[HN Gopher] Psychiatric risks for worsened mental health after p...
___________________________________________________________________
Psychiatric risks for worsened mental health after psychedelic use
Author : gnabgib
Score : 94 points
Date : 2024-04-16 05:06 UTC (17 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (journals.sagepub.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (journals.sagepub.com)
| yieldcrv wrote:
| > We find that 16% of the cohort falls into the "negative
| responder" subset.
|
| "they should have known they had a family history of
| schizophrenia before using it!"
|
| every dismissive psychedelic user that brags about increased
| empathy in the next breath
|
| but in all seriousness, yes I would like to see more studies so
| we can _at least_ have side effects printed on the side of the
| package, so the right people can take informed risks
| moneycantbuy wrote:
| so 84% had a positive response?
| jjallen wrote:
| 84% positive and 16% worsened mental health is not the same
| thing as 84% and the rest neutral or mild side effects.
| mikeyouse wrote:
| No.. 16% had a negative response, 28% had ~no response, and
| 55% had a positive response. I think people would be much
| more hesitant to try psychedelics for their mental issues if
| you told them it was a coin toss whether it would help or not
| -- and was an unlucky game of Russian Roulette from making
| their mental problems worse.
| bennyhill wrote:
| People take prescribed drugs for less than a 25% chance
| that it helps and a Russian roulette of side effects. Does
| sexual dysfunction improve depression?
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I, for one, would like the same standard applied to
| psychedelics, instead of worrying about whether bad
| results lead to its continued prohibition
|
| It seems that right now people are too worried about a
| bad result messing up their ability to talk casually
| about their trips
|
| I just want side effects to be based on less conjecture
|
| science lets its beliefs die, faithful die with their
| beliefs
|
| right now, psychonauts seem to be in the latter group and
| its not helping the science form at all
| jrflowers wrote:
| This makes sense because people that have used psychedelics
| sharing their positive experiences are the bad guys and people
| that have used psychedelics sharing their negative experiences
| are the good guys
| yieldcrv wrote:
| using anyone as a source for side effects is a dumb standard
| and we should reach parity with how other drugs are studied
|
| just like this study is trying to chisel at
|
| while psychedelic communities are uniquely dismissive
| jrflowers wrote:
| Exactly! People that say that they've benefited from
| psychedelics are uniquely dismissive and people that say
| that those people form a uniquely dismissive community that
| should be distrusted are not uniquely dismissive
| yieldcrv wrote:
| interesting commenting strategy, its as if its supposed
| to spark introspection by strawmanning absolutes that
| nobody said to discredit their position, while feigning
| agreement with them
|
| oddly consistent in your other recent posts
|
| dang, is this substantive to you?
| mistermann wrote:
| At least there's one thing everyone can agree on: what
| seems to be true is true.
| fleshmonad wrote:
| Unironirally this. Whenever taking drugs of any kind, but
| especially with one's that meddle with your reality. There is
| no excuse for not doing your research. Your consciousness is
| all you have
| otherme123 wrote:
| Thing is research has been extremely hindered in the last
| ~100 years. At least they are trying to do their research
| instead of going blindly "psychedelics bad, make you jump
| from roofs and stare at the sun. Take this thingy-zepam for
| years instead, known to turn you into a zombie, increase the
| risk of suicide, create dependency and tolerance, and have
| withdrawal".
| uniqueuid wrote:
| I find the design and results somewhat underwhelming (weak
| significance in a N=800 sample with >50% dropout). The authors
| also mention that they lack power, but the only correct answer
| then is not to do the study, include more people, more data
| points, or reduce measurement variance.
|
| That said, I think it's a refreshing perspective, and it seems
| like a good idea to look at effect heterogeneity in psychedelics
| use. Thinks like bayesian trees (BART) can help identify
| subgroups that react differently to stimuli along specific
| characteristics.
| WesternWind wrote:
| A lower power study can still lend weight to a good meta
| analysis.
| uniqueuid wrote:
| That is true, but there are also conditions where low-powered
| studies degrade meta-analyses. For example, if the panel
| attrition is caused by self-selection on unobserved
| variables, then the study contains bias that is not (and
| cannot be) accounted for, which skews the meta analysis. But
| yeah, those concerns are mostly about measurement not sample
| size.
