A Public-Health-Based Vision for the Management and Regulation of Psychedelics

Substance use as a public health issue: A critical review of the Canadian literature, 1896-2020

BACKGROUND

The risks associated with substance use can be framed in many ways. In Canada, the consumption of psychoactive substances has at various times been considered a moral, criminal, or medical issue. In the past decade, substance use has increasingly been framed as a public health issue. This study sought to trace the historical development and evolution of the concept of a public health approach to substance use in Canada through a critical review of the academic literature.

METHODS

Critical review is a method designed to systematically search a body of literature, take stock of its evolution and current state, identify conceptual contributions, and compare schools of thought. Systematic searches were conducted in February and March 2023 in five English-language databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycInfo, Scopus, Web of Science) and three French-language databases (Cairn.info, Érudit, SDM Repère). Eligible articles were written in English or French by a first author based in Canada, focused primarily on substance use, and published in 2020 or earlier.

RESULTS

64 articles, published between 1896 and 2020, were synthesized. We found that while public health has been used as a framing for substance use in Canada for at least 120 years, what that means and what it implies for public policy has changed over time. During the first several decades covered in this review, we periodically see the emergence of new conceptualizations of the problem of substance use and its framing as a public health issue. For example, between the 1890s and 1980s, the dominant view of alcohol evolves from that of a social problem, to a disease, to a population health issue. In the 1990s we see the last of these paradigmatic shifts. From that point onwards, the dominant conceptualization is one that prioritizes drug policy harms over drug harms; correspondingly, proposed solutions center on harm reduction, regulation, and policy reform. Beginning in the 2000s, we see detailed proposals for a comprehensive public health framework to substance use, with authors setting out to define the premises, objectives, and components of such a framework.

CONCLUSION

Overall we found a gradual convergence towards a potential Canadian model for a public health approach to substance use: a model based on principles including human rights and equity, in which psychoactive substances are neither criminalized nor commercialized, but rather strictly regulated, proportionately to the risks they pose, in a manner that optimizes the health of the population. At present, governments across Canada appear to be moving in the opposite direction: drug policy is leaning further into criminalization for already illicit substances and further into commercialization for legal ones. Treating psychoactive substances as either the objects of criminal law or as harmless commodities are both associated with harm. It is incumbent on the public health sector to demonstrate that there are less harmful alternatives.

Set and setting in microdosing: an oft-overlooked principle

RATIONALE

The use of psychedelics for medical and recreational purposes is rising. Contextual factors such as expectancy, intention, and sensory and social environment (set and setting) are widely recognized as moderating the effects of these substances. Nevertheless, clinical trials of microdosing - the ingestion of small, sub-hallucinogenic doses of psychedelics - rarely report their set and setting. This fact suggests that such factors are not considered important in the context of microdosing.

OBJECTIVE

This paper challenges this assumption and makes the case for the crucial relevance of set and setting in microdosing practice. Building on set and setting theory and placebo theory, we explain why set and setting are of crucial importance in the case of microdosing.

RESULTS

This reasoning helps elucidate the role of set and setting in determining the outcomes of microdosing and helps explain some of the contradictory results that have emerged in microdosing research in recent years.

CONCLUSION

Set and setting are important constructs to be considered especially in the context of microdosing psychedelics. By reporting set and setting, the results of microdosing research can be made more reliable and consistent.

Psychedelics and Desistance From Crime: Lessons From the Concord Prison Experiment

Recent investigations of naturalistic psychedelic use purport that psychedelic therapies may be useful in criminal justice contexts for reducing recidivism. The present study applies interactionist theories of desistance to critically explore how psychedelic therapies could facilitate agentic self-transformation to support desistance from crime. Psychedelic experience reports written by inmates as part of the “Concord Prison Experiment” (CPE) were collected from the New York Public Library. Reports from 29 participants were then analyzed using a qualitative content analysis that employed both conventional and directed approaches. Participants frequently reported on changes in emotion and sense perception, interactions with other participants, and self-knowledge. Reports of self-knowledge often emerged from cognitive shifts that led to reflexive thought and novel insights regarding crime and criminality. These findings demonstrate how psychedelics can facilitate cognitive shifts in meaning conducive to inspiring desistance from crime. However, shortcomings of the CPE indicate that the social environment can hinder integration, by constraining the potential to enact changes in one’s life or realize meaningful insights through prosocial relationships. The combination of potentially harmful prison environments and the vulnerable states of consciousness generated by psychedelics should preclude investigations among actively incarcerated participants. Without addressing common social and structural barriers to successful reentry such as housing and employment, the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapy as a recidivism reducing intervention will be limited. Alternative approaches might explore how psychedelic therapy can address the psychological impacts of incarceration.

Adverse experiences resulting in emergency medical treatment seeking following the use of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)

BACKGROUND

Recreational lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) use is growing in popularity amid increasing research interest on psychedelics and their possible therapeutic potential yet; the potent psychotropic effects of LSD may result in adverse reactions and behaviour.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the 12-month incidence and nature of LSD-related adverse experiences resulting in emergency medical treatment (EMT) seeking in an international sample of people reporting LSD use.

METHODS

We use data from the 2017 Global Drug Survey - a large anonymous online survey on patterns of drug use conducted between November 2016 and January 2017.

