OPEN Foundation

J. Cole

Perceived harm, motivations for use and subjective experiences of recreational psychedelic 'magic' mushroom use

Abstract

Background: Data on actual harm of magic mushrooms suggest that toxicity and abuse potential is low, however, their legal status suggests otherwise. We aimed to gauge perception of harm of magic mushrooms in both users and mushroom-naïve participants. We also aimed to observe differences in expectations of effects between users and mushroom-naïve participants, and whether motivations for use predicted their expected effects.

Method: In total, 73 polydrug users with experience of using magic mushrooms and 78 mushroom-naïve participants completed an online survey. We asked participants to rank a list of 10 substances from most dangerous to least dangerous and questioned them about expectation of effect using a modified magic mushroom expectation questionnaire. Users were asked about their motivations for using magic mushrooms.

Results: Both groups perceive mushrooms to be safer than heroin, cocaine, prescription painkillers, gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB), ecstasy, tobacco and alcohol. However, the mushroom-naïve group ranked mushrooms as significantly more dangerous than the user group. Non-users reported greater expectancy for negative intoxication. Users reported greater expected entactogenic, prosocial, aesthetic and mood effects, and perceptual alterations. Finally, expectant effects of mushroom use were associated with different motivations for use, for example using for personal psychotherapy was associated with expectation of increased entactogenic effects and decreased negative effects.

Conclusion: Our data suggest a general perception of harm that is in line with data on actual harm, but at odds with current legal classifications. Future clinical investigations may require management of negative intoxication expectation of participants with no prior experience of psilocybin.

Roberts, C. A., Osborne-Miller, I., Cole, J., Gage, S. H., & Christiansen, P. (2020). Perceived harm, motivations for use and subjective experiences of recreational psychedelic ‘magic’mushroom use. Journal of Psychopharmacology34(9), 999-1007; 10.1177/0269881120936508
Link to full text

MDMA and the “Ecstasy Paradigm”

Abstract

For nearly 30 years, there has been a steady flow of research papers highlighting the dangers of MDMA and the implications for ecstasy users. After such a long time, it would be reasonable to expect that these dangers would be obvious due to the large number of ecstasy users. The available evidence does not indicate that there are millions of ecstasy users experiencing any problems linked to their ecstasy use. The “precautionary principle” suggests that, in the absence of knowing for certain, “experts” should argue that MDMA be avoided. However, this may have been taken too far, as the dire warnings do not seem to be reducing with the lack of epidemiological evidence of clinically relevant problems. The “ecstasy paradigm” is one way of articulating this situation, in that the needs of research funders and publication bias lead to a specific set of subcultural norms around what information is acceptable in the public domain. By digging a little deeper, it is easy to find problems with the evidence base that informs the public debate around MDMA. The key question is whether it is acceptable to maintain this status quo given the therapeutic potential of MDMA.

Cole, J. C. (2014). MDMA and the “Ecstasy Paradigm”. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 46(1), 44–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2014.878148
Link to full text

30 April - Q&A with Rick Strassman

X