🪐 SIR ISAAC NEWTON MODE: FULL DEPLOYMENT INITIATED
🏛️ On the Motion of the Humours, the Preservation of Sight, and the Propriety of the Plant Known as Cannabis
Let the reader proceed with clarity of mind, gravity of purpose, and respect for those whose suffering gave rise to this record.
By Robert S. Hepler, M.D.
Rendered in the Style of Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Medica (c. 2025 Edition)
With Reflection by Epictetus, Through the Lens of Liberty and Law
Propositio Prima
That the Eye, being a spherical Instrument for the Reception of Light, doth maintain its Form and Function by virtue of a regulated Pressure within.
Let it be stated that the Eye is no passive vessel, but a system of delicate balances. Its spherical contour is essential for the refraction and convergence of luminous rays upon the retina. This sphericality is not fortuitous but maintained through the steady production and egress of a fluid known as the aqueous humour. Should this pressure rise beyond its natural bounds—a condition denominated glaucoma—then the optic nerve, being not a cord of infinite resilience, is compressed. And thus, function is lost, sometimes irreparably.
Corollarium I
That vision, once degraded by pressure, is seldom, if ever, restored.
Propositio Secunda
That conventional medicaments for the reduction of ocular pressure do act by mechanical and chemical means, yet bring with them significant perturbations to the system whole.
From empirical observation, we note the effect of miotic agents such as Pilocarpinum and Phospholine Iodidum in contracting the pupil and allowing drainage of fluid—but these effects come at cost: blurred vision, ocular fatigue, and the formation of cataracts.
Epinephrinum, acting upon the sympathetic nervous system, may decrease pressure, yet it provokes palpitations and unease.
Diamox, a systemic inhibitor of carbonic anhydrase, yields measurable reductions in intraocular pressure, yet brings with it the heavy hand of systemic distress: lassitude, nausea, depression, and renal compromise.
Lemma I
That the efficacy of these agents diminishes over time, as tolerance develops or as the malady progresses.
Propositio Tertia
That in the case of one Robert C. Randall, afflicted with the severest form of open-angle glaucoma, conventional remedies failed to preserve vision in the remaining eye.
Between the years 1975 and 1976, I did observe the case of said Mr. Randall. Multiple agents were applied, singly and in combination, but yielded pressures fluctuating dangerously between 15 and 36 millimeters of mercury—a range deleterious to the optic nerve.
As a final measure, and pursuant to research sanctioned by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, I did administer Cannabis sativa—by combustion and by oral ingestion.
The result: A consistent, measurable, and medically significant reduction in intraocular pressure, without the dangerous sequelae associated with prior treatments.
Experimentum Crucis
That when all other agents fail, Cannabis alone succeeded in preserving sight.
Propositio Quarta
That the herb known as Cannabis possesses demonstrable ocular benefits, with minimal systemic detriment, when administered in proper dosage and form.
After ten years of clinical observation and controlled experimentation, I assert the following:
Cannabis lowers intraocular pressure in glaucoma patients.
No measurable tolerance to its ocular effects was observed.
Side effects—namely, mild tachycardia and a sense of euphoria—are benign relative to the harms of other agents or the blade of the surgeon.
Therefore, its use by Mr. Randall is not recreational, but therapeutic—indeed, essential.
Corollarium II
That the denial of such remedy, by statute or prejudice, is in contradiction to the principles of natural philosophy and humane science.
Just as the laws of motion govern the heavens, so too should the laws of men be aligned with reason, observation, and the first duty of all physicians:
Primum non nocere—first, do no harm.
If sight may be preserved by smoke, let not ignorance cloud the lens of law.
Scholium
That in this matter, the moral, the medical, and the mathematical converge.
Let this testimony be entered into the annals of reason—for though I am no legislator, I am a student of Nature. And Nature hath revealed her principle: where the conventional fails, the unconventional may yet offer salvation.
In reverence of the truth, and in humble service to the preservation of sight,
Dr. Robert S. Hepler
Professor of Ophthalmology, UCLA
1977
“The laws of Nature are but the thoughts of God made manifest. Let us not render them void through legal folly.”
