OPEN Foundation

Research

Does LSD enhance the emotional response to music?

February 7, 2022 / Articles, LSD, Research / By

Aside from its hallucinogenic properties, LSD is known to have noticeable effects on emotion. This is one of the reasons why psychedelics were used in psychotherapy in the 1950s and 60s, hypothesizing that they facilitate emotional release and insight  [1][2]. Similarly, music can evoke emotion and was also a component in psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, for aiding emotional arousal and release, and in promoting the occurrence of peak or spiritual-type experiences [3][4]. Working at Imperial College, London, neuroscientist and OPEN board member Mendel Kaelen and colleagues conducted a study [5] aiming to explore the significance of music in psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. Using a placebo-controlled setup, the study sought to test the hypothesis that the emotional response to music is enhanced on LSD. The research team also investigated the role of music in occasioning peak or spiritual-type experiences.

Ten participants attended two study days. During one such day, they received a placebo (10ml saline), while on the other day they were given between 40 and 80 μg of LSD, with roughly a week in between. The design was single-blind, which means participants were blind to which condition they were in, but researchers were not. Participants listened to a playlist of five different (mostly neo-classical and ambient) instrumental tracks on each of the two study days, with the order of the playlist counterbalanced across participants. In order to assess the emotional response to the music, participants were asked how emotionally affected they were by the music, which served as the primary outcome. Furthermore, the Geneva Emotional Music Scale (GEMS-9) was used to investigate the specific factors of the participants’ emotional experiences, consisting of nine subcategories of emotion (wonder, transcendence, power, tenderness, nostalgia, peacefulness, joyful activation, and tension). The results showed that the mean scores for the emotional response to music were significantly higher for the LSD condition than for the placebo. Additionally, all nine factors on the GEMS-9 scored higher in the LSD condition than in the placebo, with significant increases for the items “wonder”, “transcendence”, “power” and “tenderness”. Correlational analyses showed a significant positive relationship between ratings of intensity of drug effects and emotional arousal to music.

The finding that LSD enhances the emotional response to music supports the popular assumption that music has more significance under the influence of psychedelic drugs. Emotions of transcendence and wonder are traditionally thought of as core constituents of peak and spiritual experiences [6][7]. This led the authors to infer that the combination of LSD and music may increase the likelihood of having spiritual-type or peak experiences. Moreover, these experiences have been shown to correlate with sustained improvements in well-being and life satisfaction [8] and also with increases in the personality trait of openness [9], which supports the view that music is an important element in psychedelic-assisted therapy.

Due to this being a pilot study, it does come with its limitations. Small sample size and musical genre selection mean that results cannot be generalised to a larger population. Also, participants could have guessed the purpose of the study, meaning the results could reflect their own or the researchers’ expectations. Additionally, results could be attributed to the effect of LSD alone, rather than the specific effect of music in combination with the drug.

When asked about the implications of his study for future research, Mr. Kaelen told us these are just humble first steps in helping build an evidence-based approach to psychedelic therapy. “It’s important to start a discussion on the role of music and the importance of the setting in general within psychedelic therapy,” Kaelen said. “Due to the study’s limitations, future studies have to come up with different designs and more detailed research questions.” Kaelen also mentioned research already underway at Imperial College, including brain imaging studies with FMRI and MEG, which aim to investigate which brain mechanisms are involved. He also emphasised the importance of translating elements into clinical work. “A clinical trial, now in progress at Imperial, uses psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression. Part of this study looks at the role of music, which will hopefully further our understanding of how music and psychedelic therapy work together.”

[1] Busch AK, Johnson WC (1950) L.S.D. 25 as an aid in psychotherapy; preliminary report of a new drug. Diseases of the nervous system 11: 241-243

[2] Leuner HC (1983) Psycholytic therapy: Hallucinogenics as an aid in psychodynamically oriented psychotherapy In Psychedelic Reflections, ed. Grinspoon L & Bakalar JB, pp. 177-192: Human Science Press

[3] Bonny HL, Pahnke WN (1972) The use of music in psychedelic (LSD) psychotherapy. Journal of music therapy: 64-87

[4] Grof S (1980) LSD Psychotherapy. Hunter House Publishers, US.

[5] Kaelen et al. (2015) LSD enhances the emotional response to music . Psychopharmacology [Abstract]

[6] Maslow AH (1993) The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. Arkana

[7] Richards WA (2009) The rebirth of research with entheogens: lessons from the past and hypotheses for the future. The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology Vol. 41: 139-150

[8] Griffiths RR, Richards W, Johnson MW, McCann U, Jesse R (2008) Mystical-type experiences occasioned by psilocybin mediate the attribution of personal meaning and spiritual significance 14 months later. Journal of psychopharmacology 22: 621-632

[9] MacLean KA, Johnson MW, Griffiths RR (2011) Mystical experiences occasioned by the hallucinogen psilocybin lead to increases in the personality domain of openness. Journal of psychopharmacology 25: 1453-1461

Entheogens, Society, and Law – Towards a Politics of Consciousness, Autonomy and Responsibility

December 6, 2021 / Book reviews, Consciousness, Other subjects, Research, Safety / By

Entheogens, Society & Law: Towards a Politics of Consciousness, Autonomy & Responsibility by Daniel Waterman, edited by Casey William Hardison, Melrose Books, 2013.

Psychoactive substances are strongly intertwined with society. They produce highly subjective effects, and are simultaneously highly politicized. Likewise, the cultural and societal context determines to a large extent the content and interpretation of the experience. Daniel Waterman’s ‘Entheogens, Society & Law’ is about this interplay. In his book, he discusses the interrelation of consciousness and ethics and argues that a reconsideration of regulatory choices is necessary for a more beneficial way of dealing with these substances. It is a broad-ranging book that addresses a large variety of subjects.

After a brief personal introduction, Waterman shows how the way we talk about psychoactive substances influences not just the experience, but also its interpretation and whether the outcome is beneficial. Similarly, he argues that law stratifies such beliefs we hold about psychoactive substances and that this in turn influences both the way we see them and the way we see ourselves.

The second chapter is an elaboration on the different ways in which psychoactives have been conceptualised throughout history, and the results of these conceptualisations. Drugs and drug users have many faces and Waterman gives a thorough analysis of all the different roles they play within society, both positive and negative. He shows the complexity of these concepts and how many different interpretations are possible. This analysis contributes to a fuller understanding of psychedelics and the psychedelic experience and has not been published elsewhere to such an extent.

