If you are interested in learning more about psychedelics, and their context in 2018, I'd recommend UC Berkeley Professor Michael Pollan's latest book "How to Change Your Mind". It is a really nice, easy to read primer on the topic, and his experience with psychedelics. He approaches the topic with a scientific yet accessible tone, and he asks and answers lots of good questions. Pollan interviews many of the people mentioned in this New York Times article.
Go put your name on the list at your local library!
Definitely a cool dude. I've watched his cooking show on Netflix a couple of days ago, his philosophy impressed me and I've found out about his books too. Didn't know he also is a Berkeley professor.
I second this recommendation. it's a well thought out and well-organized exposé of this topic. Could be tightened up a bit, but the prose makes a pretty inpenetrable topic quite accessible
I just finished the book and would recommend it to those who are interested in the long history of psychedelic research and the future of it. However, I think most of what I took from the book can be captured on the few podcasts he's been interviewed on. Specifically his chats with Tyler Cowen [1] and Kevin Rose [2] were particularly interesting.
I don't know how the government can claim with a straight face that these substances have no known medical use, and are harmful. That's the criteria I think for Schedule 1, but there are clearly known uses for them, and the harm is relatively low.
I really don't like thinking, "the government just wants to ban dangerous thoughts" but mushrooms - really? Compared to alcohol they are so incredibly safe.
Institutional inertia is one hell of a drug. Even putting aside the sinister motivations people are often very reluctant to change even in the face of major evidence - especially if it undermines their self worth to admit being wrong.
Institutional inertia reminds me of the process of indoctrination, learned through memorization and not through experience and critical thinking. It's true too, that this process can result in good people with no sinister motivations falling into certain traps.
I do think the government knows that they are harmful.
The main fear I think comes from the majority of people who are not that bright and can not cognitively handle the type of thinking that comes from psychedelic use.
Imagine if you just listened to the gov your whole life and then after taking psychedelics u start questioning what is good/bad , what is true/false.
Personally I'd be willing to risk open-mindedness spreading to people in society that "might not be able to handle it" rather than slide further into a dystopia where we're kept stupid on purpose because we might be harder to control if we thought for ourselves.
I have a friend who used to be quite involved in the ayahuasca church. He now knows five people from the church who have committed suicide. The fifth just hung himself last weekend. He was 25, and was the son of one of the priestesses in the church. Spent his childhood in the church, being fed ayahuasca regularly.
One of them was also a friend of mine. By the time he killed himself he was clinically insane and should have been hospitalized, sadly the services didn't get to him in time.
I realise this is about psylocibin, but I think its still appropriate here. Psychedelics are no joke.
I think it is a selection effect, it takes a special kind of person to want to do ayahuasca all the time. Or any more mind altering drug. Normal well adjusted people don't use drugs to excess. Maybe a little here and there.
Do you think that heavy psychedelic use is what caused them to commit suicide, or do you think that these people had their own inner demons, which they tried to combat with psychedelics?
In my experience a lot of people with their own issues are drawn to psychedelics as a means managing their demons. In the right setting, they can be incredibly healing. However, for some people, psychedelics become a means of coping, tripping becomes their default state and reality becomes too much for them.
Lifetime psychedelic use is associated with reduced suicidality.
"Lifetime classic psychedelic use was associated with a significantly reduced odds of past month psychological distress (weighted odds ratio (OR)=0.81 (0.72-0.91)), past year suicidal thinking (weighted OR=0.86 (0.78-0.94)), past year suicidal planning (weighted OR=0.71 (0.54-0.94)), and past year suicide attempt (weighted OR=0.64 (0.46-0.89)), whereas lifetime illicit use of other drugs was largely associated with an increased likelihood of these outcomes."
