[HN Gopher] Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new... ___________________________________________________________________ Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for them Author : benbreen Score : 74 points Date : 2023-06-29 17:54 UTC (2 days ago) (HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com) | TaylorAlexander wrote: | About two months ago I was at a festival with friends and a I had | a psychedelic experience. What's funny is earlier that day I had | just told my friends "I know this sounds boring but I don't like | dancing that much." Then while I was tripping I found that I was | really enjoying the dancing. I felt like I was tapping in to a | part of myself that had been dormant for a long time. I felt | really confident and cool and sexy dancing to the music, and had | a wonderful time. The thing about this is that in the subsequent | weeks and to this day the confidence is still here. I have come | to realize that the pandemic messed me up in ways that I hadn't | even realized! I'm pretty in touch with myself - I go to therapy | once a week but I'm usually talking about work and relationships. | Dating in particular felt hard and I didn't know why, but since | rediscovering my confidence dating has been going very well for | me. Now when I talk to people I like I'm finding them asking me | for my number or asking me out. I had a cute friend I've been | crushing on for a while nervously ask me for a kiss! | | The point is that there are parts of us that are nearly | accessible but our brain pathways need a little temporary | loosening to strengthen some of those pathways, and psychedelics | can do just that. They're no panacea and it takes some experience | to really gain the desired effects. But they can also just be | enjoyable and they're generally harmless, and it's such a shame | that they're so stigmatized. I live in Oakland where they have | decriminalized mushrooms and I'd like to see more | decriminalization and ultimately legalization of mushrooms, LSD, | and more. | | I have a friend who has been doing legal ketamine therapy under | the care of their therapist and it has helped them realize the | ways in which they had been hanging on to old relationships which | were holding them back. They're finding out how to advocate for | their own needs and they're much happier for it. | | We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and psychedelic | therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could use to help | people find themselves. | | Though I should say, probably because I just listened to a bunch | of Noam Chomsky last night, that allowing broad swaths of the | population to become more deeply in touch with their core needs | threatens the status quo and current power dynamics. Honestly tho | the structures of power are so solidified I'm not sure there's | really much actual risk to them from drug legalization. | ernst_klim wrote: | I don't think there's any kind of global anti-drug conspiracy. | | Anti-drug fear mongering is a byproduct of few factors: | ignorance (people confuse crack, LSD and say MDMA, labeling | everything as drug), valid fears (LSD was legal while being | underresearched and that lead to few terrible events), self- | propelled drugwar cycle (drugs caused wave of fear, became a | good target for politicians, that caused even more fear | mongering and the cycle is closed), and valid historical | concerns (many drugs are very bad and caused pretty terrible | historical precedents like opium abuse in China). | | People are getting more educated on drugs these days, and more | questions arise in the society regarding if certain kinds of | drugs like LSD should be more available. Though it would be a | long road. | chiefalchemist wrote: | > We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and | psychedelic therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could | use to help people find themselves. | | While I agree with everything else you said, this bit concerns | me. I'm certainly in favor of using these tools to help anyone | who needs help. But maybe we should start with a mirror, and | collectively ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?" | | These psychedelics can help resolve the symptoms, but what are | we going to collectively take to address the root problem(s)? | And when? | golergka wrote: | > But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively | ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?" | | Because that's the default.. People haven't evolved to be | happy; we have evolved to barely survive to have kids and | care for them so that a few become adults. Being happy is the | exception, you should ask how anyone manages that. | nemo44x wrote: | I sort of agree with this. We've been marketed to that we | should be happy and that buying <thing|experience> will | make us happy. These <things|experiences> will bring | pleasure but they don't create meaningful happiness. As if | pleasure and happiness are the same thing. But they are | often conflated. | | I can't tell or teach people "how to be happy". I'm not | even sure that's possible or if it's something everyone can | do or would really want to. But I do know that being hooked | on a treadmill of pleasurable experiences isn't it. | newacct3 wrote: | > But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively | ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?" | | How is this even supposed to be determined? It isn't like you | can test for happiness like you test a pool for Ph levels. | Assuming we can is optimistic | dr_dshiv wrote: | Thanks for sharing. Great example. | slibhb wrote: | For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone | like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt- | derealization-and-... | | Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is | much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a | stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and | addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by | the way. | | It seems clear that psychedelics are going mainstream and, | unlike the 60s and 70s, they will be legal in some places. I'm | not convinced that ths will be a net good, partly because it's | not clear that it was a net good in the 60s and 70s, but we'll | see. | knightofmars wrote: | You are implying a 1:1 relationship with good experiences and | bad experiences. That's not how drugs work. It is important | to know the actual reality of this type of ratio so that | individuals who are looking to use a drug of this nature can | be well informed. | slibhb wrote: | No, I'm positing a 1:1 relationship between "holy shit I am | a new person" in a good way and "holy shit I am a new | person" in a bad way. | | That's not the same as good/bad experiences. | marcod wrote: | > Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way. | | https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-07-ketamine- | addiction.ht... | | I have done the medically assisted Ketamine trips. No sign | them being addicting to me whatsoever. It didn't do a whole | lot for me, but some of the other peeps in my cohort had | amazing results working through old grief. | slibhb wrote: | It's well known that ketamine is addictive. Just google | "ketamine addiction". It's an effective antidepressant for | many people but you can't take it long term because | tolerance develops quickly. | golergka wrote: | There's nothing stopping you from dancing on acid or shrooms. | In fact, that's the whole point of psytrance. | jagaerglad wrote: | I have been struggling a lot with dating. Despite being a quite | social, and often popular guy to be around, there has been some | block/hump that always stood in the way of dating. Funnily | enough it struck me some weeks ago that I probably have to go | on a psychadelic trip to rewire my brain to be able to show my | interest romatically to others. What I'm scared of is the | possibility of it having some other undesired effect though | | I had a similar experience with dancing though. Thought I hated | it, and I always had to force myself to do it, until I started | (modestly) drinking alcohol. My body would dance for me and I | would enjoy it. The effect more or less stuck around and I even | genuinely have days of more confidence after a night with | alcohol. | | All of this is mildly depressing though. It feels as though we | are just our brains (maybe obviously), but just that we're the | strange effects of the functions of a non-magical/soul-less | organ in our heads primarily just meant to steer our bodies. | Those thoughts make drugs both existentially liberating but at | the same time also "imprisoning" for me | [deleted] | kortex wrote: | > All of this is mildly depressing though. It feels as though | we are just our brains (maybe obviously), but just that we're | the strange effects of the functions of a non-magical/soul- | less organ in our heads primarily just meant to steer our | bodies. Those thoughts make drugs both existentially | liberating but at the same time also "imprisoning" for me | | That is certainly one way of looking at things, and one of | the more frequent perspectives I harbor. But I've also had | enough trips down the rabbit hole to realize there's more to | it than that. _Way_ more to it. | | We are definitely strange effects for sure. We are haunted | atoms that formed in the core of a dying star. Weird, right? | If you find that worldview imprisoning, I encourage you to | question it. Magic is often simply what you need it to be, no | need to get hung up on whether magic is "real" or not, | because that doesn't actually matter. | | Check out Discordianism if you haven't already. It's kinda | like hot swapping reality tunnels. No need to commit to one | ontology all the time :). | mahathu wrote: | >I have been struggling a lot with dating. | | >I probably have to go on a psychadelic trip to rewire my | brain to be able to show my interest romatically to others | | u wot m8 | __MatrixMan__ wrote: | I totally agree that: | | > We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and | psychedelic therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could | use to help people find themselves. | | But our blues haven't appeared from nowhere. We have | significant cultural institutions that function primarily by | dividing the populace against itself. Getting healthy likely | means waking up to the fact that we're under attack and doing | something other than "self care" about it. | | So I disagree with: | | > the structures of power are so solidified I'm not sure | there's really much actual risk to them from drug legalization. | | They seem pretty shaky to me. Which is for the best. Being | powerful _should_ come with a fear of the people you have power | over. If you 're one weird trip away from a revolution then | it's probably time to start treating your people better. | s1artibartfast wrote: | >Getting healthy likely means waking up to the fact that | we're under attack and doing something other than "self care" | about it. | | I pretty strongly disagree with this sentiment. The vast | majority of misery in this country is self-inflicted from | buying into a worldview and lifestyle that is inherently | unfulfilling. The self care of conferring oneself from that | mindset goes a long way. | webnrrd2k wrote: | There is some history in the US with regards to power | structures, getting needs met, and psychedelics. Mostly in | the late 60's and early 70's there was a big counterculture | movement that focused on exactly those things, and the power | structures at the time were certainly threatened, and created | things like cointelpro. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=Overall%2. | ... | coder4life wrote: | https://archive.is/XCkZD | triyambakam wrote: | > I have met others who only stand and look at you blankly, who | have lost their desire, even their self-respect. They have lost, | shall we say, the structure through which their mind force | previously flowed, and it has not been replaced. | | > What happens to a Hindu yogi when he enters a superconscious | state of bliss in which his mind opens up, turns to light, and he | sees the world revolving below the state of his suspended | consciousness? He has arrived at this state through many years of | practice in concentration, meditation and contemplation, many | years of building strong nerve fiber. But in a momentary high on | LSD or any other powerful psychedelic, such as mushrooms, peyote, | ecstasy or DMT, the nerve structure is strained, in a sense which | we can best describe as abnormal, to allow the individual to | reach this exalted consciousness. Coming out of it, the result is | often a kind of shock in which the person has a great difficulty | in readjusting to any kind of normal routine. [1] | | [1] Living with Siva, 79 | jokoon wrote: | Whatever you do please don't advocate to replace ssri with | psychedelics. Listen to a doctor or psychiatrist, just like it | was for vaccines. | | And avoid personal anecdote, they have little value compared to | what a doctor says. | | Thanks in advance. | bigyikes wrote: | I agree with your main point, but the bit about anecdotes is | tricky. We live in a society where research and information on | these substances has been suppressed. As a result, anecdotes, | to a large degree, are all we have. | | This is gradually changing as we see new studies emerging with | the relaxation of regulation. However, the picture the data | paint is still quite limited compared to the wealth of personal | experiences that have been recorded over the decades. | yieldcrv wrote: | I agree, I sometimes run into people - usually corporate | employee, college educated people - "straight edge" people that | are just getting around to experimenting with psychadelics and | say things like "I'm not really into _drugs_ " and treading | carefully for that reason | | Its a smart approach | | But being unable to distinguish between "drugs" is sad | | Its a categorization problem, its a anti drug education problem | that also categorized everything together and conflated | everything with wild rumors. Its a supply chain problem as | substances do need to be tested to ensure you are only getting | your psychedelic. | benbreen wrote: | I'm the author of the OP. Happy to talk more about the history of | psychedelics. | | I also wanted to flag that if anyone is interested in some of the | historical sources I cite here (such as the Jesuit talking about | ayahuasca in the 18th century) I go into more detail in this | journal article, which is open access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/a... | ImAnAmateur