Essentials: Psychedelics for Treating Mental Disorders | Dr. Matthew Johnson
Watch on YouTubeVideo summary
In this episode of Huberman Lab Essentials, Dr. Andrew Huberman interviews neuroscientist and psychiatrist Dr. Matthew Johnson to explore the pharmacology and therapeutic potential of psychedelics for treating mental disorders. The conversation begins by defining "psychedelic" not merely as a chemical term but as a cultural descriptor for substances that profoundly alter one's sense of reality and self-models, including classic tryptamines like psilocybin and DMT, phenethylamines like mescaline, NMDA antagonists such as ketamine, and entactogens like MDMA. Dr. Johnson explains that while serotonin is ubiquitous in the body and not psychedelic itself, compounds like LSD and psilocybin act as agonists at the 5-HT2A receptor to disrupt habitual neural firing patterns. This disruption allows individuals to temporarily dissolve rigid cognitive models of themselves—such as identifying strictly as a "smoker" or a "failure"—creating an opportunity for neuroplasticity where new, healthier self-representations can form before returning to baseline reality. The therapeutic process described involves rigorous screening to exclude patients with psychotic disorders like schizophrenia or bipolar mania, followed by extensive preparation and integration sessions led by trained guides. During the actual experience, typically administered in a capsule at doses of 20 to 30 mg for psilocybin without concurrent cognitive tasks, participants are encouraged to surrender control rather than fight their internal reactions. Dr. Johnson notes that even highly prepared individuals may encounter "bad trips" characterized by intense fear or anxiety, but these can be managed medically if necessary and often serve as a gateway to profound mystical experiences involving the dissolution of ego boundaries. The safety protocols include monitoring cardiovascular responses like blood pressure spikes, which are generally modest and treatable with nitroglycerin without interrupting the therapeutic journey. A significant portion of the discussion addresses microdosing versus high-dose "heroic" administration for clinical purposes. Dr. Johnson expresses skepticism regarding peer-reviewed evidence supporting microdosing as a substitute for stimulants or antidepressants, noting that studies have found little to no benefit and sometimes slight impairments in time estimation and cognitive tasks. While he acknowledges anecdotal reports of improved mood from low doses, his primary focus remains on high-dose interventions which produce lasting changes in self-perception over months after treatment for depression and addiction. The mechanism behind these long-term effects appears to be a fundamental shift in how individuals relate to themselves; patients often report an immediate realization that they are choosing their behaviors rather than being controlled by them, effectively flipping the switch on chronic habits like smoking or avoidance of sunlight due to depressive states. Beyond treating mood disorders and trauma, Dr. Johnson highlights emerging research into using psychedelics for neurological repair following repetitive head impacts in athletes or recovery from strokes. While human data is still exploratory compared to promising rodent studies showing enhanced neuroplasticity, the lab plans to investigate whether these compounds can reverse cognitive decline associated with chronic brain injury by promoting structural changes in gray matter. The interview concludes with a balanced view of risks and benefits: while psychedelics are profoundly destabilizing for those with severe psychiatric illness or when taken without proper support, they offer a unique tool for reprocessing trauma and alleviating depression that traditional pharmacology cannot match. Ultimately, the consensus is that these substances hold immense promise not just as chemical agents but as catalysts for deep psychological transformation within a safe container of trust and guidance.
Read the full video transcript
Welcome to Huberman Lab Essentials,
where we revisit past episodes for the
most potent and actionable science-based
tools for mental health, physical
health, and performance.
I'm Andrew Huberman, and I'm a professor
of neurobiology and ophthalmology at
Stanford School of Medicine. And now, my
conversation with Dr. Matthew Johnson.
Well, Matthew, I've been looking forward
to this for a long time. I'm a huge fan
of your scientific work, and I'm here to
learn from you.
