Transform Drug Policy Foundation publishes new guide on regulating psychedelics

In this piece we share the highlight of Transform Drug Policy Foundation’s recently published comprehensive guide to regulating psychedelics. The Foundation is a leading advocate in drug policy reform that has been providing expertise to governments and the public about alternative modes of drug regulation for over two decades.

Given the considerable rise in popularity of psychedelics over recent years, the 124-page How to Regulate Psychedelics: A Practical Guide - by Steve Rolles and Ester Kincová maps out how non-medical use of these substances may be responsibly regulated.

“Research into the medical use of psychedelics, and its attendant public discourse, are both relatively well-advanced. Yet non-medical use has remained marginalized in much of the public and debate,” the guide states. “This guide, therefore, focuses on the policy questions, raised by the reality of extensive non-medical use of psychedelic drugs.”

The guide also aims to “help inform emerging developments at this critical moment in psychedelic policy evolution,” as governments across the globe continue to reconsider prohibitory laws surrounding psychedelics.

Principles for decriminalizing psychedelics

Several US cities have decriminalised psychedelics in recent years, removing and reducing criminal penalties for their use. However, with considerable variation in current strategies, the guide recommends key guiding principles to underlie all psychedelics decriminalization.

These principles include removing any punishment and pre-existing criminal records for personal psychedelic use. They include being allowed to grow psychedelics at home freely and share small amounts among peers, as long as the sharing wasn’t part of a financial transaction.

The guide also discourages having “threshold amounts” - maximum quantities of psychedelics someone can legally own for personal use. It acknowledges how changes in foraging seasons, cultivation cycles, and varying consumption behaviors make it difficult to determine how much someone should be allowed to own at a given time. 

Increasing psychedelic safety through regulating products

For regulating commercial psychedelics, the guide highlights the need for a regulatory authority to issue licenses for the production and sales of psychedelic drug products. License regulations should also be kept updated in light of new scientific evidence. 

Regulations would include clearly labeling product packages with recommended dosages, potential drug interactions, and adverse effects of the given psychedelic compound. Labels would also highlight which people may be most vulnerable to adverse effects and include appropriate harm-reduction information for safe use and psychological support. 

The guide advises those selling psychedelic products to be trained in harm-reduction knowledge so they can provide adequate and personalized safety advice to buyers. Vendors would also limit the number of products someone could buy at a given time and refuse sales to anybody intoxicated or under the age of 18. 

Similarly, online vendors would “provide prominently and accessible information on drug risks, harm reduction guidance, and links to other relevant drug services.” Pre-purchase screening processes could determine those with individual vulnerabilities to psychedelic-related harms.

Avoiding the corporate capture

When assessing commercial psychedelics at large, the guide emphasizes avoiding corporate capture - the psychedelic industry becoming dominated by large businesses. Companies may over-hype the benefits of psychedelics while underselling their risks to increase product sales, as is currently occurring in the ketamine-telehealth market. 

To avoid this risk, the guide recommends “no marketing, branding or promotional activity for retail or online outlets beyond functional availability” and “strictly no medical claims” on psychedelic product packaging. It also recommends “limiting the number of production and retail licenses to any one commercial entity” to prevent such businesses from monopolizing the industry. 

The guide outlines the advantages of members-based not-for-profit associations for sharing psychedelics as an alternative to commercial entities. Similar to Cannabis Social Clubs, which emerged in Spain around the early 2000s, psychedelics would be collectively grown and distributed to members to be used in safe and supportive community-based environments.  

“With no profit motive to increase cannabis consumption or initiate new users, the clubs can offer a more public-health centred alternative to large-scale retail drug markets,” the guide authors write. 

They also suggested prioritising psychedelic licenses to not-for-profit organizations and social enterprises rather than corporate entities. 

Supporting marginalized communities 

As well as non-profits, the guide advocates prioritizing licenses for black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) wanting to participate in the psychedelics market. 

