The ballot question was unilaterally authored and pushed by New Approach PAC, a D.C.-based lobbying entity that created “Massachusetts for Mental Health Options” (MMHO) and filed to create the ballot question without consulting local advocates. Its ballot question campaign is managed by Dewey Square Group (DSG), a lobbyist organization, and its donors are mostly non-residents who have contributed to campaigns to pharmaceuticalize psychedelics.
There are five main reasons why we urge voters to reject Question Four so that we can work together to pass better legislation over the 2025-2026 legislative session.
Legalized Corruption
The PAC ballot question, which is approximately 30 pages long, would create a five-person unelected agency to issue regulations, modeling the structure that New Approach PAC previously created for the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) and within the Oregon Health Authority. The CCC is now facing the prospect of being put in receivership for its failure to carry out legally required duties, and the agency is widely criticized for causing severe financial harm to small businesses owners and social equity applicants.
In Oregon, the chair of the agency that New Approach PAC created with a similar ballot question was forced to resign when it became public that his romantic partner was selling the training he was regulating. Given these conflicts of interest, Provincetown and Medford have called for the state to make progress on this issue without creating another unelected agency and citing the fact that many voters feel misled. Compounding this mistrust is the fact that the Massachusetts ballot question would allow this agency to be run by unelected individuals who have only lived here for 90 days.
Affordability
At a time when most Americans live paycheck to paycheck, the cost of psychedelic treatments under the ballot question in Oregon is far outside the reach of most. And this is a lesson we should learn from, not copy and paste here as Question Four would do. The average price per session, with just a few grams of mushrooms is between $2,000 and $3,500 for a session lasting several hours. That is why most Oregon clients have been wealthy individuals from outside the state, and it is part of the reason why Oregon businesses are seeing extremely low demand for the services.
The ballot question misses a generational opportunity to create affordable pathways to care, as our coalition's bills, S.1009 and H.3605 would have done and will do next legislative session. Passed by the legislature's Joint Committee on Public Health, a historic feat, our framework for legalization would make this care affordable.
Small Businesses
In Oregon, businesses are shutting down due to high regulatory costs imposed by the agency, including over 100 hours of training, center licenses that cost $10,000 or more per year, individual licenses costing $2,000 per year, the costs of insurance, and the inability to deduct costs on federal taxes. In Colorado, where the PAC used illegal tactics to push through the ballot question over the concerns of indigenous and patient advocacy groups, businesses are publically questioning whether they should open at all due to fears that the law will simply force them into bankrupcy.
The taxpayers of Oregon have had to pay more than $3 million in subsidies for every year of the program’s existence because it is not creating revenue for the state (unlike the cannabis industry).
Exclusion of Mental Health Professionals
Much like Oregon service centers, licensed mental health professionals would shockingly not be allowed to be part of these treatments, limiting the ability to integrate treatments, insurance, and research in the future. People trust their healthcare professionals, and they ought to be able to offer harm reduction education, facilitation, or integration services without having to fear that their professional license will be revoked. Therapists should not have moonlight in a way that could risk their career if they want to act as a therapist as they administer these treatments—rather than just a guide.
Exclusion of Indigenous and Religious Services
Within the nearly 30-page ballot question, there are several provisions that would effectively ban Indigenous ceremony and religious ceremony that currently enjoys protection under the first amendment. Organizations offering services in Massachusetts would have to engage in lawsuits costing potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars to challenge these provisions in court, effectively forcing them to adhere to Question Four.
The first provision is the one gram restriction on psilocybin. For group ceremonies, this limit on growing and sharing is far lower than what is necessary to indigenous rites. The second provision is a ban on advertising of services that do not pay the required tens of thousands of dollars in fees annually. This means any incorporated entity including churches and nonprofits are required to register with the unelected agency and its requirements because they cannot make any transfer that is "not advertised or promoted to the public and is not part of a business promotion or other commercial activity" (Line 554-555). This opens up the possibility of legal action and being shutting down by the Attorney General's office for posting about ceremonies on social media, for example.
Listen and hear the concerns of people in our network for whom these medicines are sacred:
"I am a Boston parent originally from Mexico City and Oaxaca, where curandera traditions for healing with psilocybin mushrooms go back a thousand years... indigenous practioners would be criminalized by the out-of-state ballot question." - Tania D., Boston
"My mother is Mazatec, from Huautla de Jimenez, Oaxaca, Mexico, where Psilocybe mushrooms are used in traditional healing rituals... [this ballot question] authored in secret by an interest group outside our state does not provide any exemption from its licensing regime for people exercising their first amendment rights to religious practice."
