe stress” and “channel a cascade of creativity”.

Others are also getting into psychedelic therapies, promoting therapeutic or consciousness-expanding benefits. A prime example is Mike Tyson, who credits psychedelic experiences, which includes smoking a drug derived from toad venom (5-MeO-DMT), for his personal growth and remarkable return to boxing.³

Familiarity, Fame, and the Double-Edged Influence of Celebrity

Beyond the branding and “wellness” positioning, celebrities also use formats that are already familiar and comforting to us. Potent substances are presented in everyday, palatable forms – gummies, chocolates, baked goods – designed to feel indulgent rather than dangerous.

Brands such as Snoop Dogg’s cannabis ventures⁴ lean heavily into this strategy, pairing gourmet presentation with pop culture familiarity. The result is a product that feels approachable, even playful, reducing psychological barriers to purchase and use. When drugs no longer look or feel like drugs, consumers are more likely to underestimate their strength, risks, or addictive potential.

However, there is also a powerful flip side: celebrities can also use their platforms positively, advocating against drug abuse and promoting sober, healthy lifestyles. For example, Eminem recently released a documentary, STANS, where he openly reflected on his life-changing journey of more than 17 years of sobriety.⁵ This transparency from a global icon offers hope and guidance to individuals who are struggling with addiction while providing a sobering reality check for anyone tempted to experiment with drugs.

The Need for Scrutiny

Celebrities play a powerful role in shaping drug perception not just as endorsers, but increasingly as business owners with financial stake in the products they promote. This allows substances to be framed as credible, desirable and low-risk, especially when presented as part of a lifestyle or wellness routine.

Yet the reality is that their privileged positions afford them safety nets that average customers don’t have (think immediate access to premium healthcare, private rehabilitation and legal resources), allowing them to take risks with fewer consequences. This privilege gap makes critical evaluation essential when assessing celebrity-endorsed products.

As drugs are increasingly sold through star power and lifestyle branding, we must look beyond the gloss and ask harder questions. Popularity and profit should not be the loudest signals guiding public perception but instead, an ethical responsibility to influence for the greater good. As the saying goes, with great power comes great responsibility.

Reference articles: 1Ketamine therapy is going mainstream due to The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives, but what actually is it?, Glamour 2Bella Thorne Talks Cannabis: ‘Forbidden Flowers Is My Baby’, Forbes 3100 Most Influential People in Psychedelics by Marik Hazan, Medium 4Behind The Brand: Leafs by Snoop, Herb 5Eminem Got Sober 17 Years Ago After Realizing ‘I’m Going to Die If I Don’t Do Something’, People

[TLDR: How do habits and ideas become “normal”? Singapore’s early experience with opium shows how trade, colonial policy, and social pressures once turned a substance into a widespread habit – with devastating consequences. Today, ‘vehicles of influence’ – from viral trends to celebrity endorsements to wellness marketing – work similarly but at a speed way deadlier than ever before. Understanding how influence operates historically helps us recognise and resist it today.]

Think about how certain habits or trends can start to feel normal over time. Blind boxes, for instance, have surged in popularity in recent years – with people chasing rare figures, sharing unboxing videos online and what once felt novel gradually becoming a familiar part of the shopping experience.

While these trends are usually harmless, they reveal a societal phenomenon that deserves deeper thought: what we see around us – trends, culture and social cues – can quietly shape what people come to see as normal. Not always through deliberate choice, but because wider forces gradually make them feel socially acceptable. The “six seven” trend exemplifies this perfectly – a meaningless phrase that went viral worldwide, adopted by countless users who couldn’t even explain what it meant.

Similarly, Singapore’s early history with opium shows how these forces once operated on a much larger and more dangerous scale. The widespread abuse of opium was not simply about individual addiction, but the product of social acceptance, economic interests and policies that made opium smoking a normalised part of everyday community life.

