Dr. Bronner's Soap Is Investing Millions into MDMA Research
inverse.com
inverse.com
I believe there's a case that funding MDMA research has very high dollar/impact returns - or at least that it's likely enough that it's worth a thorough exploration.
It sounds like they still need to raise about $10-15 million, which is shockingly small compared to the ~$1.5bn/yr NIMH budget - and all of it will come from private philanthropists, as governments aren't yet willing to fund the work and for-profit companies don't see much profit yet due to the lack of patentability.
If you're on HN and this is the first you're hearing about this research, some resources:
- A short video excerpt from a documentary on MDMA therapy - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9iKx2MKS70
- NY Times article - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/us/ptsd-mdma-ecstasy.html
https://www.theverge.com/2014/4/29/5594872/ecstatic-states-c...
Sort of? I'm sure there's potential, but you pay a lot of your grant money to DEA licenses. Also, MDMA might be neurotoxic.
Re neurotoxicity - neurotoxicity should definitely be explored, though more important seems to be does it negatively impact someones life - are the less happy, less smart, etc.
https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/10report/chap02e.pdf
> Studies clearly indicate that alcohol is neurotoxic
Though apparently alcohol has minimal consequences in safe doses. Same thing appears to be true of MDMA.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3053129/
> In a study designed to minimize limitations found in many prior investigations, we failed to demonstrate marked residual cognitive effects in ecstasy users.
Overall this causes a lot of problems, since, well, synapses are very important! Mood, memory, motor function. You simply just get "generally more brain damaged" in all areas. If you've ever seen a problematic user of amphetamines, it's quite obvious. Microdosing, even though slightly neurotoxic, maybe have benefits that outweigh it, a bit like the addiction and general very slight brain damage that comes with Xanax and the like.
Also the "mormon study" linked above is a good one to check out.
Short answer:
> "High and/or frequent doses of MDMA have been shown to be neurotoxic in laboratory animals.7 However, no properly controlled studies have shown cognitive impairments in human users after a period of abstention long enough to rule out temporary effects of MDMA, polydrug use, and a partying/unhealthy lifestyle."
From https://rollsafe.org/how-to-take-mdma/
Also:
> “I am slightly reassured,” Baggott said, “that we haven’t seen an obvious epidemic of mental health problems despite thirty years of widespread MDMA use. But we absolutely still need to consider potential neurotoxicity when considering giving MDMA to people.”15
> MDMA researcher Matthew Baggott: “To the best of my understanding, doses around 1.5-1.7 mg/kg MDMA (roughly 100 to 125 mg MDMA) are unlikely to cause long-lasting serotonin changes. Studies by MAPS have looked for changes in mental abilities after people participated in their studies, with some participants receiving 125 mg followed by 62.5 mg, and have not found any changes.” MAPS study protocol involves 3 - 5 week breaks, and a total of 2 or 3 MDMA sessions in total.
Your comment is factually correct and is a relevant counterpoint. It should not have been downvoted.
> Your comment is factually correct and is a relevant counterpoint. It should not have been downvoted.
Sort of. I didn't downvote their comment, though I don't think it's unfortunate that they were downvoted. Their comment is partially correct, but also partially misleading/misinformed, so seems reasonable for it to be downvoted.
> HN: MDMA _is_ neurotoxic.
At certain doses
Again,
> MDMA researcher Matthew Baggott: “To the best of my understanding, doses around 1.5-1.7 mg/kg MDMA (roughly 100 to 125 mg MDMA) are unlikely to cause long-lasting serotonin changes. Studies by MAPS have looked for changes in mental abilities after people participated in their studies, with some participants receiving 125 mg followed by 62.5 mg, and have not found any changes.” MAPS study protocol involves 3 - 5 week breaks, and a total of 2 or 3 MDMA sessions in total.
https://rollsafe.org/mdma-side-effects/
> Although there is considerable debate over how much MDMA it would take to cause damage to a human user’s brain, there is no real doubt that at some dosages damage can and will occur. Fortunately, brain damage doesn’t seem to happen at moderate recreational doses.
https://dancesafe.org/drug-information/is-mdma-neurotoxic/
> HN: Very much so too.
