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

41–50 of 200 posts

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

#41

Post by recyclelater »

zionic wrote: post #37
heap_perms wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" 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.

I publicly, to my peer group at least, state I have enjoyed benefits of psychedelic drugs every five or ten years, I am pretty sure I have my shit together compared to most people. That being said i know the people you are talking about, but they in my experience use drugs much more frequently. Multiple times a year, and regularly also smoke weed etc.

Obviously biased when talking about myself, but I think you can split your judgement into a frequency argument rather than a binary yes or no.

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

#42

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

#44

Post by ruined »

zionic wrote: post #37
heap_perms wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" 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.

as with anything, there is a set of people who are too excited, and they are all evangelists

you know plenty of people who aren't vocal about their experiences because they understand it's not appropriate or acceptable in the situations you have shared.

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

#45

Post by 14 »

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…

Where does one buy LSD this day and age. Doesn’t seem very popular in my neck of the woods and have not heard anyone having it since I was in high school 20 years ago.

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

#46

Post by stocknoob »

engineer_22 wrote: post #43
mathgladiator wrote: post #15

Do we really need new ones? Maybe, we just need to decriminalize nature and let a shamanic class arise to guide us on a spiritual journey of self-awareness.

What could possibly go wrong?

What could possibly go wrong with a society full of people living unexamined lives?

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

#47

Post by colinsane »

NickC25 wrote: post #20
criddell wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is an inexpensive drug that can "cure" PTSD after a very small number of doses a dream or nightmare for drug companies and lobbyists?

A nightmare - as said companies will have a fixed amount of revenue per patient, and it won't be recurring. Wall Street doesn't like companies that go against the ingrained model of "extremely expensive long term care as a service".

what of the insurance companies though? if they no longer have to pay for recurring treatments, then more of the customer’s monthly premium can go to the shareholder. Wall Street gets their recurring revenue one way or another.

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

#49

Post by labrador »

standardUser wrote: post #13
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.

Mushrooms are being lightly legalized in some cities and states. And while a lot of that is under the umbrella of mental health or spirituality, it is not being confined to medical environments. The normies appear to be losing that particular battle. And I think they're set to lose a lot more.

There are some spots in American where that is very true, such as my hometown of Santa Cruz

That said, I am not opposed to a therapeutic setting if that's what people who never tried them feel comfortable with

Leading the psychedelic renaissance: https://maps.org/

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

#50

Post by recyclelater »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #33
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.

It’s not more low key it’s actually much more intense, or rather can be depending on dosage. Easier to exact dose with LSD. Mushrooms are over quicker and as a result can be more pleasant.
Post reply on HN