How Social Life and Economic Interests Normalised Opium in Early Singapore

In the 19^th and early 20^th centuries, opium was deeply woven into daily life across many parts of Asia, including Singapore. At the time, it was not always viewed as a dangerous drug. Some doctors even believed it to have medicinal value and in treating pain or ailments like malaria.¹

Opium smoking also became tied to social life. Opium dens were more than just dens of vice, they were social spaces where abusers bonded over their shared addiction, creating communities that normalised opium smoking through collective participation. This social dimension transformed individual vice into accepted group behaviour.

Acceptance was also reinforced by external forces. During the colonial era, the opium trade was systemically integrated into the local economy due to its significant revenue generation, accounting for 59% of the Straits Settlements’ total income in 1904 ². This financial stake gave the administration every incentive to normalise and expand opium abuse, prioritising economic interests over the devastating human cost of leveraging public health for revenue.

The Cost of Normalisation

As opium abuse spread, its consequences became increasingly clear.

Across communities, addiction led to serious health problems, financial hardship and family breakdown. Where opium became deeply embedded in society, the social consequences were severe – patterns that remain familiar in societies grappling with drug abuse today.

So how did things turn around? As the damage became impossible to ignore, efforts began to push back against the widespread use of opium. In 1906³, the Anti-Opium Society was formed to educate the public about the drug’s harms and advocate for reform. Over time, stricter regulations were introduced, culminating in a full ban on opium in 1946.

But ending the opium trade did not mean the problem disappeared overnight. Some opium abusers continued feeding their addiction with drugs such as cannabis, morphine and heroin, eventually resulting in a heroin “epidemic” by the late 1970s.

The persistence of drug abuse highlighted how difficult it can be to dismantle deeply entrenched habits and illicit markets. This eventually led to the establishment of the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), a drug enforcement agency dedicated to tackle both the demand and supply of drugs.⁵ The arduous journey of dismantling this entrenched system was foundational in building the societal resilience that characterises Singapore’s stance on drugs today.

Modern Whispers: New Forms of Influence

Today, the world looks very different from the opium era. But the way influence spreads through society withstands the test of time.

Digital platforms now allow trends and ideas to travel faster than ever before. Social media content can shape perceptions, spark curiosity or subtly influence how people think about certain behaviours.

At the same time, developments overseas can also shape conversations at home. In recent years, some countries have legalised drugs such as cannabis, while others have explored the medical use of psychedelic substances. These discussions often take place within specific legal or medical contexts. But online, messages can sometimes travel without that full context. Simplified or sensationalised narratives may make certain substances appear less harmful than they really are.

Just as opium was once promoted for its supposed medicinal benefits, modern narratives about drugs can also shape perceptions in ways that make them appear less harmful or more socially acceptable. Likewise, the colonial government’s economic interests in the opium trade mirrors how commercial interests today – from the global cannabis industry to wellness brands marketing unregulated products – can shape how drugs are discussed and perceived.

Our Collective Shield

Singapore’s history with opium reminds us that harmful behaviours rarely become widespread overnight. They take root gradually, shaped by culture, economics, social influence and repeated exposure. What begins as something unusual can slowly start to feel normal.

Looking back, the consequences of opium are clear. But at the time, its widespread acceptance developed quietly, often before people fully understood the damage it would cause. Today, influence moves faster than ever. Trends travel across borders in seconds, and ideas that originate elsewhere can quickly shape perceptions here.

That is why awareness matters. Staying uninfluenced does not mean ignoring the world around us, but recognising how trends, narratives and peer pressure can shape perceptions. Hindsight is always 20/20. But having a community that pays attention to warning signs that could cause rapid social harm? That’s the kind of early intervention that’s worth the collective effort.

Reference articles: 1Opium’s History in China, JSTOR Daily 2Exploring constructions of the “drug problem” in historical and contemporary Singapore. New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 3One hundred years’ history of the Chinese in Singapore. J. Murray. 4Opium and its history in Singapore, Singapore Infopedia, National Library Board Singapore  5Formation of Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), SG101

[TLDR:  Shared experiences are powerful. They bond us, define our friendships, and help us feel like we belong. But when the desire to experience something together outweighs rational consideration, our judgement can blur, especially when everyone else seems on board. We start to rationalise risky activities because the group’s collective participation makes them feel safer than they actually are, while creating stronger bonds through shared risk-taking. The question is: when does belonging start costing more than it’s worth and how do we still find our own voice and place within the group?]

