View source for Talk:Psilocybin

{{Talk header}}
{{Article history
|action1=GAN
|action1date=22:34, 19 September 2011
|action1link=Talk:Psilocybin/GA1
|action1result=listed
|action1oldid=451399194

|action2=PR
|action2date=23:03, 12 October 2011
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Psilocybin/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid=454097725

|action3=FAC
|action3date=01:09, 18 January 2012
|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Psilocybin/archive1
|action3result=promoted
|action3oldid=471919930


|action4 = FAR
|action4date = 2023-03-04
|action4link = Wikipedia:Featured article review/Psilocybin/archive1
|action4result = demoted
|action4oldid = 1140932455
|currentstatus=FFA
|maindate=29 February 2012
|topic=Natsci
}}
{{Backwardscopy|title=Pharmacology and Abuse of Cocaine, Amphetamines, Ecstasy and Related Designer Drugs |year=2010|comments=While researching sources for this article, I found the following text from the [http://www.springer.com/biomed/pharmaceutical+science/book/978-90-481-2447-3 2010 book] "Pharmacology and Abuse of Cocaine, Amphetamines, Ecstasy and Related Designer Drugs" (Springer, isbn=978-90-481-2447-3), in the chapter "The Mushroom Psilocybin with Psychedelic Properties " by Enno Freye:
 <blockquote>"The toxicity of psilocybin is relatively low; in rats, the oral LD50 is 280 mg/kg, approximately one and a half times that of caffeine. When administered intravenously in rabbits, psilocybin’s LD50 is approximately 12.5 mg/kg [138]. However, rabbits are extremely intolerant to the effects of most psychoactive drugs. The lethal dose from psilocybin intake alone is unknown at recreational or medicinal levels, and has never been documented; psilocybin makes up roughly 1% of the weight of ''Psilocybe cubensis'' mushrooms, and so nearly 1.7 kg of dried mushrooms, or 17 kg of fresh mushrooms, would be required for a 60 kg person to reach the 280 mg/kg LD50 rate of rats."</blockquote>

The wording is almost identical to the Wikipedia article. Worried that this was a [[WP:copyvio|copyvio]], I checked the article history, and found that the Wikipedia text has been there since 2006—long before the publication of the book. I further checked their citation #138, Passie ''et al''. (2002) "The pharmacology of psilocybin" ''Addiction Biology'' '''7''':357-64 ({{PMID|14578010}}). This source does support the LD50 of 280 mg/kg in rats, but does not mention one for rabbits. Note that the rest of the Freye paragraph is not cited. Thought I'd throw this out here in case in comes up in the future. [[User:Sasata|Sasata]] ([[User talk:Sasata|talk]]) 19:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Chemicals|importance=mid|FA=no}}
{{WikiProject Fungi|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Neuroscience|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Pharmacology|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs}}
}}
{{archive box|auto=yes|search=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 80K
|counter = 2
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Psilocybin/Archive %(counter)d
}}

== FA Review ==
I think this article needs to be delisted as an FA. In addition to the sourcing issues mentioned in the section above, quite a bit of the article seems off-topic in that it's talking about the effect of psilocybin ''mushrooms'' which is not necessarily the same thing as psilocybin effect (the mushrooms have a distinct article). [[User:Alexbrn|Alexbrn]] ([[User talk:Alexbrn|talk]]) 11:22, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

== History "Further backlash against LSD" misinformation. It was all Nixon ==

I have changed in History section, Modern subsection: "Further backlash against LSD usage swept psilocybin along with it into the Schedule I category of illicit drugs in 1970." -It was specifically the actions of the Nixon administration that put psilocybin in Schedule I. This previous wording makes it sound as if there was a vote, or process in Congress, or some similar input from the public. There was no vote. There was no "backlash" involved in the legal regulation, except in the sense that Nixon made all known psychedelic substances into "Schedule I: no accepted medical value" all at the same time. Perhaps the public acceptance of this can be attributed as part of a "backlash", but it was Nixon's decision alone. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 02:54, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
:A source would be needed. [[User:Bon courage|Bon courage]] ([[User talk:Bon courage|talk]]) 04:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

== Research - Psilocybin and LSD can be classified as psychoplastogens  ==

Hello @[[User:Bon courage|Bon courage]],

Last month, I attempted to add the below passage to this article within the Research section but you removed it citing WP:MEDRS. I have found a new source for the passage, which I believe meets the requirements of WP:MEDRS. Do you agree? The source is https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/the-recent-resurgence-of-psilocybin-is-it-here-to-stay. Thank you in advance for your time!

Passage:
Researchers have discovered evidence that psilocybin and LSD can be classified as [[Psychoplastogen|psychoplastogens]], which are compounds that [[User:HHA LTP|HHA LTP]] ([[User talk:HHA LTP|talk]]) 22:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

:{{re|HHA LTP}} [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34671279/ This] and [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6149016/ this] would be better sources to use. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 22:16, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you @[[User:Smartse|Smartse]]. It's much appreciated. I will go ahead and add back in the copy with the two sources you recommend.
::Best, [[User:HHA LTP|HHA LTP]] ([[User talk:HHA LTP|talk]]) 17:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

