
Single psilocybin dose may make lasting personality change - MaysonL
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-09-dose-hallucinogen-personality.html
======
bherms
Psilocybin use definitely changed me for the better. The first time I did it
was one of the most eye-opening and impacting experiences in my life. Since my
first trip, I've tried to work it into my life at least 1-2 times a year.
Every time I feel like I learn something new and/or come out a better person
by seeing certain aspects of life in a new light. It's something you only want
to try in controlled environments when your head is in the proper place (no
hidden depression or anything lurking in the back of your mind), but when done
right, with the right people, it can be an amazing experience and I highly
recommend to everyone with the proper mindset.

~~~
WA
The emphasis is on: done right, with the right people.

There is a reason why drugs are prohibited in many countries. People don't use
them "correctly" and can become messed up pretty heavily.

I took shrooms when I was 18. After an initial phase of a lot of hardly
controllable laughter, I experienced the strongest fear that I ever had in my
life. Basically, the fear to remain stuck on this trip - nothing unusual by
the way, as I figured out later by reading reports from other people. The main
fear for me was to be stuck in this situation where your brain isn't filtering
anything anymore. I was literally sitting around UNABLE to do anything. I
mean, somehow I knew how to do a more complicated thing (like building another
joint), but somehow I was incapable of performing the necessary steps. It was
frightening, especially since there was no supervisor who could lead me out of
this spiral of fear. The fear lasted only for 2 hours or so, then the trip was
over as I fell asleep.

But I had panic attacks for another 6 months. Also a very typical time frame
for many people. No fun. Stressful places, loud dogs, everything noise sort of
made me feel anxious. On the other hand, it was a time where I thought about
myself A LOT. I mean, really a lot. After 6 months, I somehow emerged with new
self-confidence which grew a lot over time way beyond the self-confidence I
had before (which could also be just a side-effect of getting older, I don't
know).

So, now I wouldn't like to miss that experience. I don't know how it changed
me, but I certainly do recommend that people should never try hallucinogenic
drugs without supervision - people who can help you mentally to escape states
of fear.

~~~
tokenadult
_There is a reason why drugs are prohibited in many countries._

I used to think that all educated adults had read the same books about history
I had, but I was surprised when I was in law school that my professor of
criminal law and criminal procedure had never heard about why drug laws in
east Asia and southeast Asia are very harsh. The painful experience of China
after defeat in the Opium Wars means that several countries of Asia view
promotion of drug use among their populace as an instrument of foreign
colonialist oppression. The zero-tolerance policies (including the death
penalty for possession of quite small amounts of prohibited drugs) in those
countries flow directly from a historical experience in which a drugged
population became easier rather than harder to oppress. On historical grounds,
and on observation of the Grass Roots Party (a political party in my state
supporting legalization of marijuana), I'm not at all sure that easier access
to drugs makes a populace happier or more free.

~~~
dreamdu5t
I disagree. Most drug laws have little basis in any kind of rational
motivation, in the East or West. Though I know about the historical events
you're referring to, I don't think they're as connected as you imply.

------
throwaway33422
I once had a single, very high dose Psilocybin experience which lead to a
lasting change that was very much for the worse.

Having had my perception of reality profoundly changed by the experience I
began to question my senses on a regular basis, with associated anxiety and
panic. Then there were also the nightmares where I was tripping, would wake
up, have something weird / trippy happen have a "world is ending" anxiety
attack complete with ears ringing so loudly its painful. Then I'd wake up from
that, with similar results, only to wake up from that. Never really sure if I
was fully awake or not.

Thankfully after 18 months or so, it went away.

Of course, your mileage my vary :-)

I personally am in favour of this type of research but just wanted to share my
experience. Its not all beer and skittles!

~~~
throwaway7-2521
To echo that point... my pure-shroom experiences were generally positive, but
one time mixing with MDMA resulted in a very strong experience that by the end
involved some paranoia about keeping my thoughts and public utterances
separate. That paranoia would occasionally mildly recur the next year or so.
That's now many years ago, but I still wonder if crazy street people talking
to themselves just mixed too many things, too many times creating permanent
confusion.

