Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#21

Post by _dmav »

empath75 wrote: post #2

This is a fantastic article and I intend to spend more time reading it in detail. Articles about psychedelics tend to be either dismissive or full of woo and this takes them seriously as tools to better understand the physical basis of human consciousness. A major thing I took away from my experience with lsd and mdma was how impossible it seemed that such a small amount of material could so utterly transform my expe…

As someone who recently tried MDMA, I second this. Marijuana gives me intense anxiety, so I was very nervous to take something “hard” like MDMA. I couldn’t be happier that I took the risk and tried it.

I suspect that my first time “rolling” permanently changed pathways in my brain in one of the best ways possible; on MDMA, I experienced what it felt like to feel unconditional love for complete strangers around me. I genuinely felt like I cared and wanted to connect with everyone. I saw beauty in people I wouldn’t even notice in my normal, routine life. This, of course, was an artificially created and temporary feeling, but 6 months later, I still feel the affects from that night.

After trying MDMA, I’m convinced that the fastest way to change yourself is through drugs. Neuroplasticity goes down as you get older, but it seems like certain drugs can accelerate changes to your brain anyways. I have yet to try psychedelics, but can understand how they would have similar, mind altering affects.

I recognize a lot of this is pseudoscience and needs to be better understood, so I’m happy to see research is being done. Drugs can be a very dangerous thing, but they can also have some extremely positive affects. Figuring out how to maximize benefits while reducing risk is something that I believe will benefit many people.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#22

Post by akvadrako »

dlwdlw wrote: post #12
bwang29 wrote: post #10

It seems like the filtration theory still produced by far the most significant impact to our current understanding of psychedelic effects. What I was surprised to learn was most research in this domain clearly distinguish adult and non-adult, and the filtration theory implies that kids or younger adults are more creative, have more imaginary freedom, and less emotionally stable - meaning they're naturally more "on dr…

Also may explain why they can be damaging to younger people. Like disturbing plants before their root system (filtration system) takes root tends to kill or damage the plants entire lifespan.

Why do you think psychedelics are damaging for younger people? I doubt this has been studied.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#23

Post by akvadrako »

bwang29 wrote: post #18
achileas wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, when I experimented with these, that's basically how I felt - it was very reminiscent of my imagination when I was much younger. As I started studying neuroscience, especially in grad school (I specialized in attention and sensory systems), the filtration theory made even more sense because our brain works on a lot of things in this way, especially our senses. I was also interested in autism and there's…

I feel that somehow this also changed how adults process pain and happiness. Now I have a million other questions - are adults seeking psychedelic as a result of fatigue or emotional boredom, as a method to revive imagination?

I would say for exploration. It's like traveling to an exotic land, more alien than anywhere on Earth.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#24

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

MikkoFinell wrote: post #17
bwang29 wrote: post #10

It seems like the filtration theory still produced by far the most significant impact to our current understanding of psychedelic effects. What I was surprised to learn was most research in this domain clearly distinguish adult and non-adult, and the filtration theory implies that kids or younger adults are more creative, have more imaginary freedom, and less emotionally stable - meaning they're naturally more "on dr…

The problem is the theory implies that people with brain damage should experience psychological effects similar to those induced by psychedelic drugs, and we don't see anything like that.

It doesn’t imply that.

“Brain damage” usually means gross structural damage, while psychedelics seem to operate at the neurotransmitter level.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#25

Post by anfractuosity »

bwang29 wrote: post #10

It seems like the filtration theory still produced by far the most significant impact to our current understanding of psychedelic effects. What I was surprised to learn was most research in this domain clearly distinguish adult and non-adult, and the filtration theory implies that kids or younger adults are more creative, have more imaginary freedom, and less emotionally stable - meaning they're naturally more "on dr…

I thought this was interesting:

"It has been proposed that this connectivity may facilitate arbitrary sensory experiences in infants that are unlike anything experienced by typical adults but are similar to the sensory experiences of adults with synaesthesia, a rare sensory phenomenon that has been associated with exuberant neural connectivity and that is characterized by strong arbitrary associations between different sensations. We provide the first evidence for this infant-synaesthesia hypothesis by showing that the presence of particular shapes influences color preferences in typical 2- and 3-month-olds, but not in 8-month-olds or adults."

