MESSAGE
| DATE | 2013-04-28 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Lets do more drugs
|
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/04/psychedlic/
Did you catch this little tibbit of news?
Timothy Leary really screwed things up for science. By abandoning the
scientific method for a mystical embrace of hallucinogenic drugs, the
Harvard-professor-turned-LSD-evangelist became a symbol of ’60s-era
drug-fueled degeneracy. Worse, the ensuing backlash pushed these drugs
underground and caused an enormously promising field of research to go
dormant for nearly half a century.
Or so say some scientists who met in Oakland, California last weekend
for a conference on the science and therapeutic potential of psychedelic
drugs. “The antics of Timothy Leary really undermined the scientific
approach to studying these compounds,” psychopharmacologist Roland
Griffiths of Johns Hopkins University told the audience.
But the times they are a-changin’. In recent years, a small cadre of
scientists has cautiously rekindled the scientific study of
psychedelics. At the conference, they reported new findings on how these
drugs scramble brain activity in ways that might help explain their
mind-bending effects. They’re also slowly building a case that these
drugs might help people with depression, anxiety and other disorders.
Roughly a dozen small clinical trials are now underway worldwide. But
the idea isn’t “take two tabs of acid and call me in the
morning.” Instead, these trials are testing the idea that
psychedelics taken in a therapist’s office as part of a series of
psychotherapy sessions can make talk therapy more effective.
'The illegality of these drugs ... is one of the greatest scandals in
modern research'
“Now that we’ve been able to start getting some evidence on the
benefits, it changes people’s calculus,” said Rick Doblin, the
founder and executive director of the Multidisciplinary Association for
Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), one of the meeting’s sponsors.
Doblin and MAPS have been battling regulators since the mid-80s to allow
research and clinical trials with psychedelics. The recent revival of
psychedelic science may be one sign their efforts are finally paying
off.
Public attitudes towards illegal drugs in general may be shifting. A
recent Pew Research Center survey, for example, found for the first time
that more than half of Americans think marijuana should be legal. Baby
boomers in particular, who may have hidden their stash while raising
kids, seem to be loosening up in their old age, the survey found.
The interest in psychedelics may also have something to do with a
growing sense of frustration over the lack of promising new psychiatric
drugs in the pipeline. Many of the current drugs are based on compounds
discovered serendipitously in the 1950s, and true innovation has been so
hard to come by that many companies are giving up.
Meanwhile, people have been using hallucinogens for centuries, often in
religious healing ceremonies, and yes, sometimes just for the hell of
it. But just because they’re party drugs for some doesn’t mean
they can’t be the subject of serious scientific inquiry. Or does it?
After all, it didn’t end so well the first time around.
From its inception in 2010, the Psychedelic Science meeting has brought
together an interesting mix of people. A record 1,800 of them attended
this year. The prevalence of ponytails, nose rings and hemp accessories
is predictably higher than at a typical science conference. There was
also a tea lounge, a psychedelic art gallery, and a quiet room for
anyone in need of riding out a rough trip.
“Absolutely some scientists would see the rainbow colors on the logo
and the psychedelic art exhibits and say ‘that’s not real
science,’” said Brad Burge, the communication director for MAPS.
At the same time, some of the more mystically inclined devotees of
psychedelics are averse to the scientific dissection of what they see as
a sacred experience, Burge says. The conference isn’t for the folks
at those ends of the spectrum.
Burge acknowledges there’s a tricky balancing act involved in
hosting a forum for scientists who want their work to be taken seriously
without excluding those who use psychedelic drugs recreationally. Even
so, “we’re trying to get around the idea that there has to be a
separation,” he said.
After all, this latter group helps fund much of the research through
their donations to MAPS and other private organizations like the Heffter
Research Institute and Beckley Foundation. Government funders like the
National Institutes of Health are still skittish about psychedelic
research.
Ayahuasca. Image: Awkipuma/Wikimedia Commons
This year’s conference showcased one area of research that’s
exploded recently. It involves ayahuasca, a potent hallucinogenic brew
of vines and leaves used in healing ceremonies by Amazonian shamans (as
well as tourists — a pamphlet included in the conference swag bag
advertised one center offering ayahuasca retreats).
Dráulio Barros de Araújo, a neuroscientist at the Brain Institute at
the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte in Brazil, presented new
findings from an fMRI brain scan study with 10 experienced ayahuasca
users, followers of Santo Daime, a spiritual practice that uses the
brew.
Araújo’s team found that ayahuasca reduces neural activity in
something called the default mode network, an web of interconnected
brain regions that fire up whenever people aren’t focused on any
specific task. It’s active when people daydream or let their minds
wander, for example.
The default mode network has been a hot topic in neuroscience in recent
years. Scientists don’t really know what it does, but they love to
speculate. One interpretation is that activity in this network may
represent what we experience as our internal monologue and may help
generate our sense of self.
Last year, British scientists reported that psilocybin, the active
ingredient in magic mushrooms, like ayahuasca, reduces activity in the
brain’s default mode network.
The researchers proposed that interfering with the default network could
be how psychedelic drugs cause what users often describe as a
disintegration of the self, or even a sense of oneness with the
universe.