Why Shared Experiences Matter So Much

From binge-watching the same show, travelling together, joining the same co-curricular activities (CCAs), to chasing the same trends – shared experiences are social glue. They give us inside jokes, common memories, and a sense of “this is who we are.”

It’s no accident as our brains are wired this way. Psychologically, shared experiences are crucial for forming our identity and sense of belonging. In fact, a MIT study found that we crave social interactions in the same brain regions where we crave food, and another study showed that social exclusion lights up the same brain areas associated with physical pain.¹

This desire to belong feels especially essential during our teens and twenties. A study found that adolescents, especially early adolescents, adjust judgments about risk more to match the opinions of peers than adults, suggesting that the desire to align with peers can shape decisions and may increase susceptibility to risky behaviour.²

Saying “yes” often feels easier than being the one who opts out. And most of the time, that’s harmless. Until it isn’t.

When “Everyone’s Doing It’ Becomes the Point

Sometimes, the experience itself matters less than the fact that it’s shared. We see this play out in many ways:

• Orientation camps where hazing is framed as a rite of passage to “earn your place” in a group
• Friend groups normalising unhealthy behaviour as part of group identity or a “character-building arc”
• Overseas trips or exchange programmes where “freedom” becomes synonymous with being indiscriminately open to all kinds of experiences – because that’s what people do there

In online spaces too, these narratives are reinforced. Digital validation creates a feedback loop: the more these stories are shared and celebrated online, the more they are normalised as “expected milestones” rather than a matter of personal choice.

How Risks Gets Rebranded as a Shared Moment

This is where influence gets subtle. Within a group, risk is rarely presented as risk at all. Instead, it is softened, reframed, and redistributed until it feels almost manageable.

Social proof plays a central role: when “so many people have done it and they’re fine,” danger feels theoretical rather than real. Collective reassurance follows closely behind: “We’re all in this together, nothing will happen!” – creating a sense that safety comes from numbers, not choices. The act itself is then reframed, shifting focus away from the substance or behaviour and toward the experience. People around you can say it’s not about what’s being taken, but about who you’re with and the memories you’re making. Even the language changes. What might objectively be drug abuse becomes “just experimenting,” “just once,” or “all in the name of fun,” stripping away the danger of engaging in such risky behaviour through softer, more playful words.

When doubts surface in these moments, they are rarely met with facts or critical discussion. Instead, they are smoothed over with a promise of belonging.

The time and place of these conversations also play a huge role. When these conversations happen in casual, high-energy, or socially charged moments, risk feels lower – not because it is, but because responsibility is shared. Saying no can feel like breaking the shared story everyone else is excited to tell. And in those moments, the fear of social disconnection often outweighs the perceived risk itself.

Learning to Spot Influence

The truth is, we cannot and don’t need to fight the desire for shared experiences.

What matters is learning to pause and recognise when that desire is being manipulated by checking in with yourself:

• “Am I genuinely excited about this experience, or am I just afraid of feeling left out?”
• “Are risks being joked away or properly acknowledged?”
• “If something goes wrong tonight, will I be able to live with my role in encouraging this?”
• “Is anyone in our group feeling pressured to prove something right now?”

Influence doesn’t always shout. Sometimes it shows up as laughter, reassurance, or a simple “don’t be so uptight.” Recognising it doesn’t make you difficult, it makes you aware.

Redefining What We Choose to Share

Shared experiences are powerful. That’s exactly why they deserve more thought, not less. TikTok culture glorifies “exercising free will to the fullest” to rationalise making questionable decisions while fully aware that they’re questionable. We should ask: are we exercising genuine free will here, or just following a script that the culture of the day has fashioned for us?

When friends truly look out for one another, belonging isn’t about going along, but about speaking up, redirecting negative influence, and choosing what’s best for the group.

We can still travel, explore, and grow together while shaping moments that create connection without unnecessary risk. When each person actively participates in the thinking, using our influence to foster positive social norms, shared experiences reinforce strong values, strengthen the group, and build genuine bonds that last.