Psilocybin and LSD are on their way to legalization, but the enormous host of compounds in their phenethylamine family might not be so lucky due to a systematic problem with U.S. drug scheduling policy. This family shows enormous potential for treating some of our trickiest mental health / public health problems (addiction, depression, anxiety, OCD, and the list goes on) but the policy for newly discovered phenethylamines and tryptamines seems to be "Schedule first, worry about it later." This slows scientific research down dramatically, research that we need in order to even know in the first place whether a compound might have "high potential for abuse and no known medical potential." If there is medical potential (and in these families at least there usually is), what took days to Schedule will take millions of dollars and years or even decades to reschedule...per compound.
So, while I celebrate the progress being made for a couple of promising compounds with a relatively large base of recognition and support, I'm hoping that I see a more sane approach to drug policy within my lifetime (Portugal seems to be the fashionable example these days).
I'll also second /u/jrowley 's recommendation of Michael Pollan's recent book "How to Change Your Mind" as a good primer, and would recommend the TV show "Hamilton's Pharmacopeia" as another fascinating dive into the subject.
Psychedelic mushrooms are powerful medicine. They have a psychoactive effect which alters brain chemistry and helps neurological disorder. We can see that in the paper. But then so do anti-depressants.
I believe the key difference between plant medicines like mushrooms, Peyote, Ayahuasca and others and clinical mood altering medicine is within the ecstatic experience. It is one to thing to have a pill lead you to an empirically more "healthy" brain. It is quite another to embark on a deep, introspective vision which provides a narrative to match the chemical benefit.
I volunteer as a guide within Ayahuasca ceremonies in Peru. Many turn to Ayahuasca as a last resort for depression, PTSD, sexual trauma, and much more. I have seen people in ceremony live through what they interpret as a hellish exorcism, an active exploration of their lineage, or a direct confrontation and resolution of their deepest emotional and spiritual trauma. These people often undergo significant positive transformation after the experiences.
These profoundly "real" experiences appear to be essential to the healing process.
We are creatures of story and psychedelics can help write a _most radical_ chapter of recovery.
Trips often elevate beyond dualistic thinking. Common dualistic spectrums include good and bad, light and dark, heaven and hell, wet or dry, dead or alive, human and non-human, space or time...
The experiences are ineffable and unlike anything perceived by prior physical sense. The integrative aspect - taking the ecstatic vision and letting it into daily life - is an ongoing process which often takes up to a year. And so good or bad is too simplistic a lens in which to judge the psychedelic experience.
Moments of sheer terror, perceiving the blackest of black, are common. So too are moments of pure bliss and the sensation of limitless loving grace. These become trivialized by the overall experience, which is powerful enough to fully reorient a person's understanding of what it means to be a human being.
The result depends heavily on the pre-existing mental framework that engages with the medicine. For example, people from traditional western religious backgrounds may manifest demons, angels, and heaven and hell within their experiences -- if that is what _they feel they need to experience_ in order to realize the intention that they have brought with them into the ceremony.
My personal view revolves around the entrenchment of an individual's ego. Those who meditate and who have comfort with nondualistic thinking tend to ride the wave better than those who have very rigid conceptions of their self identity and its resultant patterning.
A rewarding read was the academic 'Antipodes of the Mind', a phenomenological study from cognitive scientist Benny Shannon. It is the most rigourous resource that addresses the wondrous weirdness of the Ayahuasca experience.
The team that I work with is very diligent. No one has ever had a breakdown, acute/persistent anxiety, PTSD, or anything similar as a result of what has happened in the ceremonies. We are careful with screening candidates that might be susceptible to these issues.
However, there have been very nasty experiences that have happened as a result of not following the very strict guidelines of pre and post ceremony care. It is recommended that you abstain from alcohol, sugar, sexual conduct for varying time periods. It is also required that all medication - within reason and with a long list of disallowed contraindications - be weened off of prior to partaking.
The medicine is serious stuff. It is beautiful stuff. And it should be approached with great care. If you take it with a reputable group, prepare appropriately, and follow the post-ceremony guidelines, there is a high likely hood of a net positive experience. If you do not, well...
Your first two paragraphs really stand out to me. It can be very difficult to piece these experiences into tangible sentences. It truly is ineffable. Yet, when you’re there it’s so trivially effable. It’s at times comical and yet sad when you become aware you are experiencing something ineffable and won’t be able to bring it back to convey to the world. It can only be experienced.