wrote: | I've got a question for you. Some people are very carefree with | their use of psychoactive drugs. I'd say nearly everyone I've | ever seen post online about trying mushrooms, LSD, etc. has | done it for fun (or the experience) instead of spiritual, | psychological, or medicinal reasons. | | What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to have a | friend hurt themselves. | mschuster91 wrote: | > What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to | have a friend hurt themselves. | | Have your friend research Erowid, a place where people have | posted all possible sorts of information about mind-altering | substances and their risks. | ImAnAmateur wrote: | That is a good source. I've forgotten about that site for | years. Thank you. | colecut wrote: | I would imagine the same risks as someone doing it for | spiritual, psychological, or medicinal reasons | operatingthetan wrote: | Right, I'm confused what they are trying to accomplish | gatekeeping others intent. | ImAnAmateur wrote: | How is that gatekeeping? I'm trying to ask about what the | risks are for people who take it at a party or a festival | or at home for fun. | | >Psychedelics like psilocybin have a remarkably benign | safety profile relative to other Schedule One drugs, not | to mention very different social, cultural and historical | roles. Lumping psychedelics together with powerful | opioids like fentanyl misdirects resources, diminishes | buy-in from the public and undercuts the legitimacy of | federal drug laws. | | The author of the article does not specify what risks | these drugs have. Simply that they are relatively less | dangerous than synthetic opioids. | otherme123 wrote: | There are some studies, and LSD is quite safe. Way safer | than alcohol, for example. | | But being on a very tight Schedule I (like MDMA, also | quite safe), worse even than morphine, good luck | researching the risks. It's a catch 22: we don't know the | risks, so we ban studies about the substance. We don't | have studies about the risks, so we cannot unban it. | | When LSD was liberally consumed (1960's), there were | almost no deaths related to it. And the very few reports | are suspiciously "suicides" or "near suicides", which all | of them seems to be accidents while tripping, like any | drunk commit everyday (and not like LSD makes you | suicidal by choice). More serious reports have found | _zero_ deaths directly linked with LSD toxicity: | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29408722/ | umanwizard wrote: | Sadly, "LSD is safe" doesn't mean "things sold as LSD and | that feel similar to LSD are safe". Lots of research | chemical LSD analogues feel very similar to LSD but are | dangerous. Just wanted to leave that disclaimer in case | anyone on the fence about trying it reads this. Be | careful. | emptysongglass wrote: | MDMA is not quite safe. We have decades of research to | prove otherwise now. r/DrugNerds have been putting out | study after study pointing this out. The protocols | required and safety measures for how often to dose are | not what folks are going to be doing generally. It is | neurotoxic. | | LSD on the other hand, yes quite safe (and even good) for | _your brain_ , unless you're prone to mental illness or | currently suffering from mental illness. | nemosaltat wrote: | Since we're speculating. I would imagine like just about | all human experience, framing, priming and setting matter | quite a lot. | renewiltord wrote: | Given that, it seems like fun and pleasure are probably | safer than medicinal. | bozhark wrote: | Recreational will happen despite the restrictions. Why | not tax it an apply the funds where socially needed? | colecut wrote: | I agree that set and setting are huge factors in your | psychedelics experience. I am 'speculating' but also do | have a lot of experience in a variety of psychedelics. | | I'm not sure where "intent" falls on that spectrum. The | vast majority of my experiences have been "for fun" or | "for the experience" at music festivals, concerts, or at | home.. | | I have also taken ayahuasca and changa with a shaman. I | was doing it "for the experience", but how is that | different from someone else who was in the same room as | me doing it an attempt to treat depression or anxiety? | How would the risks be different? | | Being an anxious or depressed person in general may | increase risk factors of negative experience. This is | still not related to intent. | bozhark wrote: | Anxious or depressed people benefit from the experience | more so than someone of speculatively sound mind. | colecut wrote: | I think by the nature of their position, they have more | to potentially benefit. | | But it's totally possible for an anxious person to end up | worse. | [deleted] | coderintherye wrote: | Erowid is a great resource for these sorts of questions: | https://erowid.org | | In fact