First federal grant for psychedelic treatment research in 50 years

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/newsroom/news-releases/johns-hopkins-medicine-receives-first-federal-grant-for-psychedelic-treatment-research-in-50-years

by infodocket • 5 years ago

512 113 5 years ago

hopkinsmedicine.org

yellow_lead• 5 years ago

It will be interesting to see the results, which may have built-in reproduce-ability.

The study will be conducted simultaneously at the three institutions to diversify the pool of participants and increase confidence that results apply to a wide range of people who smoke.

standardUser• 5 years ago

It's nice to see the cowards and control freaks losing their fight to increase human suffering. But wow it has been a long, expensive road with uncountable casualties.

sammalloy3• 5 years ago

Science progresses, one funeral at a time. Most of the opposition to psychedelics eventually just died out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

ultra_nick• 5 years ago

Watch one of these turn out to a miracle cure for some random disease.

I can understand preventing access to dangerous drugs for the average person, but keeping ourselves deliberately ignorant by blocking research was stupid.

babyshake• 5 years ago

It's impossible to talk about how dangerous psychedelics are without context of the dosage as well as the setting for higher doses. We don't consider alcohol to be especially dangerous only because it requires a very large amount of most forms of alcoholic beverages to result in alcohol poisoning and death.

rib3ye• 5 years ago

Like anything else, doesn't that depend on the concentration?

CryoLogic• 5 years ago

The active dose to LD50 ratio for alcohol is somewhere about 1:13 depending on tolerance. For Magic Mushrooms or LSD, it is above 1:1000.

In other words, it is nearly impossible to accidentally kill yourself via overdose on psychedelics - but somewhat easy with alcohol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose

Dumblydorr• 5 years ago

You vaguely imply psychedelics are dangerous, comparing them to alcohol, yet you provide zero evidence of their dangers. Sounds like you need to flesh out your post, it comes across anti-psychdelic with no reasoning.

Especially odd because we DO consider alcohol dangerous, why else is there a 21 age minimum on it, why else is drunk driving a scourge and menace? The "danger of psychedelics" looks meek by comparison.

dekhn8• 5 years ago

After many years reading about Leary, I realize now that he set the field back by decades.

kesslern• 5 years ago

Michael Pollen talks about this in his book, How To Change Your Mind. It's insane how irresponsible Leary was. A good example is what's commonly called the Good Friday Experiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_Chapel_Experiment

gremloni3• 5 years ago

Intuitively, we learnt a lot about human behavior when we were able to do those unethical experiments back in the 60s and 70s. Set us back yes, but “set us back” by being moving us forward unsustainably.

dekhn8• 5 years ago

I'm more concerned about the lack of random sampling:

Leary and Alpert taught a class that was required for graduation and colleagues felt they were abusing their power by pressuring graduate students to take hallucinogens in the experiments. Leary and Alpert also went against policy by giving psychedelics to undergraduate students, and did not select participants through random sampling. It was also problematic that the researchers sometimes took hallucinogens along with the subjects they were supposed to be studying

pvarangot3• 5 years ago

It's hard to blame it on a single person. The Stanford Prison Experiment didn't involve any drugs and was as or even more irresponsible than Leary's messianic psychedelic mania fueled binge. The Stanford Prison Experiment was in 1971, Leary had already been indicted of multiple charges by that year if not in prison already, according to Wikipedia he was fired from Harvard in 1963.

So eight whole years after Learys irresponsibility the ethical standards for human experimentation in psychology were still nowhere near to what they are today.

tayo422• 5 years ago

The perspective given in this book was really interesting to read. Way different the typical story you get out of drug communities

tenaciousDaniel2• 5 years ago

Agreed. I think Alexander Shulgin deserves some blame as well, though maybe not to the same extent.

dekhn8• 5 years ago

I recall talking to a guy when I was working at Berkeley who was convinced that you could take shulgin's work and expand it to larger sample sizes and use it as a basis of rational drug design for psychedelics. I see Shulgin as a bit of a different character, and he was embedded in an time and area that had already absorbed LSD and was ready for psychonautical adventures.

robbedpeter2• 5 years ago

I respectfully disagree. What Shulgin did simply represented rational science and protocols for self experimentation. He established some of the best possible harm reduction methodologies, and communicated his knowledge to the world through PIKHAL and TIKHAL. Through those books he's saved countless lives and minds as people used and shared his guidelines.

