-
33C3 musique de préroulement
-
Herald: Ok! Venons-en à la discussion...
La suivante est Andrea Jungaberle. Elle
-
nous parle des drogues et de comment elles
affectent la psychiatrie. Quel mot dur !
-
Pourquoi tu ne le fais pas? Je sais
maintenant. Et la question est, après la—
-
comment dit-on "verbot" en français ?
Andrea Jungaberle: Prohibition.
-
Herald: Après la prohibition dans les
années 70. On n'a pas beaucoup réfléchi
-
à comment ces drogues fonctionnent et
pourraient améliorer la psychiatrie... Et
-
maintenant tout le monde se demande,
est-ce le remède miracle? Je ne crois pas.
-
Mais plus d'informations sur ce sujet avec
Andrea. Un accueil chaleureux, svp.
-
Applaudissements
-
Andrea: Bonjour, tout le monde. Je suis
heureuse d'être ici et pouvoir vous parler
-
d'un sujet qui me tient à cœur et qui est
très important pour beaucoup de personnes,
-
aujourd'hui et demain. Donc, le sujet est
la médecine psychédélique, le piratage, la
-
psychiatrie. Et juste pour rappeler la
chute, ce n'est pas un remède miracle et
-
ça ne le sera jamais. Mais aussi il y a
beaucoup de choses à savoir et à penser
-
dans ce contexte. J'aimerais vous les
présenter. Mais d'abord, quelques mots
-
sur moi. Je suis docteur en médecine,
spécialisée dans l'urgence et les soins
-
intensifs. Je travaille et vis à Berlin.
Je suis aussi l'un des fondateurs de MIND,
-
la Fondation Européenne pour la Science
Psychédélique, et actuel directeur médical
-
Juste une phrase de plus. Voici notre
équipe de base. MIND est une association
-
de membres de Science psychédélique. Nous
avons 450 membres au niveau mondial et une
-
équipe de 50 personnes. C'est un noyau de
personnel rémunéré, nombreux volontaires
-
très bons et très dédiés , et de grands
internes de différentes disciplines, comme
-
les neurosciences, la psychiatrie, la
psycho/pharmacologie, etc Nous travaillons
-
pour établir la science psychédélique,
comme une méthode, fondée sur des preuves
-
et informer en Allemagne et autour en
Europe. Ok, plongeons dans le vif du sujet
-
Les Psychédéliques. Que sont-ils ? Et bien
le terme vient des Grecs, Psychée et Délos
-
que l'on peut traduire par "manifestation
de l'esprit par la pensée". Tant de gens
-
parlaient des substances psychoactives
comme ayant une certaine, capacité de
-
transformer la perception de chacun,
l'introspection,les qualités sensorielles
-
d'une manière très typique qui est parfois
décrite comme onirique, mais pas toujours.
-
Les psychédéliques classiques, également
appelés hallucinogènes, terme qui me
-
déplait car ces drogues ne provoquent pas
d'hallucinations. Ce qu'ils font, c'est
-
induire de pseudo hallucinations; donc si
on a prend une substance psychédélique,
-
dans 99% des cas, on est conscient d'avoir
pris une substance et que ce que l'on
-
ressent est dû à cette substance. C'est
donc non un hallucinogène, mais un pseudo
-
hallucinogène. Mais ces substances, comme
les classiques- LSD, psilocybine ou DMT -
-
fonctionnent de manière très spécifique et
agissent toutes sur le système
-
sérotoninergique. La sérotonine est l'un
des principaux neurotransmetteurs et il y
-
a un récepteur, le 5-HT2A, qui est le plus
petit dénominateur commun à toutes ces
-
substances, non qu'elles agissent toutes
uniquement sur celui-ci, elles affectent
-
toute une pléthore de neuro-transmetteurs
et de récepteurs. Mais c'est la clé où
-
elles fonctionnent toutes. Il y a d'autres
substances qui sont classées comme
-
plutôt psychédéliques,comme les
entactogènes -l'ecstasy ou MDMA par ex.-
-
qui agisent aussi sur le système sérotoni-
nergique. Les dissociatifs -kétamine,...-
-
agissent plus sur le récepteur NMDA; et
d'autres sont basiquement des produits
-
chimiques aléatoires, comme l'Amanite
tue-mouche, la Datura ou la Salvia. Bon.
