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

Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 303 posts

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#241

Post by hinkley »

umvi wrote: post #77

Do mushrooms make you write incoherent ramblings on Facebook about how you are God and how everyone else is stuck in the matrix? Because I have 3 different friends who all started doing that after dabbling in psychedelics

There is something to be said for waiting until you're 25 to do this stuff. Let the brain form all the way first. I think the last study I saw on marijuana linked most of the worst effects to starting while still a teenager.

The logistical problem of getting access to these experiences if you wait until well after college is not insurmountable (especially with THC, today) but it definitely seems more like a project than just showing up on a Friday night to your extended social group.

Poor Paul Stamets ('the' mushroom guy of this era). From his writing it seems like half the people who want to talk to him want him to hook them up with psychedelics. It's hard to tell if he's playing up that ratio or playing it down. His standing answer is "I don't do that, I can't help you." He also mentions that the DEA has made him aware that they are aware of his existence.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#242

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

hackernewds wrote: post #224
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for taking the time to explain, but if I understand correctly in the instances you relate, you were taking mushrooms specifically in order to get high, correct? Whereas the OP (root of the thread) is talking about microdosing, which is, if I understand it correctly, taking drugs in an attempt to not get high, but get other benefits? As to the "powerful feeling of connectedness with the universe", well, I've be…

the importance of "set and setting" is almost universally known and easily verifiable. I've had terrible trips when stressed out and beautiful revelational ones when in the right frame of mind. shrooms are not as benign as alcohol. you're usually even less in control of your mental state, which can be both amazing and scary

I don't dispute the "set and setting" idea. I am asking why that makes a difference in the therapeutic or otherwise beneficial use of psilocybin and why it doesn't make any difference with other drugs like aspirin.

To clarify, as far as I understand, "set and setting" matters when taking psilocybin to get high, but microdosing is taking psilocybin (or other similar drugs) to very deliberatly not get high.

So what does "set and setting" have to do with microdosing, and why doesn't it matter with aspirin, which also doesn't get you high?

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#243

Post by akomtu »

umvi wrote: post #77

Do mushrooms make you write incoherent ramblings on Facebook about how you are God and how everyone else is stuck in the matrix? Because I have 3 different friends who all started doing that after dabbling in psychedelics

That "god" thing is often misunderstood. If we assume that humans are somehow connected, by quantum entanglement in their brains or whatever, then mushrooms make this connectedness apparent by muting the link to the body motor complex. In other words, that "god" is the union of all humans, and currently it's undergoing, for its own reasons, a severe form of schizophrenia when its big consciousness is split into a few billions small consciousnesses.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#244

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

peteradio wrote: post #232
mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how being high is an insult. OP didn't seem insulted to me.

I think incorrectly paraphrasing someone that misleads the conversation is insulting, perhaps that is a personal feeling of my own.

I could argue it's condescending to be insulted on the behalf of someone who's clearly not insulted, but how is this useful? We're all adults here, feelings are boring and irrational and they don't advance the discussion at all.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#245

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

hackernewds wrote: post #221
mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying her experience is invalid. If it works for her, great. But there is this tendency of microdosing proponents to oversell what is effectively a high(nothing wrong with that, I love getting high) as some sort of profound self-help tool. It's a high. That's fine. Getting high can have positive effects too. Call it that, though.

Bit of a tangent here but I noticed you used "her" instead of the default assumption of "him". Is this a new practice?

Assumption based on the username "EmilyHughes". Otherwise I would have used they/them or maybe a he/him would've slipped through, though I try to avoid that.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#246

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

hinkley wrote: post #233
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And yes, I've tried it. It made me high, but generally I was far less productive than I would be taking stimulants for my ADHD instead. I had some coworkers try microdosing several years ago. They were convinced that they were smarter and more productive on those days. Meanwhile, the rest of us could clearly see that they were just operating slower than normal and had a weirdly positive response to even slight achi…

I have often wondered this about people doing the napping versus sleeping experiment. Euphoria makes you feel like you know so much more than you do. I know of maybe one or two people who gave themselves cognitive tests during their experience. I don't recall the results but I clearly didn't take them seriously since I'm still unconvinced. I don't know about you guys but I tend to do better if I'm given the same kind…

There's studies on "brain training" apps like Lumosity that tend to show that all you're improving at is the specific test, not the underlying mental capacity like working memory.

And a related anecdote: I once asked my psychologist to do an IQ test on me, mainly out of curiosity. She refused, basically giving the logic you did. We have no reason to believe your IQ is low, or even average, and if we did do a test, and at some future point we needed a test for actual diagnostic purposes(say if I had a stroke or something), it could taint the result.

So I'd say you're right on the money wrt the limited usefulness of doing these neuropsych tests repeatedly. Especially over short periods.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#247

Post by ace2358 »

cdot2 wrote: post #41
ace2358 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This aligns with my experiences. Especially for me, how low my productivity was during the come down, which could sometimes last a week or four!

How do you know you wouldn't have felt the same about a placebo?

Fuck Brah, have you taken psychedelics or other hard drugs? The comedown feeling where you nervous system feels on fire and your skin feels tight it unmistakable for me. I might possibly feel like that from a placebo, the placebo effect can be very tricky and you kind can play tricks.

But I’d say 99% chance no. I’d know the difference.

This is obviously talking about doses closer to mega dose than micro dose. Although as time went on, even small doses that wouldn’t get me much of a buzz would still ruin me for weeks afterwards.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#248

Post by effingwewt »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #240
effingwewt wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Hi. Have I recently posted a comment that used offensive language like "pure bullshit" in response to one of your comments, or have I in some other way shown disrespect to you?

No post body was provided.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#249

Post by sowbug »

entropie wrote: post #152
j_m_b wrote: post #122

I'm sort of surprised they didn't extract/synthesize psilocybin directly and administer that. Decades ago, I grew a few batches of P. Cubensis. Even amongst mushrooms from the same rice cake, the dosage wildly varies. You could have a "trip" from a tiny mushroom or eat a handful of duds.

> Even amongst mushrooms from the same rice cake, the dosage wildly varies This is the main reason with psychoactive mushrooms overall. You can't dose exact via bio material so overdosing happens regular and could be actually harmful.

Would you mind citing a case of harm caused by pharmacological effects of mushroom overdose? My own online research since your post found no such recorded instances, but perhaps we're using different terminology.

Re: Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

#250

Post by redox99 »

zosima wrote: post #90

In studies such as these with huge intersubject variability, and probably also quite large intrasubject variability from day to day on many scales, it makes sense to look at change from baseline for individuals in the various groups rather than just differences in raw scores between treatment groups. It seems by a cursory glance that most analyses done were of the latter kind, and I think then a study such as this, w…

Did you actually read the methodology? Because what you are saying doesn't really fit the used methodology.

They had all participants on shrooms for 1 week, and on placebo for 1 week (order randomized), and compared the results.

Post reply on HN