He was a subtle rebel, who played by the rules and they kept changing the rules until they could shackle his research.

The context of the war on drugs and the vastly restrictive IP laws created the current culture of drug development and research. That culture is dominated by the pseudo capitalism and monopolistic death grip Big Pharma has on drugs in general, and their development and manufacture in particular.

People absolutely should be allowed to self experiment, and knowledge should be freely available. Shulgin and his wife showed virtually no I'll effects after a life of responsible drug use - he lived to a vigorous 89, and his wife is still kicking around at 90! I wish their brand of drug use had taken deep root in American culture such that substance use was appreciated and respected and approached with the caution it deserves. If high school children were given drug use education, and pharmacies were a legal source of all drugs without the asinine scheduling prohibitions, so many tragedies could have been avoided.

Even most doctors don't prescribe drugs as responsibly and carefully as they should, and people are ignorant and ill prepared for anything that happens. They could use Shulgin's approach, carefully increasing dosage and providing patients with a common verbal framework with which to describe their experience.

Anyway, sorry to rant. Shulgin is a hero to me - a gentle rebel who made his PhD count for something he believed in.

mysecretaccount• 5 years ago

Leary was just the fall guy – Nixon sent the field back decades. The narrative about Leary's damage to the psychedelic movement is massively overstated.

Here is a relevant discussion between Michael Pollan and Hamilton Morris about this: https://youtu.be/XvMArmwI10Q?t=2744

eminence32• 5 years ago

This is an off-topic comment, but in the title it seems the word "for" was replaced by the letter "4" -- is this a common substitution for NH titles? Was it done because of length constraints?

napsterbr• 5 years ago

Was it done because of length constraints?

Yep, most likely. The title has exactly 80 characters, which is the limit. "Years" was also abbreviated.

drannex• 5 years ago

Personal opinion, but I think it's time that HN increases the character limit, we are seeing more and more of these sort of things.

colechristensen6• 5 years ago

You could also change “receives” to “gets” and eliminate the word “treatment” to remove all need for awkward shortening.

jugg1es• 5 years ago

My dad is a professor of psychiatry at JHU medical school and has been telling me about this psilocybin study for years. He was always pretty strict about me doing drugs growing up, but now he's excited about the amazing results they're seeing in this study. He's even been asking me about my own hallucinogen experiences that I had growing up. The world is truly changing.

robbedpeter2• 5 years ago

I'm happy for you and your dad, and for our country - we need little victories, and this a big one for everyone. The science part has to be uniquely thrilling, though. Your dad's in a wonderful place in space and history.

tayo422• 5 years ago

My parents were real strict about drugs growing up too. Even in my late 20s I would dodge the question about drugs. Idk what changed in the last couple years. They both have gotten more open about it. More so my dad, whos now growing mushrooms and microdosing, and gave dmt and mdma a try. I showed him how to do dabs and hit a bong correctly lol. He cant get around the idea snorting something so no ketamine yet and is having trouble finding time for acid. I think Michael Pollans book helped a bit. Its crazy to see though.

I used to be pretty shy about my drug use, but i try talking about it more if it comes up. I like to think it helps get rid of the stigma.

klondike_klive• 5 years ago

They both have gotten more open about it. More so my dad, whos now growing mushrooms and microdosing, and gave dmt and mdma a try. I showed him how to do dabs and hit a bong correctly lol.

Wow. That sentence escalated quickly! (Actually if DMT reports are anything to go by, the sentence peaked there...)

cletus2• 5 years ago

Here's a fun fact: since 1968, only one US institution, the University of Mississippi, has had a Federal license to grow marijuana for medical research [1], although this may be (finally) changing [2]. The barriers to Federally funded medical research of cannabis remain significant [3]. It's almost like the University of Mississippi and the Federal government are doing everything they can to stymie research and limit access.

Also, cannabis remains a Schedule 1 drug at the Federal level. Schedule 1 drugs are "drugs of abuse" that have "no accepted medical use" [4], the same as methamphetamine and crack cocaine (and of course it's worth mentioning that powdered cocaine is the less serious Schedule 3).

All the while ~18 states have legalized recreational and/or medical cannabis at the state level [5].

The case for the continued criminalization is beyond ridiculous.

