Peacefroggie's avatar
In psychology it's not always possible to do the really strictly scientific sort of tests you can do in the other sciences. Often you have to rely on a subject's description of what they are going through. Like say someone has a brain injury that alters their behaviour, you'd definitely have to take into account their description of their own mental state as well as look at what had physically changed in the brain. In this case, a group consensus as to what the experience felt like subjectively is enough to conclude that, as the study does, that drugs can cause powerful "mustical experiences."
Shidaku's avatar
true, but we all know that 'shrooms contain chemicals that affect your brain, and the resulting experiances you feel are caused by the brain activity triggered by the change in chemical levels. I dont recall if actual scans of brain activity were done in this study, but I feel they are necessary.

If this drug does indeed activate a "positive" portion of the brain, then it should be made known what part of the brain that is, so that perhaps we can engineer something that is less toxic, but just as effective, and perhaps do some good.
Peacefroggie's avatar
Sure, we know to some degree what goes on in the brain with psychedelics...they cause the brain to release an excess of serotonin. Obviously there are other factors involved which are less understood due to the 40-year research ban. But the guy who did the John Hopkins study wants to do more research including MRI scans, etc., as soon as he can get government approval and more funding. Could be tricky though...FOX News already has a headline reporting that psilocybin causes a high that lasts for months :)