[HN Gopher] Is the psychedelic therapy bubble about to burst? ___________________________________________________________________ Is the psychedelic therapy bubble about to burst? Author : pseudolus Score : 122 points Date : 2022-09-02 13:49 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (www.wired.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.wired.com) | twirlock wrote: | devonallie wrote: | Is this not the opposite of a bubble? It seems like public | opinion and public policy are actually making significant shifts | into making psychedelic treatments more mainstream. From which I | expect a large industry to emerge. | hcks wrote: | You are literally stating what makes it a bubble: the narrative | according to which psychedelics are now being rehabilitated | into treatments due to very promising results. | | But this narrative is getting old now, and the promising | results in question are actually quite slim, in a field which | is historically riddled with treatments that have a low | effectiveness (when they work at all) | nocoiner wrote: | I know an anecdote isn't data, but I'm a pretty straight | laced guy who's never used an illegal drug other than pot, so | no prior experience with any psychedelics (except for taking | an Ambien on an empty stomach lol). I started ketamine | therapy a few weeks ago, and while I obviously can't prove | that it isn't the placebo effect at work, my mood was | tremendously and noticeably improved immediately after my | first course of medication. And it's had an immediate | beneficial effect on my regular/traditional therapy sessions. | It just feels like it was a missing piece to a puzzle I've | been working on for a long time. | | I want to see the science continue to study these drugs and | psychedelic therapy, but for me there's no doubt in my mind | this has been significantly more beneficial in the short term | than any other medication I've ever taken (i.e., been | prescribed). If the science shows it isn't right for everyone | or most people - so be it. But it has been a game-changer for | me. | MAGZine wrote: | So by your definition, fusion energy is also a bubble? | ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: | I don't think that makes it a bubble. A bubble is when my mom | starts talking about it. Who has access to these psychedelics | outside of research? They are not mainstream at all. If I | wanted some I couldn't get any. | mistermann wrote: | > the promising results in question are actually quite slim | | Promising results that occur outside of formal scientific | settings _still occur_ , although consciousness (possibly | amplified by various pre-existing beliefs) can make it appear | as if they do not. As luck would have it, psychedelics can be | very helpful in sorting out one's thinking on such things. | devonallie wrote: | This is true. I should have said that it seems to be a slowly | but sustainably growing market. When I think of bubble, I | think of a rapid boon followed by a bust. I don't think this | industry will have either. | mw888 wrote: | It seems like the bubble that's been bursting for the last couple | of years obvious to anyone paying attention is that microdosing | is not equal to the sum of its doses. | | The studies which show inspiring results on hard problems like | PTSD and depression involve high dose, singular experiences, and | because of the nature of that high dose, a lot of preparation | takes place, weeks or months sometimes and a lot of care planned | out via therapist. | | I believe it was a Roland Griffiths study that showed that if the | subjective and measured (brain scan) experience was not | consistent with a deeply spiritual experience, the positive long | term effects did not come. | Mordisquitos wrote: | Whether the potential of psychedelic therapy has been overstated | or not, I think the bubble cannot be "about to burst" for the | simple reason it hasn't had the timeframe nor the scale to even | be called "a bubble", let alone for it to finish on such an | intense note as "bursting". | | _<<Is the psychedelic therapy spark about to fizzle out?>>_ | might have been a more apt analogy. | | (I have no reason to opine either way regarding the answer) | mountainriver wrote: | It hasn't even remotely reached its potential | flybrand wrote: | I agree, this isn't yet big enough - or fake enough - to be | labeled as a bubble. | Cthulhu_ wrote: | It hasn't even had nearly enough scientific research done on it | either, since it's classed as drugs in most areas. | alecbz wrote: | I've dealt with depression for the better half of my life. I | tried SSRIs for a decade with moderate results -- they definitely | helped, but more so in a way where the depression felt manageable | than feeling really happy. I went off them at the beginning of | the year to experiment with managing the depression other ways: | therapy, meditation, exercise. | | One day I got to work and noticed that for the first time in a | while, I was feeling really happy. In a way where I realized that | other times I thought I was happy, I was really just not-too-sad. | _This_ was what actual happiness felt like. I was kind of | surprised, but thought "wow, I guess the meditation and exercise | are finally paying off? It must be that... nothing else has been | different recently..." | | And then I remembered that I'd tried shrooms for the first time | the day before. | | So far, trips seem to pretty reliably have this effect for maybe | 1-2 weeks. I suspect I'm also seeing some more durable benefits | beyond that, but a little harder to be sure. | nocoiner wrote: | This sounds very similar to my experience. I have persistent | depression - usually pretty minor, but sometimes worse than | others - and social anxiety, and recently started psychedelic | therapy with ketamine (I'm still on my SSRIs, which keep things | in check, but certainly aren't a cure). | | I didn't experience any psychedelic effects, but my mood was | significantly improved during the weeks after. Anxiety greatly | diminished, confidence greatly increased and I for the first | time in a few years, I feel like I have a path to conquering my | impostor syndrome. | | I'm not yet totally comfortable telling my social circle that | I've been prescribed horse tranquilizers, but I've been an | immediate convert to the possibilities of these courses of | treatment. I can't say it isn't psychosomatic or the placebo | effect at work, but I've been frankly shocked at how quickly it | worked for me and how well it has seemed to work. | spaetzleesser wrote: | I have had the same after trips. For a few days I just felt | good which is usually rare for me. It was good to experience | how feeling good feels. I had almost forgotten. | mistermann wrote: | > It was good to experience how feeling good feels. I had | almost forgotten. | | Good point. | | I wonder what kind of interesting experiments could be | designed around psychedelics, skilled counsellors & | mediators, and people who've ended up with various "extreme" | beliefs, political or otherwise. | mattgreenrocks wrote: | I don't take psychedelics. But I'm convinced meditation and | exercise can re-wire your brain. | | Meditation trains the mind to learn to see when it is falling | into maladaptive grooves. It doesn't prevent it, just a raises | awareness. Exercise for me seems to shift the baseline mood | forward a bit. Kind of feels like my hormones are in the right | place after 25 years. | kekebo wrote: | I agree, learning to direct focus can shine valuable light | onto (often unreflected) self-narrative processing. | | Exercise never yielded the benefits I sometimes saw in | studies for me but every time I manage to motivate myself to | do the healthy/sane/right thing against inner resistance, it | leads to a small boost in self-respect that accumulates over | time. | alecbz wrote: | I think exercise is closer to improving hormonal balances | than really "rewiring" your brain, but for sure I notice that | it can help a bit. Maybe it does have some "rewiring" | effects. | | I do think meditation rewires your brain in a way that's | similar to psychedelics (there's common themes you experience | with both, like ego death), but I think it just takes _much_ | longer to achieve similar effects. I'd meditated daily for | close to a year straight, and while it helped, I didn't feel | like I got anywhere close to how I felt either during | tripping (kinda obviously maybe) or after tripping. | | That said, while so far psychedelics seem safe, they're at | the very least more logistically "disruptive" than | meditation, not to mention social stigmas, difficulty getting | them, etc. Meditation does seem like a more sustainable long- | term practice. | | Some of the above is why I've become interested in trying | ketamine therapy instead. | workshirt wrote: | Hormones are kind of the wires in the "rewiring the brain" | analogy. | endorphine wrote: | Did you stop meditating after a year? If so, why? | | I tried to stick to it but I find it kinda hard to. | elevaet wrote: | As someone who's taken plenty of psychedelics, done lots of | meditation, and gets tons of exercise, I'd agree that they | can all re-wire your brain. | | Psychedelics are very different from the other two tho, just | like exercise is very different from meditation. | | They are all very worthwhile and can help you grow. | | Meditation and exercise are best practiced regularly. | Psychedelics are best used for singular cathartic events, | saved for special occasions. | | Psychedelics can change your outlook overnight, while | meditation is a more gradual process. Excercise won't really | change your outlook palpably, it will just keep you in a | better head and body space. | | They all can be difficult and rewarding. Its possible to harm | yourself with any of them, but generally you come out well | ahead if you do them responsibly. They can all make you a | better person. | ravenstine wrote: | Is the pop science journalism bubble about to burst? | | Unfortunately, Bettridge's Law applies here. | adultSwim wrote: | I don't think psychedelics need to be a miracle cure-all to have | value in our society. Prohibition should end immediately. | Ambolia wrote: | Never cared about psychedelics, but if it's only "marginally | better" than antidepresants, and has less side effects, that | sounds like a huge win. | pessimizer wrote: | The first bloom of the rose being _marginally better