Once back, it can easily take a year to unpack the experience, and find the right metaphors to attempt to, almost, but not quite really, slightly describe an infinitesimal part of the experience, maybe. :)
Could you describe what you mean by "....-- if that is what _they feel they need to experience_ in order to realize the intention that they have brought with them into the ceremony", perhaps with an example intention?
With mood disorders, there is a moment where an individual decides: "yes, I am going to get better." For many reasons, getting to this pivotal choice is very difficult.
In metaphor, each person keeps their affliction locked within a box. And each person must be the one to create their own key. A person must be willing to open this dark box and release whatever is in it -- the sexual abuse, the long lived depression, or the significant trauma --- and _decide_ to become healthy.
An intention is saying: "This is what I have locked in my box. I want to get rid of it. I want to get better."
Real examples are:
* I no longer want to be depressed.
* I want to get over past sexual, emotional, or physical abuses.
* I want to become sober.
Through the ritualistic component of the ceremony, individuals then go deep within themselves to find and create the narrative, the key, to open the box. The contents of the journey will be unique to each individual. For some, it is getting out of hell or exorcizing a demon within themselves. For others, it is going back to their younger selves to give them love, strength, and support to get over what almost destroyed them. Or, perhaps just catch a glimpse into the delightful madness that is beyond self.
Do you have any kind of a feel (from direct observations, or hearing through the grapevine) for how much more effective going in with an explicit, conscious intent to meditate on a particular topic or problem is, versus going in with no specific intent but rather to just "catch a glimpse into the delightful madness that is beyond self"?
Of course, there's no way of doing a direct comparison, but curious if you have a feel or opinion on it, or might know of anyone who writes on that topic.
This is the main reason why psychedelics are so high risk - the variation of the experience makes them hard to recommend in any serious way.
It's not even a bad trip necessarily, a positive trip can still cause after affects, increased risk of psychotic episodes, or pretty severe anxiety and it's very hard to predict whether or not you'll be unlucky.
Calling something high risk I think suggests some combination of likelihood and magnitude of harm - can you possibly speak to these two aspects, so we might have some idea of how high risk they are?
I can on the bad side from personal experience, but prefer not to talk about it publicly. I’d be ok to say in private, feel free to mail me sheldon.els+psy[at]gmail.com
While I have never had a bad trip, I tend to argue that a bad trip is more likely to occur if you are in a unstable inner state and or your projection of the drug or the possible experience of using the drug is unstable.
Then again, I think your question comes down to semantics. I have heard friends say a bad trip is their best trip. But anyways and above all, I want to say, don't use labels of good, bad, etc, and just experience the experience.
The "pills" like SSRIs also change the actual function of the brain, not simply flooding it with a certain molecule that mimics; the two honestly shouldn't compared to as equals, though I understand the desire to as one is heavily legal because of the pharma. industrial complex, and the others have been struggling for their place for far too long now.
Context of course is important too, like having a ceremony with a group of people or with things like MDMA - outside of a therapeutic setting with a therapist - of positive environment with dance music, etc of course will prime the brain in certain ways, and trigger certain pathways that won't otherwise be triggered if simply taking a pill that forces a function change (vs. using existing flows and function); contrast a ceremony taking a medicine vs. going to doctor who only sees you in the context of a clinic, speaks with you for maybe 15 minutes, prescribes you a pill, and sends you on your way to maybe check back in a week to see how their experiment is going.
I've used an array of psychedelics for spiritual experiences and would be really keen to try Ayahuasca when I'm in Peru later this year. Do you have any pointers on how to find a place to have a Ayahuasca ceremony in Peru? Can I send you an email about it?
I firmly believe that psychedelics were possibly what laid the foundations for humans forming society. They were what helped us to form the abstract thought of working together towards a greater goal than simply survival. I've never felt more at one with humanity than after smoking changa with a group of friends and just standing there silently in a group hug for the trip. It was an incredible experience and really helped me come to terms with myself.