>> Likewise. Big fan, and happy to do this
with you. Great. Well, thank you. My
first question is a very basic one,
which is what qualifies a substance to
as a psychedelic? Nomenclature
is a real challenge in this area of
psychedelics. So, starting with the word
psychedelic, it just
if if you're a pharmacologist, it's it's
not very satisfying because that term
really
spans different pharmacological classes.
In other words, if you're really
concerned about receptor effects and the
basic effects of a compound, it spans
several com- classes of compounds. But,
overall, so it's really more of a a
cultural term or uh
it does have a relationship to drug
effects, but it's at the at at a very
high level. So, all of the so-called
psychedelics across these
distinct uh classes
that I can talk more about, um
the way I put it is they all had the
ability to profoundly alter one's sense
of reality, and that can mean many
things. Part of that is profoundly
altering the sense of self,
um acutely. So, when someone's on
the psychedelic, um so, the different
classes that can be the specific
pharmacological classes that can be
called a psychedelic are one that what
are called the classic psychedelics. So,
in the literature, you'll see that term
and
hallucinogen and psychedelic are all
have traditionally been used
synonymously.
Um I think there was a little bit of a
tendency to stay away from psychedelics
of the baggage, but there's been a
return
to that in the last several years. But
the classic psychedelics or classic
hallucinogens are things like
LSD,
um psilocybin, which is in so-called
magic mushrooms. It's in over 200
species that we know of so far of
mushrooms. Uh
dimethyltryptamine or DMT, which is in
dozens and dozens of of plants.
Um mescaline, which is in the peyote
cacti and some other cacti like San
Pedro. And even amongst these classic
psychedelics,
um there are two structural structural
classes. So, that's the chemistry.
There's the tryptamine-based compounds
like psilocybin and DMT. And then
there's the phenethylamine-based
compounds. So, these are the basic two
basic building blocks that that you're
starting from, either a tryptamine
structure or a phenethylamine structure.
But that's just the chemistry. The all
of the
what's more important, or at least to to
someone like me,
are the receptor effects. And then
ultimately, that's going to have a
relationship to the behavioral and
subjective effects. So, all of these
classic psychedelics serve as agonists
or partial agonists at the serotonin 2A
receptor, so subtype of serotonin
receptor.
Then you have these other classes of of
of that you compounds that you could
call psychedelic.
Another big big one would be the NMDA
antagonists. So, this would include
ketamine,
PCP, and dextromethorphan, something
I've done some research with, which
folks might recognize from like
robo-tripping, guzzling like, you know,
uh cough syrup. A large overlap in the
types of subjective effects that you get
from those compounds compared to the 2A
agonist classic psychedelics.
Um but then you have another big one of
MDMA, which really stands in a class by
itself. So, it's been called an
entactogen and and uh What does that
mean? It means like uh
touching within. It sort of alludes the
idea that it can really put someone in
touch with their emotions. Um it's also
been called an empathogen, meaning it
can can afford empathy. So, I get the
impression that the psychedelic space is
a enormous cloud of partially
overlapping compounds. Right. Uh meaning
some are impacting the serotonin system
more than the dopamine system, others
are impacting the dopamine system more
than the than the serotonin system.
Given that the definition of a
psychedelic is that it profoundly alters
sense of self,
at least that's included as a partial
definition. Mhm. I think of these as as
psychedelics as profoundly altering
models, you know, you know, we're all
you know, we're prediction machines and
that's large so much of that is is
top-down and
uh
and and
psychedelics have a good way of
you know, loosely speaking dissolving
those
models and and one of if the if the
reality
>> us an example of one of like a model
like a like I know that when
um
I throw a ball in the air, it falls down
not up. This might sound extreme, but
there are these cases it was over
overblown and sort of the propaganda of
the late '60s, early '70s, but
there are credible cases of people and
it's very atypical of
sounds like they really thought they
could fly and you know, jump out of a
of a window. Now,
far more people every year
fall I mean, who knows, you know, they
they they fall and die out of you know,
from height because they're drunk, you
know, so this is extremely rare, but you
know, there are some like pretty
convincing um
cases. There was one research volunteer
in our studies that uh
it she
looked like she was in one of our
studies like she was trying to dive
through a painting on the wall. She was
fine, but she
reviewing the video, it looked like
she really thought that she was going to
go through that painting and
who knows? Yeah, so she was in the other
dimension. Yeah, so they're violating
these predictions. The reason I ask it
the the question the way I did is
because um given the enormous cloud of
different substances and given the range
of
previous experiences that people show up
to a psychedelic experience with.
