Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Pharmacy / May 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Lancet calls for LSD in labs

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jasbird - 16 Apr 2006 10:20 GMT
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1754088,00.html>
Lancet calls for LSD in labs

James Randerson, science correspondent
Friday April 14, 2006

"Use more psychedelic drugs," is not advice you would expect
from your GP, but that is the call from an influential US
medical journal to researchers.

An editorial in the Lancet says that the "demonisation of
psychedelic drugs as a social evil" has stifled vital medical
research that would lead to a better understanding of the brain
and better treatments for conditions such as depression.

The journal's editor Richard Horton said he was not advocating
recreational drug use, but championed the benefits of
researchers studying the effects of drugs such as LSD and
Ecstasy by using them themselves in the lab.

"The blanket ban on psychedelic drugs enforced in many countries
continues to hinder safe and controlled investigation, in a
medical environment, of their potential benefits," said the
editorial, "...criminalisation of these agents has also led to
an excessively cautious approach to further research into their
therapeutic benefits."

Dr Horton told Guardian Unlimited that important advances were
made by researchers using psychedelic drugs on themselves, but
that these studies were stifled by the post-1960s anti-drug
backlash. "Our very earliest understanding of the neurochemistry
of the brain came from studying LSD-like compounds. Those same
researchers were also taking those drugs, not recreationally,
but as experiments on themselves. This was immensely important
work."

"The whole taboo around recreational drug use can make the study
of these drugs very difficult," he said, "We need to get a
balance between these social taboos and what's best for
patients."

Dr Horton's comments echo those from psychiatrist Ben Sessa on
the 100th birthday of Albert Hoffmann, who discovered LSD. "It
is as if a whole generation of psychiatrists have had this
systematically erased from their education," he told the
Guardian in January.

"But for the generation who trained in the 50s and 60s, this
really was going to be the next big thing. Thousands of books
and papers were written, but then it all went silent. My
generation has never heard of it. It's almost as if there has
been an active demonisation."

Some anti-drug charities and politicians argue that medical
research on illegal drugs should remain taboo because it risks
sending a confused message to potential users. Rick Doblin of
the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in
Sarasota, Florida rejects this argument. "The idea that by
contradicting the exaggerated propaganda you are somehow sending
the wrong message is false," he said, "Kids know when they are
being told something that is way exaggerated, but then they
don't know what is the truth."

The journal's call comes at a crucial moment, he said, because
several small studies of the medicinal effects of illegal drugs
are under way. "I think it is a tremendously courageous step."

MDMA, the active ingredient in ecstasy, has shown promise in
treating post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety in cancer
patients, while LSD and psylocibin - the active ingredient in
magic mushrooms - are being investigated as treatments from
cluster headaches. Sativex, a treatment for multiple sclerosis
derived from cannabis, is already available in Canada.
Jasbird - 16 Apr 2006 10:23 GMT
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1754088,00.html>
>Lancet calls for LSD in labs
> ...
> "It's almost as if there has been an active demonisation."
> ...

I've got news for you doctor - there has been an active
demonisation, aided and abetted by the scientific community.
Doctors and pharmacists want to be in control of these drugs -
so much so - that they are happy to go along with current laws
criminalising users. Any scientist who dares standup against
such demonisation is labelled a crackpot and given no support
from their peers. Most scientists knowledgeable in this area are
working for agencies which have an active interest in
maintaining such demonisation : drug companies and government.

(rejected by the moderator at news:bionet.neuroscience - which
explains the delay)
Jasbird - 16 Apr 2006 12:13 GMT
<http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673606685152/fulltext>
The Lancet 2006; 367:1214

DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68515-2

Reviving research into psychedelic drugs

That psychedelic drugs, such as LSD and MDMA (ecstasy), can be
effective treatments for various psychiatric illnesses is an old
idea. Once considered wonder drugs for their effects on anxiety,
depression, alcoholism, and other mental illnesses, they have
been effectively banished from medical practice after legal
rulings banned their sale and use. Although such bans were
largely put in place to quash concerns about rampant
recreational drug use fuelling the counter cultures of the 1960s
and 1980s (LSD and MDMA, respectively), criminalisation of these
agents has also led to an excessively cautious approach to
further research into their therapeutic benefits.

So do illicit drugs have therapeutic benefits that outweigh
their substantial social harm? The evidence is scant. But the
case of a man who emerged from a decade-long period of intensive
MDMA use - during which he is estimated to have taken 40000
pills - with no signs of the profound neurotoxicity that has
long been feared to result from even limited consumption of
ecstasy, has re-energised calls for more research into the real
side-effects, and therapeutic potential, of psychedelic drugs.
Although some small-scale research projects using LSD, MDMA, and
the active components of cannabis are now underway, the blanket
ban on psychedelic drugs enforced in many countries continues to
hinder safe and controlled investigation, in a medical
environment, of their potential benefits.

Exaggerated risks of harm have contributed to the demonisation
of psychedelic drugs as a social evil. But although this
dangerous reputation - generated and perpetuated by the often
disproportionately stiff penalties for their use - is helpful
for law enforcement, it does not correspond to the evidence.
Rather, the social prescription against psychedelic drugs that
hinders properly controlled research into their effects and
side-effects is largely based on social and legal, as opposed to
scientific, concerns. To maximise research into therapeutic
benefits without exacerbating real social harms a legal
structure that recognises this distinction is sorely needed.
Jasbird - 02 May 2006 06:51 GMT
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1754088,00.html>
>Lancet calls for LSD in labs
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>research that would lead to a better understanding of the brain
>and better treatments for conditions such as depression.

There's a short (5 minute) discussion of this in a Guardian pod
cast on psychedelic drugs "Are we getting drug classification
wrong?"

http://download.guardian.co.uk/sys-audio/Guardian/Science/2006/04/17/science_Apr
il172006.mp3


Time: from 1:30 to 6:30

--------------------------------
http://www.ourrights.0catch.com/
--------------------------------
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.