I have extensive experience with pharmaceutical anti-depressants and with psilocybin.
It's not the introspection that causes psilocybin's anti-depressant quality. Mood and improves, and phantom pain diminishes by about 12-24 hours, regardless of the qualities of the trip, and continues to rise for a couple of days. Even if the trip is relatively non-descript, or is difficult, the internal change is still very clear.
A euphoric trip overshadows this change, obviously.
I’ve used micro doses of psilocybin as a depression treatment and found it effective. Be definition the microdose meant I never had a “trip”, let alone a strong one with lots of introspection. It improves mood and increases energy even at low doses.
I would like to add some counterpoint to the otherwise seemingly endless supply of HN enthusiasm for psychedelics.
Personally, I like psychedelics. I have an annual(ish) tradition of tripping somewhere really pretty. I think that the personal growth and emotional... trip is fun and worthwhile.
However, my girlfriend had a bad trip and was scared of large trees for months. And I'd rate my girlfriend as one of the most mentally stable people I have ever met. I am unconvinced that throwing psychedelics at mentally unstable (unhealthy) people is a good idea. We need a lot more research before we start recommending them as medicine.
To that end, I do believe that we should allow researchers greater flexibility to experiment with them because it would be worthwhile to understand more about why psychedelics do what they do.
You are using an experience of a "mentally stable" person to dictate the treatment of "mentally unstable" people.
The effects of Ritalin on a non-ADHD person are the opposite to what happens when an ADHD person takes them.
I appreciate the spirit behind your message however.
I think we are at the point where we can start research with mentally unstable people. It has been shown that there is little permanent issues from taking LSD or Mushrooms responsibly.
I'm sorry about your gitlfriend's experience. I agree that these substances are quite powerful and should be handled with great care.
> I am unconvinced that throwing psychedelics at mentally unstable (unhealthy) people is a good idea.
Fortunately, this isn't what happens. The medicine is administered in sessions with experienced therapists present as guides. Extensive therapy sessions are also conducted in preparation for the treatment as well as for follow-up.
> I do believe that we should allow researchers greater flexibility to experiment with them because it would be worthwhile to understand more about why psychedelics do what they do.
This is (finally) happening. The results that are coming in are quite amazing. For example, the use of guided MDMA therapy sessions to treat severe PTSD was actually granted "breakthrough treatment" status by FDA. It is currently in the last phase of trials before the treatment is FDA approved.
Is anyone else concerned about capitalism getting their hands on these sorts of things? I'm all for decriminalization, but I'm really not excited for the patents, potentially heavy modifications to the organism for the purpose of higher yields, potency, etc.
Ya that is what I am worried about. Can you imagine the guy selling MDMA? Would make a fortune.
Drugs were best when sold by the hippies that did it to get by day by day. It got corrupted when sold purely as a money making enterprise. I believe that the current trend to legalization is to combat the Mexican cartels which are gaining immense political power using their drug money.
The fact that things like mushrooms are illegal is a great example of government programs that are ill-conceived, purely destructive, and take decades to kill.
Maybe so, but please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. It leads to generic ideological flamewars, which are toxic and predictable.
I recommend “Food of the Gods” https://www.amazon.com/Food-Gods-Original-Knowledge-Evolutio...
to anyone that’s interested in what role magic mushrooms may have played in the evolution of humans. It also does an interesting job in talking about what drugs are legal and what drugs are illegal (and the somewhat arbitrary demarcation line between what’s socially acceptable (alcohol, caffeine, sugar, tobacco) and what is not and will put you behind bars).
Take it w/ a grain of salt but it’s definitely thought provoking.
