Psychedelic Drug Research Held Back By UK Rules and Attitudes, Say Scientists (theguardian.com) 34
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Guardian: Draconian licensing rules and a lack of public funding are holding back the emerging field of psychedelic medicine in the UK, leading scientists have warned after the release of groundbreaking results on the use of psilocybin to treat depression. The latest clinical trial found that a single dose of the active ingredient in magic mushrooms, combined with psychotherapy, helped alleviate depression in nearly a third of patients with severe depression. The finding follows other promising results suggesting that psychedelic drugs could be used in treating conditions including anxiety, PTSD, addiction and anorexia.
However, Prof David Nutt, the former government drug adviser and director of the neuropsychopharmacology research unit at Imperial College London, said that unless regulations and attitudes changed, potential treatments would remain "in limbo" at an experimental stage and available only to those who could pay for them in private clinics. "Patients are being denied access because of the regulations," he said. "The research is really hampered by the legal status."
Despite what some are hailing as a "psychedelic renaissance," Nutt said there had been minimal public funding for research in this area, besides a grant he received from the Medical Research Council to study psilocybin and funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Research for a trial published last week. "I don't think there's any other funding. It's all philanthropists and private sector funding," he said. "It reflects the fact that we still see illegal drugs as drugs to be banned." He said basic scientific research was vital for the development of new potential treatments. "This isn't just some public groundswell of hippy resurrection," he said. "The science has driven the clinical work."
However, Prof David Nutt, the former government drug adviser and director of the neuropsychopharmacology research unit at Imperial College London, said that unless regulations and attitudes changed, potential treatments would remain "in limbo" at an experimental stage and available only to those who could pay for them in private clinics. "Patients are being denied access because of the regulations," he said. "The research is really hampered by the legal status."
Despite what some are hailing as a "psychedelic renaissance," Nutt said there had been minimal public funding for research in this area, besides a grant he received from the Medical Research Council to study psilocybin and funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Research for a trial published last week. "I don't think there's any other funding. It's all philanthropists and private sector funding," he said. "It reflects the fact that we still see illegal drugs as drugs to be banned." He said basic scientific research was vital for the development of new potential treatments. "This isn't just some public groundswell of hippy resurrection," he said. "The science has driven the clinical work."
Re: (Score:2)
I see you conjured up the old attitude that drugs will hook anyone that goes near them. Decades long misinformation campaign by anti drug warriors appears to be extremely successful. ;-) Oops was that bias?
Shouldn't you be worrying about your bad teeth and not what other people are doing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can't blame Leary for what the government did; Nixon was far more important in that scenario than Leary ever was. Nixon made a conscious political choice to demonize hippies, pacifists and minorities, and people chose sides within that framework the way they always do in response to a polarizing figure (Nixon). People choose up sides before even considering whether the whole way of organizing sides makes any sense.
Leary was one of those researchers doing early psychedelic research, and if his researc
Re: Just use cyanide (Score:5, Informative)
There aren't many man made compounds that increase signal diversity in the human brain the way that psilocybin does, and even fewer, if any, that cause the growth of new brain cells.
And there are none currently that can deliver single dose relief to a non-trivial fraction of people with treatment resistant depression.
Its not about your simple minded and false ideas concerning natural compounds that humans have been using since before the invention of paper. It's about measurable outcome improving effects that result in better mental health for some of the most vulnerable people among us.
Stop thinking selfishly and denying the science.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Pretty sure mushrooms evolved psilocybin to bump off any animals that decided to eat it. No way evolution would favor mushrooms curing humans of depression. The mushrooms that produced psilocybin survived because it would fuck up animals that ate it. Animals that ate it, went nuts and animals that avoided eating it would thrive. As a neuromodulator, it is possible that it is helpful against depression in small doses. That is just luck, not some God or mushroom intending it so. Just because something is natu
Re: Just use cyanide (Score:5, Insightful)
Eating the fruiting bodies of fungus does not endanger their survival. The majority of the fungus is distributed throughout the soil, dung, and/or rotting plant matter under the area where the mushrooms appear. Eating them will not hurt the organism, just as eating an apple does not kill the tree.
If anything, having organisms repeatedly eat their fruiting bodies and distribute them is part of their reproductive process that leads to their survival.
Psilocybin has an LD50 that is greater than aspirin. This means it is easier to kill yourself with aspirin than the active ingredient in these muchrooms. Do you feel so strongly about tree bark extract? Why not?
Uninformed people with completely wrong ideas who have attached pejorative arrogance to their ignorance are preventing medical scientists from studying these natural substances for the betterment of mental health for all mankind.
We know they work to treat depression, PTSD, and end of life trauma in terminally ill individuals. And we know that this is possible for many patients with just one low level dose. We also know they have neuroprotective effects that seem to undo the kind of damage seen in patients with dementia, neurological probelms, and even the kind of destruction caused by neurotoxins.
