Johns Hopkins finds Sweet Spot with Psilocybin

[Muskogee Herbman]

John Hopkins Finds Optimum Beneficial Dose for Therapy
my apologies if this is already posted, noticed its an older study

The latest Psilocybin study at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine set out to discover the "sweet spot" dose of pure chemical Psilocybin that would offer users all the positive benefits while minimizing the negative effects. Researchers screened volunteers between the ages of 29 and 62, ensuring that they were of sound mind and body (as the saying goes), and chose 18 to undergo five sessions lasting eight hours each and timed a month apart. At four of these, the volunteers would receive varying doses of the chemical and a placebo (no drug) at the remaining session.

In common with other studies at Hopkins, volunteers in this one were settled into a comfy couch in an aesthetically-pleasing, living-room-like environment during each session and were accompanied by trained monitors. The subjects were encouraged to lie back and relax, with mood-complementing classical and world music being played through headphones. Neither the volunteers or the monitors knew beforehand how much Psilocybin they were to receive at each session but subjects were given preparatory guidance and coaching.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, researchers noted that the reported positive effects increased as higher doses were given, but also that there was a sharp increase in the negative aspects at the very highest dose. At the highest dose (30 mg/70 kg, p.o. - meaning "per oral" or by mouth), 78 percent of the volunteers were reporting one of the top five most spiritually significant happenings of their lives but those suffering anxiety, stress and fear episodes increased by six times, so that around a third of those participating in the study showed signs of psychological struggle.

By contrast, only one of the volunteers receiving the second highest dose (20mg/70 kg, p.o.) reported having negative issues, and all benefited from positive experiences, although with less intensity than at the highest dose. Critically, even the lowest amount used in the study resulted in notable and long-lasting positive changes in the attitudes, behavior, overall satisfaction and spiritual beliefs of the subjects during the period of study. These changes were also noticed by family members and friends.

"We seem to have found levels of the substance and particular conditions for its use that give a high probability of a profound and beneficial experience, a low enough probability of psychological struggle, and very little risk of any actual harm," says lead author of the study, Roland Griffiths, Ph.D.

Those who received a small taster before a higher dose were observed as being even more likely to reap the benefits than those who were only given the higher dose.

A month after the conclusion of the study, 61 percent rated the experience as being the single most important spiritual experience of their lives and 14 months later, 94 percent of the volunteers rated it in their top five.

 

[Nathanial.Dread]

Hmm, that should work out to between 2-3.5 g of dried mushrooms, if my back-of-the-envelope (literally) calculations are correct.

Blessings
~ND

 

[concombres]

Hmm, that should work out to between 2-3.5 g of dried mushrooms, if my back-of-the-envelope (literally) calculations are correct.

Blessings
~ND

:lol: Not to undermind the study, Very good work going on & it is exciting to read about the progress they are making with this study, but they just discovered the typical dosage everyone seems to already know to shoot for with dry mushrooms.

I guess the work here is not to show the positive effects to those who already know first hand but rather to enlighten the general public & government on the fact that psilocybin is a beneficial medicine when used appropriately contrary to what has been drilled into their heads through propeganda the last 60 years.

 

[anne halonium]

lol.

scientists confirm,
what we have known for decades.

were the world experts.
but it aint a fact till we see it on PBS i guess.

 

[Muskogee Herbman]

Its not true unless a scientist says it :lol: yay for hierarchy lmao

 

[anne halonium]

^
its disturbing for many reasons.

we do the research " the hard way"
often under fire from LEO ,
and then a pack of noob scientists scoops us and claims glory.
only in our convoluted world would this be possible.
think of the thousands of us researching, and the fortunes involved, over decades.

we get slapped with this stuff , im shocked we take it.
i coulda saved my self the price of a mercedes and decades of work......
if i just woulda sat back and let harvard figure it out.
but ,were way too cool as nexians, to sit back and wait.

fact is , its essentially scientific plagiarism.
they could have asked us.....
but then , what good are they , if we already know.

next they are gonna declare hydro cactus as plausable.........
(and the utility of fire and the wheel)

if thats the big discovery,
cut off their funding and send the bux to nexus instead!
for that budget, we would have gladly told them to
"take 3 grams and call us in the morning"............
and ,it would have been expert experienced advice.

we have the worlds largest best trained army of volunteer guinea pigs.
and its a fact jack.
spare us the middleman harvard , and ask a talking lab rat!!!!!!!

the real joke is, "academia" is at least 20 yrs in our wake.
they should use thier psil stockpiles , to calm their egos on these great break thrus.
hopefully, they will figure out that use for the stuff next!