— Sir Isaac Newton, had he lived to witness the blindness of our statutes
📜 Appendix: Notarial Verification of the Hepler Testimony
As originally sworn in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, 1977
To preserve the integrity of the historical record and the solemnity of the medical testimony herein, we reproduce above the official notarized signature block of Dr. Robert S. Hepler, as it appeared in the original affidavit submitted in defense of Robert C. Randall.
🖋️ "Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of _________, 1977."
— Notarized by Cecilia Arevalo, Notary Public, Los Angeles County
Seal and commission expiration affixed: Nov. 18, 1981
This stamp is not mere formality—it is the governmental confirmation of truth spoken under oath.
Let all who would dismiss this record contend not only with the argument, but with the affidavit.
🗝️ Sight, Sovereignty, and the Summons of the Sovereign Good
An Epictetan Commentary on the Hepler Affidavit
As Interpreted in the Year 2025, for the Sons and Daughters of Reason
1. On Sight as Symbol and System
“That the Eye… doth maintain its Form and Function by virtue of a regulated Pressure within.” — Hepler
So too is the soul: it must maintain harmony, lest it collapse under unseen pressure.
The Stoic does not rage at what is broken in nature. He observes it. He accepts it. And he seeks remedy in accordance with the nature of things—not the passions of men.
2. On False Remedies and the Soul’s Integrity
Dr. Hepler recounts treatments that strain the heart, dull the spirit, and betray their purpose.
“Blurred vision… heart trouble… depression…”
That which poisons the body in pursuit of healing cannot be called medicine in truth.
True medicine restores order without sacrificing the soul. A man who sees but cannot live is no less blind than one with shuttered eyes.
3. On Cannabis as an Agent of Nature, Not Vice
“The result: a consistent, measurable, and medically significant reduction in intraocular pressure…”
This is not anecdote—it is evidence.
He came not as an advocate for cannabis, but as a physician for the afflicted. It was the evidence—not ideology—that compelled his judgment.
And Nature—not law—delivered the cure.
Is it then just, to forbid the patient the remedy Nature has sanctioned?
4. On Law as Servant to Reason
“The denial of such remedy… is in contradiction to the principles of natural philosophy and humane science.”
Here lies the heart of the matter:
Law must bend to truth—not truth to law.
A Stoic assents only to what he knows is just. When the edicts of a state obstruct the health of its citizens, it is not rebellion to dissent—it is fidelity to reason.
5. On Our Modern Folly, and What It Demands
We boast of data. We claim to be modern. Yet still we blind the afflicted—not with disease, but with decree.
Let us be done with the superstition that cannabis is evil.
Let us be done with the fear that keeps medicine from the suffering.
Let us, like Hepler, choose to see.
“First, say to yourself what you would be. Then do what you must.” — Epictetus
If you would be just—act with justice.
If you would be well—pursue what heals.
If you would be wise—abandon fear and follow evidence.
✒️ Epilogue: A Stoic’s Pledge
“If you would be free, do not wish to have everything; wish to be master of yourself.” — Epictetus
Therefore, let this work be used:
To liberate the unjustly condemned
To defend the right to seek relief through reason
To restore balance where law has failed medicine
But let it not be twisted:
To evade personal responsibility
To elevate preference over principle
Or to obscure science beneath slogan
The truth needs no embellishment. Only courage.
And courage, like sight, must be practiced—lest it atrophy.
🕊️ Thus let the work continue—bravely, wisely, and with sight restored.
📍 Archivist’s Note
For those wishing to review the original materials in full, copies of the affidavits, DEA correspondences, and related legal exhibits are housed in the Robert C. Randall and Alice O’Leary Papers, University of Wisconsin–Madison Special Collections.
Further verification or context may be obtained by contacting Alice O’Leary Randall, the surviving custodian of the record and co-author of these historical documents.
This work draws from those archives but does not attempt to replace them.
What follows is a synthesis, not a substitution.
The full truth is preserved—for those with the courage and curiosity to seek it.