than | current antidepressants_ is a bad sign, seeing as right now it | 's going to be getting the most biased and cherry picked | selections of studies it's ever going to get. SSRIs started off | as _miracles_ before they became _possibly no more effective | than placebo_. Psychedelics are starting as marginally better | than possibly no more effective than placebo. | febeling wrote: | Let's not forget, the bubble being about getting these substances | back from being banned and considered to dangerous for society to | research and otherwise deal with responsibly. | | Fits the theory that this is a paid hit piece, obviously without | evidential support. Remind me, could there be an industry | financially interested to get psychedelics back into the box? | NoToP wrote: | What industry conspiracy are you trying to insinuate? Is it big | pharma? Doubt it. Guess who would ultimately own the labs, run | the clinical trials, and be first to market with a safe and | precise FDA approved antidepressant based on a psychedelic | active ingredient. Let's not forget LSD started as a research | chemical in a drug r&d lab in Switzerland. Industry never | wanted it criminalized. | | It's not a good look to rationalise away all bad news as "paid | hit piece". | TeeMassive wrote: | > What industry conspiracy are you trying to insinuate? | | What is wrong with insinuating an "industry conspiracy"? | Industries are found guilty by judges and juries in massive | lawsuits all the time. | | > Guess who would ultimately own the labs, run the clinical | trials | | Big Pharma doesn't run most of its lab experiments. They use | contracted research companies to do that. In the past this | was done to evade responsibility and it doesn't seem to have | changed. See the Pfizer Covid vaccine whistle blower article | as an example of that: | https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635 | | > and be first to market with a safe and precise FDA approved | antidepressant based on a psychedelic active ingredient | | They can't patent molecules found in nature or synthetic | molecules they didn't create. | | > Let's not forget LSD started as a research chemical in a | drug r&d lab in Switzerland. | | How is one lab in Switzerland representative of al all the | other pharmaceutical companies? | | > Industry never wanted it criminalized. | | How do you know that? | | > It's not a good look to rationalise away all bad news as | "paid hit piece". | | The health industry is a major source of revenue of all major | US news publications. | mandmandam wrote: | It's not a rare or unheard of thing for an industry to attack | solutions that are significantly better than their own (very | profitable) solution. | | Psychedelics _can_ _permanently_ fix problems - anxiety, | alcoholism, depression - that otherwise would make pharma | companies huge amounts of money. | | LSD is incredibly cheap to manufacture. There's no patent on | it. Same with mushrooms and many others. | | Now look at how much money those pharma companies made with | Lexapro, with Prozac, with Risperdal. Even when they were | caught marketing those drugs for unapproved uses, _to | children_ ; and caught buying academics opinions, they made | _billions_ off the stuff. | | Compare the list of side effects on their drugs to mushrooms | or LSD. Compare the effectiveness. These companies aren't | maintaining huge divisions of PR goons for the fun of it; | they absolutely are out there on the internet, lobbying, and | on traditional media, convincing people to form opinions like | yours. | GuB-42 wrote: | But LSD was a "big pharma" solution and Sandoz tried to | sell it as a pharmaceutical for at least a decade. | | There is a lot of problems with "big pharma" but being | against cheap and effective permanent solutions is not one | of them, otherwise they wouldn't sell vaccines: many | vaccines are cheap, one time use, effective and prevent | profitable (?) diseases. | | The pharmaceutical industry has ways of making money of | cheap and out of patent drugs. For example, by patenting a | 0.1% more effective derivative and selling it, or by simply | jacking up the price when you are the only one making it | (see the Epipen scandal). This, by the way is the problem | with the pharmaceutical industry, they spend way too much | effort making money with old medicine and finding | patentable derivatives than researching new ones. If LSD | turned out safe and effective by regulatory agency | standards, they will definitely sell it, or maybe some | slightly tweaked and patented variant of it. | jasonhansel wrote: | There's currently no patent on Lexapro, Prozac, or | Risperdal either. "These companies" now have basically zero | incentive to support them or to sic "PR goons" on their | opponents. | | There are also legitimate concerns about biases in the | evidence base for claims about the efficacy of | psychedelics: | https://stuartritchie.substack.com/p/psychedelics | | And yes, psychedelics have side effects: https://en.wikiped | ia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_percep... | brnaftr361 wrote: | Patent is actually kind of irrelevant here, it's discrete | competition. How do you put your fingers into this when | it takes all of 3 months to have a lifetime supply of | therapeutic doses? But it does ostensibly (if effective) | curtail sales of pharmaceuticals. | | The originator pharma companies pay generic mfgs to _not_ | manufacture the drugs, ultimately the arrangement is such | that both parties profit while maintaining the status quo | allowing single-entity control of a given substance - in | the US at least, which is the only place any of this | matters. Not that that 's the case with the previously | mentioned medications. | | Ritchie on his vast tower of scientific conceit totally | fails to acknowledge the human element in all of this. | These drugs are interesting because of their mechanism, | but that mechanism isn't necessarily complimented well by | the "therapeutic" setting; the drug in and of itself | isn't necessarily the catalytic element, but rather the | experience - itself derived from the _set and setting_ : | | In normal (particularly traditional use) practice it is | unheard of to take a bunch of these drugs and hang out in | a lab with a bunch of strangers. Anthropology shows us | these drugs are uniformally used in _group_ practices | with familiars. | | And this is something noted in the textbooks, you can | have internal and external validity - and "internally" | yes, it may not look great but that's kinda predictable | because it's going to get railroaded into the narrow | confines allowed by statistics and ethics. You can on the | other hand hop on Erowid and read countless case studies | from various perspectives to get a holistic view, but | that's not "science" because it has nigh-zero internal | validity. But to me that reads as a semantic difference | and we could debate it all day - what I think really | matters in this case is that in the wild, in real | practice, it's efficacious. | mandmandam wrote: | > "These companies" now have basically zero incentive to | support them or to sic "PR goons" on their opponents. | | Bro. They have new drugs that are a molecule different | which they sell instead. And your scorn notwithstanding, | they _do_ have entire division of goons, whose explicit | purpose is to alter opinion online, in academia, in | politics, etc. | | > There are also legitimate concerns about biases in the | evidence base for claims about the efficacy of | psychedelics | | Pfft. Same goes for pharma drugs. | | > And yes, psychedelics have side effects: | | I didn't say they don't. The side effects are on a | different level though. | | We're talking about companies that _knowingly_ sold AIDS | infected products, among other atrocities. You 'd wanna | be a little less naive. | tomclancy wrote: | > There's no patent on it. Same with mushrooms and many | others. | | https://www.wired.com/story/race-to-engineer-new- | psychedelic... | dr_dshiv wrote: | > It's not a rare or unheard of thing for an industry to | attack solutions that are significantly better than their | own (very profitable) solution | | See Juul, attacked by both the smoking industry and anti- | smoking lobby. Ecigs don't have brand loyalty like | "Marlboro"--and cigarettes cost only 6 cents a pack to | manufacture. So, buy Juul, kill it, preserve the massive | profit flow. | eurasiantiger wrote: | Juul was/is a tobacco industry scam to make vaping more | accessible and more likely to lead to tobacco addiction. | | Juul started with all kinds of flavors, but then they | were banned and only tobacco extract flavors were | allowed. | | Those extracts are more than flavor. They contain the | same psychoactives which make tobacco smoking so | addictive compared to vaping freebase nicotine -- which | Juul is _not_ because it is an extract of tobacco | nicotine salts to begin with. | samatman wrote: | This is hmm. Poorly informed. | | I use a Juul most of the time to vape. To keep myself in | cartridges, I do have to buy the Juul ones, so I get a | cart full of the magic Juul juice to keep me company. | | Then I refill it a bunch of times with third-party | nicotine salts which taste better. It's the same thing | basically. | | Juul popularized using salts at high concentration with | less vapor. That's about it. The rest is good product | design and a fad. | mandmandam wrote: | Yep. That's a pretty clear example, and it sucks to see | people falling for it. Vaping is immediately and | obviously far less bad than smoking, but _they can 't say | that_. The fear-porn around the issue is wild, and I'm | certain legislators and media types are getting brown | envelopes to demonize vaping. | | Cannabis / hemp would be another. Alcohol giants, cotton, | painkillers, and many more have a lot to lose to an | alternative that's superior in many ways. | | Fossil fuel companies spend huge amounts putting doubt | into people's mind about nuclear and renewables, lobbying | for themselves, systematically buying academics and news | stories. | | With the above examples, there are people _dying_ thanks | to the PR FUD. | | Microsoft did similar stuff, buying and squashing | competitors by any means necessary. Even the DoJ had to | step in when they tried to own the internet. Some people | think MS Office is still around because it's better than | the competitors, lol. | | Banks lobby to