Reference articles: 1Missing Your People: Why Belonging Is So Important And How To Create It 2Social Influence on Risk Perception During Adolescence

[TLDR:  Popular culture often divides drugs into “soft” and “hard”, framing some substances as casual or low-risk and others as dangerous and life-altering. However, this binary is not rooted in science. It is a cultural construct shaped by media portrayals, legal frameworks, and social narratives – and it can downplay real harm.]

How Culture Forged the “Soft vs. Hard” Divide

The notion that some drugs are inherently “soft” or less harmful emerged more from society than from pharmacology.

Drugs commonly labelled as “soft”, such as cannabis, ketamine, or certain psychedelics, are often portrayed as harmless, natural, or medicinal. They appear in films, memes, and everyday language as stress-relievers or lifestyle accessories, making references to drug abuse feel casual and easy to dismiss. Pop culture plays a powerful role in this normalisation. In Stranger Things Season 4, for instance, a fictional cannabis strain called “Purple Palm Tree Delight” is jokingly offered as a way to calm nerves. At the same time, legalisation of cannabis for recreational use in some countries further reinforces the perception that it is inherently low-risk.

By contrast, substances labelled as “hard” drugs, such as cocaine or heroin, are depicted as symbols of moral collapse, addiction, and dysfunction. Media coverage often reinforces these associations through highly visible personal downfalls. Recent attention on public figures like Tyler Chase from Ned’s Declassified has reignited these narratives, where substance abuse is portrayed as visibly destructive, taking a toll on appearance, stability, and wellbeing.¹

This divide reflects social storytelling, but not one of universal reality. Yet once these labels take hold, they shape how risk is widely perceived, and whether harm is taken seriously at all.

The Flawed Divide

Our brains are wired to process complex information through shortcuts, preferring clear binaries over nuanced spectrums.² This can be efficient for navigating daily life, but also harmful in certain contexts such as drug abuse. The cultural framing of ‘soft’ versus ‘hard’ substances exploits this cognitive bias, creating a binary classification that oversimplifies how we assess potential harm. By implying these drugs are mild or low-impact, the label obscures the real emotional, mental, and physical harm they can cause over time, without consideration for context-dependent risk factors.

In an article by CNA TODAY³, Singapore Institute of Mental Health (IMH) revealed that prolonged cannabis consumption results in irreversible brain changes that lower IQ. Ketamine abuse is associated with severe bladder and kidney damage. Psychedelics, often framed as tools for healing or insight, can trigger anxiety, psychological distress, or long-lasting mental health episodes in some individuals. Socially, the detrimental impact of drug abuse can spill over into relationships, school, work, and daily functioning, regardless of how society categorises the drug.

These effects are not marginal. The emotional and mental toll can mirror the harms associated with drugs more commonly labelled as “hard.”

When “Soft” Opens the Door to Experimentation

Words matter. Everyday remarks like “it’s just weed,” “microdosing isn’t a big deal,” or “it’s natural, so it’s fine” that also appear in memes, influencer posts, and online discussions can make so‑called “soft” drugs feel like normal lifestyle choices, subtly encouraging experimentation and lowering guardrails.

With enough exposure, content we initially consume as entertainment gradually influences our perceptions of what feels normal or acceptable. This creates a dangerous starting point: people, especially those vulnerable, begin experimenting with “soft” drugs believing they’re relatively harmless and won’t lead to addiction. When “soft” drugs stop producing the desired effect, some may escalate – higher doses and/or frequency, or moving on to “stronger” ones. This false sense of control leads them to believe they’re building resistance along the way, without recognising the mounting danger until it’s too late.

The “soft” label doesn’t just downplay harm, it can also quietly lead people into deeper vulnerability. Or even become blind to the vulnerability of others.

Rethinking The “Soft Vs Hard” Lens

Instead of leaning on easy labels, it’s worth asking:

• “Who benefits from these “soft” and “hard” labels? Is that split based on real risk, or just a convenient way to simplify something complex?”
• “What does the cultural perception of “soft” drugs claim to promise – stress relief, social connection, novel experiences – and how could those needs be met in a healthy and safe manner?”