-
C'est la seule diapositive où je vais vous
déranger avec ce genre de science dure. Je
-
pense qu'il est important d'être clair sur
ce sujet car même si les psychédéliques
-
sont un mème de la culture pop, personne
ne sait rien à leur sujet, à dire vrai. La
-
majorité les associe à des drogues ayant
la même dangerosité que la méthamphétamine
-
ou les opioïdes. Pense qu'il existe une
dépendance avec les drogues psychédéliques
-
qui, en fait, n'existe pas. Et c'est le pb
fondamental de la perception pour beaucoup
-
de gens depuis très longtemps. Les choses
ont un peu changé récemment. Les psyché-
-
déliques sont devenus la norme. D'abord,
à cause d'un changement général de la
-
perception des drogues, comme avec le
cannabis ou un changement des médications.
-
Aussi pk des gens, comme Michael Pollan,
qui est un auteur mainstream qui écrit sur
-
la cuisine et la nutrition, s'est mis à
écrire sur les psychédéliques. Et un autre
-
facteur qui a aidé les psychédéliques à sa
façon et leur a nuit d'une autre est toute
-
cette lubie du microdosage que nous voyons
dans la scène tech ou développementale, et
-
surtout dans la région de la Baie et à la
Silicon Valley. Mais d'où viennent-ils ?
-
from? In this talk, I am not going to
speak about psychedelic, psychoactive
-
substances in other cultural frameworks.
There are cultures like in the Amazonian
-
basin or some Aztec people in Mexico
who have been using psychoactive
-
substances, psychedelics, in a very
ritualized sense for millennia, perhaps,
-
or at least centuries. But this is not us.
So let's talk about what happened here in
-
Europe or in the Western world, including
America. This guy up here, sorry, that's
-
the wrong one. The pointer isn't strong
enough. We'll work like this. This nice
-
guy up here is Albert Hofmann. In 1938, he
was developing several substances that
-
were supposed to work on atonia and in
postpartum women, but also on other
-
problems like blood pressure and he,
among other things, developed the
-
thing that later became LSD. But
back then, he didn't see any sense in
-
pursuing it medically because it didn't
work the way he wanted it to and he
-
shelved it. And for some reason in ’43, he
took it out the shelf again to retest it
-
for other purposes, and accidently gave
himself the first noted LSD trip. This
-
happened not because he was a shitty
chemist, but because the amount that is
-
needed to induce an effect is so low as it
has never been noted before in any other
-
substance. So 20 micrograms of LSD can
already produce a notable change in
-
perception. So when he came out of that
experience, this first one he had, after
-
accidentally dosing himself, he decided
to go for, well, a trial on himself and
-
trying to be safe. He used what he thought
was a very low dose of the substance he
-
discovered, which turned out to be 250
micrograms of LSD, which was his… I hear
-
the laughter. It’s rather a high dose
trip, especially for somebody who just
-
didn't know what was expecting him out
there in his own mind. And this is the
-
famous bicycle day trip where he rode home
on his bike thinking that the world was
-
collapsing around him, basically. So even
this wasn't a nice trip, the first one. So
-
what happened next was that he reported to
his superiors at Sandoz Chemical in Basel,
-
and they had the idea of turning this
into a substance for many doctors,
-
psychiatrists, psychologists, to experience
what it would be like to be psychotic. So
-
its first application of LSD was as a
psychotomimetic. And as a psychoto-
-
mimetic, thousands of dosages were
distributed worldwide from the
-
Czech Republic to Harvard University to
everywhere. And doctors tried it out. What
-
happened then was that a small group of
young, ambitious psychologists around
-
Timothy Leary tried it out too, and
thought this is not just something for
-
doctors. This is not just a psychoto-
mimetic and brought it out basically into,
-
yeah, the real world. And people were
experimenting with LSD quite a bit in the
-
’60s before it was forbidden in ’71. Not
because it turned out to be so dangerous.