I fully support decriminalization and further study of the effect of psychedelics but I'm not confident that the US government, even with a Democratic president, a Democratic House and a (notionally) Democratic Senate won't make this as difficult as possible.

The roots of US criminalization of cannabis and psychadelics is rooted in racism (eg crack cocaine vs powder cocaine), cracking down on counterculturalism and anti-Vietnam protesters (ie the hippy movement of the 60s and 70s) and virtue signaling to a conservative and fearful voter base under the guise of "law and order" and "family values".

It's truly ridiculous we're still here some 50+ years later.

[1] https://www.drugdiscoverytrends.com/nations-only-federally-a...

[2] https://mjbizdaily.com/dea-preparing-to-ok-companies-to-grow...

[3] https://cen.acs.org/biological-chemistry/natural-products/Ca...

[4] https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._j....

tclancy• 5 years ago

I’m 100% with you, but this country will forever be legislating the fact their neighbors might be happy and enjoying life. And then the fact so much race enters into it too as you mention, just makes it addictive for certain people. It’s like crack or something.

nick__m• 5 years ago

Meth is not schedule 1, it's sold under prescription under the name of Desoxyn !!! According to the weird US federal drug schedule weed is more abusable that Meth...

throwaway0a5e• 5 years ago

Don't forget Adderall which is very similar.

wk_end• 5 years ago

Although there may be more nefarious reasons behind why crack is penalized more harshly under the law than cocaine, that scheduling is at least technically correct: powdered cocaine is indeed used as a medical anesthetic, whereas crack isn’t used for anything medically.

The classification of marijuana as not having any medical use despite being used to treat all sorts of ailments all over the country is, of course, ridiculous.

Now that I think about it - regardless of your stance on recreational drug prohibition - it does seem strange to tie penalties for illicit use or sale of a drug with whether or not the drug has so-called legitimate uses.

cletus2• 5 years ago

It's worth adding that the DEA scheduling classification is a little weird. Example: fentanyl is a Schedule 1 drug but it's an extremely potent opiate that is prescribed typically to end-stage cancer patients and others in extreme pain.

throwaway9909095• 5 years ago

I was a participant (ie, research subject) in one of the previous rounds of studying psilocybin for smoking cessation at Johns Hopkins.

I was randomly assigned to the non-psilocybin "control" group. I still successfully quit smoking -- the "cognitive behavioral therapy" and just general support was great. The researchers showed genuine care, it wasn't like being a lab rat.

Because the study was designed with a "crossover" component, I still got the option, which I took, to return 6 months later for a psilocybin session. The session was interesting, but I wouldn't say life-changing. Probably. I am still a non-smoker, over 2 years after quit date, did the 6-months-post-quit session help? Maybe?

Ask me anything! Although I'm not sure what else there is to say!

loceng3• 5 years ago

So what I'm curious about then is the practices/experiences the researchers/staff involved used/had in order to provide you with the space that you found supportive enough to help you quit smoking.

What was the dosing for the session with psilocybin? Did they tell you the strain/weight?

throwaway9909095• 5 years ago

They told me the weight, but I forget. It was a large "heroic" dose. The research protocol is perhaps already available somewhere (published paper, pre-print, registered study, not sure) which would have the dose.

They used manufactured/sythesized psilocybin compound in a capsule, not mushrooms or extracted from mushrooms.

I think they tried to take all the 'best practices' for quitting smoking and gave it to all participants, same experience up until quit day. On quit day, "control" group got a prescription for nicotine patch; "psilocybin group" got a session (and no patch!) -- the psilocybin group in this particular study was just one "heroic" dose session on smoking quit day, that's it.

Some of the supportive practices or suggestions included:

* just regular sessions, that were in some ways more or less like a "therapy" session focused on looking at smoking in your life. (whatever that means to you, it really was also just a good therapy session!)

* set your quit day near the beginning, several months before the quit day. Build up to it.

* at one period, every time you want to smoke, note what you feel like and what is precipating it, make a note of it. Develop a sense of what things make you want to smoke and why, and what role is has in your life.

* A "practice quit" day a month or two (I forget) before actual quit day -- just try not to smoke for 24 hours, see what it's like, knowing you can smoke again after that. Now you know what it's like, and that you got through the worst day, and what parts are going to be hardest and can develop more strategies for them.