Also keep in mind that it was written in 1993 but does a pretty good job of anticipating the legalization of marijuana and the eventual decriminalization of moslty all drugs on Schedule I that were put there without any kind of research or backing data (psilocybin, DMT and friends)
A kind of a problem with "LSD-like" psychedelics (seemingly doesn't apply to "meth-like" MDMA) as well as with the weed is the experience with them depends hugely on your pre-existing vision, what do you actually want and where do you drive yourself during the trip. If you are a kind and loving person by nature (even if depressed and confused at the moment) sensations of beauty, joy and love will probably overwhelm you and you'll end up happy and kind but if you're a psycho like Manson you end up even more psycho. If you consciously stick to the positive emotions and vision during the trip the trip is going to be amazing and may have a profound positive therapeutic effect, but if you stumble upon fear or sorrow inside you and don't know you can and should consciously choose positive emotions it can be nightmarish. I only know of one tryptamine (5-MeO-DMT) and one rare Hungarian mushroom (can't even remember the species name now, perhaps I'll add it later) that seem to always yield positive experience, with all the others one should never forget to "use the steering wheel" during their trip. One can rely on the setting and the sitter instead but I believe this is less reliable and people should really learn basic compassion meditation and being mindful about their feelings before trying psychedelics).
I generally dislike mushrooms but I was pretty moved by Joe Rogan's podcast #1035 with Paul Stamets. Despite being over 2 hours long I suggested it to and watched it in it's entirety with several different people and each time we end up discussing the content off and on for weeks or months afterwards. Highly recommended.
I have a question about mushrooms that I don't often see get addressed. Psychedelic mushrooms nearly always are touted as medicinal tools and powerful substances for curing PTSD or depression.
However, in my own life, I don't suffer from any of these things. I am healthy, don't suffer from depression in any way, and am pretty satisfied with life.
I am mainly interested in psychedlic mushrooms out of curiosity. I have never had any experience similar to that, and it all sounds fascinating to me. Is it a good idea for a healthy person to try these "mind altering" substances strictly out of curiosity?
Just the opinion of an internet stranger here, but I think the medicinal benefits are touted because they're a way to get a foot in the door and start the conversation about the utility of these substances. Society still has PTSD (pun intended) from the out-of-control utopianism and concomitant criminalization / smear campaign of the 60s and 70s. Therefore using the substances to help those in desperate need is much more palatable for most people than the less urgent "betterment of well persons." But the latter is (or at least should be) a goal of the psychedelic community, for sure. I for one have been helped hugely, _tremendously_, by psychedelics...and never would have been diagnosed as mentally unwell beforehand.
71 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 113 ms ] threadGo put your name on the list at your local library!
https://www.amazon.com/Change-Your-Mind-Consciousness-Transc...
Well worth a watch for anyone even remotely interested in the topic.
[1] https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/michael-pollan-t...
[2] https://www.kevinrose.com/single-post/Michael-Pollan
https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002839081...
I really don't like thinking, "the government just wants to ban dangerous thoughts" but mushrooms - really? Compared to alcohol they are so incredibly safe.
The main fear I think comes from the majority of people who are not that bright and can not cognitively handle the type of thinking that comes from psychedelic use.
Imagine if you just listened to the gov your whole life and then after taking psychedelics u start questioning what is good/bad , what is true/false.
Before you know it, flat earth theory is real.
One of them was also a friend of mine. By the time he killed himself he was clinically insane and should have been hospitalized, sadly the services didn't get to him in time.
I realise this is about psylocibin, but I think its still appropriate here. Psychedelics are no joke.
In my experience a lot of people with their own issues are drawn to psychedelics as a means managing their demons. In the right setting, they can be incredibly healing. However, for some people, psychedelics become a means of coping, tripping becomes their default state and reality becomes too much for them.
"Lifetime classic psychedelic use was associated with a significantly reduced odds of past month psychological distress (weighted odds ratio (OR)=0.81 (0.72-0.91)), past year suicidal thinking (weighted OR=0.86 (0.78-0.94)), past year suicidal planning (weighted OR=0.71 (0.54-0.94)), and past year suicide attempt (weighted OR=0.64 (0.46-0.89)), whereas lifetime illicit use of other drugs was largely associated with an increased likelihood of these outcomes."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25586402
So, while I celebrate the progress being made for a couple of promising compounds with a relatively large base of recognition and support, I'm hoping that I see a more sane approach to drug policy within my lifetime (Portugal seems to be the fashionable example these days).