-
They were not so many accidents. Not so
many people had dire side effects. But
-
because the political will to cope with
the substance and its implications wasn't
-
existent in the Nixon era. So. ’71,
underground goes into subculture. But the
-
genie was out of the bottle and it was not
going to go back in. And psychedelics, not
-
only LSD, but also Psilocybin, later on
MDMA. And these days, more than 500 new
-
psychoactive substances that have been
brought up on the black market are around
-
us. And people use them. It's a societal
reality that our juridical system doesn't
-
keep up with, to be fair. So it's been in
many subcultural setting from people just
-
going dancing and having a good time to
self-exploration to pseudo-chamanic or
-
chamanic settings. And I think most people
will at least know somebody who have
-
experienced psychedelics at least once.
And then something else changed. A few
-
years ago, let’s say, 10-ish, 10 years ago,
psychedelics started coming back. There
-
had been research, for example, at the
University of Zürich around psychedelics
-
before that already. There had been trials
before. But the big comeback of substances
-
like psilocybin, LSD, and MDMA as tools to
augment psychotherapy was within the last
-
10 or 15 years. So these people up here
are some of the people worldwide working
-
with these substances, trying to develop
them into medications. So … not
-
over-the-counter, but prescription
medications to be applied within the
-
setting of psychotherapy. So the idea is
never that somebody can walk into a
-
pharmacy saying, oh, I'm depressed, I want
to buy psilocybin to treat myself, but to
-
have a structured therapeutical session in
which the effects can be contained and the
-
benefits enhanced. So the ones that are
most promising these days are psilocybin
-
for depression, which is already heading
for the third stage, third and final stage
-
of approvement as medication within the USA
and consecutively hopefully in Europe. And
-
MDMA, so what is used? What people want to
find if they buy ecstasy, not that they
-
always get it, but MDMA is the substance
they're trying to get, for post-traumatic
-
stress disorder (PTSD). In the U.S., even
the Veterans Association has jumped on the
-
bandwagon and has sponsored this research,
which is interesting at least. But isn't
-
that harmful? Aren't these substances
very dangerous? Well, not in the way you
-
think and not as much as you might think.
This graphic up here is something that was
-
put together by a group of 40 experts who
discussed what substances have what harm
-
on the user and what harm on the people
around the users. So, for example, alcohol
-
is harmful for the person, giving them a
liver disorder, making them addicted and
-
so on, so on. But also because people get
aggressive when they use it or drive
-
dangerously, for example, when they're
intoxicated, it's dangerous to others. If
-
you check out. I have to walk over here
now. Sorry to the camera people. The
-
substances we're talking about for
treatment are not up there with the very
-
dangerous ones. We have the shrooms down
here, the LSD is there, ecstasy is there.
-
So very low danger to the user and almost
no danger to other people. If you compare
-
that to alcohol, heroin, tobacco, it's all
up there. And, to be quite fair, we’re all
-
part of a giant field study anyway. Because
these substances are being used. This is
-
data from the 2017 Global Drug Survey,
which is a self-reporting study where
-
people talk about their own drug use
and fill in forms online. This is not a
-
statistically sound sample of the general
population because to fill out that trial,
-
you have to have a certain interest. But
the people that have filled this out—
-
we're talking about a number of
over 115.000 worldwide—say that
-
they have, in their lifetime, partially
used LSD. … were the numbers …? MDMA,
-
mushrooms and LSD, so MDMA 35%,
mushrooms almost 25%, LSD over 22%.
