Hamilton Morris and Dr. Mark Plotkin — Exploring the History of Psychoactive Substances and More | Transcription

Note: This transcription is split and grouped by topics and subtopics. You can navigate through the Table of Contents on the left. It's interactive. All paragraphs are timed to the original video. Click on the time (e.g., 01:53) to jump to the specific portion of the video.

Introduction

Intro (00:00)

This episode is brought to you by Athletic Greens. I get asked all the time what I would take if I could only take one supplement. The answer is invariably Athletic Greens. I view it as all-in-one nutritional insurance. I recommended it, in fact, in the four-hour body. This is more than 10 years ago, and I did not get paid to do so. With approximately 75 vitamins, minerals, and whole food-sourced ingredients, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a more nutrient-dense and comprehensive formula on the market. It has multivitamins, multimineral greens complex, probiotics, and prebiotics for gut health, an immunity formula, digestive enzymes, adaptogens, and much more. I usually take it once or twice a day, just to make sure I've covered my bases, if I miss anything I'm not aware of. Of course, I focus on nutrient-dense meals to begin with, that's the basis. But Athletic Greens makes it easy to get a lot of nutrition when whole foods aren't readily available. From travel packets, I always have them in my bag when I'm zipping around. Right now, Athletic Greens is giving my audience a special offer on top of their all-in-one formula, which is a free vitamin D supplement and five free travel packs with your first subscription purchase. Many of us are deficient in vitamin D. I've found that true for myself, which is usually produced in our bodies from sun exposure. So, adding a vitamin D supplement to your daily routine is a great option for additional immune support. Support your immunity, gut health, and energy by visiting athleticgreens.com/tim. You'll receive up to a year's supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs with your subscription. Again, that's athleticgreens.com/tim. This episode is brought to you by Five Bullet Friday, my very own email newsletter. It's become one of the most popular email newsletters in the world with millions of subscribers, and it's super, super simple. It does not clog up your inbox. Every Friday, I send out five bullet points, super short of the coolest things I've found that week, which sometimes includes apps, books, documentaries, supplements, gadgets, new self-experiments, hacks tricks, and all sorts of weird stuff that I dig up from around the world. You guys, podcast listeners and book readers have asked me for something short and action-packed for a very long time, because after all the podcasts, the books, they can be quite long. And that's why I created Five Bullet Friday. It's become one of my favorite things I do every week. It's free. It's always going to be free, and you can learn more at Tim.blog/Friday. That's Tim.blog/Friday. I get asked a lot how I meet guests for the podcast, some of the most amazing people I've ever interacted with, and little known fact, I've met probably 25% of them because they first subscribed to Five Bullet Friday. So you'll be in good company. It's a lot of fun. Five Bullet Friday is only available if you subscribe via email. I do not publish the content on the blog or anywhere else. Also, if I'm doing small in-person meetups, offering early access to startups, beta testing, special deals or anything else that's very limited, I share it first with Five Bullet Friday subscribers. So check it out, Tim.blog/Friday. If you listen to this podcast, very likely that you dig it a lot, and you can, of course, easily subscribe any time. So easy peasy. Again, that's Tim.blog/Friday. And thanks for checking it out. If the spirit moves you. Optimal minimal. I think this altitude, I can run flat out for a half mile before my hands start to shake. Can I also close my question? Now I just see it in a front-pin time. What if I did the other one? I'm a cybernetic organism living tissue over a metal empress current. Me too. That was so... Well, hello boys and girls, ladies and germs. This is Tim Ferriss. Welcome to the Tim Ferriss Show, where it is usually my job to deconstruct world-class performers, to tease out their routines, habits, etc. That you can apply to your own life. This time around, we have a very special edition of this podcast, featuring two of your favorite guests from the past, Dr. Mark Plotkin and Hamilton Morris. Mark takes over my duties as host and interviews Hamilton for an episode of the Plants of the Gods podcast. You, my dear listeners, are hearing this audio before anyone else. So it's a Tim Ferriss Show exclusive. I've previously featured some of my favorite episodes from the Plants of the Gods podcast here on this podcast. And you can find all those at Tim.blog/Plants of the Gods. These episodes cover a lot of fascinating ground. So let's get to the bios. Who is Mark? If you don't know, Mark on Twitter at DocDOC. Mark Plotkin is an ethnobotanist who serves as president of the Amazon Conservation Team, which has partnered with roughly 80 tribes to map and improve management and protection of roughly 100 million acres of ancestral rainforests. He is best known to the general public as the author of the book Tales of a Shaman's Apprentice, one of the most popular books ever written about the rainforest. His most recent book is the Amazon What Everyone Needs to Know. You can find my interview with Mark at Tim.blog/MarkPlotkin. That's M-A-R-K-P-L-O-T-K-I-N. And the guest, his guest today is Hamilton Morris. Love Hamilton. Hamilton on Twitter @HamiltonMoris, M-O-R-R-I-S, is a chemist, filmmaker, and science journalist. Graduate of the new school, he conducts chemistry research at St. Joseph's University. Hamilton is the writer and director of the documentary series Hamilton's Pharmacopia, depending on how you like to say it, in which he explores the chemistry and traditions surrounding psychoactive drugs, very often subjecting himself to personal intake. You can find my most recent interview with him at Tim.blog/Hamilton. And what you're about to hear is a tightly packed 60-minute interview. Mark and Hamilton cover the history of different psychoactive substances, Timothy Leary's legacy, the drunken monkey hypothesis, conservation, microdosing, the differences between 5-Meo, DMT, that's 5-Methoxy, dimethylterctomy, and DMT, a disease that afflicts people who smoke enormous quantities of cannabis. Yes, really. The impact of the placebo effect, synthetic versus natural options in this psychoactive spectrum of things, the role of ritual and much, much more. Please enjoy.

Details On Various Psychedelic Substances And Their Usage

Placebo effect, expansion of humans through industrial tech (06:18)

Well, Hamilton, I want to thank you for agreeing to do the interview. And I would like to start by talking about the Sonoran Desert Toad, which as you know, is an object of fascination, not only regionally, but certainly nationally and perhaps internationally. So perhaps you give us some thoughts on this recent fascination with this intriguing creature. Yes, it really does seem to be gaining popularity. Every time I think that it's peaked, it gets more and more popular. And in the last month, there were two major articles that came out one day after another in the New York Times and the New Yorker. The New York Times one actually was largely focused on conservation issues. I thought that it was pretty responsible in its orientation. The New Yorker one was more a profile of Octavio Redig, but I think that even though it wasn't focused on conservation, implicitly a lot of those issues were evident, if only in terms of the magnitude of his work, how many people I think he claimed to have personally turned on 10,000 people. And so if you want to use a rough estimate that each mature, Bufuel various Toad when milked, if all of the glands are milked, could produce enough venom to supply five people, that's the milking of 2,000 Toads from one man. And you add to that his partner, Jerry Sandoval, or his former partner, makes at 4,000 Toads. And then everybody else was inspired by them.

