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

The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 200 posts

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#31

Post by [deleted] »

cflewis wrote: post #9
labrador wrote: post #2

It's sad that the only way to legalize is to force people to see a qualified therapist and take patented psychedelics in order to benefit from the experience, but that's what the normies want. I've taken them with a therapist and it was meh because the doctor/patient relationship became weird under the influence. On the other hand I've had peak experiences by myself alone in a redwood forest on a fresh clear morning.

As a normie for whom ketamine treatment was a life changer, I can attest I would never ever have taken it without specialist supervision. And by specialist, I mean someone qualified, not some dude who has done plenty and has a K dealer. I would hazard there’s a large contingent of normies for whom the difference between supervised medical treatments that happen to be psychedelics and just the act of taking psychedeli…

[deleted]

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#32

Post by Scoundreller »

NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

It’s like when med chemists trialled a cannabinoid-blocker as an experimental appetite suppressant. Surprise surprise, it gave the participants depression and suicidality.

Like, what did you expect?

https://www.nature.com/articles/nrcardio.2010.148

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#33

Post by TaylorAlexander »

NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

Well, I love my therapist, and research suggests that psychedelic assisted therapy is effective. I've never taken a large dose of mushrooms because I am nervous about where it would take me, so personally doing that with my therapist could be pretty nice. Tho expensive lol.

I've only really done LSD once tho and it was interesting, and seemed more low key than shrooms, so maybe I should try that again.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#34

Post by golergka »

mkoryak wrote: post #22
NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

sounds like you had a good trip. If you had a bad trip, you might feel differently about it.

I've had many bad trips throughout my life, and they have always been the most educational. Learning about your shortcomings and confronting your demons and traumas isn't supposed to be a pleasant experience.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#35

Post by anigbrowl »

mkoryak wrote: post #22
NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

sounds like you had a good trip. If you had a bad trip, you might feel differently about it.

It's not that simple at all. Bad trips can be more therapeutic than good ones. If you have tripless neuroplasticity, (a possibility I doubt) then what's your feedback mechanism? You might wind up selecting for shitty or dysfunctional behavior.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#36

Post by [deleted] »

km3r wrote: post #17
criddell wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at least some normies want that. I'm pretty much as normie as it gets and I've been watching Michael Pollan's series on Netflix How to Change Your Mind . One day I might want to try LSD, psilocybin, or MDMA (those are the episodes I've watched) but probably wouldn't until I could buy from an FDA regulated company. I don't trust dark web sources or the neighborhood guy who knows a guy.

You can and should test any substance you acquire from an unregulated source.

[deleted]

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#37

Post by zionic »

heap_perms wrote: post #21
NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

" Talk about missing the forest from the trees. The whole transformative experience is the "trip" itself. " I couldn't agree more. In fact, the trip itself is not a nice side effect, it's the precondition to get measurable, long-term positive changes.

>long-term positive changes.

Proponents frequently mention things like this, yet _no one_ who publicly admits to psych use is someone I want to be.

All the people I've ever met, and friends who didn't but started down that road, aren't "all there" anymore. They'll preach day and night about the "benefits", but from the outside looking in it's obviously a coping mechanism.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#38

Post by WalterSear »

NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

> The whole transformative experience is the "trip" itself.

IMHE, it's not, at least in regards to (racemic) ketamine and depression. The benefit doesn't appear until ~24 hours later, and the effect scales with dosage, but not trip intensity or outcome.

I found taking it almost unpleasant at times, but the subsequent effects uniformly profound. Unfortunately, I developed a rare health issue, or I'd still be taking it.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#39

Post by anigbrowl »

huetius wrote: post #11

With the collapse of the SSRI hypothesis, I feel like there was a missed opportunity to interrogate what it is about the affluent, technological society that makes such a staggering number of people so depressed. It seems that we will instead (characteristically) plow forward with even more powerful drugs.

Just because it hit the news last week doesn't mean the window has closed. You jsut have to be willing to get in arguments/break up with people who dislike hearing their assumptions questioned.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#40

Post by engineer_22 »

criddell wrote: post #14
game-of-throws wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really what "normies" want? Or is it just what drug companies/lobbyists want?

I think at least some normies want that. I'm pretty much as normie as it gets and I've been watching Michael Pollan's series on Netflix How to Change Your Mind . One day I might want to try LSD, psilocybin, or MDMA (those are the episodes I've watched) but probably wouldn't until I could buy from an FDA regulated company. I don't trust dark web sources or the neighborhood guy who knows a guy.

Reach out to a friend and explain your situation, I'm sure you can find what you're looking for. These substances are ubiquitous. You might benefit from having a friend around while you're tripping, anyway.
Post reply on HN