In the third chapter we find a large section on the work of Professor Jan Bastiaans, a Dutch psychiatrist who treated people suffering from what was then called ‘concentration camp syndrome’ with LSD. Concentration camp syndrome would later be incorporated into the more recent category PTSD. Bastiaans was educated in classical psychoanalysis and went on to apply these techniques in psychedelic therapy. In the late eighties, Bastiaans would come into disregard for not maintaining proper archives, preventing anyone from evaluating the effectiveness of his treatment. Although largely based on the work of Stephen Snelders and the biography by Bram Enning, this book provides one of the first extensive reviews of Bastiaans’ work in English and it is a welcome addition to the historical study of psychedelic research.

The book continues with a section on the transpersonal psychology of Stanislav Grof. While a giant in the field, Grof is not often compared and contrasted to his predecessors, starting with Sigmund Freud and his heirs Carl Jung, Otto Rank and Wilhelm Reich, and with peers like Abraham Maslow. This comparison helps us understand Grof as part of a lineage of psychoanalysts. By placing Grof in this lineage, we can see how he both learned from his tradition and elaborated upon it by working intensively with LSD in the Czech Republic and the US.

In his final chapter, the author shows how the transpersonal experience is central to a variety of religions and argues that these experiences help people integrate on a personal and social level. In that sense, Waterman posits, they are the epitome of ethics itself, because they require us to take responsibility for our actions on a grander scale. Conversely, prohibiting (some ways to achieve) such experiences prevents people from becoming more conscious and, consequently, more compassionate and kind.

The book is not neutral and doesn’t claim to be. Both author and editor are outspoken proponents of cognitive liberty and the freedom to alter consciousness. However, their claims are supported by relevant research and their political stance is rooted in a strong tradition of scientific research and philosophical thought, although conservatives might label it as radical.

The book does have flaws, the biggest of which is that it is often unclear where the argument is taking the reader. Because many subjects are dealt with extensively, it is easy to lose track of the line of reasoning. More elaboration on how digressions fit in with the general argument would have allowed for a more focused book. As it stands, the book’s topics, while interesting in themselves, often remain unconnected. The effect is that the reader has to piece the argument together himself, which makes for a sometimes challenging read, requiring a strong focus on the part of the reader.

Another flaw is that some ideas are explained in both footnotes and in the main text. This unnecessary repetition, along with some mistakes and sloppiness in the footnotes, stain an otherwise well annotated text. Both these issues should have been mended in the editorial process.

But there are enough diamonds in the rough. This book broadens one’s perspective well beyond the boundaries of what is normally found within the literature on psychedelics. The author discusses many questions that are usually left unanswered and still manages to fit everything together. It is a book for those interested in the interplay between how we think about altered states and the substances that induce them, how this influences the experience, and how these feedback loops influence the way we deal with them as a society.

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

[Interview] Michael Bogenschutz likens psilocybin treatment to ‘reverse PTSD’

February 7, 2022 / Articles, Interviews, Mushrooms / Psilocybin, Research / By

Addiction psychologist Michael P. Bogenschutz currently works at the Department of Psychiatry at NYU. Prior to New York, he worked at the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of New Mexico.

Much of Bogenschutz’s work has involved searching for new applications of existing treatments for addictions. The OPEN Foundation talked to him to learn more about his research on psilocybin-assisted treatment for alcohol dependence, the first trial of its kind.

Could you briefly describe your career, and what led you to pursue psychedelic research?

My career has focused on clinical treatment and, particularly in the last 10-15 years, clinical research on treating addictions. I have always been deeply interested in how people change and how we can facilitate change in problematic behaviours.

Working with patients, you’ll find people who will tell you they came to a point where they just quit suddenly, while some gradually become abstinent or the problem diminished over time, and others have relapse episodes for years, never improve, or get worse. There is a very real and not uncommon phenomenon of sudden and categorical change in behaviour, which is not unique to addiction. I find that interesting scientifically, psychologically and clinically. Why does this happen to some people and not to others?

I really became interested in research with psychedelics shortly after joining the faculty at the University of New Mexico (UNM) in 1994. At that time, Rick Strassman was doing work with the intravenous administration of DMT. Dr. Strassman left UNM not long afterwards and as I was a junior faculty member, it didn’t seem realistic to pursue my own research in that area. I didn’t think much about it again until I saw Roland Griffiths’ 2006 paper on the effects of psilocybin on healthy volunteers.

I was immensely impressed with both the findings and the fact that it was possible to do these kinds of studies. In that paper, the authors describe the acute effects of psilocybin in volunteers and the relatively high frequency of mystical types of experiences. More importantly, from a clinical perspective, there was a report of the persisting change in attitudes, emotional states and relationships. The follow-up paper two years later documented the persistence of these effects on the basis of a single experience with relatively high doses. I found it immensely interesting and it made sense to start investigating the clinical potential of these types of drugs myself.

Addiction obviously has a huge public health impact. Why are you interested in alcohol-related issues and treatments in particular?

I’m interested in addiction in general but for me alcohol, which is a very common, devastating addiction throughout the world, was a logical place to start. As I learned when I started investigating the topic, a considerable amount of research on the use of psychedelic treatment (mainly LSD) and alcohol had already been conducted in the late 1950s.

In the United States, the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) philosophy is prevalent in addiction treatment. It’s a philosophy that emphasizes the spiritual component of the addiction process and the importance of becoming healthier spiritually in order to recover. This also interests me.

What are the benefits of using psilocybin over LSD in a study?

Psilocybin has two practical advantages. For one, the duration of action is significantly shorter, in the order of six hours instead of ten with LSD. This makes psilocybin easier to use in an outpatient model. In other words, you can administer it in the course of a normal workday, whereas LSD sessions could easily continue late into the evening. Another important reason is that there is much more stigma attached to LSD. Many people think of LSD as a very dangerous and frightening drug. Certainly in the 1960s, there were many adverse reactions to LSD. Much of this had to do with taking extremely high doses of a substance with unknown potency, as well as a lack of understanding at the time about how important setting was in determining an experience’s outcome. Clinically speaking, both LSD and psilocybin appear to be very safe when used under carefully controlled research conditions. Also, even though the psilocybin we administer is actually a synthetic version, people often think of the substance as “mushrooms” or a naturally occurring compound, which is reassuring to some people.

Could you generalise about what types of persons were interested in joining this trial?

