OPEN Foundation

History

From Psychiatry to Flower Power and Back Again: The Amazing Story of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide

Abstract

Among the psychedelic drugs that enjoyed a period of popularity in psychiatric research during the 1950s and 1960s, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is the most prominent one. Psychiatrists of that time had seen LSD not only as a tool for psychotherapy but also as a potential therapeutic for anxiety, depression, alcohol abuse, autism, and even schizophrenia. When it became a quasi-religious epitome of the Hippie counterculture in the mid 1960s, and cases of what we now call hallucinogen persisting perception disorder and acute psychotic “flashbacks” mounted, authorities moved to make LSD illegal. Although research was never actually forbidden, the field almost completely dried out until the early 2010s. Using today’s tools of molecular pharmacology, functional imaging, and neuronal network theory, neuropsychiatry is now resurrecting LSD research-with implications that leave us with many medical and ethical questions. Few people are aware that this is a repurposed compound, originally developed in an effort to synthesize a new analeptic. On top of all potential LSD might have in psychiatry, it also serves as a reminder of the unexpected potential that discarded early-stage compounds can have.

Mucke, H. A. (2016). From Psychiatry to Flower Power and Back Again: The Amazing Story of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide. ASSAY and Drug Development Technologies. 10.1089/adt.2016.747.

Link to full text

Prohibited or regulated? LSD psychotherapy and the United States Food and Drug Administration

Abstract

Over the 1950s and early 1960s, the use of the hallucinogenic drug lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) to facilitate psychotherapy was a promising field of psychiatric research in the USA. However, during the 1960s, research began to decline, before coming to a complete halt in the mid-1970s. This has commonly been explained through the increase in prohibitive federal regulations during the 1960s that aimed to curb the growing recreational use of the drug. However, closely examining the Food and Drug Administration’s regulation of LSD research in the 1960s will reveal that not only was LSD research never prohibited, but that the administration supported research to a greater degree than has been recognized. Instead, the decline in research reflected more complex changes in the regulation of pharmaceutical research and development.

Oram, M. (2016). Prohibited or regulated? LSD psychotherapy and the United States Food and Drug Administration. History of psychiatry, 0957154X16648822.
Link to full text

On the Origin of the Genus Psilocybe and Its Potential Ritual Use in Ancient Africa and Europe

Abstract

On the Origin of the Genus Psilocybe and Its Potential Ritual Use in Ancient Africa and Europe. The role of altered states of consciousness in the production of geometric and figurative art by prehistoric cultures in Africa and Europe has been hotly debated. Helvenston and Bahn have tried to refute the most famous hypothesis, Lewis-Williams’ neuropsychological model, by claiming that appropriate visual hallucinations required the ingestion of LSD, psilocybin, or mescaline, while arguing that none of these compounds were available to the cultures in question. We present here mycological arguments that tell another story. A prehistoric worldwide distribution of the mushroom genus Psilocybe, and therefore of psilocybin, is supported by the existence of endemic species in America, Africa, and Europe, the disjunct distribution of sister species, and the possibility of long-distance spore dispersal. It is more difficult to point to instances of actual prehistoric ritual use in Africa and Europe, but there are a growing number of suggestive findings.

Froese, T., Guzmán, G., & Guzmán-Dávalos, L. (2016). On the Origin of the Genus Psilocybe and Its Potential Ritual Use in Ancient Africa and Europe1. Economic Botany, 1-12. http://http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12231-016-9342-2
Link to full text

The History of MDMA as an Underground Drug in the United States, 1960-1979

Abstract

MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxy-methylamphetamine, a.k.a. “ecstasy”) was first synthesized in 1912 and resynthesized more than once for pharmaceutical reasons before it became a popular recreational drug. Partially based on previously overlooked U.S. government documentation, this article reconstructs the early history of MDMA as a recreational drug in the U.S. from 1960 to 1979. According to the literature, MDMA was introduced as a street drug at the end of the 1960s. The first forensic detection of MDMA “on the street” was reported in 1970 in Chicago. It appears that MDMA was first synthesized by underground chemists in search of “legal alternatives” for the closely related and highly sought-after drug MDA, which was scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) in 1970. Until 1974, nearly all MDMA street samples seized came from the U.S. Midwest, the first “hot region” of MDMA use. In Canada, MDMA was first detected in 1974 and scheduled in 1976. From 1975 to 1979, MDMA was found in street samples in more than 10 U.S. states, the West Coast becoming the major “hot region” of MDMA use. Recreational use of MDMA spread across the U.S. in the early 1980s, and in 1985 it was scheduled under the CSA.