Mark Plotkin Bio (08:04)

You can just easily knock that up to 10,000 Toads. And I think it becomes clear that even if it wasn't a problem for a few people to do this, if it continues to gain popularity at the current rate, it's going to become a problem very quickly. There's an excellent ethanol botanist by the name of Gary Nabhan, very prolific, but his best book, my favorite is called "The Desert Smells Like Rain" and came out about 40 years ago. And it talks about how the Ho-Hulcan people have expanded agriculture in the desert. And this apparently has expanded the habitat for this Toad. But I think as you're pointing out that there'd be a lot more habitat needed to support this Toad. And I know you've been one of the leaders in terms of natural product chemistry and recreating some of these chemicals in the lab. So I wonder if you could share with us your thoughts on the role of the chemist in terms of taking the heat, taking the pressure of natural populations of plants, animals, and fungi? Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting time because a lot of these things can be synthesized somewhat trivially in an industrial lab with the appropriate resources. So something like I began to produce it fully synthetically would be totally impossible for a normal person to do on a multi-gram scale to supply a clinic or something like that. But if it were a large industrial manufacturing operation, it would then be possible. And that was what Howard Lassoff was trying to do with Ibogaine.

5-EMEO DMT (09:32)

The same is not true of something like 5-EMEO DMT. It's synthetically more approachable, which is really nice. This is one of the advantages is that it could be produced industrially for a pharmaceutical company, there's actually quite a few different pharmaceutical companies right now that are pursuing 5-EMEO DMT as a therapeutic product. And all of them are using synthetic material, which I think is really a good thing, actually a necessary thing because there's no way that the toads could supply a pharmaceutical demand. But what's nice about this is that there's a sort of intermediate that exists. It doesn't need to be pharmaceutical and it doesn't need to be extracted from a toad. It's possible for somebody, if it is done legally in a region where they won't potentially lose their freedom for doing this, it's possible to produce it synthetically in a one-step reaction starting from 5-methoxy-tryptamine. And this is very approachable, somewhat safe chemistry. I don't want to say that it's completely safe because it isn't. But I would say in the grand scheme of synthesis, this is certainly on the easier side of the balance. And that means that if somebody were operating a clinic in Mexico, they conceivably could hire a chemist to make enough to supply their clinic for years very easily at a low cost. And that was what I was trying to show people because this idea that, "Okay, chemistry, there's no way that's not accessible to an average person." Well, maybe not to everybody, but it is accessible to people with a little bit of training. And so people should be aware that that exists as a viable option. Well, you mentioned Howard's name. And I heard you talk a bit about him in an interview you gave with our friend Tim Ferriss. And I'll link to that interview in the show notes. But I wonder if you could tell a little bit of background about Howard's story and how he discovered that this was, in some cases, an effective treatment for addiction. Yeah, it's a fascinating story because if you look at the history of Iboga and even the early pharmaceutical history of Ibogaine in Central West Africa, it's a religious sacrament and part of a religion called "Buiti." And it's used for medicinal purposes there, but it is not traditionally used as a treatment for addiction. There was not opioid addiction in Central West Africa until the 21st century. So at least on a large scale, I'm sure there were a couple people. But so this idea that Ibogaine or Iboga could serve as a treatment for substance abuse disorders was not something that was circulating at all. And there was a guy in New York named Howard Lotsoff, who was friends with a chemist, and the chemist gave him Ibogaine because it was a psychedelic that was available.

Howard LOSSOFF (12:22)

I believe that he had either synthesized it or ordered it from a chemical supply catalog. And Howard Lotsoff was dependent on heroin at that time. And he took the Ibogaine not because he wanted to stop using heroin necessarily. He just wanted to use a psychedelic. And what he found in the wake of that experience was that he lost his craving for heroin. And not only did he lose the craving for it, the very way that he conceptualized the heroin had changed. He didn't think of it as something that was desirable or good. He started to think of heroin as essentially a symbol of death, something that was not only did he not need it, he didn't want it either. And this was something that emerged accidentally. This was a serendipitous discovery. He wasn't looking for this, but he found it. And what he experienced was not unique. Other people tried Ibogaine and Iboga for the same purpose as a treatment for addiction. And it was found to be the case that actually quite a large number of people responded similarly. And this has even been demonstrated in animal models of addiction. So this is a demonstrated effect. It doesn't work for everyone all the time, but it seems that maybe a solid third to a quarter of people that undergo this therapy are able to stop using heroin or other opioids. Well, there's many fascinating nuggets of information tucked in that answer, but one that stands out to me is that this is a powerful and effective use for something that the indigenous peoples weren't using it for. And so the point of this, and I think the relevance for this podcast, is that not only are these mind altering substances important and useful for things they've always been used for, but there's new things that come to the fore. I'm reminded of Charles Nichols at LSU who's using tiny doses of hallucinogens to treat asthma. And they're not causing hallucinations. And I'm wondering if you think that this kind of explains this whole microdosing movement that people aren't really sure how it works or what it's for, but people seem to like it and find it effective for a variety of purposes. Well, yes, microdosing is difficult to talk about because it doesn't really have a precise definition. So what I might call microdosing could be completely different, especially when you factor in the issue that psilocybin containing mushrooms and LSD are the two psychedelics that people typically have access to.

Micro Booking (14:56)

And both of these are psychedelics where people do not know the precise dose of chemical they're consuming due to variation in mushrooms and due to uncertainty about the concentration on blotter. So you might say a microdose is half of one tab of a blotter, but you don't know how much LSD is on that tab. So it could be completely different. For some people, a microdose is a low dose of a psychedelic. For some people, they define microdoses subperceptual. And in the research that has been done thus far, it seems like it's a placebo effect, but that's not to say that low doses of psychedelics couldn't have some kind of therapeutic property under the appropriate circumstances. And like you said, the work of Chuck Nichols is great evidence of that.

Therapeutic endpoints; The scientific relation between DMT and 5-MeO-DMT (15:52)

So maybe the other thing is that the therapeutic endpoints aren't well defined in a lot of these microdosing. What is it exactly that people are looking for? Enhanced creativity, enhanced focus, enhanced energy, mood lift. I mean, people seem to be pursuing microdosing for an almost unlimited number of different applications. And so maybe it works for one thing, for one person, maybe somebody suffering from chronic inflammation with a certain psychedelic could have some benefit. And maybe for someone else there would be no benefit at all. So I think the real issue with talking about microdosing is a lack of precision in the definition of what a microdose is, what psychedelic is being used, and what the application of that microdose of a psychedelic would be. Excellent. Thank you. Which ties back into something else you're alluding to. The famous pamphlet by Albert Most that you've helped bring back to the fore was actually written by Ken Nelson.