We recruited from the community, using advertisements aimed specifically at people who were not engaged in treatment. We wanted this to be a stand-alone treatment. We required people to be alcohol dependent, in general good health, and not suffering from any serious psychiatric illness. In our Albuquerque study, participants were working and had some intact social structure or support. They had been alcohol-dependent for an average of 15 years, the mean age was 40, and there were six men and four women. Some had limited amounts of experience with psychedelics in the past, but we excluded those with extensive use.

One concern was that people might volunteer because they wanted a psilocybin experience. We wanted to attract those seriously interested in changing their drinking and open to the possibility of novel treatments.

Can you describe the setting you provided for your patients?

The outpatient clinic was set up to look as much as possible like a comfortable living room with a large couch. We asked participants for most of the session to wear eyeshades and headphones – there was a standard program of music – and instructions were to focus on their internal experience, to accept and explore whatever came up. We prepared them for what they might experience during sessions, what the possible range of experiences could be, and advised them to manage those experiences in order to make the most of them. We believed that setting an intention was important. In this context, the general intention might have been to use the session to learn or experience something to help them make a positive change in drinking or other issues related to drinking they wanted to explore. There was very little direct intervention. Two therapists provided support and were available to intervene when needed, otherwise they checked in every 30 minutes to an hour to make sure the participant was doing okay. At the end of that session, the participants could start talking about what they had experienced. (The volunteers received psilocybin in one or two supervised sessions; this was in addition to Motivational Enhancement Therapy and therapy sessions devoted to preparation for and debriefing from the psilocybin sessions, ed.)

In some of the initial LSD trials, the therapists’ aim was to recreate an experience akin to delirium tremens (DT), a severe withdrawal symptom sometimes experienced by alcohol-dependent patients. These DTs were often a turning point for alcoholics, and they felt LSD could have similar consequences. What they found was that some participants had mystical, transcendent experiences that affected their long-term behaviour. Could you describe how peak experiences affected the patients in your study?

On a psychological and biological level, we don’t have theories, let alone data to explain these phenomena. In the context of a person trying to address a problem and make a kind of change, what we’ve seen is that participants often have an experience of oneness, the hallmark of a mystical experience. They have a sense of unity with all of creation or the universe or God, and they also have a very powerful experience of love and connection on a deep emotional level. This includes self-love and self-compassion, that feeling of being okay. This sounds almost trivial, but for some of these folks who’ve experienced a lifetime of feeling unloved, it’s a very powerful experience. In some cases, they told us their drinking had been motivated by the lack of feeling loved or lovable, and that this experience made them feel less like they needed to drink for that reason.

Other changes accompany this kind of experience. People emerge with a sense of optimism that change is possible, that life can be different because they have experienced something that is so different from anything they could have imagined. We’ve seen people spend a lot of time during sessions thinking about family and relationships, about the grief, guilt and harm their drinking has brought to others, as well as themselves. People emerge from sessions talking about pro-social values like being a good parent or contributing to society. We’ve measured significant decreases in craving and an increase in confidence that they will be able to make a change in their drinking.

How can taking a drug once or twice cause lasting behaviour change? What evidence speaks to this question?

I don’t really have an answer. Clearly things are going on in the brain and we are beginning to conduct studies that look at brain function using MRI scans before and after the psilocybin sessions. But we can’t say yet why a single acute experience can produce such lasting changes.

The best analogy we have come up with is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), in which a single traumatic event can impact someone’s day-to-day experience. These traumas can be of a purely psychological nature, though they often involve physical violence as well. PTSD is an example of how an acute event can cause persistent psychological and measurable biological changes in brain function and structure. Maybe what we are seeing with psilocybin is something like the opposite of PTSD—an experience so powerfully positive it can actually make lasting impact on one’s psyche and brain.

Addiction is a misguided search for spirituality. Can you comment on this or elaborate?

Carl Jung is really the person who expanded on this idea, which was that through intoxicants people (in some limited way) were able to experience connection, unity, a sense of wellness and being loved. You can think of it as a misguided search for mystical or human connection, a way to experience a reliable emotional attachment to something external in order to receive comfort. This can be a useful way of understanding and reframing people’s struggle with addictive substances as not simply seeking hedonistic pleasure, but a genuine desire for wholeness. Though if this isn’t found in healthier ways, it can readily become a trap.

The outcome of your study seems to be very promising: all of the patients experienced a definite improvement. However it was a small sample. Do you have plans to do another clinical trial?

This was a small trial without a control group, done to demonstrate the feasibility of conducting such a study. We were able to demonstrate clinical improvement, and the degree of improvement correlated with the strength of the subject’s experience during sessions. It is suggestive and by no means conclusive or convincing evidence. We need to do much larger controlled trials. Our current trial aims to recruit 180 alcohol-dependent patients, which will provide a much more rigorous test of efficacy. This will take a few years—we estimate five—to complete the trial.

Do you think there may be obstacles other than scientific that might bring psychedelic research to a halt all over again? Or do you think it will evolve into standard practice?

We understand these drugs better scientifically than we did in the 1960s, in terms of effects, potential dangers, and how to minimise those dangers in a clinical research setting. The people doing clinical research with psychedelics now are serious, experienced scientists who approach their work cautiously and with scientific rigour. The general public also has a much better understanding of psychedelics than it did 50 years ago. We need to stay balanced in our approach and avoid extrapolating beyond the data, guard against exaggerated claims and expectations, and remind people of the significant risks that exist with these drugs when used outside of structured and controlled settings.

While I and others in the field are hopeful that what we discover will lead to important advances in addiction treatment, no drug is a magic cure. There are limitations to any treatment. Addiction is a complex, chronic disorder and you cannot cure everyone in one or two sessions, nor reduce the risks to zero. But it’s reasonable to hope that we will be able to demonstrate reproducible benefits, and learn a lot about the psychology and biology of behaviour change in the process.

Ketamine-induced state models schizophrenia

February 7, 2022 / Articles, Ketamine, Psychology, Psychosis, Research / By

In the 1950’s, research on the psychoactive properties of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) led scientists to the serotonin hypothesis of schizophrenia, a theory still used to explain the neurochemical roots of schizophrenia. Today, Höflich et al. (2015) have used ketamine to explore the role of neurotransmitter glutamate in this mental disorder [3].

Since neuroimaging studies indicated dysfunctional glutamate pathways in schizophrenia, glutamate is thought to play a key role in its aetiology. These abnormalities are specifically apparent in the thalamus, a brain region regarded as the information integration system of the brain. By measuring brain activity in healthy volunteers after ketamine administration, Höflich et al. (2015) explored ketamine as a model for schizophrenia to further investigate the link between glutamate and schizophrenia. Ketamine is a glutamate antagonist, which means that it prevents neurotransmission by blocking the activity of glutamate on N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors. The effects of ketamine resemble some of the positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia.