------
MarkPNeyer
i took mushrooms once, and documented my experience. i've gone back and re-
read it several times, and each time i do so, i both laugh like crazy and
realize i was getting glimpses of ideas i'm only now starting to understand.

if you want to read it, here it is:

<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9465583/ShroomReport.pdf>

~~~
edtechre
How is that enlightening? The doc makes you sound like an imbecile.

~~~
steve_b
That's pretty harsh. I bet you Huxley's original notes for Doors Of Perception
were probably jumbled too. But both DoP and Mark's notes allude to the same
thing: without a valve on our consciousness, we'd just sit around all day and
be blown away by the creases in our jeans.

Edit: oh ya, and thanks for sharing Mark.

~~~
hartror
Seconded, thanks for sharing Mark. A number of friends have gone through life
altering trips such as you describe, there appear to be positive things that
can be gleaned from psychedelics about oneself.

That said I had one friend who didn't come back and ended up in an institution
for a period of months. He had a number of underlying issues that the drug
brought to the fore. It was a horrible experience for all involved.

~~~
Radix
Would you elaborate on this? Did he come out of it twelve months in? it's rare
to find negative commentary on psilocybin on the internet. Only a couple
warnings in the thread now.

~~~
hartror
He took some at a party I was at and freaked out. I nursed him for a few
hours, he babbled the same phrase over and over until his housemates came and
picked him up. I've been told since that he had freaked out before and had
been fine once he came down so they treated this incident the same. Took him
home and sat with him till he calmed down and put him to bed.

The next morning he was still acting strangely, not making sense etc. They
kept an eye on him that day figuring he was just tired and worn out. But the
next day he was worse so they got him into a psych hospital after some
difficulty (he wouldn't go at first). He was put on anti-psychotics and stayed
there for a couple of months.

He was released back into his parent's care, he is from the UK and this
happened in Australia. So he went back to the UK and reportedly has found god
and is doing fine. (apart from the religion thing ;)

------
Triumvark
The phrase "measured on a widely used and scientifically validated personality
inventory" jumps out at me. What does that really mean?

Myers-Briggs is 'widely used' and proponents would probably argue it has been
'empirically validated' (by this one study no one can reproduce...). Myers-
Briggs still lacks the "retest reliability" necessary for this sort of
analysis.

In fact, in most personality tests, you'd expect wild swings in personality
without drugs, even by just waiting a day.

Stop right here. Go watch Ben Goldacre on "Bad Science:"
[http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science.h...](http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science.html)

Now, stop giving any attention to campy press release results. I don't even
really disagree with the thesis here, but without a full description of the
methods, and probably a metanalysis of previous work in this field, the
'canned results' buzzers should be ringing loudly in all of our heads.

------
redthrowaway
I'm not surprised. Given the number of people who claim hallucinogenic drugs
have had a massive, lasting impact on their lives, I expected to see empirical
support of same at some point.

It's sad that the War on Drugs has made conducting research of this kind so
difficult; It has the potential to provide powerful insights into how our
minds work.

------
aheilbut
I don't doubt it, but reading a book may make a lasting personality change
too.

~~~
astrofinch
What book do you estimate has the greatest probability of causing lasting
personality change?

~~~
lusr
"Feeling Good" by David Burns. Sounds like a pop-psych title, but it is not.
At 28 years of age, I am fairly certain this is the most important book I have
ever and will ever read in my entire life (but then I desperately needed it -
it is the user's manual to my brain that has allowed me to debug so much of my
problematic thought processes).

~~~
charlieflowers
I will second this. I read it over 20 years ago, when I was 17, and it changed
my life. It is basically a friendly introduction to how to apply cognitive
therapy to yourself.

