4 ms·

Yeah you're right, my slight bias against the clinicalization of psychedelics probably slipped through there! Thanks.

reaperman 3y ago
I share your bias, although until we find a better way to pair therapists and patients in other settings, I am accepting of the clinical setting. I have always been pro-legalization and I personally enjoy mushrooms, MDMA, and weaker psychoactive compounds -- but I've always had a rational skepticism of overpowered medical claims, especially when it comes to popular, politicized topics like medical applications of recreational drugs. The data and results for MDMA-assisted clinical therapy have blown me away. For example, a 2020 study[0] measured outcomes 12 months after the final MDMA-assisted therapy session and nearly half the participants ceased lifelong suicidal ideation for the full year following treatment. I was willing to easily believe that MDMA-assisted clinical therapy reduced symptoms of PTSD but I was worried that the benefits would wear off quickly; it wasn't until just the past few years we started measuring outcomes >3 months past the completion of MDMA interventions. Seeing these strong long-term effects in has really made me a believer that there's value in the clinicalization of psychedelics, even if other guided settings might have even stronger results. Moving over to pure conjecture, I also believe that the submission of MDMA for FDA approval (which, if granted, will force the DEA to reschedule MDMA), has been used as a lever to pressure the DEA to move on rescheduling THC/marijuana -- I believe the timing is mainly because it would be embarrassing if MDMA were moved off Schedule I before marijuana was. Obviously the broad public support for rescheduling of marijuana is a necessary prerequisite, but I don't believe it's the trigger for the specific timing. I also believe part of the timing is to generate positive press close to a presidential election. But I would be very happy to see these both rescheduled, regardless of the reasons. I also desperately want better access for Americans to get their drugs tested, so that we can more easily shift cultural norms towards getting in the habit of knowing their dose, purity, and contaminants before taking recreational, psychedelic, or pharmaceutical drugs. 0: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05548-2 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05548-2
- mtalantikite 3y ago
  Absolutely, I'm in the same camp as you it seems. It's important to study these things and make sure we can get psychedelics rescheduled. I'm also happy that people that aren't as weird as me can have therapeutic settings to help with lifelong issues they might otherwise completely avoid. Even if I might laugh and cringe a little inside when I see the yuppie corporate branding for things people have been taking for thousands of years and (for me) seem like no big deal at all. Or rather, a big deal that's not so much of a big deal.

I share your bias, although until we find a better way to pair therapists and patients in other settings, I am accepting of the clinical setting. I have always been pro-legalization and I personally enjoy mushrooms, MDMA, and weaker psychoactive compounds -- but I've always had a rational skepticism of overpowered medical claims, especially when it comes to popular, politicized topics like medical applications of recreational drugs. The data and results for MDMA-assisted clinical therapy have blown me away. For example, a 2020 study[0] measured outcomes 12 months after the final MDMA-assisted therapy session and nearly half the participants ceased lifelong suicidal ideation for the full year following treatment. I was willing to easily believe that MDMA-assisted clinical therapy reduced symptoms of PTSD but I was worried that the benefits would wear off quickly; it wasn't until just the past few years we started measuring outcomes >3 months past the completion of MDMA interventions. Seeing these strong long-term effects in has really made me a believer that there's value in the clinicalization of psychedelics, even if other guided settings might have even stronger results. Moving over to pure conjecture, I also believe that the submission of MDMA for FDA approval (which, if granted, will force the DEA to reschedule MDMA), has been used as a lever to pressure the DEA to move on rescheduling THC/marijuana -- I believe the timing is mainly because it would be embarrassing if MDMA were moved off Schedule I before marijuana was. Obviously the broad public support for rescheduling of marijuana is a necessary prerequisite, but I don't believe it's the trigger for the specific timing. I also believe part of the timing is to generate positive press close to a presidential election. But I would be very happy to see these both rescheduled, regardless of the reasons. I also desperately want better access for Americans to get their drugs tested, so that we can more easily shift cultural norms towards getting in the habit of knowing their dose, purity, and contaminants before taking recreational, psychedelic, or pharmaceutical drugs. 0: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05548-2 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05548-2

mtalantikite 3y ago
Absolutely, I'm in the same camp as you it seems. It's important to study these things and make sure we can get psychedelics rescheduled. I'm also happy that people that aren't as weird as me can have therapeutic settings to help with lifelong issues they might otherwise completely avoid. Even if I might laugh and cringe a little inside when I see the yuppie corporate branding for things people have been taking for thousands of years and (for me) seem like no big deal at all. Or rather, a big deal that's not so much of a big deal.