-
And if you look around you, of
how many people do you know who
-
ended up in an emergency department
or in a psychiatric ward due to _only_ using
-
those substances? Actually, looking at
this giant field study that the illegal
-
market has provided us with, it seems to
be rather safe because these people
-
are not using clear dosages of a clean
substance and still there's hardly
-
anything happening. OK. But what about
microdosing? Well. We don't know much
-
about microdosing, in fact. There are no
scientifically randomized controlled
-
studies, as to yet; the first ones are just
starting. There are self-reporting studies
-
where people have filled out online forms.
And it seems to be that what people are on
-
one hand trying to achieve is, yes,
enhancing creativity, getting better work
-
performance. But a lot of them are trying
to treat, cure, enhance that latent or
-
apparent depression, and the other thing
is: microdosing—which is defined mostly as
-
using a very low, almost subliminal dose
of a psychoactive substance such as LSD—is
-
being done by people with all sorts. There
are people microdosing MDMA and ibogaine,
-
which is, if you look at the receptor
profiles, just insane basically and
-
frankly can't do what they hope it does.
And when we took a look at people who
-
microdose, we can't say how much of
the effect they’re feeling is really from
-
microdosing that substance or if we have a
top-notch, first-grade placebo effect going
-
on where people feel much better because
they have taken this and believe in it.
-
Let's not turn down placebo. Placebo is
extremely valuable medically. It’s
-
actually shown that placebo effect, for
example, enhance the endogenous opioid
-
production. So your body revs up towards
healing, towards feeling better with the
-
placebo effect. But this could also be
done with a sugar pill. And there's one
-
thing I just want to leave with you in
this group. If anybody of you is
-
microdosing and has preexisting heart
condition: don't! Simply because some of
-
the subreceptors, especially with LSD that
are being activated in prolonged micro
-
dosing for a long time can be cardiotoxic
and possibly harm your heart. Just again,
-
there's not clear data about this yet.
Just to leave it with you, if you suffer
-
from a heart condition: don’t!
Depression. That keyword I had with the
-
microdosing as well. But let's go
deeper into this, because if we want to
-
talk about how psychedelic medicine can
really make a difference in psychiatry,
-
depression is like, yeah, the first-line
thing to think and talk about and why is
-
that? Depression is a very serious
psychiatric disorder. People who are
-
severely depressed—and that's many people;
statistically, in Germany, every 8th
-
woman is likely to suffer from a severe
depressive episode. At one point in their
-
life or the other. People who are
depressed lose social functioning. They
-
have very decreased life expectancy
partially through suicide, partially
-
because they don't manage to care for
themselves. These people lose themselves
-
and are being lost for others, too. And
there is treatment for depression, yes,
-
but in many cases it only has a limited
capacity. And even though depression is a
-
worldwide epidemic—with rates from
3% of the population in China to
-
22% of the population in Afghanistan
suffering from it—there have not really
-
been new forms of treatment for two, two
and a half decades‽ So the stuff we're
-
working with is partially working, partly
not: about one third of patients don't
-
react to the medication at all, even
though there's different types. And those
-
who do usually have very low rates of
acceptance because of the side effects.
-
Because many people use antidepressants,
and the best combination is cognitive
-
behavior therapy—so what is called in
German “Verhaltenstherapie,” cognitive
-
behavioral therapy—in conjunction with
antidepressants. That might work, but for
-
some it doesn't. And those who take the
medication don't feel well. It's not that
-
they're back to normal. They're just less
depressed. But usually they're like dimmed
-
in on all sides. So they are still not
getting happy. The libido is decreased.
-
Their activity levels are decreased.
People are suffering quite a bit from the
-
side effects and it's really not nice. So.
