Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Research papers on it, like https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01336-3 , are appearing in the top science journal in the world and are no less enthusiastic than a press release. The article actually discusses that very paper : > While we’re here, it’s worth talking about the MAPS MDMA-therapy trial itself. In May 2021, to much media fanfare, they published their Phase III clinical trial in Nature Medicine.…
I think these get a lot of traction because of the interesting proposal that, should this go through, the possibility of a future where when one is feeling a little down or a little bored they might pop into their local Walgreens and get a one-night dose of OTC MDMA to liven up the boredom and sadness of their life. It's an interesting consideration that I think is part of the excitement and buzz these articles gener…
Psychedelics and mental illness
141–150 of 165 posts
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#142Not mentioned anywhere, but probably the strongest effect of psychedelics, is that LSD absolutely kills the desire to drink alcohol for months.
Drugs are tools. Know yourself, know what you're taking, and plan accordingly.
ce
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Research papers on it, like https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01336-3 , are appearing in the top science journal in the world and are no less enthusiastic than a press release. The article actually discusses that very paper : > While we’re here, it’s worth talking about the MAPS MDMA-therapy trial itself. In May 2021, to much media fanfare, they published their Phase III clinical trial in Nature Medicine.…
It feels like they actually mostly overlook this study in favor of their thesis that psychedelic research is bogus. The Nature critiques are less than convincing, either way they are doing another phase 3 trial so we will know. My guess is if this scientist did psychedelics he wouldn't have written this article.
Out of curiosity, is there anything specific about them that you think make them weaker critiques?
> either way they are doing another phase 3 trial so we will know.
As long as (potential?) weaknesses are not repeated; for example, if loss of blinding is indeed a significant issue and the second trial also suffers from the same flaw, then I think it's not unreasonable to call into question the utility of that second trial.
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#144Do you think a disturbed work life balance could be a reason for mental illness as well?
From knowing a whole bunch of people with ranges of issues, my personal opinion is that it seems that certain people are just simply not "tuned" to their lifestyle/environment, and the mental health issues stem from a certain part of that psyche not wanting to change their environment. Not that this would get past any ethics board, but it would be an interesting experiment if you took someone suffering from severe de…
I personally would very much like to use my phone after somebody fed me TEN GRAMS of shrooms. I strongly feel that I would want to do them on the plane, and not in a remote village where I don't even speak the language, and I've got to occupy myself in the darkness with strangers who are going to make me stagger into the jungle and fish, or farm, or hunt. Something I was not severely depressed about would be my very low parasite load, or the lack of arthropods in close proximity. In fact, there are virtually none here. Somewhere in South America there are very large spiders. We don't have them here. I would certainly not be depressed about this. In fact, I am jubilant and appreciative of my good fortune.
In fact, were I to have this condition, it would stem from an imbalance in my head. Because of it I would become depressed. This would be different than me not being "tuned" to my lifestyle, it's not clinical depression if I just need to paint my walls orange or just stop being such a mopey downer, it's a real drag, pitter patter, let's get at er! WEW! PROBLEM SOLVED!
It's like going bald, or having asthma, or being washed away by a tsunami while you are on a date. Sometimes things happen, which are not ideal and also not because of any defect or sin on your part. Sometimes things just happen, sometimes they happen to you.
For example, the poor person who's mind you reset with TEN GRAMS of shrooms and fired off thousands of miles from home and back in time thousands of years to do backbreaking manual labor among strangers. Seems unusually coercive, no? Punitive. Would you do that to your dog? A dog? For being sad too long?
Depressed is not stupid, after the monumental shroom trip, you'd have to force them to stay there, surely? This is probably the part where the ethics board might ask more questions, I reckon. We agree on that at least. Anyway, what if they in fact are not shamming and succumb to despair? Or simply tip the canoe or whatever over learning how to fish? TEN DAMN GRAMS of shrooms is going to make skills acquisition difficult, for quite some time after they eat them.
Socialization might be a lot to ask, do we share a language? What's the purpose of this anyway? Shouldn't this PURPOSE be something defined by me? Lack of agency was not a problem I had before, why is it part of your experiment? I mean, you don't even give me a choice, can't I volunteer or something? My friends probably are not sick, can I socialize with them? Instead of the strangers? In the village? How about you send me to work in Milan? Ok, Wales? Scotland? Missis... hmm. Scotland?
I mean really, you think phone and internet need to go, but instead want to force group interactions with strangers instead?
By the way, about your "personal opinion." If you know a whole bunch of people with ranges of issues, how did you achieve the deep insight into las depresionistas? Or are you saying that slacking is the root cause of mental illness? Force them into paleolithic lifestyle and they'll snap out of it? Would you say you've read 10 books on the subject? How many more than 10? Lots? I'm just trying to properly value your opinion here. How's your results?
Finally, I have to say that your experiment kind of seems similar to pray away the gay camp or whatever name was used for it. Isolation, coercion, duress and reconditioning. Plus TEN GRAMS OF SHROOMS.
Whole thing seems a bit sus, frankly.
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
It feels like they actually mostly overlook this study in favor of their thesis that psychedelic research is bogus. The Nature critiques are less than convincing, either way they are doing another phase 3 trial so we will know. My guess is if this scientist did psychedelics he wouldn't have written this article.
> My guess is if this scientist did psychedelics he wouldn't have written this article. That was my thought too, though that also runs into the author's argument that psychedelic research is heavily biased by people who have tried it. On the other hand, I think people who have not tried psychedelics have never experienced how much of what they think of as objective, rational mind is actually fairly fluid, and how muc…
Physics research is heavily biased by people who live in reality.
Oncology research is heavily biased by having study participants who have cancer.
Am I missing something?
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#146I agree with the basic point of the article entirely. However he shows the same kind of bias that he is speaking out again by not discussing the best known branch of such research. And that is MDMA for PTSD. It is best known simply because it is, in fact, demonstrating that it works. The FDA has been repeatedly calling it a "breakthrough therapy" since 2017. It is in multiple phase 3 trials around the world that are…
We'd ordinarily use at least - at least - an alpha-2 agonist like prazosin. Even going with just that would be malpractice-bordering conservative for severe PTSD.
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My guess is if this scientist did psychedelics he wouldn't have written this article. That was my thought too, though that also runs into the author's argument that psychedelic research is heavily biased by people who have tried it. On the other hand, I think people who have not tried psychedelics have never experienced how much of what they think of as objective, rational mind is actually fairly fluid, and how muc…
Psychedelic research is heavily biased by people who have tried it. Physics research is heavily biased by people who live in reality. Oncology research is heavily biased by having study participants who have cancer. Am I missing something?
I don’t know if someone who has never taken psychedelics can adequately understand what it is like, unless they have experienced something similar without taking psychedelic substances. (That is, spontaneous, visionary experiences). There’s an intellectualization of what the person thinks this experience is about, as a substitute for direct experience.
A physicist might study physical phenomena, but what they work with are models about those physical phenomena, and then call that “reality”. That isn’t reality. Those are models of physical phenomena with high degree of predictive ability.
Rather, if you want to use an example of someone who attempt to directly experience reality, we’re talking about Zen practitioners or one of those non-dual teachers. If you hear them talk, they spend a lot of time saying very plainly, you don’t really experience reality directly. But people hearing it pretty much nod their head and think that they do.
As far as oncology research goes, you are right. It is biased towards study participants with cancer. Not only do the _researchers_ themselves are not experiencing cancer themselves (unless they got cancer), but what is _not_ being studied is what health and wholeness looks like and contextualizing cancer that way. Instead, we’re getting to know a lot about the mechanisms of cancer, and the various causal chains of cancer, and this limits our view to that of the body as a machine. That by somehow understanding all the fiddly bits, we would understand the whole, and we won’t.
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#148I agree with the basic point of the article entirely. However he shows the same kind of bias that he is speaking out again by not discussing the best known branch of such research. And that is MDMA for PTSD. It is best known simply because it is, in fact, demonstrating that it works. The FDA has been repeatedly calling it a "breakthrough therapy" since 2017. It is in multiple phase 3 trials around the world that are…
[0] https://stuartritchie.substack.com/p/psychedelics?s=r#:~:tex...
Re: Psychedelics and mental illness
#149I’m reminded of something the PhD Pharmacologist Psychiatrist told us during med school - effect size of new depression meds decreases over time (probably because you have an early positive result and then it’s pushed in and then later better quality studies show smaller difference) so the joke is ‘every time a new depression medication comes out there’s a race to use it before it stops working!’