Live data from Hacker News

Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

gazette.gc.ca

31–38 of 38 posts

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#31

It will help Canadians not to feel hunger pains, once the food trucks are turned back.

Canada is a net exporter of food and agriculture commodities. https://www.fcc-fac.ca/en/knowledge/economics/canada-food-an...

Yep, Canada will be fine as long as we don't want fresh vegetables in winter and can increase the capacity of our abattoirs.

I think I could live off rolled oats and beet sugar for quite a long time in any case!

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good, yes. But something being "organic" / "natural" is just a generic content-free talking point to use whenever it fits your agenda. Like you wouldn't be supporting this if these compounds were useful but -gasp- synthetic.

They are cheap to produce. A couple of grad students working hard for 2 weeks could create enough acid to keep the entire US trippy for a year, assuming they had the blessings of the lab owner and free access to inputs. Can’t charge exorbitant fees for something trivial to produce. I’d probably respond to your tone and assumptions with a string of vulgar invective containing ‘cope’, ‘nerd’, ‘sneed’ etc but I now real…

If by my "assumptions" you meant that you personally are the kind of person whom I would expect to lean on "natural" / "organic" talking point to push your agenda, as opposed to using that trope unknowingly (which seemed like a distinct possibility at the time), then your reaction tells me that would be the right assumption. Although I couldn't care less how much some random anon fits my assumptions, even if I had any.

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good, yes. But something being "organic" / "natural" is just a generic content-free talking point to use whenever it fits your agenda. Like you wouldn't be supporting this if these compounds were useful but -gasp- synthetic.

They are cheap to produce. A couple of grad students working hard for 2 weeks could create enough acid to keep the entire US trippy for a year, assuming they had the blessings of the lab owner and free access to inputs. Can’t charge exorbitant fees for something trivial to produce. I’d probably respond to your tone and assumptions with a string of vulgar invective containing ‘cope’, ‘nerd’, ‘sneed’ etc but I now real…

> Can’t charge exorbitant fees for something trivial to produce.

Read up on escitalopram and esketamine. Both are racemic separations of the original compound (with anti-depressive properties). Biochemically/medically they're basically identical to the original citalopram and ketamine. Same effect, same side effect. They're literally just the active half of the original compound. But legally a racemic separation which is medically equivalent is still juuuust different enough chemically you can patent it.

It seems highly likely to me that a pharma company is going to design and patent a psilocin prodrug with nearly identical effects to mushrooms, that's patentable, and they'll charge tidily for it. (Psilocybin itself in mushrooms is just a prodrug for psilocin.) I suspect if that happens psilocin or psilocybin will never be approved for routine use.

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are cheap to produce. A couple of grad students working hard for 2 weeks could create enough acid to keep the entire US trippy for a year, assuming they had the blessings of the lab owner and free access to inputs. Can’t charge exorbitant fees for something trivial to produce. I’d probably respond to your tone and assumptions with a string of vulgar invective containing ‘cope’, ‘nerd’, ‘sneed’ etc but I now real…

If by my "assumptions" you meant that you personally are the kind of person whom I would expect to lean on "natural" / "organic" talking point to push your agenda, as opposed to using that trope unknowingly (which seemed like a distinct possibility at the time), then your reaction tells me that would be the right assumption. Although I couldn't care less how much some random anon fits my assumptions, even if I had an…

Also by organic I meant the definition from chemistry, not the yuppie bullshit definition.

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#35
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd love federal elections in Canada, it's a pet peeve of mine to listen to both speeches of a candidate and note the differences. Trudeau did a lot of that in the last campaign where he wanted to appease both Quebec and the ROC so he added some qualifiers to his sentences in either language to create or remove ambiguity on some promises he was making.

And the latest Governor General now speaks in three different languages!

Although she says the same thing in all 3 languages, unlike most politicians.

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by my "assumptions" you meant that you personally are the kind of person whom I would expect to lean on "natural" / "organic" talking point to push your agenda, as opposed to using that trope unknowingly (which seemed like a distinct possibility at the time), then your reaction tells me that would be the right assumption. Although I couldn't care less how much some random anon fits my assumptions, even if I had an…

Also by organic I meant the definition from chemistry, not the yuppie bullshit definition.

Don't care, it's the same bullshit as yuppies, antivaxxers, druggies, and everyone else using those empty words for their agendas.

Heroin, fentanyl, opiates, amphetamines, benzos, are all chemically organic, that doesn't mean shit for how they should or shouldn't be used, neither in research nor medically nor recreationally.

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by my "assumptions" you meant that you personally are the kind of person whom I would expect to lean on "natural" / "organic" talking point to push your agenda, as opposed to using that trope unknowingly (which seemed like a distinct possibility at the time), then your reaction tells me that would be the right assumption. Although I couldn't care less how much some random anon fits my assumptions, even if I had an…

Also by organic I meant the definition from chemistry, not the yuppie bullshit definition.

But amphetamines and benzos are organic... So that definition literally is incorrect the way you use it in your top comment

Re: Health Canada authorizes psychedelic drugs for therapies

#38

Good, I’m supportive. Even if you think psychs are not positive or moral, it’s pure bad faith to use that as a reason to exclude them from research. It’s mind boggling that amphetamines, benzos, etc have been common in clinical settings for years, but not organic compounds derived from various fungal species (psilocybe and ergot) both of which have lived alongside us (or vice versa) for centuries if not millennia.

> have lived alongside us (or vice versa) for centuries if not millennia

Without addressing the overall point, I don't understand this sort of argument for drug legalization, which I hear occasionally. Almost everything on earth has lived alongside us for 200,000 years, but does that affect safety and efficacy? Should we treat people with polonium? Bleed them with leaches? Burn them with fire to get out the bad parts? Eye of newt and toe of frog? I'm not comparing the OP's treatments to those things, I'm saying that being 'natural' isn't correlated with efficacy or safety.

Someone said to me recently that there was no point to vaccinations and masks because 'you can't stop nature'. I stop nature pretty well: I stop 'natural' thermodynamics with my insulated clothes and home, I stop entropy by eating, I stop gravity with a parachute and e. coli with a clean food supply. Sure, eventually I'll die, but not today.

Post reply on HN