> Almost half struggled with existential confusion and “derealization,” the sense that everything was unreal.
For me, the main transformative of taking acid recreationally was that the world came to seem less solid, reliable and "real". To be clear, I regarded that as a positive outcome.
A Buddhist teacher once explained to me that one of the expected effects of certain kinds of meditation was a growing sense that the world is insubstantial, as if it were made of tissue-paper that you could stick your finger through. I find that sort of view helpful; a world made of tissue-paper isn't "heavy" and oppressive. Anything can be changed.
And in fact, that solid, reliable world isn't real; the real world is very different from the world presented to us by our senses.
So this guy didn't find that insight helpful at all. Some people find it very hard to cope with.
I'm not sure that the Galapagos Islands is the ideal place to sleep-off a bad trip!
I'm inclined to agree with Evans that Leary's "set and setting" doctrine is far from a complete protection against bad trips. We used to attribute them to "bad acid", but that was bullshit; I just don't know what precipitates a bad trip.
The current trend in psychedelic folk knowledge is away from the good trip/bad trip dichotomy and towards "challenges" or "challenging experiences." IE trips that force you to reckon with some particular fear, past experience, core part of your worldview etc but provide (or demand) an opportunity for growth or fuller self-knowledge through it.
I've found this valuable in that it encourages full & nonjudgmental engagement with the "bad" experiences, focused on gaining something meaningful from them. Though it risks dismissing the potentially harmful effects of these experience. Or even worse, considering people who do have bad trips to be merely too weak or unenlightened to have chosen to avoid the experience.
But anyway I suspect the author is aware of this view, having used the phrase "challenging trips" in almost exactly the same sense.
> The current trend in psychedelic folk knowledge is away from the good trip/bad trip dichotomy
Wow, maybe "folk knowledge" is dumb. A real bad trip is not any kind of "challenging experience"; it's maybe 8 hours of completely senseless horror, a meaningless nightmare. And it doesn't really matter much whether it's 10 minutes or 10 days; if you have no sense of time, you're contemplating eternity.
Bad LSD is still a thing unfortunately. You can test a batch for purity now, though.
I think what Evans did actually violated set and setting, but it's possible this article is just poorly framed. He did enough LSD on his first trip in a packed club to experience depersonalization. To me a review of set and setting would've told me three of those things are a bad idea. He later then went to do a drug like Ayahuasca in a foreign country under a cultural practice he likely didn't appreciate. Again, things set and setting would tell me are likely not a good idea - at the very least that I should build up to. For the unfamiliar, I view both things he did like climbing Mt Hood and Mt Everest as an amateur with barely adequate gear.
I think he should continue to tell his stories, maybe even post them to Erowid or the Psychonaut wiki where there are similar warnings. That said, I'm not super convinced he's challenged the theory of set and setting.
Bad LSD being "a thing" and bad LSD being "a thing that causes bad trips" are very very different.
Among the things that people often sell as LSD, some have dangerously steep dose-response curves like 25I-NBOMe, some are pretty close analogues like AL-LAD.
None outright cause bad trips, and most or all of them are also sold with their proper labels and enjoyed by enthusiasts.
His personal experience is not what that claim is based on, but rather the collected bad trips of hundreds of others, many of which were in a therapeutic setting.
That last part in the article about them being surprised that 8% of people in psychedelic clinical trials had difficulties is interesting to me. I think assuming that being in a therapist or clinician's office is a good 'set and setting' is sort of funny, because I can't imagine wanting to be in a clinical setting for a psychedelic experience. I'd likely want to leave and go wander in nature and they'd probably say no, too dangerous, put this blindfold and AirPods Max on. I'd do it for science, but it's not in my top 10 choices of location to do it in!
I think the article stated that 8% of the respondents who said they had a “bad trip” had their trip in a clinical trial. Not that 8% of clinical trials resulted in a bad trip.
That is what the article said, thank you for clarifying. This comment led me to read the article and try to find the data behind the study. Mainly I looked for this because the article doesn't say how this 8% compares on a normalized basis to other settings, but does make the claim that it provides evidence/proof that
> This [8%] finding challenges the “set and setting” hypothesis of psychedelics.
Edit 3: This claim was made by the article on nautil.us but was not made by the study, and indeed the Discussion in the study seems to be axiomatically accepting of the "set and setting hypothesis", and indeed the authors actually pull out quite a few statistics from previous studies which can only be viewed as supporting the "set and setting hypothesis". Some of those cited studies, such as Simonsson [1] would likely also be worth reviewing for anyone who finds interest in this one. I provided a link to Simonsson as it seems most directly relevant at first glance and I don't have time right now to review the other studies quoted, but the other studies cited shouldn't be overlooked by curious minds - they all seem quite relevant in their own way.
I've been unable to find a resource with more numbers, or ideally the underlying dataset itself to analyze on my own. If you or anyone else know where I can find more numbers from the n=(about 608) survey, I'd greatly appreciate a pointer to it.
