Hacker News Reader

Comment by yieldcrv | Hacker News Reader

> We find that 16% of the cohort falls into the “negative responder” subset.

“they should have known they had a family history of schizophrenia before using it!”

every dismissive psychedelic user that brags about increased empathy in the next breath

but in all seriousness, yes I would like to see more studies so we can at least have side effects printed on the side of the package, so the right people can take informed risks

View on HN

Unironirally this. Whenever taking drugs of any kind, but especially with one's that meddle with your reality. There is no excuse for not doing your research. Your consciousness is all you have

Thing is research has been extremely hindered in the last ~100 years. At least they are trying to do their research instead of going blindly "psychedelics bad, make you jump from roofs and stare at the sun. Take this thingy-zepam for years instead, known to turn you into a zombie, increase the risk of suicide, create dependency and tolerance, and have withdrawal".

This makes sense because people that have used psychedelics sharing their positive experiences are the bad guys and people that have used psychedelics sharing their negative experiences are the good guys

using anyone as a source for side effects is a dumb standard and we should reach parity with how other drugs are studied

just like this study is trying to chisel at

while psychedelic communities are uniquely dismissive

Exactly! People that say that they’ve benefited from psychedelics are uniquely dismissive and people that say that those people form a uniquely dismissive community that should be distrusted are not uniquely dismissive

interesting commenting strategy, its as if its supposed to spark introspection by strawmanning absolutes that nobody said to discredit their position, while feigning agreement with them

oddly consistent in your other recent posts

dang, is this substantive to you?

At least there's one thing everyone can agree on: what seems to be true is true.

so 84% had a positive response?

84% positive and 16% worsened mental health is not the same thing as 84% and the rest neutral or mild side effects.

No.. 16% had a negative response, 28% had ~no response, and 55% had a positive response. I think people would be much more hesitant to try psychedelics for their mental issues if you told them it was a coin toss whether it would help or not -- and was an unlucky game of Russian Roulette from making their mental problems worse.

People take prescribed drugs for less than a 25% chance that it helps and a Russian roulette of side effects. Does sexual dysfunction improve depression?

I, for one, would like the same standard applied to psychedelics, instead of worrying about whether bad results lead to its continued prohibition

It seems that right now people are too worried about a bad result messing up their ability to talk casually about their trips

I just want side effects to be based on less conjecture

science lets its beliefs die, faithful die with their beliefs

right now, psychonauts seem to be in the latter group and its not helping the science form at all

Reply on news.ycombinator.com