| coldtea wrote:
| Meta-analyses are even less rigorous than a low power study
| exodust wrote:
| Interesting that OCD is the winning disorder, with zero negative
| responders.
|
| Recalling my mushroom days.... Okay, I think I get it.
| Psychedelic experience is, in part, about embracing the beautiful
| chaos of the universe. Surrendering to the charms of free-flowing
| wild information at scale so huge there's no chance of imposing
| your own orderly corrections - as you might in normal every day
| life via OCD. That's my armchair take anyway.
| Psychiatric history | Negative responders (%) | Non-responders
| (%) | Positive responders (%) OCD | 0.0 | 25.0 | 75.0
| otherme123 wrote:
| The _n=16_ is ridiculously low, though. Psychotic disorder,
| with 25% /25%/50%... _n=4_. The only number from Table 2 that
| makes sense is the aggregate. Even "history" vs "no-history"
| the differences are not that big, and slightly suggest that
| having a history of psychiatric illness has better outcome.
| exodust wrote:
| Yes true, I left out n=16 for my casual observation.
|
| It's a murky subject due to the traditional way being far
| removed from clinical environments. Anything artificial like
| therapy props would stand out under the influence of
| psychedelics, but I guess they've thought of that. Good luck
| to them.
| int_19h wrote:
| My subjective take is the opposite - psychedelics make you see
| order (patterns) emerge out of seeming chaos pretty much
| everywhere you look.
| exodust wrote:
| Yeh the infinite latticework does reveal a kind of order, I
| know what you mean. Perhaps it calms the OCD person seeing
| all those patterns.
|
| Although while under the influence of psychedelics you're
| unlikely to arrange your sock drawer with compulsive order.
| You're more likely to free the socks from captivity.
| AnarchismIsCool wrote:
| You know when you see HN discussion on some subjects where you
| have significant background and it's hyper cringe?
| Psychology/neurology is one of those areas where the community's
| commentary is almost always extremely...factually challenged. Be
| very careful making health decisions based off of HN comments.
| Lots of people with strong agendas and weak subject matter
| knowledge. Also, be careful not to over-estimate your ability to
| interpret random study results. It's kinda like trying to get a
| project to build you downloaded from sourceforge.
| 2four2 wrote:
| I've found this to be generally true. Engineers are passionate
| and intelligent people, but frequently make the mistake of
| thinking this means they are experts in everything.
| rokkitmensch wrote:
| Dentist's curse.
| tivert wrote:
| > but frequently make the mistake of thinking this means they
| are experts in everything.
|
| That condition has a name, and it is "Engineer's Disease" or
| "Engineer's Syndrome."
| fragmede wrote:
| which tbh isn't fair to the doctors and lawyer who also
| suffer from the disease
| tivert wrote:
| > which tbh isn't fair to the doctors and lawyer who also
| suffer from the disease
|
| Even if that's the case, I think framing it as
| "Engineer's Disease" is pretty critical for HN, which at
| times can become a literal orgy of it.
|
| Also, SV culture amplifies Engineer's Disease into a
| destructive force only rivaled by its counterpart in
| finance. Doctors and lawyers who suffer from something
| similar are far more limited in their effects.
| fragmede wrote:
| Doctors and lawyers can become programmers far more
| easily than programmers can become doctors and lawyers
| though, so though the SV amplification is real, doctors
| and lawyers can also wreak havoc outside their
| discipline.
| tivert wrote:
| > Doctors and lawyers can become programmers far more
| easily than programmers can become doctors and lawyers
| though, so though the SV amplification is real, doctors
| and lawyers can also wreak havoc outside their
| discipline.
|
| I think that's kind of missing the point. Also, I don't
| think many doctors are making the switch to engineering.
| Why would they? There are probably _far_ more engineers
| becoming doctors than vice versa (though the total
| numbers in both directions are likely small).
