Talk:Psychedelic therapy

Let's see the sources for this, please. Viriditas (talk) 05:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have decided to tag this article with {{

Please see also the sentence of

Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 03:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, the article needs to be cleaned up. There is one particular point to be made, though. Even though the majority of 1960s studies don't fulfil the strict methodological criteria of today, they were nonetheless professional, academic studies, and their findings should be reported in one way or another. Sure, WP:MEDRS is a fine guideline, but it is obviously based on the assumption of academic freedom and cannot account for purely anti-scientific ostracization of research areas. Psychedelic research was halted for decades because of political zeitgeist. The relative lack of good sources is, first and foremost, due to this fact; it is not caused by inherent flaws or misconclusions in the pre-1970s research.

That said, we still need better sources. I'm planning to do some major work on this article in the near future. Anyone willing to help me? TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to the accounts of Grof and Halifax, a pediatrician named Valentina Pavlovna Wasson, was intrigued by the use of psychedelic mushrooms by Mexicans. She further turned out to be the first recorded Westerner to be admitted into a “sacred ritual led by a medicine woman”. The use of psychedelic mushrooms was supposedly a natural characteristic of the Columbian cultures, and it had spread wide across Central America. After the use of this substance, the effect of the mushrooms left a great impression upon Valentina. She later revealed that these magic mushrooms could be put into use for deep psychic experiences and even other various medical/therapeutic uses. These mushrooms are identified as Psilocybe mexicana (Psylocybin).^[1]

Nonetheless, before the West had the begun its deep research and experiments into the benefits of psychedelic therapy, the use of these psychedelic plants were referred as mystical healing powers across most ancient cultures. It became a tradition to use these plants for all their communal rituals. It would be involved in death mostly, helping those in pain transition into the next dimension. This transition would be a part of a shared experience, as the “shaman or the wise leader would ingest these psychedelic plants or would make the group do so” in order to conduct the ritualistic process properly.

Sizeofint (talk) 15:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kellynbobellyn (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1) Read

WP:MEDHOW

1) Get say 5 recent MEDRS sources on this topic (find them via the box at the top of this page - the part starting with "Ideal sources ....")

2) read them, carefully

3) Read this article, carefully.

3) Review this article to see if the sections follow the sections described in MEDMOS.

4) If the sections don't follow MEDMOS, fix the sections and move content where it belongs.

5) Review the content again in light of what you have learned from the MEDRS sources, and update/fill in/correct where ever you find problems. Jytdog (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PBIO4181J Evaluation: Overall the article is organized into sections that all relate to the topic itself, but it could be organized better. There is a history section right when the article begins and another section about history at the end. Those two sections should be closer together in the article to make it more understandable. The topic is not fully covered and there is a lack of information on the subject. The article only covers the use of psychedelic therapy with regards to alcoholism and terminal illnesses. To improve the quality and information it would be best to add in the use of psychedelic therapy as treatment for addiction as a whole, illnesses like depression and anxiety, and server or chronic pain. This is especially important because in the history portion of the article it is stated that psychedelic therapy can be used to treat PTSD, depression, alcoholism, and cluster headaches, so information should be added regarding each. Kellynbobellyn (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC) Another organization mistake is putting the 'restrictive regulation' section towards the end. The section explains that psychedelic therapy was at a standstill for awhile because of government laws on the psychoactive drugs. This section would be more appropriate towards the beginning of the article because it is apart of the topic's history and does no good to read it at the very end. The article is also written in chunks and doesn't flow well. For example, this first section is broken into eight mini paragraphs with ideas that jump around. Overall the writing and ideas of the article are very scattered and jumbled. It is also a good idea to state the importance and recent concern for psychedelic therapy, so readers understand why this topic is being written about. The article begins with an introduction that gives a brief overview on psychedelic therapy. It could be rewritten to emphasize the main points of the article rather only describing the psychoactive drugs used and how the therapy sessions work. It ends with information about a previous study done, which I think would be more appropriate in a section dedicated to prior research. The article has many headings and subheadings which is good, but there are no images or diagrams shown. Adding images and figures from previous studies to show how psychedelic therapy as helped people should be done. The overall coverage of the article is very neutral and unbiased. The article explains the positive effects psychedelic therapy has had on people and also highlights an opposing view. Lastly, the references are all reliable and good sources of evidence, but more citations are needed. It is not good to have facts presented with no citation afterwords. One problem with some of the references is that you aren't able to be redirected to them. This makes it hard to tell if the information presented actually came from that reference. Kellynbobellyn (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read

WP:MEDMOS and base your comments about article structure and style on that. Style is in Wikipedia is not governed by individual preferences. Jytdog (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

This article does need help. Thanks for taking it on! I imagine the layout should be something similar to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles#Drugs.2C_treatments.2C_and_devices. Sizeofint (talk) 03:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have restructured the bulk of the page to make more sense. I isolated information about its history to a single sequential section. I removed information about the applications of therapy from the history section to its own Applications section. I also added a significant amount of information about studies conducted after 2000, which the original page lacked almost completely.

In the near future, I plan to review/revise the opening summary, Methods section, and Applications section to make sure each is written in a non-biased fashion and that all claims are cited. Additionally, I would like to add a "PTSD" subheader underneath the new Applications section and attempt to fill in some information. I want to add more information to the new "Early Psychedelic Therapy" subheader.

Jakexx360 (talk) 17:31, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those were generally good changes, thanks! Please see the note I left at your talk page about sourcing (no primary sources please) and formatting citations (which were mostly correct!) Jytdog (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have cleaned up the intro paragraph to be substantially shorter and more to the point. It had a lot of bad and pointless information in it originally. I don't think I'll have time to add the `PTSD` subheader in the `Applications` section, however that is a perfect location for anyone who wants to contribute to add any of the huge wealth of PTSD-related studies (utilizing MDMA) that have occurred since the early 2000s. That is likely the most relevant information somebody would be looking for when they visit this page.

Jakexx360 (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 25th, 2020 Katie Thorne I am going to be doing some work on this page over the next few weeks. I am going to be adding to some sections and updating some with more recent research. Once I have completed editing it I will spell out what I changed exactly.

I can find a lot of hype and claims on this topic but there is no evidence. Research about it is biased: small sample groups, no randomization, lack of long term observation etc. ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}

I think this page should be thoroughly revised and corrected, highlighting the evidence we have on "Psychedelic therapy". Digressivo (talk) 10:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of research has been done since the discussion on lack of evidence, but there is a lot of large RTC's that still need to be done. Will be updating this page with systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Td1678 (talk) 13:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]