I've read a lot of books in my life that I said "Wow" about, but not many that
I _still_ say "Wow" about 20 years later.

~~~
lusr
I was about to say I envy you for having 10 extra years to apply clearer
thinking, but the funny thing is I discovered the book years ago and wasn't
interested in getting past the first chapter. It was only when I crashed hard
due to some messy circumstances that I realised I needed to go back to it and
read it properly (and to perform the exercises!).

------
tokenadult
It's regrettable that the HN submission about this that reached the front page
for sustained discussion is based on a press release rather than on follow-up
by independent journalists. Suffice it to say that this is an interesting
preliminary study finding, but it needs a lot of refinement and quite a bit of
replication before serving as a basis for self-medication by HN readers.

Earlier HN submissions based on journalistic reports of same study:

from yesterday:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3053068>

from 105 days ago:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2664252>

In general, press release services are just a guide to look for independent
accounts of someone's newly announced study finding. The researcher will
always be enthusiastic about his or her new finding, but a good journalist (a
rarity, I acknowledge, when it comes to science reporting) will provide
perspective and lessen the gee-whiz factor in the researcher's announcement
via press release.

------
lusr
'Nearly all of the participants in the new study considered themselves
spiritually active (participating regularly in religious services, prayer or
meditation).'

...

'In the study, the change occurred specifically in those volunteers who had
undergone a "mystical experience,"... He defines "mystical experience" as
among other things, "a sense of interconnectedness with all people and things
accompanied by a sense of sacredness and reverence."'

So they took a bunch of people prone to mystical experiences and found when
you give them hallucinogenics that they have further mystical experiences?

~~~
Tsagadai
It is pretty common to read or hear about spiritual, religious or mystical
experiences even from ardent atheists under hallucinogens. That evidence
raises a very interesting philosophical question.

~~~
lusr
It is common to _you_. But who are you? And therein lies the rub.

Anecdotal evidence isn't useful when it comes to research like this: I feel
that the experimental design is flawed by not balancing out this very
significant variable to be representative of the population at large
(estimates vary, but the non-religious make up from 2-20% of the population
depending who you ask and how you define the question).

 _My_ experience is that a significant portion of people in the world do not
identify themselves as spiritually active and that people these people do not
have such "mystical experiences", whether exposed to hallucinogenics or not.

~~~
dreamdu5t
Experiments with psychedelics are not really possible because psychedelics
present the intellectual paradox: Experiments are based on observational
evidence and psychedelics change the nature of observation itself.

The only thing you can do is questionnaires like the topic study.

------
markbao
Psilocybin and other psychoactive drugs of the sort somehow affect how we see
and think about things. I'm surprised more isn't being done to research these.
If it can have such a profound effect on perception and personality, research
into psychoactives could reveal insights into how we think and how our
personalities work. Fascinating stuff.

~~~
spiralganglion
And, it could undermine the last few decades of anti-drug propagandizing by
the government, DARE, etc. If the government can't justify its War On Drugs,
the billions of dollars funding it[1] would have to go somewhere else, and I'm
sure the military (and other recipients of this budget) would rather keep that
cash flowing.

I'm completely with you. These hallucinogenics have a growing mountain of
scientific evidence pointing to their substantial, measurable, repeatable
benefits. It's a crying shame that they're still being lumped in with the
other destructive, unhealthy, justifiably illegal substances.

[1] <http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock>

~~~
philwelch
Much of this scientific evidence--enough to incite further research and almost
enough to put the lie to the "no currently accepted medical use" criterion for
Schedule I drugs--is decades old and often predated prohibition.

------
thefool
I thought this type of research had been outlawed.

Glad it still occurs. I see a lot of potential for this sort of stuff both in
term of developing new therapies, but also in the sense of doing controlled
experiments to better understand perception and cognition in humans.

------
veidr
Many smart people I know try to work in a trip on mushrooms once a year or so.
Many of them are folks who don't generally even smoke weed or drink regularly,
which surprised me.

I think it is a good idea, and I try to do it, too.

But, I have a healthy respect for the potential downside of a psilocybin
experience, too. Many years ago, I ate some shrooms before a concert at the
L.A. Coliseum. There were some thuggish types and an air of violence in the
parking lot, and that was enough to set my trip down a bad road. An hour
later, I experienced a dark stadium full of bloody froth-mouthed humans, along
with some other lizardish creatures, killing and eating each other, to the
ear-splitting sound of huge metal sawblades grinding against each other, while
I huddled in my seat unable to move. It seemed to go on forever, but after it
was over I realized it was only 3-4 hours.