- Diana Xochitl Munn, Somerville
Listen to a renown expert on Psychedelic Law, Dr. Mason Marks of Harvard Law School's Petrie-Flom Center on Bioethics, who argued that the heavy restrictions and licensing requirements abridge indigenous and religious practice:
"Because the petitions significantly limit the quantities of natural psychedelic substances that can be given away or otherwise transferred between individuals, they would require religious organizations and practitioners that use these substances to become licensed “psychedelic therapy centers” and “facilitators” under the petitions’ regulated program. Other state-regulated psychedelic programs, such as Oregon’s Psilocybin Services Program, impose similar licensing requirements on religious organizations. Some religious groups in Oregon have objected to the imposition...
Unlike in Colorado, religious organizations in Massachusetts would likely be unable to practice under the personal use provisions of the proposed petitions because the petitions do not decriminalize the sharing of psychedelics beyond small personal use amounts. Most religious organizations would immediately exceed the personal use limits and would therefore be required to become licensed 'psychedelic therapy centers.' "
Failure to Protect Grow Rights
Question four would also lead to more arrests, not less. Right now there are virtually no arrests for personal growing and sharing, yet this law would increase law enforcement attention and action. After the PAC-led cannabis legalization in Massachusetts more people are arrested for growing after the ballot question came into effect, not less. In fact, the multi-state corporations that dominate the cannabis industry have explicitly lobbied with allied lawmakers to file legislation that put more pressure on law enforcement to crack down on home growing. Oregon also serves as an instructive example of how cultural blowback would increase law enforcement's attention, seeing as 7 in 10 counties and hundreds of cities banned psilocybin and the state recriminalized possession just a short time after passage by confused voters.
We also feel obligated to tell you that the PAC and its lobbyist group have made the explicit threat that it would lobby to remove any mention of cultivation from this law once the legislature reviews and amends it, citing voter confusion.. Its allied lawmaker Senator Gomez also said this quiet part out loud at a recent staged rally by the PAC's lobbyist firm, Dewey Square: Asked about regulating psychedelic use and promoting safety among people who cultivate the substances at home, Gomez said that will be addressed through future policymaking on Beacon Hill. “Once the ballot question comes, the Legislature’s going to have to come in and create policy behind it, and making sure that we have to amend anything of that nature,” Gomez told the News Service after the event.
Cultivation is mentioned in this law to mislead psychedelics supporters.
The limits are so low that it does not realistically protect growing.
Transportation is illegal, even though that would obviously occur.
There are no personal arrests happening now.
This law would create a profit motive for criminalization.
When the ballot question fails in November, there will be many opportunities to pass other legislation that protects innovation, personal cultivation, and services in this space. This last legislative session, Massachusetts filed a record number of bills, and nearly all of them protected service affordability and innovation, unlike the DC PAC's ballot question.
The PAC initially filed two versions of the ballot question to confuse the public. One that included no mention of cultivation and another that did with confusing restrictions. When we started raising concerns publically, it forced the PAC to include the confusing restrictions so that it could sell this to psychedelic supporters as "grow rights." Its restrictions are purposefully confusing so the PAC can also sell this as "strict medicalization" to psychedelic skeptics.
One provision claims individuals who own their own residence could grow mushrooms in a 12 by 12 foot space. And yet prosecution and jail time would still await people who transport mushrooms away from their residence. Most people under 65 do not own a residence, so they could still be evicted or prosecuted for growing mushrooms. This means the law is setting up a system for the law to be broken, which still leaves people open to prosecution.
Another provision states that individuals could grow up to one gram of mushrooms. That fails to protect a standard grow amount, since common grow bags produce way more than this restriction. People who might misunderstand this confusing law could still be evicted, pulled over, arrested, and face substantial jail time for a standard grow bag that anyone can get online. By pretending to decriminalize cultivation to mislead psychedelic advocates, it is putting people at more risk.
The ballot question, which is approximately 30 pages long, would create a five-person unelected agency to issue regulations, modeling the structure that New Approach PAC previously created for the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) and within the Oregon Health Authority. The CCC is now facing the prospect of being put in receivership for its failure to carry out legally required duties, and the agency is widely criticized for causing severe financial harm to small businesses owners and social equity applicants.
The ballot question was unilaterally authored and pushed by New Approach PAC, a D.C.-based lobbying entity that created “Massachusetts for Mental Health Options” (MMHO) and filed to create the ballot question without consulting local advocates. Its ballot question campaign is managed by Dewey Square Group (DSG), a lobbyist organization, and its donors are mostly non-residents who have contributed to campains to pharmaceuticalize psychedelics.
We urge voters to reject Question Four so that we can work together to pass better legislation over the 2025-2026 legislative session as we were already doing before this lobbyist PAC launched its campaign for question four.
