But that is the politics of the drug. I cannot help but comment on some aspects of the medical ethics that accompanied these studies. Here were a collection of 14 schizophrenic patients, experimental cattle is the analogy that comes to mind, into which the researching physicians injected their drug. Listen to the account of one lady, following a rapid intravenous injection of bufotenine. "There was intense salivation. She could easily have drowned in her own saliva, and she had to be turned on her side. The pulse rate rose slightly during the period extending from the end of the injection until some 10 minutes later, but without much change in blood pressure. Responsiveness returned in about 23 minutes, at which time the patient was entirely lucid and, in response to a query related to a preinjection suggestion, spoke of a long repressed memory from the age of three years, when she came into the bathroom and saw her mother dying of a uterine hemorrhage. This was told without affect and had no therapeutic consequences." HOLY COW! A schizophrenic victim volunteers a long-repressed memory of her mother's traumatic death. And with the state of the healing art in the mental hospitals of that time, two physicians effectively ignore what today would be considered a dramatic break-through in therapy. Another of their trials was acknowledged as being nearly fatal, requiring artificial respiration as intervention. This is research in the healing art of medicine?
Now I returned it back to TODO-list, thanks for interesting and inspiring comments in the thread.