I was just … just to tell you one
-
little story. I told you I’m an
emergency medicine doctor. And just
-
to illustrate how bad depression can get:
A few weeks ago, I was being called out to
-
an attempt of suicide. A woman had jumped
out of her window on the fourth floor. We
-
found her lying in her yard and she was...
injured, badly injured, but still alive,
-
and we stabilized her and took her to
hospital, and when the nurse kind of
-
pulled up her data in the emergency room,
she went like, oh, no, not again, because
-
this woman had jumped out the same window
just half a year before. That's how bad
-
this disease can be. So how desperate
people get and how terribly important it
-
is for us not to look away, but try to
find better new therapies. And this is, in
-
my opinion, with psychedelic medicine …
Psychedelic therapy can be a real game
-
changer. The one therapeutic application
we have the best data for is psychedelics
-
for treatment-resistant depression. There
are several studies going on in the UK, in
-
the States, and Switzerland, but also in
the Czech Republic and so on, so on. And
-
what they seem to be finding is that even
though they're still working with small
-
samples because you have to fan out; if
you try to bring out a medication like
-
that, you have to show first that it's
safe with healthy people and then you
-
start with a small sample of sick people
and then you enlarge it from there. And
-
they’re now in this enlarging process …
that's treating depression with psilocybin
-
especially does not only decrease
depression in those patients, but also
-
does one great thing: it decreases
anxiety! Not only talking about state
-
anxiety, so how anxious people are at this
very moment in living their lives, but
-
that trait anxiety. So how anxious people
are as a part of their personality, which
-
is a good thing to gauge how likely people
are to relapse back into depression,
-
people that are very anxious, very
insecure about life, are far more likely
-
to relapse. OK, so you see, there's a lot
happening worldwide studying this, but
-
this is Germany on that. A scientific
desert. We're in the largest country;
-
It’s also the scientifically perhaps most
important country when it comes to medical
-
research in Europe. There’s zilch
happening. There hasn't been a study on
-
psychoactive compounds in this context,
forever, like 30 years, the last one on
-
entactogens like 20 years ago. But
studying psychedelic here hasn't happened.
-
And we want to change that. Let’s …
applause
-
So we as the main foundation had, perhaps,
let's call it groundbreaking, what a
-
groundbreaking conference this September
in Berlin at the Charité buildings.
-
We had 600 participants, over 50
speakers from worldwide, everybody
-
basically, almost everybody who's
important in this dialog scientifically
-
was around. So from the pharmacology, the
psychiatrist, the psychologist, the
-
therapist, but also philosophers talking
about a culture of older sets of mind have
-
been around. And we have been trying to
bring this to the German public and try to
-
lay groundwork for doing new science in
Germany. And what's to come next is this.
-
With our P.I., so a principal investigator,
Gerhard Gründer, who is a
-
new pharmacologist from the University of
Mannheim ZI. We are about to apply for the
-
1st psilocybin depression study in Germany
this next year. So in 2020, we're
-
putting in the applications, we've already
put the first paperwork in, and what we
-
want to do is do a double standard study,
both at the ZI Mannheim and the
-
Charité Berlin. Those are the two most
renowned psychiatric research facilities
-
in Germany. And it's a collaboration from
the ZI, Charité, and the MIND Foundation.
-
Each group contributing their knowledge,
their capabilities, and their strengths.
-
And what we want to do is this. We
want to do a double blind, randomized
-
controlled phase IIa study. Big word.