That experience was only in my mind, but it still had a lasting impact on me,
something like what I imagine being caught up in a murderous orgy of
cannibalism really would. For weeks afterwards, while glad to be back in the
real world, I was still nervous and averse to sudden noises, had many
nightmares, and was generally less happy. Eventually those effects diminished,
and I don't think I suffer from any kind of permanent damage (although, how
can you really know).

But I now make sure to prepare a calm stress-free environment before doing
psilocybin.

~~~
puredemo
Yeah, that is definitely the wrong sort of environment to do them in.

Camping with best friends is a better environment.

~~~
khafra
Those of us who feel a bit uncomfortable and nervous when camping with friends
should just stick with the minds we have, then?

~~~
Radix
No, the two implications are that 1. You should be somewhere you feel safe.
Preferably with someone you feel safe. and 2. It is better to be outside in
nature. (1) is always spoken of as being crucial and (2) is something that is
oft repeated. I don't have any experience myself to say why (2) is so often
suggested.

~~~
bait
The whole being outside in nature thing is because of the character of the
visual perceptual distortions that occur on psychedelics.

Basically it perturbs the brain's pattern recognition systems, and causes them
to look much more strongly and insistently for patterns and regularities in
the input. Therefore, to get the best effect, one should feed in highly
irregular images, such as the messy, fractal-ish geometry of nature.

When you look at tree bark or grass or clouds on psilocybin, your brain tries
furiously to see a pattern or regularity in it, and as a result your
perception of it constantly shifts and rearranges.

When you stay indoors and look at manmade things with human-conceived
geometric shapes, the patterns are already there and your brain sees them
immediately. At best this is boring, and at worst it can cause you to become
fixated in a way that is quite uncomfortable.

This isn't the most eloquently worded explanation but I'm sure most people
here can tell what I'm talking about. Psychedelics have a lot to teach us
about the workings of perceptual cognition as well as about more spiritual
matters.

------
salemh
Poll for Yea / Nay of HN's? Anonymous?

Some LSD discussions <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=695947>
<http://apps.ycombinator.com/item?id=895962> (v sensory deprivation)

------
pnathan
I am not favorable to unregulated use of drugs. I've known a couple drug-
users, and been around quite a few. For whatever reason, their lives were/are
not good. Success (in any realm) did not seem to be theirs. There seemed to be
an unwholesomeness that pervaded their lives.

Now, that is anecdotal datum, and it is of course reasonable and plausible
that an analytical and careful approach to the business produces a better
effect than simply taking bong hits for the lulz.

Therapeutic drug use, IMO, should be investigated with all due scientific
process and rigor.

~~~
pjscott
Which drugs are you talking about? There's a wide range here; something like
LSD is not as dangerous as, say, methamphetamine or tobacco.

Also, you're ignoring the possibility that the "unwholesomeness" of their
lives, and general propensity for failure, caused their regular drug use,
rather than vice versa.

It doesn't sound like you're being entirely honest in your reasoning here.

------
thyrsus
I just took the test here <http://www.123test.com/personality-test/> , which
appears to measure this "openness" trait, and it says I'm already on the far
end of open. My tradition doesn't contain, and I don't think I've ever
experienced, "sartori", but if I ever get a tinge of boredom, I start tying to
imagine the scale and complexity of the subatomic and relativistic models of
the phenomena I'm experiencing (e.g., photons as probability waves moving at
light speed and then an infinitesimal fraction of them collapsing in
interactions with atoms in my retina), and I'm instantly fascinated. So the
question is, would a psychedelic experience really change me?

------
Alex3917
If anyone is interested in learning more about the science of psychedelics,
I'd recommend checking out the Horizons conference if you're going to be in
NYC on Oct. 16th:

<http://www.horizonsnyc.org>

The speakers list is pretty awesome this year.

------
rohit89
Is there some place where you can read the experiences of people ?