History of cannabis (16:48)

And he's a fascinating figure in his own right. So I wonder if you could give us a little bit of detail and background on this incredible fellow. Yeah, and it was nice to see his name in these articles. It's nice to really see him integrated into this history because I think what he did is so fascinating. And I think that because our culture has done such a terrible job dealing with psychedelics and psychoactive drugs in general, it's just about as bad as it could possibly be, locking people in cages for using them is really not been an effective strategy. And for that reason, I think we tend to look to indigenous cultures for guidance because they've done a far better job at learning how to use these things constructively and medicinally. And so we're almost uncomfortable with our own contributions. I think there's a tendency to try to exclusively look. Some people go too far. And in the case of Bufal various, I think that they have done that they have essentially fabricated an indigenous history of use because if it's ancient, if it's traditional, if it's indigenous, that means that it's good. That means that it's okay. That justifies it. Well, all known evidence points to there not being a tradition of using Bufal various. This is something that emerged in the United States with a white man in Texas named Ken Nelson, who was he was actually inspired by a misunderstanding by an anthropologist named Jeanette Runquist, who had hypothesized that there was ancient use of psychoactive toads. So he read about this in Omni magazine and thought, well, that's cool. I'd like to, you know, I'd like to try that myself, not realizing that in his imitation of what he thought was an indigenous practice, he was actually inventing it. And he was inventing a new practice himself. Very interesting twist in all of this. And so he was by all known accounts, the first person to find this toad milk it and smoke the venom. And at the beginning, it was obscure. There were, you know, psychedelic cognacenti, like Andrew Weil or Wade Davis who pursued this and were very interested in it. But this was not a phenomenon. The celebrities weren't talking about toad venom in the 1980s. And if it was popular, it was probably equivalent in popularity to synthetic 5-Meo DMT at that time, which had been available from chemical supply companies since at least the 1960s. So the synthetic 5-Meo DMT history actually predates the use of Bufal various venom. It just was never talked about as much. And there's something, I suppose, something cool about the idea of smoking toad venom. People like to talk about it. We're talking about it right now. There's something weird about it. It's a good story. And it wasn't until celebrities really started doing this in the 21st century and until Octavia Rettig and Jerry Sandoval started going on a crusade as toad venom evangelists that this really became the phenomenon that we're currently talking about. Well, that's a new phrase for me. Toad venom evangelist. Yeah. I'm going to have to be lifting that one. So why are people calling this the God molecule versus just plain old DMT? Well, the experiences are very different. This is one of the unfortunate things about 5-Meo DMT is its name. People think that because the name contains DMT, that it is a form of DMT or that it is, you know, very, very closely related to DMT. But, Silicin, the active metabolite of Silicibin and a component of Silicibin containing mushrooms is closer to DMT than 5-Meo DMT is structurally. You could call Silicin for hydroxy DMT. So it's really the name more than anything that I think causes people to have this association. It was actually a big problem when I was planning a large scale synthesis of 5-Meo DMT in Mexico because the lawyers looked at this and they said, "Well, this is DMT." And I'd say, "No, it's not. It's 5-Meo DMT. It's 5-Methoxy DMT." And so it contains DMT in the name. And I'd say, "Okay, well, what if I call it NNO trimethylsaritonin? Then can I synthesize it?" And they thought that was okay. Of course, it's the same chemical. But the difference experientially between 5-Meo DMT and DMT is enormous. I would say that DMT is very much a prototypical, classical psychedelic. It's highly, highly visual. You have profound visual distortions. You often see you're in an environment in a different way. You think about yourself, your relationships. It's a personal experience. Whereas 5-Meo DMT is often non-visual. It's often sort of impersonal. I think it tends toward universal, where it's not about your life, but life in general. And it doesn't have a lot of the qualities that people think of when they talk about psychedelic drugs. I mean, for many people, myself included, the experience is losing consciousness entirely for a brief period and then having something that could be termed a near-death experience. Physiologically speaking, it isn't. But experientially, it does feel that way. Well, I want to make the point here that we're not doing commercials for any of these substances. And in all the episodes, I point out that these things can be lethal. And you've mentioned that on your show and in some of your writings and interviews. But even of cannabis, which people sort of think of as this harmless thing that can't hurt anybody, and I was reading something of yours recently that talked about problematic relationships with cannabis. So I wonder if you could give an example of that so that people understand that all of these plants are the gods and fungi are the gods and frogs are the gods, may have a downside. Yeah, I think it's very important to have a balanced perspective on these things, because there's been something really polarizing about the way they've been publicly discussed from the very beginning.

Pitfalls of harsh language (22:56)

They're either a panacea, it's going to cure all of society's ills, they're going to prevent us from being mean to each other, they're going to end all wars, or they're poisonous agents that will destroy your mind and leave you intellectually crippled. And of course, the truth is somewhere in the middle, where for some people, under some circumstances, they can have a tremendous benefit, and they can be truly life-changing. And under other circumstances, they can have a damaging effect.

Perceptions (23:41)

And cannabis, I think, is an interesting example, because it also includes the political dimensions of all this, because the people that have been using these substances for decades have been persecuted, and that creates a sort of insecurity complex. Understandably, justifiably, if the government says that this is dangerous and they're willing to lock you in a cage for it, if your employer can terminate your employment, if they find traces of this substance in your hair or your urine, which is an insane invasion of privacy that nobody should tolerate, then it makes sense that you'd want to really stand up for this stuff and say, "Hey, wait a second. It's never killed anybody. It's safer than alcohol, safer than tobacco. This stuff is innocuous, and in fact, you can smoke it every single day, and you'll be totally fine." And in many instances, that might be true, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you should. And it doesn't mean that I think this is the tendency, as we go too far in one direction or another, and a lot of it has to do with this insecurity from people demonizing these substances for so long. Agreed, but can you give perhaps an example of a problematic relationship with cannabis? Because your point is well taken, but that is even cannabis can have a downside. Oh, certainly. Yeah. I mean, I think one of the most interesting examples is there's a disorder called cannabis hyperamisis disorder. Are you familiar with this? It wasn't described in the medical literature until somewhat recently. It's a very odd phenomenon where people who smoke enormous quantities of cannabis will start vomiting continuously. And the only thing that relieves their nausea is taking a hot shower. And people started showing up in emergency rooms when they ran out of hot water because they couldn't control their vomiting. And this seemed really bizarre because, wait a second, people have been using cannabis for thousands of years. What are the chances that now, all of a sudden, a new cannabis related disorder would emerge. It couldn't be the cannabis itself. It must be a pesticide.

