[HN Gopher] Adults who microdose psychedelics report lower level...
___________________________________________________________________
Adults who microdose psychedelics report lower levels of depression
and anxiety [pdf]
Author : miobrien
Score : 239 points
Date : 2021-11-19 15:36 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| olliej wrote:
| This seems to be a version of "owning horses makes you healthier"
| xzywy wrote:
| Outcomes of the study aside, it is great that despite the
| legality of these substances, we are seeing research beginning to
| bubble up into popular culture. I believe they can help a lot of
| people, and are so under researched!
| zepto wrote:
| Homeopathic psychedelics are even more effective.
| comeonseriously wrote:
| Of course they do, that's why they're microdosing psychedelics.
| sedeki wrote:
| Several people here in the comments point out the lack of quality
| of the linked study.
|
| I am not a researcher so I wouldn't be able to "see" or figure
| out these things or know what to look for myself, unfortunately.
|
| But this is Nature, a well-respected journal, no?
|
| I'm surprised that they're essentially posting clickbait
| studies...
| krrrh wrote:
| Co-author here, the discussion section of the paper details
| many of the limitations raised by commenters here in greater
| depth. People seem to be debunking claims that aren't made in
| the paper. I'm biased but I don't think Nature Scientific
| Reports can be accused of publishing clickbait in this case.
| da39a3ee wrote:
| Surely this analysis is completely flawed unless they were able
| to introduce placebos unwittingly to the participants who thought
| they were microdosing?
|
| Otherwise you've got a bunch of people who are the sorts of
| people who are going to try microdosing. Of course they're going
| to answer questionnaires in a way that scores them as less
| depressed. Firstly because they're less depressed people (can be
| bothered to work out how the hell to get hold of the stuff) and
| secondly because they're not stupid and know what sorts of
| answers will influence the score in what direction).
|
| Totally did not read the paper. Someone tell me I'm wrong please!
| aseerdbnarng wrote:
| People who seek out drugs are not a good proxy for the general
| population
| vadfa wrote:
| A microdoser is not an average drug-seeker.
| metalliqaz wrote:
| This might be true but in no way refutes grandparent's point.
| monkeybutton wrote:
| Not average as in someone that is doctor shopping to get
| high, but it is someone that self-selected themselves for it.
| How much of the effect is placebo? Skimming the paper it is
| not mentioned except in the title of one reference.
| vadfa wrote:
| We're talking about mental health. If it's placebo, what's
| the practical difference?
| shawnz wrote:
| I'm a big believer in medical use of psychedelics, but if
| the effect is strictly due to placebo, then there are
| cheaper and safer placebos we can give.
| vadfa wrote:
| Only that placebos won't work if you know they are
| placebos. Which means if doctors get a reputation for
| giving out placebos, they will stop working.
| luckydata wrote:
| no you're wrong. The placebo effect works even if you are
| aware of meds being fake. Look it up.
| teataster wrote:
| I ate two bananas before my motorcycle test for their
| placebo effects to calm nerves. Cool as a cucumber I
| passed without a jitter on the throttle. It's anect-
| data-l. I know.
| shawnz wrote:
| Placebos actually do work even if the patient knows they
| are placebos (source: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/a
| rticle?id=10.1371/journal...), but regardless, how do you
| keep the patients from finding out that the psychedelics
| are just placebos? Why not just use some other realistic-
| sounding placebo like a rare herb or something?
| lostmsu wrote:
| I think you misunderstand placebo. The placebo is needed
| foremost to reduce falsely reporting positive and
| negative effects after the study. E.G. for most drugs not
| beating placebo is essentially the same as zero or even
| negative effect. The rare exceptions when giving sugar
| water actually improves something because person thought
| they got a cure are themselves very anecdotal.
| monkeybutton wrote:
| Well not being a restricted drug is a practical
| difference. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against
| microdosing or anything. I'm just skeptical. I've
| listened to one too many acid-head's long winded speeches
| about enlightenment to take what people are self
| reporting about it seriously.
| gunshai wrote:
| Sounds like a dinner party in SF
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| Very few drugs doctors prescribe for depression, or
| anxiety, get you high.
|
| After trying at least 7 antidepressants over the years; I
| sometimes wonder exactly how much over Placebo do they
| work.
|
| My doctor finally came clean one day. Antidepressants at
| their best might give you a bit more energy.
|
| I noticed he started prescribing bupenorpine off label for
| treatment resistant depression. I understand why. I think
| he got tired of seeing patients not responding to
| traditional antidepresssants.
|
| Most psychiatrists will not deviate from the old standbys
| though, even the progressive doctors.
|
| (I can offer this. With time you will start to feel better.
| Everyone's biology is different. My depression when it hits
| sometimes takes a few weeks/months to lighten up, but it
| always lightened up, and wasen't tied to situational
| circumstances.)
| mmastrac wrote:
| Your comment has an interesting perspective, but I
| disagree that anti-depressants would solely give you more
| energy as a treatment.
|
| The vast majority of them these days are SSRI, which
| effectively raises the level of serotonin that your body
| (not just brain) functions under. If anything, they will
| tend to make you more tired and blunt mood swings.
|
| Bupropion, on the other hand, is a wonder drug for me
| that seems to effectively remove the bottom of my
| depression without really causing any other side-effects
| (except maybe a subtle positive effect on ADHD symptoms).
| bashonly wrote:
| > Very few drugs doctors prescribe for depression, or
| anxiety, get you high.
|
| except for that whole class of drugs called
| benzodiazepines
| vmception wrote:
| In this case someone that isn't having a pleasant effect
| isn't still using it
| jollybean wrote:
| "A microdoser is not an average drug-seeker."
|
| They are not an average anything, i.e. not representative of
| anything really, which is the OP's point.
| realce wrote:
| It's not even factually true - 66% of the US population is
| on a prescription drug. The average citizen is a "drug
| seeker" of some type.
| jollybean wrote:
| First, even if your statement was correct, it would say
| nothing about the OP (or my) issues of selective
| sampling.
|
| Second, people who receive medicine for their ailments
| are not 'drug seekers' by any stretch of the imagination.
| People do not 'seek' blood thinners arbitrarily, people
| seek drugs which provide some kind of physical or
| psychoactive experience i.e. cocaine, opiods, thc. Very
| few prescription drugs fit that category.
| realce wrote:
| I sincerely disagree with your somewhat puritanical
| definition of drug seeking. If someone seeks marijuana to
| relieve their misery, it's "arbitrary drug seeking
| behaviour" but if it's blood thinners, then you're
| just... not looking for drugs to provide a cure? That
| makes no sense.
|
| I certainly do seek out blood thinners, antidepressants,
| antibiotics, ect, if I am suffering from illnesses that
| they provide relief for. Nobody seeks out drugs
| "arbitrarily" whatsoever. You seem to think that people
| who use narcotics to address their pain aren't worthy of
| a medical definition that is reserved for people who
| obtain their medication from a pharma company.
|
| It's plain cognitive dissonance.
| jollybean wrote:
| It's 'cognitive dissonance' to contemplate those getting
| prescriptions for diabetes, cancer and chemo as 'drug
| seekers' who are in any way remotely similar to those
| buying illegal drugs, most of which are not purchased for
| therapeutic value.
| luckydata wrote:
| People who use blanket statements unsupported by facts don't
| bring much to a conversation.
| [deleted]
| ensacco wrote:
| More anecdotal than anything else, my fiance suffered from
| crippling anxiety and moderate depression until mushrooms. Since
| then, she's come leaps and bounds, and she attributes quite a bit
| of this to her trip.