this basically means that … It’s a
-
top-notch level, internationally acclaimed
study. This is how these studies need to be
-
done to have any value. So it's double
blind, meaning that neither the patient
-
nor the therapist know what this patient
is getting. It's randomized. So this gets
-
assigned without anybody playing around
with it. And phase II means that it's a
-
safety and efficacy study, so not yet dose
testing and not yet comparing dosages, but
-
just trying to make sure it works. And we
are going to do that in a 144 participants
-
sample in total, in two locations, which
is huge. This will be the second or third
-
biggest sample worldwide doing this. And
the first one in Germany, as we said and
-
what we are going to test is 25
milligrams of standardised GMP. So
-
Medical Grade Psilocybin versus two active
placebos. One being a small dose of
-
psilocybin, which used to be the standard
thing to do. But now talking about
-
microdosing, what is if the small doses
already does something? And testing it
-
against another placebo that isn't
psilocybin, which is: there’s some physical
-
reaction, but is not psychedelic in this
sense. So in this design, every patient
-
will receive at least one—some two—high
dosages of psilocybin. So everybody who
-
gets accepted will have his try. And the
study design consists of preparation
-
sessions, dosing sessions where people
receive either placebo or psilocybin and
-
integration sessions. Integration is so
important and not only in a scientific
-
study on this topic, but if people are
working with psychedelics, experimenting
-
with psychedelics themselves, integration
is the key to do something with the
-
experience. Because if you don't work with
it actively, the experience is going to
-
fade. And you might remember something
about what you learned, but it will not
-
have the impact on you, your life, and how
you—yeah—benefit from what you've seen
-
and learned in that way. Right. Just one
more sentence. It's mixed funding, its
-
funding and progress. So we have some
public money coming in, but we're also
-
looking for donations and investment just
at the side. And this is almost the end of
-
my talk. What I want to say is the
following: What we try at the moment
-
is to establish safe and legal psychedelic
therapies in Germany, Europe, and the
-
world. This is going to take time. If
things go well, we might be there in five
-
to ten years—five if things go really
well. And I know that it's very tempting
-
for many people to say: “Well, I can
just go to somebody and have a
-
psilocybin session. I can go to somebody,
have an ayahuasca session.” And yes, you
-
can. But be aware if you do that, because
you're really suffering from psychiatric
-
disease, if you have a mental illness, if
you really are in distress. Be very
-
careful with yourself, because the thing
is, you need somebody to really support
-
you, really help you through somebody who
really knows what they're dealing with,
-
because otherwise you can do yourself more
harm than good. This picture down there
-
with the ambulance is a real picture.
Right. That's what I wanted to say.
-
Thank you very much for having me. If
you're interested in what we're doing,
-
check it out!
appplause
-
Herald: Andrea, thank you very much.
That gives us plenty of time for some
-
questions. People are lining up on the
microphones already. So we start with
-
microphone number two, please.
Mic 1: Thank you for this amazing talk.
-
That's really great. Just one question.
Wouldn't that be a problem for a double
-
blind study if a person can surely tell if
they're experiencing psychedelic effects?
-
Andrea: That is a problem. Yes, but this
is the way the authorities request the
-
study to be done. And interestingly
enough, there have been cases where people
-
couldn't tell. If people thought they were
either on a small dosage or on a high
-
dosage, or even if they where on an
inactive placebo. Right. So the self…
-
Yeah, self-suggestive capabilities of
people should not be underestimated
-
either.
Herald: Okay, then we're going to jump
-
over to number six.
Mic 6: Thank you very much for the
-
talk. I would like to hear your opinion on
the fact that, uh, like in the last 150
-
years, most drug agents were discovered
in Germany, and meanwhile, we have
-
the pity of scientifically Germany
lying in Arizona.
-
laughter
Andrea: Right. Germany has two points that
-
historically hold us back. One is the
forced human trials during the Nazi era
-
where substances, techniques, were tested on
concentration camp prisoners. And we have
-
the Contergan scandal that harmed so many
people and led to, in all of the world,
-
the stricter rules we have now. That's two
reasons why Germany is so reluctant to
-
expose itself in this kind of process. But
still, it is a pity. And I think it is
-
about time that the German not only
government, but also the scientific
-
establishment gets to understand that they
lose out and they are trading behind a
-
development that has
started and will continue.
-
Herald: And now we have a question
from the Internet, I hear.
