• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Gwern's "LSD Microdosing" - No Beneficial Effects Found

Migrated topic.
jamie said:
I would think that the efficacy of microdosed LSD and other psychedelics would be increased in those who are already familiar with fuller range of the substances effects.

I microdose ergolines occasionally and I enjoy it. I have not microdosed LSD yet, only HBWR alkaloids..mostly because LSD is such a gem I don't want to put it towards that yet.
Click to expand...

I've microdosed LSD for approximately two weeks around a year ago.

I found it to be quite uplifting and pleasant. We're talking 12.5mcg early morning and mid afternoon. I think a lot of it is how you are prepared mentally to feel positive and be of a positive mind set. I really enjoyed it. I felt very very happy, very calm within myself, engaged in whatever I was doing creatively and in conversation with others. I listened more intently to others and felt a general sense of connectedness and empathy to all living things. I was far less stressed, more energy. I kept that flow rolling into my every day life and enjoy everything life deals me. If I need to reset and remember why I want to be a positive and engaged person, I'll have a yearly strong dose of LSD then reflect.

I'm sure long term it's probably not the best idea but It was a beautiful fortnight.
 
Even if it's a first, in this shape and form, I'd say it simply doesn't count as a "first". As I said, it doesn't read as scientific research, and it was done with disproportionate attention paid to protocol details while completely ignoring basics (such as dosage and identifying the drug).

I guess we totally could do a proper double-blind test here on the Nexus, with multiple volunteers.
 
obliguhl said:
I guess we totally could do a proper double-blind test here on the Nexus, with multiple volunteers.
Click to expand...

Can you design a study? I thought the same. The most expensive part would be sending in LSD samples for testing.
Click to expand...


I could be a good volunteer. I haven't tried lucy yet but have acquired some and am just waiting to hear back from the lab on results. I was planning to experiment with microdosing any how, after I experiment with my first macro dosing.
 
Nathanial.Dread said:
As far as I know, Gwern (however you might feel about him personally) is the ONLY person who has attempted to use placebo controls and blinding procedures to investigate microdosing, and for that, I take my hat off to him. Given how much set and setting influence our relationships with psychoactives, and the demonstrable power of the placebo effect, it seems silly to me that people are holding up their own, casual experimentation as 'data' for microdosing.

Plenty of people believe passionately that all kinds of New Age treatments make them feel better, even when the effects fall apart under experimental conditions (looking at you, homeopaths).

If it works for you, that's awesome: it totally works for me, I love it, it really helps with my OCD, but I acknowledge that it could be placebo.

Gwern may have the opposite problem: he comes off in this as pretty anti-psychedelic (or at the very least, spounts the kind of masturbatory 'rationalism' that might predispose him to discount psychedelic effects).

Until we can get a sizable population taking a controlled dose of a known drug under placebo controlled, double-blind conditions, I think the jury will have to remain out on the question of microdosing.

Blessings
~ND
Click to expand...

Has Nathaniel ever tried meditation with microdosing? Advanced meditation like closing one's eyes and using the void as a canvas. If not I highly recommend it! If you get deep enough the question of it being a placebo or not becomes pointless. Sample size of one, I get it, I'm not trying to prove you wrong. Just giving you an opportunity to examine things more closly :)
 
I could be experimenting with you too. I like LSD and microdosing in general, but I must say I do it more the mood lift, I don't target any specific conditions like cluster headache or the like.
I'm in if we design a protocol. I don't have mluch time now but I have enough time to selfperiment !
 
BringsUsTogether said:
ehud said:
Results back from EC! The stuff is good :) I only have one major hurtle to overcome before my first dance with lucy.
Click to expand...

That's awesome.:thumb_up: What dosage do you plan on using?
Click to expand...

I am deliberating on whether to go with something in-between 100-150, or half of that. I am undecided but I am leaning to the larger dose because I am not sure of how many opportunities I may have to try it.
 