|
| As for myself, it helped me get over a mountain of grief after a
| rough childhood. I feel like there's no way I'd be where I am or
| forgive as much as I have unless I had taken them.
|
| No, they're not addictive. No, you can't take them repeatedly
| within a short time span. Yes, they're decriminalized/legalized
| in _many_ areas.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| That's all nice and dandy, but with severe mental issues you
| mention, you both were much more lucky than you clearly
| realize. Shrooms can do true magic, but can easily drag you to
| the deepest sewer your mind can come up with, and drown you
| there. In extreme cases, it can literally break you, sometimes
| forever. There are people who end up in psychiatric ward for
| the rest of their lives after single acid trip, sometimes after
| way too high dose, sometimes not.
|
| There is no way to guarantee the outcome the first time, that's
| why medical expert supervision is important, especially for
| people with mental issues/baggage.
|
| That is all being said by person who did shrooms few times,
| alone, laying with closed eyes and the journey inward and back,
| with dissolution and later recomposition of every sense and
| part of my being as a bonus. By far the strongest experience in
| my life. It was absolutely amazing and beyond positive. But I
| don't have any mental or childhood issues and am very balanced
| person who knows himself pretty well (also thanx to these
| experiences).
| akomtu wrote:
| This is textbook fearmongering: handpicking bad outcomes to
| paint the wrong picture. I bet the risk of losing mind after
| shrooms is much lower than dying in a car accident.
| krrrh wrote:
| Our understanding of the effects of set and setting has come
| a long way, and a lot of bad experiences can be chalked up to
| not taking these into account. The understanding of severe
| psychological conditions that would serve as a
| contraindication for psychedelic medicine is also
| progressing.
|
| On the subject of bad trips (or the better term "challenging
| experiences"), Roland Griffith's lab at Johns Hopkins has
| found that people who had "bad trips" on psilocybin often
| actually experienced better long term improvements. Sometimes
| the best way out is through, and these medicines appear to
| help people confront issues that they have a hard time facing
| through standard approaches.
|
| https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/qanda_griffiths.h.
| ..
| gunshai wrote:
| >there are people that end up in psychiatric wards after one
| acid trip.
|
| Really, where have you heard this. I have only heard myths
| about this. Do we have any collections of data for these
| cases?
|
| Something that is interesting is one of the lead researchers
| in the area professes that the disclaimer about psychotic
| episodes due to psychedelics in research is not based on any
| study more of a fear of tainting the study outcomes.
| dokem wrote:
| I'm sorry but your comment is fear mongering. The idea that
| psychedelics are dangerous unless you are 'mentally healthy'
| misses the point of these substances entirely. Yes they can
| sometimes do real harm but I would dare to say that those
| cases are extremely rare and often relate to people with
| mental ailments like schizophrenia, not issues like
| depression, anxiety, regret, remorse.
| ensacco wrote:
| When we considered the permanent and irreversible dependency
| and damage that years of anti-depressants could have done,
| the choice seemed to favor mushrooms.
|
| That said, we... - took smaller doses - went with a beginner
| friendly strain - dosed in a calm, trusting setting - had
| guides that ensured our safety
|
| Don't take these things lightly, and they'll treat you well.
| sxv wrote:
| | But I don't have any mental or childhood issues
|
| found the replicant
| sanketpatrikar wrote:
| How long before this gets serious consideration and a cure for
| "depression" becomes available?
| dfxm12 wrote:
| As long as the US continues the war on drugs, maybe 2 or 3
| generations, based on how marijuana research is playing out.
| createunderrate wrote:
| Never. While helpful, this is not a cure.
| more_corn wrote:
| There was a quite promising study treating depression with
| psychedelics. Study precipitants reported 3 months of relief
| from a single dose. I think it was paired with therapy. One
| study is hardly conclusive. I'd love to see more of those
| studies.
| lvass wrote:
| That's the only thing left until our World is indistinguishable
| from a Brave New one.
| ChipSkylark wrote:
| I'm not a doctor or health professional of any kind.
|
| But my friend showed me a study a while back of turmeric
| supplementation and how it can be comparable and in some cases
| more effective than prozac:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23832433/
|
| I started taking 450-900mg daily and noticed an increase in
| optimistic perspective and seeing "the point" of doing things
| during rut of burnout after quitting my last job. Just my
| story. This is not health advice.
| r1ch wrote:
| Be careful, turmeric can sometimes be adulterated with lead
| chromate to give it a more vibrant orange color. Make sure
| you buy from reputable places that test it if supplementing.
| hbn wrote:
| If a cure for depression was ever found, you'd be fighting a
| lot of very rich and very powerful companies with a vested
| interest in keeping people on their products forever
| tonymet wrote:
| findings : people who like micro dosing report that it helps
| dqpb wrote:
| I would be more interested to hear the thoughts of the children
| of adults who microdose psychedelics.
|
| I imagine they would be the best guage of the total net effect.
| awillen wrote:
| Chris Rock had a good bit about this a couple of decades ago
| with alcohol and marijuana. To paraphrase, if you want to
| figure out which is worse, just ask the kids if they'd rather
| have daddy come home drunk or stoned. Drunk daddy yells and
| stumbles around and breaks stuff and throws up. Stoned daddy
| giggles at cartoons and orders pizza.
| airstrike wrote:
| Can daddy come home sober, please?
| cwkoss wrote:
| I've seen several anecdotes from stay at home parents who
| microdose psilocybin and say it helps them better connect and
| play with their children sincerely. I think it's plausible it
| could facilitate the development of deeper emotional bonds and
| empathy in some cases. Certainly worthy of study with some
| reasonable controls.
| dathinab wrote:
| Disclosure: Haven't read the paper yet, time constraints...
|
| One think pointed out when I stumbled about similar papers before
| was:
|
| The reduction of depression, anxiety, stress from micro-dosing
| are rediculus small compared to the effects of a more healthy
| live style and environment. Even just taking a walk in nature for
| 10min a day often had many times stronger positive effects.
| gunshai wrote:
| Anecdotally I've seen these effects in someone I care about.
| They live a very healthy life and do all the other stuff well,
| but still no effect. They take one medium dose of psychedelics
| and are transformed for weeks. The effects do wear off. That
| effect by the way is the extremely esoteric "feeling openness".
| It is night and day for how they feel socially.
|
| I also have not read this study yet judging from a few comments
| it's not really randomized or blinded or anything.so the
| takeaways are very minimal.
