
Psilocybin shows success in medical trials - gnosis
http://www.salon.com/2011/09/28/the_new_lsd_cure/
======
sp332
Heidegger posited that our society's anxiety over death was artificial. Not
the instinctive fear of death, but the constant worrying. This also leads to
massive denial of the reality of death in popular culture (at least your own
death; death is something that happens to "other people"). He proposed that
people would be happier if they stopped denying their own mortality and also
stopped being afraid of it.

So maybe the LSD and psilocybin just cut through the socialized anxiety crap
and give people a more natural or normal view of death, among other things.

~~~
hosh
You can reach the same insight by doing enough vipassana meditation. I've
talked with people who, having gained this insight through LSD, psilocybin, or
other methods, gain an interest in meditation.

Either way, it's not so much that it cuts through socialized anxiety. Another
insight you gain from this kind of experience is realizing how much you
participated in creating the socialized anxiety within you. The anxiety
doesn't go away so much as you become less attached to it. Being less attached
to it, you see how it no longer serves a purpose in your life, and you're free
to pay attention to the stuff that is more important. Like experiencing what
time you have left -- and make no mistake, whether you have a terminal cancer,
or not (or whether we make it to technology that allows someone to transfer
personality into silicon), you too will eventually die.

One day, I hope that we'll have socially sanctioned initiations, not just for
treating existential anxiety in people facing terminal illness. It would cut
away a lot of teenage adolescent bullshit, and a lot of midlife bullshit.
Having experienced that "cosmic force" invites people to really connect with
each other, something far more meaningful than our current crop of "social
networks." So this isn't just about having a meaningful experience of death.
It's about having a meaningful experience of _life_.

~~~
rada
_You can reach the same insight by doing enough vipassana meditation._

If someone posted an article about a new supersonic jet that takes you from
New York to Sydney in under 4 hours, you could make a comment about being able
to do the same by foot. You would be technically correct however it wouldn't
be a very useful comment, given the difference between several hours and a
lifetime.

~~~
hosh
There is something interesting in the Taoist canon, though I imagine many
teachers in other traditions know of this.

People don't know why they should be practicing mindfulness. And then for
whatever reason they gain insight -- be that practice, or ritual, or
psychedelics -- they get it. A lot of things open up. There's a whole layer of
meaning in textual traditions that opens up, and you realize a _lot_ of people
have been trying to say the same things. And you wonder how you missed it?

And then you want to go back. Now you jump into the practice diligently, to
try to get back to that peak experience. The thing is, peak experiences are
just that. Like all things, they come and go.

Coming through the psychedelics, it is easy to spend a lot of time taking hit
after hit to get back to that peak experience. It was part of why people who
have not been initiated into this fear it. They see people drifting out from
the real world, and these people then say crazy things like, "well, reality is
much bigger than you think."

The thing is, this happens in any mystical traditions. Someone who realized
these insights while sitting on a cushion starts become uninterested in
anything but sitting on that cushion.

Which is ironic because all of this is about experiencing reality, not
escaping from it. That is another reason I pointed out the connection with
vipassana. The point is to _experience_ reality, something that seems
counterintuitive when people talk about psychedelics.

Usually, you have a sangha -- people who are cultivating with you, whatever
the modality -- helps you stay grounded.

Generally speaking, once you had some psychedelic experience, you'd find
meditating much easier. It's the journey, not the destination. Of course :-)

~~~
kamaal
I get your point.

But isn't meditation more like "You don't get it, until you get it" kind of a
thing?

I mean I haven't read anything so far that describes the process of mediation
as do Step 1) -> Step 2) .. All I get is description of what meditation can do
and even that too more or less put down like- "You will not know how it feels,
until you feel it".