Cannabis risks (25:55)

It must be some contaminant in the cannabis. Otherwise, how could this possibly be explained? And the explanation is that, yes, it is the cannabis itself. This is a product of chronic hyperstimulation of CB1 receptors. And the reality is that people are smoking more cannabis now than any other time in human history. So new use disorders are actually emerging. And although this is described as a somewhat obscure phenomenon, it's not as obscure as people think. I've known two people that had this disorder, both of whom didn't know they had it. And it's especially insidious because cannabis has an anti-ametic effect. So you're nauseous. You think, oh, man, I'm so sick. I need to smoke some cannabis because I'm really nauseous, but the cannabis is actually making it worse. It's the source of the nausea. And during the pandemic, I had a friend who this happened to, because he was just getting really, really stoned all the time. And I had noticed that he was constantly soaking wet. And I thought, like, why is this guy, is he taking showers five times a day? Why is he always so wet? And he then told me, you know, I don't know what's going on. I've just been vomiting all the time, and a hot shower is really the only thing that helps. And I thought, wow, all right, I know what you have.

The shamans frogs or other flora and fauna as scalpels (27:17)

This is a -- so that's -- I don't want to bring that up as an example of something that everyone should be really terrified of, because this is something that only afflicts people who are extremely stoned all the time. But it's just an example of how this plant that's considered totally innocuous, under some circumstances, can have a negative effect. Also, I think there's something to be said for maybe just not being stoned all the time. And I say this is somebody that likes cannabis personally. I'm not trying to hate on cannabis. It's just, like I said, a tendency to go to these extremes of either cannabis is terrible or you should be stoned all the time, because cannabis is a medicine. Well, my mental issues, shulties, would often describe my end-altering plants as scalpels in the hand of a shamanic can heal, but it can also harm if it's not used correctly. And so, once again, all of these plants, all of these fungi, all of these substances need to be used with caution and approach with reverence and carefully. And that's why I often tell people you shouldn't be experimenting on your own with their powerful substances. I'm also wanted to ask you Hamilton about other frogs before we move into a few other topics. And that is when I was working on a book called Medicine Quest about 30 years ago, I interviewed John Daly. And at that point, 30 years ago, a daily had isolated 40 novel chemicals, just from frogs, from 50 different species. So, I'm wondering what's your perspective on frogs and other plants, animals, and fungi as to what's still out there?

Shultis heroism (28:49)

I love frogs, and they are amazing chemists. I mean, are you, I imagine you're familiar with epibatidine? It's such a beautiful molecule. And for a terrestrial species to even produce a chlorinated natural product like that is already sort of unusual, then you have the seven-azza-norbournain ring, which is just bizarre. I mean, the chemistry of it is really, really fascinating. And these frogs and toads are capable of biosynthetic feats that would be very difficult for human chemists. It's remarkable. And I don't doubt that there are amazing things left to be discovered. Well, I have read recent reports of two venomous frogs found in eastern Brazil. Genis chorothromantis and aparasvenidon, where they have toxins, more poisonous than the bushmaster. And these are recent finds. So the idea that we've kind of got everything from the natural world, or even just from the frogs, is obviously not the case. Of course, the flip side of that is with kite root fungi and climate change, these animals, which are probably the most sensitive of any group. So the race is on is to find, utilize, and protect these creatures at the same time that we seem to be destroying them faster than ever. There's about a thousand species of frogs are known in the Amazon, and we're finding more all the time. But I wanted to turn to one of your idols or mentors, a hero, I don't know how you'd best describe them, Alexander Shulgen, better known as Sasha. And since we're talking about mental states, I wonder if you'd share with us the story about Sasha and the surgery on his thumb. Oh, yeah. Yeah, of course. And this is a sort of foundational story in psychedelic history because Alexander Shulgen was in the Navy and when he was in the Navy, he was injured. He injured his thumb and he was having a, I believe, a small surgical procedure. Maybe it was just stitches on his thumb. And the nurse gave him a glass of orange juice that had crystals that he could see present in the juice. And he thought, "Okay, well, they're giving me morphine in my orange juice. Makes sense.

Personal Experiences And Opinions On Psychedelic Substances

You should believe your own experiences! (31:09)

This is going to be a painful procedure." He drank it and the morphine had this miraculous analgesic effect and he thought that was great. That was exactly what I needed. And later he asked the nurse, "How much morphine was that in the juice?" And he said, "Oh, no, it was sugar. Those are sugar crystals." So he came to realize that his own mind was capable of producing these sorts of experiences. I mean, this is the placebo effect and it's very, very powerful. And as somebody who spent his career evaluating completely unknown substances, substances that did not exist in the known universe until they were synthesized in his lab and he would be the first human being to try those substances, you have to be ultra aware of not just the placebo effect, but also the no-cebo effect, the belief that something that is pharmacologically inactive that you have consumed is a poison, because it could go either way. You could take something and suddenly think, "Oh, no, what did I just do?" "Oh, no, this could be some kind of cardiac toxin. I could be dying." You can have a... Both are totally possible and both are established phenomena in the medical literature. This is not some kind of speculative thing. This is why placebo-controlled trials are done because the placebo effect is a real effect. This is one of the complicated things about it. Understood, but we've got two pieces of the puzzle that don't fit together well. Here you have a man who invented more wild mind, ultra, and chemicals than anybody ever had or ever will and is a big fan of the placebo effect. So what's the lesson we draw from his life and work in terms of the future and healing if we get this right? Well, I think the first thing is to not always believe your own senses immediately, to scrutinize your own experiences and to try your best to be skeptical and to conduct your work in evidence-based manner. Because yes, there is nobody who is not vulnerable to the placebo effect. You might think, "Oh, that's just for the people out there that don't really... They're not really knowledgeable like me, but someone like me so knowledgeable." I could obviously tell the difference between a placebo and an active substance. Well, the whole issue with placebo is that you can't tell. That's the whole purpose of this effect. And so I think this actually comes back to the conservation issue because people will say, "Well, of course, toad venom is different than a synthetic material." And of course, Iboga total alkaloid extract is different from isolated Ibogaine. And of course, one variety of psilocybin containing mushroom is going to be different than another. Well, not so fast. If you're going to make that claim, especially if that claim could have serious ecological consequences, you need to be sure that it's real. Well, everybody in our field is repeatedly asked or told, "I would never take a synthetic. I will only take the natural product." So what's the difference between synthetic mescalin and mescalin? I love that question because it's... There's a really beautiful study that was done between two groups of researchers, one in France and the other in Germany. And it was a group of natural product chemists in France who were studying a traditional medicine in Cameroon called nauchleolatopholia. And they knew that this plant had been used to treat pain for generations. So they brought it to the lab, they extracted it, what's in this stuff, and they find that it contains tramadol, which is a completely synthetic pharmaceutical opioid that was thought to have been discovered in Germany in the 1960s. So wait a second. There's now two parallel histories of tramadol, one that is pharmaceutical, starting in Germany, and the other that is a multi-generational, traditional medicine history in Central West Africa. And this was kind of a remarkable claim.