I'll also second /u/jrowley 's recommendation of Michael Pollan's recent book "How to Change Your Mind" as a good primer, and would recommend the TV show "Hamilton's Pharmacopeia" as another fascinating dive into the subject.
I believe the key difference between plant medicines like mushrooms, Peyote, Ayahuasca and others and clinical mood altering medicine is within the ecstatic experience. It is one to thing to have a pill lead you to an empirically more "healthy" brain. It is quite another to embark on a deep, introspective vision which provides a narrative to match the chemical benefit.
I volunteer as a guide within Ayahuasca ceremonies in Peru. Many turn to Ayahuasca as a last resort for depression, PTSD, sexual trauma, and much more. I have seen people in ceremony live through what they interpret as a hellish exorcism, an active exploration of their lineage, or a direct confrontation and resolution of their deepest emotional and spiritual trauma. These people often undergo significant positive transformation after the experiences.
These profoundly "real" experiences appear to be essential to the healing process.
We are creatures of story and psychedelics can help write a _most radical_ chapter of recovery.
The experiences are ineffable and unlike anything perceived by prior physical sense. The integrative aspect - taking the ecstatic vision and letting it into daily life - is an ongoing process which often takes up to a year. And so good or bad is too simplistic a lens in which to judge the psychedelic experience.
Moments of sheer terror, perceiving the blackest of black, are common. So too are moments of pure bliss and the sensation of limitless loving grace. These become trivialized by the overall experience, which is powerful enough to fully reorient a person's understanding of what it means to be a human being.
The result depends heavily on the pre-existing mental framework that engages with the medicine. For example, people from traditional western religious backgrounds may manifest demons, angels, and heaven and hell within their experiences -- if that is what _they feel they need to experience_ in order to realize the intention that they have brought with them into the ceremony.
My personal view revolves around the entrenchment of an individual's ego. Those who meditate and who have comfort with nondualistic thinking tend to ride the wave better than those who have very rigid conceptions of their self identity and its resultant patterning.
A rewarding read was the academic 'Antipodes of the Mind', a phenomenological study from cognitive scientist Benny Shannon. It is the most rigourous resource that addresses the wondrous weirdness of the Ayahuasca experience.
However, there have been very nasty experiences that have happened as a result of not following the very strict guidelines of pre and post ceremony care. It is recommended that you abstain from alcohol, sugar, sexual conduct for varying time periods. It is also required that all medication - within reason and with a long list of disallowed contraindications - be weened off of prior to partaking.
The medicine is serious stuff. It is beautiful stuff. And it should be approached with great care. If you take it with a reputable group, prepare appropriately, and follow the post-ceremony guidelines, there is a high likely hood of a net positive experience. If you do not, well...
Once back, it can easily take a year to unpack the experience, and find the right metaphors to attempt to, almost, but not quite really, slightly describe an infinitesimal part of the experience, maybe. :)
In metaphor, each person keeps their affliction locked within a box. And each person must be the one to create their own key. A person must be willing to open this dark box and release whatever is in it -- the sexual abuse, the long lived depression, or the significant trauma --- and _decide_ to become healthy.
An intention is saying: "This is what I have locked in my box. I want to get rid of it. I want to get better."
Real examples are:
* I no longer want to be depressed.
* I want to get over past sexual, emotional, or physical abuses.
* I want to become sober.
Through the ritualistic component of the ceremony, individuals then go deep within themselves to find and create the narrative, the key, to open the box. The contents of the journey will be unique to each individual. For some, it is getting out of hell or exorcizing a demon within themselves. For others, it is going back to their younger selves to give them love, strength, and support to get over what almost destroyed them. Or, perhaps just catch a glimpse into the delightful madness that is beyond self.
Of course, there's no way of doing a direct comparison, but curious if you have a feel or opinion on it, or might know of anyone who writes on that topic.
