Promising Early Results From Largest-Ever Trial Testing LSD For Anxiety 66
Biopharmaceutical company MindMed has announced the first topline data from a novel Phase 2 trial testing high doses of LSD as a treatment for anxiety. The results indicate one to two LSD sessions can generate rapid and sustained reductions to anxiety, however, significantly larger trials will be needed to validate these findings. New Atlas reports: This new trial was conducted at University Hospital Basel in Switzerland. The trial was randomized, and placebo-controlled with a crossover design enrolling 46 participants. The participants completed two high-dose (200-microgram) LSD sessions, six weeks apart. The primary endpoint was a reduction in anxiety 16 weeks after the second LSD session, as measured on a scale called STAI (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), a common test used to quantify anxiety.
The data revealed by MindMed indicates 65 percent (13 out of 20) patients in the LSD group demonstrated a clinically significant reduction in STAI scores of more than 30 percent. Only nine percent of the placebo group (two out of 22) showed similar clinical improvements. The results indicate the treatment was generally safe with only mild adverse effects reported by most subjects. The announcement did report one serious adverse treatment event during an LSD session described as "acute transient anxiety and delusions." This subject required sedatives but no long-term adverse effects were noted. [...] MindMed is now beginning a Phase 2b trial to expand on these findings and further explore LSD as a treatment for anxiety disorders.
The data revealed by MindMed indicates 65 percent (13 out of 20) patients in the LSD group demonstrated a clinically significant reduction in STAI scores of more than 30 percent. Only nine percent of the placebo group (two out of 22) showed similar clinical improvements. The results indicate the treatment was generally safe with only mild adverse effects reported by most subjects. The announcement did report one serious adverse treatment event during an LSD session described as "acute transient anxiety and delusions." This subject required sedatives but no long-term adverse effects were noted. [...] MindMed is now beginning a Phase 2b trial to expand on these findings and further explore LSD as a treatment for anxiety disorders.
It's medicine now? (Score:1)
Ok, where can I get the proper disease?
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:1)
War?
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
No it was actually developed in secret by the CIA for use in mind control and interrogation experiments. It's meant to break your brain and it can if you're too careless. Luckily they shelved it because it wasn't very reliable at doing that, and required a lot of accompanying stimulus (torture) to get full effect.
Re: (Score:1)
(Modded down by CIA.)
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Your thinking of MDMA, which yes has excellent results with PTSD. Basically you dose someone up on MDMA and then do regular psychotherapy with them. Because of the MDMA they can recall and talk about the traumatic event without triggering the run-away andrenaline spike that characterizes PTSD, meaning regular old fashion talky talk psychology can actually work properly. Even after a few sessions war vets have talked about finally being able to think about their service and that bad things they experienced without going into shivers and freaking out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:4, Informative)
No, It was invented by a guy at Sandoz who had figured out how to synthesize the medically useful compounds in ergot. He started playing around, creating all kinds of variants in hope of finding some more medically useful compounds. That included LSD, which Sandoz decided was not medically useful. But he "had a feeling" about it, and started dosing himself.
Google sandoz lsd and read the Atlantic article that pops up
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:1)
You know, before some ENORMOUS asshole figured out extremely high doses of it could get you high and basically ruined research into the drug for decades.
Dr. Albert Hoffmann, the guy who first synthesied LSD, was the guy who first got really high on it. Did you just call _him_ "some ENORMOUS asshole"?
Re: (Score:3)
It was originally made while searching for drugs to treat migraine headaches. A closely related drug (ergotamine tartrate) was also studied, and is still prescribed for this use.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't claim to know what the origin of LSD is, but fascinated that we have half a dozen takes right here.
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, the original guy is wrong but the corrections are all parts of the same story. Albert Hoffman worked at Sandoz laboratory. He was working with compounds derived from ergot. He accidentally got some on his fingers and discovered the psychedelic effects. It's not half a dozen takes, it is different pieces of the same, single story.
Re: (Score:1)
Looking forward to the flesh interfaces, segmentation, hygiene beds and silver cylinders spontaneously appearing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It's medicine now? (Score:1)
"The Posting of a Loser" (Score:2, Insightful)
Fixed your subject for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like somebody found the LSD!
Re: (Score:2)
It starts up north from Hollywood
Placebo (Score:5, Interesting)
>"The trial was randomized, and placebo-controlled"
I have to ask- how do you placebo-control with "high doses of LSD"? I think it would be pretty obvious if you were in the control group, unless you have no idea what LSD is...
Re: (Score:2)
That part's pretty easy. You wouldn't be able to be double blind. But you don't have to tell participants what the medication is so they won't have any preconceptions on how they should feel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The study is even weirder:
Double-blind, placebo-controlled random-order cross-over trial using two LSD (200 g) and two placebo sessions with subjects acting as their own control.