Taming of the shrew (35:11)

It was very exciting to me. But then a group of chemists in Germany decided that they were going to try to replicate these findings. They went back to the same region, they started collecting samples, and they found that tramadol was actually distributed throughout the environment. And then the question emerged. Okay, so one group is saying this is being biosynthesized by a plant. The other group is saying this is a product of anthropogenic contamination of the environment. And if you're comparing these two samples, what is the difference? How would you ever know? And what it came down to was radiocarbon, because if something is a natural product, it will contain traces of radiocarbon. If something is synthesized from petrochemicals, it will contain no radiocarbon. So in the strictest sense, if you were going to say, what is the difference between synthetic and masculine biosynthesized by a plant, hypothetically, the biosynthesized masculine would be slightly more radioactive. But this is not something that would have any health consequence. We're talking about amounts of radioactivity that are barely detectable with the most sensitive known analytical instruments. But effectively, the short answer is nothing. There is nothing different. But again, back to the placebo effect, just because there's nothing different about it, doesn't mean that you won't have a different experience. This is why it's so complicated, because this is dependent on your values. So if you're somebody that really likes plants and you have a sort of animist relationship with plants, where you see them as having a vital essence of one kind or another, and that is important to you, then you are going to probably have a better experience with plant derived masculine because of the associations and the psychological priming associated with that. If you also think that synthetic artificial substances are bad and dangerous and undesirable, you will be inclined to have a negative experience. So again, this is not to say that people don't have different experiences, but that the experience is psychologically mediated as opposed to being mediated by the psychopharmacology of these effectively identical substances. Which links to another issue that I want to discuss, and that is that of ritual, and the role of ritual, and the importance of ritual. The best description I was able to find, it was ritual is the performance of ceremonial acts prescribed by tradition or sacred decrees. So many of these traditional uses involve a lot of ritual. So what in your view is the importance of this ritual in terms of the placebo effect setting the stage or convincing you of something that might not happen without it? There are so many different purposes that a ritual can have depending on the ritual and the plant and what is being done and where it's being done in the culture. But I think that ritual can be very important for emphasizing and accentuating certain dimensions of an experience. So traditionally, Iboga was not used to treat substance abuse disorders in Gabbalne, but in recent years it is being used that way. And what really struck me was that even without the ceremony being explicitly oriented toward that purpose, I felt that something of that nature was being implicitly communicated, which was a sort of endurance feat where you dance and you fast and you give yourself entirely to this experience. And because you abandon comfort, because you abandon all of your associations in everyday life, it causes you to rely on yourself in a different way. And I think that that could have a sort of anti-addictive effect because it's, you know, what we refer to as addiction in the substance abuse sense, I think is a ramification of a far more common human tendency, which is a sense of being dependent on anything. It could be your phone, it could be someone that you're in a romantic relationship with, it could be sweet foods, it could be a specific comfortable bed, and you feel that if you don't have that thing, you're just, that's necessary for your life. You're not whole without it. You need it. You're dependent on this external force. And I think that that ritual emphasizes a certain core independence and a endurance and a feeling that you have so much within you that you can withstand the deprivation of sleep or water because the reserves exist inside you. Well, again, to drill down a little deeper on this, when I was in Oaxaca 20 years ago, I had the honor and privilege of working with Dona Hulieta, who certainly didn't get the press at Marissa being it did, but the local people's considered her. Every bed is powerful. At one point, she told me, she said, you know, before the gringo started showing up here, before people like Watson showed up here, we used the Ninosantos, the little sainted ones, the mushrooms, to heal and to search for lost objects. That was the two purposes, very different than what people are going there for now. And so when I hear about people starting to come on cannabis with Iowaska and things like this and saying it's traditional, what are your thoughts on this sort of combination of these different traditions and these new uses? Oh, yeah, it's really actually remarkable.

No way, theres both buffale and Senonga (40:30)

I'm repeatedly surprised by how common that has become. And this is something that's actually not talked about. I'm glad you brought this up because I'll talk to people and they'll say, you know, I just did a combo ceremony with Filen-Bodusa by Coler, and I'll say, oh, where was it? I'll say, oh, you know, it was in Brooklyn. And I'll say, okay, what was it like? And they say, you know, they gave me five burns, and then as soon as I recovered from the vomiting, they gave me Bufal various venom. I'll say, oh, so they're throwing that in the mix as well. And they'll say, and then when I came down from the Bufal various venom, they gave me Senonga eyedrops. And they'll think, wow, all right, they're just really giving you the women sampler. - Where are the buffa? - And that is not uncommon. I actually, when I talk to people that are, you know, not a part of an indigenous group, but they've created a sort of, let's say, it sounds mean, but, you know, sort of pseudo-traditional, pseudo-indigenous practice where they use pieces of those ceremonies, but they're not actually from those groups themselves. And the way, I know that that sounds kind of unsavory, the way I just described it, but I think some of these people have good intentions and they're not necessarily harming anyone, but they do tend to mix and match these traditions in a way that is surprising to me. I don't even want to go so far as to say it's necessarily bad, but it's something that I would be very cautious about, and it is a, I think, cause for concern, because they'll do these multi-day, multi-substance retreats where, you know, day one, you do ayahuasca, day two, you do psilocybin containing mushrooms, then you do Ibogaine, then you end the whole thing with Bufal various venom, and I don't know. I think your guess is as good as mine when it comes to whether or not that's a constructive practice. I also wanted to ask you one thing really quickly. So you were in Woutla in the early 2000s. I'm curious. And Marius Sabina was dead by then, and I'm curious what it was like then. It was sort of just becoming discovered, and I remember being in the plaza and there would be people walking through the plaza with plants of the gods, the shulties and the Huffman book going like, I think I'll try that one, sort of like a Chinese menu. So it was changing at the time. Tourists are doing this. Tourists. Yeah. Gringos. But I was working with a Mexican physician who had lived with the Weachholes for eight years and was actually dating the daughter of the most powerful shaman. So I kind of sidled into a very traditional healing tradition, rather than being all these guys who showed up in the plaza looking for people saying, "Mushrooms, mushrooms, hongos, hongos." So it was just at that cusp where things were becoming more commercial and more open to the outside world. And as you know, this type of psychedelic tourism has positive and negative aspects. And that's one of the things I want to ask you about because you talked about good intentions. And Michael Pollan in his book talks about the fact that a lot of people who were seeking out this psychedelic healing tend to be people with emotional problems who may not be all that together and are the ones most likely to come apart if they're not under the care of really a skilled practitioner who's not in it for the money or just for the money. So I'd like to get your thoughts on this type of psychedelic tourism and the potential downsides and the real downsides that we see. Yeah.