From "Synaesthetic Associations Decrease During Infancy" by Katie Wagner and Karen R. Dobkins

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#26

Post by virtualwhys »

akvadrako wrote: post #22
dlwdlw wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also may explain why they can be damaging to younger people. Like disturbing plants before their root system (filtration system) takes root tends to kill or damage the plants entire lifespan.

Why do you think psychedelics are damaging for younger people? I doubt this has been studied.

I believe there have been studies done on the detrimental effects of regular marijuana use on adolescents and resulting (permanently) impaired cognition.

Having smoked way too much marijuana in my early life, it seems fairly obvious that regular drug use is potentially damaging to the developing brain (or any brain for that matter), independent of how interesting or intense the experiences while under the influence may be.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#27

Post by iaml »

MikkoFinell wrote: post #17
bwang29 wrote: post #10

It seems like the filtration theory still produced by far the most significant impact to our current understanding of psychedelic effects. What I was surprised to learn was most research in this domain clearly distinguish adult and non-adult, and the filtration theory implies that kids or younger adults are more creative, have more imaginary freedom, and less emotionally stable - meaning they're naturally more "on dr…

The problem is the theory implies that people with brain damage should experience psychological effects similar to those induced by psychedelic drugs, and we don't see anything like that.

Have you seen "my beautiful broken brain"(2014) ? It's exactly about that happening to one person. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSfpA3AEKmY

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#28

Post by collyw »

virtualwhys wrote: post #26
akvadrako wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think psychedelics are damaging for younger people? I doubt this has been studied.

I believe there have been studies done on the detrimental effects of regular marijuana use on adolescents and resulting (permanently) impaired cognition. Having smoked way too much marijuana in my early life, it seems fairly obvious that regular drug use is potentially damaging to the developing brain (or any brain for that matter), independent of how interesting or intense the experiences while under the influence m…

Marijuana isn't generally considered a psychedelic.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#29

Post by collyw »

_dmav wrote: post #21
empath75 wrote: post #2

This is a fantastic article and I intend to spend more time reading it in detail. Articles about psychedelics tend to be either dismissive or full of woo and this takes them seriously as tools to better understand the physical basis of human consciousness. A major thing I took away from my experience with lsd and mdma was how impossible it seemed that such a small amount of material could so utterly transform my expe…

As someone who recently tried MDMA, I second this. Marijuana gives me intense anxiety, so I was very nervous to take something “hard” like MDMA. I couldn’t be happier that I took the risk and tried it. I suspect that my first time “rolling” permanently changed pathways in my brain in one of the best ways possible; on MDMA, I experienced what it felt like to feel unconditional love for complete strangers around me. I…

Politicians ban this. The world would be a better place if the people in control took some.

Re: Unifying Theories of Psychedelic Drug Effects

#30

Post by stinos »

MikkoFinell wrote: post #17
bwang29 wrote: post #10

It seems like the filtration theory still produced by far the most significant impact to our current understanding of psychedelic effects. What I was surprised to learn was most research in this domain clearly distinguish adult and non-adult, and the filtration theory implies that kids or younger adults are more creative, have more imaginary freedom, and less emotionally stable - meaning they're naturally more "on dr…

The problem is the theory implies that people with brain damage should experience psychological effects similar to those induced by psychedelic drugs, and we don't see anything like that.

we don't see anything like that

Yes we do. For quite some effects seen in patients in psychiatry it's not too hard to come up with a drug which induces similar experiences. Take paranoia for instance. And hallucinations of course. Or, to mention an extreme and very rare example: there are people lacking a certain connection between the low-level visual processing and the parts translating that to known objects (sorry, don't remember exact terminology). It's extremely hard to imagine, but such people have normal vision yet they do not recognize based on what they see. E.g. they see a chair, but don't know it is a 'chair'. However when they touch the chair they know 'aha, chair'. Someone I know described that exactly once when on psychdelics; psilocybin IIRC.

Post reply on HN