-
Signal Angel: Yes! For people
struggling with depression, anxiety, or
-
mental illnesses: What specific options
are there in Europe with regards to
-
psychedelic-assisted therapy?
Andrea: Well, one is that you can try to
-
participate in the existing trial. So, for
example, in London, there's Kings College
-
and Imperial College, there's a group in
Bristol working, there's also therapy
-
happening in Switzerland and so on. And
there's also, if you happen to be lucky
-
enough to live in Switzerland, there's the
so-called compassionate use where
-
psychiatrists with special permits are
allowed to use LSD and MDMA as therapeutic
-
agents on a case-to-case basis that they
have to discuss with the authorities.
-
So that's all we can say for now:
study participation or compassionate use.
-
We just really hope that
things will rev up and we'll be able
-
to offer more in the future.
Herald: And microphone number 4, please.
-
Mic 4: Yeah. Hello. Thank you
very much for your talk.
-
My question is more related to
the history of the uses of psychedelics
-
in the US and to the MAPS Association
founded by Rick Doblin, but I was curious,
-
how would you explain that MAPS is so
actively criticizing the experiments led
-
in the 1950s and ’60s by the CIA, and yet
they accept donations of several million
-
dollars coming from the Mercer family, who
are among the largest shareholders of
-
Cambridge Analytica, Breitbart News, and
they also accept, they accepted recently
-
about three millions from members of Tea
Party. Isn't it a bit of an irony here?
-
applause
Andrea: That is a very good question. The
-
way I know Rick Doblin and many people
from MAPS personally, I know that they're
-
pursuing an honest goal. What they’re
trying to do is bring this into the world
-
and they have been doing that since 1986.
So they've been on this for almost 35
-
years. He's dedicated his life to doing
that. I don't fully understand his
-
motives. I don't have to, to be honest,
because I'm not speaking for him. I think
-
there is a huge necessity for integrity
because if we don't—as people working
-
with it scientifically—if we don't move
along with the necessary integrity, we're
-
opening the doors for other people to
don't care at all. But on the other hand,
-
finding the money, getting this done and a
lot … he was … Rick was criticized a lot,
-
for example, for accepting veterans;
snipers from Iraq into his therapy
-
program. Like, okay, are you not getting
people fit again to go out back to the
-
battlefield? And I find this all very
difficult because there is a thing that is
-
called perpetrated PTSD. There is a thing
of people only realizing afterwards what
-
they have done. And I would not … I
would be very careful in judging people in
-
distress. But you're very right. It's a
very delicate topic. And I think we all
-
have to be very aware that there are thin
paths we are threading in what we're
-
doing there. When we accept money that
comes from sources that don't follow
-
ethical standards.
Herald: Then we're going to switch over to
-
microphone number five.
Mic 5: Hello, I guess you have a really
-
nice answer to the following statement. So
I hope you will share your answer:
-
Little Greta twittered today that the
house is on fire and just that. So
-
actually that means an adequate reaction
would be to jump out of the window. So you
-
could argue that actually we should rescue
all the people that are really down, like
-
down and out, because they cannot help us
anymore. But actually, we should get the
-
people that are still happy to be a little
depressed instead of all getting them
-
happy. What do you say?
Andrea: There's always two ways of dealing
-
with a system: You can step out of it,
and you can try to change it from within.
-
It is always very difficult to go from
caring for the individual to things that
-
are right for all. And me being a doctor,
for example, I have simply decided to put
-
the individual in the center of my
concern, and I think others need to put
-
the greater good in the center of their
concern. I think it's inconsolable. We
-
can't do both at the same time. So it's
good to make your decision and do this
-
what you do with all your heart.
Herald: Then we're going to switch over to
-
the Internet again.
Signal Angel: Yes. And do you know of any
-
studies or evidence corroborating the
other side, like triggering mental
-
illnesses by using psychedelics, for
example, if you have a family history of …?
