6 ms·

Results from placebo-controlled LSD microdose human study

58 points by sahin-boydas 7y ago

tomq 7y ago
It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect. Failure to find an effect is different from evidence there is no effect.
- ncmncm 7y ago
  The significant outcome is that microdosing is harmless.
  - maxander 7y ago
    If done only ~3 times, and only considering outcomes that manifest within a day or so. On possible harms beyond that the study is silent.
    - ncmncm 7y ago
      ...appears harmless. That said: I know firsthand that people who are borderline schizophrenic can have a very bad, long-lasting outcome from a regular dose of LSD. I doubt a microdose would do them any good. I hope that in studies like this, they screen the participants carefully.
- gwern 7y ago
  > It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect. This is a within-subject experiment: each participant got all 4 possible doses. The paper (https://www.gwern.net/docs/nootropics/2019-bershad.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/nootropics/2019-bershad.pdf) doesn't discuss power that I can see, but the power of a within-subject design will be a lot higher than the between-subject you're probably thinking of, where n=20 is generally way too little. So, might be decently powered after all.
  - belltaco 7y ago
    So the article did not do a good job of explaining the study. Also, why did they not go for a dose every 3-5 days like the anecdotes, but instead of went for every 7 days. And then say it might be different when done every few days. Were they trying to avoid testing on the weekends or something?
    - gwern 7y ago
      Washout. If you went more frequently, then the excuse would be that the LSD microdosing might still be having effects on the low-dose or placebo days.
tmoney9999 7y ago
Not the first study, although it might be the first academic study. . . This was on HN in 2013, and the same results were reported. https://www.gwern.net/LSD-microdosing https://www.gwern.net/LSD-microdosing
- dang 7y ago
  Gwern thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6565869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6565869 First-everness struck from title above.
  - tmoney9999 7y ago
    Props to OP.
alexandercrohde 7y ago
Well, I'd like to see a long-term follow-up on the participants. Some people self-report lasting mental changes from hallucinogens.
- gwern 7y ago
  They do... but typically from much larger doses, 'macrodosing', if you will.
  - alexandercrohde 7y ago
    Sure, but the premise of this study was that there are real, measurable effects of microdosing that are too subtle to be self-reported. So it's worth following up if this study's finding is a lasting effect too, actually I almost think it'd be irresponsible not to.
Analemma_ 7y ago
I have a mild objection to this headline: in context, "intriguing" plants the suggestion that there were positive results, or at least potential avenues of future research, whereas the article body states pretty clearly that there was no effect: > In the end, the researchers conclude the LSD microdoses did not affect the majority of mood, cognition and physiological measures that were examined. It goes on to say: > However, it is also noted this is not at all a final determination on the ultimate veracity of LSD microdosing, either as a cognitive booster, or an anti-depressant. This is merely the first step in trying to empirically understand the acute effects of this oft-reported anecdotal phenomenon. More research is always good, but it's important to remember that cases like this where the purported effects are on things like mood and creativity (which are tricky to measure and probably have significant day-to-day variation) are going to be especially vulnerable to placebo effects and wishful thinking. When you combine this with gwern's also-negative result, I don't think you can escape the conclusion that LSD microdosing probably does nothing.
- derefr 7y ago
  If a "microdose" is defined as "a dose that has no perceivable effects", is there a term for a dose one step up from that: the weakest dose whose effect can be perceived? I have a feeling that a lot of the people who think microdosing works, are actually taking that level of dose, rather than a true microdose.
  - ivarv 7y ago
    The study noted that the highest dose administered (25ug) was perceptible so I wonder if you could isolate the results of just the cohort that received that dose. That said, it would negate the blind on the study and all data would then be suspicious.
  - sideshowb 7y ago
    Threshold dose is the term you're looking for
- AstralStorm 7y ago
  You cannot assume a null result without testing against it rigorously. Gwern level of tests are way not rigorous nor sensitive enough. Which is why this is much more useful. Blinding is relatively easy with substances that are active at very low doses and have relatively unpredictable effects.
ValleyOfTheMtns 7y ago
Curious to see more studies like this on other hallucinogenic drugs like psilocybin (psilocybe cubensis i.e. magic mushrooms).
opportune 7y ago
Yeah, this doesn't surprise me. LSD makes you think you're developing truly profound thoughts and realizations but most people are unable to vocalize those realizations after coming down. Kind of like how every idea you come up with sounds like a great idea when you're on stimulants like cocaine. Potentially one of the reasons that people like to take small amounts of LSD while they work is due to its slight stimulant effect. You'll note in the article that blood pressure increased with higher doses. LSD also reduces any sensation of need/wanting to sleep. So it will definitely perk you up better than a strong cup of coffee
- empath75 7y ago
  I had genuinely profound thoughts and feelings when I was on lsd that I would say changed the course of my whole life in a positive way. That you can’t describe them or put them into words doesn’t make them meaningless or valueless, it makes them _ineffable_. Most of the most amazing and important experiences of my life, the ones that I would choose if I were forced to say which were the ones that made life worth living, fall into that category.
  - opportune 7y ago
    Well, to provide a different opinion, I've never experienced anything lasting from it. I maybe had one realization, once, which is that everything in life is so silly I should just not get upset about it. Though on one of the 6 times I tried it I also had a very bad panic attack. To me, it's just that a drug is a drug, not a panacea. There is nothing magic about it, and lots of drugs make you think you're smarter than you really are.
    - api 7y ago
      You and the parent are both "right." Psychedelics are notoriously unpredictable YMMV things, which is part of why they haven't been mainstreamed as a treatment for anything. For mainstream drugs we usually want something as predictable as possible.
      - 7y ago
ve55 7y ago
>did not affect the majority of mood, cognition and physiological measures that were examined. Poor headline, the results are not actually intriguing.
- dang 7y ago
  Ok, no more intrigue in the title above.