BIPOC has historically and continues to be disproportionally affected by the war on drugs, with racial profiling and higher rates of criminal punishment among these communities. The guide, therefore, urges BIPOC to be actively supported in psychedelics regulation. 

Suggested support means include proactive discussions between legislators and underrepresented groups to determine how they would like to participate in the psychedelic space. Loans for those wanting to train in psychedelic-related studies or set up a small psychedelic business could also be offered.

Ensuring indigenous reciprocity

As well as supporting their inclusion in the psychedelic space, the guide highlights the importance of protecting indigenous communities that use psychoactive plants and fungi. It states, “The rights of religious and Indigenous communities to freedom of belief and practice using psychedelics must be secured (this principle extends to all psychoactive plants) and not be encroached upon by regulatory frameworks.” 

Though some current laws exist to protect indigenous uses of psychedelics, the guide notes how these legislations are contradictory, highlighting the need for clear guidelines. 

These guidelines would involve protecting Indigenous communities not only from drug enforcement but also “actions by private companies and third parties that deny Indigenous people their traditional sources of nutrition, medicines, livelihoods, and ceremonies.”

Clear examples of such companies are for-profit retreat centers, which utilise regulatory loopholes in places where psychedelics are legal for spiritual and traditional use. These companies are criticised for copying indigenous practices but excluding such groups from financial benefits. Their encroachment on protected land and overharvesting of psychoactive plants and fungi are also major concerns. 

“Industry actors, sometimes unapologetically, are already seeking to gain financially from the knowledge and established ritual psychedelic practices of these communities,” the authors write. 

The guide urges for greater reciprocity between psychedelic enterprises and indigenous communities and spotlights organisations working to increase mutual benefits between these groups. For example, the Indigenous Medicine Conservation Fund (IMCF) helps flow money from psychedelic companies into community projects and conserving indigenous land. 

Supervised Psychedelic Use

The lack of ethical guidelines is also of major concern in the psychedelic retreat landscape. Retreat facilitators may be poorly trained, harming participants through malpractice, or seeking to exploit the vulnerability of participants during psychedelic experiences. Such cases of power abuse, including sexual assault, have been reported. 

“Sufficient ethical training, facilitator accountability and supervision, and other formalised safeguards are necessary in this context to mitigate such risks,” the guide states. 

As with commercial psychedelic products, the guide recommends an overseeing body to regulate licenses for supervised psychedelic experiences. The body would oversee facilitator training and accreditation and establish best practice guidelines and rules for screening and safeguarding. 

Addressing the War on Drugs at Large

As their therapeutic, well-being, and spiritual benefits continue to be publicized, the global motivation to regulate psychedelics is becoming increasingly apparent. Medical MDMA and psilocybin have already been legalized in Australia, and two US states have legalized supervised psilocybin use.

The guide cautions, however, that the campaign for legalization needs to extend beyond psychedelics, “Drugs need regulating because of their risk, and criminalization/prohibition increases those risks, while responsible regulation can reduce them…This rationale applies across the board, not just to the drugs we read about in glossy feature articles or hear promoted on celebrity podcasts.”

In 1961, the United National Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs was established. The treaty classified drugs into different schedules based on their potential for abuse and medical usefulness. Psychedelics were categorized as Schedule 1, deemed to have the most amount of harm and least benefit. 

Though established to benefit public health, it’s clear the treaty has failed its mission. “It has made drugs riskier, incentivised higher-risk behaviors, created obstacles to effective health interventions, generated stigma and criminalisation of already oppressed and exploited communities, and fuelled organised crime and associated violence and corruption, contributing to insecurity across the world,” the guide states.

Transform Drug Policy Foundation is committed to ending these injustices and supporting a just and effective system of legal regulation of all drugs. Pragmatically, they are doing so by developing and publishing viable options for legal regulation, such as the recently produced guide. 

The full guide is available as an online copy, which you can download from their website.