> > We collected cross-sectional data between November 2019 and July 2020 from self-selected respondents recruited via media related to psychedelic use such as podcasts and online psychedelic research conference presentations.
> This is already a significant bias in participants.
In my experience, these pro-psychedelic conferences and associated discussion venues have already concluded that microdosing is a positive, to the point that they’re actively hostile to any information to the contrary.
Psychedelic forums and even threads on HN and Reddit can be extremely hostile to anyone arriving with negative anecdotes about their personal microdosing experiences. When people report negative effects there’s a rush to blame them for dosing too high or too low, or for having counterfeit substances, or any other number of easy outs to dismiss the negative anecdotes. There’s almost no room for discussion of people who aren’t convinced that microdosing is a positive.
> This is already a significant bias in participants.
In my experience, these pro-psychedelic conferences and associated discussion venues have already concluded that microdosing is a positive, to the point that they’re actively hostile to any information to the contrary.
Psychedelic forums and even threads on HN and Reddit can be extremely hostile to anyone arriving with negative anecdotes about their personal microdosing experiences. When people report negative effects there’s a rush to blame them for dosing too high or too low, or for having counterfeit substances, or any other number of easy outs to dismiss the negative anecdotes. There’s almost no room for discussion of people who aren’t convinced that microdosing is a positive.