Live data from Hacker News

Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

independent.co.uk

71–80 of 236 posts

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#71

I'm personally excited to see what sorts of new treatments will come out of using psychedelics medically. I've always been on the skeptical side of medical marijuana usage in all but the most extreme cases, but I have a feeling that LSD and psilocybin can really provide mental turning points and help people break out of depression.

Low hanging fruit here may be ayahuasca / ibogaine treatment for symptoms of withdrawal from chronic opioid abuse.

It sort of makes sense intuitively. If you you can just make it through the agony of junk sickness. You are in the clear. A 36-hour dose seems preternaturally suited.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5773453/

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#72
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are controlled experiments necessary for proving safety? Intuitively, there shouldn't be a placebo effect, and you could get twice as powerful a study by giving twice as many people the drug and using statistics for the general population as the control group.

Why shouldn't there be a placebo effect? It's well documented for basically any drug, even for alcohol. Serve people non-alcoholic drinks but tell them otherwise, and they get drunk.

Because the trial wasn't about finding the expected effect (drunkenness) but the secondary effects. People don't get heart disease or cirrhosis from non-alcoholic drinks, or at least, I'd be interested in reading the study where they do.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#73
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I'm a skeptic that 1. CBD+THC offers any additional medical† benefits over CBD used alone; 2. that it makes any medical sense to prescribe a (non-dose-controllable) plant over a pill, or at the very least an extract with tested dosage. I'm not skeptical of the medical benefits of (some of) the compounds in marijuana; I'm just a skeptic of prescribing marijuana itself as a way of delivering those compounds…

Hydroponic cannabis is grown in highly controlled environments and the dosage levels are tested to be within an acceptable range. There are also dozens (hundreds) of other cannabinoids found in marijuana which (may) have additional medical benefits. >It's like prescribing willow bark for a headache when aspirin exists. Willow bark contains salicin, not aspirin, while marijuana contains both THC and CBD. Willow bark a…

My point was more, "measurement good; eating psychoactive things off the ground bad."

The "key advancement of chemistry"—the thing that makes chemistry chemistry, rather than alchemy (and as it happens, the thing that differentiates baking from cooking) is being able to measure the reactants we put into a beaker, and clean the product of the reaction of any side-products, such that we can then crystallize/distill/etc. out the product alone, weigh it, and thereby determine the exact potency of product. Once we know that, we can then do all sorts of things: dilute it to a controlled strength; create delivery vehicles that deliver it at particular speeds; put it straight into the body in ways that would just kill you if you put into the body all the other stuff that you isolated the product out of; etc.

Anyone can do this. People make THC tinctures and essential-oils all the time, in their kitchens. It doesn't matter to me whether you do it or someone else does it for you; but it seems irresponsible to me to tell someone to go eat the non-processed version for medical effect.

> Hydroponic cannabis is grown in highly controlled environments and the dosage levels are tested to be within an acceptable range.

Sure, you can control everything about the production of the marijuana itself. But the key to medical treatment is the last mile, and specifically the ability to relate a patient's response over time to a dosing schedule/pharmacodynamic profile for the drug. If you prescribe someone "medical marijuana", without fixing down how they're going to take it, they could very well do anything from eating the whole batch at once, to vaping it every three minutes, to just doing hits off a bong whenever they feel pain. These are not the same thing, and medically they should be different prescriptions if the doctor has any hope of knowing whether the treatment is working.

Pills (or, really, anything more specific than "here's a plant, go to town") let a doctor say something more specific like "take one of these every two hours", and then from there know exactly how much of the active ingredient should be in the patient's bloodstream at any given time of the day, and so be able to measure effects (and side-effects!) against those that are normal, or abnormal, for that level of dose being in the patient's body for that period of time.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#74
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always been on the skeptical side of medical marijuana usage in all but the most extreme cases, Really? I've always found the milder claims fairly believable (fighting nausea or chronic low level pain relief). As an anecdote, I can attest to dealing with kidney stone pain well (rather than stopping the pain it reduced how much I noticed it) and it ended up more effective and felt less dangerous than the opiods…

For myself cannabis literally has the opposite effects -- increases inflammation and pain (I have chronic back pain). So I think it's right to be skeptical because the compounds themselves have extremely variable results.

This is very surprising to me -- have you done any research in to this? I would be interested to go down the rabbit hole but if you did some of the research already maybe we can be efficient humans :D

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#75
post #60
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still big news that anyone is even doing phase 1 trials, since you wouldn't tend to bother if you didn't intend to follow up with further phases. I.e. "X is safe in a phase 1 trial" is never a useful terminal fact that you set out to prove and then, having proven it, do nothing more.