To bring it back to Gwern for a moment, this is all nonsense:

...there is no solid evidence of what the dose-response curve would be for microdosing, even just the basic shape, much less specific dose levels that someone could tell me that my dose was all wrong and worthless. And it’s such a convenient fully-general excuse, a no true Scotsman: “Xμg didn’t work for you? Must’ve taken the wrong dose! Try again with [more/less]!” (But one man’s modus ponens is another man’s modus tollens…)
Click to expand...

To liken opinions about dose/response to a "no true Scotsman" is pretty poor reasoning, imo.

As is this:

Try again? Well, it is the obvious second experiment, trying multiple levels of doses (eg. 1, 2, and 3ml doses). But I’m not doing a second one: it took something like 6 months to get any level of certainty with the dose I was using, and if I bought more tabs, then that’s even more opportunity to argue that I bought bunk LSD or that the tabs differed in dose etc. Given that I didn’t see any benefits, I simply cannot justify taking more time to explore a potential supplement which failed the first test. It doesn’t begin to pass the cost-benefit/VoI test for me.
Click to expand...

Especially given that he had no validation of any of those variables the first time!

This whole writeup is a mess, imo. Did he try to conduct an experiment? Sure...but there are some pretty glaring holes, no? He has no clue what was on those tabs and in what quantities. To argue that repeating the experiment further compounds those issues ignores the fact that those are already glaring problems in the experimental design.

There are a number of other problematic issues, imo, but I'll leave it at this. Honestly, this reads (to me) as the work of someone more interested in showcasing their "analysis", statistical models, and experimental design than anything else. It looks like he had fun doing it, but his preemptively defensive position on several of the obvious flaws exposes, imo, pretty severe bias (or at least defensiveness :p).
 
SnozzleBerry said:
There are a number of other problematic issues, imo, but I'll leave it at this. Honestly, this reads (to me) as the work of someone more interested in showcasing their "analysis", statistical models, and experimental design than anything else. It looks like he had fun doing it, but his preemptively defensive position on several of the obvious flaws exposes, imo, pretty severe bias (or at least defensiveness :p).
Click to expand...

I admit that his reasoning is often flawed, especially with the dosage argument. It is very likely however, that what he had was LSD (assuming he was being honest when discussing how the LSD came into his possession). I don't think that the entire experiment was worthless. It does suggest that if we were to run a microdosing trial, we ought to use more than 10ug.
 
BringsUsTogether said:
SnozzleBerry said:
There are a number of other problematic issues, imo, but I'll leave it at this. Honestly, this reads (to me) as the work of someone more interested in showcasing their "analysis", statistical models, and experimental design than anything else. It looks like he had fun doing it, but his preemptively defensive position on several of the obvious flaws exposes, imo, pretty severe bias (or at least defensiveness :p).
Click to expand...

I admit that his reasoning is often flawed, especially with the dosage argument. It is very likely however, that what he had was LSD (assuming he was being honest when discussing how the LSD came into his possession). I don't think that the entire experiment was worthless. It does suggest that if we were to run a microdosing trial, we ought to use more than 10ug.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's "likely"...I'd agree with that statement. I'd even say I believe it was LSD. That said, why not confirm this? He seems fixated on parts of his experimental design, yet he couldn't be bothered to confirm the identity of the substance in question? Who knows how the blotter was laid or the actual potency? I don't, you don't, and he doesn't. Of all of us, he's the only person who could have taken any steps towards rectifying that. I generally don't believe anyone's claims when it comes to blotter (or other LSD) doses, because the average person has no way of knowing the potency of their dose and they usually go off of what someone told them.

Imo, the fact that the average person has no clue what dose is on their blotter is significant for this type of experiment, especially when the experimenter takes no steps to counter that ignorance.

Might people need more than 10µg to have successful microdosing experiences? Sure...but there's no way of knowing whether or not Gwern's experiment shows that, even for him, as we have no clue how much he actually took because he took no steps to verify that. That seems significant to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom