- Individuals with mental and physical health issues rated the effectiveness of microdosing with psychedelics higher than traditional therapies, particularly for ADHD/ADD and anxiety, but lower than standard higher doses of psychedelics.
- Microdosing demonstrated significantly better self-rated effectiveness than conventional treatments for certain disorders, while regular doses of psychedelics were rated more effective for mental health issues.
- The effectiveness of microdosing was found to be disorder-specific, showing varying benefits across different conditions.
Introduction
The researchers highlight an increasing curiosity around the use of psychedelics for health treatment, specifically in alleviating symptoms related to disorders like anxiety, depression, and chronic pain. Although most recent clinical studies have been concentrated on high doses of these substances, anecdotal accounts propose that microdosing—taking low doses—might also yield positive results and be more fitting for specific conditions. However, there is still a lack of concrete empirical data supporting the effectiveness of psychedelic microdosing for symptom relief.
This investigation aimed to evaluate the self-rated effectiveness (SRE) of psychedelic microdosing in comparison to conventional treatments and full doses of psychedelics for various mental and physiological disorders. To accomplish this, an online survey was administered to individuals who had experience with microdosing.
Study Methods
Study Design and Participants
The researchers executed an online survey advertised on multiple websites and forums dedicated to psychedelics from March to July 2018. Participants had to be aged 18 or older and possess experience with psychedelic substances to qualify. The aim was to assess the general presence of microdosing within psychedelic user groups without exclusively targeting microdosers.
Out of an initial 5,681 responses, 3,590 satisfied the inclusion requirements and completed the survey. Ultimately, a total of 410 respondents, who reported having microdosed and been diagnosed with at least one mental or physiological disorder by healthcare professionals, were included in the analysis.
Questionnaire Structure
The questionnaire encompassed demographic data, psychedelic usage history, and specifics concerning diagnosed conditions. Participants detailed their experiences with both conventional therapies and self-treatment using psychedelics, which included microdoses and regular doses.
Each participant was asked to answer three questions regarding effectiveness: “Did it work?”, “Did symptoms subside to a level where daily life was not impacted?”, and “Did your quality of life improve?”. These responses were categorized as positive or negative.
Statistical Evaluation
Binary logistic regression was utilized to measure the effectiveness of microdosing against that of conventional treatments and regular doses, addressing both mental and physiological diagnoses, and exploring specific disorder categories when feasible. This led to the computation of odds ratios (OR) for each effectiveness question.
Study Results
Demographics
The selected sample of 410 microdosers had an average age of approximately 28.9 years, with a significant majority being male (74.6%). Most participants had pursued higher education (70.7%) and hailed from North America (67.3%). The predominant psychedelics used for microdosing included psilocybin (60.5%), LSD (56.3%), and 1P-LSD (10.5%).
Diagnoses
Among the 410 participants, a total of 901 mental diagnoses and 161 physiological diagnoses were reported. The leading mental disorders included depressive disorders (72.7%), anxiety disorders (55.6%), and ADHD/ADD (37.3%). The most frequently reported physiological disorders were migraines (14.6%), chronic pain (13.7%), and cluster headaches (3.7%).
Effectiveness of Treatments
The findings indicated that microdosing was significantly more effective than conventional treatments for mental disorders, with odds ratios spanning from 2.30 to 2.77, meaning participants were over twice as likely to rate microdosing favorably compared to traditional options. Specifically, this included markedly favorable responses from those with ADHD/ADD and anxiety disorders. For physiological conditions, microdosing was also rated as more effective than conventional treatments, especially in ailments of the nervous system, with odds ratios varying from 4.36 to 7.74.
When contrasting microdosing with full doses of psychedelics for mental health issues, microdosing was generally regarded as less effective, with odds ratios ranging from 0.13 to 0.31. This finding suggests that microdosing was only one-third to one-eighth as likely to be perceived as effective compared to regular doses, especially noted in cases of depression and anxiety. No substantial differences were found for physiological disorders between microdoses and full doses.
Discussion and Implications
The researchers summarize several significant insights derived from their research. Microdosing was perceived as superior to conventional treatments for both mental and physical conditions, particularly for ADHD/ADD and anxiety disorders. However, when looking at mental disorders, standard psychedelic doses were often seen as more effective than microdoses, a trend not observed for physical conditions. Moreover, the effectiveness of microdosing varied based on the specific disorder being treated, indicating a need for more nuanced approaches to therapy.
The authors speculate that the results might suggest fewer side effects associated with microdosing compared to traditional medications. They also propose that the intense experiences often linked to higher doses may be crucial for improving certain conditions such as depression and anxiety.
In recognizing the study’s limitations, including potential bias and lack of comprehensive disorder severity data, the researchers call for future randomized controlled trials. These trials should focus on objectively evaluating the efficacy of psychedelic microdosing, exploring dose-dependent effects, and comparing these outcomes with conventional treatment options.
Read the full paper summary on Blossom.
