They were criminalised to criminalise part of society. Lsd was similar - the govt was worried about losing control of people and their desires.
Lsd has never been an interest of mine, but I am aware many people find the experiences they have truly profound.
there was some excellent work in curing alcoholism that used Lsd and proved very successful prior to it being banned; BBC News - LSD 'helps alcoholics to give up drinking' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17297714
The Yale Manual for Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy of Depression (using Acceptance and Commitment Therapy as a Therapeutic Frame) https://psyarxiv.com/u6v9y
“Trial of Psilocybin versus Escitalopram for Depression“, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2032994
Effects of Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy on Major Depressive Disorder. A Randomized Clinical Trial, Alan K. Davis et al., 2020 doi : 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.3285
Can Psychedelic Drugs Attenuate Age-Related Changes in Cognition and Affect? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41465-019-00151-6
LSD is one of the safest drugs there are. You may get a bad trip but it ends. Of course people in danger of psychosis should not take it.
People don't get addicted to LSD or psychedelics in general. It's not something you want to take frequently (excluding some who microdose at the levels where you don't feel the psychedelics effects).
How can one determine if they are at risk of psychosis prior to consuming LSD? I've heard many stories of people who were "never the same" (in a bad life-outcome sense) after having bad LSD trips. It wasn't clear from family history or medical history that they were at-risk for such a reaction.
At least based on these outcomes, it might be a bit inaccurate to claim LSD is safe. I suspect it was outlawed in part due to observed risks decades ago, but am still curious about political motivations. (e.g. "they want to deny us access to knowledge, man." or racial reasons, etc)
Perhaps there will be technology advancements in support of ascertaining propensity for adverse reactions to psychedelics. I suspect there's a strong component related to dosage. Maybe this is related to the microdosing movement?
Things like that get repeated, though. People like to repeat scare stories. I wouldn't be surprised if that's where most of the "never the same" stories come from.
I will admit that I took LSD quite a few times at the end of the 1970s, and that at the peak of that period I spent a month or two in a fairly confused and impressionable state. Someone who had known me before and who encountered me during that period might be forgiven for concluding that I would "never be the same". It was temporary, though.
I gave up on psychedelics and other mind-altering substances by the early 1980s. They were no longer showing me anything new. As the fellow said, once you've gotten the message, it's time to hang up the phone.
The literature that I found in the late 70s made LSD look fairly harmless, as long as you were not already psychotic or close to it. That was peer-reviewed research, though, not news stories. It would have been scandalous at that time for anyone in the mainstream press to suggest that LSD was anything less than the scourge of Western Civilization.
Sometime around the late nineties or early 2000s, respectable researchers began to obtain permission to conduct research with psychedelics again, and have gotten some pretty interesting results, especially in areas like treatment of alcoholism, depression, and anxiety. By the way, they don't seem to be finding a lot of civilization-ending dangers in the process. Judging by the medical literature, they just aren't very dangerous.
As far as I know, based both on personal experience and medical literature, the main dangers from psychedelics are that they can be very disorienting and several of them amplify the experience of emotion. Bad trips mostly seem to be a combination of disorientation and fear, with the disorientation becoming frightening, and the fear amplified by the drug so that it becomes terror.
But bad trips end, just like good ones do.
So if you're going to experiment with them, you want to be in a safe place, in a reasonably sane and calm state of mind, and in the company of trustworthy people who have your best interests in mind--preferably mental-health professionals with some experience with psychedelics, if possible.
This seems to be weird legend with very little fact behind it.
> claim LSD is safe.
Obliviously nothing is perfectly safe, but pharmacologicallly LSD is the safest drug there is. Safer than Aspirin. It's virtually impossible to overdose it, it's not toxic and LD50 is way 10^5 - 10^6 times of what is the usage. It is possible to get into accident during big LSD trip if you are not fully aware of your surroundings. Having trip sitter helps with that.
Frequent use of any drug when you are young is probably always more risky. Brain is fully developed late 20's.
Family history of mental illness, particularly schizophrenia.
> I've heard many stories of people who were "never the same" (in a bad life-outcome sense) after having bad LSD trips.
I think those stories are overblown. People like to have something to blame for when a loved one goes down the wrong path.
Szabo A. (2015). “Psychedelics and Immunomodulation: Novel Approaches and Therapeutic Opportunities”. Frontiers in immunology, 6, 358.
Abstract:
Classical psychedelics are psychoactive substances, which, besides their psychopharmacological activity, have also been shown to exert significant modulatory effects on immune responses by altering signaling pathways involved in inflammation, cellular proliferation, and cell survival via activating NF-κB and mitogen-activated protein kinases. Recently, several neurotransmitter receptors involved in the pharmacology of psychedelics, such as serotonin and sigma-1 receptors, have also been shown to play crucial roles in numerous immunological processes. This emerging field also offers promising treatment modalities in the therapy of various diseases including autoimmune and chronic inflammatory conditions, infections, and cancer. However, the scarcity of available review literature renders the topic unclear and obscure, mostly posing psychedelics as illicit drugs of abuse and not as physiologically relevant molecules or as possible agents of future pharmacotherapies. In this paper, the immunomodulatory potential of classical serotonergic psychedelics, including N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT), 5-methoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine (5-MeO-DMT), lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine, and 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine will be discussed from a perspective of molecular immunology and pharmacology. Special attention will be given to the functional interaction of serotonin and sigma-1 receptors and their cross-talk with toll-like and RIG-I-like pattern-recognition receptor-mediated signaling. Furthermore, novel approaches will be suggested feasible for the treatment of diseases with chronic inflammatory etiology and pathology, such as atherosclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, schizophrenia, depression, and Alzheimer's disease.
