4 ms·

I always find it interesting that whenever an article about psychedelics gets posted, the comments are always “We don’t know yet if this is positive, we need mu

I always find it interesting that whenever an article about psychedelics gets posted, the comments are always “We don’t know yet if this is positive, we need much more evidence and science!” Yet the standard of rigor for alcohol, weed, SSRIs and tiktok is somehow not as stringent.

pcchristie 3y ago
Even more than that, it's always mentioned by the scientists, advocates, and journalists ad-nauseam too.
bongodongobob 3y ago
I don't. None of those things completely mess with your perspective of reality like psychedelics. Idk it's like comparing code correctness for a calculator vs a control module for a spaceship. Totally different ballparks.
scythe 3y ago
>alcohol, weed, SSRIs and tiktok Only one of these is conventionally understood to confer a net benefit in its most common use cases, and the SSRIs have been subject to extensive testing and approval processes. I disagree with the sibling commenter that alcohol does not dramatically alter your perception of reality. He simply isn't drinking enough. Likewise it is more than possible to limit the psychedelic dose so that it does not lead to heedlessness; Shulgin noted that many users prefer what he called a "plus-two" instead of the highly disorienting "plus-three". While the medical application of psychedelics is probably going to be subject to the same rigorous approval process that characterizes the medical application of other things, the primary benefits attributed to conventional psychedelics are not easily reconciled with the usual endpoints of contemporary medicine. People claim to have experienced improvements in moral character, reasoning about certain problems, interpersonal trust, and other behavior changes which are not considered targets of treatment by contemporary medicine. There have been a few limited studies looking at psychedelics for depression and anxiety, but the improvements are just OK, though the prospect of just taking a drug once instead of daily is certainly attractive. Meanwhile, the non-prescription use of psychedelics has been "experimented" with in a few cases, particularly in the Netherlands, Oregon, and Florida. Unfortunately, while incidents of psychedelic-influenced misbehavior are rare in general, they seem to become more common when the availability of these drugs is decriminalized. My hypothesis is that people are more likely to be reckless when they are not afraid of getting caught. A system of licensure for users would hopefully help prevent this.
- deepnotderp 3y ago
  > SSRIs have been subject to extensive testing and approval processes. SSRIs barely beat placebo and have a significant side effect profile
  - BobaFloutist 3y ago
    And this is pretty widely known and accepted among patients, prescribers, and almost anyone that's remotely informed about them. We keep using them because they sorta work a little, which is better than placebos, even if marginally, and we don't really have better tools.
    - worik 3y ago
      > e keep using them because they sorta work a little, which is better than placebos, even if marginally, and we don't really have better tools. Seems we might have now. Psilocybin and ketamine research is looking very promising
BobaFloutist 3y ago
Are you saying that people are insufficiently critical of alcohol, SSRIs, and tiktok? That's been far from my experience. Weed, you might have a point, but it's also fairly evidently far more benign than alcohol and tobacco, and has been pretty clearly unjustly demonized for decades in an attempt to target specific populations, so it's not unreasonable for the pendulum to overcorrect a bit before we find a comfortable equilibrium.

pcchristie 3y ago

Even more than that, it's always mentioned by the scientists, advocates, and journalists ad-nauseam too.

bongodongobob 3y ago

I don't. None of those things completely mess with your perspective of reality like psychedelics. Idk it's like comparing code correctness for a calculator vs a control module for a spaceship. Totally different ballparks.

scythe 3y ago

>alcohol, weed, SSRIs and tiktok Only one of these is conventionally understood to confer a net benefit in its most common use cases, and the SSRIs have been subject to extensive testing and approval processes. I disagree with the sibling commenter that alcohol does not dramatically alter your perception of reality. He simply isn't drinking enough. Likewise it is more than possible to limit the psychedelic dose so that it does not lead to heedlessness; Shulgin noted that many users prefer what he called a "plus-two" instead of the highly disorienting "plus-three". While the medical application of psychedelics is probably going to be subject to the same rigorous approval process that characterizes the medical application of other things, the primary benefits attributed to conventional psychedelics are not easily reconciled with the usual endpoints of contemporary medicine. People claim to have experienced improvements in moral character, reasoning about certain problems, interpersonal trust, and other behavior changes which are not considered targets of treatment by contemporary medicine. There have been a few limited studies looking at psychedelics for depression and anxiety, but the improvements are just OK, though the prospect of just taking a drug once instead of daily is certainly attractive. Meanwhile, the non-prescription use of psychedelics has been "experimented" with in a few cases, particularly in the Netherlands, Oregon, and Florida. Unfortunately, while incidents of psychedelic-influenced misbehavior are rare in general, they seem to become more common when the availability of these drugs is decriminalized. My hypothesis is that people are more likely to be reckless when they are not afraid of getting caught. A system of licensure for users would hopefully help prevent this.

deepnotderp 3y ago
> SSRIs have been subject to extensive testing and approval processes. SSRIs barely beat placebo and have a significant side effect profile
- BobaFloutist 3y ago
  And this is pretty widely known and accepted among patients, prescribers, and almost anyone that's remotely informed about them. We keep using them because they sorta work a little, which is better than placebos, even if marginally, and we don't really have better tools.
  - worik 3y ago
    > e keep using them because they sorta work a little, which is better than placebos, even if marginally, and we don't really have better tools. Seems we might have now. Psilocybin and ketamine research is looking very promising

BobaFloutist 3y ago

Are you saying that people are insufficiently critical of alcohol, SSRIs, and tiktok? That's been far from my experience. Weed, you might have a point, but it's also fairly evidently far more benign than alcohol and tobacco, and has been pretty clearly unjustly demonized for decades in an attempt to target specific populations, so it's not unreasonable for the pendulum to overcorrect a bit before we find a comfortable equilibrium.