 

[Gone-and-Back]

^
we have the worlds largest best trained army of volunteer guinea pigs.
and its a fact jack.

the real joke is, "academia" is at least 20 yrs in our wake.

This is all sad, funny, and very true.
A lot of the research that has come out lately about psychedelics I feel is all stuff that I have found on the nexus in my few years of being here, and some of it dates back before that even. We are not trained academic scholors though, so it is not taken as fact or real knowledge except by those that are part of this community.

As for the largest and best trained army of volunteer guinea pigs, this is spot on. I think any one of us would jump at an opportunity to take doses of different psychedelics in the name of science and consciousness exploration. Tell me where the sign up sheet is and I'll be there, no doubt about it!

 

[anne halonium]

Tell me where the sign up sheet is and I'll be there, no doubt about it!

the irony is, we have been holding the clipboard and roster , all along.
harvard should send us money and volunteer scientists.

we will set them straight:thumb_up:

the lab rats, have become the masters it seems.............

 

[BringsUsTogether]

^
fact is , its essentially scientific plagiarism.
they could have asked us.....
but then , what good are they , if we already know.

next they are gonna declare hydro cactus as plausable.........
(and the utility of fire and the wheel)

if thats the big discovery,
cut off their funding and send the bux to nexus instead!
for that budget, we would have gladly told them to
"take 3 grams and call us in the morning"............
and ,it would have been expert experienced advice.

To be fair, I don't think any of us have conducted double blind experiments on psilocybin therapy...

 

[Nathanial.Dread]

The data coming out of Johns-Hopkins is useful for a number of reasons, despite the fact that it's 'stuff we already know:'

1) It's placebo controlled - given how much mindset and expectations play into the psychedelic experience, if you want to do objective analysis, a placebo really is an absolute *must have* for a researcher. Any effects that appear in both placebo and active conditions can be dismissed as a psychological effect, not a result of the drug itself.

2) The setting is controlled. This one should be obvious. If one person eats shrooms at a rave, one in a field, one at a house party, two with their loved ones, one for the 10th time, one for the first time, etc, there's no consistency with the set, setting, so getting a useful data set is hard.

3) The data is quantitative. Again, this should be obvious. There's not much you can do with rambling written reports about "expanding consciousness into the matrix of universal potentiality," but there is a LOT you can do with a validated questionnaire and some standard deviations.

4) This stuff forms policy. If you want psychedelics legalized for medical use, you need to speak the language of the Powers That Be. Erowid trip reports and earnest feelings will not get the job done.

5) This lays the ground work for more investigative work into the neurobiology of psychedelic drugs. Carhart-Harris et al would not have been able to do the groundbreaking modeling work that they have without Griffiths et al's work showing that psychedelics can be administered safely in a hospital environment.

Blessings
~ND

 

[endlessness]

Excellent post Nathanial.Dread

 

[anne halonium]

To be fair, I don't think any of us have conducted double blind experiments on psilocybin therapy...

me and maid eat heroic doses together.
and were both blinded by the light.

thats good enough for me.
i still think science has a long way to catch up .
scientists could save alot of time, learning OUR language.

we are far too tolerant of science and various "churches" usurping our high ground.

this is like cannabis growers winning the grow war,
and then having cig companies take it all over.

we should learn from history on this.

 

[endlessness]

We've had talks with the john hopkins crew and you can be sure they certainly are listening to us and very open to the knowledge we have gathered

It's not an 'us vs them' situation, it's rather an 'us and them versus misinformation/lack of knowledge/bad policies' scenario

 

[anne halonium]

and cig companies.........
are certainly watching the cannabis growers.

the question is, will they recognize the soldiers on the front line,
or will the generals declare victory like they fought the war themselves.

its history cliff notes and revisionism,
if we arent up front.

we did the work.
we get the ribbons and purple hearts for it.
let them earn theirs.

so what if they are scientists, were alchemist growers.
and the scientists are way out classed on air miles on this one.