|
| The specific problem with Engineer's disease, is that
| engineers have the job of building things for others, and
| thus have the opportunity to force their half-baked ideas
| onto them. SV has amplified that and turned it into a
| monster, by elevating things like "disruption" into
| something like a moral imperative.
|
| The counterpart in finance and the closely related
| managerialism rival it because those jobs involve control
| of others.
|
| Doctors though? If they get arrogant about some other
| field, they usually just end up hurting themselves or a
| few others (like they learn to sail, get in over their
| heads, and sink their ship in a storm). They don't have a
| mechanism to do more damage.
| piuantiderp wrote:
| Midwitism and lack of culture
| rpastuszak wrote:
| Reminds me of this article by Dan Luu:
| https://danluu.com/cocktail-ideas/
|
| > A line I often hear from programmers is that programming is
| like "having to build a plane while it's flying", implicitly
| making the case that programming is harder than designing and
| building a plane since people who design and build planes can
| do so before the plane is flying1. But, of course, someone
| who designs airplanes could just as easily say "gosh, my job
| would be very easy if I could build planes with 4 9s of
| uptime and my plane were allowed to crash and kill all of the
| passengers for 1 minute every week".
|
| We tend to think that some problems are only as complex as
| our understanding of them.
| RamblingCTO wrote:
| This argument is moot as we know jackshit about halucinogenics
| and research isn't very rampant in this area. And what we have
| is weak bs like this. So both sides are lacking I would say.
| smt88 wrote:
| Your entire comment is about HN, not the article. Do you have
| anything substantial or interesting to say about the study?
| emsixteen wrote:
| It's a valid comment, you don't need to be offended.
| smt88 wrote:
| I'm not offended. I'm curious if this person actually has
| an interesting angle on the article or is just grinding an
| axe.
|
| It's also against HN guidelines to comment about the site
| itself instead of something substantial that promotes
| discussion.
| cupcake-unicorn wrote:
| This really just feels like fearmongering because this is a
| threat to big pharma. I mean, several commonly prescribed
| antidepressants have black box warnings about increased risk of
| suicide. When they trialed Prozac on people with no history of
| mental illness, someone committed suicide out of the blue. Fairly
| certain someone could cobble together a much more compelling meta
| analysis about even worse adverse effects of psych meds on
| similar populations, but due to NAMI and big pharma I think
| there's pressure not to draw those lines too clearly.
|
| I think there's a clear bias in cases of big pharma approved meds
| to jump to "Oh, it wasn't the medication, the condition just
| worsened" and with psychedelics/weed to jump to "The substance
| use is causing this". Even when there is proof of RX medication
| worsening mental health conditions, it's common to have these
| relationships straight up denied by the prescribing doctor.
|
| This isn't to say that there isn't a similar relationship in
| psychedelics, but it feels really disingenuous to me to be
| mentioning this outside of the wider context of psychiatric meds
| which somehow get a free pass for causing a much wider and
| dangerous range of side effects. If psychedelics cause less harm
| than commonly prescribed drugs in the same population, isn't that
| a good thing? We should understand these harms, but the bias of
| Big Pharma needs to be taken out of the picture.
| swores wrote:
| > _When they trialed Prozac on people with no history of mental
| illness, someone committed suicide out of the blue._
|
| I hadn't heard about this before, and while I'm sure it is
| possible for any drug that messes with brain chemicals to cause
| someone to decide to kill themselves, I've always been told &
| read a different explanation for the suicide warning that comes
| with most (or all?) antidepressants:
|
| Which is that a depressed person while at their lowest might
| think about suicide but not have the energy or willpower to do
| anything, but if they start taking a drug that partially fixes
| it, so they start having energy again, but doesn't fix their
| root problems so they still think that suicide would be
| preferable to life, and suddenly have energy to make that
| happen.
|
| Which is also the reason that modern guidance is for
| antidepressants to be co-prescribed with talk therapy, to try
| to use drugs to let the person be able to work on their issues,
| rather than just hoping the drug can fix all issues.
| cupcake-unicorn wrote:
| I can understand why you would have that reasoning, but SSRIs
| are commonly prescribed off label to populations for non-
| mental health related reasons, for example ED or urinary
| incontinence, and in these populations the relationship
| holds, leading to some governments and regulatory bodies to
| recommend or warn against use for these conditions.
