4 ms·

any chance the correct dose of this becomes the new caffeine or coffee?

partomniscient 3y ago
I'm pretty sure set and setting are way more important factors than declaring 'n' is the right amount. So, to put it bluntly no. It's not that simple or comparable and the study already shows it affects different people differently with some ending up resulting in a negative experience overall. This is one of the key problems with the capitalistic approach to modern medicine - you do the trials, you get approval based on the majority result, Done. There's not much research into what doesn't fit and why it doesn't fit, because there's no money in it. Yet all the end-users of the supposed cure that aren't in that majority actually end up suffering more because once you find out something doesn't work for you you get rejected by the system, or put on the 'try a different one' endless go-round. This is way more of a problem in mental rather than physiological health, because emotional states are much less consistent and harder to quantify than things like blood pressure or iron levels etc. etc. That being said, if you do fit the majority then maybe you can just add it to your set of stuff you take. One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead. My gut feel is because its easier to understand/influence. Doesn't mean its the correct thing to do, its just something that is achievable and makes things better. Kind of like using humour as coping mechanism to avoid a situation.
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  > it affects different people differently with some ending up resulting in a negative experience overall I mean 7% having a negative experience after a few months of use is better than coffee right? I don't know coffee's stats but people that are co-dependent on coffee think its waaaay more normalized than it is. 17.5 drink decaf which is like 95% less caffiene, basically trace amounts
  - lm28469 3y ago
    > I don't know coffee's stats but people that are co-dependent It's just "dependent" or "addicted"", codependency is something else entirely
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      the reason I used that word is because I felt someone else would argue about the words “dependent” or “addicted”
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        This is a good idea. If you are concerned about how people might object to the usage of one word, it is best to use another without looking up the definition. It’s a sign of a germane turgid intellect, heretofore.
  - partomniscient 3y ago
    >Participants were primarily college-educated White men residing in the United States with a prior history of psychedelic use; mean age = 40 years. Participants primarily used dried psilocybin mushrooms (mean dose = 3.1 grams) for “self-exploration” purposes. I think the participants already don't represent the everyday person or even coffee drinker, but I certainly don't disagree with your last statement either.
    - konfusinomicon 3y ago
      if the average person was accustomed to taking 3g of science grade mushrooms this world would be very different lol...oh no Mr. Dinosaur, I don't think that was a microdose!
- improv 3y ago
  >One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead. Psychedelic therapy can reveal things about your reality that you may have been completely blind to or unaware of, thus enabling you to change it. To use these substances properly, it's not just about taking the substance and having an enlightening experience and then being done with it. It's about taking what you learned about your reality, what you want to change about it, and then integrating/implementing that into your every day life in the weeks, months, and years afterwards. That's where the real work is.
- orasis 3y ago
  “One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead.” A lot of our problems are due to self deception. One thing psychedelics are good for is being able to see through the lies we tell ourselves and face the facts about our behaviors.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
loa_in_ 3y ago
If you drink coffee or take caffeine in little doses once every month I could see it happening.
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  Why is that?
  - loa_in_ 3y ago
    Talking about psylocybin in terms of a daily dose is misguided in my opinion. It's not really something you would want. I really look forward to more studies exploring use of psylocybin.
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      my question wasn't about daily dose, it was about cognitive utility. caffeine is seen as having increased cognitive utility > any chance the correct dose of this becomes the new caffeine or coffee?
      - loa_in_ 3y ago
        I see. My bad for thinking about coffee as the daily supplement.
orasis 3y ago
Nah, while it’s good for mental health, it’s not a productivity enhancer. It can be hard to focus on complicated concepts or even recall facts like people’s names.
- thelastparadise 3y ago
  > It can be hard to focus on complicated concepts or even recall facts like people’s names. Surely not with a micro dose?
  - orasis 3y ago
    Yes, even a small microdose can inhibit recall. That’s not to say it’s not worth the trade off.
washadjeffmad 3y ago
I do daily Tiger's Milk and Lion's Mane, which are synergistic with psilocybin, but you generally only do psilocybin to a threshold every 72-hrs if you're "dosing". Honestly, while these things can help, they aren't cognitive panaceas. They won't teach you pacing or how to manage your stress, they're not substitutes for active improvement efforts, and you won't suddenly have better ideas. I don't recommend them or discourage their use, but if they might help you realize that maybe you shouldn't be living in a way that required coffee all the time, that naps are natural and you can take them when you want and not be less of a person, or that maybe trying to fit your natural rhythm to something that doesn't suit you isn't the smartest way to live, then I'd say that's great but that you also don't need a mushroom to convince you of that.

