It just shows you can be an avid drug user and still make enormous contributions to STEM. It only takes n=1 to provide a counterexample to an absolute like "drugs never produce anything substantial."
That's quite the strawman, I don't know anyone who says that. And if they did I would ask them if they drank coffee or if they were aware that a good chunk of young professionals are on ADHD medication
Yes that is an absolute statement (and maybe an incorrect one!) but it's scope is psychedelics in relation to GEB, not all possible drugs in all possible situations
