I wonder if this could be the birth of the legal microdosing industry?
https://www.gwern.net/LSD-microdosing
tl;dr it's bogus. Lots of anecdotal reports of its efficacy though, but again, why don't these amateur recreational users blind their doses? They're prone to placebo otherwise.
I'm not ignoring and belittling the progress because of the lack of formal verification. I'm belittling it because even amateurs refuse to take the first step towards confirmation of effects.
As a matter of fact, I took a microdose of shrooms an hour ago. I don't need to blind my dose, I can tell when I'm buzzed. I'm not arguing that it's noticeably improving my intelligence, performance, stamina, or anything, but it is most definitely making my afternoon more enjoyable.
That is exactly what microdosing is.
> A microdose of psychedelics [is] enough to feel buzzed
No it isn't. If you've taken enough to feel buzzed then you took too much, according to proponents of microdosing. Here is a quote from a sticky on Reddit's /r/microdosing:
> If you are feeling any changes that remind you even vaguely of tripping/being high, you've taken too much.
> DevO on October 15, 2017 at 12:31 am
> Niels, Micro-dosing is taking amounts too small to be psychoactive, but at the same time the substance still has effects that are beneficial in many different ways for different folks.
Here's a quote from from James Fadiman, the person who came up with the whole idea of microdosing in the first place: (at https://sites.google.com/view/microdosingpsychedelics/faq-on...)
> A dose that feels as if you are right at the edge of a psychedelic experience is too high.
As far as I can tell, there is one school of microdosing, and you're not in it. I wish you were right, because the whole idea of "sub-perceptual" doses is obviously bullshit, but I'm not seeing it.
That understates the ludicrousness of homeopathy. Homeopathy is dilution to the point where there is an extraordinarily low probability of even a single molecule of the active ingredient being in a dose, not merely no “appreciable” amount.
And, yes, this is very different from microdosing, in which the dose used definitely contains the drug of interest, just at much lower than typical recreational dosing.
Whether the latter has an appreciable drug related effects rather than placebo effects may be an open questio, but it's very different in nature from the former, which absolutely will not have such effects except due to massive fraud (i.e., not performing the stated dilution.)
Granted, there is confusion over terminology here but _small amounts_ ie. sub-balls-to-the-walls-tripping-with-visuals of psychedelics can definitely be helpful and contribute to increased well being, concentration, problem solving, energy, mood, etc.
Why would nature not have us operate at peak efficiency with regards to problem solving, unless there was a side effect. I'm very interested in micro dosing, and nootropics, but I would have to think there is a downside.
There are things that are not on by default within us humans. These came to mind quickly:
For example modulating your breath (deep slow breathing) can give your consciousness a boost or help induce relaxtion.
Meditation exercises or when you calm down to slow breathing and pay attention to sensations and thoughts has been shown to modify brain matter [0], and according to eastern scriptures and personal experience, increases awareness.
Touching the roof of your mouth with your tongue (taoist technique to connect the two main channels) has been shown to boost performance. [1]
Ymmv but long term daily use may contribute to increased sensitivity to emotions and have you be 'way out there, mayne' a bit too much. Not very scientific, I know.
[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3004979/ [1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3940506/
Classic psychedelics have a lot in common, the differences are mere nuances.
I mean the Psilocybin content can vary depending on how the mushroom grew and was stored and deteriorate over time.
Whereas with LSD, even when the tabs are weak, there is at least something on there, at least that'd be my explanation.
My experiences are several years in the past, so memory is hazy, but LSD always felt 'sharper' with fractal like infinite details on textures and the like. Mushrooms on the other hand felt more 'organic', but the head space was quite similar.
I tried microcoding with mushrooms once and I think the effects were similar as to what people are describing with LSD microcoding.
However the whole microcoding seems to edge between placebo and real response, almost by definition.
There is also no agreement as to what constitutes microcoding afaik.