* Get a clear list of the reasons you want to quit. Think about em. Write it down, to refer to it when it gets hard.

* Make a list of things you can do instead of smoking, after you quit. It doesn't matter if they are unhealthy (junk food or whatever), they're still healthier than smoking.

* after quit day, phone number of a therapist you've been working with, invitation to call or text if you feel tempted and need support and to talk through it. Therapist texted me daily checking in, seeing how it's going. (seriously, why DON'T we use techniques we associate with alcohol and other drug addiction treatment on cigarettes, you know? they are crazy addictive!)

There were other things too, additional like little cognitive-behavioral (I guess?) games/techniques. I don't even remember them all. I should have taken more notes on all of it! Just having people there rooting for you and to whom you feel kind of accountable to is big.

If their study really does show significantly more success in psylocybin group than control group, I find it meaningful that even the control group got really good support from good counselors. (And I still wouldn't say it was easy to quit!)

sammalloy3• 5 years ago

Just wanted to pipe in here: I quit smoking tobacco in 1995 due to the influence of psilocybin. We knew back then it worked. I think you need a lot more than just psychedelics to quit smoking, however. The first week was easy. The next 11 months were hard. After a year, I never wanted a cigarette ever again.

throwaway9909095• 5 years ago

Me, the first week was pretty hard, the next 6 months were still hard, the next year was a lot easier -- but I still want a cigarette with some frequency! It's just a "want" I can, now, after two years, fairly easily choose not to fulfill.

But when I see other people smoking in a context I remember being enjoyable, OR when I am especially stressed or depressed -- I definitely still want a cigarette. I don't especially think I'll ever never want a cigarette again.

They are so addictive!

vmception• 5 years ago

Its always so interesting to me to run into people conditioned to have a blanket juvenile “anti drugs” view, especially if they are US citizens

They cant even tell the difference between substances to say why or why not

If thats you, why is that? And is there any specific authority you would need to hear from to take another look?

pksebben2• 5 years ago

I worry that this is NIDA-funded. That institution has history of commissioning nonsense studies to maintain prohibitions. [1] They're also probably responsible for a series of (failed) propaganda pieces focused on maintaining an arbitrarily anti-drug culture [2]

1 http://www.ukcia.org/research/gettman.htm 2 https://slate.com/technology/2006/09/a-white-house-drug-deal...

alxndr• 5 years ago

A) it is; "The grant, totaling nearly $4 million, is funded by NIH’s National Institute on Drug Abuse."

B) your first link is 404ing

pksebben2• 5 years ago

a - Put more precisely, I worry because this is Nida-funded

b - thanks. It's too late to edit, so...

http://www.ukcia.org/research/gettman.html

edit redux: still 404-ing. rats.

pkaye• 5 years ago

I presume other countries didn't have a ban on such research so there should already be research data from those countries on the benefits of psychedelic treatment?

cyberpsybin• 5 years ago

US forces countries it trades with to align themselves with its drug laws. Just another front in war against drugs.

bwest875• 5 years ago

A friend and I did a "guided" psychedelic session earlier this year. We did it individually over one weekend. It was great. She did it for more therapeutic reasons. I did it more for philosophy/spiritual reasons. But the two main things I took away are 1.) Guided sessions are qualitatively different than recreational sessions, and 2.) It is such a crying shame that this isn't an accepted "tool in the toolbox" for therapists.

It's not about having crazy life altering, world-bending experiences (though that can happen). It's just about helping you get into a state of mind that allows for an effective therapy session. Sort of like... would you want to do your therapy session in a crowded bar, next to your mom? No, probably not. We all recognize that such a setting would not be conducive to good therapy. So similarly, we should be able to recognize that having the right setting, both mentally and physically can affect the quality of your session. Psychadelics can do exactly this.

It's also worth noting my friend has done "regular" therapy for 2 years, and she felt like there was a step change after the guided session. Her therapist noticed it as well.

When you consider that pain meds have ruined literally millions of lives through addiction, and that also virtually (maybe literally?) no one has ever died due to overdose of psilocybin, it's very confusing why one is prescribed all the time, and the other is considered incredibly dangerous. The U.S.'s perspective on drugs is so very backwards.

agumonkey2• 5 years ago

One session means one time or a few times in one week ?