Uh
I feel like the ability to extract some
universal themes is is useful,
especially for people who haven't done
them before, right? Who might not have
an understanding of what their effects
are like. Can we just briefly touch on
the serotonin system? Mhm. So,
compounds like LSD,
lysergic acid diethylamide, and
psilocybin,
my understanding is that they primarily
target the serotonin system.
How do they do that at a kind of general
level? And why would increasing the
activity of a particular serotonin
receptor or batch of serotonin receptors
lead to these profoundly different
experiences that we're calling um
model challenges, challenging
pre-existing models and predictions. I
mean,
at the end of the day, it's a chemical
and these receptors are scattered around
the brain with billions of other
receptors. Yeah.
Uh what do we think is going on in a
general sense? Yeah, yeah, and this is
really the area of active exploration
and we don't have great answers. We know
a good amount about the receptor level
pharmacology, Some things about post
receptor signaling pathways. In other
words, just fitting into the receptor,
clearly, you know, serotonin itself is
not psychedelic, you know, or else we'd
be tripping all of us all the time. Cuz
when I eat a bagel, I get serotonin
release, right?
>> Uh-huh.
>> I mean, there's
or turkey, I mean, there's tryptophan,
right? Mhm. My understanding of
serotonin is is that in in very broad
strokes, that it it generally leads to a
state of being fairly it pushes the mind
and body towards a state of contentment
within the immediate experience. Whereas
the dopamine system really places us
into an external view of what's out
there in the world and what's possible.
Yeah. Is that fair?
>> something. I mean, that's consistent
with my understanding. And
and and I'll certainly not in terms of I
don't primarily identify as a
neuroscientist. I'll definitely tell
the, you know, the viewers that we're
here
far more neuro domain here than mine,
but in terms of how psychedelics and
other drugs, you know, interface at the
at the neuroscience level.
>> free to to explain it at the
experiential level. Yeah.
>> it doesn't have Let's say I were to come
to one of your clinical trials, cuz
these are clinical trials, right? And in
your at your lab at Hopkins.
>> Yeah. And uh would I need to be
depressed or could I just be somebody
who wanted to explore psychedelics? It
we've had studies for
all of these. And and a number of other
disorders. So, healthy normal studies,
the code for
not a problem to fix, but we're all
here. That's what's amazing about
psychedelics though, because you if you
administer them under this model and you
develop a relationship and give a high
dose of psychedelic, you could be
healthy normal without a a diagnosable
issue, but man,
we're all human and the issues seem to
come to the surface. So, but we've done
work with smoking cessation, so people
trying to quit tobacco and haven't been
successful.
>> of reasons. So, maybe I'll just ask some
very simple questions that that will
kind of step us through the process. So,
let's say I were to sign up for one of
these trials and and I qualified for one
of these trials, I'd show up. You said I
would do several hours in advance of
getting to know the team that would
that would be present during this
psychedelic journey. First there's
screening, so it's kind of like a couple
of days of both psychiatric like
structured psychiatric interviews about
your whole your past and symptoms across
the
DSM, the psychiatric Bible, to see if
you might have various disorders that
that could disqualify you. Like the the
main ones being the psychotic disorders,
schizophrenia and also including
bipolar. So, the manic side of of
bipolar. So, so after that's in also
cardiovascular screening, heart disease.