make business as awkward as possible for | credit unions. | | Bitcoin maxis smear superior tech with the most laughable | arguments. | | Etc. | darksaints wrote: | In the case of the recent fast tracked FDA trials for MDMA | assisted therapy, I believe those trials were being led by a | non-profit organization, and they don't have any interest in | patenting the drug, let alone selling it. Their interest is | in the therapy aspect of it, for which cheap and readily | available MDMA is a high priority. So yeah, the pharma | industry isn't going to be profiting off of it, at least for | MDMA. | yung_steezy wrote: | I'm not sure this is necessarily a hit piece. There have been a | few high profile cases of psychedelic therapists in countries | like Canada being investigated for questionable practice. At | the moment we're in a bit of a wild west where the actual | procedures surrounding the use of these drugs as treatment are | not standardised. | BobbyJo wrote: | That feel less like a bubble bursting and more like a cage | breaking. | Lacerda69 wrote: | Your comment sparked some interest in me and I found this | article to be very detailed and nuanced: | | https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/09/ending-silence- | psychede... | | If you know other sources on your comment, I would love to | check them out as well! | eternalban wrote: | > The findings were somewhat lackluster: it found that the | psychedelic was only marginally better than traditional | treatments at relieving depression. | | Not a peep about the side-effects of "traditional treatments", | which presumably include the designer drugs. | [deleted] | michaelwww wrote: | 1) This is nothing compared to when Prozac(r) was introduced in | the 90's. The idea that Prozac was going to cure Western mental | health ills was quite popular and viral. It was a dawn of a new | age according to some. Now SSRI's are still used when | appropriate, but no one thinks they are a cure all for | depression. | | 2) There's a distortion at work here. Many people, including | myself, thing that natural growing mushrooms or other plants | containing hallucinogens should not be illegal. The problem is | that it appears the only way to legalize at the current time is | to force them into a doctor/patient therapeutic relationship. | This is causing people to twist themselves into a knots trying to | explain why this small step towards legalization should be | allowed. Many exaggerations and false claims are being made. And | who wants to always have to do their trip with a doctor sitting | by their side? | | My hometown of Santa Cruz California is on the right track. | Decriminalize for personal use and move on to more important | issues. | | Santa Cruz decriminalizes magic mushrooms and other natural | psychedelics, making it the third US city to take such a step | | https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/us/santa-cruz-mushrooms-psych... | yboris wrote: | Other cities have followed, for example _Ann Arbor_ in Michigan | - making mushrooms the lowest priority for police (effectively | decriminalizing them). | | One thing stands out: _Oregon decriminalized all drugs in 2020_ | - it feels like a not well-known fact. | | Another side-note: because mushroom spores do not contain the | psychoactive ingredient, they are not illegal to ship across | state lines, so it's entirely legal to purchase spores on the | internet ("for microscopy use only"), and then use "Uncle Ben | Tek" to grow your own mushrooms (this part is illegal). | michaelwww wrote: | Thanks for the tip! I've been thinking about growing my own. | pessimizer wrote: | If only 2) were true; the process that pot went through didn't | turn out that badly. My fear is that it's exactly the opposite, | and medicalization will turn psychedelics into the new class of | drugs that a medical degree anoints you to deal, like opioids. | Still very illegal, but everyone is on them. | michaelwww wrote: | That's what I was trying to say. They want to do it | differently than they did with pot. With pot you could easily | get a doctor to write a prescription and you used THC and CBD | as needed in the comfort of your own home. With hallucinogens | it sure seems like they want you to take them under the | supervision of a therapist, who will guide your experience in | a therapeutic direction. A few reasons come to mind for why | they might be doing this | | - To reassure the legal authorities that the use of them is | properly supervised and safe | | - To bring them to a wider audience, such as a depressed | grandma who needs to accept her approaching death but would | never take them on her own | | - For their own status, power and money needs. It worries me | that once they achieve this, they will fight legalization for | recreational use | | That's all fine, but don't tell me I can't take them for my | own pleasure and purpose when I want, such as at a music | festival, on a hike in the woods, or just because. I really | don't need a therapist to guide my trip, thank you very much. | | Edit: Another thing, I've raised the issue on Twitter that | doctors and therapists who used them in therapy settings | should have some experience with hallucinogens. They shut me | down really quick. It's the elephant in the room apparently. | How are you going to guide someone when you have no | experience with them? | benevol wrote: | No, it hasn't even started, and it's not a bubble. | | There is so much potential in this and so much catching up to do. | Many who are familiar with the relevant substances know this. | | Our various corrupt systems (political, financial, "health" care, | media, etc.) have deliberately prevented this type of therapy | from exploding for a very, very long time. It will massively | reduce the pharma industry's revenues, among other things. | pessimizer wrote: | The health care industry would be overjoyed to administer | psychedelics to you for the rest of your life, and politicians | and media will be happy to be paid to allow you to do it, to | subsidize your doing it, and to convince you to do it. | | Whatever bizarre conspiracy theory that would convince you of | the opposite is evidence that there's already lots of money | being spent. | zozbot234 wrote: | > There is so much potential in this and so much catching up to | do. | | And a whole lot of new risks to go with the potential. As the | saying goes: it's important to keep an open mind, but not so | much that your brains fall out. | AndrewVos wrote: | It's people like you that keep holding humanity back from | really flourishing. Think on that for a bit. | derac wrote: | Keeping relatively safe substances criminally illegal is | probably not the best solution. | matt89 wrote: | Proper and wider research is important. Let's hope that these | substances become more popular and available to be researched | and tested, so that hopefully in 5-10 years we would know | their risks and advantages. Then people could make educated | decisions whether or not to try and use them. | spaetzleesser wrote: | "And a whole lot of new risks to go with the potential" | | As long as alcohol is legal and easily available we shouldn't | worry about psychedelics. I know plenty of people who have | taken all kinds of psychedelics and seem OK. Psychedelics | just don't seem very addictive for most people. I also know | quite a few people who have been hurt by alcohol. They either | hurt themselves or they hurt others while drunk. | WastingMyTime89 wrote: | Psychedelics are mostly illegal because Nixon didn't like | the hippies and federal agencies were looking for new | budgets. It's not as shameful as weed being illegal because | the cops hired to enforce the prohibition needed new jobs | and it mostly impacted poor communities and African | American but it's close. | ghostpepper wrote: | The core complaint here seems to be that therapists abuse | patients undergoing pyschedelic therapy - but I don't see any | claims of evidence that abuse is more prevalent than abuse in any | other therapeutic setting. | jp0d wrote: | How is this a bubble if it's actually helping people with mental | health issues. A lot of universities have begun studying this. | These should never have been illegal in the first place. | Kalanos wrote: | right, "only slightly better than existing drugs." | photochemsyn wrote: | It's a bit odd that this article doesn't even mention the fact | that psychedelic treatments for depression, if widely successful, | would likely destroy a major fraction of anti-depressant sales | across the United States. That's an obvious reason the | pharmaceutical industry would be pushing back against this. | mousetree wrote: | If they were widely successful, why wouldn't the pharmaceutical | industry offer psychedelic treatments? | akomtu wrote: | Because it would be wildly efficient and cheap. All your | permanently depressed clintee would be gone and with them | your profits. | [deleted] | LouisSayers wrote: | The problem is barriers to entry. If made legal there'd be | very little barrier to entry for people (or companies) to | grow mushrooms. | | There's a lot stopping people from producing patented drug | concoctions. | jscipione wrote: | The SNRI therapy bubble has already burst, now druggists are | looking for alternatives. The tragic part is that psychologists | have been prescribing mind-altering drugs for years that didn't | treat depression. What makes psychedelics any different? | myshpa wrote: | Personal anecdote: 2 years of "research", 2 trips on psilocybe | (one month apart), proper set & setting & guide & a lot of | talking about it later with a trusted person ... decades-long | cripling neurosis/anxiety disorder gone, addictions gone, | depression receding, worldview changed, rated as one of the most | influential experiences. | | Depression is (imho) not to be healed with "here, swallow a | pill", structural changes to one's life are necessary. | Psychedelics can help to show the way, not to solve it. | johnfn wrote: | I'm confused how your first sentence appears to say that you | completely solved your depression, addictions, anxiety, | neurosis and worldview with two trips, and your second sentence | says that depression can't be solved with a pill. These seem to | be at odds, unless I'm missing something. | birdyrooster wrote: | Even if you take psychedelics it won't magically fix your | problems bc most peoples problems are systemic. The