~~~
simon_weber
Check out erowid.

~~~
bait
Bear in mind that the trip reports on erowid suffer a massive self selection
bias.

Theyre not biased towards positive or negative experiences, just towards
incredibly earnest depictions of the drug experience. People don't bother to
write up the boring shit.

------
robot
Pity it doesn't describe how the level of openness has changed. It doesn't
even say if some people became more open or less open.

------
beaker
Those who are quick to judge, really you're not curious at all?

------
vziard
Well no shit, right?

------
michaelochurch
A few things I'm going to say.

First, these drugs aren't "hallucinogens". They're _psychedelics_ (mind-
revealing). A hallucination is a false perception which the person believes to
be real; _visuals_ are perceptions that the person knows are not real, such as
"light shows". Except at very high doses, these drugs don't produce
hallucinations _per se_. Other drugs can, but LSD and psilocybin generally do
not. Ok, that may be a pedantic note but the term "hallucinogen" is incorrect
and I think it's important to point that out, because much of the stigma
associated with these drugs is the misconception that they generally produce
true hallucinations (which are extremely dangerous, except for the kind that
occur in the 8-hour-long catatonic state that the body and brain require each
day).

Second, I'm 28 and I've known a lot of people who've used these drugs. The
dangers are real. I'm not saying, "Don't do them." I am saying that if you
choose to do so, you're on the frontier of something whose upsides are
intensely personal and difficult to measure (this doesn't make them "not
real", not in the least) and whose dangers are serious. Then again, so are the
dangers of alcohol, which is legal and socially accepted.

It's important to understand, even though that attitude is mostly wrong, _why_
society holds negative views toward this sort of drug use. It's because the
upsides (positive personal experiences) are invisible except to the user,
while the downsides (psychological damage) are quite visible and affect other
people. Also, most of society sees absolutely no distinction between pleasure-
seeking, stupid, and possibly self-destructive drug use (cocaine, heroin,
inhalants, methamphetamine) and exploratory drug use (LSD, psilocybin). Most
of us know that there's a world of difference between those two patterns of
use and the types of people who pursue them, but most of society has no clue.
They think people use LSD because it's "fun" and as a party drug, not as a
means for growth.

Guilt and anxiety are two psychological hurdles to positive drug experiences.
As for guilt, I explained why society considers drug use to be "morally
wrong", not because that attitude is right but because one needs to understand
it. If you've internalized it, it's something you're up against and need to
resolve before you touch a single drug. You should examine your own morality
and make sure you're 100% OK with what you're about to do. If you have
reservations, don't do it. Don't _ever_ use drugs because of "peer pressure"
either, because it's always OK not to use drugs (you're not missing out on
that much). But if you do decide to use a drug, don't spend a single second of
thought on that guilt. It's now in your body, and it will leave, and there's
not much you can do. But I'm prepared to say that, no, drug use does not make
you a bad person. :) It may be unwise in many circumstances, but it doesn't
make you "bad".

Anxiety is more of an issue. If you have issues with anxiety, depression, or
panic, you should probably stay away from psychedelic drugs outright. This
includes alcohol. I developed panic disorder in the least "druggy" means
possible (working on Wall Street through a nasty throat infection that
eventually put me in a hospital) and aside from an occasional beer (and I
limit myself to one) I haven't touched a substance like this since then (that
was March 2008). My PD is manageable at this point (about 2 attacks per month,
with frequency and intensity continuing to decline) but I have no desire
whatsoever to roll the dice.

I would also note that legal drugs exist. This is important because one of the
worst things about some illegal drugs is that they are illegal; this is (1)
conducive to paranoia and guilt, and (2) a factor that means you will likely
have to form relationships with some pretty ugly people in order to get access
to these drugs. So, if "breaking the law" is an issue for you, there are legal
drugs out there. Psychoactive lotus is interesting and mildly psychedelic, and
seems to be innocuous. "Mind machines" (not a drug) can have similarly
interesting effects. Salvia I would advise people away from unless they know
what they are getting into. Don't be fooled by its legality: it's extremely
intense, and high-power extracts can produce a very unpleasant experience.

Ok, now some personal thoughts. If I had to describe psychoactive drugs in one
word, it'd be: _unnecessary_ , at least for most people. Their therapeutic
potential really _should_ be investigated by mainstream psychiatry, but I
don't think most people _need_ them in order to have powerful, beautiful
spiritual experiences. There's an arrogance in certain drug-using communities
about the power and singular importance of these experiences, mostly a
reaction to society's (unjustly) extreme negative attitude toward their
behavior. Those experiences can be interesting but are not a necessary part of
a deep, spiritual life. Not at all. Really, a lot of people use psychedelic
drugs and learn nothing. Timothy Leary was an outright mess (and an alcoholic)
toward the end of his life. Psychedelics can certainly show what's possible,
and that shouldn't be entirely discounted, but I don't think they're a good
substitute for a true spiritual path that becomes a deep part of one's life,
not "recreation" in 6-hour installments.

I've come to the conclusion that the effect of these drugs is to accelerate
karmic processes 100- to 1000-fold, so that you mentally "age" a few months in
a couple of hours. If what's ahead of you is spiritual growth, you might grow
a little faster and have a very positive experience. On the other hand, if
you're 3 months from a nervous breakdown that you might be able to avert
(therapy) if you have sufficient time, drug use is a seriously _bad_ idea
because this acceleration makes said breakdown more likely to occur
immediately and fiercely.

I think much of what gives psychedelic drug experiences their power is the
duration of an open-minded state. If you have the skill and focus to hold a
mindful, meditative state for _one_ hour, much less 6, you will have a very
potent experience-- probably much more meaningful than most drug trips. I
don't want to give the impression that this is easy. It takes a lot of work
and study to get to that level of skill. You've probably been meditating for
months, if not years, before you can keep a mindful or meditative state for an
hour. Once you develop this skill, however, it's very much worth it and you
will have no need for (and probably not much interest in) psychedelic drugs.

One note I'll also point out is that the "failure mode" in meditation is non-
experience, which is much softer a landing than the failure mode of drug use,
which is an intensely negative and potentially damaging experience.

Ok, I'm done. I know that was long, but this is one of the most important
decisions that young people face and most go into it without enough
information, so I felt it to be worth the volume of text.