After that screening, then the
preparation where you get you're both
you get you develop a therapeutic
rapport with the people who are going to
be in the room with you, your guides.
But, you're also then didactically sort
of explained about what the psychedelic
could be like. And that's kind of a
laundry list because they're more known
by their variability.
You could have the most beautiful
experience of your life or the most
terrifying experience of your life. So,
it's just kind of laundry list of like
the things that could happen so there's
no surprises.
I think that's so important for people
to hear because you really can't predict
how somebody is going to react
internally. Let's say that somebody
passes all the prerequisites
and that and it's the day comes the day
that they're going to have this
experience. Are they eating mushrooms
like
you hear about or are they taking it in
capsule form and how do they get it into
their body?
>> So, they receive pure psilocybin. Most
of our studies are looking at where we
we want a psychedelic effect or in the
20 to 30 mg
range. The session day itself is not
full of
for most of our studies is not full of
task. We really want to look at the
therapeutic response. Obviously, if it's
a therapeutic study, we want it to be a
meaningful experience and uh research
has found, not surprisingly, that you
get a less meaningful experience when
you're in an fMRI Right. or when you're
doing a lot of cognitive tasks. So, our
typical therapeutic model, which again
isn't just limited necessarily to the
therapeutic studies where we're trying
to treat a specific disorder, um it it
is is to you know, have that
preparation, so you know, the person
feels very comfortable with their
guides. Um uh I mean, ultimately, what I
tell people is like
any emotional response, it's all
welcome. I mean,
you could you could be crying like a
baby hysterically. Like, that's what you
should be doing if that's what you feel
like.
>> I mean, you're doing therapy for people.
This is it's not just about the
experience. Right. And the experience
itself is very much shaped by by that
that container, by the environment, and
the degree to which one allows it to
happen. Like, one should let go of
control. The letting go of control is an
interesting feature, actually, because
one of the common themes of of good
psychoanalysis is or psychotherapy of
any kind is that there's a trust built
between the patient and the analyst, and
that relationship becomes a template for
trust more generally and trust in
oneself. How do you convince people to
go further and further down that path?
What do you think allows them to do
that? Because I think that that to me is
one of the more unusual uh aspects to
psychedelics is that normally the the
social pressure, but also just our
internal pressure from our own brain is
pay attention to many things at once,
not just one.
Is that
>> Especially these days. Yeah, multitask.
Yeah.
>> Multitask, and the more that we focus on
one thing, the more bizarre that thing
actually can appear to us, right?
>> Right.
>> even if it's the tip of your finger and
you're not taking any psychedelics, you
spend a long enough looking at the tip
of your finger, you will notice some
very weird things, right?
That I think of that as the classic
psychedelic effect that or or
one classic effect and and one I've used
many times of
this example of why people shouldn't
necessarily, you know,
these aren't these one should be
judicious in putting themselves in these
circumstances. Someone could be, you
know,
having a a very strong psilocybin
experience and they're trying to
navigate their way in Manhattan,
crossing the street and they might be
staring into the hand and real like
that's
their hand is the most amazing miracle.
Like the entire universe has essentially
conspired to come to this one point to
make this absolutely breathtaking. It's
almost like I think of the simplest form
of of of well, we know the simplest form
of learning is habituation. Simply keep
applying stimuli and there's less
response. Like
this is what organisms do. This is what
we have to do and it's like there's this
dishabituation component that like
>> dishabituation
>> Yes, like we wouldn't be able to get
through life if we wouldn't be able to
cross that street if we were like whole
like this is a miracle. It sounds like
on psychedelics the one of the primary
goals therapeutically is to really drill
into one of these perceptual bubbles and
expand that bubble and the safety seems
is the safety it's sort of like a
permission to to do that without
worrying that something's going to
happen. Right, because, you know, I've
had people there on the couch.