58 points by sahin-boydas 7y ago

tomq 7y ago

It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect. Failure to find an effect is different from evidence there is no effect.

ncmncm 7y ago
The significant outcome is that microdosing is harmless.
- maxander 7y ago
  If done only ~3 times, and only considering outcomes that manifest within a day or so. On possible harms beyond that the study is silent.
  - ncmncm 7y ago
    ...appears harmless. That said: I know firsthand that people who are borderline schizophrenic can have a very bad, long-lasting outcome from a regular dose of LSD. I doubt a microdose would do them any good. I hope that in studies like this, they screen the participants carefully.
gwern 7y ago
> It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect. This is a within-subject experiment: each participant got all 4 possible doses. The paper (https://www.gwern.net/docs/nootropics/2019-bershad.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/nootropics/2019-bershad.pdf) doesn't discuss power that I can see, but the power of a within-subject design will be a lot higher than the between-subject you're probably thinking of, where n=20 is generally way too little. So, might be decently powered after all.
- belltaco 7y ago
  So the article did not do a good job of explaining the study. Also, why did they not go for a dose every 3-5 days like the anecdotes, but instead of went for every 7 days. And then say it might be different when done every few days. Were they trying to avoid testing on the weekends or something?
  - gwern 7y ago
    Washout. If you went more frequently, then the excuse would be that the LSD microdosing might still be having effects on the low-dose or placebo days.

tmoney9999 7y ago

Not the first study, although it might be the first academic study. . . This was on HN in 2013, and the same results were reported. https://www.gwern.net/LSD-microdosing https://www.gwern.net/LSD-microdosing

dang 7y ago
Gwern thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6565869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6565869 First-everness struck from title above.
- tmoney9999 7y ago
  Props to OP.

alexandercrohde 7y ago

Well, I'd like to see a long-term follow-up on the participants. Some people self-report lasting mental changes from hallucinogens.

gwern 7y ago
They do... but typically from much larger doses, 'macrodosing', if you will.
- alexandercrohde 7y ago
  Sure, but the premise of this study was that there are real, measurable effects of microdosing that are too subtle to be self-reported. So it's worth following up if this study's finding is a lasting effect too, actually I almost think it'd be irresponsible not to.