== Seizure on co-use with lithium ==

{{reply to| Smartse}} Regarding [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Psilocybin&diff=next&oldid=1156027448 this] edit, I think the source used in the revision can be used as a secondary source for the provocation of seizure under co-use with lithium because it reports ''another'' primary study. And information in '''Introduction''' section is an accumulation of several studies.
{{talk quote block|One concern is that classic psychedelic use may cause seizures. For example, one study reviewed single-substance exposures of LSD or psi- locybin reported to poison control centers in the United States between 2000 and 2016. There were 190 instance (2.0 % of total reports) of seizures related to LSD or psilocybin use, but it is not known whether the seizures were caused directly by these classic psychedelics, drug-drug interactions, or third factors (Leonard et al., 2018). <u>Another study analyzed online reports and found that co-use of lithium and classic psychedelics was associated with seizures (Nayak et al., 2021; see also Fisher and Ungerleider, 1967).</u>|source={{cite journal | journal = Drug and Alcohol Dependence | doi = 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109586 | url = https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871622003234 | volume = 239 | date = 1 October 2022 | vauthors = Otto S, Simon G, Richard C, Walter O, Distin L, Peter H | pmid = 35981469 | pmc = 9627432 | pages = 1-3 | title = Prevalence and associations of classic psychedelic-related seizures in a population-based sample}}}}

Another source that summarizes a primary study is:
{{talk quote block|The presence of MAOIs in ayahuasca may increase risk for severe drug–drug interactions with prescription, herbal, or over the counter drugs (Malcolm and Thomas 2021). Psychedelics’ safety profle may also be impacted by drugdrug interactions, especially with psychiatric medications, as highlighted by a recent online forum analysis study that found an association between psychedelic coadministration with lithium and seizures (Nayak 2021). <br /><br />Dosing may be impacted for patients currently taking psychiatric medication, with evidence suggesting that chronic administration of various psychiatric medications may attenuate (SSRIs and MAOIs) or intensify (lithium and TCAs) the efects of classical psychedelics (Bonson et al. 1996; Bonson and Murphy 1996). | source={{cite journal | journal = Psychopharmacology | title = Assessing the risk–benefit profile of classical psychedelics: a clinical review of second-wave psychedelic research | vauthors = David B, David H | url = https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-021-06049-6}}}}

So I think since we are not using the ''results'' analyzed by these papers but rather summaries of other studies that they accumulated, this qualifies as a secondary source for co-use with mood stabilizers. --[[User:WikiLinuz|<span style="font-family:Optima;color:#292928;">'''Wiki'''<span style="color:red;">'''''Linuz'''''</span></span>]] {[[User_talk:WikiLinuz|<span style="font-family:Optima;">talk</span>]]} 23:50, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
:A secondary source (that summarizes the Nayak study):{{talk quote block|The interactions between psychedelics and anticonvulsant and antipsychotic drugs are less well documented than interactions with antidepressants. However, the available studies reported potentially significant interactions. For example, analysis of reports revealed that coadministration of psychedelics with lithium, but not lamotrigine, increased the risks of seizure and dissociative effects in bipolar disorder patients (Nayak et al., 2021). Antipsychotic-induced blockade and down regulation of the 5-HT2A receptor may blunt the subjective effects of psychedelics, and subsequently increase the risk of 5-HT syndrome (Howland, 2016).|source={{cite book | title = Psychedelics as Psychiatric Medications | url = https://books.google.ca/books?id=7lazEAAAQBAJ |publisher = Oxford University Press | chapter = Risk and adverse events associated with the use of psychedelics | vauthors = David N, David C | page = 241}}}} --[[User:WikiLinuz|<span style="font-family:Optima;color:#292928;">'''Wiki'''<span style="color:red;">'''''Linuz'''''</span></span>]] {[[User_talk:WikiLinuz|<span style="font-family:Optima;">talk</span>]]} 23:51, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

::{{re|WikiLinuz}} Thanks for the detailed source analysis. [[Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#Biomedical_journals|MEDRS cautions using introductions as secondary sources]] and for good reason. The answer here is surely to cite Nutt's book, but the main takeaway I get from that is that there is still a lot of uncertainty, which is not conveyed in the text you added. It's not surprising that Nutt takes that view when the actual source of the information is self-reported trip reports. This is another high-quality source which cites Navak and again cautions drawing any conclusions:
::{{talk quote block|“Low quality evidence due to lack of standardization, selection bias, and lack of clinical verification” was acknowledged by the study authors. |source={{cite journal |last1=Sarparast |first1=Aryan |last2=Thomas |first2=Kelan |last3=Malcolm |first3=Benjamin |last4=Stauffer |first4=Christopher S. |title=Drug-drug interactions between psychiatric medications and MDMA or psilocybin: a systematic review |journal=Psychopharmacology |date=1 June 2022 |volume=239 |issue=6 |pages=1945–1976 |doi=10.1007/s00213-022-06083-y |url=https://link-springer-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/article/10.1007/s00213-022-06083-y}}}}
::If those are the best sources available on psilocybin and seizures, it is probably best left out of the article for now. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 10:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

==Wiki Education assignment: Wikipedia for the Medical Editor==
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Illinois_College_of_Medicine/Wikipedia_for_the_Medical_Editor_(Spring_2024) | assignments = [[User:ChasYoung4|ChasYoung4]] | start_date = 2024-01-29 | end_date = 2024-02-23 }}

<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:ChasYoung4|ChasYoung4]] ([[User talk:ChasYoung4|talk]]) 04:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)</span>

== Recent large changes ==

Re this.[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Psilocybin&diff=prev&oldid=1208731739] Medical content should be based on high-quality sources. Non-MEDLINE indexed [[Frontiers Media]] journals, and in particular ''[[Cureus]]'', are suspect. [[User:Bon courage|Bon courage]] ([[User talk:Bon courage|talk]]) 14:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

:While I see your point about ''Cureus'', all of these articles were acquired through PubMED and are all from peer-reviewed journals. [[User:ChasYoung4|ChasYoung4]] ([[User talk:ChasYoung4|talk]]) 14:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
::See [[WP:MEDFAQ#I have a source from PubMed, so that's reliable right?]]. [[User:Bon courage|Bon courage]] ([[User talk:Bon courage|talk]]) 14:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)