|
| "Although duloxetine reduced the symptoms of stress urinary
| incontinence and improved women's quality of life, the harms
| related to suicidality and violence were 4 to 5 times more
| common with duloxetine than with a placebo, a meta analysis
| using patient level data by researchers from the Nordic
| Cochrane Centre showed."
| https://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i6103
| swores wrote:
| Wow, TIL, thanks!
|
| Any idea if the logic I wrote about is also true? Or is it
| the same as how many doctors will talk about SSRIs working
| because depressed people "have too little serotonin", a
| myth that remains commonly believed despite research not
| backing it up?
| skissane wrote:
| It is possible multiple processes are at work-it is
| possible that SSRIs increase violence risks independently
| of their antidepressant effect, and simultaneously their
| antidepressant effect also increases it. The two
| explanations aren't necessarily mutually exclusive
| cupcake-unicorn wrote:
| Sure, but if that's what's going on, it should be
| researched further and taken seriously during
| prescribing. 100% guarantee that when psychedelics hit
| the market, doctors will fall prey to overstating the
| harms from studies like this while turning a blind eye to
| the wealth of evidence of greater likelihood of harms in
| prescriptions they churn out without blinking an eye.
|
| I'm not anti medication, and I'm not saying that there
| are cases where the benefit doesn't outweigh the harm,
| but I do think the potential harms of each medication
| should be thoroughly investigated equally. Large
| companies with the ability to withhold damaging trials,
| sway the public opinion, and have a giant PR team and
| legal team at their disposal shouldn't be impacting our
| understanding of the real risks and science.
| skissane wrote:
| > Sure, but if that's what's going on, it should be
| researched further and taken seriously during
| prescribing.
|
| Well I mean, it is, at least to some extent. The FDA has
| officially put a "black box" warning on antidepressants
| that they can increase the risk of suicide, especially in
| the young, and so have its counterpart agencies in
| several other countries. All doctors know about it -
| whether they all take that risk seriously enough is a
| matter of opinion, some are much more hesitant about
| prescribing them than others are. And it remains an
| active area of research.
|
| > 100% guarantee that when psychedelics hit the market,
|
| Here in Australia, they only let psychiatrists prescribe
| them (started in July last year for psilocybin and MDMA),
| and only for individually approved psychiatrists who have
| completed a training programme in psychedelic treatment.
| This is similar to our existing restrictions on
| prescribing psychostimulants-which most Australian states
| only permit psychiatrists and paediatricians to prescribe
| absent special approval-albeit even stricter. They'll
| likely relax the rules over time, but very unlikely non-
| psychiatrists will ever be legally allowed to prescribe
| them (outside of exceptional circumstances).
|
| From what I understand, the approach in the US is
| different, as far as the DEA is concerned, theoretically,
| any doctor can get a DEA number which lets them prescribe
| any Schedule II/III/IV controlled substance. However, in
| practice, there are a number of drugs which very few US
| doctors would dare write a script for, even though by the
| letter of the law they are allowed to do it, because they
| don't want the "extra attention" the DEA will give them
| if they do - methamphetamine is a good example.
| (Technically, any Australian doctor can legally write a
| script for methamphetamine, but it is almost impossible
| to fill, because unlike the US, it isn't approved for
| sale in Australia-not because it is a controlled
| substance, rather because it lacks our equivalent of FDA-
| approval-the only way to actually fill the script would
| be to get a government permit to import it for an
| individual patient, and there is zero chance they'd
| approve such a permit unless the prescriber was a senior
| psychiatrist.)
| PedroBatista wrote:
| Seems like a pretty good system as letting doctors
| prescribe "psychedelics" can mean everything under the
| Sun.
|
| Also the training and approval is paramount, they are
| doctors not magicians and many don't even have a good
| understanding of nutrition let alone this type of drugs.
| cupcake-unicorn wrote:
| No problem, I like to spread awareness of this stuff! BTW
| here are a few more RCTs about the relationship
| https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/03/antidepressants-
| still-l...