Edit: Found the study[0]
Edit 2: The study does not have enough granular data for me to perform my own quantitative analysis. Of note though, 5.3% of participants took it in a clinical setting, but 8% of the people who "suffered afterward" had taken it in a clinical setting. This is elevated compared to what it would be with a uniform distribution but the study itself also says:
> "Experiencing a greater range of difficulties was predicted by being in an unguided setting at the time of the trip and having a more challenging trip. Duration of difficulties was predicted by the challengingness of the trip but no other factors emerged as significant. "
Taking this at face value, it would seem that an unguided setting is more strongly correlated to a "challenging trip" than a therapeutic setting. And "challenging trip" was shown to be the greatest, and one of the only, predictors of post-trip difficulties:
> To test this, linear regression analyses were conducted, firstly with range of difficulties as the DV and secondly with duration of difficulties as the DV. The overall regression model for the prediction of range of duration was significant (R2 = .04, F(4,519) = 4.97, p < .001). In terms of individual predictors, two emerged as significant; the challengingness of the trip (β = .17, p<0.001) and being in an unguided setting (β = .11, p = 0.008).
Thanks for digging these out. It definitely would be interesting to look at this dataset, because there are some parts of the study I wasn't expecting. For instance, the participants could report more than one substance during their experience -- I had assumed single drug use for the session -- where 10% indicated cannabis use. The only times I've seen people on psychedelics go from "everything is great" to "wow wtf is going on" has been after they smoked weed while a couple hours into an LSD trip.
They also didn't seem to have an option for alcohol use, which seems like an important factor if we're collecting data on mixed drug use. I'd even be interested in tobacco use, it's certainly a powerful drug and would likely be involved in most ayahuasca ceremonies.
Also was surprised that 26% of people had no idea what their dosage was. That seems really irresponsible.
Anyways, thanks again, interesting data and would love to be able to look at it more!
> Also was surprised that 26% of people had no idea what their dosage was. That seems really irresponsible.
I agree that it's irresponsible, but personally I was surprised it wasn't way higher. I have a 0.1mg resolution analytical balance and for my psychonaut acquaintances/friends I'm almost always the very first person to introduce them to consistently weighing their doses to help start building a sense of what's appropriate for them. Even for people who've been using them regularly for >10 years. And no one I know has ever quantitatively tested the purity+dose of their drugs either, which is relatively "easy" through http://energycontrol-international.org (a few do reagent testing to test for contaminants but it doesn't tell you much about % purity or dose)
Note also that with mushrooms, weighing the fresh or dried mushrooms gives you very little information on your psilocybin/psilocin dose, different strains can vary by two orders of magnitude and even within the same strain you might find the strongest sample has 5x the concentration of the weakest sample. https://www.copsychedeliccup.com/2023-psychedelic-cup-data
A 0.1mg-resolution balance would let you measure your dose to the nearest 100 microgrammes. That gives you just 3 gradations between no dose at all, and a fairly "standard" 300 mikes.
Yes it isn't appropriate for pure LSD but is fine for most other psychedelics, or dilute LSD of a known, tested, concentration. TFA is not limited to pure LSD.
I share your bias, although until we find a better way to pair therapists and patients in other settings, I am accepting of the clinical setting. I have always been pro-legalization and I personally enjoy mushrooms, MDMA, and weaker psychoactive compounds -- but I've always had a rational skepticism of overpowered medical claims, especially when it comes to popular, politicized topics like medical applications of recreational drugs.
The data and results for MDMA-assisted clinical therapy have blown me away. For example, a 2020 study[0] measured outcomes 12 months after the final MDMA-assisted therapy session and nearly half the participants ceased lifelong suicidal ideation for the full year following treatment.
I was willing to easily believe that MDMA-assisted clinical therapy reduced symptoms of PTSD but I was worried that the benefits would wear off quickly; it wasn't until just the past few years we started measuring outcomes >3 months past the completion of MDMA interventions. Seeing these strong long-term effects in has really made me a believer that there's value in the clinicalization of psychedelics, even if other guided settings might have even stronger results.
Moving over to pure conjecture, I also believe that the submission of MDMA for FDA approval (which, if granted, will force the DEA to reschedule MDMA), has been used as a lever to pressure the DEA to move on rescheduling THC/marijuana -- I believe the timing is mainly because it would be embarrassing if MDMA were moved off Schedule I before marijuana was. Obviously the broad public support for rescheduling of marijuana is a necessary prerequisite, but I don't believe it's the trigger for the specific timing. I also believe part of the timing is to generate positive press close to a presidential election. But I would be very happy to see these both rescheduled, regardless of the reasons.
I also desperately want better access for Americans to get their drugs tested, so that we can more easily shift cultural norms towards getting in the habit of knowing their dose, purity, and contaminants before taking recreational, psychedelic, or pharmaceutical drugs.
Absolutely, I'm in the same camp as you it seems. It's important to study these things and make sure we can get psychedelics rescheduled. I'm also happy that people that aren't as weird as me can have therapeutic settings to help with lifelong issues they might otherwise completely avoid. Even if I might laugh and cringe a little inside when I see the yuppie corporate branding for things people have been taking for thousands of years and (for me) seem like no big deal at all. Or rather, a big deal that's not so much of a big deal.
I don't think you should assume what you experienced is the same thing that the author experienced. I have had both good and bad trips, ones that are like you described that lead me to imagine a world of possibilities after the trip and other ones that left me depersonalized. They definitely were not the same effect.
