3 ms·

Psychedelics are nice and powerful - maybe too powerful. I don't trust the system to use them responsibly. I'd rather obtain and use them on my own than as part

Psychedelics are nice and powerful - maybe too powerful. I don't trust the system to use them responsibly. I'd rather obtain and use them on my own than as part of some private - or governmental - initiative. There's no one to trust more than a good friend to be there for you when the ride gets bumpy, not some guy in a suit doing it for the money.

throwup238 2y ago
Thankfully it’s just mushrooms. It must be one of the easiest drugs to grow yourself after just dropping a cannabis seed in the ground. As long as spores are accessible it’ll be “democratized” and even in places like California where they’re illegal to ship, they’re still easy to get. It’s a lot harder to accurately dose in its natural form though.
the_gorilla 2y ago
As an outside observer, I have to notice that doctors and "the system" have lost such trust that people prefer self-medicating with illegal drugs.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  "The system" has no interest in curing your depression. They want you to keep making therapy appointments, and they want you to keep refilling prescriptions. Individual doctors may or may not have this view. I'm talking about "the system." Just consider the incentives. That tells you all you need to know.
  - Sharlin 2y ago
    When "the system" subsidizes your therapy and your prescription drugs (as in most civilized societies), and indeed pays for your medical leave and loses value in the form of lost workdays, it definitely doesn't have much of an incentive to keep you in therapy or on drugs.
    - iknowSFR 2y ago
      I get the impression that there’s misalignment on what “the system” is to each commenter here. One side views it as the larger society and the other as the pharmaceutical industry.
      - Wytwwww 2y ago
        > society and the other as the pharmaceutical industry The market is huge and executives usually care much more about short-term (or at the most medium-term) growth. A company that actually found some magical cure for depression they would have no reason to not undercut their competitors and still make massive amounts of money even if that would destroy their target market would disappear over the next 10-20 years. Also aren't pretty much all the most popular antidepressants and related drugs relatively very chip. Nobody is making that much money selling SSRIs. Why would pharmaceutical companies forego hundreds of billions on purpose?
  - lovethevoid 2y ago
    I don't think you've really considered the incentives either. The system has as much interest in curing your depression as it does curing obesity. Long term, these conditions are very costly. It takes people out of peak condition, reduces labor pool, increases number of patients taking up resources at hospitals and doctors offices, and so on. A system which encourages these things is a failing one, as taxpayer costs would only continue to balloon. Additionally, since the thread is about psilocybin, people would still be filling up prescriptions for those. Also, self-medicating is also very costly. Not only to the system, as people often wind up in hospitals due to laced products or incorrect doses (see marijuana in a lot of states where dealers really aren't concerned about quality), but also to the individual. People are spending absurd amounts of money on vitamins and mushroom teas and all that in hopes it helps, but rarely is that the case due to these categories not being strictly regulated.
    - BowBun 2y ago
      I think your argument is as valid as the one you're responding to. >The system has as much interest in curing your depression as it does curing obesity. Ironically enough, the system hasn't cured obesity (if you believe obesity is primarily caused by a poor environment) and seems to instead to be headed towards managing symptoms by hacking our hormones and brains with semaglutides, etc. But at least you can work. If you use a similar train of thought applied to depression - we're now in a situation where something like 50 million Americans are on antidepressants or antianxiety medication. 1 in 6. This is also treating symptoms and putting people into a state of being able-bodied without being so well as to remove their dependency on the drug. But at least you can work. So I think the original idea fits with the concerns you outline. Mass producing a few drugs to keep a majority of the population able-bodied might not be that much money in the big picture. I'm not a firm believer in this theory, but I can totally believe an overly complex system with poor incentives and no absolute oversight can lead to these outcomes.
- detourdog 2y ago
  I think the advertising of pharmaceutical is big loss of faith. Not to mention the opioid crisis. If medicine was an honorable industry in the USA the might be more faith.
crazygringo 2y ago
> There's no one to trust more than a good friend to be there for you when the ride gets bumpy, not some guy in a suit doing it for the money. I couldn't disagree more. Your good friend most likely doesn't have the slightest idea how to handle things if your trip goes south. Especially when they're on their own "ride". That's not to disparage anyone, but just to state the fact that there is training around these things that comes from lots of experience. And therapists are not "some guy in a suit doing it for the money". You don't get rich doing psychotherapy -- you do it because you genuinely want to help people. And never in my life have I seen a therapist in a suit. This isn't to say that every therapist is great or that every friend is terrible -- just that the relative success rates of being able to help someone on a bad trip, both during and after, are going to be a lot higher on the side of trained therapists. Because of the training.
- xterminator 2y ago
  >Your good friend most likely doesn't have the slightest idea how to handle things if your trip goes south. Yes they can, everyone experienced can. It's part of having empathy. >Especially when they're on their own "ride". The trip sitter doesn't trip while sitting.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    Well those are a lot of details you've added now. Before it was just a "good friend". Now they've also become the "trip sitter" who is "experienced"? Sure, that's going to help. But empathy isn't everything. Just because you've personally experienced of a bunch of trips, doesn't mean you have the knowledge of how to handle things when a trip goes south for someone else, in a way that you've never experienced. That's why there's genuine training in these things, the kinds of training psychotherapists in this area learn. That draws on many thousands of peoples' experiences, and the knowledge of what has worked and what hasn't. Your "good friend" probably doesn't have this training, I'm guessing. And if they do, then what counts most isn't that they're your friend -- it's the training they've learned.

throwup238 2y ago

Thankfully it’s just mushrooms. It must be one of the easiest drugs to grow yourself after just dropping a cannabis seed in the ground. As long as spores are accessible it’ll be “democratized” and even in places like California where they’re illegal to ship, they’re still easy to get. It’s a lot harder to accurately dose in its natural form though.

the_gorilla 2y ago

As an outside observer, I have to notice that doctors and "the system" have lost such trust that people prefer self-medicating with illegal drugs.

