Hamilton Morris

that goes even further in elucidating how different psychedelics interact with the protein and how these different types of interactions produce either psychedelic or non-psychedelic effects. So there's nothing even remotely nefarious about any of the work that Brian Roth is doing. It's some of the most important cutting-edge pharmacology on serotonin 2A agonists that exists.

that goes even further in elucidating how different psychedelics interact with the protein and how these different types of interactions produce either psychedelic or non-psychedelic effects. So there's nothing even remotely nefarious about any of the work that Brian Roth is doing. It's some of the most important cutting-edge pharmacology on serotonin 2A agonists that exists.

that goes even further in elucidating how different psychedelics interact with the protein and how these different types of interactions produce either psychedelic or non-psychedelic effects. So there's nothing even remotely nefarious about any of the work that Brian Roth is doing. It's some of the most important cutting-edge pharmacology on serotonin 2A agonists that exists.

It depends on what benefit you're describing and what you're looking for and who the patient is and what the disorder is. Exactly, because you conceivably have a full spectrum of... psychedelic to not psychedelic. And maybe at one point on the spectrum for a certain type of person, you're getting the benefit and maybe not. And what about the duration? And what about the environment?

It depends on what benefit you're describing and what you're looking for and who the patient is and what the disorder is. Exactly, because you conceivably have a full spectrum of... psychedelic to not psychedelic. And maybe at one point on the spectrum for a certain type of person, you're getting the benefit and maybe not. And what about the duration? And what about the environment?

It depends on what benefit you're describing and what you're looking for and who the patient is and what the disorder is. Exactly, because you conceivably have a full spectrum of... psychedelic to not psychedelic. And maybe at one point on the spectrum for a certain type of person, you're getting the benefit and maybe not. And what about the duration? And what about the environment?

And what about a million and the frequency of dosing and a million things? It's very hard to say what is optimal. I try to keep an open mind because I think people can be very moralistic about things like this, or they'll say like, Oh, you're just commodifying this and destroying the spirituality and destroying the the whole thing that makes this valuable and making it into the next Prozac.

And what about a million and the frequency of dosing and a million things? It's very hard to say what is optimal. I try to keep an open mind because I think people can be very moralistic about things like this, or they'll say like, Oh, you're just commodifying this and destroying the spirituality and destroying the the whole thing that makes this valuable and making it into the next Prozac.

And what about a million and the frequency of dosing and a million things? It's very hard to say what is optimal. I try to keep an open mind because I think people can be very moralistic about things like this, or they'll say like, Oh, you're just commodifying this and destroying the spirituality and destroying the the whole thing that makes this valuable and making it into the next Prozac.

Okay, I understand the argument, but... we should explore everything and see what's out there. Because Brian Roth's work, you could look at this two ways. You could say, oh, he's studying non-psychedelic psychedelics. But part of studying non-psychedelic psychedelics is also recognizing what creates a psychedelic. You can kind of move in both directions.

Okay, I understand the argument, but... we should explore everything and see what's out there. Because Brian Roth's work, you could look at this two ways. You could say, oh, he's studying non-psychedelic psychedelics. But part of studying non-psychedelic psychedelics is also recognizing what creates a psychedelic. You can kind of move in both directions.

Okay, I understand the argument, but... we should explore everything and see what's out there. Because Brian Roth's work, you could look at this two ways. You could say, oh, he's studying non-psychedelic psychedelics. But part of studying non-psychedelic psychedelics is also recognizing what creates a psychedelic. You can kind of move in both directions.

One of the big subjects of this work has been biased signaling at the serotonin 2A receptor and whether whether a receptor interaction that is associated with something called beta-arrestin or GQ is responsible for the psychedelic effect. And this work has allowed us to better understand what makes psychedelic psychedelic in terms of their molecular neuropharmacology. It's been very important.

One of the big subjects of this work has been biased signaling at the serotonin 2A receptor and whether whether a receptor interaction that is associated with something called beta-arrestin or GQ is responsible for the psychedelic effect. And this work has allowed us to better understand what makes psychedelic psychedelic in terms of their molecular neuropharmacology. It's been very important.

One of the big subjects of this work has been biased signaling at the serotonin 2A receptor and whether whether a receptor interaction that is associated with something called beta-arrestin or GQ is responsible for the psychedelic effect. And this work has allowed us to better understand what makes psychedelic psychedelic in terms of their molecular neuropharmacology. It's been very important.

So I don't see these things as like two things that exist in opposition to one another. You could argue in the same direction say that studying psychedelics shows you what you need for maybe like a in this instance GQ biased path that would be more likely to be psychedelic, but I think the basic thing is like the psychedelic experience is Incredibly powerful and is

So I don't see these things as like two things that exist in opposition to one another. You could argue in the same direction say that studying psychedelics shows you what you need for maybe like a in this instance GQ biased path that would be more likely to be psychedelic, but I think the basic thing is like the psychedelic experience is Incredibly powerful and is

So I don't see these things as like two things that exist in opposition to one another. You could argue in the same direction say that studying psychedelics shows you what you need for maybe like a in this instance GQ biased path that would be more likely to be psychedelic, but I think the basic thing is like the psychedelic experience is Incredibly powerful and is

may be unsuitable for certain types of people and maybe not beneficial. And if you had a way of dialing it down a little bit, that could allow certain benefits of psychedelics, which may have little to do with what we typically associate with the psychedelic experience, right?

may be unsuitable for certain types of people and maybe not beneficial. And if you had a way of dialing it down a little bit, that could allow certain benefits of psychedelics, which may have little to do with what we typically associate with the psychedelic experience, right?