
Psychedelics have promise. But after losing my son, we can't ignore the dangers.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently sat in a congressional hearing to discuss departmental cuts. But what caught the attention of many were his comments about psychedelics, which he has long and publicly supported.
Kennedy later posted on X: 'We're accelerating clinical trials (of psychedelics at the Food and Drug Administration) with urgency – and working to ensure safe, science-based access within 12 months.'
This suggestion was made even more concrete on July 22, when the FDA began accepting applications for its new accelerated-approval program for drugs that address national health priorities, like mental health.
Many see a turning point: a chance to accelerate research, expand access and legitimize the use of psychedelics ‒ not only in medicine but also in culture.
There is real promise in these substances. Veterans report healing from post-traumatic stress disorder, cancer patients speak of end-of-life peace, and some people with depression or addiction find relief where nothing else helped. But as access grows and the public becomes more curious – if not enthusiastic – we must urgently pair this moment with clear-eyed public health safeguards and education.
Because these substances, while potentially therapeutic, are also powerful, unpredictable and not right for everyone.
I know this firsthand.
In 2020, my 21-year-old son, Will, died in an accident linked to psychedelic-induced delusions. He was a college senior – curious, thoughtful and much loved. He believed what many of his peers believe: that psychedelics are 'safe,' 'natural' and 'the least harmful drug.' That night, every safety net failed – or wasn't there in the first place.
What do psychedelic drugs do? Know the facts 'Before You Trip.'
Today, psychedelics are moving from subculture to mainstream. About 8 million American adults used a psychedelic in the past year.
Use of psychedelics among 19- to 30-year-olds has more than doubled in the past decade, and it has surged sevenfold among adults ages 35 to 50, numbers that represent historically high levels.
Yet, clinical trials and legal therapeutic use represent only a small fraction of that. An increasing number of people report taking these drugs outside of medical settings for recreation, to improve well-being or for spiritual or self-exploration.
Opinion: Ketamine bros are giving psychedelics a bad rap. That's a problem for those who need them.
Many are first-time users, ostensibly beckoned by the headlines but often lacking community knowledge or harm reduction guidance.
The contemporary media narrative has emphasized breakthrough therapies and personal transformations. But it rarely mentions contraindications, risk factors that make use inadvisable – like certain mental health conditions – or the need for supervision, preparation and integration.
That's especially concerning for young people, who often hear only one side of the story.
We've gone from 'Just Say No' to near silence. My Gen Z kids never had drug education that reflected today's landscape. They came of age amid cannabis legalization messaging that emphasized it as natural and healing. Now, psychedelics are being framed similarly – without balanced drug education to match. That leaves young people to navigate in the dark.
We can do better. A nonprofit coalition recently launched Before You Trip, a public health campaign led by Generation Z voices, as a pilot project in Colorado – where psilocybin (hallucinogenic mushrooms) and other psychedelics were decriminalized in 2022.
The campaign encourages young adults to pause, learn and reflect before deciding whether psychedelics are right for them. It offers clear, accessible and research-backed guidance on effects, contraindications and risk-reduction practices. The campaign promotes open dialogue, critical thinking and informed decision-making about these substances.
It's about honest, harm reduction-oriented education, delivered in a voice that meets young people where they are, on social platforms. More is needed, but it's a building block.
Opinion: I'm a doctor and a recovering addict. America can't lose ground on the opioids fight now.
In addition to education, we also need public health infrastructure: trained first responders, accessible crisis resources and support, widespread harm reduction and better data collection.
Too often, psychedelic-related crises are met with criminalization or stigma rather than care and understanding.
Psychedelic drugs can offer healing, but they still come with risks
I think often about a moment that haunts me. It was when I caught Will vaping during a college break. I panicked. I got angry. I didn't ask questions or try to understand. I shut down the conversation because of fear and because I didn't have the tools to approach it more skillfully.
That could have been a moment to build trust. I wish I had used it to begin an honest dialogue. We now have an opportunity to open that dialogue – with families, communities and the public at large.
Psychedelics can indeed offer healing, but they also bring complexity and risk.