Analemma_ 7y ago

I have a mild objection to this headline: in context, "intriguing" plants the suggestion that there were positive results, or at least potential avenues of future research, whereas the article body states pretty clearly that there was no effect: > In the end, the researchers conclude the LSD microdoses did not affect the majority of mood, cognition and physiological measures that were examined. It goes on to say: > However, it is also noted this is not at all a final determination on the ultimate veracity of LSD microdosing, either as a cognitive booster, or an anti-depressant. This is merely the first step in trying to empirically understand the acute effects of this oft-reported anecdotal phenomenon. More research is always good, but it's important to remember that cases like this where the purported effects are on things like mood and creativity (which are tricky to measure and probably have significant day-to-day variation) are going to be especially vulnerable to placebo effects and wishful thinking. When you combine this with gwern's also-negative result, I don't think you can escape the conclusion that LSD microdosing probably does nothing.

derefr 7y ago
If a "microdose" is defined as "a dose that has no perceivable effects", is there a term for a dose one step up from that: the weakest dose whose effect can be perceived? I have a feeling that a lot of the people who think microdosing works, are actually taking that level of dose, rather than a true microdose.
- ivarv 7y ago
  The study noted that the highest dose administered (25ug) was perceptible so I wonder if you could isolate the results of just the cohort that received that dose. That said, it would negate the blind on the study and all data would then be suspicious.
- sideshowb 7y ago
  Threshold dose is the term you're looking for
AstralStorm 7y ago
You cannot assume a null result without testing against it rigorously. Gwern level of tests are way not rigorous nor sensitive enough. Which is why this is much more useful. Blinding is relatively easy with substances that are active at very low doses and have relatively unpredictable effects.

ValleyOfTheMtns 7y ago

Curious to see more studies like this on other hallucinogenic drugs like psilocybin (psilocybe cubensis i.e. magic mushrooms).

opportune 7y ago

Yeah, this doesn't surprise me. LSD makes you think you're developing truly profound thoughts and realizations but most people are unable to vocalize those realizations after coming down. Kind of like how every idea you come up with sounds like a great idea when you're on stimulants like cocaine. Potentially one of the reasons that people like to take small amounts of LSD while they work is due to its slight stimulant effect. You'll note in the article that blood pressure increased with higher doses. LSD also reduces any sensation of need/wanting to sleep. So it will definitely perk you up better than a strong cup of coffee

empath75 7y ago
I had genuinely profound thoughts and feelings when I was on lsd that I would say changed the course of my whole life in a positive way. That you can’t describe them or put them into words doesn’t make them meaningless or valueless, it makes them _ineffable_. Most of the most amazing and important experiences of my life, the ones that I would choose if I were forced to say which were the ones that made life worth living, fall into that category.
- opportune 7y ago
  Well, to provide a different opinion, I've never experienced anything lasting from it. I maybe had one realization, once, which is that everything in life is so silly I should just not get upset about it. Though on one of the 6 times I tried it I also had a very bad panic attack. To me, it's just that a drug is a drug, not a panacea. There is nothing magic about it, and lots of drugs make you think you're smarter than you really are.
  - api 7y ago
    You and the parent are both "right." Psychedelics are notoriously unpredictable YMMV things, which is part of why they haven't been mainstreamed as a treatment for anything. For mainstream drugs we usually want something as predictable as possible.
    - 7y ago

ve55 7y ago

>did not affect the majority of mood, cognition and physiological measures that were examined. Poor headline, the results are not actually intriguing.

dang 7y ago
Ok, no more intrigue in the title above.