In the study of Höflich et al. (2015), thirty healthy volunteers completed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover study in which each volunteer was scanned using fMRI on two separate days. Brain network activation under ketamine was compared to placebo. The brain images revealed higher functional connectivity in the thalamus hub network in the ketamine condition compared to placebo. Furthermore, ketamine induced higher connectivity between thalamic regions and somatosensory and temporal cortices. Connectivity between the thalamus and prefrontal, motor, posterior parietal, and occipital cortices did not differ significantly.

The authors conclude that ketamine temporarily triggers alterations in functional connectivity in healthy volunteers that resemble structural brain connectivity patterns in schizophrenic patients. They infer that the ketamine-induced state might function as a model of schizophrenia, especially relative to characteristic sensory filtering problems. However, their results did not reveal a decrease of prefrontal-thalamic connectivity typical for schizophrenic patients [4] suggesting that other neurotransmitters also account for the manifestation of schizophrenia. Using ketamine and other drug models [5] to investigate the relationship between neurotransmitter systems and the symptomatology of schizophrenia could yield valuable information about the neural underpinnings of this mental disorder.

[1] Gaddum, J. H., Hebb, C. O., Silver, A., & Swan, A. A. B. (1953). 5-Hydroxytryptamine. Pharmacological action and destruction in perfused lungs. Quart. J. Exper. Physiol., 38, 255.
[2] Woolley, D. W., & Shaw, E. (1954). a Biochemical and Pharmacological Suggestion About Certain Mental Disorders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 40(4), 228–231. doi:10.1073/pnas.40.4.228
[3] Höflich, A., Hahn, A., Küblböck, M., Kranz, G. S., Vanicek, T., Windischberger, C., …Lanzenberger, R. (2015). Ketamine-Induced Modulation of the Thalamo- Cortical Network in Healthy Volunteers As a Model for Schizophrenia. International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 1–11. doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyv040 [Abstract]
[4] Leitman DI, Sehatpour P, Higgins BA, Foxe JJ, Silipo G, Javitt DC (2010) Sensory deficits and distributed hierarchical dysfunction in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 167:818–827
[5] Steeds, H., Carhart-Harris, R. L., & Stone, J. M. (2014). Drug models of schizophrenia. Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology, 5(1), 43–58. doi:10.1177/2045125314557797 [Abstract][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Xenolinguistics – Psychedelics, Language, and the Evolution of Consciousness

December 6, 2021 / Book reviews, Consciousness, Other subjects, Research / By

Xenolinguistics – Psychedelics, Language, and the Evolution of Consciousness by Diana Reed Slattery, with a foreword by Allyson Grey. Evolver Editions, 2015.

Psychedelic research always in some way evokes what David Chalmers has called the “hard problem of consciousness”. How does experience arise from physical activity in the brain and, to apply this problem to psychedelics, how does the alteration of the chemistry of the brain alter this experience? Most published research into psychedelics does not address this question directly. Diana Reed Slattery, however, combines both her subjective experiences, those of several other people, with scientific insights from linguistics, biology and psychology. The result is a richly illustrated philosophical work rather than a scientific attempt at proof and explanation. Her work opens up new avenues for further scientific and philosophical inquiries.

The focus of the book is xenolinguistics, which is defined as the study of alien (i.e. strange) languages. Slattery further limits the scope to previously non-existing languages that have been “received” during psychedelic experiences. Although this is a fringe phenomenon even within , understanding it might shed light on other aspects of the psychedelic experience and consciousness in general. Slattery’s aim is twofold. On the one hand she wants to show how psychedelic practices, the use of psychedelics within a certain ritualistic (secular, spiritual or religious) context, can be a “powerful means of gathering knowledge about consciousness”. On the other hand, she examines the results of her own and others’ psychedelic practice in the light of theories of the evolutionfrom a variety of disciplines, with a continuous focus on languages learned during the psychedelic experience.

The book is divided into three parts. The first deals with the practices used for xenolinguistics. The discussion of rituals and the philosophical segments on what can be considered “self” and “other” are among the most interesting of the book, as they pose questions about the way psychedelic experiences are interpreted; is the thing one communicates with the Self, subconscious, Other or even alien? Slattery argues that psychedelic practice hinges upon the setting of a clear intent, controlling the set and setting and the focus that one brings to the experience. Her practice is simple in the sense that no elaborate ritual or belief system accompanies the expglidemazeerience. The idea is to ingest the psychedelic (Slattery mostly uses psilocybin mushrooms, 2C-B, MDMA and cannabis) in solitude, experience and report as fully as possible. She got a “download” of the language she calls Glide quite early on in her practice and continued to explore the details in the years that followed. Glide is an aesthetically pleasing and purely visual language that meanders in all directions. It consists of glyphs, each comprising three rounded strokes. Combining these glyphs results in a ‘Maze’, where glyphs flow into each other. Meaning is multidimensional and reverberates throughout the field of meaning that is created. The result is non-linear and unbounded, much like the psychedelic experience. It is interesting to note that here, the focus on healing that we find in much research on psychedelics is largely absent, in order to focus on knowledge acquisition and creativity. This perspective is very welcome in a field that has become focused on one or just a few aspects of the psychedelic experience, namely the therapeutical applications and the neurobiological effects of psychedelics.

The second part of the book is more theoretical, as Slattery frames xenolinguistics within some scientific theories. This evaluation is far from complete and theories that do not support the possibility of xenolinguistics are not considered. The mere fact that people sometimes receive or develop strange languages under the influence of psychedelics disqualifies any theory that precludes this possibility. In this sense, a more dialectical approach would perhaps have been more beneficial. As it stands, however, it is a collection of fascinating scientific theories that all somehow fit in with the practice of xenolinguistics. Slattery refers to many key actors in psychedelic research; the extensive 16-page bibliography stands witness to this achievement and provides a wealth of information for those who want to dig further into the material. The theoretical ideas are interwoven with notes from her personal journal that support or illustrate the hypotheses about how perception, reality, language and consciousness are, to use one of the beautiful key concepts of the book, intertwingled.

The third part focuses on language, natural and unnatural, constructed and living. Slattery gives examples from a variety of xenolinguists of how meaning is put into language in the psychedelic experience. The role of language in society is also elaborated upon. Strange languages serve many purposes, according to Slattery: they help us express new ideas, new emotions; they enable us to convey these to others or alternatively to keep them private while still being expressed; and they allow us to experience reality in a different way, showing how the creative use of language can alter the way we see the world. Slattery refers to the idea put forth by Richard Doyle that the psychedelic experience is an ecodelic experience, which gives us the opportunity to see ourselves as part of nature and to see how things are interconnected.

Xenolinguistics is a book for those interested in the interplay between psychedelics, language and consciousness. The overall picture that emerges shows that psychedelics can shed light on the way in which language and consciousness interact and co-evolve, by providing us with new languages that stretch our awareness beyond that which we are accustomed to. While the scientific theories in the book are interesting and support the ideas put forth by the author, those looking for pure science will probably be disappointed. The strength of the book lies in its exploration of new ideas and their synthesis into an overarching worldview that invites the reader to think along. The role language plays in our ongoing search for meaning and connection needs further study. This book is an inspiring and inspired attempt to open up this new field.

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

Symposium about psychedelic research at Utrecht University

December 6, 2021 / Articles, Events, Public Lectures, Publications, Research / By

On Thursday May 7th there will be a symposium on academic research with psychedelic drugs at Utrecht University. This symposium is organized by the student society Brainwave (Neuroscience Utrecht University), in collaboration with the OPEN Foundation.

Speakers:

Leon Kenemans – Professor Psychopharmacology Utrecht University.

Mendel Kaelen – PhD student Imperial College London and board member OPEN Foundation.

Joost Breeksema – President OPEN Foundation and harm reduction expert.

Barbara van Zwieten-Boot – College ter Beoordeling van Geneesmiddelen (Medicines Evaluation Board).

Leon Kenemans will open the symposium by providing a general overview of the brain mechanisms of various psychoactive drugs. Following this, Joost Breeksema will introduce the topic of psychedelic drugs, and argue for the relevance of modern research with psychedelics. Subsequently, Mendel Kaelen will talk about the brain mechanisms of psychedelics on the basis of recent research at Imperial College London. There he studies the brain mechanisms of LSD and the effects of LSD on music perception. Next, Barbara van Zwieten-Boot, will talk about the potential risks of medicines. Finally, there will be discussion between the speakers with the possibility for questions by the audience.

Brainwave created a Facebook event at which people can register themselves for this symposium. People without a Facebook account can register here.

The language of the symposium will be part English and part Dutch. Mendel Kaelen and Joost Breeksema will speak English. Leon Kenemans and Barbara van Zwieten-Boot will speak in Dutch.

[Interview] Peter Gasser dreams of further research with group settings

February 7, 2022 / Articles, Interviews, Research / By

The first LSD study on human subjects of the new era of psychedelic research was conducted in Switzerland by psychiatrist and psychotherapist Peter Gasser. This study, which was sponsored by MAPS, has yielded promising results in the treatment of end-of-life anxiety in patients facing a life-threatening disease. In this interview, Dr. Gasser reflects on the methodology and findings of the study and on future perspectives.

Could you briefly describe your career, and what led you to pursue psychedelic research?

When I was training to be a psychiatrist and psychotherapist, at the end of the 1980s, I got in contact with psychedelic drugs for the first time. At the time, there were five therapists in Switzerland who were allowed to work with MDMA and LSD, and I first underwent treatment, and then followed training in psycholytic therapy. That’s how I learned that psychedelics can be of great help, not only to myself, but also to patients. In 1992, I became a member of the Swiss Medical Society for Psycholytic Therapy, and in 1996 I became the chairman of this society – I still am to this day. With the society, we tried several times to get permission to set up research projects with psychedelics. In 2000, we sought permission to treat depressed patients with psilocybin, but this project was not approved by the ethical committee, so we had to drop it. In 2004, one of our members received approval to use MDMA to treat patients with PTSD. And in 2007, I got approval to use LSD to treat patients with cancer or other life-threatening diseases who struggled with end-of-life anxiety. This study went on from 2007 until 2011, and we’re still publishing our findings.

How did you become interested in the treatment of end-of-life anxiety?

In 2006, we had a conference in Switzerland for Albert Hofmann’s 100th birthday. At the end of this conference, we sent an open letter to several governments in Europe to urge them to allow scientific research with LSD again. The Swiss ministry of health actually responded with a letter, saying that if the ethical and scientific requirements were met, they would grant permission for such a study. So we wondered what kind of study we could do, and we learned that in the 1960s, studies had taken place involving the treatment of end-of-life anxiety in cancer patients using LSD, with very good results. Stanislav Grof, for instance, published on this topic. So we figured we could take up the research where it had been left. On the other hand, we thought patients with life-threatening diseases really need a fairly quick approach for the problems they face. They don’t have time for long psychotherapeutic processes, and I think LSD is a good tool to quickly enter the core issues that emerge in the psychotherapeutic process.

You refer to previous studies, like Grof’s, and in one of your articles you state that “the present LSD study was designed to evaluate previous findings applying current research methodology.” What exactly is the difference in methodology as compared to previous studies?

Today, in the eyes of authorities, this is a drug study, although I personally consider this to be a psychotherapeutic study. Therefore we had to have a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study design. In the 1960s, this was not the gold standard for this kind of research. So we had to go by today’s procedures that allow a scientific evaluation of the drug.

Regarding methodology, there’s a distinction in the article between the psycholytic and the psychedelic approach. Is it right to state you chose to remain somewhere in between, but leaning slightly more toward the psychedelic method? In other words, you use the psychedelic approach but with a slightly smaller LSD dose?

Personally, I don’t really like this distinction between psycholytic and psychedelic, which seems to be of historical rather than methodological relevance. What is important to me is the fact that there is a psychotherapeutic process. We have regular, verbal psychotherapeutic sessions with the patients, and we integrate the psychedelic experiences into that process. The dosage we gave was moderate, 200 µg, which in a way is indeed somewhere in between psychedelic and psycholytic when you look at these respective procedures in the 1960s. But I think the important point is to insert these sessions in the psychotherapeutic process, to prepare the patients for them, and then afterwards to help them integrate the LSD experiences. Psychedelic therapy in the 1960s was more about giving high doses of the drug and just assuming that the peak experiences they provided the patients with would initiate change by themselves. I think the psychotherapy is necessary for the experience to be integrated, but I wouldn’t say that makes our approach “psycholytic”. It’s more something in between, and maybe we should invent a new term, it’s more along the lines of “therapy with psychoactive drugs”, something like that.