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| I don't think feeling openness is extremely esoteric. One of
| the five basic personality traits is Open-Mindedness. It
| allows us to accept data with less bias, prediction, and
| judgment. It allows us to refresh our browsers, clear our
| cache, and garbage collect our minds. Open-Mindedness is a
| wonderful trait that everyone should cultivate.
| throwamon wrote:
| > They take one medium dose of psychedelics and are
| transformed for weeks
|
| How much is this "medium dose"? In all likelihood it's not a
| microdose, which is what is under discussion. It's well known
| that higher doses can have lasting effects.
| gunshai wrote:
| You are correct that this isn't in the realm of micro. I
| was more speaking to the substance than the dose.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| I walk at least two miles a day outside, every day, and have
| for years. I'm in the middle of a bout of depression, and I was
| having a very hard time focusing on work while at work. I've
| been microdosing for two weeks now, and I've noticed a _huge_
| increase in my productivity at work, as well as my general
| mood. I guess what I 'm trying to say is that regular
| exercise/nature can only get me so far, and even a ridiculously
| small improvement from psilocybin has been a game changer to
| me. So, why not both?
| dathinab wrote:
| Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it.
| lostmsu wrote:
| Almost 100% of people who increase their consumption of
| cucumbers during common cold feel significantly better after
| two weeks. Maybe cucumbers work for depression too. You
| should check them out.
| the-dude wrote:
| This is unneccessarly snarky and disrespectful.
| lostmsu wrote:
| Posting low quality anecdata on drugs is disrespectful
| for the time of people who can validate the data quality,
| and outright dangerous for the people who can not.
| mistermann wrote:
| I'm curious what evidence or reasoning you could offer to
| substantiate each of these claims.
| FredPret wrote:
| Tread carefully when altering the processes that constitute your
| ability to reason. I know somebody who nearly broke their mind by
| dosing with this and that chemical to self heal their issues.
| fnord77 wrote:
| same here. it took them years to get back to almost-baseline,
| and they still have chronic insomnia triggered by the trip.
| caseyohara wrote:
| This article is about microdosing, which is very small doses of
| psychedelics, well under the threshold dose for a proper
| psychedelic "trip". For psilocybin, a microdose would be on the
| order of 200mg, which is 1/10th the minimum threshold dose for
| a full-on trip (2 grams).
|
| Microdosing isn't going to alter your ability to reason.
| akomtu wrote:
| Everything looks gravely dangerous if we hand pick bad
| outcomes.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| Everything is gravely dangerous if you ignore looking at bad
| outcomes.
| Archio wrote:
| Were they microdosing, or repeatedly consuming full doses of
| psychedelics? Were "this and that chemical" psychedelics at
| all, or drugs of unknown type and providence? What is the
| connection to this discussion, which is about adults
| microdosing psychedelics?
| FredPret wrote:
| Wow, tone it down a notch. It was an adult microdosing on
| psychedelics.
| rand_r wrote:
| Which ones?
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| Sam Harris states that, when it comes to self discovery,
| meditation is like a sail boat slowly heading towards mental
| clarity. In contrast, psychedelics are like strapping yourself
| to a rocket and hoping you see clarity and change your mind
| along the wild, dangerous ride.
| elwell wrote:
| I know someone who took psilocybin mushrooms and it seemed to
| be the beginning / unlocking of schizophrenia for them.
| ZanyProgrammer wrote:
| That was what happened with Brian Wilson.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| Unfortunately in these cases it is difficult to disentangle the
| effect of the drugs from the underlying problem they were
| trying to treat.
| tqi wrote:
| Definitely true, but it feels like proponents have a heads i
| win tails you lose mindset to these anecdotes. When things go
| well, it's bc of the drugs, and when things go poorly, it's
| the underlying issues.
| belval wrote:
| To me, this study has a few "smells" that makes it dubious:
|
| > We collected cross-sectional data between November 2019 and
| July 2020 from self-selected respondents recruited via media
| related to psychedelic use such as podcasts and online
| psychedelic research conference presentations.
|
| This is already a significant bias in participants.
|
| > Mental health was assessed with the questions "Do you currently
| have any psychological, mental health or addiction concerns?"
| Participants who endorsed concerns identified specific mental
| health and substance use categories from a drop down menu, and
| were allowed to select more than one category
|
| So mental health is not actually accessed medically and simply
| self-reported.
|
| To be clear I lack an informed opinion on microdosing
| psychedelics, but any study that picks its participant from a
| community engaging in X to study X but then uses the same
| community to sample their control group (for lack of a better
| expression) is questionable.
|
| EDIT: Page 6 has a table that compare microdosers/non-microdosers
| and the latter was actually less likely to self-report *any*
| mental health or substance use problem by 5%. It's only when
| using the DASS-21 subscales that they can draw the conclusion
| that non-microdosers are more anxious, depressed or stressed.
| Their microdosers/non-microdosers ratio is also almost 1:1.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > > We collected cross-sectional data between November 2019 and
| July 2020 from self-selected respondents recruited via media
| related to psychedelic use such as podcasts and online
| psychedelic research conference presentations.
|
| > This is already a significant bias in participants.
|
| In my experience, these pro-psychedelic conferences and
| associated discussion venues have already concluded that
| microdosing is a positive, to the point that they're actively
| hostile to any information to the contrary.
|
| Psychedelic forums and even threads on HN and Reddit can be
| extremely hostile to anyone arriving with negative anecdotes
| about their personal microdosing experiences. When people
| report negative effects there's a rush to blame them for dosing
| too high or too low, or for having counterfeit substances, or
| any other number of easy outs to dismiss the negative
| anecdotes. There's almost no room for discussion of people who
| aren't convinced that microdosing is a positive.
| 71a54xd wrote:
| I support the basis of this study, I myself have benefitted
| from the practice. However, something that most overlook or
| simply aren't aware of is that the prolonged use of
| psychedelics, specifically psilocin (active psych in mushrooms)
| carries a cardio-toxicity[0]. Put simply, for reasons that
| aren't yet known, psychedelics over time will slowly erode the
| lining of certain heart / circulatory muscles.
|
| 0 -
| https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287756303_Psilocin_...
| convolvatron wrote:
| how high is 10ug/kg? from the dosing chart here
| https://www.leafly.com/learn/psychedelics/how-to-dose-
| mushro... it seems quite low.
| 5faulker wrote:
| Regardless the result, the point here is that this is an idea
| worth looking into.
| monktastic1 wrote:
| The question here is whether the paper _supports_ the idea
| that it 's worth looking into. Your parent comment suggests
| that it doesn't (or at least, doesn't strongly).
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Probably the key line in the abstract is:
|
| > "Our results indicate health and wellness motives and
| perceived mental health benefits among microdosers, and
| highlight the need for further research into the mental health
| consequences of microdosing including studies with rigorous
| longitudinal designs."
|
| It's not an unusual approach: 'We have some preliminary
| indications that X results in Y, but to confirm or reject this
| hypothesis we'll need more rigorous studies.'
|
| It's basically going to be the centerpiece of a grant proposal
| to do that work.
|
| What would be really interesting is to set up a double-blind
| placebo study comparing the results of using antidepressants
| (SSRIs etc.) with the results of using psilocybin at similar
| levels.
|
| It would also be interesting to compare the results of a
| 'normal' psychedelic dose (full effect) taken once a month vs.
| the effects of daily microdosing or daily antidepressant use,
| again with a double-blind + placebo approach.
| habitue wrote:
| Yes! Everyone is trying to reduce risk, and once way
| scientists[0] reduce risk is to get preliminary results like
| this before spending a ton of money on a huge study.
| Absolutely not the final word, it's good to keep in mind the
| limitations when discussing it.
|
| [0] Translate "scientists" into "the current scientific
| system between academic researchers and grant agencies"
| snikeris wrote:
| > What would be really interesting is to set up a double-
| blind placebo study comparing the results of using
| antidepressants (SSRIs etc.) with the results of using
| psilocybin at similar levels.
|
| https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2032994
| JasonCannon wrote:
| >two separate doses of 25 mg of psilocybin 3 weeks apart
| plus 6 weeks of daily placebo (psilocybin group) or two
| separate doses of 1 mg of psilocybin 3 weeks apart
|
| I don't know how this compares to similar studies (if there
| are any similar studies) but microdosing is almost never
| done 3 weeks apart. That's usually the time frame done for
| macro dosing (but with multiple grams not mg).