 

[pitubo]

2) The setting is controlled. This one should be obvious. If one person eats shrooms at a rave, one in a field, one at a house party, two with their loved ones, one for the 10th time, one for the first time, etc, there's no consistency with the set, setting, so getting a useful data set is hard.

Actually, this is something that I would like very much to see better researched: the effect that these different settings have on the experience. This study doesn't address it very much AFAICS.

4) This stuff forms policy. If you want psychedelics legalized for medical use, you need to speak the language of the Powers That Be. Erowid trip reports and earnest feelings will not get the job done.

Well, I want it legalized for personal use. They may not get The Man's job done, but some of the subjective reports found here and on erowid really are the works.

Blahblah such as "expanding consciousness into the matrix of universal potentiality" is just blahblah, I agree. That sort of discussion does indeed happen too, but is only a detraction of the real thing. Categorizing every report like that does no justice to many of the excellent reports of individual experiences.

5) This lays the ground work for more investigative work into the neurobiology of psychedelic drugs. Carhart-Harris et al would not have been able to do the groundbreaking modeling work that they have without Griffiths et al's work showing that psychedelics can be administered safely in a hospital environment.

True, this kind of scientific research has its place and its use. The sooner the detrimental labeling of "druugs.. baaaad.. muuuhh.." is cleared the better - for all participants.

 

[concombres]

We've had talks with the john hopkins crew and you can be sure they certainly are listening to us and very open to the knowledge we have gathered

It's not an 'us vs them' situation, it's rather an 'us and them versus misinformation/lack of knowledge/bad policies' scenario

^This is how I see it. This information is not new to us here. BUT in order for psilocybin to be accepted & used as a medicine, the foundation has to be laid by the right people. Once this information is regarded as credible & scientificly accurate according to above ground research, it opens the doors for further research.

The general population has been lied to & scared away from substances we have explored & had first hand experience with for years, so it will take a bit of catching up & proving what we have already verified by mainstream science before the government & public is willing to accept the fact that medicines like psilocybin have the positive benefits they do.

Personally, i see this effect directly every day. I have family members who did not agree with my psychedellic use or take it seriously until I started showing them legitimate research via various organizations that is beginning to validate & support the positive effects of using these drugs as medicine. They seem to be coming around now & much less skeptical when I speak about using psychedellics to do internal work.

Honestly, if I live to see the day even a single psychedellic compound is widely accepted as medicine & the stigmas & legal issues surrounding it`s use dissolved, i will be happy in a way I never have before.
I cannot speak for everyone, but as someone with a passion & deep involvement with psychellics, there is a part of me that has to remain hidden from most of society for my own protection.
Conversation can be a bit strained in public settings like work, stores, etc. when the thing that interests you most is considered taboo & dangerous.

 

[Nathanial.Dread]

Lets also remember that these scientists are NOT just co-opting things that we psychonauts have known for ages. Plenty of the studies being done on psilocybin in humans has been absolutely groundbreaking and these results are not things that anyone was likely to discover by just tripping by themselves or their loved ones, no matter how much introspection they engaged in.

Also, you'll never hear us admit it in public, for fear of loosing academic standing, but many people researching psychedelics have been touched by them in one way or another. Without outing myself too much, I work in neuroscience research, on a psychedelic project currently, and my psychedelic experiences have informed pretty much all of my research in one way or another, even the projects that have nothing to do with psychedelic drugs.

Blessings
~ND

 

[concombres]

Lets also remember that these scientists are NOT just co-opting things that we psychonauts have known for ages. Plenty of the studies being done on psilocybin in humans has been absolutely groundbreaking and these results are not things that anyone was likely to discover by just tripping by themselves or their loved ones, no matter how much introspection they engaged in.