How to Meditate? I hope someday I get some clear answer to this question.

~~~
snickell
How to meditate: a simple, permissive, breathing meditation. A nearly-
identical form of this meditation can be found in most 'meditation-based'
systems. Its pretty universal.

What you do: 1) Sit in a comfortable position, without shifting around, in a
quiet place, with your eyes closed 2) Primary Focus: to constantly feel
yourself breathing 3) Do this for about an hour

Likely Contingencies: a) You "need" to shift around. Nothing wrong with that.
What happens if you don't? Keep feeling your breath! b) You will start
thinking. Nothing wrong with that. But can you think while constantly feeling
your breath? Or are you multi-tasking now? Keep feeling your breath! c) a+b:
You think about needing to shift around. Nothing wrong with that. Keep feeling
your breath! d) You might wonder if the hour is over or not. Alternatively, if
you set an alarm, you will wonder if its properly set, and if maybe you should
check it. Keep feeling your breath! e) You might need to do a million little
things, check the dog's water, the task queue, the pot on the stove, whatever.
Keep feeling your breath! f) You will find yourself thinking about how you are
now 'feeling your breath'. Oops, you probably just stopped feeling your breath
to think that thought. Keep feeling your breath!

What does it mean to "constantly feel yourself breathing"? a) It means your
attention/focus is completely on the feeling of breathing. Your conscious
existence is the sensation of being 'a breathing thing'. b) Corrolary: you
probably aren't 'thinking in language'. In my experience, its not common to
multitask thoughts 'in language' with a focus on physical sensation. c) As you
begin meditating (first several times? more? less? depends...) You will
context switch back and forth constantly between 'thinking in language' and
'feeling your breath'.

Why is this meditation interesting? The best reply I can give is, "Isn't it
interesting enough that you can't just do such a simple thing as watch your
breath without thinking about a bunch of other things?"

------
JumpCrisscross
David Nutt, former head of Britain's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs,
amusingly points out that "Francis Crick, who discovered the double helix
structure of DNA with James Watson, and Kary Mullis, who invented the
polymerase chain reaction (PCR), had both taken [LSD, another psychedelic],
and attributed some of their understanding and insights to it". He also notes
that "l'Avenue des Champs Elysees in Paris is named after the Elysian Fields
in ancient Greece, where people went annually to eat psychedelic mushrooms"

Nutt was removed from his role for suggesting British drug classification
needed to correlate more with drug harm. The absurdity is illustrated by the
British people having the "ridiculous situation that if you find magic
mushrooms in the wild you can sit in the field and munch them to your heart’s
content, but if you take them home you could go to prison for up to seven
years, and if you give them to a friend you’ll be supplying a Class A drug and
you could spend 14 years in jail."

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-Air-
ebook/dp/B009KCL...](http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Without-Hot-Air-
ebook/dp/B009KCLHXI/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1360827484&sr=8-1) _Drugs
Without the Hot Air: Minimising the Harms of Legal and Illegal Drugs_ (2012)

~~~
elliptic
Quick note - Nutt is incorrect. The Elysian Fields were a Greek domain of the
dead. He probably means the city of Eleusis, which was the location of the
famous mysteries, during which some (1) speculate that the participants did in
fact use psychoactive substances, although I believe ergot is the most
frequently suggested culprit.

1 - it's by no means universally accepted. E.g, I don't believe Walter Burkert
thinks much of the idea.

------
hudibras
I think Salon's editor messed up the title of the article (and, by extension,
the HN title). The article describes recent trials for psilocybin and MDMA,
not LSD. There were certainly LSD trials in the '60s but if there have been
some recent ones the article doesn't mention them.

~~~
orasis
I'm also curious about the facts, at one point he sates that 30mg of LCD was
measured out, which is a pretty insane amount of LSD from my understanding.

~~~
amckenna
_From a massive steel combination safe they removed a bottle containing one
gram of synthesized psilocybin, the psychoactive agent animating the
200-member fungus family commonly known as “magic mushrooms.”_

 _The Johns Hopkins team has identified the golden mean — between 20 and 30
milligrams, roughly equal to a good fistful of strong ‘shrooms — to maximize
peak experience while minimizing transitory anxiety._

The article said 20 to 30 milligrams of psilocybin which is the hallucinogen
in shrooms.

------
steeve
My only concern now is how do you find pure LSD/Psylocybin? As in, how do you
know that you're buying what you think you're buying?

Obviously in a controlled, medical environment the problem is void.