Robin Carhart-Harris, the neuroscientist who led the psilocybin study,
reported new findings at the conference from a study that used a method
called magnetoencephalography, which tracks brain activity with better
time resolution than fMRI does. The results suggest psilocybin affects
not only the default mode network, but also disrupts a certain type of
rhythmic brain activity.
'This opens a door to the scientific study of mystical experience'
Individual subjects who experienced more of this desychronization while
on the drug tended to report a greater subjective sense of
disintegration. ”For me this is the most interesting observation of
the lot,” Carhart-Harris said. “Our sense of self, the sense of
being someone, really is a kind of an illusion. All we are is a product
of our brain activation.”
Eroding the sense of self may be one way hallucinogens produce what many
users experience as profound spiritual insights. In 2008 Griffiths and
his team at Johns Hopkins reported that the majority of 36 ordinary
people who took psilocybin for the first time in an 8-hour session in
his lab still regarded the experience as one of the five most personally
meaningful events of their lives more than a year later. Two-thirds of
them rated it among their top five spiritual experiences.
“It seemed so improbable to me when we started that they’d
compare this to birth of a child or death of a parent,” he said at
the conference.
More recently, Griffiths surveyed 1,600 recreational psilocybin and
found that 40 percent ranked the experience in their top five most
personally meaningful. The somewhat lower percentage isn’t
surprising, Griffith says, because in the lab he and his colleagues went
out of their way to make the environment as positive and comfortable as
possible. But he’s encouraged that the results seem to generalize.
Psilocybin. Image: Jynto/Wikimedia Commons
“This opens a door to the scientific study of mystical
experiences,” Griffiths said. In future work, he hopes to
investigate how the psilocybin experience may differ in people with
different personality types, religious backgrounds, and genetics.
Clearly, drugs like psilocybin have powerful effects on the mind, but
the rationale for using them in psychiatry requires a fair amount of
hand waving. The same could be said of virtually all psychiatric
treatments already on the market, however: Nobody really knows how they
work.
The classic psychedelics, including psilocybin and LSD, stimulate
receptors for serotonin, a neurotransmitter that’s also targeted,
albeit in different ways, by approved antidepressant and anti-anxiety
drugs like Prozac and Zoloft.
Several scientists at the conference pointed to findings that activity
in the brain’s default mode network is elevated in people with
depression. Because psilocybin and ayahuasca seem to dampen activity in
this network, perhaps they could help.
It’s hard to connect those dots without a strong dose of
speculation, but one idea is that the elevated activity in the default
mode network reflects too much attention directed inward. People in the
grips of depression, the thinking goes, are trapped in an endless cycle
of critical self-examination, and a little neural desynchronization
might help them reboot.
Araújo presented promising preliminary findings on using ayahausca to
reduce symptoms of depression, and he’s recently gotten approval for
a larger clinical trial in Brazil. The British group has approval to
begin a trial with psilocybin.
Recent clinical trials
Ayahuasca Depression: Brazil (upcoming)
Psilocybin Depression: UK (pending), Smoking cessation: US (ongoing)
MDMA PTSD: Switzerland (completed), Spain (completed), Israel
(ongoing), US (ongoing), Canada (upcoming)
LSD End of life anxiety: Switzerland (completed)
Ibogaine Addiction: Mexico, New Zealand (ongoing)
Source: MAPS/Psychedelic Science conference
Meanwhile, researchers in Switzerland, Israel, and elsewhere have been
investigating MDMA (more commonly known as Ecstasy) to treat
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other anxiety disorders.
Ravers love the drug for the sense of euphoria and comfort and closeness
with others it engenders. Some therapists think its anti-anxiety and
pro-social effects might help put anxious patients at ease and make them
more receptive to psychotherapy.
MAPS is sponsoring several studies to test this idea. The first, begun
in 2004 and led by psychiatrist Michael Mithoefer in South Carolina,
treated 19 people with PTSD, mostly women who’d survived sexual
abuse or assault. Although these patients had had little success with
conventional treatments, 14 of 19 still had significant reductions in
their symptoms one to six years after undergoing MDMA-assisted
psychotherapy, the researchers reported in the Journal of
Psychopharmacology in November.
Another trial underway in South Carolina is testing the therapy in
military veterans, police and firefighters, and Doblin says MAPS has
been talking with the Pentagon about a study involving active duty
soldiers with PTSD. MAPS is willing to pay for it if the Pentagon will
allow the soldiers to participate. “We were there about a month ago,
and we got a very good reception,” he said. “Now we’re
working our way up the chain of command.”
The fact that the US military would even consider such a thing is a sign
of how much things have changed. But that’s not to say there’s
no resistance left.
Psychedelic scientists still face obstacles at every step of the
process, from getting research funding, to getting the compounds
themselves, to publishing the findings, says psychiatrist David Nutt of
Imperial College London. Nutt recently won a large grant from the
British government to conduct a clinical trial of psilocybin for
depression. But red tape is holding it up.
To comply with the law, Nutt has to find a manufacturer who’s
capable of making medical-grade psilocybin and has all the proper
permits to make controlled substances. So far, he hasn’t found one.
The study is on hold.
“The illegality of these drugs has profoundly distorted research and
continues to do so,” Nutt said at the conference. “It’s one
of the greatest scandals in modern research.”
|
|