Also, you'll never hear us admit it in public, for fear of loosing academic standing, but many people researching psychedelics have been touched by them in one way or another. Without outing myself too much, I work in neuroscience research, on a psychedelic project currently, and my psychedelic experiences have informed pretty much all of my research in one way or another, even the projects that have nothing to do with psychedelic drugs.

Blessings
~ND

I agree completely. There is much unexplored territory with psychedellics still. The neuroscience & pharmacology aspects are 100% not something we can get too much information on without scientific research & IMHO play a very importan role in understanding these medicines & how they function.

To touch on the topic of scientists who use psychedellics & also research, this has always been fairly obvious to me, from a scientific standpoint, how can one research something so interesting & not experience it? It seems by nature a scientist researching a compound like this would surely be curious & even if only for raw data & understanding further, feel compelled to experience what they are researching first hand.

The fact that psychedellic research is re-emerging now IMO seems to be connected to the fact that those who were young & experimenting in the last 3 decades or so have progressed in life & gained positions that make research possible again.

 

[Chan]

I'm all over the Johns Hopkins stuff, and with the books to prove it. Have been for quite a few years now.

When a relative's parent was diagnosed with terminal cancer, I offered them a copy of Grob's paper about psilocybin and existential anxiety in terminal cancer patients. The relative (not the cancer patient) is a newly-qualified doctor themselves, and not averse to 'hedonism' either...

We did a funny kind of eye-dance. I said here's some stuff about psilocybin, you might be interested in for your dad, and if you think he might be interested ahem, then let me know...

The reply: I know where you're headed, I think it's great, thank you, but I cannot touch this with a 1000 foot pole, because I'll be struck off, or worse...

I wasn't asking him to 'touch' anything. I was only asking him to read something, and decide if it was something he should speak to his dying father about. Only then, if both were in agreement, I made it clear, would I 'facilitate' anything, and he had only to be 'nearby' in case of emergency.

Anyway, the idea died there and then, and his father too, not long after. In agony, with much grief, mostly about why more couldn't have been done.

And they're a family of doctors and lawyers, who look down on the rest of us because we don't spend half our lives in the Caribbean...

So, my compassion, and understanding, is somewhat stretched in this area, when the very professionals who could be helping, choose not to, simply to save their sorry asses and enjoy a quiet, and wealthy, unprincipled life, shilling for Big Pharma til the inevitable comes to their own doorstep...

 

[anne halonium]

are not things that anyone was likely to discover by just tripping by themselves or their loved ones, no matter how much introspection they engaged in.
~ND

theres plenty of room for scientists to explore,
beyond the capability of the typical tripper.

let it be understood im not anti academia.

without details exceeding the community guidelines,
id suggest some of us exceeded the " friends and loved ones" ( stadium, cough) decades ago.

of course i love a good science project with big names players.
but ,to catch up on human studies,
they are gonna need to double book the bleachers at harvard stadium for yrs.
( name bands would be nice, but im not pushing that detail in the rider)

1 subject is a beginning, hundreds of subjects a project,
many 1000's of subjects,over decades, is a understanding.

as amazing as academia is,
its gona be a while before they administer field tests in large strip clubs..........
and seriously, ya dont get people till ya seen em trip naked in groups.
just saying.

this also suggests that if ya trip in a medical setting , ya learn more,
or that we somehow arent holy enough to make an observation ourselves.
the community has democratized research thru vacume.
no turning back.


the sensible thing, would be for science to take the field testers seriously.
thats the core of my angle on this.
at no point , am i anti science on all this.
im simply pro full awareness of the entire spectra of players ,
and the contributions of the clandestine wing of the movement.

the work the community has done, is not trivial.
our works have been documented.
inclusive doesnt mean we need their stamp of approval to join in,
inclusive suggests they should take field experience VERY seriously.
and they should, considering the the cows left the barn entirely on hallucinogens control ,
decades ago, ...........the lab rats have escaped the lab long enough to breed it seems.

this is not a new controversy or divide.
the core of this dates back to timothy leary and his departure from academia ,
to the hallucinogenic clandestine research movement................
tim was one of "them", and, then he chose to become one of "US",
and he crossed over for a reason.
let us not forget that.
im quite certain, they havent forgot that often overlooked detail.


nuf said from annie and the lab rats.