3 ms·
What you seem to be after is scientific evidence. The problem is that these substances by nature cannot be double-blind trialed because blinding is impossible.
by rvcdbn 3y ago
What you seem to be after is scientific evidence. The problem is that these substances by nature cannot be double-blind trialed because blinding is impossible. So as individuals we all need to make a decision whether we would like to try them or not for ourselves and the best evidence we can ever hope to get is subjective and anecdotal. If you want to deny yourself the potential of these life changing experiences without scientific evidence then that’s your choice. In my opinion it’s your great loss too.
- MayeulC 3y ago> these substances by nature cannot be double-blind trialed because blinding is impossible That's a bold claim. You can try multiple different substances, the test subjects know they ingest a psychedelic, but don't know which, which allows you to have a control group. Clinical trials would face other issues, but not this one.
- p_j_w 3y agoYou run into another problem here: those other psychedelics may also cause the same changes.
- kadoban 3y agoIt still might be worth trying though, if it can be done ethically. It's not a perfect test, but it's halfway decent?
- rvcdbn 3y agoi think it would be super interesting to do a study where we compared the effects of moderate/high-dose psychedelics to some other substance that had comparable subjective effects. but (a) i don't think such a control substance actually exists and (b) i strongly suspect that you'd see the same benefits to both groups - and then what conclusion do you draw from that?