Do you or her plan to keep doing it ?

bwest875• 5 years ago

One session meaning one time. Both of us think it would be valuable to do, but on the timescale of like... once/year or once every few years. But there are people who do it once/month for several months if they have a lot of specific things to work through. Our guide actually works with a number of 'regular' therapists, and they pass clients on to him if they think a guided session is the right move. He says therapists will sometimes say, "please take this person on a journey once / month for the next 3 months" (or something along those lines)

elromulous• 5 years ago

it's very confusing why one is prescribed all the time, and the other is considered incredibly dangerous. The U.S.'s perspective on drugs is so very backwards.

The lobbying system. Aka legalized corruption.

inter_netuser4• 5 years ago

pain meds have ruined literally millions of lives through addiction

Unpopular opinion: opioids are massively under-prescribed for those that actually need them.

Addiction is a mental illness. That's whats killing so many, but why is to so few question what is actually causing such terrible emotional pain that must be self-medicated with incredibly potent medicaments?

Why is it that instead of acknowledging the rather uncomfortable root cause of those deaths, we just default to the so much simpler scapegoat, pills (the active ingredient in which has been with us in one form or another since 5000 BC), and pretend everything else is just rainbows and unicorns?

jdc3• 5 years ago

Why is it that instead of acknowledging the rather uncomfortable root cause of those deaths, we just default to the so much simpler scapegoat, pills (the active ingredient in which has been with us in one form or another since 5000 BC), and pretend everything else is just rainbows and unicorns?

Okay, I'll take mushrooms, which have actually been with us since then, and you take synthetic intravenous opioids and we'll see who fares better.

stadium5• 5 years ago

why is to so few question what is actually causing such terrible emotional pain that must be self-medicated with incredibly potent medicaments?
Why is it that instead of acknowledging the rather uncomfortable root cause of those deaths, we just default to the so much simpler scapegoat, pills

Missing from these arguments is the role of criminalizing addiction versus treating it as the mental health issue you accurately described. And ignoring the pharmicuitical and lobbying industries behind the same pills.

I don't think it's a valid argument to reassign blame from the potency and availability of pills, to unmet mental health needs. They are related and intertwined, sure, but correlation != causation.

Case in point, the Purdue Pharma Sacklers settled for $billions (which also bought their immunity from future prosecution) precisely because they were pushing hard drugs and preying on those same people mental health issues [0]. Predatory, sociopathic behavior. But pill are a scapegoat? Sorry, that's a hot load of b.s.

[0] https://www.npr.org/2021/09/01/1031053251/sackler-family-imm...

WarOnPrivacy2• 5 years ago

opioids are massively under-prescribed for those that actually need them.

Absolutely.

While reports of ODs are endlessly bullhorned, millions in pain get demonized by algorithmic opioid blacklists, get ignored by news orgs/legislators addicted to opioid hysteria and get gaslighted by a public who only hears the bullhorning.

I have a lifelong friend with visibly crippling arthritis. He lost access to effective pain meds after the state passed a 3-day-max on opioids (passed >10 years after the pill-mill problem abated). Over the year that followed the law's passage, every Dr in his network (along with most Drs in the state) ~stopped Rx opioids. The (now fewer) pain mgt clinics are overloaded and not accepting patients.

His remaining avenues for pain relief no longer involve Dr's.

I had emergency abdominal surgery this year and had to convince the discharging Dr to prescribe Tramadol. Our new normal is for ERs/Hospitals to undermedicate patients in pain with OTC analgesics.

So yeah. Shout out to folks who are hand-waving away millions in pain - because pharma is greedy or because folks can't differentiate responsible Rx opioids from street fentanyl (that many in chronic pain turned to in desperation after they were cut off from safer pain relief).

fourtrees• 5 years ago

Having both witnessed the whole opioid debacle first hand, first the sleezy over-prescription, then the reactionary under-prescription, which has caused, in my opinion, at least, as much, if not more, suffering and death than the over-prescription. Reading these comments is the first really sensible debate over the issue I've encountered and very encouraging.

For quite a while I've thought that the via media on the Rxs and an honest, more intensive treatment of the causes of 'deaths of despair' (which would certainly only partly be medical in nature) is by far the most humane (and medically ethical) way toward treating the problem. I know MDs who feel the same way but whose agency is very limited by this opioid Thermidor -- both in acting and speaking on the issue. I hope this is a sign of a changing trend in the public and political debate on the issue.

drawkbox• 5 years ago

The U.S.'s perspective on drugs is so very backwards.