Um
Yeah, I remember one lady said this is
probably uh 13, 14 years ago, said,
"Matt, tell me again I can't die. Like I
feel like my heart is going to rip
through my chest." I mean, she was
feeling her And I should say
typically cardiovascular response is is
modest. The the pulse and blood pressure
go up. And if it goes over certain
level, we have a protocol. We've had to
do this only a few times, but the
physician comes in, gives them a little
nitroglycerin under the tongue and you
know, knocks the blood pressure down a
little bit, doesn't affect the
experience. So, we have it all in place
even though they'd probably be fine out
of an abundance of caution.
>> Sure. Um but but yeah, but someone can
feel
that my god, I'm going to die. Like I I
have never felt my heart
beat like this before. So, there's a an
expansion of a particular fairly narrow
percept. It could be sound, could be an
emotion, could be sadness, could be a
historical event or a fear of the
future.
>> Yes.
And you've mentioned before that
there's something to be learned in that
experience. Yeah. There's something
about going into that experience in a in
an un
um
in an
in an undeterred way that allows
somebody to bring something back into
more standard reality. Yeah. Given the
huge variety of experiences that people
have on psychedelics, given the huge
variety of humans that are out there,
but what are now very clear therapeutic
effects in the realm of depression,
what do you think is the value of going
into this
fairly restricted perceptual bubble,
what we are calling letting go or giving
up control? Because if the experiences
are many, but the value of what one
exports from that experience is kind of
similar across individuals,
>> Yeah.
that raises all sorts of interesting
questions, and this is not a a
philosophy discussion. We're talking
about biology and psychology here.
>> Yeah. So, what are your thoughts on
that?
This is in the terrain we're figuring
out, you know, so there's no educated
speculation is the best I can provide,
but I
I think the best the the the the
the most
I think the common denominator
are persisting changes in
self-representation.
Okay. Tell me more about
self-representation.
>> That's uh
the way one holds the the sense of self,
the relate the fundamental relationship
of a person in the world. I mentioned
earlier that these experience seems to
alter the models we hold of reality. And
I think if the self is the biggest
model, that I am a thing that's separate
from other things. And
that's
I am defined by certain I have a certain
personality and I I'm a smoker that's
having a hard time quitting or I'm a
depressed person that
you know, views myself as a failure and
all of these things. Those are models,
too. So this is this innovation of the
perceptual bubble. A narrow a narrow uh
percept that then grows within the
confines of that narrow percept. Yeah.
>> The So sense of self is a very
interesting uh phenomenon. And if we
could dissect it a little bit, um
there's the somatic sense of self. So
the ability to literally feel the self.
Uh in this process we call
interoception. And then there's the the
the title of the self, the I am blank.
Yeah. And I noticed you said that
several times and it's intriguing to me
how one
defines themselves
internally.
Not just to other people, but how a one
psychologically and by default in uh
defines themselves, I think is a very
powerful. Like um in depressed people
as well as happy people seem to define
themselves in terms of these categories
of emotional states. So I think it it
it's so interesting that
letting go and going into this
perceptual bubble, which is facilitated
by obviously a really wonderful team of
of therapists, but also the serotonergic
agent Yeah. allows us to um potentially
reshape the perception of self. That's
that's a tremendous feat of
neuroplasticity. Right. I think there's
something about this change in in sense
of self. There is it seems to be
something on the identity level, both
with I think of the the work we did with
cancer patients who had substantial
depression anxiety because of their
cancer. And also our work with people
trying to quit cigarette smoking. I
mean, there's this
real There seems to be when it really
works this change in how people
view themselves. Like with smoking, like
really stepping out of this model like
I'm a smoker. It's tough to quit smoking
cigarettes. I can't do it. I failed a
bunch of times. I remember one
participant during the session, but he
held onto this afterwards said, "My god,
it's like
I can really just decide."
Like flicking off a butt, I can decide
not to smoke. And it's I call these duh
experiences with psychedelics cuz people
often like in the Kansas City you say,
"I'm causing most of my own suffering.
Like I can I can follow my appointments.