|
| Even the study at the top mentions that
|
| >Reported microdoses identifed in observational research
| typically range from 5 to 20 mg of LSD and from 0.1 to 0.3
| g of dried psilocybin mushrooms. Microdoses are most
| commonly used several times a week with various patterns of
| alternating days.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Can you really be "blind" to taking psychedelics?
|
| Are these doses small enough that you don't notice the
| immediate effects?
| dntrkv wrote:
| Placebo can be incredibly strong when taking low dose
| psychedelics, especially for inexperienced users. You
| begin to focus on normal parts of reality as if they
| aren't part of your usual experience.
| lexpsd9834 wrote:
| If it's correctly microdosed the acutely noticed affects
| should be very close to placebo.
|
| For lsd this is generally under 15~20ug, though 5ug/10ug
| is generally what people dose at.
|
| These dosages aren't well established with "proper
| studies" but I can say that people documenting there
| experiences seem to establish this pretty well. The
| psychonauts wiki is a good place for this type of
| information
| photochemsyn wrote:
| At the microdose level the obvious hallucinatory effects
| of psychedelics are not present, so I'd imagine those
| without prior experience with psychedelics wouldn't
| immediately realize they had taken an SSRI or a
| psychedelic.
|
| The above comment study is pretty interesting, points to
| equivalent effectiveness.
| snikeris wrote:
| Yeah, it was interesting that they phrased the conclusion
| negatively:
|
| > On the basis of the change in depression scores on the
| QIDS-SR-16 at week 6, this trial did not show a
| significant difference in antidepressant effects between
| psilocybin and escitalopram in a selected group of
| patients. Secondary outcomes generally favored psilocybin
| over escitalopram, but the analyses of these outcomes
| lacked correction for multiple comparisons. Larger and
| longer trials are required to compare psilocybin with
| established antidepressants.
|
| For no significant difference in outcome, I'd much rather
| have two psilocybin sessions versus daily SSRI use.
| stathibus wrote:
| Can anyone explain to me why a journal like Nature would
| accept such a half-assed paper with weak conclusions that is
| transparently serving as a grant proposal for the experiment
| that would actually be interesting?
| willcipriano wrote:
| People who interact with mountain biking posts on social media
| report less depression whilst mountain biking.
|
| The results of this study are people like to do whatever they
| are into.
| more_corn wrote:
| Huh. This might be less inane than you think.
| gwern wrote:
| Unfortunately, I don't see what this study adds to the
| microdosing literature. We already know from plenty of surveys
| that people will self-report a lot of benefits; and we also
| already know that adding in randomization, longitudinal
| tracking, or blinding makes most or all of the effects go away.
| The simplest explanation is that most or all of it is
| placebo/demand effect, and running yet another self-selected
| cross-sectional survey on unblinded participants doesn't help.
| Alacart wrote:
| > We already know from plenty of surveys that people will
| self-report a lot of benefits; and we also already know that
| adding in randomization, longitudinal tracking, or blinding
| makes most or all of the effects go away.
|
| Do we _know_ this or do we "know" this?
|
| Having another study, even a self reported one like this,
| doesn't degrade the scientific body of knowledge, it adds to
| it. The fact that there have been other studies doesn't make
| doing another worthless.
|
| I also think a lot of people here are discounting the fact
| that this study would typically be _very_ hard (or
| impossible) to administer at such a large scale, especially
| in such a short amount of time.
|
| In my mind, the important questions here are:
|
| Are the benefits of massive scale studies worth the trade-
| offs of self-reporting?
|
| What can we do to reduce or eliminate those trade-offs?
|
| Imagine the scientific value of having easily created, easily
| administered, _massive_ studies be easily accessible to any
| research group. If the research data can be made even a
| little bit more reliable, that 's hugely valuable.
| sbierwagen wrote:
| >doesn't degrade the scientific body of knowledge, it adds
| to it.
|
| Yes. The simple corollary to Bayes theorem: all
| observations, even biased ones, improve your knowledge of
| the world.
|
| But it doesn't say anything about _efficiency._ A single
| photodiode mechanically scanned behind a pinhole can
| capture the same image as an image sensor behind a lens,
| but it takes millions of times longer. A self-reporting
| survey will say _something_ , but it will be very noisy.
| How many self-report surveys would it take to match an
| actual double-blinded study with double digit participants?
| What if the answer is "hundreds"? Should we wait a century
| for all these surveys to be done before even attempting
| data analysis? (After all, surveying the _same set_ of
| people over and over won 't give you additional data. You
| need to wait for some of the survey respondents to die)
| What about all the people in the preceding 99 years who,
| perhaps reasonably, look at a stack of fifty self-reported
| surveys that all say the same thing, and come to an
| incorrect conclusion? Science is right _eventually_ , not
| right _right now._
|
| You say that "millions" of participants should be useful,
| almost automatically. Why should that be the case? If
| you're off by an order of magnitude somewhere in your stack
| of assumptions, the data could be noisy enough that you
| need to be sample from a population of a hundred billion.
| If the data is bad enough or biased enough then even a
| large survey wouldn't be powered enough without a world
| population ten times bigger.
| dntrkv wrote:
| > Having another study, even a self reported one like this,
| doesn't degrade the scientific body of knowledge, it adds
| to it.
|
| I really don't see how it's valuable. I don't even believe
| my friends when they talk about how much micro-dosing
| benefits them (and this is coming from someone who is a
| huge supporter of psychedelics). People are really good at
| making themselves believe what they want to believe.
| paulgdp wrote:
| You might be interested in reading this more serious study:
|
| https://elifesciences.org/articles/62878
|
| Article summarizing it:
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/amandasiebert/2021/03/03/larges...
| GloriousKoji wrote:
| > So mental health is not actually accessed medically and
| simply self-reported.
|
| Saddly from my experience self-reported is about as accurate as
| any medical professional. When I was actively seeing
| professional help it always started off filling out PHQ-9,
| adding up the numbers and seeing the sum in the range of
| depression.
|
| I was never officially told I've been diagnosed with anything
| but it was enough to where I've gone through a plethora of
| psychiatric medication.
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| Yeah, I bet you'd get similar results with this methodology if
| you were instead focusing on "microdosing" with alcohol all
| day.
| kenjackson wrote:
| You might find those same results micro-dosing anything from
| a self-selected group. I bet you'd find a group of ice cream
| enthusiasts that would be onboard for this.
|
| That said, I am supportive of more rigorous studies along
| these lines.
| more_corn wrote:
| I certainly self-report higher levels of satisfaction,
| lower levels of depression and anxiety when I dose with ice
| cream. I don't really do the micro part though. Full dose
| only. Let me know if you want to do a double blind study.
| We might face some study problems since I can certainly
| tell if I'm in the placebo group. If you can come up with a
| viable ice cream placebo I'm all ears.
| dreadlordbone wrote:
| Breakfast beer bb
| LocalH wrote:
| If a tiny sip of beer every couple of days had such marked
| benefits and few downsides, I feel like it would be
| legitimately considered as at least an option.
| ummwhat wrote:
| Was there not some study floating around the pop sci press
| suggesting exactly this with wine?
| connicpu wrote:
| I feel like at this point it's pretty well established
| that having a few glasses of wine a week was actually
| associated with being upper class, which was why those
| studies correlated it with better health outcomes.
| bigfudge wrote:
| It's also a problem that not drinking at all is a leading
| indicator that you are already sick (i.e. you stop
| drinking because you can't tolerate it, but you can't
| tolerate it because something is wrong which is not yet
| diagnosed but will be in a later assessment).
| [deleted]
| conductr wrote:
| Opposite results as this is would likely be a reduction of
| alcohol consumption for many participants
| roywiggins wrote:
| Meanwhile this placebo-controlled study happened quite recently
| and didn't find benefits, or at least no benefits compared to a
| placebo.