Subjective. Depends on dose. And your definition of very much.
> HN: Overall this causes a lot of problems, since, well, synapses are very important! Mood, memory, motor function.
Doesn't appear to be true in humans http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/harvard-study-publis...
> Today the journal Addiction published online the results of a neuroscience study finding no evidence of impaired cognitive performance in users of Ecstasy, the street name for the chemical known as MDMA.
> Since previous studies of the neurocognitive effects of Ecstasy did not address these issues, their reports of damage to memory, strategic planning, and other cognitive tasks may have been due to confounded study design rather than to Ecstasy itself.
> HN: Microdosing, even though slightly neurotoxic
? I think they might be confusing MDMA and LSD/other psychedelics, microdosing MDMA is an exceptionally rare practice
-----
To other readers, the most comprehensive summary of the research is here: https://www.mdmawiki.org/wiki/Is_MDMA_Neurotoxic%3F
And regarding marijuana: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/01/05/marijuana-much-more-th...
And regarding LSD: https://tripsafe.org/lsd-side-effects/
This is the big takeaway that most of the world still doesn't understand. They think that if a currently illegal drug is used, it is by necessity abused. There is no room in their world view for illegal drug use that's not also illegal drug abuse. It's going to take a lot to change this mindset.
The basics, it is widely agreed, are what are known as "set" and "setting". That is, what your mindset (or mind state, or where you are emotionally, what your expectations are, etc) and where you are physically and who and what are around you. Try to make those positive, supportive, friendly, stress-free, and comfortable.
It's also important to have an experienced, trusted sitter or guide, and it helps to have a constructive intention for the trip, to be in a safe, supportive environment, not to have any commitments about what you have to do or where you have to be that day (and perhaps the next as well, for recovery). It might help to have some personally meaningful items with you to review during the trip. Things like photographs of loved ones, or other things that remind you of important people or things in your life. It can help to have a good mix of music to listen to.
When all of these things, and perhaps some others not mentioned here, are in alignment, it's more likely that you'll have a constructive trip. But there are never any guarantees (with this or anything else in life, but especially in regards to what is likely to be a very emotionally powerful experience where you might be confronted with all sorts of things that could change your perspective or set you face-to-face with maybe something you weren't ready to face).
The Psychedelic Explorer's Guide[1] and The Secret Chief Revealed[2]. The latter was written by a therapist who conducted hundreds of therapy sessions with MDMA.
[1] - https://www.amazon.com/Psychedelic-Explorers-Guide-Therapeut...
[2] - https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Chief-Revealed-Myron-Stolaroff...
But I think if there wasn't the stigma legal or otherwise, the use of these substances would be much safer. An experienced guide like a sitter or a shaman can guide people through rough experiences and encourage the uplifting ones.
There's a very interesting story about Nancy, an incommunicative, self-destructive, schizophrenic, dying eleven-year-old girl who was administered a high dose of LSD in the 60's.[1][2][3] You'd think she might not be the best candidate for a strong psychedelic experience. But it reportedly saved her life, and helped restore her to sanity. There have been many other cases of psychedelics being used to treat mentally ill people, with impressive results.
Some people do react negatively, but in those cases I really wonder which drug(s) they took, what the dosage was, what their mindset was, what environment they took it in, who they took it with, what they did during the trip, and what intention they had. I would be willing to bet that in most cases many of these factors were far from ideal, and if they'd used them more constructively they would have probably had a better experience.
I do believe it's possible to abuse these drugs, mostly by not taking them seriously enough and not treating them with enough respect, taking them only to "party" or even with destructive intent. And, yes, maybe some people just won't be able to handle psychedelics no matter what. Maybe.