I can do everything, but I can still
plan for the vaca- I'm not getting
outside in the sunshine. I'm not playing
with my grandkids. I'm choosing to do
that." And it's like they told
themselves that before. And the smoker
has told themselves a million times,
"I can ch- And it So it sounds when it
comes out of their mouths, and you folks
will say this is part of the
ineffability of a psychedelic
experience. Folks say, "I know this
sounds like [ __ ] and this sounds
like but my god, I could just decide."
Like they're feeling this gravity of
agency that seems to be at times
fundamentally like supercharged from a
psychedelic experience. This idea like
I'm just going to make a decision.
Like normally like you tell a depressed
person like don't don't think of
yourself that way. You're not a failure.
It's Yeah, it's like and but you can
actually in one of these states have an
experience where you realize like, "My
god." Just like using MDMA to treat PTSD
and we're going to be starting work with
psilocybin to treat PTSD, someone could
really reprocess their trauma
in a way that like has lasting effects
and clearly there's probably something
you know, reconsolidation of those
memories. They are they are
they are altered, you know, very
consistent with what the our
understanding of the way memory works.
So, the whole idea people can actually
in in a few hours have a such a profound
experience that they they decide to make
these changes in who they are and it
sticks. I'm fascinated by this idea that
a
a somatic and a perceptual experience,
but a real experience of the sort that
you're describing Yeah. is what allows
us to reshape our neural circuitry and
to feel differently about ourselves. And
uh I know there's been um really
tremendous success in many individuals
of alleviating depression, Mhm. treating
trauma with these different compounds.
If we could, I'd like to just ask about
some of the more dopaminergic compounds.
In particular, MDMA. Yeah. And my
understanding is that MDMA
leads to very robust increases in both
dopamine and serotonin simultaneously.
So, why would it be
that having this
uh increased dopamine and increased
serotonin would provide an experience
that is beneficial? And how do you to
the extent that you can describe it, how
do you think that experience differs
from the sorts of experiences that
people have on psilocybin or more
serotonergic agents? Speculating, but it
may be that MDMA for a broader number of
people
is better for for trauma because the
chances of having an extremely
challenging experience, what I call the
bad trip,
like really freaking out, is much lower
with MDMA. People can have bad trips,
but they're of a different nature. Well,
what is the It's not sort of like
freaking out because all of reality is
sort of shattering. And it's less of
this It can take so many forms with the
classic psychedelics, but like
typically you'll you'll hear something
like I didn't know it was going to be
like this. No matter how hard you tried
to prepare them that like this is like
get me off this ride.
>> about LSD or psilocybin?
>> LSD, psilocybin. I watched uh Yeah.
Yeah, and just this sense of like I'm
going insane. This is so far beyond
anything I've ever experienced and it's
scaring the [ __ ] out of me.
How often do
>> have a toehold on anything, even that I
exist as a as as as an entity and that
can be really I think frankly
experientially that's kind of the
gateway to both
the transcendental mystical experiences
the the the sense
uh of unity with all things which we
know our data suggests is related
um to long-term positive outcomes.
>> Wait, I want to make sure I understand.
So, you're saying the bad trip can be
related to the transcendental
experience?
>> Right, I think those are both
speculating, but you you have to pass
through this sort of like
you know, reality shattering including
your sense of self and one can handle
that in one of two ways. You can either
completely surrender to it or you can
try to hang on and if you try to hang on
it's going to be more like a a bad trip.
So, again, I wish there was more and
hopefully there will be more
experimentation. There's a lot going on
here in the black box in terms of the
operant behavior of how you are
you know, within yourself choosing to
handle like letting go, you know, and
eventually we'll be able to see this in
real time with brain imaging. Ah, there
they are surrendering to the psychedelic
experience. Here they are trying to hold
on, but we we're not there yet, but I
think it's a good through clinical
observation seems pretty clear that
something like that is going on. There
has been an attempt at creating this
movement toward um openness about
psychedelics and their positive effects.