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/amandasiebert/2021/03/03/larges...
| gunshai wrote:
| I think that study is focused on cognitive benifits around
| thi King and creativity no? Not mental health.
| roywiggins wrote:
| No, it studied "well-being, mindfulness, life satisfaction,
| and paranoia" also.
|
| https://elifesciences.org/articles/62878#s4
| gunshai wrote:
| That study is really interesting. Thank you for linking
| it
| azundo wrote:
| What's interesting to me about this study is it was done with
| people who already actively microdose. So they have prior
| experience of what non-placebo microdosing feels like to
| them. The placebo effect might be much stronger in that
| population than a population that has never microdosed. That
| could be great news in terms of long term benefits of
| microdosing by using a combo of placebo and actual
| psychedelics.
| solumos wrote:
| How does a study like this make it into Nature? Is their bar
| simply that low?
| [deleted]
| belval wrote:
| That's what I was wondering as well, this is obviously a
| study done on a very small budget with conclusions that could
| be called a stretch but maybe they knew that research in that
| area gets more attention?
| sideshowb wrote:
| It's in Nature Scientific Reports. Not the same journal as
| it's better known sibling, and it takes the megajournal
| approach of not judging notability, only rigour.
|
| That said, the reputation of any journal is a poor predictor
| of the impact of papers published in it, so you shouldn't
| judge. In fact that's why megajournals like nature scientific
| reports, plos one and peerj have become so popular.
| p_j_w wrote:
| Perhaps the editors of Nature are more informed on the matter
| than someone commenting on a HN link.
| desireco42 wrote:
| Anecdotally, it did wonders for me.
|
| I had really stressful workplace environment, it helped me
| immensely. I feel good effects today as well.
| officeplant wrote:
| Would love to participate in a study just because I can't get
| regular access to mushrooms/cacti without growing it myself, and
| LSD is much harder to come across these days in my area.
| OneTimePetes wrote:
| Adults who are addicted report anything positive to keep the
| substance flowing?
| Archio wrote:
| To comment on psychedelics in such a way betrays your lack of
| knowledge about how they work both chemically and practically.
| monkeybutton wrote:
| Psychedelic drugs are not known to be addictive?
| lvass wrote:
| Did you ask a question or mistype a question mark?
| throwamon wrote:
| It's relatively common to end an affirmative sentence with
| a question mark when your intent is to say something you
| consider to be clearly right, as opposed to the thing
| you're replying to, which you consider to be clearly wrong.
| lvass wrote:
| I happened to search what it could mean before you
| answered and got many conflicting answers like yours and
| [0]. I guess we can only know what the author meant here
| if he clarifies it himself.
|
| [0] https://english.stackexchange.com/a/5620
| monkeybutton wrote:
| What I said is a statement, not a question. The question
| mark is not a mistake. What else could it indicate if not
| a question? Perhaps it was marking my general sense of
| confusion in response to the original comment. Or it
| could also be adding a hint of sarcasm. What would you
| like me say? Do you not approve of my use of it?
|
| Throwamon's explanation is good too. When someone asks a
| question with an obvious affirmative answer, a popular
| answer is an inquisitive "yes?". Only the thing being
| questioned in that case isn't the answer, its the doubt
| in the mind of the speaker who asked.
| gunshai wrote:
| There are multiple comments in here talking about or
| mentioning these drugs as addictive. I can't tell if it is a
| more common misconception.
| gunshai wrote:
| I suppose it may be possible to become dependent or relent on
| these substances, because not being depressed is better than
| being depressed. Assuming minimal other side effects...
| Probably best to skip the moral panic.
| hinkley wrote:
| Is it possible that traditional diets were exposing us to small
| quantities of nootropics and we've just lost them through
| commodification?
|
| I wonder if this is a new phenomenon or just an undiagnosed one.
| cwkoss wrote:
| Nootropics is a very vaguely defined categorization. There are
| certainly vitamins and amino acids that improve brain function
| (especially in cases of deficits) that are underexpressed in
| modern food because of our optimization for size, shelf
| stability and appearance.
|
| However, the idea that there could be chemicals like psilocybin
| or modafinil or piracetam that used to be in our produce seems
| highly implausible.
| KittenInABox wrote:
| More accurately: People who claim to be microdosing also claim to
| have lower levels of depression and anxiety, compared to people
| who claim they are not microdosing.
|
| None of this tells me whether or not people who have the time and
| money to microdose are simply in a situation more conducive to
| mental wellbeing.
| snikeris wrote:
| If you're curious, they gathered income, employment, and
| education data from both groups (table 1).
| casi18 wrote:
| fwiw lsd is very cheap compared to other drugs/medicines. i can
| get enough for a year for $30. (ten tabs as $3 a tab, 150/250u
| == ten strips per tab, 100 microdoses spread over the year,
| about twice a week).
| gunshai wrote:
| Why is it so hard to find fair criticism with in this comment
| section. Your comment is one of few that stays on topic to the
| study and skips the hyperbole. Thank you.
| danschumann wrote:
| Pff, studies. Just tell me how fun they are.
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| It's important to have studies. How else can we justify our
| microdosing trends? Obviously we'd love an RCT, randomization
| to those who are willing, and placebo controls to help fool
| those who are motivated by the thought of taking a treatment.
| danschumann wrote:
| You have a sense of humor.
| mjfl wrote:
| Interviewer: "Why aren't you depressed?"
|
| Psychedelic microdoser: "Because I'm a balloon."
| alx__ wrote:
| I know you're kidding. But with microdosing you shouldn't feel
| high. Similar with taking pharmaceutical pills, you'll feel
| something, but it won't impair your day
| akomtu wrote:
| Serious question. If you live in a state where mushrooms aren't
| legal yet, can you declare yourself a researcher and register
| your kitchen as a lab?
| dang wrote:
| Recent and related (but different):
|
| _Compass Pathways ' Phase IIb psilocybin trial shows reduced
| depression symptoms_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29169160 - Nov 2021 (119
| comments)
| vondur wrote:
| I wonder if microdosing is effective for longer periods, or will
| the dosage need to be increased after after longer time periods?
| saltyfamiliar wrote:
| Tolerance to psychedelic substances ramps up very quickly in
| the short term, but reverts to baseline in a few days.
| bobobob420 wrote:
| Yeah cause your high lol. Psychedelics and other drugs can
| provide a different perspective of looking at things. For some
| people this might help them. For a lot of people I still believe
| that we should be doing studies with meditation and breathing
| exercises first. As much as I think drugs like marijuana have
| helped me become very emotionally intelligent, drugs are still
| dangerous even if they can't physically hurt you. I think
| headlines like this which are used only to drive clicks to
| nature.com are 100 percent inaccurate and misleading. It's hard
| to be depressed when your high (yes it's microcode but ur still
| high and you know it lol). Doing research on this is fine but for
| nature.com to take it and write this headline is cancer
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| There are people that have had terrible mental problems
| triggered by meditation too. Nothing is perfectly safe.
| arboghast wrote:
| Anecdotal, but since I moved to Canada I enjoyed the legality of
| cannabis (thank you SQDC) and started to dose THC oil before bed
| and it solved most of my sleep issues (used to have insomnia).