The vast majority of drugs don't make it through phase 3. Most will fail by the end of phase 2. If we trumpeted every time a prospective intervention underwent the earliest phases of study... well, I guess we'd have what we have had for years. Constant claims of miracle drugs on the way, with almost no subsequent impact on human lives. If you find the endless hype a source of optimism and hope, then ... well, I guess…

Oh, to be clear, I'm not excited by the prospect of psilocybin making it all the way to FDA approval. What excites me is that this is more evidence of a pattern of change in what medical research is being conducted. There were many drugs that we were "leaving on the table" before, that we're actually bothering to look into now. Whether or not they turn out to work for anything, at least we'll know, instead of pretending they don't exist!

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add in the non essential amino acid L-Theanine [1]. Has a nice calming and focusing effect. [1] - https://examine.com/supplements/theanine/

Personally I didn't notice any difference before or after or during going through a bottle of it.

I am not a neurologist nor a doctor and I am entirely guessing, so I should not even comment, but some people may not be affected by small amounts of amino acids like this depending on their diet, gaba receptors, existing amino acid intake such as already drinking green tea or using arginine or citruline, or other medications. It is entirely possible that your α waves are already elevated from something else or that this amino acid isn't metabolized correctly.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#77
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of pain treatment, it seems likely that the psychoactive affects of THC may be a large contributor to its effectiveness. In that it distracts you from the pain. And there are a lot of people who are going to be more comfortable taking a plant in its natural state, than using an isolated compound that's been through a processing plant they have no control over, and which depends on a regulatory structure t…

I would argue that if they don't trust aspirin, they should buy a kit that lets them make aspirin (or salicin, rather) at home from willow bark. Still safer than consuming arbitrary unknown amounts of salicin, together with whatever else is in the bark besides salicin. Let me put it this way: the big-pharma drug manufacturing (and more generally, medical-equipment manufacturing) pipeline is set up such that the only…

>Let me put it this way: the big-pharma drug manufacturing (and more generally, medical-equipment manufacturing) pipeline is set up such that the only thing about a drug that should be able to kill someone, is if the drug's active ingredient itself has a bad interaction with their body.

"Should be" is a giant risk factor... "Don't worry Mrs. Jones, this drug shouldn't be able to kill you unless you have a terrible allergic reaction!"

Big-pharma has shown, repeatedly, that their sole motivation is not altruistic treatments of human aliments... it is that of any other corporate entity. Profit. I don't think that is inherently evil either.

Medical cannabis could kill you... you are right, but I would argue that you are much more likely to be killed from alcohol or tobacco related events.

For just one data point: I've worked in EMS for 14 years and I have never seen a cause of death that was directly the result of using cannabis. Unfortunately, I have lost track of how many people I have seen die that were the direct result of alcohol ingestion. Same for Oxycotin and other opioid based "medicine" prior to everyone and their brothers walking around with narcan.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#78
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of pain treatment, it seems likely that the psychoactive affects of THC may be a large contributor to its effectiveness. In that it distracts you from the pain. And there are a lot of people who are going to be more comfortable taking a plant in its natural state, than using an isolated compound that's been through a processing plant they have no control over, and which depends on a regulatory structure t…

I would argue that if they don't trust aspirin, they should buy a kit that lets them make aspirin (or salicin, rather) at home from willow bark. Still safer than consuming arbitrary unknown amounts of salicin, together with whatever else is in the bark besides salicin. Let me put it this way: the big-pharma drug manufacturing (and more generally, medical-equipment manufacturing) pipeline is set up such that the only…

> heavy-metal soil toxicity; by pesticides; by coincidental allergens in non-active-ingredient plant matter

The exact same risks are in your grocery store produce aisle.

I'll grant that illegal marijuana has higher risk, but if it's regulated like any legal food crop I don't see the difference; in fact, I'd say there's less, since people consume it in relatively low quantities.

Re: Psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

#79
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you probably would not want to take it for an extended period of time [1] There is not a direct causation link to liver damage as of yet. It may be that people have a preexisting issue that is exacerbated by kava. [1] - https://examine.com/supplements/kava/

There was something of a hit campaign against it at one point. I forget the specifics, but it’s safe if you do your homework and buy from proven sources.

That's happened to several food compounds. Scientists don't spend time on a compound unless there is a compelling medical need to do the research. There just isn't much money in supplements / foods as compared to prescription drugs and the risk of litigation is really high, according to a few of my favorite scientists that I follow.
Post reply on HN