-
Andrea: Well, doing a randomized,
controlled study with that would be
-
unethical. So what we have is the
epidemiological and the anecdotal
-
evidence that is found. So, yes,
if you have a predisposition for
-
psychosis, for schizophrenia, for mental
instability, there is a large chance of
-
triggering that if you use psychedelics.
But on the other hand, many people try to
-
self-medicate with substances, be it
psychedelics or cannabis, because they're
-
feeling they're already on the edge of
some instability. But the current paradigm
-
for the studies is to exclude people
whose direct family is affected by
-
psychosis.
Herald: Number two just disappeared, so
-
we're gonna go straight over to four.
Mic 4: I would like to ask you whether you
-
changed your mind about anything related
to psychedelics in last few years or if
-
you have seen something in the
research that really surprised you?
-
Andrea: Let’s … Well, I am worried. In a
few respects. Like, for example, the whole
-
development around the 5-MeO scene, people
using bufo alvarius toxins for very, very strong
-
psychedelic experiences, sometimes risking
their live doing it. This whole scene
-
kind of lifting from the ground and going
in a very strange direction, in my
-
opinion. This is kind of worrying me
because I think people are not taking the
-
care they should be taking of themselves
in what they are doing. But otherwise, I
-
think scientific results we're seeing are
rather consistent. It's very important to
-
know that these are not magic bullets and
not expect too much. You can’t expect
-
something to cure everything. And
psychedelics seem to be a good idea
-
for people who are rigid, transfixed, not
able to transcend something. But people
-
who are already like in a chaotic state
are very unlikely to benefit. And I think
-
that's a very good basic rule. And
this is something I see proven
-
time and time again.
Herald: Number five, please.
-
Mic 5: Hi, thanks. Regarding certain
setting and how it can have such a huge
-
influence on one's experience, can you
comment on the setting of the new
-
psilocybin study in the upcoming year?
Andrea: Like all the studies that are
-
being ta… being done, certain settings
are being taken into consideration. These
-
people don't trip in a sterile white
hospital bed. They get to have their
-
psychedelic experience in a warm,
comfortable, organic, welcoming
-
environment. For example, on a couch with
a nice cushion, nice dim light, flowers,
-
music is extremely important. There have
been released scientific works around what
-
kind of music is beneficial for those.
Mendel Kaelen, for example, at Imperial
-
College is a specialist in this kind of
music and is being taken very seriously.
-
Also, those questions of how much physical
contact is beneficial, is allowed. What
-
could harm the patient is discussed very
precisely in all those groups I know,
-
because this is so much more than just a
pill. This is really about making sure
-
that people have a safe experience where
they can, yeah, come to healing inside
-
themselves
Mic 5: Thank you.
-
Herald: So we have time for one more
question. Number one, please.
-
Mic 1: I don't know if I want to hear the
answer, but do you think it would help
-
your cause if you would stop
take these drugs for fun?
-
Andrea: My answer to this is the
following: Imagine there was a food
-
thing, something that tasted nice; let’s
say chocolate and there were people
-
who could only survive if they got
chocolate. But because everybody else was
-
doing it too, and it was somehow
not okay, it would be forbidden for
-
everybody. Then I would say, well if you
replace chocolate with LSD, I think there
-
are people there who really need it. And
we have to be careful that recreational
-
use and playing around with drugs doesn't
spoil their chance to something lifesaving
-
because they need the chocolate. You might
get along without, but it's something we
-
have to take into consideration. This
doesn't mean it's wrong to have psychedelic
-
experience for your own benefit, for your
own betterment, for your own fun. But just
-
keep in mind, if you're hindering with
your wanting to have a good time that
-
somebody gets a life-saving therapy,
perhaps, then this is an ethical problem
-
we are facing.
Herald: Andrea, thank you so much.
-
That's your applause.
applause
-
36c3 rollout music
-
subtitles created by c3subtitles.de
in the year 2020. Join, and help us!