|
| Every morning I wake up relaxed, refreshed and it stays the same
| through the day.
|
| Before that I used to do something similar with shrooms but in
| the morning. Always had that odd feeling I was borderline of
| starting to trip even with very low micro doses.
|
| But my experience in both cases is pretty similar to what people
| usually say about micro dosing.
| mmastrac wrote:
| I've found that daily THC before bed impairs my ability to
| dream and taking a few nights off results in very vivid dreams.
| I'm in the same boat - it basically has cured or at least
| majorly blunted my insomnia.
| jakear wrote:
| Generally true, but elimination of chronic nightmares is
| sometimes the whole point.
| can16358p wrote:
| It might be related to having better/deeper sleep. When you
| sleep deeper and don't have interruptions, you probably
| wouldn't remember your dreams. When you withdraw, your sleep
| quality decreases, leading to more interruptions/shallower
| sleep, creating more possibility to remember your dreams.
| Just my two cents, of course I'm no pro and just speculating.
| luckydata wrote:
| There's tons of research showing THC impacts negatively REM
| sleep. A quick google search will return a lot of hits.
| arboghast wrote:
| I doubt the quality of the studies. Also on my first hit
| "although this is not consistently replicated".
|
| Google is one thing, reading and interpreting the papers
| is another. What matters to me is that I feel great,
| regardless.
| mmastrac wrote:
| I think it's important to understand that there are
| trade-offs, even if this is a very powerful treatment. I
| tend to vary between THC-assisted sleep anywhere from 25%
| to 100% of nights and the trade-off of reduced REM is
| totally worth it. I do find that extended periods of 100%
| assisted sleep tend to make my memory a little foggy and
| that taking a week off resets things.
|
| Caveat: anecdote is not data and all that...
| DerekBickerton wrote:
| Why not CBD instead? For me THC is very energetic in nature and
| would make my mind race violently. My biology must be very
| different to yours if you're able to take THC before sleep.
| gaspard234 wrote:
| Try an indica strain, they are grown for the full-body
| effects, increasing deep relaxation, and reducing insomnia.
|
| The effects you are describing are those of sativa strains,
| know for the 'head high' and creativity boost.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| Indica and sativa don't mean anything, please stop
| spreading misinformation. Different strains have different
| effects due to the cannabanoid and terpene profile of a
| specific strain, sativa and indica don't mean anything.
|
| It's marketing, nothing more.
| kuhzaam wrote:
| My understanding is that the terms "indica" and "sativa"
| have sort of lost their meaning a little bit. I believe
| those terms technically refer to the height of the stem,
| and that it doesn't necessarily translate to the effects of
| the high the way we once thought it did.
|
| For example, I always had the same understanding of indica
| as you described, and I would solely buy indica gummies.
| They would give me a pretty "heavy" high, full body but
| mostly in my head, and I would wake up lethargic and often
| with a headache. I switched to a "sativa" of the same
| brand, and got a very nice full body high, but much
| lighter, very relaxing, and would sleep very well and wake
| up feeling refreshed.
|
| Anyway, all that to say, different strains have different
| effects, and often the description from the dispensary can
| give you a good idea of the effects they are intended to
| have.
| DerekBickerton wrote:
| Yes but OP said: "started to dose THC oil".
|
| Can you get an 'indica oil' then? Pure THC oil is different
| than plant matter.
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Same for me, THC is bringing my whole being to life, my
| senses are enhanced, motivation rises, ideas start popping
| and my mind becomes awakened. I can definitely not go to
| sleep after that and if I do I have an agitated shallow
| sleep. I consume something close to micro dosing, maybe a
| tiny bit more but not on a regular basis. CBD does have the
| relaxing effect needed for insomnias but since I don't really
| have that problem I rarely use CBD.
|
| The strain does not make a huge difference to me, Indica does
| not much make of difference, I still get somewhat energized
| by it. It is quite unusual that I get the opposite effect
| from other people but I know I'm not the only one.
| [deleted]
| arboghast wrote:
| CBD didn't do anything for me, even at higher doses. Either
| most reported experiences are placebo, or I'm just not
| sensitive to it.
| r1ch wrote:
| I always seem to dream more with CBD, I don't know if that
| translates into better sleep quality or it's just better
| dream recall, but it seems quite consistent.
| saltyfamiliar wrote:
| I don't really feel anything from store bought cbd
| edibles/oils either and I'm one of the most substance
| sensitive people I know. If you're still interested, I
| recommend buying some high cbd hemp online and smoking it.
| You will definitely notice that.
| endisneigh wrote:
| Is there even an objective set of criteria to measure depression
| and anxiety?
| mmastrac wrote:
| All depression and anxiety scales are self-reported
| questionnaires AFAIK. I'm sure there's ways to get a more
| objective relative anxiety level via sweat/temperature/etc but
| I'm not aware of anyone using that to measure changes over
| time.
| testemailfordg2 wrote:
| Will they do a next study lasting 10 years on addictive effects
| of microdosing and putting you on a path of wanting highly potent
| stuff gradually?? No they will not, smells like a study funded by
| someone to prove a point on their sales pitch...No doubt the
| researchers could have been under a NDA for limited disclosure of
| observations / the funding provider reviewing information first
| before anything is published. Just like antibiotic resistance
| develops, addiction too follows the same path...
| can16358p wrote:
| Psychedelics are not addictive. Stimulants and narcotics are
| (potentially).
| gunshai wrote:
| Everyone watch out for "big mushroom". But seriously gatewayism
| is total bullshit, also consider these substances are not
| addictive and if you've ever tried micro dosing you'd notice
| how benign the whole experience really is.
| luckydata wrote:
| we have 50 years of data that show psychedelics are not
| addictive - they stop working if done continuously and I for
| one have no clue why anyone would want to be in that state
| constantly.
| krrrh wrote:
| Hi everyone, I'm a co-author on this paper and also the co-
| founder of Quantified Citizen (we built the mobile research
| platform used in this study). What a nice experience to see this
| on the front page this morning.
|
| I'll address a few of the comments made here so far below, but
| feel free to reply with more questions (or reach out directly,
| email in bio) and I'll try to get back to them throughout the
| day.
|
| There are a lot of comments re-iterating concerns already covered
| in the limitations section of the paper. It's clear that an
| observational approach like this cannot establish causality and
| that self-selected recruitment can introduce bias, and the paper
| acknowledges this. RCTs will happen on this subject, but there
| aren't many significant ones published yet, and other types of
| evidence also provide value.
|
| The subject of microdosing is one where the community practice
| and experimentation is far ahead of where the science is, which
| is different from research into regulated medicines where drugs
| are either not on the market or prescribed by doctors. There are
| a lot of health-related topics like this that are understudied
| where practice within a community that is not served by
| mainstream medicine moves forward slowly through anecdotes and
| informal discovery processes. Think not just about stigmatized
| subjects like psychedelics, but also about chronic disease
| communities, biohackers, athletes, etc. Sometimes alternative
| therapies and bottom-up health practices like these end up being
| validated by the scientific community, and other times the
| relative lack of rigor leads to years of people taking harmful or
| fruitless approaches. Bringing a more scientific lens to what
| people are already doing and speeding up the feedback loop with
| the research community is a big part of what we're doing with our
| company.
