We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
Psilocybin-- first of all, not for everybody. People with psychosis, it is still illegal decriminalized in certain places. So obviously the cautionary notes people who have drug addiction issues or other kinds of addiction issues need to be thoughtful about diving into a neurochemical landscape like that.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Psilocybin is illegal in many places and carries real medical and psychological risks. Anyone considering it should only do so where lawful, with proper clinical support, and after consulting a qualified professional.
So if you ask these people what were the consequences of their worst experience, we have about 10% who say that they may have put themselves or others at risk of physical harm during the experience. And there's some percentage of people who say that they have enduring psychological problems for which they are seeking out psychological or psychiatric help with a year after the experience.