they have an answer specific to your question on | mushrooms: https://www.erowid.org/ask/ask.php?ID=1606 | | In short, there is very little risk but whether or not | someone should choose to take something should still be an | informed choice. As far as risk to life, there's been few or | no reported deaths purely due to ingesting psilocybin. | However, there are small risks around operating heavy | machinery (e.g. driving) after as well as small risks around | ensuring you are actually ingesting a safe psilocybe mushroom | as opposed to a different toxic mushroom. | s1artibartfast wrote: | I think there's a lot more nuance than even that. Many | psychedelics can trigger or exacerbate undesirable mental | conditions that persist for the rest of your life. | bozhark wrote: | Nah, they don't cause undesirable mental conditions that | persist for the rest of your life. Your "trip" is about | 6-8 hours on a typical 3.5g dose. | kayodelycaon wrote: | That's not what they said, psychedelics can trigger | preexisting vulnerabilities to mental disorders. A | psychotic break can do enormous damage. | bozhark wrote: | Caffeine is a psychoactive drug. | photochemsyn wrote: | As far as the cover photo, I don't think ketamine (a | replacement for PCP) and MDMA (an analogue of drugs like | Adderall (amphetamine class)) qualify as psychedelics. It makes | more sense to classify psychedelics as 5-HT2A partial agonists, | meaning LSD, psilocybin, DMT and analogs like bufotenin, and | mescaline, from a pharmacological perspective. See: | | (LSD, mescaline, psilocybin) | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5756147/ | | (DMT) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9768567/ | | Ketamine and MDMA in contrast act through different pathways, | the former being a dissociative anaesthetic acting via the NMDA | receptor, and MDMA acting as much via dopamine receptors | (though unlike other amphetamines, it also increases serotonin | levels significantly). In popular use, these are so-called | party drugs, and users often have no idea what they're taking | (amphetamines and ketamine have been commonly sold as MDMA). I | don't know why they've been lumped in with true psychedelics so | frequently, but they're much more likely to be used | recreationally as a replacement for alcohol, cocaine, etc. | | Secondly, I think naive users should be aware that the true | psychedelics are indeed dangerous if not treated with caution | and respect, in the same sense that a motorcycle is. Drive a | motorcycle too fast, bad things happen. Ingesting a large | amount of psychedelics is similar. There are at least two | particular dangers: immediately, a psychedelic overdose leaves | the user ambulatory, so they can end up falling off cliffs, | walking into traffic, and otherwise oblivious to dangerous | situations. Secondly, some people have traumatic responses to | very large doses of psychedelics that can take months to | recover from (dissociation from reality, paranoia, etc.). | | Still, I think these drugs can be immensely beneficial and | people should be able to access them, much as people should be | able to drive motorcycles. Perhaps one solution is that they | should only be supplied in low dosage packaging (aka microdose | amounts), such that people don't accidentally take large doses | with the common unfortunate consequences. It's generally not a | good idea to think of them as 'recreational' either, although | many people are going to use them that way. | jokowueu wrote: | What a weird thing to gatekeep. | | What you have mentioned are called classic psychadelics . | | Something being a psychadelic has nothing to do with it's | pathways. | | Let's take a look at the definition . | | Psychedelics are a subclass of hallucinogenic drugs whose | primary effect is to trigger non-ordinary mental states | (known as psychedelic experiences or psychedelic "trips") | and/or an apparent expansion of consciousness | | This fits ketamine perfectly, I have tried many substances | and ketamine is one of the most powerful substances I have | tried . | pcthrowaway wrote: | Just because they act through different pathways doesn't mean | they're not psychedelics. | | They're not Tryptamines, sure, but they _are_ psychedelic | even if they act differently from "classical hallucinogens" | (to borrow a similarly strange term I've read in scientific | literature). | | Salvia is also not a 5-HT2A agonist, does that mean it's not | a psychedelic? | cies wrote: | The categories law has for drugs suck, psychs dont need a new | category, they simply need to be unscheduled. Like daffodils. | ttctciyf wrote: | I'm curious why you're dissatisfied with the organically | arrived at "folk taxonomic" category: _psychedelics_. Are you | looking for a new classification in law? | JadeNB wrote: | The article specifically refers not just to the cultural, but | also to the legal and