|
| Honestly it's hard to say and I'm not even sure if you'd
| be able to study this empirically in this population. I
| do think that's why doctors fall prey to this bias, and
| especially so in a stigmatized population. "Ah, they were
| likely to have these symptoms anyway". It would be
| interesting to do a wider study, but there already was a
| history of these companies withholding damaging trials
| and results so I doubt it would be done, especially given
| that suicides have occurred in these trials.
|
| I really do believe that these classes of medications are
| treated differently due to the great power the industry
| has on this issue. If you look up the background of NAMI
| it's quite suspect and reminds me about how doctors were
| getting textbooks that were written by the opioid
| prescribing company. NAMI goes on to inform public
| opinion and then this stuff becomes "fact". I'm glad the
| "too little serotonin" thing is being examined but it was
| crazy to see how many weirdly defensive memos and
| articles there were out when it first came out. I see I'm
| getting downvotes on my original comment but I do think
| it's extremely important to examine these intuitions and
| where they came from, because as we've seen some of this
| stuff has been based on profits/trial P-hacking/junk
| science.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| SSRIs are never used for ED. If anything they may cause it.
| They are sometimes used to treat premature ejaculation
| though because they tend to cause genital numbing or
| anorgasmia.
| skissane wrote:
| That may be a factor, but it is likely more complex than just
| that.
|
| SSRIs can cause some individuals to become disinhibited,
| impulsive. It is a particularly common symptom in children
| and adolescents (which is why many paediatricians and child
| psychiatrists hesitate to prescribe them), but more rarely
| can happen in adults too. Probably some people have a genetic
| susceptibility to it. It isn't purely about ameliorating
| depression, since the same side effect has been observed in
| non-depressed children administered SSRIs (which aren't
| solely used to treat depression, sometimes they are used to
| treat anxiety too, plus some children can end up being
| prescribed them when they have neither, due to misprescribing
| or off-label use.)
|
| Disinhibition and increased impulsivity can increase the
| risks of suicidality/homicidality/etc
| cupcake-unicorn wrote:
| I honestly wonder if it isn't less rare in adults or if
| adults just are more likely to fall through the cracks and
| to have whatever underlying disorder blamed on the
| behavior. Children are a more vulnerable group who has a
| parent who is witness to the obvious behavior changes and
| can staunchly advocate for their child. Many adults
| starting SSRIs are isolated, don't have great support
| networks or friends looking out for them and are meeting
| with their doctors for the first time. For all the doctors
| know, behavioral issues were underlying, things just got
| worse, etc.
|
| Anecdotal, but I've never once met a doctor who adequately
| described the risks of an SSRI to me as a patient, and even
| some who have pushed back when I've told them of my own
| dangerous reactions and other risk factors the drugs have.
| They really should, as should the risks of new psychedelic
| based drugs hitting the market. I don't have a problem with
| the study that's posted. What I do have a problem with is
| that I feel as if this information is going to be
| disproportionately used to deny access to RX psychedelics,
| when existing RXs with similar or worse risk factors aren't
| discussed in this manner at all.
| skissane wrote:
| > Anecdotal, but I've never once met a doctor who
| adequately described the risks of an SSRI to me as a
| patient,
|
| I've tried SSRIs several times, more than one (and an
| SNRI and MAOI too). They never did anything for me other
| than cause unpleasant side effects.
|
| The best cure for depression I've ever found is
| Vyvanse/lisdexamfetamine. Is that because I was never
| actually depressed and my real problem all along was
| ADHD? Maybe... but, on the other hand, I'm pretty sure
| sometimes my depression has been an independent problem
| from my ADHD and sometimes a much bigger one. The fact
| is, psychostimulants have an antidepressant effect, and
| are sometimes even prescribed off-label to non-ADHD
| patients in order to treat depression (generally only for
| "treatment-resistant depression", i.e. "we've tried all
| the antidepressants and none of them work"). I think it
| could possibly benefit more people with depression (at
| least they should try it), but psychiatrists are
| discouraged from prescribing it for them (here in
| Australia, psychiatrists actually need per-patient
| government approval to legally prescribe stimulants off-
| label). In practice, it is easier to convince a
| psychiatrist that you have ADHD, than it is to convince a
| psychiatrist to prescribe you stimulants for something
| other than ADHD.