The this has happened before. The
difference is that now there are people
like you inside the walls of the
university or publishing peer-reviewed
studies and things of that sort. The
question is to me, you know, what are
the what are the valuable exports,
right? And where does the extreme lie? I
mean, clearly there's a there's a
problem with um
tinkering with reality through
pharmacology. And there's a benefit, it
sounds like, to tinkering with
reality through pharmacology.
And for the average person, right? Or
for kids that are hearing this, kids
that are in their teens, right? Yeah.
What are the I want to talk about what
are the the dangers of psychedelics?
This is something you don't hear a lot
about these days, and it's not because
I'm anti-psychedelic at all, but what
are the dangers? Yeah, so these can be
profoundly
destabilizing experiences.
And ones that, you know, ideally,
um
are are had in a safe container, you
know, sort of where where someone, you
know, what are the relevant dangers and
what can we do to mitigate those? So,
there's two biggies.
One, and I've already mentioned, is
people with
very severe psychiatric illness. Not not
depression, not anxiety. I'm talking
about
psychotic disorders like schizophrenia
or, you know, mania as part of bipolar
disorder. The far more likely danger is
the bad trip. Anyone can have this. The
most psychologically healthy person in
the world probably. You jack the dose
high enough, and especially in in in in
a less-than-ideal environment, you can
have a bad trip. You can you even get it
in an ideal environment like ours at at
a high dose of around 30 mg of
psilocybin,
after, you know, the best preparation we
can provide, about a third of people
will say essentially, at some point they
have a bad trip, you know, we
>> point within the the entire journey.
Right. Now, they could have one of the
most beautiful experiences of their life
sometimes like a couple minutes later,
but at some point they had a sense of
strong anxiety, fear, losing their mind,
feeling trapped, something like that.
>> I definitely want to ask you about
microdose versus standard or macrodosing
psilocybin. I'm micro cynical, if you
will, about this term microdose. Is
there any clinical evidence or
peer-reviewed published evidence that it
works, quote-unquote, to make people
feel better about anything? So, yeah,
the claims are, and there a number of
them,
there's two general ones. One is is sort
of acting
in in place of the ADHD treating drug,
so the psychomotor stimulant. So, like a
better version of Adderall.
The other claims are essentially a
better version of of the traditional
antidepressants, a better version of
Prozac. None of the peer-reviewed
studies that are have much credibility,
um
none of them have shown a benefit. The
handful of studies that have done that
have shown
they've ranged from finding no effect
whatsoever to just a little bit of
impairment, like impairing someone's
ability to do time estimation and
production tasks. So, you want an
accurate sense of time, at least if
you're navigating in the real world.
It's different if you're on the couch on
a heroic dose for therapeutic reasons
where you're safe, but if you're
crossing the street, if you're get, you
know, You have to function. in your work
life. Yeah, which is what the way people
are claiming to use that helps them be a
better CEO. Like, you want an accurate
sense of time. So, if anything the data
suggests that it makes it a little bit
less accurate. And and there's evidence
that someone feels
a little bit impaired, um
and they feel a little bit high. So, in
terms of, you know, you call that abuse
liability in research. So far, no
studies have have shown, you know,
an increase in creativity, enhancement
of any form of cognition, or or or a
sustained improvement in mood. Now,
no studies have actually looked at the
the the
the system of microdosing that the
aficionados are claiming. Folks like
Paul Stamets and others, they'll have
particular formulas. They're like, you
need to take it 1 day, then take so many
days off, and take it every 4 days. And
they really say you need to be on it for
a while. Like a few weeks in, you may
start to notice through this pattern of
of of using it, and you you're you're
feeling the benefits on those off days,
like the three or or two days in between
your active doses. So, those are the
claims. Again, we don't know that
there's any truth to that working, but
studies have not been done
to model that. So, that's a big caveat.
