What we have here seems to be written from a prohibitionist mindset. I find this mindset not unrelated to the attitudes behind forced psychiatry. Declaring that you may *not* have a certain substance in your body (e.g. “recreational” drugs) denies your bodily autonomy just as much as saying you *must* have a certain substance in your body (e.g. antipsychotics under an “assisted” outpatient treatment order); though the latter is, in addition, a *violation*. The author’s faith in regulatory frameworks is touching. As he says: “This activity is completely unregulated and therefore dangerous.” That is a creed stated as a syllogism. Indeed—-there are plenty of shysters in the unregulated psychedelic space: just as there are a great many shysters with the imprimatur of state approval in the highly regulated field of psychiatric “medicine”. Why on earth would anyone who has experienced psychiatric abuse (many readers of this site, one supposes) think that bringing psychedelic therapy under the jurisdiction of psychiatry is going to make it *safer*? When an underground shyster (psychedelic or otherwise) defrauds or abuses a patient, that amounts to one abuser versus one victim (to first approximation). When a psychiatrist defrauds or abuses, that is one abuser *plus an entire system with the force of law* against one victim/patient. The key difference between an underground abusive therapist and an abusive psychiatrist is that the abusive underground therapist isn’t likely to call the police on you.