system | must change but the psychedelics allow the user to see the | value in the change. | voisin wrote: | Can you elaborate on your research and how you were able to | find the right guide, achieve the proper set & setting? | Maursault wrote: | > Depression is (imho) not to be healed with "here, swallow a | pill", structural changes to one's life are necessary. | | Clinical depression rarely has anything to do with what you've | done or events in the outside world. | | Psychiatry has settled on treating depression with two strokes, | a cocktail which is a chemical antidepressent, and a chemical | stabilizer, and they expect you to take these daily and stay on | it for the rest of your life. I have no evidence for it, but I | assume this is some pharmaceutical company's agenda, to keep | you a customer for the rest of your life. While it works, | chemicals always have side-effects, and with so much exposure, | daily, they are bound to compound, making it more difficult to | consume. | | Therapy alone can cure depression, it just takes a lot of time | and effort. I don't think it is possible talk therapy could | ever make things worse, but it just doesn't work fast enough. | Still, recommended. | | But I have discovered a way to cure depression relatively | quickly in two ways. | | First, chemically, but without a life sentence. I have | discovered a substance that will cure depression overnight, not | unlike an aspirin cures a headache. You get headaches, too? How | would you feel about being told you need to take a daily | medication for the rest of your life to cure it? No, one dose | will do. The drug is unregulated, and is available OTC in cough | gels. You won't find this in any PDR, but depending on the | patient's weight, say for a 160lb. man, 900mg of | dextromethorphan will cure depression overnight, and it has | been for some time in many clinical studies exploring its | potential as a fast acting treatment for treatment-resistant | depression. You take the large dose with a pepsid, and go to | bed, wake the next day depression free, and its depression- | killing effects can last up to a year. It is an old and safe | drug, and the lethal overdose is estimated, because it is | unknown. Though it is an OTC remedy for cough, dextromethorphan | has already been approved for treatment of emotional | incontinence, which could be seen as sort of a cousin of | depression. | | The other cure, chemical free, is sunlight. Light in the eyes | regulates mood. Not enough light will eventually cause | depression. Too much light will cause mania (as we should have | suspected from the exploits of Florida Man). Put enough | sunlight in your eyes, it will cure your clinical depression. | If daylight is not enough, get an artificial light that is an | accurate simulator of natural sunlight, which is probably not | LED, due to too much blue light, which also damages the eye and | slowly blinds you, but you can't go wrong with halogen. Point | it at your eyes. You can even close your eyes, light goes right | through the eye lids and is still effective at fighting | depression. | ncmncm wrote: | Dextromethorphan is now approved by FDA for treating | depression. They use much less than 900 mg, though -- 45 mg | -- and coupled with 100 mg bupropion, increasing to twice | after tolerance is demonstrated. | Maursault wrote: | This just happened a couple weeks ago. There are still | ongoing clinical studies which are testing much higher | doses for treatment-resistant depression. | Jabrov wrote: | mbesto wrote: | > Psychedelics can help to show the way, not to solve it. | | The best way I had it described to me is: | | Psychedelics are microscopes, not panaceas. A trained | psychiatrist is the panacea. | hi5eyes wrote: | Psychs often leave oneself with the motivation to make radical | changes to improve themselves | | implementing those changes over time is the key | konfusinomicon wrote: | I wonder if the same effects can be attained by someone who has | used psychedelics recreationionally their entire life, from say | 16 onward. is it the external guidance during the experience | that really makes the difference? or is a life of experiences | responsible for one not having anxiety or depression on those | levels | nico wrote: | Not sure, but I have a friend who has plenty of experience | with psychedelics, and he just had his first session of | psychedelic therapy with ketamine (done by a medical | professional trained to do it). After the session he said it | was very different to anything he had done before and that he | felt he made a ton of progress. | | My guess is that the intention that you set before "the | trip", really impacts the experience and hence the results. | As well as having a professional guide/sitter that knows how | to guide you and create a therapeutic setting. | hesdeadjim wrote: | Buddy of mine recently did a two session psychedelic | ketamine treatment with intensive pre and post-support | therapy. The changes in his negative habits and ruminative | thoughts were impressive. He had done LSD a few times, but | he said the ketamine was a much more "safe" feeling | experience. | | I've been considering it myself, despite not being | depressed or anxious, just to see what channels of growth | it might open up. | mmsnberbar66 wrote: | where can you do these therapies? | cypherpunks01 wrote: | USA directory here: https://www.askp.org/directory/ | brnt wrote: | > is it the external guidance during the experience that | really makes the difference? | | That's what psychiatrists using psycho active drugs say: | without proper stage setting and guidance, the experience can | be terrifying and traumatic in itself. Remember, not | everybody has good trips, especially not people dealing with | depression and trauma. | mudrockbestgirl wrote: | It's difficult to explain if you haven't had that kind of | experience yourself, but one way to describe it is that | psychedelics (some more so than others) open up a window that | allows for change. You are no longer stuck in your old ways | of thinking that you took for granted. | | But the experiences themselves don't change you. _You_ still | need to put in the work to make the changes. You can | certainly do this without a guide. But if you take these | drugs recreationally without such intentions and without | putting in hard work pre- and post-session, nothing much is | going to happen in the long term. A guide will help you to | get the most out of the experience (while also helping with | trip safety). | | It's not about whether you use psychedlics or not, it's about | _how_ you take them. | hammyhavoc wrote: | "It's not about whether you use psychedlics or not" | | "without putting in hard work pre- and post-session, | nothing much is going to happen in the long term" | | Sounds a lot like cognitive bias to me. It's ultimately a | placebo if you still need to put the work in. Ergo, you | could achieve the same results even without taking it. It's | attributing personal growth to a drug rather than to your | own willpower to do something. | GendingMachine wrote: | This doesn't really make any sense, just because you | still need to put in the effort doesn't mean it isn't | highly affective at making it much easier for an | individual to direct that effort positively. | coldtea wrote: | > _Sounds a lot like cognitive bias to me. It 's | ultimately a placebo if you still need to put the work | in._ | | If you take a doping pill to run faster, you still need | to train and to expand heavy personal effort during the | race. Is the doping pill "placebo"? | | Heck, if you have leg surgery after an accident, | depending on the type of surgery, you often need (and are | advised by the doctor, and asked to take it up with | physiotherapist and such) to put in personal work and | exercize properly for months, to be able to walk and | regain use of your leg again. Is the leg surgery placebo? | | Or how about a debugger. It wont solve your problem | automatically. You still need to write the program | yourself, to look into different places, and to know how | to find a bug etc. Is the debugger a placebo? | | Needing to put personal work to get a result is not | what's the distinction between a placebo and a drug. | | A placebo is not that which is only effective when | combined with additional personal effort (that can hold | for any regular drug). | | A placebo is a neutral drug that does nothing at all | itself (it's just water, or some neutral powder or saline | solution, etc) and it's effectiveness is all about the | belief that it helps. | | Besides, psychedelics (even assuming what they do have no | bearing at all to getting better from depression, etc, an | assumption with which research disagrees), have huge | immediate effects on mental state when taken. So they're | not neutral in the way a placebo is even on that account. | hammyhavoc wrote: | Logical fallacy of composition/division. My comment isn't | being applied to all these other scenarios, it is being | applied to the topic at hand--psychedelics. | coldtea wrote: | Logical fallacy of non seguitur. | | The logic of the comment should hold for any analogous | scenario. | | You either have to argue why one or all of the above | analogies doesn't hold (what element is crucially | different, so that the same counter-argument can't apply | to your psychedelics argument), or to argue that the | points made for those other things are wrong. | | Except if you believe that you've discovered some unique | logic that only applies to a single specific case. | hammyhavoc wrote: | I don't have to argue, period. An analogy is unnecessary. | We are talking about psychedelics, not doping in sports. | | My opinion: people are likely commonly capable of working | through things without the use of psychedelics, and we | are crediting the substance and not the human being. | | I'm not anti-drugs by any stretch, just feel like a lot | more research needs to be done before we can start | stating things like they're facts. Can you otherwise | disprove that it wasn't placebo effect and the individual | wouldn't have otherwise figured it out without a placebo | or with a sugar pill he was told was a microdose of | psychedelics that would unlock the secrets of the | universe? | kaoD wrote: | Well, during victorian times people got through surgery | without anesthetics. What's your point? | | Not sure why you think studies aren't controlling