The War on Drugs is a flaw that needs to end but at least with psilocybin US is moving slowly in the right direction. The only countries where psilocybin is legal are Brazil, Jamaica, Nepal, Samoa, Netherlands (truffle format), British Virgin Islands and the Bahamas [1].

Many places are illegal but unenforced though still illegal.

US psilocybin is decriminalized in many places now including all drugs in Oregon. More states need to get more like Oregon definitely.

However, in most states spores are legal and so are grow kits for other types of mycology.

Grow kits and spores legal in most states, full cultivation decriminalized in Seattle, Washington, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Denver, Colorado, Santa Cruz, California, Somerville and Cambridge, Massachusetts, Oregon and Washington D.C. [1]

Legal in Oregon for mental health treatment in supervised settings since 1 February 2021 [1]

Full legalization needs to happen for marijuana and psychedelics. Decriminalization needs to happen for all drugs minimum as well.

As far as marijuana, psilocybin and LSD, they are the least toxic and less dependency forming of most drugs, even caffeine, aspirin and more. It is a tragedy and a drug dark age that they are in the Controlled Substances Act. I believe drugs should have to be toxic or cause death to actually be on that list. Marijuana, psilocybin and LSD are very safe when it comes to toxicity and drug overdoses are non-existent, all would be better as legal safer production products.

Legality makes everything safer, increases harm reduction and reduces black market unsafe production as well as reduces funding of cartels/mafias/bratvas. Their criminality truly makes no logical sense except to invite problems.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_psilocybin_mus...

taurath• 5 years ago

Just wanted to add that the US led the criminality to spread across the globe via the UN.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Psychotropic_S...

stadium5• 5 years ago

What area are you located, and how did you find your guide? Word of mouth?

Not looking so much for specifics, more to understand the process.

bwest875• 5 years ago

I'm located in San Francisco. I asked around a bunch of friends, got intros, and talked to a few potential guides. Eventually got linked up with someone who's been doing it for a number of years, and we vibed. We had a few phone calls through Signal, and then decided on a date/time/place.

louis___• 5 years ago

Would you maybe like to elaborate on what was the details of the "guided" aspect of your sessions ?

bwest875• 5 years ago

Guided aspects... he sent over a questionairre ahead of time with a lot of broad questions. We then did a one hour zoom call going over the questions and getting to know him. It's all designed to help you figure out what you want the session to be about for you personally at that moment in time in your life. And then the session itself lasts 4-6 hours, and he will ask you many questions, but also will follow the journey wherever it takes you, and there's ups and downs and everything in between. It's all very specific to you and the guide and where you want to go with it. And lastly there's an "integration session" the following week where you talk with him for an hour to go over how it went, and what it means. Can discuss more if you want. Email me at bwest87 at gmail.com if you'd like to discuss further.

f0rgot• 5 years ago

I've always wanted to try a guided session, but I have no idea how to even start looking for a guide. I'm in Illinois.

zhengyi13• 5 years ago

Medical tourism? Elsewhere upthread there are specific places called out where psilocybin is legal or decriminalized. Poking around on the web for therapeutic providers in those areas might be an effective strategy.

bwest875• 5 years ago

This actually took me a bit of time. I had to search around. But can give advice. If you're serious, email me at bwest87 at gmail.com

colhom• 5 years ago

How are you going to sustain the largest economy on earth if your populace isn't hypnotized? Most of the work that needs to be done is not intrinsically or spiritually fufilling.

So there must be an alternative synthetic rewards system- which inevitably requires some form of mass hypnosis to remain dominant in the aggregate psyche.

It's no coincidence that all the research in this space was shut down in a hurry right around when the CIA figured out that LSD and the pikhal family weren't going to help with this at all.

say_it_as_it_is• 5 years ago

Not only has no one ever died of psilocybin but it just doesn't get abused the way that pain killers do. You can't get the full effect by taking it often. If it's a deep session, you don't even want to!

sexy_seedbox• 5 years ago

One can only hope for something close to this in Southeast Asia : (

First federal grant for psychedelic treatment research in 50 years

Related Stories