I'm pretty sure set and setting are way more important factors than declaring 'n' is the right amount. So, to put it bluntly no. It's not that simple or comparable and the study already shows it affects different people differently with some ending up resulting in a negative experience overall. This is one of the key problems with the capitalistic approach to modern medicine - you do the trials, you get approval based on the majority result, Done. There's not much research into what doesn't fit and why it doesn't fit, because there's no money in it. Yet all the end-users of the supposed cure that aren't in that majority actually end up suffering more because once you find out something doesn't work for you you get rejected by the system, or put on the 'try a different one' endless go-round. This is way more of a problem in mental rather than physiological health, because emotional states are much less consistent and harder to quantify than things like blood pressure or iron levels etc. etc. That being said, if you do fit the majority then maybe you can just add it to your set of stuff you take. One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead. My gut feel is because its easier to understand/influence. Doesn't mean its the correct thing to do, its just something that is achievable and makes things better. Kind of like using humour as coping mechanism to avoid a situation.

yieldcrv 3y ago
> it affects different people differently with some ending up resulting in a negative experience overall I mean 7% having a negative experience after a few months of use is better than coffee right? I don't know coffee's stats but people that are co-dependent on coffee think its waaaay more normalized than it is. 17.5 drink decaf which is like 95% less caffiene, basically trace amounts
- lm28469 3y ago
  > I don't know coffee's stats but people that are co-dependent It's just "dependent" or "addicted"", codependency is something else entirely
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    the reason I used that word is because I felt someone else would argue about the words “dependent” or “addicted”
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      This is a good idea. If you are concerned about how people might object to the usage of one word, it is best to use another without looking up the definition. It’s a sign of a germane turgid intellect, heretofore.
- partomniscient 3y ago
  >Participants were primarily college-educated White men residing in the United States with a prior history of psychedelic use; mean age = 40 years. Participants primarily used dried psilocybin mushrooms (mean dose = 3.1 grams) for “self-exploration” purposes. I think the participants already don't represent the everyday person or even coffee drinker, but I certainly don't disagree with your last statement either.
  - konfusinomicon 3y ago
    if the average person was accustomed to taking 3g of science grade mushrooms this world would be very different lol...oh no Mr. Dinosaur, I don't think that was a microdose!
improv 3y ago
>One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead. Psychedelic therapy can reveal things about your reality that you may have been completely blind to or unaware of, thus enabling you to change it. To use these substances properly, it's not just about taking the substance and having an enlightening experience and then being done with it. It's about taking what you learned about your reality, what you want to change about it, and then integrating/implementing that into your every day life in the weeks, months, and years afterwards. That's where the real work is.
orasis 3y ago
“One does have to wonder why we need to medicate ourselves to cope with reality rather than change reality instead.” A lot of our problems are due to self deception. One thing psychedelics are good for is being able to see through the lies we tell ourselves and face the facts about our behaviors.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

loa_in_ 3y ago

If you drink coffee or take caffeine in little doses once every month I could see it happening.

lacrimacida 3y ago
Why is that?
- loa_in_ 3y ago
  Talking about psylocybin in terms of a daily dose is misguided in my opinion. It's not really something you would want. I really look forward to more studies exploring use of psylocybin.
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    my question wasn't about daily dose, it was about cognitive utility. caffeine is seen as having increased cognitive utility > any chance the correct dose of this becomes the new caffeine or coffee?
    - loa_in_ 3y ago
      I see. My bad for thinking about coffee as the daily supplement.

orasis 3y ago

Nah, while it’s good for mental health, it’s not a productivity enhancer. It can be hard to focus on complicated concepts or even recall facts like people’s names.

thelastparadise 3y ago
> It can be hard to focus on complicated concepts or even recall facts like people’s names. Surely not with a micro dose?
- orasis 3y ago
  Yes, even a small microdose can inhibit recall. That’s not to say it’s not worth the trade off.

washadjeffmad 3y ago

I do daily Tiger's Milk and Lion's Mane, which are synergistic with psilocybin, but you generally only do psilocybin to a threshold every 72-hrs if you're "dosing". Honestly, while these things can help, they aren't cognitive panaceas. They won't teach you pacing or how to manage your stress, they're not substitutes for active improvement efforts, and you won't suddenly have better ideas. I don't recommend them or discourage their use, but if they might help you realize that maybe you shouldn't be living in a way that required coffee all the time, that naps are natural and you can take them when you want and not be less of a person, or that maybe trying to fit your natural rhythm to something that doesn't suit you isn't the smartest way to live, then I'd say that's great but that you also don't need a mushroom to convince you of that.