for | placebo? Although it's obviously notoriously hard with | psychedelics. | | Just to be clear: I agree that more studies are needed, | just disagree with the rest of your statements. | hammyhavoc wrote: | That over time, through time-proven hypothesis, we arrive | at a modern understanding of our biology and psychology. | | So you openly admit that this is difficult to assess? | That much we can agree on at least. | kaoD wrote: | In fact I'd go a step further and say that it's not only | difficult but impossible to assess since it's pretty easy | for the test subject to discern whether he was given a | placebo or not, especially considering that the benefits | are suspected to come from the induced experience itself | and not the drug as a substance in isolation. | | You can't control if exercising is placebo either, can | you? But the consensus is that it's physically and | mentally beneficial. I don't think controlling for | placebo is of great use here although it obviously has to | be taken into account. | WastingMyTime89 wrote: | There is no logical fallacy. Your original comment is | just wrong. If psychedelics improve the outcome, they are | still worthwhile even if the therapy is still needed and | not a placebo. You are just misplacing the bar. The | analogy to performance enhancing drugs is actually quite | good. | hammyhavoc wrote: | There absolutely is. They held up countless irrelevant | examples that have nothing to do with psychedelics, thus | casting a wide net. | | My original comment is my opinion. When there's further | studies done rather than anecdotal rubbish pertaining to | woowoo in the comments, then I'll reconsider my stance. | | Analogies are unnecessary and distracting. | bmacho wrote: | > My original comment is my opinion. | | Not at all. "The sky is blue, therefore dogs are green" | is not an opinion but a statement, factually incorrect, | and annoyingly incomprehensible. | | The idea that you presented, that if something doesn't | solve _everything_ then it is _useless_ is just not true. | Maybe you should keep this in mind. | hammyhavoc wrote: | I never said it was useless. | bmacho wrote: | > Sounds a lot like cognitive bias to me. It's ultimately | a placebo if you still need to put the work in. | | Say without drugs 20% of the depressed population gets | better, and with drugs 80% of them. Why would you call | this 'placebo' (which is an entirely different topic), | and from this word deduce that it is bad? Nonsense. | hammyhavoc wrote: | Did I say that it was bad? Nope. | bambataa wrote: | I'm not sure I agree, because people might put in the | hard work without the psychedelic and not experience the | benefit. | | Michael Pollan's "How to change your mind" talks about | psychedelic studies where the more effective, longer | lasting changes are seen by the people who had more | "mystic" experiences. | | It's not just about good intentions, or just taking | psychedelics, but seemingly priming your mind to use the | psychedelics to (temporarily) change fundamental thought | patterns. | mudrockbestgirl wrote: | By that definition, getting therapy is also a placebo. | You could go to therapy "recreationally" without wanting | to get better or work on yourself. But that's not going | to help you. You still need to put in work. Does that | make therapy a placebo? | coldtea wrote: | I think the parent conflates "non placebo" with "fixes | everything all by itself". | barrysteve wrote: | Cars don't drive themselves just because you put fuel in | the tank. | 8note wrote: | Where does that willpower come from though? | hammyhavoc wrote: | Placebo? Situation changing day-to-day? Diet? All kinds | of variables. But in this particular scenario, likely | placebo. | | If I tell someone that a tablet will make them able to do | something and it's just a sugar pill, they'll likely be | able to do it. The blocking factor is usually a | confidence issue. | Ayesh wrote: | Psychedelics, LSD in particular, see their major use being a | party drug. Coming from a personal experience, many people | decide the "trip" they want to go on way before the trip | starts. I am pretty sure there are non-zero amount of people | who regularly take psychedelics, but have never been on that | kind of "trips" that instead of going deep into your own | mind, they just enjoy EDM, a party, perhaps a hike, paint | something, watch a movie, play some sports outside, play | video games, etc. | recyclelater wrote: | Edit: I wanted to amend this to say I don't think people | should use psychedelics regularly, which I think my | original comment below might imply. Lots of downsides to | regular use, occasional (every couple years) seems to have | little risk and some benefits in my experience. Original | text below is unedited. | | I dunno, if you regularly use lsd or mushrooms, you | probably have had a "wow that was more than I wanted" | experience, that means you had complete ego loss, had the | veil of reality completely pulled back so you could "see" | the arbitrariness of society and human interactions. Your | embarrassing actions you have been deluding yourself about | come crashing down around you. You sober up and you | rationalize some of it away but there's a big nagging thing | in the back of your mind screaming "maybe you should stop | doing ____". | | At least this has happened to me on a couple of occasions | and has led to me apologizing to people, changing my | default behaviors, etc. I am not a super introspective | person so the kick in the head that psychedelics | occasionally provide has allowed for some personality | changes that were necessary and good. | | As an adult I now recognize that these experiences could be | beneficial as therapy with the right person to guide you | through it, that most people probably don't get the full | benefit these occasional experiences provide by themselves. | I didn't think this while young and just partying (though | did have a bit of woo woo collective consciousness mind | expansion mindset). Anything other than the recreation | aspects of it were me trying to justify why it was ok, and | getting high a lot is generally not ok. I actually sobered | up for rest of my life after a strong mushroom trip left me | thinking I was wasting my life and going down the wrong | path. | | In short, there's meat here, but of course with all these | things there will be people riding a fad and making a buck, | but bad usually tags along with the good in some amount. | molszanski wrote: | People confuse simple with easy. How to quit smoking? Simple. | Don't smoke. Easy? Not so much. Many things require mental | willpower to make it happen. | | Feels like those kind of therapies help make that happen. I | know one person who was borderline suicidal and this kind of | therapy helped her move life into a nice direction. | tptacek wrote: | I'm glad for you, but the researchers involved in this story | did an actual RCT with a cohort of patients and measured the | effect, and the benefit of psilocybin was shown to be marginal. | The study is linked in the first paragraph of the story. | ncmncm wrote: | Almost all RCTs involving depression throw a bunch of people | diagnosed with "depression", but suffering a variety of | conditions, all given that label, in a tank together. The | treatment may help a few, harm others, and have no effect on | the rest, and the treatment is then labeled "ineffective". | | RCTs depend for validity _absolutely_ upon precise, accurate | diagnosis for validity. Bad diagnostics = > meaningless | results. RCTs are not magic. They can be as wrong as anything | stupidly performed. | | RCTs around depression are worse than most. | briffle wrote: | I'd probably take that choice compared to the cost and daily | dosing of the pharmacy alternative. | yboris wrote: | > The study, a small trial run at Imperial College London | | I'm puzzled how a small trial run can derail decades of | larger-scale evidence? | tptacek wrote: | The larger-scale evidence is of much lower quality than an | RCT. | | I don't think the study is dispositive, but it's strong | evidence, much stronger than a message board axiomatic | derivation of why psilocybin should work. | ncmncm wrote: | RCTs are not magic. They are not always strong evidence, | and not always any sort of evidence. The details always | matter. | tptacek wrote: | I don't disagree with any of this. | ParallelThread wrote: | Are you in the US? Where can I find information about people | who can help me be with the experience safely? | no_butterscotch wrote: | > 2 trips on psilocybe (one month apart), proper set & setting | & guide & a lot of talking about it later with a trusted person | | What does "proper set & setting & guide" mean? Clinical? Or | friend/shaman type thing? | GameOfFrowns wrote: | I'd like to know this as well. I think this is one of the | biggest hurdles to a first time user: If you're anxious or | depressed, you're by definition not in a good "set". And with | psychedelic therapists being rare as unicorns where to find | that trip-sitter who isn't just a "That's groovy, man" weirdo | that will shape your trip (and your malleable brain) into the | bog-standard _one with everything_ experience. | barrysteve wrote: | I'm glad you had a good outcome. It's difficult to relate to | your experience from the outside. Most of the time people talk | about these experiences, they are vague and difficult to | understand. | | Sometimes in poor cases it can sound like gym-bro science where | I should totally pop a supplement because this guy had a good | experience on it and trust me bro. | | I would love to know more specifically about the subjective | experience is like, so we can pick out pieces that have a | greater meaning to collective understanding. | | Depression is an umbrella term for one experience caused by | many, many different problems. Some chronic medical situations | are going to allow your body to be re-depressed after a | positive drug experience, so being able to see subjective | reports in detail can allow the public to decide if it's worth | doing a psychedelic treatment. | | Not to mention we should probably map this experience out to | slowly cut down on the same speculative questions every time | drugs come up; about the divine/psychological/medical nature of | a drug trip. | josephg wrote: | > Most of the time people talk about these experiences, they | are vague and difficult to understand. | | I've