It's not even a bad trip necessarily, a positive trip can still cause after affects, increased risk of psychotic episodes, or pretty severe anxiety and it's very hard to predict whether or not you'll be unlucky.
Then again, I think your question comes down to semantics. I have heard friends say a bad trip is their best trip. But anyways and above all, I want to say, don't use labels of good, bad, etc, and just experience the experience.
Context of course is important too, like having a ceremony with a group of people or with things like MDMA - outside of a therapeutic setting with a therapist - of positive environment with dance music, etc of course will prime the brain in certain ways, and trigger certain pathways that won't otherwise be triggered if simply taking a pill that forces a function change (vs. using existing flows and function); contrast a ceremony taking a medicine vs. going to doctor who only sees you in the context of a clinic, speaks with you for maybe 15 minutes, prescribes you a pill, and sends you on your way to maybe check back in a week to see how their experiment is going.
Careful now. Surely you don't mean that no healing can take place in the absence of ayahuasca.
I firmly believe that psychedelics were possibly what laid the foundations for humans forming society. They were what helped us to form the abstract thought of working together towards a greater goal than simply survival. I've never felt more at one with humanity than after smoking changa with a group of friends and just standing there silently in a group hug for the trip. It was an incredible experience and really helped me come to terms with myself.
It's not the introspection that causes psilocybin's anti-depressant quality. Mood and improves, and phantom pain diminishes by about 12-24 hours, regardless of the qualities of the trip, and continues to rise for a couple of days. Even if the trip is relatively non-descript, or is difficult, the internal change is still very clear.
A euphoric trip overshadows this change, obviously.
"Trip" is outdated, and harmful to public opinion, I think.
I would like to add some counterpoint to the otherwise seemingly endless supply of HN enthusiasm for psychedelics.
Personally, I like psychedelics. I have an annual(ish) tradition of tripping somewhere really pretty. I think that the personal growth and emotional... trip is fun and worthwhile.
However, my girlfriend had a bad trip and was scared of large trees for months. And I'd rate my girlfriend as one of the most mentally stable people I have ever met. I am unconvinced that throwing psychedelics at mentally unstable (unhealthy) people is a good idea. We need a lot more research before we start recommending them as medicine.
To that end, I do believe that we should allow researchers greater flexibility to experiment with them because it would be worthwhile to understand more about why psychedelics do what they do.
2. Did she partake with someone who is experienced in guiding people through trips?
The effects of Ritalin on a non-ADHD person are the opposite to what happens when an ADHD person takes them.
I appreciate the spirit behind your message however.
I think we are at the point where we can start research with mentally unstable people. It has been shown that there is little permanent issues from taking LSD or Mushrooms responsibly.
I believe this is false.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate#Uses
2: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/one_man%27s_meat_is_another_m...
> I am unconvinced that throwing psychedelics at mentally unstable (unhealthy) people is a good idea.
Fortunately, this isn't what happens. The medicine is administered in sessions with experienced therapists present as guides. Extensive therapy sessions are also conducted in preparation for the treatment as well as for follow-up.
> I do believe that we should allow researchers greater flexibility to experiment with them because it would be worthwhile to understand more about why psychedelics do what they do.
This is (finally) happening. The results that are coming in are quite amazing. For example, the use of guided MDMA therapy sessions to treat severe PTSD was actually granted "breakthrough treatment" status by FDA. It is currently in the last phase of trials before the treatment is FDA approved.
Drugs were best when sold by the hippies that did it to get by day by day. It got corrupted when sold purely as a money making enterprise. I believe that the current trend to legalization is to combat the Mexican cartels which are gaining immense political power using their drug money.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Take it w/ a grain of salt but it’s definitely thought provoking.
Also keep in mind that it was written in 1993 but does a pretty good job of anticipating the legalization of marijuana and the eventual decriminalization of moslty all drugs on Schedule I that were put there without any kind of research or backing data (psilocybin, DMT and friends)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPqWstVnRjQ