US could soon approve MDMA therapy • Hacker News Board

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#401

Post by systemtest » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 10:54 PM UTC

loeg wrote: post #340

systemtest wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stockholm has 1973 hours of sunshine a year, compared to 2100 hours in Seattle. The US has more sun, but not enough for a significant difference.

GP is talking about winter sunlight, not year-round numbers. (Longer summer days don't help seasonal affective disorder.) Stockholm sees about 6 hours of daylight at winter solstice, while Seattle sees 8.25. And Seattle is sort of cherry-picked -- it's one of the northern-most cities in the continental US, representing 1.2% of the US population (including the full metro area). LA sees 9.75 hours of daylight on the so…

You seem to be mixing up daylight and sunshine hours.

Sunshine is what helps alleviate seasonal affective disorder.

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#402

Post by tbalsam » Sun, Apr 23, 2023, 6:53 AM UTC

462436347 wrote: post #398

tbalsam wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please read the original Phase III and earlier studies where they thoroughly address these questions under the treatment modalities being tested. The process for drug approval is extremely rigorous for a reason, and does have some downsides as a result. Let's not negate that work please by ignoring all of the hard work that's already been done to show exceptionally safe viability within the context it's being used in…

> Please read the original Phase III and earlier studies where they thoroughly address these questions under the treatment modalities being tested. The problem is these drugs aren't being presented as dangerous pharmaceuticals that still have worthwhile cost-benefit ratios for certain serious conditions. Instead the "drugs are good" crowd actually argues, laughably, that they're completely safe, and safer than alcoho…

This is a rather opinionated take, to be honest. For sure, there are dangers, but I find this to be a rather extreme view.

Some drugs have a narrow dosing window. Some have a wider dosing window. Some have serious dangers associated with them. This is a core part of psychopharmacology, as you likely well know.

Strawmanning and extremifying arguments can perpetuate an echo chamber but not much else. Most people I talk to who support psychedelics seem to have a very reasonable and mature approach to the topic. Some people of course will have extreme views on either side but that is bound to happen.

Also, safer than alcohol is a... horrendously poor comparison to use. Alcohol actually is quite a dangerous drug, and MDMA I'd put up there but one step below if misused. I'm not sure where you anchored alcohol's safety here, it's very much implicated in a number of very bad things healthwise, not to mention addiction. The withdrawal syndrome alone is fatal in the wrong circumstances, something even drugs like heroin can't claim.

Once again on the microdosing side, I'm not sure what "propaganda" you're referring to. There are plenty of peer-reviewed studies on the topic. MDMA of course is not microdosed, though LSD and psilocybin still could be candidates on the table for that.

However, as far as I understand from the literature, the concerns you presented strongly are still based on theoretical evidence. It's not guaranteed, and as in all things, it for now is in the realm of "we don't know". Caution is good.

All in all, every drug class has problems and potential issues. We find those out with time and studies. Using caution as we figure that out is good. Strongly bashing things or putting down entire cultures of people with opinions that they generally don't hold is less so.

I can't speak to much more than that, and these are just my own personal opinions after all. Extremely selective-to-5ht2a ligands will likely be something that gains momentum over the coming decades unfortunately, but thankfully at least so far with the history of use that we see, so far there's not necessarily a clear smoking "negative gun" as far as I personally see. But tools are tools, and different tools have different risks, and I personally believe/feel that we should treat them as such.

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#403

Post by hydrok9 » Sun, Apr 23, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

wnolens wrote: post #396

waboremo wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that's understandable, and that's a low number relatively speaking as this is a problem that really hasn't been solved. There are places like psychologytoday that provide a decent database to finding potential therapists (with good enough filters to really narrow down what you want to get into and feel safe around), but it can still be very tough. Especially when you consider how many people go so long without b…

Each one of those therapists I saw for at least 6 months, at least one for 2y. There's probably 4-5 more I saw for 2-3 sessions before abandoning. With all this experience, I still don't know how I would filter a list of therapists except maybe remove ones that seem married to a particular method/style. Like a real relationship (that you don't pay for), it takes time to get to know eachother. And at anywhere from $10…

I find therapists are fantastic outlets to vent to, without having to worry about being judged or putting too much on the other person. But my experience is similar with therapists who feel they need to help people, or are trying to "make up for" their own issues. It's hard to take advice from someone who seems as messed up as you do.

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#404

Post by goolz » Fri, Apr 28, 2023, 4:06 PM UTC

sleight42 wrote: post #359

goolz wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this to be a great start and have had some very productive results with medicinal shrooms that I got in D.C. I would say that the experiences bordered on the profound and definitely helped me move past some recent near-death trauma in my life. While I am not as much of a fan of MDMA I could see a similar situation where, if done responsibly, it could yield wonderful results. Best of luck to all the researchers…

Live near DC. Color me curious. The "gifting" scheme of DC seems sketchy AF to me: an awkward and awful compromise to sidestep useful regulation that would create more safety, reliability, and transparency. Am I wrong?

To be honest, it has always been quite easy. Last time I simply went in, plus I am out of state. It has become MUCH more above board recently.

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#405

Post by goolz » Fri, Apr 28, 2023, 4:11 PM UTC

jseliger wrote: post #193

goolz wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hamilton's Pharmacopeia has some wonderful exchanges between Hamilton, Sasha and Ann. What beautiful souls, who brought so much light to this world.

If you read Phikal , you will see some not-great comments on Sasha's treatment of his first wife.

Life is complicated. So our the relationships we forge with people. I do not condone the mistreatment of others. And it saddens me to read this, but we all have darkness inside of us, even if a little. It can be tough co-existing, especially with those we love very much. I guess I just wanted to see the joy but you are not wrong in pointing out that Sasha is human. Quite.

And as the other commenter mentioned, there was an abundance of love in that relationship too. That much is evident.

Re: US could soon approve MDMA therapy

#406

Post by rybosworld » Tue, May 02, 2023, 4:11 PM UTC

_a_a_a_ wrote: post #355

rybosworld wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What your post comes across as, to me anyway, is that you want drugs to be a bad thing. I am curious how you could interpret that.

> I wish more people spoke about their negative experiences with psychedelics. that > It's a sobering and necessary counterpoint... and that.

It's not at all clear to me that those statements are promoting a "drugs are bad" narrative. Discussing negative experiences is inherent to an honest conversation.