NB: I am NOT advocating drug use/abuse of any kind. This is a legitimate
question I've been asking myself for quite some time.

~~~
jsn
It's pretty simple with LSD. You should buy it in blotter form. A piece of
blotter can only contain so much of active material (fractions of a
milligram). It's too small a dose for almost any psychoactive substances to
have any effect on you. LSD and DOB are rare exceptions to this rule. So if
you have something on a blotter, it's either LSD or DOB.

Now, DOB is very bitter, and LSD has no taste. If you put a piece of blotter
in your mouth, and it tastes bitter, just spit it out -- that's probably DOB.
Otherwise, it's LSD, and it's pure.

~~~
jimwhitson
The first part of your message is a rather dangerous misconception. Many, many
drugs can and have been dispensed on blotter paper, often as LSD mimics. For
dozens of examples, see DEA Microgram bulletins passim
(<http://www.justice.gov/dea/pr/micrograms.shtml>).

The point about bitterness is absolutely correct though, and certainly any
purported LSD blotter that tastes bitter should be suspect.

Interestingly, at least one non-psychedelic has been found distributed on
blotter paper: alprazolam (See
<http://www.justice.gov/dea/pr/micrograms/2008/mg0508.pdf>), for which I'd
tentatively expect the bitterness rule also to work.

~~~
LSDsockpuppet
It's worth noting that you can buy LSD test kits on Amazon (with Prime
shipping, even!): <http://www.amazon.com/NIK-Drug-Test-Kit-LSD/dp/B002ATUECS/>

~~~
Alex3917
Those only test for the presence of any tryptamine, not LSD specifically. So
even if it tests positive you could still be getting DOM/DOB/DOI. Which is
bad, since those can kill you or else have serious negative effects if you
take too much.

~~~
munchhausen
DOM, DOB and DOI are not tryptamines, but rather psychedelic amphetamines.
This is an important distinction, as it means that the most common test kit
(Ehrlich reagent), will not confuse them for LSD, contrary to what you said.

It is however true that there are substances which both fit on a blotter, and
are indole psychedelics - e.g. 5-MeO-AMT, or other (other than LSD, that is)
ergolines, such as LSB, ALD-52 (though these are extremely rare and (likely)
share the safety profile of LSD). The Ehrlich test is not capable of
distinguishing between different indoles, so you may get a case of mistaken
identity in this scenario.

~~~
Alex3917
Oops, didn't realize the DOx family were psychedelic amphetamines. Thanks for
correcting this.

------
acd
People should be free to take whatever soft drugs they like. We will not win
the war against drugs with prohibition, just look at when alcohol was
forbidden in United states during the 30ies that led to the rise of Al Capone
and similar mafia organizations.

The solution is simple make it unprofitable for criminal originations to
manufacture drugs by making them legal.

The current drug laws are also hypocrazy as long range bomber fighters are
allowed to take light doses of Amphetamine to stay awake during long missions.
So the state are allowed todo what its citizens are not allowed todo.

~~~
girvo
Citizens can be prescribed (meth)amphetamines for medical usage. Also, the air
force has moved to Modafinil IIRC.

------
sneak
psilocybin != LSD

The modern study written about in this article uses psilocybin, not LSD.

They are entirely different substances, with different effects.

~~~
raverbashing
Interesting how they're using synthetic psilocybin, maybe for control
purposes, but I thought it would be easier to obtain it from the original
sources

~~~
gnosis
Alicia Danforth, research assistant to Dr. Charles Grob (who ran the
psilocybin research study mentioned in this article) goes in to detail as to
their reasons for using synthetic psilocybin in this recording of her talk at
the Burning Man festival.[1]

The talk is also well worth hearing for the other details she gives of this
important research.

[1] -
[http://www.matrixmasters.net/archive/Playalogues/131-Danfort...](http://www.matrixmasters.net/archive/Playalogues/131-Danforth2007Playalogue.mp3)

------
pinchyfingers
Fear, depression, anxiety, misplaced energy, clouded perception, debilitating
ego...

Yes, psychedelics can alleviate these problems. I could've told you that when
I was 14, and I'm sure that many intelligent, creative, productive people will
agree. Anecdotal evidence, I know.

Although I haven't touched anything stronger than caffeine for well over 7
years, I AM advocating the use of tryptamines and phenethylamines

------
JulianMorrison
I'm a little surprised that science is so surprised that this changes people.

Basically, what it does is teach, rather than chemically alter. The chemical
goes away; the lesson does not.

What I'd do a study on, if I was studying this, is combining it with "spaced
repetition" - that is, treat the pill like a flash card, to maximize retention
of lessons.

------
spotman
20mg is an awful high dose. The usual dosage is between 75-1000 micrograms.
1000 still being awful high. (and 20 milligrams, is a _lot_ more than that!)
Wonder if its a typo, of it they are just going balls out.

