Prevalence and associations of challenging, difficult or distressing experiences using classic psychedelics
- PMID: 36720405
- PMCID: PMC9974873
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.01.073
Prevalence and associations of challenging, difficult or distressing experiences using classic psychedelics
Abstract
Previous studies have investigated challenging, difficult, or distressing classic psychedelic experiences, but little is known about the prevalence and associations of such experiences. Using nationally representative data of the US adult population (N = 2822), this study examined the prevalence and associations of challenging, difficult, or distressing experiences using classic psychedelics, in a subsample of respondents who reported lifetime classic psychedelic use (n = 613). Of the 613 respondents who reported lifetime classic psychedelic use, the majority of them (59.1 %) had never had a challenging, difficult, or distressing experience using a classic psychedelic, but 8.9 % of respondents reported functional impairment that lasted longer than one day as a result of such experiences. Notably, 2.6 % reported seeking medical, psychiatric, or psychological assistance in the days or weeks following their most challenging, difficult, or distressing classic psychedelic experience. In covariate-adjusted regression models, co-use of lithium, co-use of other mood stabilizers, and six set and setting variables (no preparation, disagreeable physical environment, negative mindset, no psychological support, dose was too large, major life event prior to experience) were associated with the degree of difficulty; and co-use of lithium, co-use of other mood stabilizers, and three set and setting variables (negative mindset, no psychological support, major life event prior to experience) were associated with overall risk of harm. In summary, this study provides insight into the prevalence and associations of challenging, difficult, or distressing classic psychedelic experiences. The findings broadly correspond with findings from previous studies and can inform harm reduction efforts and future experimental research designs.
Keywords: Adverse; CEQ; Challenging; LSD; Psilocybin; Psychedelics; Risk.
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest PSH is on the scientific advisory board of Bright Minds Biosciences Ltd., Eleusis Benefit Corporation, and Reset Pharmaceuticals Inc. OS and RC are co-founders of Eudelics AB. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose.
References
-
- Nutt DJ, King LA, & Phillips LD (2010). Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis. The Lancet, 376(9752), 1558–1565. - PubMed
-
- Rucker JJ, Marwood L, Ajantaival RLJ, Bird C, Eriksson H, Harrison J, … & Young AH. (2022). The effects of psilocybin on cognitive and emotional functions in healthy participants: results from a phase 1, randomised, placebo-controlled trial involving simultaneous psilocybin administration and preparation. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 36(1), 114–125. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Carhart-Harris R, Giribaldi B, Watts R, Baker-Jones M, Murphy-Beiner A, Murphy R, … & Nutt DJ. (2021). Trial of psilocybin versus escitalopram for depression. New England Journal of Medicine, 384(15), 1402–1411. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
