I'm a bit weirded out by the way this article alternates between talking about trends and demographics, and admitting it has no evidence whatsoever. For instan

I'm a bit weirded out by the way this article alternates between talking about trends and demographics, and admitting it has no evidence whatsoever. For instance: > Young developers and engineers, most of them male, seem to be particularly keen on his form of bio-hacking > Although data on the number of people microdosing are non-existent, since drug surveys do not ask about it Anecdotally, I had the sense that the weirder, more drug-friendly side of the Valley was probably more gender-neutral than the rest. I could be wrong about that, but certainly nothing in this article counts as evidence on that point. Similarly: > "The quest for spiritual enlightenment – as with much else in San Francisco – is fuelled by the desire to increase productivity." That's a baffling claim. Microdosing isn't a road to spiritual enlightenment - it's intentionally non-hallucinatory - and the most vocal drug advocates tend to view productivity as a route to spiritual change rather than the reverse. This is an interesting historical take, but it seems to have hidden a shortage of data behind vague platitudes about Valley culture.