The average cost of just a few grams of mushrooms in Oregon is between $2,000 and $3,500 for a session lasting several hours. That is why most Oregon clients have been wealthy individuals from outside the state, and it is part of the reason why Oregon businesses are seeing extremely low demand for the services. Let's do better in Massachusetts. Not copy and paste.
The ballot question, which is approximately 30 pages long, would create a five-person unelected agency to issue regulations, modeling the structure that the DC PAC behind this ballot question previously created for the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) and within the Oregon Health Authority. Individuals that would only have to live here for 90 days would then get to write hundreds of pages of regulations on use that we, as voters, don't get to see right now.
This ballot question does not create any protection for guided, therapeutic use at home, which is a primary way in which people want to recieve this care. Real estate interests affiliated with the PAC required expensive property leases of cannabis entrepreneurs, and likewise in Oregon the guided use of psilocybin is only allowed at expensive, highly regulated centers. In fact, real estate has been one of the main profit centers of this corporate lobbying, and entrepreneurs have suffered hundreds of thousands in debt and accompany bankruptcy because of it.
This law would not allow a cancer or hospice cancer patient to have a guided experience at home.
This law would not allow your friends and family to get guided education on microdosing at home.
People who might otherwise benefit from psilocybin may feel too strong of a stigma to go to a center.
These centers charge thousands of dollars too, and do not allow people to take microdoses home.
We urge voters to reject Question Four so that we can work together to pass better legislation over the 2025-2026 legislative session. Our legislation, H.3605, does protect home facilitation and use, and our bill passed the state's Joint Committee on Public Health.
Home growers would still face prosecution.
This bill creates a profit motive for law enforcement action.
We will pass a better law when Question Four fails.
One misleading provision would allow individuals who own a residence to grow mushrooms in a 12 by 12 foot space, giving landlords and roommates discretion over whether to report growing to law enforcement or the owner of the residence. And yet prosecution and jail time would still await people who transport mushrooms away from their homes, since transportation (an obvious component of sourcing mushrooms) would remain criminalized. Most people under 65 do not own a residence, so they could still be evicted, reported, or prosecuted for growing mushrooms. This means the law is setting up a system for the law to be broken, which still leaves people open to prosecution.
Another provision states that individuals could grow up to one gram of mushrooms. That fails to protect a standard grow amount, since common grow bags produce way more than this restriction. People who might misunderstand this confusing law could still be evicted, pulled over, arrested, and face substantial jail time for a standard grow bag that anyone can get online. By pretending to decriminalize cultivation to mislead psychedelic advocates, it is putting people at more risk.
Question four would also lead to more arrests, not less. After the PAC-led cannabis legalization in Massachusetts more people are arrested for growing after the ballot question came into effect, not less. In fact, the multi-state corporations that dominate the cannabis industry have explicitly lobbied with allied lawmakers to file legislation that put more pressure on law enforcement to crack down on home growing. Oregon also serves as an instructive example of how cultural blowback would increase law enforcement's attention, seeing as 7 in 10 counties and hundreds of cities banned psilocybin and the state recriminalized possession just a short time after passage by confused voters.
When the ballot question fails in November, there will be many opportunities to pass other legislation that protects innovation, personal cultivation, and services in this space. This last legislative session, Massachusetts filed a record number of bills, and nearly all of them protected service affordability and innovation, unlike the DC PAC's ballot question.
The PAC initially filed two versions of the ballot question to confuse the public. One that included no mention of cultivation and another that did with confusing restrictions. When we started raising concerns publically, it forced the PAC to include the confusing restrictions so that it could sell this to psychedelic supporters as "grow rights." Its restrictions are purposefully confusing so the PAC can also sell this as just "strict medical legalization" to psychedelic skeptics.
We also feel obligated to tell you that the PAC and its lobbyist group have made the explicit threat that it would lobby to remove any mention of cultivation from this law once the legislature reviews and amends it, citing voter confusion.. Its allied lawmaker Senator Gomez also said this quiet part out loud at a recent staged rally by the PAC's lobbyist firm, Dewey Square: Asked about regulating psychedelic use and promoting safety among people who cultivate the substances at home, Gomez said that will be addressed through future policymaking on Beacon Hill. “Once the ballot question comes, the Legislature’s going to have to come in and create policy behind it, and making sure that we have to amend anything of that nature,” Gomez told the News Service after the event.
Cultivation is mentioned in this law to mislead psychedelics supporters.
The limits are so low that it does not realistically protect growing.
Transportation is illegal, even though that would obviously occur.
There are no personal arrests happening now.
This law would create a profit motive for criminalization.