I do think it has a lot to do with the framework you enter with and how you understand what's happening, which I think is what OP was getting at. My most profound experience was a full depersonalization, which I never even began to consider was a bad thing at all, but maybe for someone else would be filled with panic and anxiety. So it's all dependent on your view, which is probably why Buddhism puts 'right view' (samyak-drishti) as the first of the eight-fold path (although I don't think the ordering really matters, it's just convention).
> A Buddhist teacher once explained to me that one of the expected effects of certain kinds of meditation was a growing sense that the world is insubstantial, as if it were made of tissue-paper that you could stick your finger through.
This is called "emptiness", and the second level "but actually it's all real too" is supposed to add up to something called "non-duality". Buddhists historically spend a lot of time arguing with each other about how exactly it works.
The practical upshot is supposed to be that you can look at a statement about yourself like "I have depression" and realize that it is empty of independent existence ie that you're the one doing it to yourself, and this may possibly make it go away.
If you do this too hard you then realize you don't exist and also go away.
"But amid all the scientific and cultural enthusiasm for these drugs, little attention has been paid to bad trips and their after-effects, and even less to what might alleviate them."
I don't think this is really the case. Maybe the cultural component isn't paying much attention to it, but the scientific part is. These are being researched as medicines. All medicines have side effects. These aren't being recommended for everybody. Most of the studies are looking at psychedelics as a last resort and not a first line treatment. They are also investigating or using best practices when it come to proper environment and guidance during the administration.
I think if I'd had a bad experience on acid i might not then choose my next engagement to be with one of the most profound psychadelic experiences there is half way round the world with a bunch of strangers. Perhaps start with a light dose of mushrooms at home with some friends?
It seems obvious to me that anyone supportive of psychedelic treatment should be supportive of this kind of investigation. It does no one any good to suppress or ignore stories of negative experiences with psychedelics. On the contrary, research like this can help develop better screening protocols or follow up treatment to help minimize these effects, or even treat people who are suffering long term negative impact from a difficult trip.
While better understanding is certainly useful, the framing does seem a little unfair to me. It's not like other treatments don't have their downsides. Most people will tell you they don't like seeing the dentist but few would say it's not worth it.
I've had bad trips on psychedelics and I actually think they tended to be some of the more beneficial ones for me in the long run.
Seems unfair to compare a "bad trip to the dentist" to a person experiencing severe psychological effects liking being unable to make human connections and feelings of loneliness for 30 years
Many of these experiences seem to have drastically impacted peoples lives in a very negative way. Much worse than a toothache!
What does it mean to have a "bad trip to the dentist"? A dentist can also cause decades of discomfort, but most trips (both drugs and dentists) turn out great!
I agree! I also think it would make sense for people not supportive of psychedelic treatments to be interested in this, for various reasons, including what you said, and also as an educational tool too teach kids so they don't try it illegally, which seems to be a major concern among those not supportive of this kind of research.
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden,a country famous among other things for it's Draconian stance on drugs, and I'm less than amused by the propaganda that passes for narcotics education here.
The description of feeling like he was "in a coma or some afterlife limbo state" sounds similar to Cotard's syndrome [1], a very rare condition that can develop from untreated schizophrenia — basically an unshakable belief that you are, in fact, dead, and every other fact of existence will have to be reframed to support that belief.
The author's description of dissociation resonated with me, as I experienced a solid month or so of intense dissociation when I was 17, and the only way to describe it is by saying I _knew_ I was in a dream. It was terrifying, and came and went for seemingly no reason at all. I steered clear from any mind altering substances for about 10 years, as my relationship with my own mind felt permanently unsettled.
Years later, though, after lots of therapy and educating myself, I came to learn that the dissociation is often a protective measure that the mind takes to handle incredible stress. It's so counter-intuitive; my subconscious mind is trying to protect me from something my conscious mind knows nothing about by sticking me into a terrifying dream state for a month? Thanks, I guess?
I still haven't tried psychedelics yet, but I plan to now that I understand far more about my mind, and I've realized that what I was fearful of was my anxiety, and my mind has been trying to help me through that since day one. I say all this because the negative experiences discussed in this article sound like things I experienced without any drugs, as they were the result of unaddressed mental health issues that needed therapy and tender care.
"The pilot who attempted to shut fuel off to the engines of an Alaska Airlines jet [in November 2023] after ingesting magic mushrooms has said that he had no intention of hurting anyone – but was trying to come out of a hallucinogenic state.
“I thought it would stop both engines, the plane would start to head towards a crash, and I would wake up,”"[0]
I’ve got a healthy respect for psychedelics after noticing lingering effects on my reality perception and mood for several days after taking some strains of marijuana. I know it can help many people, but the thought of anything stronger than weed messing with your sense of reality should demand caution at the very least
I'm not sure that there's scientific research on the subject, as one of the problems with drugs being illegal, is that it also stymied research (which is why we have all the CBD snake oil, nowadays).
I know that weed seems to be a triggering catalyst for folks with latent schizophrenia. I know of folks that smoked one joint, and never came back, but these are rare incidents.
As someone who has eaten over 100 hits of LSD before I was old enough to drive, I can say it has helped me in my life. Wonderful memories, never a bad trip. I have used cannabis daily since I was 13 as well and highly (sorry, pun) recommend it for stress relief among other positive effects. Each person is very different when it come to these substances.
Sorry but if you started such heavy drig use at such a young age you have absolutely no way of evaluating if it helped or hindered your life.