taken LSD a few times. When people ask about it I like | to say that the experience is exactly like how people | describe it, but nothing like what I expected. Trying to "map | it out" in complete detail would be like trying to map out | sex. I'm not convinced I can fully explain my experience, and | even if I did, I bet your experience would be different from | mine. | | Maybe the best description I can give is that your mind stops | suppressing a lot of thoughts. When I hear music on LSD my | brain turns the music into a whole planet that looks like | that music sounds. When I look in the mirror I see myself as | a fey creature full of animus and life. The things that my | sober self stresses about seem ridiculous - like the fears of | a 5 year old. And I still feel trapped by my fears at the | same time. | | It's a very unique experience. As Sam Harris says, if you | take enough LSD it's impossible to be bored. | naasking wrote: | > Trying to "map it out" in complete detail would be like | trying to map out sex. I'm not convinced I can fully | explain my experience, and even if I did, I bet your | experience would be different from mine. | | That's exactly right. I think of it like this: you've spent | a lifetime building and entrenching filters around your | perceptions and thought patterns to react to them. They | persist because in evolutionary terms you being still alive | means your behaviour is "adaptive" in a sense, irrespective | of how you actually feel. | | Psychedelics temporarily tear down most of those filters | and disrupt those thought patterns, allowing you to | perceive things in very novel ways and react to hem very | differently. | | Nobody's thought patterns or filters are going to be the | same and so nobody's psychedelic experience will be the | same even though many of them will have similarities (we | are the same species in the same culture after all). | cainxinth wrote: | From personal experience, I think one of the reasons | psychedelics can help with depression is that when you are | severely depressed, it feels permanent, like nothing will ever | get better or even meaningfully different. | | But then you have a psychedelic experience, and for a brief | moment, things are very much different. And if the experience | is even slightly positive, it reminds you that it's still | possible to feel something good, and that glimmer of hope can | chip away at your entrenched fatalism. | sharadov wrote: | But can't that experience be had under different | circumstances - like a meditation retreat, or travel to a | completely new country? | | Meditation practice under a guide, can rewire your brain much | like psychedelics. | | Not to diss on psychedelics - but there is way too much hype | about it being a miracle cure for all your psychological | ailments. | | Psychedelics are wonderful but dangerous and to be used under | the right set and setting, a bad trip can induce psychosis | and my fear is people with existing mental ailments will | start popping psychedelics - not paying much attention and | end up in a far worse place than they started. | | Hopefully it is regulated. | gentleman11 wrote: | The same is true of some existing meds and even meditation | is known to trigger psychosis and anxiety. Most | antidepressants come with a warning that they may trigger | suicide | pazimzadeh wrote: | That fits with the analogy that I use, that psychedelics are | like a helicopter - they allow you to zoom out and realize | that there is a path to the top of the mountain (assuming | you're stuck/walking in circles). But once the effects wear | off it's up to you to remember where to go | DiggyJohnson wrote: | I'm writing a book about exactly the point you're getting | at: that there is no better questions that get at the | experience of being human than our ability to ask ourselves | the following two questions: | | (1) Where am I? / What the heck is going on? | | (2) Where am I going to go next? / What am I going to do | about it? | | Sorry if this seems overly esoteric, but I really | appreciate seeing applications of my thesis in the wild. | Cheers | kingkawn wrote: | Just need some overwhelming novel stimulus | pdntspa wrote: | That describes my outlook after taking MDMA... anxiety has | been a constant through my life, and molly showed me what it | was like to not feel it. Ever since I have used that as a | benchmark in my own quest for healing, and the closer I can | get to that feeling without assistance, the further along I | know that I am in my journey. | | Of course, it's a nice to visit with molly every once in a | while. But the real progress is in how I reframe life. Too | bad that finding quality MDMA nowadays is so tough. | ncmncm wrote: | I have seen borderline schizophrenia made much worse by | exposure to LSD, and treated effectively after exposure to | MDMA. | | So, which psychedelic matters a great deal. | sharadov wrote: | True hence the need for regulation and proper diagnosis. | tleilaxu wrote: | >anxiety has been a constant through my life, and molly | showed me what it was like to not feel it | | This is so interesting to read, because I had exactly the | same experience - primarily with social anxiety. | | I sat on a hill at a festival with a friend after taking | MDMA for the first time and imagined just walking up to a | food van and ordering food... and didn't feel the automatic | anxious reaction. | | It showed me what was there, and what life could feel like | without it. I found that it started a positive feedback | loop afterwards, where I'd do something social and | automatically steel myself against the incoming anxiety... | only to feel none! It was absolutely beautiful. | Mezzie wrote: | I'd agree with this. | | I've never done psychedelics (at least not the kind that are | experimentally used for mental health; I did Molly once but | fuck that comedown), but I spent years depressed, anxious, | guilty, etc. and then I started using weed. I went a little | TOO hard for a while, because it was the first time in years | I'd had my body and brain giving me primarily GOOD feelings. | | Which led to me ending up in therapy and actually addressing | my PTSD, because then I knew that feeling shitty wasn't just | how I was programmed to be biologically because something was | Wrong with me. | | The 'too hard for a while' is probably why these things | should be done under medical supervision. I basically spent 8 | months blazed out of my mind. | Cthulhu_ wrote: | I mean mental health is never just one thing; in your case, | weed was a gateway drug to therapy (I'm simplifying to try | and keep things light). PTSD and C-PTSD are underdiagnosed | or ignored a lot, I think, but there are treaments | available. One is EMDR [0] that, anecdotally, was very | effective in treating my GF's cptsd. | | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_movement_desensitizat | ion_a... | Mezzie wrote: | I want to try EMDR but I need to find someone who can | adapt it to me since I don't have fine muscle control in | my eyes and I used to be blind. | | (I'm a statistical oddity! YAY!) | ornornor wrote: | > I used to be blind. | | That's awesome you aren't anymore! | | And also: wait what? It's possible to reverse blindness?? | I'm totally ignorant on the subject but I'd b interested | to know more if you care to elaborate. | Mezzie wrote: | Legally blind, not totally blind. | | I had really bad strabismus plus vision bad enough that | it wasn't possible to correct my vision before I had | surgery to fix my eye muscles. Since that didn't happen | until I was 4, I spent my first 4 years with vision so | bad my dominant eye is classified as 'can see movement' | and my non-dominant eye is 'can see light'. Then I had | surgery and they could correct my vision. | | I'm not sure why it wasn't done earlier. | | I have some visual issues related to this early period. | I'm terrible with crowding [0], have no depth perception, | have trouble with facial feature recognition (I recognize | my loved ones based on their auditory cues), rely more on | other senses than sight, etc. | | My life can basically be broken down into periods based | on what medical oddity I dealt with, looking back. Yikes. | | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_crowding | px43 wrote: | > I'm not sure why it wasn't done earlier. | | Giving general anesthesia to babies/toddlers can be | tricky, so that might be a key reason. Our two year old | recently went under general anesthesia, and luckily | things started going wrong early enough that they could | abort and back out without doing any serious damage. | Scary situation though. | Mezzie wrote: | That is probably why, yes! I was put under. | | I'm glad that your child was okay. | froh wrote: | emdr at its core has bilateral stimulation, can be | auditive, kinesthetic too, experienced therapists should | be able to adapt it. | EmilyHughes wrote: | going by that logic cocaine and heroin should also treat | depression in the same way, but they clearly don't. | GendingMachine wrote: | Well, if the reason Heroin doesn't help depression is | because the body quickly adjusts to it and then you end up | needing to use it just to maintain your previous baseline. | If it didn't cause chemical dependence and retained its | initial efficacy long term it would probably be extremely | valuable. | | Cocaine doesn't really help because it just dramatically | increases the intensity and energy of your current state, | it doesn't really alter your thinking in a way that could | introduce positive thoughts not already present. | | If psychedelics had similarly severe downsides then they | would likely not be effective at aiding depression in the | long run, but fortunately it has relatively few issues with | careful use. | LocalH wrote: | Various stimulants can also have a different effect, | depending on one's neurotransmitter balance. For example, | Adderall is generally speed to someone without a dopamine | deficiency. I would imagine even crystal meth would be | far less harmful with a dopamine deficiency than without | (although there are still the issues with purity and dose | size that would make it inadvisable to experiment). | | The day we can discover what someone's _exact_ | neurotransmitter balance is, I think we 'll learn a huge | amount about how the brain works via that mechanism. I | think if we ever reach that day, we'll also learn that | there is no such