~~~
Cushman
That dose is referring to psilocybin, I believe. 20,000µg would be a
psychosis-inducing dose of LSD.

~~~
s_baby
Every psychedelic I've taken has had an upper-bound beyond which increasing
dose didn't really do much. Granted I've never taken astronomical doses of LSD
but a "heroic dose" of psilocybin will take you places a "heroic dose" of LSD
can't.

~~~
Cushman
I'm sure it's possible, but I haven't heard of anyone eating a sheet of acid
who wasn't at least a little messed up afterwards.

~~~
Spakman
In case you missed this article about monster doses of LSD, you might be
interested:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5210596>

~~~
Cushman
I did miss that— thanks for the rerun.

------
brd
For anyone interested in this sort of stuff, The Spirit Molecule was a great
read. [http://www.amazon.com/DMT-Molecule-Revolutionary-Near-
Death-...](http://www.amazon.com/DMT-Molecule-Revolutionary-Near-Death-
Experiences/dp/0892819278)

------
Mvandenbergh
>Huxley himself would famously request and receive a large intravenous dose of
LSD on his own deathbed the following year.

No, it was intramuscular. His last written request (he was no longer able to
speak) was " "LSD, 100 µg, IM".

~~~
gnosis
The story of Aldous Huxley's death and his wife's decision to administer LSD
to him is very touching and well worth reading.[1]

[1] -
[https://www.erowid.org/culture/characters/huxley_laura/huxle...](https://www.erowid.org/culture/characters/huxley_laura/huxley_laura_article1.shtml)

------
northband
Love seeing the rise in interest in psychedelics posts here. I have always had
a strong interest in 'entheogens'. Its hard to write about such a subject
matter due to their powerful nature. All I can say is early on it was about
fun and partying, but over time the lesson I learned was they are powerful
tools not to be taken because you have them but instead when you need them.
Lately my interest has been in ayahuasca. Seems from what I have read its more
of a healing tool.

------
ChuckMcM
I tell you what, I'm not driving anywhere near "Medical LSD Dispensaries" :-)

~~~
mediacrisis
No need, you can float :)

------
derwiki
In case it wasn't obvious to anyone else, this post is from fall 2011.

------
rglover
_This glowing report — based on a single dose of a naturally occurring, non-
addictive, low-toxicity substance — sounds impossible. Surely one pill can’t
succeed where months of traditional psychotherapy and antidepressants usually
fail. According to science, that’s not how drugs work. It’s foreign to the
model._

Really? Have people consumed so much lack of common sense kool-aid that they
believe humans know better than the Earth? From a purely birkenstockian point
of view, it should be obvious that these _naturally occurring_ things are
there to help us. Why else would endless species of plants/fungi/etc. happen
to be hanging out at our feet?

The mistake we've made is that we're too skeptical. Instead of believing in
what's right in front of us, we choose synthesized drugs and the ideals of
people no more keyed into existence than you or I.

Be aware of what's around you and learn about why most of what they say is
harmful or "illegal" isn't and shouldn't be. Start with marijuana.

~~~
7rurl
The Earth is not an intelligent agent. The Earth doesn't "know" anything.
Also, plenty of plants have evolved to be poisonous to prevent animals
(including humans) from eating them, so you can't just blindly go around
eating any mushroom or berry you find in nature. Natural does not always mean
"good for you".

~~~
rglover
_you can't just blindly go around eating any mushroom or berry you find in
nature. Natural does not always mean "good for you_

 _Of course_ it doesn't. That's not what I was suggesting. Rather, when people
are told that something is illegal or cannot help them, for them to conduct
research into it independently. Even better, seek out studies like the one
mentioned in this article and participate in them.

Concerning the Earth as an intelligent agent, can we be so sure? It's been
around for an awfully long time to not know a thing or two.