Passie, T., & Benzenhöfer, U. (2016). The history of MDMA as an underground drug in the United States, 1960–1979. Journal of psychoactive drugs48(2), 67-75., 10.1080/02791072.2015.1128580

Link to full text

Psychedelics and cognitive liberty: Reimagining drug policy through the prism of human rights.

Abstract

This paper reimagines drug policy – specifically psychedelic drug policy – through the prism of human rights. Challenges to the incumbent prohibitionist paradigm that have been brought from this perspective to date – namely by calling for exemptions from criminalisation on therapeutic or religious grounds – are considered, before the assertion is made that there is a need to go beyond such reified constructs, calling for an end to psychedelic drug prohibitions on the basis of the more fundamental right to cognitive liberty. This central concept is explicated, asserted as being a crucial component of freedom of thought, as enshrined within Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It is argued that the right to cognitive liberty is routinely breached by the existence of the system of drug prohibition in the United Kingdom (UK), as encoded within the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (MDA). On this basis, it is proposed that Article 9 could be wielded to challenge the prohibitive system in the courts. This legal argument is supported by a parallel and entwined argument grounded in the political philosophy of classical liberalism: namely, that the state should only deploy the criminal law where an individual’s actions demonstrably run a high risk of causing harm to others. Beyond the courts, it is recommended that this liberal, rights-based approach also inform psychedelic drug policy activism, moving past the current predominant focus on harm reduction, towards a prioritization of benefit maximization. How this might translate in to a different regulatory model for psychedelic drugs, a third way, distinct from the traditional criminal and medical systems of control, is tentatively considered. However, given the dominant political climate in the UK – with its move away from rights and towards a more authoritarian drug policy – the possibility that it is only through underground movements that cognitive liberty will be assured in the foreseeable future is contemplated.

Walsh, C. (2016). Psychedelics and Cognitive Liberty: Reimagining drug policy through the prism of human rights. International Journal of Drug Policy. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.12.025

Link to full text

Breaking Convention 2015: Looking back (and forward)

BC_report_2Psychedelic researchers gathered from all over the world to present their findings at the third biannual Breaking Convention conference (BC). The conference took place at Greenwich College in London between 10 and 12 July and hosted 140 presenters from about 40 countries as well as performers, artists and musicians. Over 800 people attended the event, which included renowned presenters such as professors David E. Nichols, David J. Nutt and Roland Griffiths, along with a great variety of academics from different disciplines.

According to Dr. Ben Sessa, one of the conference’s organisers, the conference was a success: “We have had a lot of great feedback. BC is a very ‘home grown’ affair, with almost a third of delegates participating in one way or another. People feel a great deal of personal ownership over the conference, which means the atmosphere is great and a lot of important networking gets done.” Sessa was one of the co-founders of BC in 2011, and explains how the conference has built momentum since then: “We set up BC as a platform to showcase psychedelic research and culture. The conference has grown tremendously and we hope it will continue to expand and inspire young people and seasoned enthusiasts to propagate this important subject.”

One of the participants was Michael Kugel, an undergraduate medical science student from Sydney, Australia. He travelled 17.000 kilometres to meet world leading researchers in current medical cannabis and psychedelic research. He thinks his trip was worthwhile and shows that Sessa´s hopes are not in vain. “I’ve met a lot of great people here”, says Kugel. “I met Allan Badiner, author of Zig Zag Zen, who introduced me to MAPS founder Rick Doblin, who in turn told me about a psychiatrist who is trying to get approval in Australia to study MDMA for PTSD in war veterans. At lunch I bumped into Lumír Hanuš, who was part of the team that discovered anandamide [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][an endogenous cannabinoid, ed.], and who currently works with Raphael Mechoulam. I offered him my (limited) lab skills – we’ll see where that leads. I´m feeling really good about it all so far.”

For Tehseen Noorani, a researcher who has participated in a psilocybin studie at Johns Hopkins along with Roland Griffiths and Matthew Johnson, coming to BC was a no-brainer: “I do research on psychedelics and these conferences are rare. They are also big, so it totally makes sense to come and present work and find out what else is going on. When you´re in this space, you realise how much is going on – there are so many small pockets of activity all over the world.