Can you describe the setting you provided for your patients?

We tried to provide a somewhat meditative setting, with just the patient and two therapists: me and a female colleague. There were no eyeshades or headphones, but we did play music, with silence in between, near half the time. The silence allowed the inner process to develop, while the music was there at times to guide it. The patients could have their eyes open or closed, as they preferred. We mostly discouraged long discussions. We were available for the patients and they could talk to us, but we suggested leaving most of the talking for the next day: talking is slow, and the inner process is quite fast. Only one patient preferred to wear eyeshades for some time, otherwise patients would alternate between eyes open and eyes closed. The sessions took place in my office, and the session room was arranged quite comfortably with candles, flowers, and blinds to dim the daylight. So the setting was not medicalized, but there was a hospital only five minutes away in case of emergency.

Were you satisfied with the approach you took, or do you think there is room for improvement or further experimenting with different approaches?

Personally, I would like to have group settings, which I think are more efficient than individual treatment sessions. This allows for a group process, i.e. interaction with other people in the latter part of the session, and there’s also a kind of group energy that is different from the individual setting. We would like to do that in the future. Also, several patients indicated they would have liked to have more LSD sessions, and I agree with them. The fact that we only had two had to do with study reasons, but it would be better to have more.

In the article, you mention the high rate of strong emotional experiences in patients, and you suggest this to be the most efficient therapeutic trigger in the study.

Yes, we used a peak experience questionnaire, which revealed that some of the patients really had mystical experiences – but most of them didn’t, although they were very satisfied with their sessions and felt they benefited from them. So we wondered what the therapeutic principle of this therapy may be, and I would say it has to do with emotional opening and broadening of the viewpoint, seeing the whole of existence in a broader context, not only in a cognitive, but also in an emotional sense. Sometimes we had to go through difficult emotional processes, anxiety, despair, things like that. But I think it can be of great help to go through this kind of difficult emotions in a safe and supportive setting. In that sense, I would rather put the emphasis on the emotional processes than on the idea that it is necessary to have a mystical experience. Which is fine if it comes, of course, it’s really helpful and precious for people who have them, but I don’t think it’s required for the therapy to yield benefits.

How do you qualify the difference between emotional peak experiences and full-blown mystical experiences?

The elements of a mystical experience are precisely defined in the state-of-consciousness questionnaire. If one has a score of more than 60% on all of these elements, an experience is labeled mystical. But aside from that, I think a mystical experience is a feeling of great unity with oneself, with the people around you, with the whole of existence and creation. It’s an experience of unity that’s not tied to any religion. Not all of the patients had experiences like that. Strong or peak emotional experiences are more related to the person, to their history, personality and individual life situation.

Do you think it’s important to determine the biological mechanisms of action, or is this secondary to you?

I’m not a researcher – I’m a therapist – so for me this is secondary. The most important thing for me is to see to it that it works, and the question about why it works and what happens exactly in the brain comes second. I think you can do the therapy without knowing what happens in terms of neurotransmitters, for instance. But of course, on a scientific level, this is interesting in its own right.

The outcome of your study seems to be very promising: all of the patients experienced a definite improvement. Could you describe how the LSD experiences affected the patients?

They were more relaxed, in a sense. Even though their life was threatened by a disease in a relatively short term, they said they felt more relaxed. This is not just a superficial sense of relief, like the release of muscular tension. It’s on a more existential level. They felt it really broadened their mind, and that’s what they really appreciated about this therapy. Many of them said they learned to decide what really matters, what’s really important to them for the time that remains, and what they want and don’t want to do with this limited time that’s left for them.

The article also states that the results of your study are “flatter” than those of past research in the same area, which have shown “dramatic” improvement in about 1/3 of the patients, “moderate improvement” in another 1/3, and no improvement at all in the remaining 1/3. In your study, all patients experienced a significant and lasting improvement. How do you explain this difference?

First of all, the results we obtained with only 12 patients cannot be generalized, our sample was too small for that. So maybe our findings are not significant. Maybe the fact that no-one had dramatic improvements, but on the other hand none of the patients dismissed the therapy as having no effect at all, was just a chance event. On the other hand, I think what we do is closer to standard psychotherapy than to classic psychedelic therapy, where patients take a higher dosage and the experience is more dramatic, but the result maybe isn’t as long-lasting. With the moderate dosages we administer, the experience may not be as dramatic, but hopefully the effects are more sustainable. I think we’re not seeking dramatic changes as much as past researchers were, but rather sustained changes.

Another remarkable outcome was the lowered score for trait anxiety, which was sustained in the long term. Does this mean these people have experienced a stable change toward a less anxious personality?

Yes, this seems to be the case, because when we made a long-term evaluation of our results, we also reran the anxiety questionnaire, and we still had the same results as just after the LSD sessions. So we can say that in general the patients were less anxious, not only regarding state anxiety, which is more dependent on one’s present situation, but also regarding trait anxiety, which has to do with personality structure. This is extraordinary, in the sense that we only had two LSD sessions with each patient, and nevertheless there seems to be a deep change in attitude in the patients.

This finding is interesting in that it implies that this kind of treatment could potentially benefit a broader population, not just patients with life-threatening diseases.

Yes, of course, I agree. We have chosen this population because, as I said, the research had already been done, and we had to choose a specific population in order to carry out the research. But I think there are a lot of people who could benefit from this kind of therapy outside of this specific group of patients. Also, this is not only about anxiety. We measured anxiety because it’s easy to measure, but this therapy impacts the whole personality.

You mentioned past research by Stanislav Grof, who has developed one of the few models of the psychedelic experience, with a strong emphasis on perinatal experiences, which he also used in his work with terminally ill patients. Were you interested in testing this model in your study?

No, we didn’t verify this, for several reasons. I think it’s an interesting model, but it’s also kind of a hypothesis. It’s Grof’s system, his way of looking at what happens, and I think one can look at what happens under other premises. We do not put that much emphasis on verifying theories, this is not our aim. Also, Grof’s theory doesn’t fit my personal therapeutic background very well, which is less psychoanalytical.

In a previous interview, Matthew Johnson from Johns Hopkins University told us that end-of-life anxiety would be the first indication for which psychedelic treatment would become available as a legal option. He suggested this might happen in as little as ten years in the US. Do you share his optimism?