You hear this type of thing from psychedelic evangelists all the time "changed my life, learned so much" etc but when asked to substantiate these claims or provide any concrete evidence of behavioural changes or otherwise positive effects, they cannot.
By the way, im not a luddite. Done my fair share, but I'm honest with myself, its mostly just recreation, and dangerous recreation at that.
Yes good point. I was very introverted and OCD as a child. I had strange compulsive habits like counting right angles and picking at the crown of my head. Psychedelics and cannabis seem to have had an immediate positive effect in these areas, allowing me to relax, socialize while still performing academically. I certainly saw various peers using these substances and not doing so well. Cannabis especially helps me with these issues even in my forties. I take breaks (weeks or months) but the old ways seem to creep back in quickly. But I agree - I have no way of accessing my other selves in the multiverse to compare.
By the way, who's comment is more likely to cause harm, the one that suggests its okay or even helpful to smoke weed and do psychedelics at a young age, or the one that suggests a reality check on that perspective?
And wouldnt ya know it, OP responded, wasnt offended, agreed with me, and had special extenuating circumstances that make his situation complete not applicable to the general public (save those with similar situations)
"Invalidating a person" is a ludicrous concept. Perhaps I was a bit brash or rude sure, but "invalidating"? Give me a break.
Okay. Thought about it and I still think its ridiculous.
Youre offended on someone elses behalf, and they arent even offended. By the way, by your logic, you are invalidating me by expressing that my opinion, my experiences, and my perspective should not be voiced because it is invalidating.
Silly concept. Id have much rather you just called me an asshole and spare me all the pearl clutching.
I think you are either an extreme outlier (not having a unpleasant trip while having taken over hundred) or delusional about your drug consumption. Your recommendation of consuming a mind-altering substance DAILY for stress relief " and other positive effects" lets me lean towards the latter.
While each person is indeed different, their brains tend to work in a comparable way.
Do you consider caffeine and alcohol mind altering substances? I do. Perhaps you’re ascribing too much intensity to the experience of using THC daily. For many folks it’s the base level or else our minds get a little wonky. See my other comment about my OCD/counting/introvert behavior.
> “I began to suspect that I was either in a dream of my own construction or trapped in some kind of fake reality constructed by someone else,” he wrote in an essay in 2020. “Could I be in a coma or some afterlife limbo state?” ... “This isn’t real,” he thought to himself. “How do I wake up?”
Any Buddhist practitioner would tell you this is sort of what you're going for in your practice. Buddha literally means "one who has awakened". Many practices ask you to consider reality as a dream, like Lojong in some lineages of the Vajrayana tradition [1], and to look at the impermanence of all things -- especially what we call 'self' -- as part of the path towards awakening.
There's a reason why lots of the Buddhist lineages are set up to gradually introduce you to these things and wouldn't just throw you into the most esoteric parts of the practice right at the beginning. If you don't have the foundations for it I can imagine getting out of an intense psychedelic experience more confused than when you went in.
> “I began to suspect that I was either in a dream of my own construction or trapped in some kind of fake reality constructed by someone else,” he wrote in an essay in 2020. “Could I be in a coma or some afterlife limbo state?”
I've had similar thoughts while completely sober, wondering if the world was fake and I was just dreaming it. Usually when sleep deprived, after having just finishing a novel and coming out of the novel's world. Given that I'm susceptible to this kind of thinking, I've decided to steer clear of psychedelics because I can imagine that a bad trip is a real possibility. As a student, I was offered to try Salvia Divinorum and reading reports of bad trips on erowid (one person reported feeling like he was a brick on the wall for an endless amount of time) completely dissuaded me of trying it.
Anecdotally, my cousin has taken LSD repeatedly and has had psychosis episodes that she thinks might be triggered by that. She's diagnosed with Schizophrenia though and has a family history of Schizophrenia so psychedelics were probably not a great idea for her.
I had a series of dreams like this once. Each dream would start off like any other dream, some probably-objectively-improbable starting scenario extrapolated into a sequence of events, but then at some point I'd 'figure out the trick' and become aware of some glaring flaw in my subjective reality at which point the whole dream would collapse and reset, to be replaced by some new scenario. This repeated a bunch of times during the night (I think something like six but how would you tell?) and when I woke up for real it took quite a while to be certain I was back in 'baseline' reality.
"one person reported feeling like he was a brick on the wall for an endless amount of time"
I interpret these kinds of experiences as a form of dissociation as well, to me it seems the perception of time dissolves under certain forms of intoxication. I've had such experiences with cannabis, ketamine, salvia and a range of 5-HT2a-active substances. Mental exercises can bring about similar experiences too, like some forms of meditation and prayer.
To me personally they haven't been as unsettling as some people describe. It's an interesting phenomenon, similar to how some episodes of Star Trek manage to communicate how a character has lived a full life in half an hour stuck on some 'subtemporal' planet or so before they're rescued and brought back to the rest of the crew, one can have the experience of being a brick in a wall for eternity or having lived for centuries as a hermit in a desert cave.
Evan needs some education in set, setting, intention, etc.
This sounds like exactly what happens if your relationship to other mind states is extremely limited. Would you get super drunk in a club while traveling and expect good results?
This is like using power tools without instruction or supervision.