Source: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2... [clinicaltrials.gov]
They tell the subject they're either getting LSD or a placebo and neither the research or patient is told which. And then later they reverse. Seems like it should be obvious to both the patient and the researcher, so calling it double-blind is probably not accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>And then later they reverse.
by the researcher not being told whether he is taking a placebo or LSD? :)
Re: (Score:2)
The next visit they get whatever dose they didn't get the first time - placebo vs LSD.
Re: (Score:2)
my version would have more interesting writeups . . .
Re:Placebo (Score:4)
No ethics board would approve such an experiment. Giving a large dose of LSD to a subject who has no idea what to expect would be a great way to TRIGGER latent psychological problems, not cure them.
Re:Placebo (Score:4, Interesting)
Given your username and your relatively low UID I just had to check on your posting history - I expected to find that the editors had made up a user and were pulling our legs. A comment from an apparently legit "Ellis D. Tripp" on an article about "LSD trips" - how cool is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Big Bads (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if you've noticed, but drugs have been increasingly decriminalized across the country. They aren't one of the "Big Bads" anymore.
Re: Big Bads (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
LSD gives serious brain damage
Voluminous Citation Needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Anxiety (Score:4, Funny)
Anxiety: The confusion created when one's mind overrides the body's basic desire to choke the living shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
This saying still holds true.
No need to deal (Score:1)
There is a drug for for coping.
There is a drug for relaxation.
No need to feel bad there is a drug for that.
No need to be depressed we have medication.
Yup, with enough pills you can feel great all the time.
Re: No need to deal (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, with enough pills you can feel great all the time.
That is, until some pharma-bro jacks up the price of the happy pills.
Re: No need to deal (Score:1)
Set and Setting (Score:4, Informative)
https://erowid.org/psychoactiv... [erowid.org]
Can you become dependent on psychedelic drugs? (Score:2)
When I had a six week course of radiotherapy for cancer, I found aspects of the therapy extremely distressing, specifically having my head clamped in a horrible mask, to make sure the radiation went to the right place. I asked for some kind of sedative, to make life a bit easier. The nurses and other clinical workers were quite adamant that this would not be a good idea. The palliative treatment consisted of pop music and a nurse saying reassuring things. What I learned is that "You are doing really well" i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> I don't know if this happens with LSD.
It does... sort of. If you take LSD too often you do quickly build up a tolerance. The thing is that with LSD, the active dose is so small and the non-psychedelic side-effects so trivial, that you can usually still take enough to make it work. That said, back in my raver days when I had access to the stuff, I never had the desire to do so. LSD was fun and I never had a bad trip or anything. But, every time, it also left me with the feeling that: "Okay. That w
Re: (Score:2)
LSD is among the least addictive drugs available. [wikimedia.org] Heroin is the opposite.
Re: (Score:2)
LSD is among the least addictive drugs available.
This is my understanding. However, a problem with psychoactive drugs appears to be dependence on the effects of the drug, which is rather different to heroin addiction.
I have silly medical joke about addictive drugs. Tobacco is possibly the worst recreational drug ever discovered. It makes you cough, costs a fortune, it is highly addictive, gives you cancer, the smoke poisons your friends and relatives and ruins the paint and wallpaper, and after all that, you don't actually get high.
Re: (Score:2)
a problem with psychoactive drugs appears to be dependence on the effects of the drug,
I've never heard of anyone becoming to LSD in any way.
Adverse Effects (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"symptoms may include diarrhea, headaches, fever, flying monkeys, shortness of breath, and dancing elephants."
Deal with the source instead of the symptom? (Score:2)
By the way I have the same opinion about antidepressants. We'
Re: (Score:2)
> but wouldn't it be better overall in the long run to determine what is causing an individual to
>experience anxiety, and either eliminate the source of that stressor
In most states, "eliminating" a bad boss is frowned upon by the constabulary . . .
Persistence of effects is a bug, not a feature (Score:3)
One advantage of current treatments for anxiety, such as SSRIs, is that their effects do *not* seem to be persistent. If you don't like the way you feel on Prozac or Zoloft, you can taper and stop these medications, and after a short time (perhaps a few weeks, perhaps even a few days) you will go back to feeling the way you did before you started the medication.(*)
The authors of the current study are claiming that there are noticeable effects 16 weeks after the last dose is taken. (The idea of persistent effects is a common theme in psychedelic research, and you also hear it brought up in connection with ketamine).
Does it not occur to them that this is a problem-- that generally speaking, making *persistent* changes to the patient's brain is not a great idea? It may be great news if you happen to like the effect the treatment had on you, but if you don't...
(*) I'm excluding benzodiazepines from this discussion, because they are a whole other story.
Lobotomy (Score:2)
Lobotomy also alleviates anxiety.
Re: Lobotomy (Score:1)
Re (Score:1)
smoking cannabis (Score:1)
helps to smoke (Score:1)
For me, lsd has always been one drug on the list of hard drugs. I personally prefer to use only light drugs like cannabis to fight anxiety. Using bongs [everythingfor420.com] especially helps to smoke with more comfort. Have you tried this kind of anti-anxiety drug? It seems to me that it is much more effective and safe.