No. I think at the moment we live in a great era for psychedelic research, because there’s a lot going on worldwide, or at least in several countries in the world. It’s really my hope that we are at the edge of a true restart of psychedelic research. Nevertheless, this is not a mainstream process. I mean, at the moment, we’re lucky that we can go on, but there are obstacles to be overcome to establish these therapies. For instance, there’s no perspective that LSD could become a prescription drug. Maybe, in the best case, I think LSD could move from Schedule I to Schedule II or III, which means one can obtain exceptions for treatment under certain circumstances. But then it would still be available only for exceptional cases. To become a standard treatment, you should have a real option to treat people regularly with LSD, outside of scientific research premises. And to go the whole way from research to treatment, without having to register the drug, is quite a tricky thing. So I’m not sure Matthew Johnson is right, but if he is, and I’m wrong, I would really be happy. With MDMA it’s a bit different. MAPS is really working to make MDMA a prescription drug. And maybe in 10 years, PTSD could be treated with MDMA as a regular treatment. But I think with psychedelic drugs like psilocybin or LSD this will not be the case.

Your study was the first study on LSD in human subjects after decades. How do you explain the fact that, although LSD is a ‘classic’ psychedelic, it took this long to see it come back to the forefront of this second wave of psychedelic research?

I think that’s because LSD has by far the most difficult reputation. LSD is really “the hippie drug”, the drug of the counterculture. This reputation is definitely a big obstacle for LSD to become a medicine again. There’s a whole lot of prejudice against LSD, and I think that’s the main reason. The second reason is the duration of its action. LSD is quite long-acting, which means that if you want to work with it, it takes a lot of human resources. You have to be prepared to work one full day with a single patient, which makes it more difficult to work with than MDMA or psilocybin.

Switzerland seems to be very productive in psychedelic research in Europe. How do you explain this?

I think Switzerland has a certain tradition of research, on drugs and addiction in particular. As you may know, in the 1990s, it was one of the first countries to give heroin to addicts, and I think in this context it’s easier to get permission for drug research. Also, Switzerland is a small country, where personal contact is easier and more important. And finally, regarding my own LSD research, I would say luck also came into play. We were the right people in the right place at the right moment. If the ethical committee had denied us permission for this study, their answer would have been final, you can’t just make another attempt and hope for success. So I think I applied exactly at the right time.

Could it also have something to do with Albert Hofmann’s legacy? The first new LSD research took place in Switzerland, the country where it was discovered…

Maybe this is a factor too. Albert Hofmann always had a good reputation in Switzerland, he was a well-known and highly regarded researcher. But I don’t think this was a decisive element in the approval of the study.

Do you have any plans for future psychedelic studies you would like to carry out?

At the moment I have no plans for psychedelic studies, because I work in a private practice, I’m not a university researcher. I would like to do some research again, but only with a link to an academic institution and research team. In the eight years since I did my study, it’s become increasingly difficult to start new psychedelic research, because the restrictions on human research in general are on the rise, so for people like me working in an office, there’s almost no chance of doing research. Therefore I would need some link to a university. I do have some connections, but there is no specific project in the planning. And there’s also the question of financing.

If you had absolute freedom, what kind of research would you like to do with psychedelics?

That’s a good question. I’d love to have that kind of freedom! I would do two things. I would start a researchers’ training group, to train young academics who are interested in this work, so that they could learn how to conduct psychedelic therapy, and we’d have the next generation of psychedelic therapists who would be trained, who would be experienced in a legal context, who could talk about it. And second, I would carry on this end-of-life research. The study I did was only a pilot study with 12 patients. I’d like to do the same with 30 or 50 people, in group settings, just to show statistically significant results can be obtained that prove the efficacy of this method. These are my two dreams.

Second part of special issue compiled by OPEN published

December 6, 2021 / Articles, OPEN Lectures, Public Lectures, Publications, Research / By

cdarcoverAt the end of last month we published the first part of a special issue on the beneficial effects of psychedelics in the treatment of addiction of the scientific journal CDAR. Now, the second part has been published with three more articles on this subject.

In the first article, Robin Mackenzie argues that too little attention is paid to how psychedelics might positively influence both one’s life and one’s death. It is her contention that too often, neuroscientific research focuses on remedying diseases or disorders. Instead, she argues for cognitive liberty and posits that neuroscience should illuminate the role psychedelics might play in improving well-being and ‘human flourishing’.

A review by Mitch Liester traces the turbulent history of LSD, from its initial use as a ‘psychotomimetic’ (a substance that mimics psychosis-like states of consciousness) to its employment as a pharmacological aid in helping ‘addicted’ patients and its widespread association with counterculture movements in the 1960s. Liester provides an overview of its pharmacology, neurobiology and a detailed phenomenology of its subjective effects. The author argues that it is time for an unbiased reexamination of LSD’s potential as a pharmacological adjunct in addiction treatment.

Recently, studies at Johns Hopkins University have drawn attention to the significance of transcendental or mystical aspects of the psychedelic experience. These studies suggest a pivotal role for mystical-type experiences in promoting wellbeing, leading to measurable positive changes in the behaviour, attitudes, and values of healthy participants. The rigorous research study conducted by Albert Garcia-Romeu and colleagues at the same university provides further insight in how psilocybin-occasioned mystical experiences translate to the context of heavy tobacco dependence. Their clinical pilot study shows abstinence rates after psilocybin treatment that are significantly higher than that of conventional treatments for tobacco dependence, which motivates an important discussion on the future of addiction treatment.

The articles are open access and can be found here.

We are very proud to be in the position to share these articles with you and would like to extend our gratitude to all the writers and peer reviewers that have helped us in putting this special issue together.

Article Overview
Editorial (Thematic Issue: Introduction to ‘Beneficial Effects of Psychedelics with a Special Focus on Addictions’)
What Can Neuroscience Tell Us About the Potential of Psychedelics in Healthcare? How the Neurophenomenology of Psychedelics Research Could Help us to Flourish Throughout Our Lives, as Well as to Enhance Our Dying
A Review of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) in the Treatment of Addictions: Historical Perspectives and Future Prospects
Psilocybin-Occasioned Mystical Experiences in the Treatment of Tobacco Addiction

Special issue compiled by OPEN published in scientific journal

December 6, 2021 / Articles, OPEN Lectures, Public Lectures, Publications, Research / By

cdarcoverThe OPEN Foundation is proud to announce that we compiled two special issues of the journal CDAR (Current Drug Abuse Reviews). The title of the Special Issues is ‘Beneficial Effects of Psychedelics with a Special Focus on Addictions’.