[1] - https://bpaste.net/raw/c86b011161ca
http://reset.me/personal-story/personal-story-ayahuasca-addi...
Alcohol even presents similar issues. If you're in a bad mood, drinking can make you angry and violent. If you're in a good mood it can make you relax. There's definitely a more amplified effect in the case of acid, but it's the same principle.
As Humphry Osmond famously said, "To fathom Hell or soar angelic, just take a pinch of psychedelic." The problem is, you don't know which you'll be doing in a given trip, and it's not uncommon to do both in the same trip, even bouncing from one to the other many times. There are many, many factors that play in to this, some of which are mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
Now, take any 4 weekends from the past six months and compare them, what was on your mind for each Saturday and Sunday? Count the things you might think about in a span of time for any day off.
Now, imagine that thrown into the middle of that, your friend shows you, in the palm of their hand, two tabs of acid.
Add psychedelic state to all your shifts in mood, stream of consciousness and common distractions, and dredge up the baggage of memories reaching back into your childhood, and include existential questions about what it means to exist.
This was also a "new trend" in the early 90's.
If it's unsafe in some cases that will come out in clinical trials just like with any drug.
Since the effect is mind altering you can maybe understand how a _very_ altered mind is too different from your normal state for you to remember what it was like being high.
Also a mind-state is affected by context and the context never stays the same, which means there will be some variance.
However I'd argue that the question "can you use <psychadelic> correctly?" makes no sense since the word 'correctly' implies a frame of reference while the psychadelic will force you out of any such frame (depending on dose).
Historically there were complex rituals for "correct" psychadelic use, all heavily religious of course. Our society is not willing to let something like that into the mainstream.
Edit: Sometimes "correct" usage of a drug is to not ingest it, for example cyanide :)
Short answer: Yes, psychedelics including acid can be used correctly.
Psilocybin (the active ingredient in magic mushrooms) has a very similar, albeit a few hours shorter, effect to acid, and it is currently in FDA Phase 2 trials for emotional distress related to cancer, and is likely to soon progress to FDA Phase 3 trials. Some anxiety will occur in some patients, but true "bad trips" where the experience is overall negative seem highly avoidable with the correct procedure.
https://tripsafe.org/acid/#5-bad-trips-do-happen-though-poss...
> A 1955 paper found that anxiety occured in 9% more people who took 25-75 micrograms of LSD, and 14% more people who took 100-225 micrograms of LSD, compared with the placebo group.2
https://tripsafe.org/lsd/#what-is-the-probability-of-having-...
> At a dosage of 67 micrograms17 in a therapeutic clinical environment, we might expect 0% of people to experience some extreme fear,18 for an LSD-adjusted average of around ~2 minutes of strong anxiety19, and we might expect around ~45% to report a persisting positive increase in mood from this dosage assuming they had first tried 35 micrograms, then 67
The last point is particularly good. An expected average of 2 minutes of strong anxiety. With highly compelling therapeutic upsides.
I'm not saying that all trips are 'actually good' or some such. But it's not like you're rolling the dice; pretty much every 'bad' experience can be attributed to doing too much and/or doing it in a bad setting or with a poor mindset. And even in those cases, some basic prep to learn to not resist the trip, to just go with it, can make recovery quite achievable.
Basically, some of the more 'difficult' trips can also be among the most valuable. To use acid 'correctly' (I disagree with this idea), you simply have to be prepared for whatever comes your way. You may confront some personal demons, but if you're ready to face that, then the benefits from doing so are enormous.
One can see that the designation is, in fact, fairly arbitrary. As marijuana has become legal in many states, and more socially accepted, the idea that all marijuana use is abuse is fading.
Molly, in contrast, was sold in loose powder form, at least back then.
Contrary to urban legends, pressies were never made with heroin as the amount of heroin required for any appreciable effect would be cost-ineffective.