I personally love the experience of so-called ego death ("complete loss of subjective self-identity") from psychedelics, but I can understand why other people don't.
The brain filters reality in a highly organized and optimized manner. It takes all our sensory input and fuses it into a remarkably stable, though inherently subjective reality. Psychedelics attenuate the filter. Suddenly, things aren't so organized or stable. That can be very scary to some people and thrillingly fun for others. Add to that, deep-seated emotions and repressed memories, which can bubble up without warning when you lose control, and things get even more fraught.
Ego can be balanced toward the collective or the individual. For a collectivist ego death would be something very different from what an individualist would experience.
As a youth I was a moderate enthusiast for psychedelics (back when the goal was good clean fun, ie not spiritual enlightenment, cure for depression or modern mindfulness dingaling) but trust me, friends - you do not want an event like this in your life. Not even once.
I am glad there’s some pushback against the current wave of blithe and frankly under-researched psychedelics-as-panacea crowd.
It is a mighty tool and I stand by it, but it should be done only by balanced folks, at least initially under supervision. The rest is russian roulette with your own mental health, not the smartest move even if it helped few. Maybe with professional supervision this can be managed, but I think that should be reserved only for serious cases when other treatments doesn't work / has massive side effects.
Now who is balanced and who is not is a topic on its own, but I am pretty sure psychologists can cca handle this in same way they handle ie gun licenses in any sane country. Generally fucked up childhood is pretty sure indicator of massive imbalance and issues, just dig deep enough. Family history is sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. Even just broken/missing father figure while rest is cca OK messes up everybody affected in negative way.
And there are so many folks like these. For some reason I didn't have many of those when growing up, but I've sobered up when I moved around, ie in competitive corporate sphere there are more folks with something like that than without, and the higher you go in power pyramid the worse it gets.
I don't think money comes into play, good people do raise kids well despite lack of funds. I was raised dirt poor, in messed up communism which punished my parents for studying universities (smart = enemy of the state, very typical for russian oppressors), but they didn't put any major issue into me as a child.
Another case point - a friend of mine teaches small kids of many rich & powerful people in Geneva, Switzerland. Many, in some school years most of them are broken even in young age, ie self-harm, aggressive, lazy. But daddy has 7 lambos and ferraris in the garage. Many stories like this. Good people with wealth make great parents, but so do poor good folks.
As for happy part, yes definitely. Do your own stuff, its just your life and nobody else in this world actually cares enough beyond few shallow words, but risks are there and they are real. Fixing issues at source before doing the most extreme stuff with your mind is more than advisable.
When I was a youth I was given PAXIL by a corrupt psychiatrist that had gotten paid off by a highly dubious pharmaceutical company that would later get sued for fraud by the US government. Their published research was horseshit (they manipulated their studies) and their snake oil probably resulted in the deaths of scores of youth. I wish I was connected enough -- socially -- to have good-clean-fun vs being put through a ringer and it does appear that -- at the very leaset -- microdosing mushrooms isn't associated with massive upticks in suicide.
Yeah and mainstream antidepressant/anti-anxiety drugs also cause these effects and these persist long term after quitting. I also know someone who goes from raving lunatic to functional on proper meds and right back to raving lunatic if she stops taking them. So not saying don't use, but use only if your problem is serious and can't be improved with lifestyle adjustments. In particular, don't use psychiatric meds to cover up problems of your relationship partner who is giving you stress and poor self esteem. Some women in particular love to think you are the one who needs to be fixed.
I’ve never had a bad acid trip, but genuinely have zero desire to do it again in my life. I’m just not interested in it anymore. I never really was. I can’t say I’ve ever enjoyed doing acid, or any other psychedelic. I say this to establish that I’m not some kind of psychedelics fanboy or anything.
…all because I need to say that there are few people that have tried to justify their stupid decisions more than Evans.
The general population grossly misrepresenting and simplifying snippets of “””science””” from psychology today dot com is absolutely nothing new.
I’ve got no doubt that anyone that involved in any of the referenced psychedelic research would in very strong terms dissuade Evans from his subsequent interactions with psychedelics. Much less, going from acid to something more extreme.
He then seemingly proceeded to devote himself to some sort of predetermined-conclusion weird activism-laden academic pursuit, based on the false narrative that the ‘new’ man is lying to us about the dangers of psychedelics. When, in reality, I doubt that anyone worth a damn would’ve condoned his actions.
> He then seemingly proceeded to devote himself to some sort of predetermined-conclusion weird activism-laden academic pursuit, based on the false narrative that the ‘new’ man is lying to us about the dangers of psychedelics.
The article does not support this portrayal at all. Just read the last sentence in it.
Whether or not his personal experience with psychedelics involved known-bad choices is completely irrelevant to the results of his research. Unless you have any concrete evidence for bias in the design or analysis of his surveys, it is you who's building a false narrative.
“Almost half struggled with existential confusion and “derealization,” the sense that everything was unreal.”
That’s existential clarity. There is no such thing as color in light. There is no scientific reason to believe in free will. Still, an awareness of this doesn’t change our experience that there are colours and we have choices.
What would be interesting is to understand the mechanisms of “mild delusions” that the brain creates to allow/motivate us to function. And why this is inhibited in some people after using psychedelics.