| teh_infallible wrote:
| I always thought the "war on drugs" was a big pharma turf war.
|
| Nearly every school shooter was on an antidepressant, but
| somehow that never makes headlines.
| int_19h wrote:
| In US, the original war on drugs was racial in nature
| (targeting blacks and Mexicans specifically).
|
| The particularly heavy-handed enforcement from 1970s onwards
| that spawned the term itself broadened into a war against the
| social and cultural opposition to the status quo - still
| partly racial in nature as various black civil rights and
| black power movements were a significant part of that, but
| also targeting anti-war protesters, "pinkos" etc.
| randomcarbloke wrote:
| The tale of Qin Shi Huang
| andy_ppp wrote:
| N of one but my friend (who always saw the world as very black
| and white) killed herself not long after doing Ayahuasca. I'm
| pretty sure it contributed to her death, she became an extreme
| fantasist about judgement and god, not a formalised religion but
| a personified fantasy with crazed rules and vengeances. It was
| not good.
| epilys wrote:
| I'm sorry for your loss. I'm not a medical practitioner but it
| sounds like the experience triggered a psychotic "break" in
| your friend? It's a sad but real possibility with psychedelics
| that more people should be aware of.
| orbit7 wrote:
| Devasting when such events occur. This can also occur from
| doing meditation for some, I'm not sure if anyone has
| measured whether there is any set means to determine
| individual level of risk and whether any particular mental
| conditioning/ study would mitigate that risk. Certainly
| awareness is important.
| looneytoon wrote:
| Also not medical but I experienced similar and it sounds like
| psychosis to me. Personally I had manic episode triggered by
| taking several doses of acid spread over a week or so
| preceded by shroom doses spread over prior weeks. This
| culminated in several nights of insomnia, paranoia and then
| psychosis - the religious stuff is relatable. I had intense
| apocalyptic beliefs and "visions" - sort of closed eye waking
| dream more so then an open eye hallucination. The black and
| white thing also highly relatable and I think it is splitting
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)) -
| again not an expert.
|
| Her suicide is very sad but I can relate. Rest in peace.
|
| Personally it took me at least a month to feel functional
| again and then probably a year to start feeling better. Prior
| to that I struggled immensely with depression most of my life
| and abusing substances was my attempt to pull out of it, so
| to bottom out intensely like that feels extremely hopeless.
|
| Once again giant disclaimer that I'm not authority, but I
| learned more about how psychedelics work from neuroscientists
| who research them and it was very illuminating. They are
| extremely potent in regards to neuroplasticity which seems
| like why they can be heaven or hell
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoplastogen). My best take
| away from the scientists was to space trips out by several
| months similar to what you should do for MDMA. Frequently
| redosing keeps your brain activity from stabilizing. That's
| not their advice or strong statements (they were avoiding
| advice-giving entirely), of course, just what I took away.
|
| Years later and I have done a lot introspection and learning
| and I have taken psychedelics again. I can identify my own
| anxiety, paranoia, or bad patterned thoughts creeping up and
| talk myself back. I don't attribute that traumatic experience
| or drug use in general to improving my circumstance and I
| sure as hell don't recommend it but it does seem like my life
| going to total shit was a step I needed to take to get it
| back together. Therapy would've been easier.
| jnk345u8dfg9hjk wrote:
| How do you know she wouldn't have killed herself without having
| tried Ayahuasca?
| andy_ppp wrote:
| It's funny, this is the sort of harshness and absolute
| certainty Jen would have come out with. Nothing is certain
| but my opinion given the outcome is that it definitely did
| not help.
| jajko wrote:
| Psychedelics are extremely strong experience, ayahuasca is
| supposed to be the strongest. If you have anything broken
| in your personality, it will come up. Thats why at least
| initially it should be screened and if OK handled by
| professionals who can lead, guide or stop the experience if
| needed.