|
| For microdosing specifically, there is a lot to discover by
| gathering evidence on motivations, demographics, and methods of
| real-world usage. The paper linked to above brings new insights
| into these topics, and is the first published research looking at
| the practice of stacking. One advantage of a large (n=8703)
| observational approach like this is that it helps pull signals
| from the noise to help inform further study.
|
| The patient-reported data on depression and anxiety comes form
| the standardized DASS-21 scale which is a widely used self-report
| tool in psychological research. In addition to this data, we also
| included various quantitative cognitive tasks in the app (data
| will be analyzed in upcoming papers, stay tuned). While this data
| isn't collected in a controlled environment our approach collects
| data from so many participants that we have power across various
| demographics and methods of use. We also encouraged non-
| microdosers to participate, and the relatively low burden of
| participating meant that many submitted data throughout the study
| period.
| cameronh90 wrote:
| This study is non-blinded, non-RCT based on individuals who self-
| selected through social media, self reporting symptoms through an
| app.
|
| While I'm hopeful that psychedelics may prove to be a treatment
| for some mental health issues, but this study doesn't tell us
| much.
| Alacart wrote:
| I replied something similar elsewhere, but I think the real story
| here is about using tech to administer large scale studies and
| what that could mean for future research.
|
| A lot of people here are discounting the fact that this study
| would typically be _very_ hard (or impossible) to administer at
| such a large scale, especially in such a short amount of time.
|
| In my mind, the important questions here are:
|
| Are the benefits of massive scale studies worth the trade-offs of
| self-reporting?
|
| What can we do to reduce or eliminate those trade-offs?
|
| Imagine the scientific value of having easily created, easily
| administered, _massive_ studies be easily accessible to any
| research group. If the research data can be made even a little
| bit more reliable (direct mobile health-kit measurements for
| example), that 's hugely valuable.
| krrrh wrote:
| Hi, I'm one of the co-authors on the study, and also a co-
| founder of Quantified Citizen which developed the platform used
| in this study. I just left a reply further up this thread
| detailing some of the logic behind our approach, and you're
| asking some great questions here.
|
| A simple way of thinking about this is that you're almost
| always making a trade off between quality and quantity when you
| collect data, with enough quantity you can hope to overcome
| some of the quality concerns. For instance our study also
| included a finger tapping test (analysis will be in an upcoming
| paper). This would have traditionally be administered in a lab
| by a technician by placing electrodes on a persons thumb and
| forefinger and asking them to tap them together. It is a
| validated practice for measuring Parkinson's symptoms or
| neuromuscular integrity. We can easily replicate something like
| this on a mobile app.
|
| Obviously doing it this way might result in noisier or less
| reliable data because there isn't a technician standing next to
| them helping them to get it right. Over time we have improved
| this by adding better instructions, addressing training effects
| and providing better instructions. We also collect data like
| screen resolution and phone model with each response so we can
| account for people who switch devices between tests or device-
| specific issues. And having datasets measured in the thousands
| means that a lot of these confounders come out in the wash,
| which isn't the case with study populations measured in the
| tens.
|
| We're picking up the pace on our technical development. Version
| 2 of the app will be out in the next week or two; we planned to
| get it out before this paper was published, but they surprised
| us with a very fast turn-around on the proofs. One of our goals
| is to make this type of research more agile, in a similar way
| that the software industry moved from waterfall project
| management to more rapid iterations. If the cost of designing
| and deploying a study is low enough, and data can get back fast
| enough, researchers can do more rapid pilot studies and
| iterations, and more quickly make adjustments to add new scales
| and assessments.
|
| On the subject of direct HealthKit measurements that's also a
| trend that we're excited about. The new version of our app will
| read from HealthKit and Google Fit, and we will be adding more
| integrations to other wearables and passively collected data
| with a privacy-by-design approach. We'll also be moving towards
| a design where users can consolidate different feeds of data
| and assessments that they are interested in collecting for
| intrinsic reasons, and then choose to make these available to
| different research projects.
| Loveaway wrote:
| I'd be careful though. Psychedelic are a powerful eye opener that
| can and do help with depression, but taking them regularly, even
| just a microdose can be a very reckless thing. They have the
| potential to completely drive you insane if you over do it and
| are best enjoyed with long intervals in between.
| luckydata wrote:
| where did you get that from?
| gunshai wrote:
| Can you cite anything that shows these drugs drive you insane
| with regular use. That sounds like mythology.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| > Can you cite anything that shows these drugs drive you
| insane with regular use. That sounds like mythology.
|
| Take a drive down skid row. Or look at Haight-Ashbury in the
| 70's.
| gunshai wrote:
| I have no idea how to take this comment. What does that
| have to do with psychedelics or really anything related to
| the topic at all.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| We're talking about the impact of drug use on mental
| health. I'm saying: look at the homeless epidemic. 90% of
| those folks have substance abuse issues.
|
| If you've done any psychedelics you would be foolish to
| not notice that they can drive a person insane under the
| right circumstances.
| gunshai wrote:
| Would I be foolish, or do I just need to be convinced
| with better evidence? You seem to be using a gateway type
| drug analogy combined with anecdote mixed with all sorts
| of other factors.
|
| And no I wasn't talking about "drugs" I was talking about
| psychedelics and their targeted use/dosage. I made the
| counter claim to provide evidence that psychedelics cause
| permanent psychosis. No one seems to be able to produce
| such evidence, and your point of casually linking
| homelessness to drug use may be all fine in a grand sense
| but with respect to the topic at hand it just looks like
| a red herring.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| I think it's foolish to think that acid doesn't induce
| psychosis. But perhaps you need better evidence.
|
| That's not to say that microdosing can't be useful. But I
| think it's possibly quite dangerous for some people. My
| evidence of that is knowing people who have done too much
| acid, and meeting plenty of street people in Haight-
| Ashbury who do acid.
| mistermann wrote:
| Perhaps a more harmonious way of discussing this notion:
| _what percentage of times_ does psychedelic usage lead to
| psychosis, and what evidence do we have that could
| suggest a plausibly accurate answer to that question?
| kolinko wrote:
| It's quite common for people who take psychedelics regularly
| to get at least slightly detached from reality and pure
| reasoning.
|
| I've seen a friend of mine going deeper and deeper into that
| hole.
| pvarangot wrote:
| Was he by any chance hanging out with a crowd of people
| "detached from reality and pure reasoning", or consuming
| media written or recorded by people detached from reality
| and pure reasoning? Psychedelic use is associated with
| reinforcing personality traits related to openness to new
| ideas and "absortion". So do naturally occurring religious
| experiences. It's a tale as old as humanity, it's not the
| altered brain chemistry alone, it's the setting.
| mistermann wrote:
| I always find phrases like "detached from reality" in
| discussions about psychedelics to be somewhat ironic. I
| mean, I know what meaning you intend, but the phrase itself
| is a bit suspect if interpreted literally.
| gunshai wrote:
| Sine you're more comfortable talking about anecdotes, I
| find mild psychedelic experiences quite benign.
| convolvatron wrote:
| I have spent 1 yr on LSD (dosing every day) and 1 year on
| mushrooms (dosing every day).
|
| I had mental issues afterwards largely in line with those
| I had beforehand.
|
| there you go, fwiw
| p_j_w wrote:
| >It's quite common for people who take psychedelics
| regularly to get at least slightly detached from reality
| and pure reasoning.
|
| He's asked for evidence and you've responded with a claim.
| Do you have any evidence to back this claim up?
|
| >I've seen a friend of mine going deeper and deeper into
| that hole.
|
| This is an anecdote. It does not constitute scientific
| evidence.
