I'm very appreciative that we're researching psychedelics again. There is clearly some degree of therapeutic potential for these compounds as <i>adjuncts</i> to traditional therapy programs.<p>However, I'm also worried that the media glamorization of psychedelics will sink this trend before it has a chance to gain a foothold. I get worried when Fortune is consulting with tech-age gurus like Tim Ferriss instead of reporting on the underlying research.<p>Psychedelics show promise in controlled trials when embedded in the middle of intense therapy sessions, administered by trained professionals. Participants in these sessions, such as the author of the article, are generally drawn to the psychedelic treatment with a strong pre-conceived notion that the treatment will "work". In other words, it currently self-selects for true believers almost perfectly. The placebo component is very real.<p>Psychedelic treatment also doesn't work miracles the way that Tim Ferriss and other gurus tend to hype it. In the article, Tim compares a single psychedelic sessions to "a decade of highly-effective talk therapy", which is a red flag for anyone remotely familiar with psychedelics or talk therapy. He also glosses over the fact that he frequently took psychedelics as a younger person yet still suffered from depression.<p>Depressed patients are a notoriously vulnerable population, often desperate for any form of relief. Dangling psychedelics as an easy-button miracle cure is dangerously irresponsible. Yes, I know Tim technically recommends that his listeners don't self-experiment at home (wink wink) but do you really expect depressed patients reading this hyperbolic article that doesn't bother explaining the limitations or downsides to come to the same conclusion?