Psilocybin: From Serendipity to Credibility?

Psilocybin has a history of non-medical use, and some infer therapeutic utility from this. Early phase clinical trials are encouraging but only indicate a need for larger, multicentre trials, which are ongoing but will take years. Retreat centers offering paid psilocybin truffle experiences use early trial data for bold public claims, which is unwise because early trials are not designed for generalization. This risks misleading the public and conflicts with ethical principles from the Nuremberg Code and Kefauver Harris Amendments. Using psilocybin before proper testing may undermine the credibility of retreat centers and the wider field.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Psilocybin has a long history of non-medical use and some seem to infer from this that it has therapeutic utility. Early phase clinical trials with psilocybin are encouraging, but suggest only that larger, multicentre trials are required. These are ongoing but will take many years to complete. Meanwhile, retreat centers offering paid experiences with psilocybin truffles have opened in some countries, often using early phase clinical trial data as a basis for bold, public facing claims. This seems unwise. Early phase trials are not designed for their results to be generalized outside the setting they were undertaken in. To do so risks being misleading. Providing what may be seen as an unregulated drug intervention as a paid service is difficult to reconcile with long-held ethical principles underpinning human research and treatment development that were laid down by the 1947 Nuremberg Code and the 1962 Kefauver Harris Amendments. By using psilocybin before it has been properly tested, retreat centers may be undermining their own credibility and the credibility of the wider field.