I think there is a problem with the perception (or rather claimed perception) of psychedelics in general and ayahuasca in particular in popular culture (or "Western" pop culture), that this Barry Cooper thing illustrates quite well.
It's a problem of confusion;
Are you taking ayahuasca for "self development" (what we old fogies would call "for fun" ) ?
Are you taking it because you are fed up, stressed out, and this is an experience that will allow you to unload, unburden yourself?
Do you have other psychological reasons for taking it? i.e. addiction or PTSD?
Are you taking it because you have a medical condition diagnosable by allopathic medicine? e.g. a degenerative neurological disorder, etc.
Do you need some kind of cultural precedent to make the ingestion of this psychedelic okay for you?
I presume the majority of Euro-American people who take ayahuasca do it for the first reason. I don't believe the thousands of young people who pass through the eco-ayahuasca tourism circuit in South America every year, or those who attend "ceremonies" at home, usually suffer from very much more than the sort of cultural ennui that effects all of us (and is in reality more a blessing than a curse).
And yet, how often do these people, or indeed how often in this thread, is ayahuasca referred to as "medicine".
Ayahuasca; This is not a drug, it is a medicine.
Cannabis, not a drug, but a medicine.
This pint of stout? Medicina.
This chip butty? Medicine my friend! Solo por curar!
I'm not saying ayahuasca not very valuable as a medicine, it clearly is. I'm saying that it would be much better for everybody if we were quite clear about when and how it is being used as medicine, and when it is being used for self development, or -other-.
So, what's my point? Hmmm. I think my point is that the real problem is that of people seeking treatment for serious ailments being lumped together with people with, shall we say somewhat trivial ailments, but the latter are also insisting on "medicine".