Psychedelic substances were sidelined in the 1970s, but are now gaining renewed interest as potential therapies for severe mental disorders. Substances based on esketamine, psilocybin, and MDMA are making a comeback in clinical practice, offering new approaches to treating depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other mental health conditions.
Current state of psychedelic use
Antidepressants based on esketamine have already been approved in countries such as France and the United States. Australia has gone one step further by allowing the use of MDMA and psilocybin to treat certain mental disorders. Nevertheless, research from the University of Rennes shows that the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of these substances is weak and the risks associated with their use remain significant.
Read also: Ukrainians continue to support charity: results of the 2024 survey
Psychedelics: new or well-forgotten old
Although psychedelics are positioned as an innovation, their therapeutic potential is far from new. In the 1960s and ‘70s, these substances were already being researched for medical use, but quickly fell out of use due to regulatory restrictions.
Challenges of clinical trials
Psychedelics such as MDMA and psilocybin have already received approval in some regions. However, evaluating them in double-blind trials faces challenges. The known effects of these substances, such as hallucinations and altered perception, make it difficult to ensure study blindness, which can distort results.
Read also: Most Kherson residents ready to return home after stabilisation — report 2023-2024
Fast-track approval and scientific rigour
Psychedelics are often seen as a last resort for patients who do not respond to traditional treatments. This has prompted regulators to use fast-track approval procedures that require less scientific evidence, raising concerns about the reliability of such approaches.
Risks and recommendations
The analysis revealed shortcomings in scientific articles about psychedelics, including exaggerating their benefits and failing to take into account the limitations of double-blind protocols. The authors of the study emphasise the need for stricter regulation and improved clinical trial protocols to ensure patient safety.
Read also: Mental Health at Work: How to Preserve It?