------
friendly_chap
Wow, it only took us (the west) 60 years. That's what I call a progress! Not
so fast please, a couple of billion people could live miserable lives before
we stop the bullshitting around psychedelics and spirituality.

------
prawks
Interesting. I'm curious what measures they take to prevent a "bad trip"

~~~
montecarl
I imagine that being able to carefully control the purity, dosage and the
environment will go a long way. It is unfortunate that it is impossible to get
illegal drugs of known purity, concentration, and quality.

~~~
refurb
If you can get approval to possess a Schedule I substance from the DEA, you
can purchase drugs such as LSD and psilocybin from companies that manufacture
them. They also come with certificates of analysis describing their purity.

[http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/etc/medialib/docs/Sigma/General_...](http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/etc/medialib/docs/Sigma/General_Information/deareq_usa.Par.0001.File.tmp/deareq_usa.pdf)

~~~
eric_bullington
I've just read a very interesting book after seeing it mentioned in HN's
earlier discussion of LSD. It's by Dr. Rick Strassman, who conducted the first
trials of a psychodelic held in the US in 20 years (using a potent psychodelic
called DMD). Even after his trial was approved by the FDA and DEA, he
struggled to find a supplier for human-quality DMT, although he had already
procured a sufficient quantity of laboratory-quality of DMT for testing
purposes.

It's a very interesting book -- I highly recommend it [0]. He's not a strong
writer in terms of narrative (I found the book's pacing to be jarring given
the intensity of experiences described), but he's very precise and describes
some very interesting work, and some amazing experiences had by his subjects
[0].

0\. <http://www.rickstrassman.com/>

------
gburt
Why did the title get changed to "psilocybin" when the article is clearly
about both psilocybin and MDMA and even mentions the original LSD title?

------
ahoyhere
The researchers deserve serious props for undertaking this research in this
climate, and whoever approved their study proposals for doing so. The positive
effects of halucinogens on depressed, dying, & addicted people have been
"known" for quite some time but not rigorously tested. Hopefully this is as
positive a sign as it seems.

EDIT: Here's an example - a meta-analysis in the Journal of Psychopharmacology
shows that LSD seems to have a hugely beneficial effect on alcoholism
[http://www.nature.com/news/lsd-helps-to-treat-
alcoholism-1.1...](http://www.nature.com/news/lsd-helps-to-treat-
alcoholism-1.10200)

~~~
dfc
I'm curious why you think these researchers deserve more props than any other
researchers investigating helping people with terminal illness? And in what
climate? now? 2009? 2010?

~~~
betterunix
We live in a political climate where it is considered acceptable to have teams
of soldiers attack civilian homes if there is even a suspicion that they are
producing, transporting, or distributing the drugs described in this article.
Our politicians firmly believe that propaganda promoting such approaches to
drug policy should be forced down the throats of grade school children, and
that those children should be asked to report their parents' activities to the
government in the name of enforcing drug policy. That is a pretty rough
political climate for a researcher investigating positive or medical uses for
those drugs. There is also the issue of having to be careful not to tell the
public how to manufacture these drugs in their kitchens, as Alexander Shulgin
discovered after a team of soldiers attacked his lab.

~~~
dfc
Can you give more info on the soldiers attacking his lab? I have only found
references to a raid on his home and lab by the DEA and local LEOs.

~~~
betterunix
If men with assault rifles, body armor, grenades, who use military tactics in
their operations are not soldiers, what do you call them? The DEA is a
paramilitary force, soldiers in all but name.

~~~
dfc
I don't know why I did not pick up on that subtext. It must have been the
_attack_ component that threw me off. It is nice to see that there are no
rhetoric asymmetries in the "war on drugs."

"If men with assault rifles, body armor, grenades, who use military tactics in
their operations are not soldiers, what do you call them? "

Usually a Special Weapons and Tactics team and in Canada I think they are
known as Emergency Task Forces. Does the DEA deploy units with fragmentation
and/or incendiary grenades?

------
largesse
Interesting, but we live in a country where the Mayor of New York (Bloomberg)
is attempting to actively restrict the use of narcotics for people in pain in
order to keep them out of the hands of abusers.

We live in a pathetically immature culture.