~~~
lansing
Non-experience is not the only "failure mode" possible in meditation. Most
practitioners find that, as with many spiritual or psychological practices,
things get more difficult before they improve. Having partial insight into the
nature of reality, without the non-identification that comes with awakening,
can make one's suffering a lot more apparent and "real" feeling.

For more in depth discussion of the kind of insights I'm referring to,
consider the Theravada tradition's map of the progress of insight,
specifically stages 5-9.

[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.h...](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html)

Those familiar with Christian mysticism will see the parallels with St John of
the Cross's "dark night of the soul."

Personally, I believe that issues I mention above apply to psychedelic use as
well, i.e., it's possible to stumble into early stages of insight via drug
use. This can be even trickier than when it happens via meditation, because
typically drug users are not equipped with a framework to make sense of what's
happening.

Does meditation on its own ever lead to things like psychosis? Well, I've
practiced at a number of meditation centers in the U.S. and Asia, and I've
certainly heard plenty of stories of what happens when psychologically
unstable people come to do an intense period of practice...

~~~
kragen
> Well, I've practiced at a number of meditation centers in the U.S. and Asia,
> and I've certainly heard plenty of stories of what happens when
> psychologically unstable people come to do an intense period of practice...

The rest of us haven't. What do the stories say?

------
derleth
One reason I won't take them, then. I like who I am.

~~~
jarin
Hey, I like who I am too. But I know that I can be better.

~~~
Jach
I want to be better, too, and I'm continually working at becoming such. But
I'm not convinced that tripping is a guaranteed way to betterness, nor how
much better any accidental betterness would really be.

~~~
burgerbrain
Nothing is a guarantee in life.

~~~
Jach
And not all probabilities are equal. I haven't implied there exists something
which is a guarantee, I have stated that I don't think taking drugs is a
guarantee to becoming better. Being more technical, taking drugs as an action
for becoming better is heavily outweighed by other options in my expected
utility function, both probabilistically and in amount of utility. (Of course
this could change.)