San Pedro, whether can or cannot be given to healthy people (44:07)

And this is one of the fundamental changes that occurs in a medical model. If you talk to somebody like William Leonard Picard, who is a very prominent LSD chemist and is considered to have been responsible for producing more LSD than any person in history. And his philosophy when it came to the distribution of LSD was you give it to healthy people. This is not a substance that you give to somebody who just broke up with their boyfriend or girlfriend. This is not something you give to somebody who's mentally unstable. This is something that is used for the betterment of healthy people. And in a medical model, that is the complete opposite. And instead, these by necessity must be used for treatment of disease because this is the way our current medical system works. There is no provision for the use of medicines by healthy people. That's not how health insurance works. That's not how the FDA works for better or worse. And so in these trials and at these retreats, so this occurs on both the grey market, black market and the medicalized market, there is a tendency for people who are pursuing these things for treatment of disease. And you run the full gamut of problems that can come with that. I think on one end, you have a lot of the sorts of things that happen in the realm of unregulated cancer treatments where you have desperate people because a lot of diseases will put somebody in a state of serious desperation. You have a terminal neurodegenerative disease. You want something that will halt that degeneration and you'll try anything. And if somebody says, "Hey, Ibogaine is a treatment for Parkinson's disease," which is a claim that is made quite often, and the evidence for it is not very strong. I've actually talked about this in the past. And is it possible that it could treat Parkinson's? Yeah, I think it's possible. But there certainly isn't sufficient evidence that people who have Parkinson's disease should take Ibogaine thinking that this is going to cure all of their problems. It really has not been adequately studied. So you have that sort of thing happening. And then you have the problems with aftercare, with integration, where if somebody has some kind of trauma and they have this experience at, let's say, a toad venom retreat, then what? Is there a follow-up? No. Then they're on their own. And we don't live in a society that has provisions for caring for people after an experience like that, which can be really disruptive to their functioning. I think this integration issue is much overlooked in our field. My organization, the Amazon Conservation Team, does a lot of work with the original Iowa Scheddles and the Northwest Amazon that Chiltees work with in the '40s. And many times you'll finish a ceremony. And three days later, you're walking down the street and you'll get some realization or you'll have some weird sort of semi-vision. And you're able to go back to the shaman and say, "What does that mean?" And they'll be able to explain this to you usually. But in our culture, where you go to the doctor and then you're done, what happens afterwards? It's your issue, your problem. And these powerful substances in our heads, our minds and our souls, if you don't have somebody there guiding you through the aftermath, I think you're kind of asking for trouble. And I think, again, this is one of the reasons why their medicine is effective in some cases when ours is not. Yeah. But I'm just wondering if you think that fungi are as promising as frogs in terms of new substances, new mind altering substances, new stuff from microdosing, what's your perspective?

New mind-altering substances (47:53)

Well, from a sustainability perspective, mushrooms are about as good as anything anyone could ask for. And a lot of that has to do with the natural abundance of proliferation of different species in different genera that produce psilocybin. And that is a product of people being obsessed with mushrooms and searching for them everywhere, because this wasn't always the case. There was a time when people thought this was exclusively something that was found in Wohaka. And if you wanted to try psilocybin containing mushrooms, you had to go to Wohalta. And it wasn't until people started finding them in the United States. And more importantly, until Dennis McKenna adapted laboratory techniques for the cultivation of psilocybin containing mushrooms and published in an underground, non-scientific guide intended for lay readers that not only did people recognize that these things grew naturally in the United States, but that they could cultivate themselves. And that really sparked a revolution that dramatically increased the availability of psilocybin containing mushrooms.

Psilocybin mushrooms (48:59)

They went from something so obscure that essentially nobody could try them to the most common psychedelic. And that was exclusively a product of innovation, really scientific innovation and cultivation techniques. And I think that that is why it's so important to think about these things. If people hadn't done that, it could have been very different. It could have been even more overcrowding and tourism to Mexico. If people thought that by necessity, they had to make this voyage and instead it had a fact where people were empowered to pursue these things independently, which I think can be a very positive thing. And the issue is that we just haven't developed equivalent techniques for a lot of these other things. That was sort of what I was trying to do. It's 5A MoTMT. It's a little more complicated. But if there were a way to empower people to use these things sustainably, then a lot of these problems would go away. Excellent point. I mean, we send death no botanist to the jungle searching for magic frogs, and it turns out here they are in Arizona. Richard Schulte's left Massachusetts to the Wilds Oaxaca in 1936 in search of magic mushrooms. But according to Juliana Furti, who was on Tim Ferriss, this show recently, there's probably 12 or 15 magic mushroom species growing in Massachusetts. On one hand, it's a bit like the Wizard of Oz. There's no place like home. But I think that what it brings home is that all species everywhere are valuable and need to be investigated. So where do we look next for these new and wild substances? Is it the coral reef? Is it the boreal forest? You're the natural product chemist. What do you think? Well, to be, I don't actually do all that much work with natural products. Almost everything that I do is synthesis of novel compounds. Although I've done a little bit, I synthesized 5-Bromo DMT, for example, which is the only psychedelic that has ever been isolated from a marine organism. And it's really the only known psychedelic from the ocean and only the ocean. I think it is possible that there will be other marine psychedelics discovered, but again, the same problems emerge. I mean, thankfully, people don't really like 5-Bromo DMT that much, and also thankfully it's easy enough to synthesize that nobody has considered attempting to approach the sponge source, Smano-Spungia, oria. But what if that were not the case? What if it were like 5-Bromo DMT and it produced a really remarkable life-changing type experience? And that would rapidly become a conservation issue, and you'd probably run into the same phenomenon, or some shaman or zeallet would say, "Look, I found an ancient engraving of a sponge." This shows that, in fact, people have been using sponges for thousands of years, and it is our ancestral responsibility to remove these sponges from the ocean and figure out a way to smoke their alkaloids. I think it's going to present a more challenging case for these neo-shaments to claim that it was always used as a hallucinogenic, or the indigenous peoples who lived on the coral reef, but time will tell. Now, I'm wondering if you have any thoughts to share on the preponderance of hallucinogenic substances in the New World, the New World Tropic, versus the Old World. A lot of people have paid a lot of lip service to this, and I haven't heard it convincing cases to why we have so much from Central and South America and relatively so little from Africa or Asia. I think one answer seems to be that people have not looked as hard. I mean, people are finding new species of psilocybin-containing mushrooms.

Advanced Topics About Psychedelics And Environment Conservation

Use in Ugandawith the Psilocybe-bearing Mushrooms (52:29)