thing as "neurotypical" | elefanten wrote: | Coke and heroin form a stronger dependency faster, and then | you've created a new & very distracting problem. | | Weed dependency is understated by many, but it typically | takes longer to form a strong dependency, and the | withdrawal symptoms are usually much milder than the other | two. | | So, I agree that your logic could apply in some cases... in | the more typical case (like op's) of someone stumbling into | this experiential eye-opening organically, if it happens | via coke/heroin it'll probably be a much rougher road. | | Edit: Probably why psychedelics work well... the experience | is _very_ different but has very weak habit-forming pull | (it's not easy to do casually because it's an ordeal) | johnfn wrote: | Having done none of these, perhaps it's something about the | quality of the experience? E.g. perhaps when you do | cocaine/heroin, the quality of the high is so clearly | unusual and extreme that you could never mistake it for | being an accurate representation of "how things could | actually be" without depression/anxiety? And maybe shrooms | etc aren't nearly as extreme? | dymk wrote: | Those are completely different drugs, so no, that doesn't | follow from that logic. | EmilyHughes wrote: | That's my point. OP reduced the effectivenes of | psychedelics down to just being able to feel good for a | short while. | | Well do some cocaine and you'd feel great for about an | hour but nobody cured their depression that way. | cainxinth wrote: | I take your point, but I think the distinction is that | some drugs can make you feel euphoric, but psychedelics | affect you on a deeper, psychological level. You're not | just feeling an absence of pain or a rush of pleasure | (though that can happen, too), you're also thinking in a | different mindset. | api wrote: | Are there any examples? These drugs are very dangerous and | addictive but that doesn't mean nobody anywhere has ever | had a positive long term outcome from trying them. It just | means that statistically a negative outcome is a lot more | likely. There are always a few outliers. | johnchristopher wrote: | There's that Dr. Carl Hart story | https://reason.com/video/2022/04/12/carl-hart-on-life- | libert... that has popped up twice or more on HN | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31145393 | webmobdev wrote: | This is exactly why anti-depressants and anti-anxiety | medications are prescribed - to help people realise what an | "undepressed" state of mind feels like. Even with "talk" | therapies, like Cognitive Therapy (that have proven to be as | effective as anti-depressants, and actually better than it in | the long term), psychiatrists still prefer to combine it and | start treatment with such medications as it really helps you | to understand how different you think and feel when you are | not depressed. | | Please note that if you are depressed it is better to start | with well researched medications like anti-depressants (whose | working are still not fully understood) than psychedelics. To | be safe, consider shock therapy or psychedelics only as a | last resort, after you have exhausted both anti-depressants | and Cognitive Therapy under a good therapist and are really | desperate. | Spivak wrote: | > This is exactly why anti-depressants and anti-anxiety | medications are prescribed - to help people realise what an | "undepressed" state of mind feels like. | | This is so real it hurts, I had two doctors diagnose me | with severe anxiety without telling me -- like they just | put it in my chart thinking I already knew. And then one | day I did one of those depression anxiety screens and | failed so hard genuinely believing it was normal my doc, | who I guess assumed it was managed, was like, "hey have you | ever taken anything for mood." And I was like "no, why | would I do that?" | | For literally the first time in my life I felt what "not | anxious" feels like. I was in disbelief for months bracing | myself for the pangs of anxiety I got in response to | different triggers and... they just never came. | AnthonBerg wrote: | I agree. | | Then there is also this: Classical psychedelics are | _profoundly immunomodulating_. All serotonin receptor 5-HT2A | activators (agonists) reduce systemic inflammation. Generally | in very beneficial ways. | | Systemic inflammation and depression are intimately related. | | (Of course, care should be taken not to suppress inflammation | when it is needed. People probably ought not to take | psychedelics when fighting off an infection.) | | Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.20 | 15.0035... | [deleted] | BaculumMeumEst wrote: | This absolutely happened to me, except with a physician's | prescription of Xanax rather than psychadelics. I was | severely depressed, experiencing daily panic attacks, etc. | | I stopped taking them pretty quickly because I'm prone to | addiction, but your experience mirrored mine completely. | immmmmm wrote: | the second time it cured me from depression, the healing | process happened in around 10 minutes where i was taken from | the worst to the best. felt like 100's of simultaneous orgasms | and was in shock for the next three days. | | i have read a single take can increase neuronal connectivity by | 10% in rodents, which is not surprising after that experience. | | still feeling great more than a year after. | | meanwhile my mom gas been on AD for 40 years. | 34679 wrote: | The headline presupposes that a bubble exists. I would argue it | doesn't. A psychedelic therapy bubble would have many commercial | products that do basically the same thing, all competing for the | same dollars. | | Begging the question: | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question | akomtu wrote: | What psychodelics seem to do, based on all the accounts of | "feeling of connectedness" and "higher vision", is it does | something to epiphysis cerebri in the brain to mute the lower | triad of the human - body, emotions and mind - so the quiet voice | of the true human, aka its soul, can be heard. There, above, | connectedness of everything, as well as the clear vision of | purpose and practical invincibility, are self evident realities. | It gives you a glimpse into what the normal state of | consciousness of a saint looks like. Meditation is a slow and | safe way to get to the same state eventually, with an important | difference - that state won't depend on a whim of some chemicals. | bambam3000 wrote: | I happened to watch the 'Ecstacy' documentary on Prime last | night. I was surprised to see the guy who brought MDMA to the | world was sad that it had become a party drug as he believes it's | primary purpose could have been to help people psychologically. | Definitely worth a watch. | mmsnberbar66 wrote: | MDMA is underrated. I gained a lot of healing from it in the | past. If done responsibly and intelligently it can be very | powerful. | yboris wrote: | People just don't know that MDMA has been shown in careful | research studies to cure PTSD in severe treatment-resistant | cases. | kristofferR wrote: | There's no mismatch between being a party drug and helping | people psychologically [1]. The only people who think so are | the same kind of sad, dull people who were upset at the Finnish | prime minister dancing - and since MDMA turned out to be an | awesome party drug they had to ban it and punish the ones who | had fun. | | [1] For me, for example, I didn't have any major traumas before | I tried MDMA (so therapy would have been pointless), but I were | really shy. MDMA at a party setting helped me realize deeply | that there's no reason for being scared of talking and | connecting with people. | deadbeeves wrote: | No fun allowed. | [deleted] | HighlandSpring wrote: | Only tangentially related but quite interesting: | https://mobile.twitter.com/GraduatedBen/status/1565041582671... | | Sometimes I wonder if SSRIs are one of those things that the | industry overinvested in and now that there's plenty of momentum | (and budget) to support the narrative that they are the cure it's | hard to suggest that there may be simpler alternatives | pessimizer wrote: | I'm worried that the industry is stampeding into lionizing and | monetizing another thing that ultimately statistics say may not | be working better than placebo and has harmful side effects, | but 20-50% of the population is on and is also responsible for | a large percentage of health care spending. | | SSRIs are that. Opiates are almost that (for long term pain | management.) Statins are suspicious (and also held up as | miracles by paid experts suggesting that we might add both them | and lithium to the water supply like fluoride.) | | I see a future of bare clinic rooms filled with beds, and on | each bed someone who is being intravenously fed psychedelics | (that are still illegal to grow, or take without a doctor's | signoff and a nurse's supervision.) Each of them paying a $10 | copay, while the facility bills the government and insurance | $500/hr. | | It'll be like the methadone clinic model, where we decided that | to get people off heroin, we would addict them to a drug far | harder to quit than heroin. | | edit: I wish we would simply decriminalize psychedelics, and | not do this thing again where something gets captured by a | couple of oligarchs and sends their worth into the | stratosphere, while every media outlet is fanning the flames. | Really fucking dreading seeing the psychedelic (completely | industry-funded) patients' rights organizations representatives | getting interviewed while crying on tv about how | party/politician X doesn't take depression seriously and is | trying to genocide them by not letting five year olds trip. | krona wrote: | The SSRI narrative seems to be unwinding, very quickly. | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01661-0 | p_j_w wrote: | It's not been very quick, the serotonin hypothesis has had | huge question marks around it for as long as I've been | reading about it, which is 10 years. | [deleted] | throwpsychosis wrote: | If anyone with mental health issues is considering psychedelics | on their own, outside a clinical setting: please be careful and | do your research beforehand. They nearly completely ruined my | life. Definitely do not do them if you are on an SSRI. | | I am bipolar but was diagnosed incorrectly with depression and | OCD, taking an SSRI. I was a regular marijuana smoker