RESULTS

Out of 10,293 past-year LSD users, 102 (1.0%) reported seeking EMT, with a per-event risk estimate of 0.2%. Younger age, comorbid mental health conditions and higher frequency of use were associated with increased risk of EMT seeking. The most common symptoms were psychological, including anxiety, panic and confusion, with the most common explanatory factors cited by respondents being poor 'setting' and 'mindset'. Most responders reported feeling back to normal within 24 h, but 11 participants experienced persistent issues after 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that LSD is a relatively safe drug in recreational settings. Adverse reactions are typically short-lived, self-limiting and psychological in nature. Sub-optimal set and setting were commonly reported as suspected contributory factors. Within clinical settings, patient screening, preparatory sessions and supervision should reduce these acute risks considerably.

Reprint of: The regulation project: Tools for engaging the public in the legal regulation of drugs

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation.

A public health based vision for the management and regulation of opioids

Prohibition of the possession of opioids for non-medical purposes and medical/pharmaceutical commercialization of opioids are important contributors to the current opioid overdose epidemic. A new model of regulation is urgently required. Within the context of a public health framework, we explore supply control, demand reduction, health promotion, and harm reduction and describe an alternative regulatory model that includes access for medical and non-medical purposes. Oversight of this proposed new system would include a control structure with an explicit public health mandate to minimize harms and maximize benefits of opioids. Medical access would be achieved through multi-disciplinary teams who would prescribe a range of opioids for 1) pain, 2) treatment for patients who develop opioid use disorder, and 3) other medical indications. Non-medical access could be achieved through models that would allow adults to purchase and use opioids for either supervised or take-home use. We describe three possible models to support jurisdiction specific discussions around the world. The first includes education and training that could result in certification with a basic or advanced license or a purchase authorization card. The second includes mandatory training that allows general access to opioids, but excludes people with problematic opioid use. The third model has optional training and excludes people with problematic opioid use. Allowing for inclusion of people dependent on the current illegal market during transition is highlighted. With any of these models, this approach, while attending to illegal market drivers, would result in a greatly reduced illegal opioid market and its attendant toxic products, reduced violence and corruption, and at the same time, provide a sharper focus for medical use with more appropriate prescribing and indications.

Translating Psychedelic Therapies From Clinical Trials to Community Clinics: Building Bridges and Addressing Potential Challenges Ahead

Research exploring the potential of psychedelic-assisted therapies to treat a range of mental illnesses is flourishing, after the problematic sociopolitical history of psychedelics led to the shutdown of clinical research for almost 40 years. Encouraged by positive results, clinicians and patients are now hopeful that further interruptions to research will be avoided, so that the early promise of these therapies might be fulfilled. At this early stage of renewed interest, researchers are understandably focusing more on clinical trials to investigate safety and efficacy, than on longer-term goals such as progression to community practice. Looking to identify and avoid potential pitfalls on the path to community clinics, the authors, a group of Australian clinicians and researchers, met to discuss possible obstacles. Five broad categories of challenge were identified: 1) inherent risks; 2) poor clinical practice; 3) inadequate infrastructure; 4) problematic perceptions; and 5) divisive relationships and fractionation of the field. Our analysis led us to propose some strategies, including public sector support of research and training to establish best practice and optimize translation, and funding to address issues of equitable access to treatment. Above all, we believe that strategic planning and professional cohesion will be crucial for success. Accordingly, our key recommendation is the establishment of a multidisciplinary advisory body, broadly endorsed and representing all major stakeholders, to guide policy and implementation of psychedelic-assisted therapies in Australia. Although these challenges and strategies are framed within the Australian context, we sense that they may generalize to other parts of the world. Wherever they apply, we believe that anticipation of potential difficulties, and creative responses to address them, will be important to avoid roadblocks in the future and keep the "psychedelic renaissance" on track.

The regulation project: Tools for engaging the public in the legal regulation of drugs

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation.

The future of the international drug control system and national drug prohibitions

A major impediment to any nation abandoning the policy of drug prohibition has been the fact that international drug treaties to which the majority of United Nations (UN) member states are signatory prohibit the non-medical use of amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine and heroin. The future of these treaties is now uncertain because of decisions by Uruguay, eight US states and Canada to legalize cannabis use. This paper: (1) provides a brief account of the international drug control treaties; (2) outlines the major criticisms of the treaties; (3) analyses critically proposals for treaty reform; and (4) provides a personal view on policies that nation states could adopt to minimize the harms from the use of cannabis, party drugs and hallucinogens, opioids, stimulants and new psychoactive substances. It is argued that: a major risk of cannabis legalization in the United States is promotion of heavy use and increased harm by a weakly regulated industry; some cautious national experiments with the regulation of party drugs and hallucinogens would be informative; a strong case remains for prohibiting the nonmedical use of opioids while mitigating the adverse effects that this policy has on opioid-dependent people; stimulant legalization will probably increase problem use but prohibition is difficult to enforce, highlighting the urgency of finding better ways to reduce demand for these drugs and respond to problem users; and that it is unclear what the best approach is to reducing possible harms that may arise from the use of new psychoactive substances.

Psychedelic drug use in healthy individuals: A review of benefits, costs, and implications for drug policy

The potential of psychedelic drugs in the treatment of mental health problems is increasingly being recognized. However, relatively little thrust has been given to the suggestion that individuals without any mental health problems may benefit from using psychedelic drugs, and that they may have a right to do so. This review considers contemporary research into the use of psychedelic drugs in healthy individuals, including neurobiological and subjective effects. In line with findings suggesting positive effects in the treatment of mental health problems, such research highlights the potential of psychedelic drugs for the enhancement of wellbeing even in healthy individuals. The relatively low risk associated with usage does not appear to align with stringent drug laws that impose heavy penalties for their use. Some policy implications, and suggestions for future research, are considered.