For me, the main transformative of taking acid recreationally was that the world came to seem less solid, reliable and "real". To be clear, I regarded that as a positive outcome.
A Buddhist teacher once explained to me that one of the expected effects of certain kinds of meditation was a growing sense that the world is insubstantial, as if it were made of tissue-paper that you could stick your finger through. I find that sort of view helpful; a world made of tissue-paper isn't "heavy" and oppressive. Anything can be changed.
And in fact, that solid, reliable world isn't real; the real world is very different from the world presented to us by our senses.
So this guy didn't find that insight helpful at all. Some people find it very hard to cope with.
I'm not sure that the Galapagos Islands is the ideal place to sleep-off a bad trip!
I'm inclined to agree with Evans that Leary's "set and setting" doctrine is far from a complete protection against bad trips. We used to attribute them to "bad acid", but that was bullshit; I just don't know what precipitates a bad trip.
I've found this valuable in that it encourages full & nonjudgmental engagement with the "bad" experiences, focused on gaining something meaningful from them. Though it risks dismissing the potentially harmful effects of these experience. Or even worse, considering people who do have bad trips to be merely too weak or unenlightened to have chosen to avoid the experience.
But anyway I suspect the author is aware of this view, having used the phrase "challenging trips" in almost exactly the same sense.
Wow, maybe "folk knowledge" is dumb. A real bad trip is not any kind of "challenging experience"; it's maybe 8 hours of completely senseless horror, a meaningless nightmare. And it doesn't really matter much whether it's 10 minutes or 10 days; if you have no sense of time, you're contemplating eternity.
I think what Evans did actually violated set and setting, but it's possible this article is just poorly framed. He did enough LSD on his first trip in a packed club to experience depersonalization. To me a review of set and setting would've told me three of those things are a bad idea. He later then went to do a drug like Ayahuasca in a foreign country under a cultural practice he likely didn't appreciate. Again, things set and setting would tell me are likely not a good idea - at the very least that I should build up to. For the unfamiliar, I view both things he did like climbing Mt Hood and Mt Everest as an amateur with barely adequate gear.
I think he should continue to tell his stories, maybe even post them to Erowid or the Psychonaut wiki where there are similar warnings. That said, I'm not super convinced he's challenged the theory of set and setting.
Among the things that people often sell as LSD, some have dangerously steep dose-response curves like 25I-NBOMe, some are pretty close analogues like AL-LAD.
None outright cause bad trips, and most or all of them are also sold with their proper labels and enjoyed by enthusiasts.
- Overstimulation and a lack of "preparedness" for that level. That touches on my Mt Hood example.
- Unmanaged triggers ahead of a psychedelic experience. You can feel this on something as simple as THC and certain terpenes.
- Contaminants that defeat the expectation of what the substance "should be" and are potentially unsafe.
> This [8%] finding challenges the “set and setting” hypothesis of psychedelics.
Edit 3: This claim was made by the article on nautil.us but was not made by the study, and indeed the Discussion in the study seems to be axiomatically accepting of the "set and setting hypothesis", and indeed the authors actually pull out quite a few statistics from previous studies which can only be viewed as supporting the "set and setting hypothesis". Some of those cited studies, such as Simonsson [1] would likely also be worth reviewing for anyone who finds interest in this one. I provided a link to Simonsson as it seems most directly relevant at first glance and I don't have time right now to review the other studies quoted, but the other studies cited shouldn't be overlooked by curious minds - they all seem quite relevant in their own way.
I've been unable to find a resource with more numbers, or ideally the underlying dataset itself to analyze on my own. If you or anyone else know where I can find more numbers from the n=(about 608) survey, I'd greatly appreciate a pointer to it.
Edit: Found the study[0]
Edit 2: The study does not have enough granular data for me to perform my own quantitative analysis. Of note though, 5.3% of participants took it in a clinical setting, but 8% of the people who "suffered afterward" had taken it in a clinical setting. This is elevated compared to what it would be with a uniform distribution but the study itself also says:
> "Experiencing a greater range of difficulties was predicted by being in an unguided setting at the time of the trip and having a more challenging trip. Duration of difficulties was predicted by the challengingness of the trip but no other factors emerged as significant. "
Taking this at face value, it would seem that an unguided setting is more strongly correlated to a "challenging trip" than a therapeutic setting. And "challenging trip" was shown to be the greatest, and one of the only, predictors of post-trip difficulties:
> To test this, linear regression analyses were conducted, firstly with range of difficulties as the DV and secondly with duration of difficulties as the DV. The overall regression model for the prediction of range of duration was significant (R2 = .04, F(4,519) = 4.97, p < .001). In terms of individual predictors, two emerged as significant; the challengingness of the trip (β = .17, p<0.001) and being in an unguided setting (β = .11, p = 0.008).
0: Study from the posted article: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
1: Simonsson study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016503272...
They also didn't seem to have an option for alcohol use, which seems like an important factor if we're collecting data on mixed drug use. I'd even be interested in tobacco use, it's certainly a powerful drug and would likely be involved in most ayahuasca ceremonies.
Also was surprised that 26% of people had no idea what their dosage was. That seems really irresponsible.
Anyways, thanks again, interesting data and would love to be able to look at it more!