and took | DMT which resulted in acute psychosis that lasted months. I'd had | what I now recognized as hypomanic episodes before, but nothing | this bad. | | I will not get into details for privacy reasons but had to take | months off of work or school. I alternately thought I was famous, | being followed, could control cameras that were following me at | all times - the works. I had visual and auditory hallucinations | days after the DMT experience, auditory weeks to months later. I | told friends strange things about my mental health history that | were misperceived. It is a bit of a blur. | | About a week after taking DMT, I was involuntarily hospitalized | and only sent home with family supervision. They put me on strong | antipsychotics with nasty side effects. They didn't help at all. | I only got better months later, after I got off of all | psychiatric drugs, and realized when talking with a friend that I | was not famous. I then entered into a nearly year long depression | and perceived that I had lost almost all my friends, although I | now think that was not the case. | | Now, I've been stable for almost 10 years, and am married with a | great career. We have a dog, a house, and are looking to have | kids soon. I'm incredibly happy and only recovered with the | support of family, friends, and great doctors. I've been taking | lamotrigine daily for bipolar. For me, it is a wonder drug. | Bipolar is incredibly hard for psychiatrists to diagnose. It took | them years to identify it. | | Another friend of mine had acute psychosis due to another | psychedelic drug and had a similar experience to mine with a | hospitalization. | | If you have any family history of schizophrenia or bipolar or are | on psychiatric drugs, please really carefully consider the | possible consequences of using psychedelics. | kirel33 wrote: | Lamotrigine has been a wonder drug for me, I'm still early days | on my treatment but can already notice the massive | improvements! | | just adding my comment so people see that getting help is | perfectly fine (if you get the right treatment/diagnosis, it's | a life changer for the best!) - mental health is still a bit | taboo in some circles and I remember reading about the good | experiences of people online made me finally jump into | treatment :) | huetius wrote: | A friend of mine has a similar story. Still searching for his | good ending. I'm glad you're better. | | I feel like we're at the beginning of the opioid wave again, | and the obvious and foreseeable negative consequences are just | being shunted aside. We never learn anything. | ncmncm wrote: | Yes. Anyone borderline schizophrenic should be very, very | careful around psychedelics. | | But I have seen good results (treatment-seeking, successful) in | borderline schizophrenics after exposure to MDMA. | fritztastic wrote: | Thank you for sharing that. That's a valid concern- people | trying psychedelics on their own also run into the risk that | what they're getting is altered, not what they wanted at all, | or unintentionally taking a dose that will bring them bad | outcomes. Even with cannabis, back when it was completely | illegal, I knew people who would sometimesb unknowingly get | their hands on batches that had been laced with something else | and end up having wildly unpredictable (and sometimes | frightening) experiences. | jasonhansel wrote: | A lot of people here are claiming that Big Pharma is suppressing | the truth about psychedelics so that they can make money from | SSRIs. But remember: Big Pharma _isn 't_ making much money on | SSRIs anymore, now that they've gone generic. If anything, it's | the movement _against_ SSRIs and in favor of new treatments that | may be motivated by profit. | gnz11 wrote: | A drug becoming available as a generic doesn't mean end of | shady practices to maximize profits. | https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/pharmaceutical-companies-pay-... | eluketronic wrote: | Psilocybin is still something that can be grown/synthesized | outside of a lab. Sure, major pharmaceutical companies could | synthesize pure psilocybin and sell that as a new treatment in | some kind of ideal form but it seem that from a lot of | anecdotes posted here as well as many other stories I've heard, | "normal", non-lab-produced psilocybe mushrooms can have a | profiundly positive effect. This might be what big pharma is | seeing as a potential opportunity loss and therefore funding | studies that skew results in a less positive way. | jasonhansel wrote: | The issue is that your doctor can't write a prescription for | the mushrooms themselves, so those aren't likely to become a | mainstream treatment. | | The more likely outcome is that the industry will create a | synthetic analogue of psilocybin, conduct the trials needed | to get it FDA-approved as a depression treatment, and then | market it widely, making it more readily available and widely | known than psilocybin itself. | | This isn't necessarily a bad thing: such an analogue might | (say) have fewer side effects or work more reliably. But it | will result in the pharmaceutical industry getting the bulk | of the profits. | smt88 wrote: | Big Pharma has more money to make from psychedelics than from | suppressing them. They're already selling ketamine and | ketamine-adjacent drugs for depression. | jamal-kumar wrote: | I made friends with a woman who does something called integration | therapy. She deals mostly with people who have gone and dosed | themselves in the hope of finding themselves or whatever and just | end up needing professional help because that's a very hard thing | to do to yourself if you're already messed up. | | The way I've always seen it is this - Learning your lesson with | these things is kind of like learning your lesson because you | just got your ass handed to you in a fist fight, except with | psychedelics it's like getting cosmically beaten into a pulp by | having your consciousness put into a cannon and fired across the | universe and back. Some people are really attuned to this kind of | thing and can just shake it off while laughing the entire time. | Others, who have no idea what they're getting into, with stuff | like pre-existing anxiety conditions? If anyone really thinks | them going solo on these kind of journeys is going to make them | better then they might as well send them down some rapids with no | boating or swimming experience for a 'therapeutic' prank show. | | The key thing this article and the researchers touch on is that | it's the integration part of the therapy that works, the drug is | something like a catalyst, and any hype around treatments which | work without that component is likely to turn out to be a | dangerous disappointment. I don't disagree with this at all. | lawrenceyan wrote: | I think you need some kind of framework in order to utilize | psychedelics properly. Buddhist or other meditation oriented | practices are very popular, but not the only path. | | The important thing is to have something you can cultivate | because otherwise what might happen is that you accidentally | heighten your existing feedback loops, which are likely negative, | leading to a bad trip and in the worst case possibly psychosis. | | Having strong foundational positive feedback loops that you can | use as a anchor or bedrock are useful not only during chemically | altered brain states, but in general life as well in protecting | your mind (a Patronus for your "defense against the dark arts" | you might say). | braindead_in wrote: | > Afterward, participants received aftercare, known as | "integration," in which they process everything that happened | during the trip. | | Integration is definitely the key step. Without integration, the | trip is no different than recreational use for fun. Integration | requires sustained effort and guidance. If you don't have | professional help, then meditation is the best DIY method. It | usually leads to Spirituality. Pyschedlics tend to go very well | with Buddhist and Vedantic spiritual practices. I think it best | complements with Neo-Advaita. If Advaita is the theory, then | psychedelics are the practicals. | darawk wrote: | > The findings were somewhat lackluster: it found that the | psychedelic was only marginally better than traditional | treatments at relieving depression. | | Err, what? What could possibly be lackluster about that? A one | time (or few times) treatment does marginally better than a daily | pill? Even if taken at face value, that's a spectacular result. | p_j_w wrote: | It's also just one single study. Maybe there's more out there, | but this article doesn't even remotely make the case that its | headline implies. | nostromo wrote: | The actual paper states things more clearly. | | > In this trial _the primary outcome did not differ | significantly between the trial groups._ | | > Secondary outcomes generally favored psilocybin over | escitalopram; however, the confidence intervals for the | between-group differences were not adjusted for multiple | comparisons, and _no conclusions can be drawn from these data._ | mtalantikite wrote: | Another thing that stood out to me is that all participants | actually received psilocybin, it's just that one group took | 25mg vs the ssri group that took 1mg. It's certainly a very | small dose, but it's a powerful chemical that seems to have | effects even at these microdose levels. It would have been nice | to see a group that had no psilocybin at all. | tony_cannistra wrote: | I was totally struck by the sexual abuse perpetrated by | therapists within research studies that this article talks about. | It belies a need for much more careful scrutiny of the whole | research enterprise, if you ask me. | | I can't believe someone who wants to help someone else (and, by | the way, try to demonstrate the power of psychedelics that they | no-doubt believe in) would jeopardize the whole enterprise that | way. | | Why has nobody in this thread commented on that? | AndrewVos wrote: | Probably because sexual abuse is a bad thing that happens, but | not something that invalidates taking drugs to cure depression? | ChrisMarshallNY wrote: | _> create a "psychedelic utopia."_ | | To those of us "of a certain age," this sounds ... _familiar_. | mistermann wrote: | Let's hope we screw it up _less badly_ this time, and maybe | eventually get it to stick. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-09-03 23:01 UTC)