Mass. could soon legalize natural psychedelics, but not everyone is waiting | WBUR News

EASTHAMPTON — Michou Olivera stepped into her home office on a recent afternoon and pulled out about a dozen amber Mason jars. She held them to the light: inside each was a clump of dried psilocybin mushrooms.

"We have some leftover Jedi. This is a very popular strain that's very heart opening," she said. Olivera reached into a jar labeled "Shakti," and picked up a delicate white mushroom tinged with veins of electric blue.

Shakti is "very spiritual, very mystical," she said, and "for people who have resistance, they're going to find that it is helping them push through barriers."

Olivera grows these mushrooms at home and administers them to people who often suffer with severe or treatment-resistant depression. She says many clients are referred to her by local doctors, psychiatrists and therapists. In a typical session, she'll recommend a particular variety of mushroom and then guide her client through what she calls a journey.

Right now, this practice is illegal. But that could change after Tuesday's election, if Massachusetts voters choose to legalize natural psychedelic substances for use in licensed therapy centers. Massachusetts would be the third state to legalize certain psychedelics, following Oregon and Colorado.

Olivera cites research showing the potential of psilocybin as a treatment for conditions like depression and PTSD. She also credits mushrooms with breaking her own addiction to alcohol.

"People are already doing this. It's already happening," she said. "So now you need to have people that have experience come together and create something that is viable."

But there's opposition to this movement among some more traditional medical professionals, who say these substances can be dangerous to certain people.

"The drugs are very harmful, and they need to be given under medical supervision," said Dr. Nassir Ghaemi, president of the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society, during a recent debate hosted by WBUR. "We’re not saying they might not be effective for some things, but you have to choose carefully who to give them to so you give them in the effective setting without harming them."

Ghaemi said those at risk for schizophrenia or psychosis can experience severe reactions to hallucinogens. He said only doctors should administer these drugs, and only after FDA approval.

"This is an unsafe way to give the medications, in these so-called 'therapy centers,' " he said. "These people, who are not going to be physicians or mental health professionals in the vast majority of cases, are not going to know who to give them to, who not to give them to, and how to handle the harms."

In Oregon, where psilocybin centers have been up and running for about a year, the state does not require someone be a medical doctor to administer psilocybin.

Mason Marks, a law professor at Florida State University who studies psychedelics law, said the therapy centers in Oregon have largely operated safely so far. Marks helped advise the writers of the Oregon regulations — the main complaints he's heard so far, he said, are about high costs and access.

"The program was promised to Oregonians as a potential solution to the state's mental health crisis," he said. "But what we're finding is that most people are coming from out of state. Because the prices are so high, Oregon has become sort of a psychedelic tourism destination."

There’s a lot of money at stake in the business of regulated psychedelics. A national organization called the New Approach PAC has poured millions of dollars into the campaigns in Oregon, Colorado and Massachusetts to push for legalization.

"These funders and campaign organizers are the same people that brought marijuana legalization to Massachusetts and many other U.S. states," Marks said. "And they're basically trying to pass these laws for psychedelics in as many states as quickly as possible."

Local activists like Olivera are glad the issue is on the ballot — but want Massachusetts to chart a different course than the first two states.

"We can't charge $5,000 for a journey," she said. "We can't just throw five grams at someone and say, 'here you go,' and hope for the best for them. We need to do much better than that."

Olivera said she plans to vote yes. And if the ballot question passes — creating a new regulatory commission to oversee the new program — she will press for a focus on bringing down costs and increasing access for low-income patients.

"We need to start," she said, and then be willing to adjust the regulations with time. "We have to open the door."