I agree that it's irresponsible, but personally I was surprised it wasn't way higher. I have a 0.1mg resolution analytical balance and for my psychonaut acquaintances/friends I'm almost always the very first person to introduce them to consistently weighing their doses to help start building a sense of what's appropriate for them. Even for people who've been using them regularly for >10 years. And no one I know has ever quantitatively tested the purity+dose of their drugs either, which is relatively "easy" through http://energycontrol-international.org (a few do reagent testing to test for contaminants but it doesn't tell you much about % purity or dose)
Note also that with mushrooms, weighing the fresh or dried mushrooms gives you very little information on your psilocybin/psilocin dose, different strains can vary by two orders of magnitude and even within the same strain you might find the strongest sample has 5x the concentration of the weakest sample. https://www.copsychedeliccup.com/2023-psychedelic-cup-data
The data and results for MDMA-assisted clinical therapy have blown me away. For example, a 2020 study[0] measured outcomes 12 months after the final MDMA-assisted therapy session and nearly half the participants ceased lifelong suicidal ideation for the full year following treatment.
I was willing to easily believe that MDMA-assisted clinical therapy reduced symptoms of PTSD but I was worried that the benefits would wear off quickly; it wasn't until just the past few years we started measuring outcomes >3 months past the completion of MDMA interventions. Seeing these strong long-term effects in has really made me a believer that there's value in the clinicalization of psychedelics, even if other guided settings might have even stronger results.
Moving over to pure conjecture, I also believe that the submission of MDMA for FDA approval (which, if granted, will force the DEA to reschedule MDMA), has been used as a lever to pressure the DEA to move on rescheduling THC/marijuana -- I believe the timing is mainly because it would be embarrassing if MDMA were moved off Schedule I before marijuana was. Obviously the broad public support for rescheduling of marijuana is a necessary prerequisite, but I don't believe it's the trigger for the specific timing. I also believe part of the timing is to generate positive press close to a presidential election. But I would be very happy to see these both rescheduled, regardless of the reasons.
I also desperately want better access for Americans to get their drugs tested, so that we can more easily shift cultural norms towards getting in the habit of knowing their dose, purity, and contaminants before taking recreational, psychedelic, or pharmaceutical drugs.
0: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05548-2
This is called "emptiness", and the second level "but actually it's all real too" is supposed to add up to something called "non-duality". Buddhists historically spend a lot of time arguing with each other about how exactly it works.
The practical upshot is supposed to be that you can look at a statement about yourself like "I have depression" and realize that it is empty of independent existence ie that you're the one doing it to yourself, and this may possibly make it go away.
If you do this too hard you then realize you don't exist and also go away.
Take that a step further; everything is change, quite literally.
"All that you touch, You Change.
All that you Change, Changes you.
The only lasting truth is Change.
God is Change."
I don't think this is really the case. Maybe the cultural component isn't paying much attention to it, but the scientific part is. These are being researched as medicines. All medicines have side effects. These aren't being recommended for everybody. Most of the studies are looking at psychedelics as a last resort and not a first line treatment. They are also investigating or using best practices when it come to proper environment and guidance during the administration.
I've had bad trips on psychedelics and I actually think they tended to be some of the more beneficial ones for me in the long run.
Many of these experiences seem to have drastically impacted peoples lives in a very negative way. Much worse than a toothache!
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden,a country famous among other things for it's Draconian stance on drugs, and I'm less than amused by the propaganda that passes for narcotics education here.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotard%27s_syndrome
Years later, though, after lots of therapy and educating myself, I came to learn that the dissociation is often a protective measure that the mind takes to handle incredible stress. It's so counter-intuitive; my subconscious mind is trying to protect me from something my conscious mind knows nothing about by sticking me into a terrifying dream state for a month? Thanks, I guess?
I still haven't tried psychedelics yet, but I plan to now that I understand far more about my mind, and I've realized that what I was fearful of was my anxiety, and my mind has been trying to help me through that since day one. I say all this because the negative experiences discussed in this article sound like things I experienced without any drugs, as they were the result of unaddressed mental health issues that needed therapy and tender care.
"The pilot who attempted to shut fuel off to the engines of an Alaska Airlines jet [in November 2023] after ingesting magic mushrooms has said that he had no intention of hurting anyone – but was trying to come out of a hallucinogenic state.
“I thought it would stop both engines, the plane would start to head towards a crash, and I would wake up,”"[0]
[0]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/nov/10/alaska-airli...
I know that weed seems to be a triggering catalyst for folks with latent schizophrenia. I know of folks that smoked one joint, and never came back, but these are rare incidents.
You hear this type of thing from psychedelic evangelists all the time "changed my life, learned so much" etc but when asked to substantiate these claims or provide any concrete evidence of behavioural changes or otherwise positive effects, they cannot.
By the way, im not a luddite. Done my fair share, but I'm honest with myself, its mostly just recreation, and dangerous recreation at that.
Well glad it works for ya
And wouldnt ya know it, OP responded, wasnt offended, agreed with me, and had special extenuating circumstances that make his situation complete not applicable to the general public (save those with similar situations)
"Invalidating a person" is a ludicrous concept. Perhaps I was a bit brash or rude sure, but "invalidating"? Give me a break.
Youre offended on someone elses behalf, and they arent even offended. By the way, by your logic, you are invalidating me by expressing that my opinion, my experiences, and my perspective should not be voiced because it is invalidating.