My bet is, and this is totally based on
anecdotes, that I think there is
probably a reality to the antidepressant
effects. I find that more intriguing
Well, so are all of us suffering with
depression. Right. Even if it's an it it
wouldn't be as interesting as I think
what we're doing with high-dose
psilocybin or psychedelics to treat
depression. It would be, if this is
developed and there's a reality, it
would be more like
a better, you know, perhaps a better
SSRI, a better Prozac, which are
similar. And it shouldn't be that
surprise. Like even before the as going
back to the tricyclics and the MAO
inhibitors, going back to the '50s, like
augmenting extracellular serotonin in
one way or another, for many people,
leads to a reduction in depressive
symptoms. It wouldn't be that crazy for
chronically stimulating a subtype of
serotonin receptor that you have an
antidepressant effect. So, I think if I
had put my bets on it that there's if
there's anything real, it is in that
category. Although, I'm very open to
like maybe there is something to the
creativity to the antidepressant
effects. I find that more intriguing
because of the suffering with
depression. Even if it's an it it
wouldn't
>> is in that category. Although, I'm very
open to like maybe there is something to
the creativity
to the, you know, improved cognition,
which covers many domains in and of
itself, but um my
my greatest hopes are on the
on the antidepressant effects. That
said, in the big picture, I think all of
the most interesting thing about
psychedelics are the heroic doses. I
mean, the idea you can give something
one, two, three times and you see
improvements in depression months later
Right. and in addiction
you know, over a year later and with
these, you know, people dealing with
potentially terminal illness. I mean,
it's I mean, I'm interested in big
effects.
>> Right. I want to make sure that I ask
you about the other really important
mission that you're involved in with
respect to psychedelics, which is not
about depression per se, but is about
neurological a neurologic injury or head
injury. You know, we always think
sports, but there are many people who
make a living
in a way that is um
over time is detrimental to their brain.
What do you think is the potential for
these compounds, particularly
psilocybin, but other compounds as well,
for the um treatment and possible even
reversal of neurological injuries? There
are anecdotes of of people saying uh
that
that psychedelics have helped heal their
brain. You know, they've been in one of
these situations, like in sports,
a sport where there's repetitive head
impact and they're claiming that you
know, using psychedelics has actually
improved their cognitive function. For
example, improved their memory. If you
take these anecdotes and you combine it
way across orders of analysis to the
rodent research from
um several labs, like David Olson, Brian
uh Roth, these folks that have shown
different forms of neuroplasticity
unfolding, those effects
may be at play in the improve in the
psychiatric treatments that we're
dealing with that have we don't know
that. It seems like a decent guess and
we're going to be figuring out whether
that's the case.
But another potential that that sets up
is that maybe that's what's going on
with
with these claims of improvements from
neurological issues that there's
actually
you know,
repair of the brain
from injuries underlying you know,
things that you know, situations where
there's repetitive head impact. Perhaps
there's a potential for for helping
folks recover from stroke
and disorders like that.
It is more exploratory. But what I'm
hoping to do is some work with retired
athletes who have been exposed but by
the nature of their sport for example
MMA athletes in the UFC who have been
exposed to
repetitive head impacts like a lot of
sports
a lot of you know, sports exposed people
to
and and who are retired from the sport
and are suffering from say depression
which can
in part result from those types of
that history of head impact. See if we
can fix the depression but then also as
a cherry on top in a more exploratory
aim see if we can have evidence of
improvement in cognitive function and
associate like using MRI see if it
affects gray matter over time these
types of things to see if there actually
some evidence of this improved
like this more direct repair of the
brain. But again, it is very sort of
like we've got some rodent data, we've
got some human anecdotes. We we we will
acknowledge it's early days and we look
forward to seeing the data.
I appreciate how cautious you are and
tentative you are. You're not drawing
any conclusions. Thank you so much for
your time, for your knowledge, and I
think you put it best earlier for
holding the candle in a very dark time,
and then now
there's light.