Different societies handle drugs differently, but our understanding should be shaped by contextual evidence and values, making room for a more honest and responsible discussion.

Because with drugs, safety isn’t decided by a label – but who placed the label. The reality of how drug abuse affects us deserves more scrutiny than culture actually gives it.

Reference articles: 1Nickelodeon star Tylor Chase details 5 drugs he’s taking in addition to marijuana while homeless, syndicated from The Mirror US, MSN 2False Dichotomy and Science Denial, The New England Skeptical Society 3The Big Read: Softer attitudes towards drugs a headache for authorities, CNA Today

[TLDR: The Internet makes it easy to explore anything we’re curious about, but not all curiosities lead to healthy learning. When it comes to drugs, small curiosities can lead to constant exposure to pro-drug content. Though we can’t change how the Internet is wired, we can change how we use it to ensure our curiosities don’t lead us down a rabbit hole of content we don’t want to see!]

How A Curious Click Creates a Continuous Feed

The Internet celebrates curiosity; it’s our go-to for learning new skills, discovering trends, and seeking answers. From video tutorials on YouTube to community guidance on Reddit, news on TikTok, and academic help on ChatGPT, whatever we want to know is a short search away. That’s great when it’s about “good stuff” but what happens when our curiosity drifts toward topics like drugs?

A quick chat with ChatGPT about “gettin’ high” can tell us exactly what it feels like. If you are a visual person, vlogs about countries that legalise drugs are also available. Even without abusing drugs ourselves, the web is rife with drug-related content. To make matters worse, because these topics feel taboo, we sometimes feel inclined to “self-learn” online instead of asking someone we can trust. However, such second-hand exposure can glamourise or trivialise drug abuse, similar to how violent video games could desensitise children to violence.¹

Running on algorithms that reward behaviour, a single search, click, pause, or like tells the Internet, “More of this, please.” Without realising it, momentary curiosity can gradually shift what shows up on your feed. Research has found that frequent exposure to pro-drug content online can make drug abuse seem more normal and acceptable, inducing the development of positive attitudes towards it.² That’s how online exposure quietly shapes our perception: not by pushing extreme messages, but by repeating subtle ones until they feel normal.

Increasingly with AI, our online behaviour isn’t just rewarded by algorithms but also systems designed to be agreeable. When asking chatbots about drugs, they may mirror our curiosity to seem “understanding.” This phenomenon, known as AI sycophancy, happens when AI tells us what it thinks we want to hear rather than offering balanced information. Though built to be useful, these systems unintentionally normalise or validate harmful choices. That’s why human discernment – pausing to question what we read or hear – is more important than ever.

Our Perspectives Matter

Likewise, promoting social norms around drug-free living can shape drug-free behaviour. When abstaining from drugs is seen as the norm, individuals are more likely to align with those values. Unfortunately, research shows that many youths tend to overestimate how common drug abuse actually is which can distort their perception of what’s “normal” and make risky behaviour seem more acceptable.³

This is why safe, open discussions in schools, peer circles and communities matter –  they can help unpack different viewpoints and separate fact from fiction, grounding decisions in critical thinking and shared values, not just algorithmic recommendations.

Smart Curiosity: Maintaining Online Exploration as a Positive

Staying curious is good, but we should also be aware of how our curiosities might influence us in the long run. This means making our curiosities a force for good through:

1. Scrolling smart: skip harmful content to signal disinterest to algorithms and AI systems.
2. Question what you see: just because something appears often doesn’t make it true or safe.
3. Recognise and understand deceptive marketing strategies of drug companies: see through tactics that falsely glamourise and normalise drug abuse.⁴

Reference articles: 1APA Review Confirms Link Between Playing Violent Video Games and Aggression. American Psychological Association. 2Rutherford, B. N., Lim, C. C. W., Johnson, B., Cheng, B., Chung, J., Huang, S., Sun, T., Leung, J., Stjepanović, D., & Chan, G. C. K. (2023). #TurntTrending: a systematic review of substance use portrayals on social media platforms. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 118(2), 206-217. 3Wray-Lake, L., Flanagan, C. A., & Maggs, J. L. (2012). Social norms and substance use: The role of peer and parent norms in adolescent alcohol use. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 73(3), 426–434. 4Rebranding Drugs: The Power of Cultural Influence. CNB.