There was a species found in Congo not so long ago that it seems very possible to me that nobody had looked until somewhat recently. There was even evidence of traditional use of psilocybin-containing mushrooms in Uganda, which would be really interesting because that would suggest that there was maybe a parallel evolution of psilocybin-containing mushroom traditions in both Africa and in Mexico. The evidence for the use in Uganda is relatively slim, but there is one paper on it that suggests that this could be the case. Well, if you get me that reference, put it in the show notes because I'm sure that'll be of great interest to a lot of people. Now, Weston Lebar, who was on a Shulte's early expedition to Oklahoma in search of peyote, wrote a classic paper on the shamanic origins of religion and medicine. And I'm wondering if you have a personal opinion or insight as to whether these disciplines were essentially the same, or how much overlap there was thousands, tens of thousands, or maybe a hundred thousand years ago. Oh, well, certainly, traditionally, there would have been an enormous amount of overlap, depending on what culture you're talking about as well. And I think that this is one of the things about modern medicine that has been lost is these sort of ceremonial or ritual or psychological dimensions to the administration of a medicine, which will necessarily change the outcome. I mean, they've even done experiments with a treatment for hair loss called finasteride, and they gave one group of people information where they said, you know, this drug, it's going to cause sexual dysfunction. It's going to cause depression. It's going to have some negative side effects. And the other group, they didn't say any of this. And the people had been told that there was risk of these adverse effects, experienced them more prominently. So there's no question that the way a medicine is administered changes the outcome. And that's something that is not really integrated into our current medical practices. You have talked about the importance of strychnos and strychnine in medicine. In Sernum, where I've done a lot of my work, they have long sold a male aphrodisiac, T, made from a species of strychnos. I don't know whether there's strychnos in it, and I'm not advocating the use of strychnos, but I wonder if you could elaborate on this use of poisons as medicines and vice versa. Have you ever tried it? I have not tried it. Yes. I mean, but yes, strychnine was used as a medicine. It was actually used as a performance enhancing drug by athletes, whether or not that is really effective for that purpose is unclear to me. Obviously, it's potentially very unsafe. But I think strychnine is a really good example of this foundational concept in toxicology, which is the dose makes the poison. There is nothing that is inherently therapeutic or inherently toxic. These are all a function of dose. So there is a dose of strychnine that is not dangerous to consume. It's a very low dose. The therapeutic index of strychnine is quite a bit lower than other substances, but that doesn't mean that it is intrinsically a poison. Almost everything that we call a poison under some circumstances, at least conceivably could have a therapeutic effect, including radiation. So in terms of strychnine use, I've always been curious about it because one thing that I've learned over the years is almost any time somebody classifies the substances really, really bad or extremely dangerous. It tends to be the case that it's at least partially misunderstood, and it wouldn't surprise me all that much if maybe a very, very low dose of strychnine did elicit some kind of desirable effect. But obviously, I am not suggesting anyone listening to this go out and try to evaluate that on their own. Agreed. We're not advocating for the use of poisons to see what the therapeutic dosage. I mentioned the case of salvia. We talked about medicinal plants before we knew much about medicinal fungi. And then was in comes back from a Hakko, the medicinal mint. This was stunning to the chemical world, the ethnobotanical world. And I wonder what you think that tells us about what's still out there waiting to be discovered. Yeah, I love the story of salvia because it was studied by no shortage of brilliant researchers.

Salvia divinorum (57:02)

I mean, this was Albert Hoffman who had little trouble isolating and then synthesizing, silicine and psilocybin. He obviously synthesized LSD. He did a very complicated work with Erglines. And yet when he was given a sample of salvia divinorum, he couldn't figure it out. And that was the case for many people for many years. They would make extracts of it. They would inject that extract into a cat. There's a Mexican psychiatrist named Jose Luis Diaz who did that work. And it was clear that it was having an effect on animals. Humans tried it. It was also seemed clear it was having an effect, but the effect was somewhat subtle. And part of this had to do with the way that it was administered, usually as an aqueous infusion. So, you know, Wausen tried it, Hoffman tried it. They said that there was some effect that it was sort of mushroom-like, but they couldn't quite put their finger on it. And people were trying to figure out what is this stuff? What does it do? If you extract it, inject it into a cat, it does something, has a subtle effect in humans. What chemical is responsible for this? There's no nitrogenous alkaloid in it that's responsible. So what's going on here? And I was actually talking to Dennis McKenna on my podcast recently. He told me a really funny anecdote where he was working for shaman pharmaceuticals and he was studying extracts of salvia and looking at their affinity for the capoopioid receptor. And it was off the charts and he thought, "Okay, this doesn't make any sense. There's no way that this plant contains something, this potent. I must have made a mistake." So he actually discovered this, but then discounted his own finding because it seemed too extraordinary to be real. And it wasn't until Brian Roth actually started working with another citizen scientist named Daniel Seibert that they were able to definitively demonstrate that the active principle of salvia divinorum was salvinor in A and that salvinor in A was an extraordinarily potent and selective agonist for the capoopioid receptor and that it was the most potent naturally occurring psychedelic. So that is quite a curveball coming from a plant that there was some ambiguity whether it was active at all. Well, when I was in Oaxaca and asked the shaman about it, she said, "I'm not going to give it to you. It's too strong and you don't need it." And eventually changed her mind, but it was really very unpleasant. And I didn't feel a healing result from it, but now that it's obtained such wide popularity, I have to say, I remain very surprised. But it clearly is not similar to many of the other mind-altering substances that I've had experiences with. Did you chew the leaves or use aqueous infusion? No, it was the leaves. So that's how she administered. She said she didn't use it much because it was so powerful and it was like sort of a last ditch or very serious cases. Whereas as you point out that these shamans often give you medicines when you're not sick, what we'd probably call adaptogens or meanestimulants, which 20 years ago weren't words that were in common parlance. But I was just struck by how different it was and how unpleasant it was, frankly. And what was it that you didn't like? I felt that I was under water in the dark for nine hours. I didn't feel sort of healing therapeutic effect. It just was almost like a punishment. But I mean, you know, shamans will tell you, if you want a light show, but it is in the land. Okay? If you take ayahuasca and you don't see anything, it doesn't mean it's not working. That the Bejuko, the Romadio is giving you what you need. And sometimes you see the ninth dimension and sometimes you just fall asleep, but you're getting out of it what you need. The plant knows that's what they say. So again, I can't say that I was disappointed because I didn't see fireworks. I mean, I'm not a person who is seeking thrills this way.

The Stone-D章pt Theory & The Drunken Monkey Theory (01:00:58)