About 1 in 10 people who have used a classic psychedelic − such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), mescaline or psilocybin − report having experienced an adverse event related to their use. And of those who used a classic psychedelic, 2.6% report having sought post-trip psychiatric, psychological or medical care.
As these substances are scaled up in the population, these proportions will represent several hundreds of thousands of people. As public interest and use increase, we should care very much about improving outcomes and reducing preventable harms.
Let's build a culture of accountability, care and curiosity – not one of hype or silence. The future of psychedelics depends not only on access but also on responsibility. Let's make sure we're ready for both.
Kristin Nash, MPH, is a public health professional specializing in harm reduction and health communication. She is the executive director of the William G. Nash Foundation and cofounder of the Coalition for Psychedelic Safety and Education (CPSE).
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Experts explain why daydreaming could actually be key to a productive day
Every day, we're faced with constant opportunities for stimulation. With 24/7 access to news feeds, emails and social media, many of us find ourselves scrolling endlessly, chasing our next hit of dopamine. But these habits are fuelling our stress – and our brains are begging for a break. What our brains really need is some much-needed time off from concentrating. By not consciously focusing on anything and allowing the mind to drift, this can reduce stress and improve cognitive sharpness. This can often be easier said than done. But attention restoration theory (Art) can help you learn to give your brain space to drift. While this might sound like a fancy name for doing nothing, the theory is supported by neuroscience. Attention restoration theory was first put forward by psychologists Rachel and Stephen Kaplan in 1989. They theorised that spending time in nature can help restore focus and attention. They proposed there are two distinct types of attention: directed attention and undirected attention. Directed attention refers to deliberate concentration – such as studying, navigating through a busy place or posting on social media. Basically, it's any activity where our brain's attention is being directed at a specific task. Undirected attention is when we're not consciously trying to focus on anything – instead allowing things to gently capture our attention without trying. Think listening to chirping birds or watching leaves gently rustling in the breeze. In these instances, your attention naturally drifts without having to force your focus. Without time for undirected attention, it's thought that we experience 'attentional fatigue'. This can make it increasingly difficult to focus and concentrate, while distractions become more likely to grab our attention. In the past, we encountered many situations in our daily lives that we might classify as 'boring'. Moments such as waiting for the bus or standing in the supermarket queue. But these dull moments also gave our minds a chance to switch off. Now, our smartphones give us the opportunity for constant entertainment. Being able to constantly expose ourselves to intense, gripping stimuli offers little mental space for our overworked brains to recover. But attention restoration theory shows us how important it is to create space for moments that allow our brains to 'reset'. Restoring attention The origins of Kaplan and Kaplan's theory can actually be traced back to the 19th century. American psychologist William James was the first to formulate the concept of 'voluntary attention' – attention that requires effort. James' ideas were published against the backdrop of the broader cultural movement of Romanticism, which lauded nature. Romantic ideas about the restorative power of nature have since been backed by research – with numerous studies showing links between time in nature and lower stress levels, better attention, improvements in mental health, mood and better cognitive function. The restorative benefits of nature are backed by neuroscience, too. Neuroimaging has shown that activity in the amygdala – the part of the brain associated with stress and anxiety – was reduced when people were exposed to natural environments. But when exposed to urban environments, this activity was not reduced. Numerous studies have also since backed up Kaplan and Kaplan's theory that time in nature can help to restore attention and wellbeing. One systematic review of 42 studies found an association with exposure to natural environments and improvements in several aspects of cognitive performance – including attention. A randomised controlled trial using neuroimaging of the brain found signs of lower stress levels in adults who took a 40-minute walk in a natural environment, compared to participants who walked in an urban environment. The authors concluded that the nature walk facilitated attention restoration. Research has even shown that as little as ten minutes of undirected attention can result in a measurable uptick in performance on cognitive tests, as well as a reduction in attentional fatigue. Even simply walking on a treadmill while looking at a nature scene can produce this cognitive effect. Time in nature There are many ways you can put attention restoration theory to the test on your own. First, find any kind of green space – whether that's your local park, a river you can sit beside or a forest trail you can hike along. Next, make sure you put your phone and any other distractions away. Or, when you face boring moments during your day, instead of picking up your phone try seeing the pause as an opportunity to let your mind wander for a bit. Each of us may find certain environments to be more naturally supportive in allowing us to switch off and disengage the mind. So, if while trying to put attention restoration theory into practice, you find your brain pulling you back to structured tasks (such as mentally planning your week), this may be sign you should go someplace where it's easier for your mind to wander. Whether you're watching a ladybird crawl across your desk or visiting a vast expanse of nature, allow your attention to be undirected. It's not laziness, it's neurological maintenance. Anna Kenyon is a Senior Lecturer in Population Health at the University of Lancashire. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Raw milk sickens 21 people in Florida including 6 children
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Six children are among 21 people who have E. coli or campylobacter infections after consuming raw milk from a farm in Florida, public health officials said. Seven people have been hospitalized, and at least two of them are suffering severe complications, the Florida Department of Health said Monday. It did not specify if any of the six infected children under 10 are among those being treated in hospitals, nor how many people were infected by E. coli, campylobacter or both bacteria. 'Sanitation practices in this farm are of particular concern due to the number of cases,' reads the state advisory, which did not identify the farm linked to the cluster of infections in northeast and central Florida. Raw milk appears to be gaining in popularity, despite years of warnings about the health risks of drinking unpasteurized products. The Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say raw milk is one of the 'riskiest' foods people can consume. Raw milk is far more likely than pasteurized milk to cause illnesses and hospitalizations because of dangerous bacteria such as campylobacter, listeria, salmonella and E. coli, research shows. The infections can cause gastrointestinal illness, and in some cases may lead to serious complications, including a life-threatening form of kidney failure. Young children, the elderly, immunocompromised people and pregnant women are at greater risk of complications. 'We invented pasteurization for a reason,' said Keith Schneider, a food safety professor at the University of Florida. 'It's maddening that this is happening.' States have widely varying regulations regarding raw milk, with some allowing retail purchases in stores and others allowing sale only at farms. Some states allow 'cowshares,' in which customers buy milk produced by designated animals, and some allow consumption only by farm owners, employees or 'non-paying guests.' In Florida, the sale and distribution of raw milk for human consumption is illegal, but retailers get around the ban by labeling their products as for pet or animal food only. Schneider called it a 'wink, wink, nudge, nudge,' form of regulation. 'Everybody knows that they're selling it for human consumption,' Schneider said, adding that people getting sick — or even seriously ill — from drinking raw milk is 'not a question of if, but when.' ___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Solve the daily Crossword


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump administration allows six more states to bar SNAP benefits for processed food
The Trump administration on Monday approved six additional states seeking to ban food stamp recipients from purchasing processed food. Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Texas and Florida received federal waivers to adjust Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) guidelines outlawing the purchase of junk food with state funds in 2026. Colorado was the first blue state to adopt the measure. 'SNAP is a supplemental nutrition program meant to provide health food benefits to low-income families to supplement their grocery budget so they can afford the nutritious food essential to health and well-being,' Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said Monday before signing the waivers. 'That is the stated purpose of the SNAP program, the law states it and President Trump's USDA plans to deliver on it,' she added. Rollins approved the effort in May after Nebraska received the first federal waiver to ban soda and energy drinks from food stamps purchases. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has lauded the measure as a part of his 'Make America Healthy Again' campaign. 'U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to feed kids foods, the poorest kids in our country, with foods that are going to give them diabetes. And then my agency ends up, through Medicaid and Medicare, paying for those injuries,' Kennedy said on Monday. 'We're going to put an end to that, and we're doing it step by step, state by state,' he added. Researchers have long argued that SNAP restrictions are unlikely to change eating patterns, and that it will be costly for the federal government to track 650,000 food and beverage products on the market and 20,000 new products introduced annually, according to economic policy researcher Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach's 2017 testimony before the House Committee on Agriculture. However, Trump administration officials have lauded the effort. 'I hope to see all 50 states join this bold commonsense approach. For too long, the root causes of our chronic disease epidemic have been addressed with lip service only,' said the U.S. Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary, according to NBC News.