Now, who knows what your 'molly' might contain. We just had two thirteen year-olds in the area die from 'research chemicals' ordered off the internet by a friend of theirs. People are taking all sorts of weird things that have undergone zero testing, even when compared to the embargo that MDMA has faced.
Mandy, MD, madman. Never magic. Perhaps is a newer term? Or perhaps localised.
Eitherway, is a nice term for it :)
But seems to be a generic term for MDMA (like) drugs
Much easier to have a consistent result when your presses come from a popular and widely-known batch.
Unless you have a reagent test kit and want to do all that, it's best to have a trusted source or go for the presses IMO.
That being said, my first experience was with MDMA in crystal form, and it was the greatest thing ever.
However, if there was a way to completely prevent damage to the brain and eliminate tolerance, I think many many people would do MDMA every day.
It's generally accepted that tolerance to MDMA builds up, leading to a loss of 'magic'.
For example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15671132
To your second point: Quite a timely comment!
I released the results of a ~660 person study on MDMA tolerance/'loss of magic' this morning - as far as I'm aware, this is the first study of this kind.
https://rollsafe.org/mdma-magic/
If you have constructive criticism, that's always appreciated, or if you just like it and find it useful, that's nice too.
One of the odd factors that I've heard of but didn't see listed was the "someone new" factor. It maybe somewhat related to the "close friend" factor. Basically, some people claim to regain some magic if you do it with someone you just recently met or reconnected with who has a low tolerance (as opposed to doing it with someone you're already familiar with). Maybe its the empathy combined with the pleasure of making a new friend...
I've heard it makes a difference... but nothing beats supplements and tolerance breaks IMO. lol
We definitely need more studies like this-- there's still so much we don't know about MDMA.
Very good point on the someone new factor. I'll look into that in future studies.
Agreed on the desire for more research!
Get a soap dispenser, stick it up in your shower, and fill it with one or more flavors.
Reduce, Reduce, OK!
In years past they also made a seasoning powder for sprinkling on food and a range of corn puffs, both of which also came with the same crazy labels but tasted pretty good. I think they stopped making them long ago though. :(
In summary, most clinically developed chemicals are looking for small effects with small side-effects. MDMA definitely does not have a "small effect" in the therapeutic dose range (typically 100-150mg).
[1] http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/05/is-pharma-research-wors...
I'm in EU, but FDA warns about these potential issues and recommend prescribing fluoroquinolones as last line of treatment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levofloxacin
Honestly, I don't buy this argument about the numerous side-effects preventing further reasearch of psychedelics.
Psylocibin/MDMA should be available for research and even as last line of treatment, I believe, thousands of people will benefit.
But the bottleneck isn't what doctors are willing to prescribe, it's what drug companies are willing/able to get through FDA approval, which is a bit different.
(To be clear, I'm in full support of further research into these chemicals; just interested in all of the reasons that they are not as well researched.)
Just look at Adderall, it is just good old amphetamine, which turned out to be very effective at treating ADHD. So instead of marketing amphetamine, they marketed a specific mixture of different salts of d- and l- amphetamine. The base molecule is not patentable, but their specific formulation is.
And what they can get cheap and easy is crystal meth which is anything but "relatively safe" and destroys lives and the community.
For goodness sake if the government want to stop the crystal meth epidemic, then give them legal, cheap access to clean, professionally made "relatively safe" drugs like MDMA.
People on real MDMA are not doing good things for their own personal health but they certainly aren't being violent. Well heck actually maybe all that dancing is good for their health.
"We’re going to help alleviate the pain of a suffering population, and generally I’m talking about veterans, but also individuals who are traumatized by rape and other forms of violence,” Bronner tells Inverse. “That’s the immediate goal. MDMA is such an incredible adjunct to therapy, and there’s such an incredible need for it."
I.e., we already know it works?
all one!
(fantastic soap, though)