[45Auto]

Oh, not the old Ibogaine con game again! Dr. Mash has a vested interest in the Great Ibogaine Con because she is working off NSF grants. The idea of using psychedelics to treat addiction is not new; Tim Leary conducted research on the use of LSD and psilocybin in the treatment of alcoholics about 40 years ago. Freud experimented with the use of cocaine in the treatment of his friend's morphine addiction over a hundred years ago. His experiments ended in near disaster and after that, Freud swore off praising the benefits of cocaine (and he used it by injection).The whole idea of using one abusable substance to treat the addiction to another abusable substance is insane.

[tacticalogic]

The whole idea of using one abusable substance to treat the addiction to another abusable substance is insane.

Like methadone?

[neverdem]

The whole idea of using one abusable substance to treat the addiction to another abusable substance is insane.

The war on drugs is insane too, reminding me of a dog chasing its tail, but that's another story.

A single dose of ibogaine in a controlled clinical setting is certainly not abuse and definitely worth investigating in a time of AIDS with all the innocent people threatened from the sexual behavior of injecting drug users.

The story doesn't say how funding was obtained. Hopefully, the announcement of the FDA findings will be simultaneous with publication. Thanks for the abstracts. Did you find them at PubMed?

[randog]

The idea of using psychedelics to treat addiction is not new; Tim Leary conducted research on the use of LSD and psilocybin in the treatment of alcoholics about 40 years ago.

Bill Wilson, co-founder of AA, believed LSD could help in the treatment of alcoholism by inducing the "spiritual awakening" he felt was a necessary step in beating the addiction.

[Joe Bonforte]

45Auto:

Oh, not the old Ibogaine con game again!

LadyDoc:

This is a new variation of an old lie.

I'd say there's a greater than 90% probability that you two are correct and that this stuff would not pan out - that either the results are exaggerated, or that there are side effects that would be unacceptable, or both.

But, I have two questions for both of you:

1. Do you favor at least finding out what the effects of ibogaine on addiction are? (In humans that is - the previous research cited by 45Auto was all on rats.)

After all, since it's never been tried on people except for this rather sensationalized incident reported in the article, it's at least remotely possible that in the right dosage, it could be an effective tool for treating addiction. So, in the interest of finding a way to deal with addition, you would be in favor of further research, right? Or if not, why not?

2. Let's just suppose that this stuff does pan out, and is effective in treating addiction, with side effects that were either minor or controllable. Would you have any object to its usage to treat addition, even though it would be a "short-cut" over full scale withdrawal? Or would you prefer for people to endure regular withdrawal?

I'm guessing from your other posts that the two of you would give completely different answers to these questions.

[nmh]

"The whole idea of using one abusable substance to treat the addiction to another abusable substance is insane."

You're right on! But some WANT to believe there is a "magic bullet". It's shocking to still see people taking Freud seriously.