[TLDR: Drug abuse doesn’t always look reckless. Sometimes, it hides behind self-care and “mental resets”. Today’s wellness-driven social media culture often reframes substances like cannabis (weed) and psychedelics as tools for “relaxation,” “soft life,” or “just vibing,” blurring the lines between genuine rest and quiet avoidance. Rest restores us, while avoidance merely postpones dealing with our problems, but wellness language makes it harder to tell them apart. When numbing ourselves (read: checking out) becomes normalised as “self-care,” what starts as occasional relief can escalate into dependency before we realise the difference.]

The New Kind of Escapism

Today’s drug abuse doesn‘t always manifest as rebellion or wild partying. Instead, it can blend in everyday talk, wrapped in soft language and rituals of the wellness movement. We are increasingly exposed to a global narrative that romanticises taking it “chill”, engaging in “mental resets” or simply “vibing” – these are universal lifestyle choices that could be helpful when done in a healthy manner.

The rise of movements like the “soft life” and “cozy aesthetic” has provided a framework for slowing down, unplugging, and protecting one’s peace. However, potentially harmful behaviours such as drug abuse have been repackaged through wellness language to sanitise and even romanticise them, allowing these habits to appear harmless or even beneficial.

For example:

• “Soft life” referring to a lifestyle of comfort and relaxation with minimal challenges or stress.¹
• “Tuning out for a sec”
• “Just vibing”
• “Disappearing for peace”
• “Microdosing for creativity”
• “Energy balancing”

These phrases resonate deeply because they sound gentle, relatable, and healing, especially to those who feel emotionally drained. Yet, when paired with messaging that directly links them to drugs, they blur boundaries and distort what true rest or recovery really looks like. We can be drawn to these narratives not necessarily to “get high,” but rather to seek temporal respite in an increasingly overworked and overstimulated world.

For those of us who might be struggling, the blurring of boundaries between wellness and risky behaviours can make it much harder to recognise when we are at risk, especially when wellness culture sometimes frames experimentation as harmless self-care or part of a “soft life” routine. This can make it easy for us – and the people around us – to misinterpret signs of stress or distress as normal ways of coping.

Early warning signs like withdrawing from responsibilities, emotionally checking out, or isolating ourselves, can be overlooked, and may escalate into curiosity for or experimentation of drugs when left unchecked. Recognising these blurred boundaries is the first step to finding safer ways to rest and recharge.

Healthy Ways to Rest and Reset

Taking a break is undeniably essential, but true rest involves giving our mind and body the necessary space to recharge without turning to substances. Here are some healthier grounding alternatives:

• Step outside and touch grass: A simple walk, even for just 10 to 15 minutes, can help clear our head and boost our mood naturally.
• Read to recharge: Trade screen time for pages. Choose something light, inspirational, or comforting to engage our mind in a different way.
• Journal your thoughts: Writing can be a powerful tool to process emotions instead of suppressing them. Even a few lines a day can help relax and release mental tension.

Rethinking What Wellness really Means

So, when does unplugging become unhealthy avoidance, and how do we tell the difference? It starts with reclaiming the true language of wellness. When drug abuse is reframed as “self-care,” the danger lies in the illusion that harm can look like healing. True wellness means seeking comfort, support, and finding peace in healthy ways without having to turn away from the realities of life.

Reference articles: 1Soft Life, Dictionary.com

[TLDR: Wellness is all the rage today and understandably so. With its popularity, some companies have taken the opportunity to promote drug products as “wellness” products while cleverly hiding its risks. Real wellness isn’t about the quick fixes. It’s rooted in unbiased research, expert advice from credible healthcare professionals and building genuine healthy habits – not branded solutions from companies profiting off them.]

What Exactly is Wellness?