|
| I've seen lifelong schizophrenia triggered by nothing more
| than a bit of binge drinking. For some people it takes
| trauma to trigger bad things, some drugs, some have luck
| and manage to go through life with such a thing without
| ever experiencing it. Powerful tool, nothing more, nothing
| less.
| K0balt wrote:
| If you shake up a box of poorly packed stemware, you're
| going to get some breakage.
| jnk345u8dfg9hjk wrote:
| It's an objective comment on your subjective opinion of an
| N=1 result. You are free to share your opinion (and I may
| even be inclined to agree with you) but it holds no
| scientific value.
|
| Sorry for your loss.
| K0balt wrote:
| N=1 is perfectly relevant to an individual occurrence
| when the N and the event in question are one and the
| same. If I kill myself with a hammer n=1 hammers were
| fatal to use in my case. I don't see anyone asserting
| that this means that broadly ayahuasca is dangerous or
| claiming scientific relevancy.
| optimalsolver wrote:
| Reminder. Psychedelics can also lead to extremely traumatic
| experiences:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/DMT/comments/gb9ar0/dark_dmt_trip_r...
|
| This doesn't get mentioned in the current "psychedelics as a
| cure-all" hype wave.
| ssijak wrote:
| it gets mentioned
| namero999 wrote:
| Maybe not the best example as the report ends with "I'm doing
| great now! I think the experience despite being f* terrify was
| super useful", but I get what you mean. However, serious
| narrators or researchers usually don't fail to mention that we
| are not dealing with a panacea.
| jajko wrote:
| It gets mentioned all the time, everywhere I ever saw anything.
| If you really see info only in such way, stay away from those
| sources
| ahiknsr wrote:
| from the post
|
| > and out of pure immaturity and desire to breakthrough I
| packed 100mg into the bowl.
|
| https://psychonautwiki.org/wiki/DMT says heavy dosage is 60mg+.
|
| > This doesn't get mentioned in the current "psychedelics as a
| cure-all" hype wave.
|
| No. You forgot to mention 100mg is way above heavy dosage.
| n4kana wrote:
| That's a trauma cum redemption story. Sometimes it's just
| trauma.
|
| RIP Richard Skibinski (July 17, 2022)
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/Psychedelics_Society/comments/uzed2...
|
| https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/legacyremembers/richard...
| rdtsc wrote:
| It's pretty scary to me that so many people seemingly on whim are
| willing to upgrade their brain firmware. I often hear stuff like
| "and then my whole view on reality changed". Unless there's an
| easy way to upload the previous "factory image" so to speak, it
| feels pretty risky to experiment with that.
| holoduke wrote:
| An illusive broken firmware it is. Better stay sober. Also when
| learning new things being sober is better. You wont get your
| phd using drugs. You wont get your brains to a new state using
| drugs. You maybe think you do, but thats a illusional defect of
| your brains when using drugs. Stay sober.
| mistermann wrote:
| Is the omniscience pure rationalists experience on vanilla
| consciousness genuine?
| lukan wrote:
| It is risky, but life comes with risks. And not facing risks
| can be risky, too. You might waste your life in boredom,
| instead of taking off.
|
| You also might "crap on the roof with your ass on the ground"
| to (miss)quote Castaneda.
| rumdonut wrote:
| I agree as someone who was previously excited about the idea.
| Although to be honest, I think people overstate the changes.
| They did not last. Lots of salesmen in this industry like any
| other.
| jajko wrote:
| Reprogramming? Not at all, at least not with intense mushroom
| experience alone and laying with closed eyes, never did
| ayahuasca. But understanding way way more about myself,
| overall brain structure, and ie where religions come from?
| And by far the most intense and out-of-reality/body/senses
| experience I could ever go through?
|
| Definitely, those few experiences will be with me till my
| last breath.
| herbst wrote:
| You can't pop a trip, go to a music festival and except a new
| mindset. You can however use these tools to deeply connect
| with yourself and this is where life altering experiences
| happen.
| quchen wrote:
| It's less that you upgrade your firmware, but rather that some
| thoughts that never occurred to you are thought in such a
| setting. Having felt connected to nature, or even a specific
| tree, changes how you view trees and life in general. There are
| many other ways to gain such insights, like travelling or
| reading; any insight that resonates with you will >>change your
| view on reality<<.
