MAPS Why do MAPS and others only push PTSD and end of life crisis for research?

S

ScheduleFun

Guest
Hi. Everytime I see research being done with psycs, cannabis or any others with funding; its always PTSD with troops, or end of life crisis with cancer paitents etc. Why isnt more research done in other realms like Mushrooms for OCD?

Is this a clever way to bypass schedule arguments that the medication "has zero medical use."

How could all the other benefits be worded to fit that if this is the case?
 
It is a beginning. Hopefully it will continue to grow into all sorts of areas where it could be helpful. While some might discount these two applications as "playing it safe" in order to change public perception in and beyond the medical community, PTSD in veterans in particular is an urgent issue right now and since this is the only therapy that is having success, that makes it pretty compelling to stay on the front burner.

I can see so many applications that would be worthy of study and I have faith that the not too distant future we will be able to see many more. I agree with you that OCD along with many other diagnosed "disorders" would be ripe for scientific research into the use of psychoactive substances.
 
Exactly. It makes sense to "play it safe" in these initial phases, when use of drugs that are also used recreationally continues to be stigmatized.

ebola
 
Last edited:
^Do you think that the term "medical marijuana" is still defined as a cancer/pain treatment, or that other symptoms like insomnia and anxiety apply now?
 
I've experienced an opening up in my past social anxiety from OCD by using MDMA and mushrooms before. I dunno if I would have had the same experience in a medical setting. Its hard to tell really.
 
I agree with herbavore that they are probably prioritizing, I also think they need to play it safe. It's a step by step process, they can't do it all at once and a large part of it is breaking the societal stigmas about psychedelics.

Very little is understood about these substances in the scientific community and if they just went full tilt straight away they could have a lot of negative outcomes and it would be all over. We need to learn from the mistakes of the 60s and not let it happen again.

MDMA is the safest psychedelic in terms of adverse reactions. If they can break the stigma of MDMA and prove how beneficial it can be then they will be able to move onto more powerful substances like LSD and psysilocybin.

If they were to start with more powerful psychedelics there would be a lot more adverse reactions. they will need to do a lot more research to manage the risks of other substances than they need to for MDMA. So they need to prove the concept before delving in too deep otherwise they would just get shut down. They have to take it one step at a time.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Top