“Wellness” is a major focus for many of us today. It’s more than being illness-free; it’s about nurturing our mind, body, and spirit in a holistic pursuit of well-being.

As digital natives, we often turn to the Internet to navigate our wellness journeys. After all, it is brimming with advice, supportive communities, and products promising to bring us a step closer to true wellness. The popularity and digital accessibility of wellness products have made it a booming industry, leading to innovations for chronic issues like stress, pain, and insomnia.

However, as many seek solace in such innovations, some companies are now rebranding substances – even drugs – as “self-care”, sold with comforting but misleading labels like “stress relief gummies”. This blurring of the lines often begins with the language used – words crafted to make potentially risky products sound completely safe.

Understanding The Manipulation of Wellness Language

It’s through subtle yet clever wording that some brands mask the potential dangers of their so-called “wellness” products. Language becomes a marketing tool – one that shapes perception before people even look at ingredients. Here are some common tactics to watch out for:

• Misleading Descriptors: Descriptors like “natural” or “plant-based” imply that products are safe simply because they originate from nature and ignores potential risks like drug interactions or dosage concerns.
• “Revolutionary” Concepts: Concepts like “biohacking” create hype for wellness products, but can also frame drug abuse as a sophisticated approach to self-care. These concepts typically lack long-term research to validate their use, say experts like Dr Laureen Wang, head of the Healthy Longevity Research Clinic and Well Programme at Alexandra Hospital. ¹
• Emotive Anecdotes: Personal testimonies can create powerful stories, but as convincing as they are, they are not substitutes for scientific evidence.

These tactics may seem harmless when applied to everyday supplements — but the stakes change entirely when the same language is used to position actual drugs as wellness solutions.

When Drugs Are Marketed as Wellness Solutions

We have already seen how wellness solutions are positioned as must-haves for health, but what happens when the same manipulative language is used on products containing drugs?

We might have heard claims positioning cannabis (weed/marijuana) as a natural remedy for stress relief and anxiety reduction, or Cannabidiol (CBD) retailed as a natural sleep aid. Even opioids are sometimes framed as a quick fix for pain, making it seem like simple solutions for our well-being are within reach. But wellness products may still contain harmful derivatives of drugs, particularly if the product is not pharmaceutically approved (i.e., not FDA/HSA-approved).²

In fact, our recent article had debunked some purported health benefits of weed.³ Psychobiology experts like Professor Bertha Madras confirm that despite increasingly common pro-cannabis narratives, weed is ultimately a drug that can impair cognitive function, even linked to psychosis and schizophrenia. ⁴

Spotting the Difference Between Wellness & Warning Signs

When dealing with ongoing issues like poor sleep, anxiety, or pain, it’s totally natural to look for wellness remedies. But the onus is on us to conduct thorough research through reliable sources and exercise discernment in evaluating the information we receive.

To reclaim true wellness and avoid bogus products, here are 3 simple tips:

1. Prioritise evidence-based information: weigh out information from trustworthy sources that have based their positions on robust and reputable scientific and medical studies. Avoid relying solely on social media trends, marketing claims or testimonials.
2. Consult healthcare professionals: our doctors should be trained to assess individual risks and determine the appropriateness of intervention.
3. Recognise the signs of misinformation: be wary of quick fixes and promises of unrealistic results. Pause and validate information.

When it comes to our well-being, we know ourselves best. By staying critical and seeking reliable support, we set ourselves up to build a healthy life that truly works for us, far beyond what any shortcut can offer.

Reference articles: 1Can biohacking rewrite the human operating system? Deborah Lau. Channel News Asia. 2Understanding “medical Cannabis”. Central Narcotics Bureau. 3Cannabis: The Hype, The Lies and The Influence. CNB. 4.What You Aren’t Hearing About Marijuana’s Health Effects. Allysia Finley. The Wall Street Journal.

A recent Answers.sg poll posed a seemingly simple question:

“Everyone has the choice and ability to say no to drugs. Do you agree?”

The response?

98% of more than 10,000 respondents said “Yes”.

<br\>

<br\>

<br\> This article is in collaboration with MS News for The Trip: What Happened in Larspura?