The idea of this special issue originated at the Interdisciplinary Conference on Psychedelic Research, organised by the OPEN Foundation in 2012. This special issue of CDAR takes an interdisciplinary approach to the topic of psychedelics and mental health, while maintaining a particular focus on applications of psychedelics in the fields of substance abuse and addiction. This special issue also takes a critical look at some widespread assumptions about psychedelics, introduces new ideas and suggests novel directions for future research.

For instance, in the first article, Beatriz Labate and Kenneth Tupper take a critical approach towards the instruments of modern science. They reflect upon the Amazonian brew ayahuasca, which is rapidly gaining popularity, both from individuals interested in experiencing its effects as well as from scientists studying this plant admixture. Drawing from the ever-expanding and interdisciplinary field of ayahuasca studies, Tupper and Labate question the possibility of absolute objectivity when studying ayahuasca and other psychedelics. They also look at how psychedelics are generally regarded and how these conceptualizations influence current research and the scientists pursuing their investigations.

How should one respond to individuals undergoing a difficult experience after ingesting a psychedelic substance? Is it possible to transform such a negative experience into a beneficial one? These questions are at the heart of Maria Carvalho and colleagues’ article. The authors provide a detailed account of how an integrated service that offers ‘compassionate care’ to music festival participants may be effective in mitigating the negative effects occasioned by the use of psychedelics, taken in an unfamiliar and highly stimulating environment. Their article shows how an intervention that combines principles from harm reduction, risk reduction and crisis intervention can effectively deal with the unintended negative consequences of recreational (psychedelic) drug use. This increases knowledge on the risks and benefits of altered states of consciousness – not just those induced by psychedelic substances – for both the individual and professional caregivers.

In the first wave of scientific interest in psychedelics in the 1950s and 1960s, their effects on ‘alcoholism’ represented one of the early approaches. Michael Winkelman’s article reviews the historical evidence on the safety and efficacy of various psychedelics used as aids in the treatment of substance dependence disorders. The author also provides an overview of the various possible mechanisms of action that underlie the effectiveness of these therapies. Given the safety of psychedelics and the limited success of current conventional treatments in treating addiction, Winkelman argues that medical professionals have a moral duty to further pursue the investigation of treatment with psychedelics.

As the field of neurosciences makes its advances, more researchers look towards the potential offered by psychedelics in understanding the brain mechanisms underlying their idiosyncratic effects. Samuel Turton’s article provides unique insights in the subjective experiences of study participants. He describes the phenomenology of the experiences of fifteen participants in an fMRI-scanner after intravenous psilocybin administration.

Brazilian neuroscientist Rafael Guimarães dos Santos contributes to this special issue with a thorough review on how the extremely potent, but little investigated non-classical psychedelic Salvinorin A might be effective as a pharmacological agent in treating psychostimulant substance addiction. In his article, he reviews the available data on κ-opioid receptor agonists and their mechanisms of action in animal studies, presenting a novel perspective on the potential effectiveness of this psychedelic substance in the treatment of addiction to psychostimulants such as amphetamine and cocaine.

The next part of the special issue will feature articles by Mitch Liester, Robin MacKenzie and Albert Garcia-Romeu, Roland Griffiths and Matthew Johnson.

The articles are open access and can be found here.

Article overview

Editorial (Thematic Issue: Introduction to ‘Beneficial Effects of Psychedelics with a Special Focus on Addictions’)

Ayahuasca, Psychedelic Studies and Health Sciences: The Politics of Knowledge and Inquiry into an Amazonian Plant Brew

Crisis Intervention Related to the Use of Psychoactive Substances in Recreational Settings – Evaluating the Kosmicare Project at Boom Festival

Psychedelics as Medicines for Substance Abuse Rehabilitation: Evaluating Treatments with LSD, Peyote, Ibogaine and Ayahuasca

A Qualitative Report on the Subjective Experience of Intravenous Psilocybin Administered in an fMRI Environment

Salvinorin A and Related Compounds as Therapeutic Drugs for Psychostimulant-Related Disorders

Classic psychedelic use is associated with reduced psychological distress and suicidality

December 6, 2021 / Anxiety disorders / PTSD, Articles, Depression, Psychology, Publications, Research / By

A8_thumbnail_500x400In a population-based survey study that was published earlier this month, an association was found between the use of classic psychedelics and reduced psychological distress and suicidality [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”][1]. The researchers included the data of 191.382 individuals that participated in the annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) [2] between 2008 and 2012, and made a comparison between the psychological well being of classic psychedelic users and non-users. Classic psychedelic users were categorized as such if they met the criteria of having used ayahuasca, mescaline, LSD, peyote or San Pedro and/or psilocybin at least once in their lifetime. To rule out the possibility that differences between the groups of users and non-users could be attributed to factors other than classic psychedelics, the researchers statistically controlled the demographical factors age, gender, ethno-racial identity, educational attainment, annual household income, marital status, self-reported risky behavior and lifetime illicit drug use. No solid claim can be made about causality from this correlation, but the results are in line with earlier hypotheses that the effects of psychedelics may have qualities that could be helpful in modulating suicide risk [3]. As a current estimate, about 7% of the population worldwide suffers from mental health disorders [4]. The results of this study are a hopeful answer to the request from the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention (2014) to develop novel interventions that aim at suicide prevention.

 
[1] Hendricks et al. (2015).
[2] The NSDUH survey is the annual survey that is conducted by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. The survey aims at estimating the prevalence of substance use and mental illnesses.
[3] An extensive overview of earlier research can be found in the third and fourth paragraph of the article of Hendricks et al. (2015).
[4] This is based on the estimate of the World Health Organization (2001) that about half a billion people worldwide experience mental health problems and that the current world population is estimated at 7.2 billion (United States Census Bureau, 2015)
 
References

Hendricks, P. S., Thorne, C. B., Clark, C. B., Coombs, D. W., & Johnson, M. W. (2015). Classic psychedelic use is associated with reduced psychological distress and suicidality in the United States adult population. Journal of Psychopharmacology. [Abstract]
National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention: Research Prioritization Task Force (2014). A prioritized research agenda for suicide prevention: An action plan to save lives. National Institute of Mental Health and the Research Prioritization Task Force, Rockville, Maryland.
United States Census Bureau (2015). U.S. and World Population Clock. As retrieved on January 17. from http://www.census.gov/popclock/
World Health Organization (2001). The World health report 2001: Mental health: New understanding, new hope. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

14 May - Psychedelics & Psychosis with Phoebe Friesen and Dirk Corstens

REGISTER NOW!
X