The issue is that those artists (vincent VF, pollack) were great artists who just happen to be drug users. It's purely correlation. I have a suspicion that they would still be great artists without the drugs.
If youre assertion that drug use is linked to creativity, then why arent millions and millions of people creating great works of art? You cant pick two artists and say, "Well, their creativity is linked to their drug use." Doesn't work that way.
And vice versa, maybe the others would have been better with drugs.

Also, quite the spurious correlation there, I mean great works of art are how we are measuring creativity? those people are poor examples all around, I simply used them because TA did, they are extraordinary people, basing anything off them would be a poor choice imo.
My assertion is that specific drugs are linked to higher creativity as they alter perception. Hallucinogens specifically, also, creativity is kinda hard to define as it is a nebulous idea, is it simply creation of novel ideas?