medical, thinking about psychedelics. | ttctciyf wrote: | From the article: | | > this new landscape demands more than just new laws. It | also requires a new category for psychedelics. Are they | recreational drugs? Are they medicines? Are they religious | sacraments? | | I'm asking why we can't just answer this question with | "They are psychedelics". | crazygringo wrote: | Because legally, that's as meaningful as saying "they are | quooquaquams". | | The entire point of categorizing them is to answer | questions around: | | - Should they be sold to take recreationally, like | tobacco and alcohol? Should there be limits, like tobacco | packaging and taxes, or rules similar to drunk driving? | | - Or should they only be prescribed by doctors for mental | health reasons, and not allowed recreationally or in | religious ceremonies? | | - Or should there be exceptions for certain religious | ceremonies as well? Is this open to anyone (so Catholics | can invent a ceremony) or only ones that have | traditionally used it? Does it require licensing or | authorization? | | By categorizing them, we come to answers on these | questions. If they fit into existing categories, we don't | have to write many new laws except to state the | categories. Or if we decide they don't fit into existing | categories, we come up with a new category with its own | set of answers and new laws to write, but part of this | whole process is determining if that's necessary or not. | And even if it is, the name of the label may not be | "psychadelics" because we realize there's another set of | non-psychadelic compounds that make sense to be included | as well (e.g. empathogens like MDMA). | PragmaticPulp wrote: | > Because legally, that's as meaningful as saying "they | are quooquaquams". | | I don't see how this is at all equivalent, given that | "psychedelics" is a well-known term that can be found | throughout decades of literature and that gibberish word | you just made up has no attached meaning. | | If you're equating random gibberish words to well-known | words in literature then why does anything have any | meaning? Why would a new word have meaning? | | Regardless, the laws generally don't refer to | "psychedelics", they refer to specific chemicals by their | name. There are numerous compounds that would be | considered psychedelics that are, nevertheless, not | illegal because they're not covered by any laws | (including analog acts) | crazygringo wrote: | Because the term found through decades of literature | isn't attached to legal categories, as I explained. It's | the same way the term "drug" doesn't have much legal | distinction, as I can't think of any legal commonalities | spanning coffee, alcohol, Lipitor, cannabis, and heroin. | | > _Regardless, the laws... refer to specific chemicals by | their name._ | | Not directly, very often. I doubt there's any specific | law around Lipitor. Rather, drugs are grouped into | categories and then the laws that permit or restrict them | are mostly around those categories. Otherwise it would | all be incredibly redundant (with exceptions for certain | incredibly common drugs like alcohol). And the question | here is how to categorize pyschadelics for legal | purposes. And saying that we just call them psychadelics | answers as many legal questions as saying we call them | quooquaquams -- i.e. zero. | ttctciyf wrote: | So, short answer, "yes a legal category is what's being | asked for". | | Got it. | JumpCrisscross wrote: | Is there a downside to totally deregulating them? | JumpCrisscross wrote: | Is there a downside to deregulating them? (Like | supplements.) | bozhark wrote: | There is not licensing or authorization for religion. | | There is no application for approval required to be a | "church", ie: religion. | | Thinking there could be some "authority" for a religious | institution's practices is beyond measure. | crazygringo wrote: | There absolutely is both for tax purposes as well as for | legal religious exemptions. | | You can't just arbitrarily call your house a church to | avoid paying property taxes. Government authorities have | to make decisions all the time over what they deem to be | a legitimate religious organization. | | You obviously don't need a license or authorization to | engage in otherwise legal religious practice, but as soon | as you want legal exemptions, the government most | certainly has a say. And the ritual consumption of | otherwise illegal drugs couldn't be a more perfect | example. | [deleted] | refurb wrote: | Many drugs are already all of those. | | Opioids are both recreational drugs and medicines. | | Peyote is a recreational drug and religious sacrament. | | This seems to ignore this fact. | jimbob45 wrote: | Do you have any data on the level of criminality of those on | psychedelics versus a control group? ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-07-01 23:00 UTC)