It's just that, you know, many times we've all had experiences with these substances where we felt better for it, felt relief or stress or whatever. You know, sometimes you don't, sometimes maybe you feel a little worse off, kind of how I felt. Yeah. Anyway, I want to wind up here, but since you brought up our friend Dennis McKenna, Dennis McKenna is organizing a conference which we'll discuss among other things, the drunken, the stone-dape theory, first promulgated by his late brother, Terrence. And at the same time, we have people who are putting forward the drunken monkey theory. And I wonder what you think of these ideas that these mind-altering substances may have played a fundamental role in not only human culture, but human evolution. The stone-dape theory, which was put forward by Terrence McKenna, is of course stating that once we discovered mushrooms, whatever mind-altering substances, it created consciousness. And we began to wonder, it wasn't just about what's to eat or what plant do I use when I get sick. The drunken monkey theory is that our ancestors lived in the trees and the ripest fruit would fall to the ground, which is the sweetest fruit, which in some cases is fermented fruit. So they were catching a buzz from alcohol. And so these are sort of presented as different cases, but they kind of point in the same direction. And so we can just talk about the stone-dape theory as to whether mind-altering substances really played a fundamental role or may have played a fundamental role or may have played no role in the evolution of consciousness, culture, history, and evolution. Well, evolutionarily, I think the evidence for that is pretty slim to non-existent. And I think that Terrence McKenna is sometimes taken too literally. I think of him as a poet. I love everything that he says. And I think that a lot of the things that he said were intended to provoke people, to cause them to really think about these things and to value them. And I think that in that capacity, he was extraordinarily effective. But from an evolutionary biological perspective, that would not be my first explanation for how consciousness emerged in humans. That said, I think that if today in our culture with all of the distractions and all of the things that exist, we can still look to this experience and see it as one of the most momentous and amazing in an entire life. You think, what would that have been like if you didn't have all these distractions? If it's this valuable to us now, what would it have been like in the past? And if it allows people to have religious epiphanies and even start religions now, then what would it have been like in the past? And I think that it's reasonable to assume that it might have been similar. That said, I think that people get into trouble when they try to explain everything with psychedelics, which is the extreme that people tend to do. They either want to, again, back to these polarizing dichotomies, either psychedelics or purposeless, and have no historical value, or the origin of consciousness, religion, and everything else. And I don't doubt that they did play a role in some ancient religions, but the question is how significant that role was. And yeah. So I want to thank you for your kindness and your insights. It's a pleasure to listen to somebody so well-spoken. But I want to conclude by asking you about your mentor, Nicholas Langlitz, and the primatology of primatologists. Yeah. I mean, Nicholas Langlitz is a really brilliant medical doctor who then became an anthropologist. And he wrote a book called Neuropsychodalia, which I really admire, which is an anthropological analysis of neuroscientific research on psychedelics. And he's really great at taking a different perspective on these issues and really asking questions about what are the motivations for these people? Why are they doing it? What biases are integrated into the work they do? And he then switched to doing a sort of metaprimatology analysis where you look at the primatology of primatologists, which I thought was also really interesting. But I think he might get back into psychedelics right now because when he wrote Neuropsychodalia, this was somewhat of a fringe issue, who's spending time with the dozen or so researchers that were doing this work, like Franz Volenweider. But now it's hard for somebody to keep track of it, even if it's their full-time job. I mean, by some estimates, there are hundreds of pharmaceutical startups that are pursuing these things therapeutically.

Timothy Leary (01:05:41)

I am repeatedly amazed by the proliferation of new scientific papers and patents coming out on psychedelics. I mean, this is really expanding at a pace that has never before been seen. I mean, only rivaled by the 1960s. And so it's good that there are people carefully monitoring what's happening because it's an important time in history. Last question. Timothy Leary's legacy. From your perspective. Like McKenna, I think that Leary is somebody who's often misunderstood and possibly taken too literally. I see Leary as a comedian and a very good one at that. I mean, when I read his books, when I listen to him speak, I am repeatedly struck by how hilarious he is. And I think that he was blamed for a lot of the problems that emerged in relation to psychedelic drug use because people would say, "Okay, everything was going right. This is all going to be a medicine." And then Timothy Leary came along and this zealot wanted to go on some kind of ego crusade to create a counterculture that would delegitimize psychedelics. And I think that's a really uncharitable interpretation of what was going on. I mean, I think that the history of psychedelics had been profoundly elitist. And Timothy Leary was somebody who wanted to break with that tradition of elitism. And he wanted to say, "This experience was good for me. And I think it's going to be good for you as well. I have no reason to say that this isn't going to be good for you. So in fact, go for it." You know, is that the most responsible thing to have done? Probably not. But I think that there was something honest about it and something democratic about it and something that actually put faith in the intelligence of the broader community. Whether or not that was a good or bad idea. And if it hadn't been him, it would have been somebody else. I think that's the other thing to keep in mind with all this. You can't. Hiding is a great short-term strategy and it's a terrible long-term strategy. And if people think that these problems are going to be solved by hiding or being silent, it's just not the case.

The Need to Be Honest About Conservation (01:07:55)

Maybe for one person, for one generation, you can hide. But if you want to see progress in the long run, you have to be open. You have to be honest. And ultimately, what Timothy Leary did in the long term is the right thing. Because he was honest about what he felt about these things. He thought they were amazing. He wasn't going to hide that and say, "Oh, no, this is only for medical use." Because he didn't believe that. And I think that the same is true for these conservation issues. I remember somebody criticizing me and saying, "Well, don't you realize it by even talking about toad conservation? You're simply informing more people about toads. So what you really should do is just not talk about it." And again, that might be true if I were the only person talking about it. But people are going to talk about it whether I like it or not. And so the question is, are you going to talk about it responsibly? Agreed. Thank you very much. This is great. Hey guys, this is Tim again. Just one more thing before you take off. And that is Five Bullet Friday.

Closing Thoughts

Five Bullet Friday (01:08:51)

With you enjoy getting a short email from me every Friday that provides a little fun before the weekend. Between one and a half and two million people subscribe to my free newsletter, my super short newsletter called Five Bullet Friday. Easy to sign up, easy to cancel. It is basically a half page that I send out every Friday to share the coolest things I've found or discovered or have started exploring over that week. It's kind of like my diary of cool things. It often includes articles I'm reading, books I'm reading, albums perhaps, gadgets, gizmos, all sorts of tech tricks and so on. It gets sent to me by my friends, including a lot of podcasts, guests and these strange esoteric things end up in my field. And then I test them and then I share them with you. So if that sounds fun, again, it's very short, a little tiny bite of goodness before you head off for the weekend, something to think about. If you'd like to try it out, just go to Tim.blog/Friday, type that into your browser, Tim.blog/Friday, drop in your email and you'll get the very next one. Thanks for listening. This episode is brought to you by Athletic Greens. I get asked all the time what I would take if I could only take one supplement. The answer is invariably Athletic Greens. I view it as all-in-one nutritional insurance. I recommended it, in fact, in the 4-hour body. This is more than 10 years ago and I did not get paid to do so. For approximately 75 vitamins, minerals and whole food-sourced ingredients, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a more nutrient-dense and comprehensive formula on the market. It has multivitamins, multimineral greens complex, probiotics, and prebiotics for gut health and immunity formula. I just have enzymes, adaptogens, and much more. I usually take it once or twice a day just to make sure I've covered my bases if I miss anything I'm not aware of. Of course, I focus on nutrient-dense meals to begin with. That's the basis. But Athletic Greens makes it easy to get a lot of nutrition when whole foods aren't readily available. From travel packets, I always have them in my bag when I'm sipping around. Right now, Athletic Greens is giving my audience a special offer on top of their all-in-one formula, which is a free vitamin D supplement and five free travel packs with your first subscription purchase. Many of us are deficient in vitamin D. I found that true for myself, which is usually produced in our bodies from sun exposure. So, adding a vitamin D supplement to your daily routine is a great option for additional immune support, your immunity, gut health, and energy by visiting athleticgreens.com/tim. You'll receive up to a year's supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs with your subscription. Again, that's athleticgreens.com/tim.