| orbit7 wrote:
| When I had depression I used Salvia Divinorum and re-lived
| fragments of my childhood, I found that seemed to reset my
| brain back to last known good state bridging forgotten
| childhood memory in the short term to feeling like it was only
| a week ago. Certainly cured my depression though. It felt
| programmable with music, suspect it maybe more controllable
| with research. Interesting stuff strangely I found anti-
| addictive. Though equally could be majorily dangerous for some
| as it litterally sucks you out of reality and all perception of
| time for a bit.
| mistermann wrote:
| > I often hear stuff like "and then my whole view on reality
| changed". Unless there's an easy way to upload the previous
| "factory image" so to speak, it feels pretty risky to
| experiment with that.
|
| Some people say if you keep up to date on global news, the
| opposite may be even more true.
| fakeart wrote:
| They say such things of travel too. "It will forever change how
| you see the world, international travel."
| reify wrote:
| I am nearly 70 years old.
|
| I have been taking psychedelics for 50 over years. I am retired
| psychotherapist and I do not have a predisposition to mental ill
| health. I was also a substance misuse worker and methadone
| dispenser for over 10 years. I gave up smoking hash when I was 40
| years old.
|
| I did notice that with the introduction of skunk and the increase
| of up to 20% more Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), there were more and
| more people being sectioned under the mental health act with
| psychosis. Whereas prior to skunk when people generally smoked
| good old fashioned, Moroccan, Lebanese and Afghani hashish it was
| a rarity.
|
| I know a range of people of different ages who partake in
| psychedelic use and have no trouble, like me, in holding down a
| professional job role and engaging fully in life.
|
| As with all drugs there is a risk, however, the risks with
| Psyceedelics are very low in comparison with other drugs.
|
| We must not use individual cases to determine the safety of any
| drug.
|
| Here in the UK the media went wild over reports that a 18 year
| old girl (Leah Betts) had died from taking MDMA. Very rarely are
| the true facts given; The coroner said that "water intoxication",
| and not an allergic reaction to the drug, was the cause of death.
|
| I have a great deal of respect for Professor David Nutt who is an
| English neuropsychopharmacologist specialising in the research of
| drugs that affect the brain and conditions such as addiction. His
| recommendations to the government to reclassify drugs were
| rejected and he was sacked.
|
| heroin is top of the list - alcohol is 5th on the list - LSD is
| 14th on the list - Ecstacy is 18th on the list
| jajko wrote:
| > heroin is top of the list
|
| Can you please share the list? Went through the article hoping
| to find one but either I am blind or its not there.
|
| As for rest of the comment - thank you for your work and
| balanced insight. All this could have been researched to death
| (and optimal solutions be picked up based on results with
| regard to population health) if this stuff wasn't illegal for
| so long and governments acknowledged that people can actually
| get (a bit) high, since they can already ie drink themselves to
| death.
| quchen wrote:
| Nutt's Wikipedia entry has pictures and sources:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Nutt
|
| He's been working in the field for quite a while, and many of
| the drug harmfulness diagrams that pop up every now and then
| are from one of his papers.
| iammjm wrote:
| Psychedelics are a force to be reckoned with. Plus people are
| conflating clinical trials with taking unknown substances, in
| unknown amounts without considering the proper set and setting.
|
| Controlling for the substance and amount as well as having a
| professional, caring guide to help the patient through the
| experience will be a FAR different experience than eating a fist-
| full of shrooms at a party some stranger gave you while under the
| influence of other things...
| quchen wrote:
| I'm also worried about all the self-medication, where people
| treat serious issues without supervision. But I also want to
| highlight that there is a place for recreational, responsible,
| and safe drug use; there is a _lot_ between between
| clinical/therapeutic settings and random recklessness.
| underseacables wrote:
| _We infer that the presence of a personality disorder may
| represent an elevated risk for psychedelic use and hypothesize
| that the importance of psychological support and good therapeutic
| alliance may be increased in this population._
|
| Feels like another publish or perish paper.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-16 23:02 UTC)