Assessing risk when it comes to psychedelic use is no easy task. Much of what we know about the potential dangers of these substances stems from outdated research conducted in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. This body of knowledge is riddled with studies that would not meet today’s scientific standards, urban legends, and unverified news stories.
In a 1984 paper, psychiatrist Rick Strassman pointed out that reporting adverse events related to psychedelics is often subjective. Some view the drug-induced state as pathological, while others see adverse reactions as a means of breaking free from societal constraints and achieving a higher level of consciousness. Recent studies on the harms of LSD and other hallucinogens often rely on flawed data from decades ago, lacking crucial information about subjects and experimental conditions.
While it may be tempting to draw conclusions from individual case reports or sensational news stories, Krebs and Johansen stress the importance of taking a statistical approach to risk assessment. They remind us that every action carries some level of risk. When it comes to reports of mental distress linked to psychedelic use, it is crucial to consider the following:
1) Adverse effects of psychedelics are typically short-lived, with serious psychiatric symptoms resolving within 24 hours or a few days.
2) Both mental illness and psychedelic use are common in the general population, leading to many coincidental associations.
3) The onset period of adverse effects following psychedelic use is often misunderstood or exaggerated in case reports.
In conclusion, it is essential to approach discussions of psychedelic risks with caution and skepticism, considering the limitations of available data and the complex interplay of factors involved.