| Loveaway wrote:
| Mate you ever heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall
| ucinogen_persisting_percep... ?
|
| Here's a bunch of real people suffering from it:
| https://old.reddit.com/r/HPPD
|
| You can definitely overdo psychedelics and fuck up your
| mind if you are careless with them. Maybe read up a bit
| on erowid, dmtnexus, shroomery, plenty of warnings from
| people who went to deep. Don't be stupid and naive.
|
| Microdosing may seem harmless, but it also means taking
| psychedelics every day for long periods. I wouldn't do
| more than 2 weeks, you gotta have to function without the
| drug at some point, can't imagine dosing LSD for a year
| and then stopping will be pleasant. But your mileage
| might vary... I just have way to much respect for
| psychedelics to take them every day.
| gunshai wrote:
| That is news to me I have never heard of this mentioned.
| p_j_w wrote:
| HPPD is a FAR cry from getting "slightly detached from
| reality and pure reasoning."
| thrwn_frthr_awy wrote:
| In the US in the 80's and 90's many kids were taught that the
| psychosis seen in many Vietnam soldiers after they're return
| was due to psychedelic drugs and not a failed war, with
| little support, and lack of effort by the federal government.
| Archio wrote:
| I'd like to ask people who were kids in the 80s and 90s if
| they are aware how many Vietnam soldiers were addicted to
| heroin upon returning, and what kind of effect that had.
| gunshai wrote:
| If I'm being honest I know the guy is full of shit. I'm
| making an honest attempt at being civil about it.
| [deleted]
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| Are you making an honest attempt to be civil if you're
| also stating the "guy is full of shit"? I asked for
| evidence too, but civility and calling someone full of
| shit in the same thread?
| gunshai wrote:
| Full of shit is short hand for.
|
| I'm asking you for evidence for which I have confidence
| that you do not have.
|
| Meaning instead of saying "you are full of shit" I say
| "can you provide evidence for that" knowing I'll be
| delightedly surprised if they do, but not being
| disappointed when they don't and not making them
| immidiatly defensive with hostile language.
| dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote:
| Nah, what's full of shit is you up on your intellectual
| high-horse acting as if you're the god of all knowable
| and unknowable things.
|
| You yourself - o great one and master of all logic and
| intelligence - should know that a conclusion can _still_
| be true even if there is no well-documented evidence
| simply because enough research hasn 't been done yet.
|
| But of course it's much easier to blow people off with a
| "cite your sources, bruh" and then act like you know
| everything with a zero-effort comment. Yea, pretty sure
| it's you that's full of shit.
| pengaru wrote:
| > best enjoyed with long intervals in between
|
| This has zero relevance to microdosing.
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| Where is your evidence that they drove people completely
| insane? I'm not doubting there are serious potential side
| effects, but the description "completely drive you insane" is a
| bit vague to me.
| cwkoss wrote:
| Have you ever hung out with someone who has taken
| recreational dose LSD several times per week for months?
|
| I know two people who did this, and they both got _very_
| weird and ended up putting themselves in dangerous situations
| from their questionable judgement, years after they stopped
| even. One flipped his car while drunk and tripping and got
| seriously injured, but he made serious lifestyle changes.
| Months later he had a psychotic break and got arrested naked
| in the street. He is mostly better however he is still a
| shell of his former self. The other ended up getting addicted
| to heroin and overdosed several years later. Could just be
| selection bias and clustering of risky behaviors, but I
| believe the LSD played some role (possibly related to an
| interaction between LSD and SSRIs).
|
| I think there are a lot of potential therapeutic benefits
| that should be studied, but clandestine microdosing is still
| risky as its practically impossible dose accurately and many
| people who think they are microdosing are taking doses that
| exceed the perceptual threshold because they don't think it's
| working if they don't feel it. Taking 5mcg LSD 3x week is
| _probably_ mostly safe. Taking 40mcg once a quarter is also
| probably mostly safe. Taking an unknown 10-40 mcg 3x week
| seems like it could be entering the danger zone.
|
| (Please learn about volumetric dosing if you're considering
| microdosing - it at least allows consistency. Fractions of
| blotter are inherently inconsistent because blotter
| concentration is not homogenous.)
| l33tbro wrote:
| If people here are seriously asking for evidence-based proof
| that acid can destroy people, then they are not very old or
| have survived partying / rave scenes.
|
| The term "acid casualty" exists for a reason. I've known a
| few people that over-indulged and became detached weirdos and
| never came back.
|
| It's not a 'wives tale' as someone here said. Take acid by
| all means. Just know that you could become a despondent ghoul
| if you go too hard and frequently.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| You're just parroting an old wive's tale designed to warn
| children away from drugs, despite being complete fiction.
| Loveaway wrote:
| There's a difference between taking drugs and taking them
| every day, becoming reliant on them, considering we're
| talking about hallucinogenics here.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| You think LSD induced psychosis is not a thing?
| akomtu wrote:
| The right question is "how often does LSD cause psychosis?"
| i_like_apis wrote:
| Every time you take it?
|
| It's basically a window into a malfunctioning brain. You
| bounce back when it wears off, but you can definitely
| change from tripping too much. Have you never met someone
| who has done too much acid?
| Forbo wrote:
| HPPD and substance-induced psychosis are very real, however I
| don't know of any cases that were the result of microdosing.
| pkulak wrote:
| There was a really good Reply All about this. Not gonna spoil it:
|
| https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/2oh933
| MikeKusold wrote:
| And famously there was the Iterable CEO that was fired for
| microdosing: https://fortune.com/2021/04/28/justin-zhu-
| iterable-lsd-micro...
| Gracana wrote:
| He "tried microdosing" immediately before a meeting with
| investors. He'd never used LSD before, and was visibly
| intoxicated.
| more_corn wrote:
| And accidentally full dosed.
| 99_00 wrote:
| http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
| goodroot wrote:
| This is a poor study.
|
| But, I have been microdosing over the past few years.
|
| Happy to answer any questions.
| klondike_klive wrote:
| With what substance, and how often/how much?
| goodroot wrote:
| Psilocybe cubensis - in particular, the "Golden Teacher"
| strain. It is native to the Americas, and cultivated in
| Vancouver. Received in full fruiting body form, ground in to
| powder for consistency of dosage. Initially, I started with
| .10g, up to .20g. Most of the dosing is between those values.
|
| The schedule is 5 on, 2 off, and it's taken in conjunction
| with B3 (Niacin) and Lion's Mane (a non-psychoactive
| mushroom). All together, the mix promotes neurogenesis.
|
| Combined with tools like meditation, exercise, and a
| supportive environment, it can do wonders to help re-
| construct toxic patterns built from long-term depressions and
| anxieties.
| more_corn wrote:
| Might want to switch to a b complex. I heard a wives tale
| that b vitamins work in pairs and ramping up one can lead
| to a shortage in another. I don't even know how to research
| this for validity though.
| baby wrote:
| You need to use a control group with a bunch of people who take
| placebo... because that microdose cod rly well just act as a
| placebo.
| root_axis wrote:
| Very skeptical. How can one possibly trust self reported
| "microdosing" for something like LSD where a normal dose is on
| the order of tens of micrograms? Not to mention that self
| reported users can't be relied upon to reliably determine the
| provenance or quality of what they're ingesting. There are
| similar issues involved with something like mushrooms where
| freshness, natural concentration, and mode of preparation are all
| major factors on the drug's effects.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-19 23:01 UTC)