Noorani thinks it’s important to undertake efforts to further convince funders that psychedelics are a topic worthy of research. “For me there are a lot of sciences,” he said. “I work with pharmacologists and the steps forward for clinical trials seem to be pretty straightforward. As there´s a growing acceptance of the impressive outcomes of strictly scientific research, what we really need now is money.” He also underlined the importance of taking social scientific research around psychedelics more seriously: “My background is in anthropology, and I would say anthropological work needs to be taken more seriously. Firstly, research needs to connect the important anthropological and political questions of today. Secondly, ethnographic research needs to be recognised as serious research by so-called harder sciences, and by the public, because to be interested in psychedelics is to be interested in pretty profound stuff.”

Levente Móró, a consciousness researcher from Finland currently based in Hungary, also found what he came looking for: “Along with the interlaced biennial conference by the OPEN Foundation, BC is the most important European meeting of the international psychedelic science field. I wanted to get updated about the status of current research, to meet old and new fellow researchers, and to put forward my own ideas and receive feedback. The conference provided abundant amounts of knowledge, from all the various fields related to psychedelics. It is nice to receive fresh input and viewpoints, also from outside my own fields of study. Moreover, it has been extremely nice to meet more people from Finland, as a result of the recently organised psychedelic science activism.” A group of academics in Finland, who aim to promote practical research and evidence-based information on psychedelics, organized their first small psychedelic seminar last April, with presentations from Teri Krebs, Murtaza Majeed and Helle Kaasik, among others.

Móró’s own presentation at BC was based on a bioethical analysis of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs he produced with his colleague Imre Bárd, who wasn’t present. He focused on representations of ‘evil’ and demonstrated how the UN drug laws used a language of religious immorality to justify drug prohibition. His presentation, although based on a convention that was signed over half a century ago, found resonance in current legislative practices. One of the hot topics mentioned during many of the BC presentations was the new Psychoactive Substances Bill (2015), proposed by the British government just weeks before the conference. The new bill would increase the regulation of most psychoactive substances (not including alcohol and tobacco) and further complicate psychedelic research. An open letter was published on the conference website, addressed to the British Prime Minister, in which the undersigned urge for the content of the Bill to be reconsidered. It was signed by over 40 professionals, including academics, former and current members of Parliament and police officials.

This more politically active role of psychedelic researchers was welcomed by Levente Móró: “It was nice to see that psychedelic researchers have been getting involved more and more with drug policy reform issues.” Despite the possible tightening of regulatory practices in the UK, Ben Sessa seemed optimistic about the future of psychedelic research. “Psychedelic research requires a major Public Relations drive. Most researchers believe that psychedelic drugs are useful, safe and efficacious tools for medicine, growth and development. But sadly, for the majority of the general public, high levels of stigma and misinformation remain attached to these fascinating substances. This means we need to detach ourselves, to some extent, from the “hippie” genre and demonstrate that ‘normal’, everyday people can use psychedelics safely and with personal and communal benefits. One way of doing this is to increase the exposure of psychedelic medicine to people everywhere through the media. This is partly why I wrote my novel ‘To Fathom Hell Or Soar Angelic’, which was launched at BC15. In the meantime, my clinical colleagues and I continue to carry out robust scientific studies to determine the safety and efficacy of psychedelic therapy.”

One way to relieve the stigma could be for researchers to openly discuss their own experiences. But could this harm their credibility as scientists? Noorani: “As a researcher I would say there´s a real dilemma around admitting to having (not) taken psychedelics in terms of how it legitimises or delegitimises the research you do.” Móró believes that scientific credibility should not rest on the researcher´s person: “Researchers might get insights from their own experiences, or become more motivated to investigate phenomena they find personally fascinating and meaningful. Besides, scientific credibility should not depend on a researcher’s personal background. It should be objectively assessable and independent of the researcher’s non-scientific traits or parameters.”

While Sessa openly discussed his own experiences, he also recognises how legal restrictions might affect the extent to which professionals publicly speak about their use of psychedelics: “I am fortunate to have participated in a number of legal psychedelic research studies in the last 6 years, so I can say, on the record, that I have taken ketamine, LSD and psilocybin in those studies.” Sessa supports the idea that ‘coming out’ about safe and beneficial experiences could be a good way to forward the emancipation of these substances: “This method worked well for driving the normalisation of homosexuality in recent decades. However, I also understand professionals – especially doctors – who feel reluctant to do this. The possession of illegal drugs is still penalised in most countries.”

Next year, the special session of the UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS) will, among other things, give directions for the future of psychedelic research, and the outcomes will probably be extensively presented, discussed and debated at the next BC in 2017.

This report is based on on-site recorded interviews and post-conference email interviews.

