Prompted by “Psilocybin in the treatment of alcohol-dependent people”: http://psypressuk.com/2015/01/18/psilocybin-in-the-treatment-of-alcohol-dependent-people/
“A new study into the effects of psilocybin on alcohol dependent people…”
“The study found that there was a significant increase in abstinence in participants post being administered psilocybin.”
“…only when psilocybin was introduced that drinking patterns markedly altered, as well as there being a change in attitude towards drinking…”
“…the remarkable results in the rise in abstinence among participants cannot be proven to be the sole workings of psilocybin because there were other factors present that could have contributed to this outcome.”
“The study explains that the change in drinking pattern after being administered psilocybin are significant enough to warrant further exploration into this area.”
The potential power of psychedelics is not limited to cannabis, which can provide seriously powerful psychological effects on par with psilocybin (i.e. magic mushrooms) — usually when cannabis intake volume is heavy and strain combination occurs.
The enormously wide variety of psychological effect styles is also not limited to cannabis. Psilocybin also basically conforms to such diversity, and there is sadly no mention of that key factor. As with research involving the psychological impact of cannabis, to say people simply used psilocybin is simply never enough, scientifically speaking. Psychedelic compatibility is critical for positive mental impact. Similar to trying anything new in life, sampling different psychedelic effects via very mild psychedelic intake is required to achieve that key compatibility prior to a relatively high intensity exposure for therapeutic intent.
On the negative side of psychedelic intake, the result can be a mental storm of sorts. Like dealing with a real storm, the best course is to hunker down and ride it out as safely as possible. Such negativity antagonizes therapeutic pursuits, so roughly like a bad drunk, increases the risk of further negativity.
On the positive side of that intake, the result reveals a wonderful (if not glorious) experience beyond the unhealthy stress that sometimes comes from strict sobriety (i.e. the unhealthy stress, at least arguably from an excessively rigid society, leading to alcohol dependency). A relevant revelation during this experience logically shines a light towards ending alcohol (and/or other) dependency — my hypothesis is the user’s perceived scope is expanded, so a solution to the unhealthy stress pattern involving alcohol (or such) is then revealed.
Alcohol is a crude drug, and its application against unhealthy stress is basically terrible. Psychedelics provide a vastly superior approach for managing unhealthy stress in this era when even the best medical minds have virtually no idea how the billions of cells forming the brain function (i.e. virtually no idea how to responsibly sharply medicate mental illness, so often provide risky pharmaceuticals). Psychedelic intake has occurred for thousands of years, and its symphonic (instead of ‘leech bleeding’ sharp) approach to mental stress alteration conforms to a basic formula for safe intake, but expressors of that formula must still exercise caution against encouraging criminal action (so way too many people suffer as a result).
The bottom line is not to advocate for the reckless experimentation with psychedelics (especially due to the reckless absence of quality control due to the outrageous prohibition that merely pads the wrong wallets at serious societal detriment). For prime example, LSD on the streets is apparently not even close to the LSD as Dr. Albert Hoffman (founder of LSD) used it prior to his death after exceeding the century mark in age.
The bottom line is to continuously entertainingly broadcast the informational basics of use and abuse (regardless of the activity) and allow the unalienable right to liberty to run its course (so no law against psychedelic intake merely on grounds of abuse potential, as ultimately determined by people with a serious financial incentive to proclaim that potential). Murder is always abusive (i.e. always infringes upon liberty, so murder prohibition makes sense), but psychedelic intake is most certainly not even close to always being abusive by any published measure (but the law against that intake ironically is severely abusive, so necessarily illegal by any uncorrupted judicial measure).
Ending that abusive law begins the righteous and challenging journey towards much better understanding the psychedelic contribution to civility.