SoftTalker 2y ago
"The system" has no interest in curing your depression. They want you to keep making therapy appointments, and they want you to keep refilling prescriptions. Individual doctors may or may not have this view. I'm talking about "the system." Just consider the incentives. That tells you all you need to know.
- Sharlin 2y ago
  When "the system" subsidizes your therapy and your prescription drugs (as in most civilized societies), and indeed pays for your medical leave and loses value in the form of lost workdays, it definitely doesn't have much of an incentive to keep you in therapy or on drugs.
  - iknowSFR 2y ago
    I get the impression that there’s misalignment on what “the system” is to each commenter here. One side views it as the larger society and the other as the pharmaceutical industry.
    - Wytwwww 2y ago
      > society and the other as the pharmaceutical industry The market is huge and executives usually care much more about short-term (or at the most medium-term) growth. A company that actually found some magical cure for depression they would have no reason to not undercut their competitors and still make massive amounts of money even if that would destroy their target market would disappear over the next 10-20 years. Also aren't pretty much all the most popular antidepressants and related drugs relatively very chip. Nobody is making that much money selling SSRIs. Why would pharmaceutical companies forego hundreds of billions on purpose?
- lovethevoid 2y ago
  I don't think you've really considered the incentives either. The system has as much interest in curing your depression as it does curing obesity. Long term, these conditions are very costly. It takes people out of peak condition, reduces labor pool, increases number of patients taking up resources at hospitals and doctors offices, and so on. A system which encourages these things is a failing one, as taxpayer costs would only continue to balloon. Additionally, since the thread is about psilocybin, people would still be filling up prescriptions for those. Also, self-medicating is also very costly. Not only to the system, as people often wind up in hospitals due to laced products or incorrect doses (see marijuana in a lot of states where dealers really aren't concerned about quality), but also to the individual. People are spending absurd amounts of money on vitamins and mushroom teas and all that in hopes it helps, but rarely is that the case due to these categories not being strictly regulated.
  - BowBun 2y ago
    I think your argument is as valid as the one you're responding to. >The system has as much interest in curing your depression as it does curing obesity. Ironically enough, the system hasn't cured obesity (if you believe obesity is primarily caused by a poor environment) and seems to instead to be headed towards managing symptoms by hacking our hormones and brains with semaglutides, etc. But at least you can work. If you use a similar train of thought applied to depression - we're now in a situation where something like 50 million Americans are on antidepressants or antianxiety medication. 1 in 6. This is also treating symptoms and putting people into a state of being able-bodied without being so well as to remove their dependency on the drug. But at least you can work. So I think the original idea fits with the concerns you outline. Mass producing a few drugs to keep a majority of the population able-bodied might not be that much money in the big picture. I'm not a firm believer in this theory, but I can totally believe an overly complex system with poor incentives and no absolute oversight can lead to these outcomes.
detourdog 2y ago
I think the advertising of pharmaceutical is big loss of faith. Not to mention the opioid crisis. If medicine was an honorable industry in the USA the might be more faith.

crazygringo 2y ago

> There's no one to trust more than a good friend to be there for you when the ride gets bumpy, not some guy in a suit doing it for the money. I couldn't disagree more. Your good friend most likely doesn't have the slightest idea how to handle things if your trip goes south. Especially when they're on their own "ride". That's not to disparage anyone, but just to state the fact that there is training around these things that comes from lots of experience. And therapists are not "some guy in a suit doing it for the money". You don't get rich doing psychotherapy -- you do it because you genuinely want to help people. And never in my life have I seen a therapist in a suit. This isn't to say that every therapist is great or that every friend is terrible -- just that the relative success rates of being able to help someone on a bad trip, both during and after, are going to be a lot higher on the side of trained therapists. Because of the training.

xterminator 2y ago
>Your good friend most likely doesn't have the slightest idea how to handle things if your trip goes south. Yes they can, everyone experienced can. It's part of having empathy. >Especially when they're on their own "ride". The trip sitter doesn't trip while sitting.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Well those are a lot of details you've added now. Before it was just a "good friend". Now they've also become the "trip sitter" who is "experienced"? Sure, that's going to help. But empathy isn't everything. Just because you've personally experienced of a bunch of trips, doesn't mean you have the knowledge of how to handle things when a trip goes south for someone else, in a way that you've never experienced. That's why there's genuine training in these things, the kinds of training psychotherapists in this area learn. That draws on many thousands of peoples' experiences, and the knowledge of what has worked and what hasn't. Your "good friend" probably doesn't have this training, I'm guessing. And if they do, then what counts most isn't that they're your friend -- it's the training they've learned.