What scares you so much about scientific knowledge and improving the lives of sick, hurting, and dying people that you resort to false statements, bad logic, and ridiculously unfounded comparisons?
I am genuinely curious. It looks like fear, reinforced with completely wrong information. It is on the order of the kind of human fallibility that leads to racism.
Very curious.
Re: (Score:1)
Fruiting bodies can't be dangerous? Have you never heard of mushroom poisoning? Why is mushroom poisoning a thing? Anyway, psilocybin concentration is highest in the immature fruiting body before it is mature .. as the spores mature, the concentration of psilocybin reduces. And btw, psilocybin is found in the stem and mycelium too. Therefore the psilocybin's function doesn't seem to be a reward for eating it. If it were a reward for eating it, the psilocybin concentration would be higher at maturity.
Even th
Re: Just use cyanide (Score:5, Informative)
There's a more general question here: why do organisms which rely on their "fruits" (whether actual fruits or fungus fruiting bodies) being eaten to spread their seeds produce poisons in the fruits? You've given a partial answer yourself: if the poison level drops as the fruit matures, it discourages the eaters from eating it too soon. But there's another notable partial answer, which is that many poisons are not poisonous to the same degree in all animals, and there can be selective advantage to producing a poison which discourages animals that for whatever reason are less useful as seed spreaders. The classic example is capsaicin, which discourages most mammals (some humans are exceptions) from eating hot peppers, favouring consumption by birds, which spread the seeds further.
Re: Just use cyanide (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Eating the fruiting bodies of fungus does not endanger their survival. The majority of the fungus is distributed throughout the soil, dung, and/or rotting plant matter under the area where the mushrooms appear. Eating them will not hurt the organism, just as eating an apple does not kill the tree.
Fruiting bodies can't be dangerous?
Congratulations, kid, you just proved you're a dumbass. When we add this to knowing you're a troll, you're a real waste of air. You could make yourself useful as food for mushrooms, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, eat a fat dick. You know I am right. Just because something is a "fruiting body" does not mean it is safe. That logic bad. Oh yeah and quit spreading false information that bad trips can't happen and fuck people up.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, eat a fat dick. You know I am right. Just because something is a "fruiting body" does not mean it is safe
You're wrong about what was being discussed, which is not that. You don't get points for failing at reading comprehension.
Re: (Score:2)
My comment wasn't a reply to the part you quoted. Instead, I replied to his statement that "Eating them will not hurt the organism, just as eating an apple does not kill the tree." In the context of that, it is clear he (and you) tried to claim that psilocybin is safe by virtue of being in the fruiting body -- which is a flawed logic, a non-sequitur.
Re: (Score:3)
My comment wasn't a reply to the part you quoted. Instead, I replied to his statement that "Eating them will not hurt the organism, just as eating an apple does not kill the tree." In the context of that, it is clear he (and you) tried to claim that psilocybin is safe by virtue of being in the fruiting body -- which is a flawed logic, a non-sequitur.
They were talking about picking the fruiting body not harming the mycelium. Thanks for really proving beyond any doubt that you didn't understand the comment you were replying to, it did my work for me.
Re: (Score:1)
In other words, your an idiot. I am talking about the fruiting body too. Hope I wasted your time enough to distract you from causing damage elsewhere in the world. Now you can do the work of fucking yourself for you.
Re: Just use cyanide (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Almost no drugs are harmless if overused. I know someone who tried to kill themselves with Tylenol, almost succeeded, and did permanent harm as a result. With that said, it's stupidly hard to kill yourself through ingestion of magic mushrooms, unless you misidentify some other kind as them (which isn't in fact them...)
"Groundbreaking" (Score:5, Interesting)
Groundbreaking only when you consider humankind knew all of this until it was outlawed for 3 generations.
--
There is no way the American public will sit still for the banning of or putting any significant restrictions on the kinds of guns they want. - James Q. Wilson
Britain's drug policy was dictated by Daily Mail (Score:3)
Gordon Brown made cannabis Class B (up to 5 years in prison for possession) in return for support by The Daily Mail.
This is how both drug policy and Govt work in the UK. At least until the Brexit fundamentalists took over.
Source: ex- Govt drugs advisor, Prof David Nutt.
Re: (Score:2)
Now we have the BBC's Trusted News Initiative. which was set into motion to push fake narratives like Trump associated with the Kremlin and censor any news opposite their agenda.
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The issue isn't suppression of facts, what you're complaining about is the LACK of suppression of opinions or facts that you don't agree with and the suppression of unsubstantiated garbage that you do.
It's a fact that Trump is a very shady fucker and was caught red handed with incredibly sensitive documents he should never have had and lied about having. There are clear indications that he was very closely tied with Russia and took Russian money to support his campaigns. He's being sued by NY for tax evasio
Bad name (Score:2)
Or is it good?
Professor Nutt, in charge of neuropsychopharmacology.
I say ... (Score:2)