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Psychedelic medicine: a re-emerging therapeutic paradigm

Introduction

In clinical research settings around the world, renewed investigations are taking place on the use of psychedelic substances for treating illnesses such as addiction, depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Since the termination of a period of research from the 1950s to the early 1970s, most psychedelic substances have been classified as “drugs of abuse” with no recognized medical value. However, controlled clinical studies have recently been conducted to assess the basic psychopharmacological properties and therapeutic efficacy of these drugs as adjuncts to existing psychotherapeutic approaches. Central to this revival is the re-emergence of a paradigm that acknowledges the importance of set (i.e., psychological expectations), setting (i.e., physical environment) and the therapeutic clinician–patient relationship as critical elements for facilitating healing experiences and realizing positive outcomes [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][…]
<br />
Yensen, R., & Johnson, M. W. (2015). Psychedelic medicine: a re-emerging therapeutic paradigm. https://dx.doi.org/
<br />

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Darwin’s Pharmacy: Sex, Plants, and the Evolution of the Noösphere (In Vivo)

Darwin’s Pharmacy: Sex, Plants, and the Evolution of the Noösphere (In Vivo) by Richard M. Doyle, University of Washington Press, 2011.

In his book ‘Darwin’s Pharmacy: Sex, Plants, and the Evolution of the Noösphere (In Vivo)’, Penn State English professor Richard Doyle weaves an intricate argument that challenges some of our scientific presuppositions, like intentionality, evolution and language. He carefully analyses the influence psychedelics can have on perception and suggests an almost Copernican revolution. If we find the spiritual peak experiences evoked by plants and fungi function as “eloquence adjuncts”, and in turn we help these “bringers of beauty” reproduce, then whose intelligence can be said to influence whom?

Writing about trip reports, shamanism and cannabis pornography, Doyle tries to find a language that, like a psychedelic experience, transcends the subject/object dichotomy. His goal is to break down our ordinary way of thinking, so we can form a new perspective. A perspective in which consciousness is always already embedded in an ecological context, which means that everything we experience is dependent on ‘set and setting.’ Doyle seems to be apt when he renames these psychoactives as ‘ecodelics’ because these plants and compounds help us to perceive our interconnection with the ecosystems of our planet.

The result is a rich and challenging book in which form and content are inseparable, and the lines between facts and interpretations get blurred. The blending of his myriad ideas can only be understood in its entirety, which runs the risks that some of his key insights will be overlooked. But for the philosophically inclined reader with an open mind, it’s a well-written book that challenges many assumptions and should be read for that reason alone.

Buy this book on bookdepository.com and support the OPEN Foundation

LSD: a new treatment emerging from the past

Introduction

Psychedelics fell from medical grace nearly half a century ago, but recent activity suggests that some researchers have “high hopes” for their return. 1,2 Over 60 years ago, Albert Hofmann at Sandoz Pharmaceutical Laboratories in Switzerland first synthesized lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and personally experienced its effects (later described as a voyage into madness or a chemically induced psychosis) in 1943. Hofmann’s drug opened up a new era of hallucinogenic research. Over the next 15 years, more than a thousand articles on the use of LSD appeared in medical and scientific publications. In 1957, that work gave rise to the term “psychedelic” to describe a mind-manifesting response, described by some as an experience that brought to light matters that had previously been part of the unconscious [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][…]

Dyck, E. (2015). LSD: a new treatment emerging from the past. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association journal= journal de l’Association medicale canadienne. https://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.141358

Link to full text

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Ketamine and Phencyclidine: the good, the bad and the unexpected

Abstract

The history of ketamine and phencyclidine from their development as potential clinical anaesthetics, through drugs of abuse and animal models of schizophrenia to potential rapidly acting antidepressants is reviewed. The discovery in 1983 of the NMDA receptor antagonist property of ketamine and phencyclidine was a key step to understanding their pharmacology, including their psychotomimetic effects in man. This review describes the historical context and the course of that discovery and its expansion into other hallucinatory drugs. The relevance of these findings to modern hypotheses of schizophrenia and the implications for drug discovery are reviewed. The finding of the rapidly acting antidepressant effects of ketamine in man are discussed in relation to other glutamatergic mechanisms.

Lodge, D., & Mercier, M. S. (2015). Ketamine and Phencyclidine: the good, the bad and the unexpected. British journal of pharmacology.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bph.13222
Link to full text

7 May - Psychedelics, Nature & Mental Health with Sam Gandy

X