Silly concept. Id have much rather you just called me an asshole and spare me all the pearl clutching.
Any Buddhist practitioner would tell you this is sort of what you're going for in your practice. Buddha literally means "one who has awakened". Many practices ask you to consider reality as a dream, like Lojong in some lineages of the Vajrayana tradition [1], and to look at the impermanence of all things -- especially what we call 'self' -- as part of the path towards awakening.
There's a reason why lots of the Buddhist lineages are set up to gradually introduce you to these things and wouldn't just throw you into the most esoteric parts of the practice right at the beginning. If you don't have the foundations for it I can imagine getting out of an intense psychedelic experience more confused than when you went in.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojong
I've had similar thoughts while completely sober, wondering if the world was fake and I was just dreaming it. Usually when sleep deprived, after having just finishing a novel and coming out of the novel's world. Given that I'm susceptible to this kind of thinking, I've decided to steer clear of psychedelics because I can imagine that a bad trip is a real possibility. As a student, I was offered to try Salvia Divinorum and reading reports of bad trips on erowid (one person reported feeling like he was a brick on the wall for an endless amount of time) completely dissuaded me of trying it.
Anecdotally, my cousin has taken LSD repeatedly and has had psychosis episodes that she thinks might be triggered by that. She's diagnosed with Schizophrenia though and has a family history of Schizophrenia so psychedelics were probably not a great idea for her.
Glad I'm not the only one! It can genuinely be a pretty unnerving feeling for a little bit.
I interpret these kinds of experiences as a form of dissociation as well, to me it seems the perception of time dissolves under certain forms of intoxication. I've had such experiences with cannabis, ketamine, salvia and a range of 5-HT2a-active substances. Mental exercises can bring about similar experiences too, like some forms of meditation and prayer.
To me personally they haven't been as unsettling as some people describe. It's an interesting phenomenon, similar to how some episodes of Star Trek manage to communicate how a character has lived a full life in half an hour stuck on some 'subtemporal' planet or so before they're rescued and brought back to the rest of the crew, one can have the experience of being a brick in a wall for eternity or having lived for centuries as a hermit in a desert cave.
This sounds like exactly what happens if your relationship to other mind states is extremely limited. Would you get super drunk in a club while traveling and expect good results?
This is like using power tools without instruction or supervision.
The brain filters reality in a highly organized and optimized manner. It takes all our sensory input and fuses it into a remarkably stable, though inherently subjective reality. Psychedelics attenuate the filter. Suddenly, things aren't so organized or stable. That can be very scary to some people and thrillingly fun for others. Add to that, deep-seated emotions and repressed memories, which can bubble up without warning when you lose control, and things get even more fraught.
As a youth I was a moderate enthusiast for psychedelics (back when the goal was good clean fun, ie not spiritual enlightenment, cure for depression or modern mindfulness dingaling) but trust me, friends - you do not want an event like this in your life. Not even once.
I am glad there’s some pushback against the current wave of blithe and frankly under-researched psychedelics-as-panacea crowd.
Now who is balanced and who is not is a topic on its own, but I am pretty sure psychologists can cca handle this in same way they handle ie gun licenses in any sane country. Generally fucked up childhood is pretty sure indicator of massive imbalance and issues, just dig deep enough. Family history is sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. Even just broken/missing father figure while rest is cca OK messes up everybody affected in negative way.
And there are so many folks like these. For some reason I didn't have many of those when growing up, but I've sobered up when I moved around, ie in competitive corporate sphere there are more folks with something like that than without, and the higher you go in power pyramid the worse it gets.
Another case point - a friend of mine teaches small kids of many rich & powerful people in Geneva, Switzerland. Many, in some school years most of them are broken even in young age, ie self-harm, aggressive, lazy. But daddy has 7 lambos and ferraris in the garage. Many stories like this. Good people with wealth make great parents, but so do poor good folks.
As for happy part, yes definitely. Do your own stuff, its just your life and nobody else in this world actually cares enough beyond few shallow words, but risks are there and they are real. Fixing issues at source before doing the most extreme stuff with your mind is more than advisable.
…all because I need to say that there are few people that have tried to justify their stupid decisions more than Evans.
The general population grossly misrepresenting and simplifying snippets of “””science””” from psychology today dot com is absolutely nothing new.
I’ve got no doubt that anyone that involved in any of the referenced psychedelic research would in very strong terms dissuade Evans from his subsequent interactions with psychedelics. Much less, going from acid to something more extreme.
He then seemingly proceeded to devote himself to some sort of predetermined-conclusion weird activism-laden academic pursuit, based on the false narrative that the ‘new’ man is lying to us about the dangers of psychedelics. When, in reality, I doubt that anyone worth a damn would’ve condoned his actions.
The article does not support this portrayal at all. Just read the last sentence in it.
Whether or not his personal experience with psychedelics involved known-bad choices is completely irrelevant to the results of his research. Unless you have any concrete evidence for bias in the design or analysis of his surveys, it is you who's building a false narrative.
That’s existential clarity. There is no such thing as color in light. There is no scientific reason to believe in free will. Still, an awareness of this doesn’t change our experience that there are colours and we have choices.
What would be interesting is to understand the mechanisms of “mild delusions” that the brain creates to allow/motivate us to function. And why this is inhibited in some people after using psychedelics.