The Super PAC behind Question Four has told psychedelic supporters that "this is the only chance" to pass psychedelic reform. That is simply not true. This last year, our coalition passed better legislation out of the legislature's Joint Committee on Public Health, and our state filed a record number of bills on psychedelic reform.
Once voters reject Question Four, there will still be sustained pressure for reform — just not a whole new control agency which is the what the corporate PAC behind Question Four really wants so it can control how legalization unfurls. This agency would take three or more years to create anyway, so it is very likely we can pass another version of legalization through the legislature before that agency would have been developed and issues hundreds of pages of regulation. Since lawmakers regularly pass bills that not even 10% of the public supports, even a lackluster showing for Question Four will still signal significant public interest in this area of reform. The legislature was getting thousands of testimonies before from our volunteers, and it was already in the process of passing our legislation.
Once we lay the foundation and scaffolding of a house it is nearly impossible to change. Question Four would permanently lay a corrupt foundation for psychedelic care, making any change to scaffolding of the house nearly impossible. An unelected agency with leaders who would only have to live in our state for 90 days would control this care from now on.
In Massachusetts state politics, advisory boards and task forces are often used to make people in a reform area star-gaze or astral project that the people who hold real power will listen them. Yet as we have seen with the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) appointees and advisory board members with seemingly good intentions are unable to fix major flaws from the corporate ballot question.
Here are three examples of how this "but we can change it later" mindset has failed in-practice:
Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC): Put forward by New Approach PAC in 2016, the unelected agency, the CCC, is now facing receivership (WGBH), top staff are on medical leave citing threats from one another (Boston Globe), multiple chairs have been forced to resign including one in relation to her conflicts of interest (Biz Journal), Massachusetts has one of the least diverse systems in the country (Worcester Business Journal), legal cannabis is extremely moldy here (Boston Globe), tens of thousands of people are denied senior housing and jobs because records are still not sealed eight years later, the entire Black Wealth of Boston is not enough to open a single dispensary, and the social equity program destroyed applicants' lives by driving them hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt selling a false dream (Commonwealth Beacon). In terms of public opinion on cannabis, support has fallen (Gallup) as more people see cannabis as harmful. No major changes to the law have addressed the insurmountable barriers of entry for small businesses, and many leaders with positive rhetoric on this issue haven't muscled the power necessary to fix the foundational structure.
Oregon Health Authority: As In Oregon, the chair of the agency that New Approach PAC created with a similar ballot question was forced to resign when it became public that his romantic partner was selling the training he was regulating. Oregon's system is not only failing to bring in revenue to the state, necessitating bailouts. Like our cannabis system, it is also tricking people into opening facilitator centers or paying for trainings and licenses costing tens of thousands of dollars when there is virtually no demand for these legal services (Willamette Weekly). Would-be centers in Colorado are starting to take notice and avoid entering the market altogether (Denver Post). Advocates in Oregon have not been able to change the system in any major, meaningful way, and they are shamed by New Approach PAC into not being part of our efforts to educate voters in Massachusetts about the failures of their system.
Colorado Natural Medicine Regulation And Legalization: This system is still coming into development and may take several more years (note that Oregon took three). In Colordo, the PAC behind Question Four has engaged in illegal lobbying of Colorado's governor and state lawmakers as documented by Dr. Mason Marks at Harvard Law in the Denver Post. Indigenous and community groups opposed the ballot question in Colorado yet the bill only became more restrictive after: there was not a meaningful effort to give them a seat at the table. The legislature will also prioritize where the money is coming from and who "won" the ballot question referendum. So it is impossible to compete with legalized corruption. These laws are purposefully designed to make people stargaze and astral project that they can be fixed by creating various advisory committees where people might feel like their talking matters. But their talk doesn't matter. The structure matters. The foundation that is laid cannot be changed.
Our grassroots community group, Bay Staters for Natural Medicine, has partnered with the communities of Somerville, Cambridge, Northampton, Easthampton, Amherst, Salem, Medford, and Provincetown to pass local measures making arrest for growing and sharing mushrooms the lowest priority of law enforcement.
As a result of this work and public education on mushrooms more broadly, there are very few arrests that happen across Massachusetts for growing and sharing mushrooms. People who are growing personal use amounts are at low risk of criminal prosecution because police departments, even in cities that have not passed measures, are more focused on violent crime.
That being said, there are still serious legal consequences for selling controlled substances. We urge people to follow state and local laws and exercise careful judgement to be safe with their use if they chose to break those laws.
As a result of our work, these cities unanimously voted to tell their police departments to end arrests for growing, non-commercially sharing, and using all naturally occurring psychedelics AND possession of all controlled substances:
Somerville (Jan. 14, 2021):
Abolished its entire narcotics unit (Nov. 2021)
Cambridge (Feb. 3, 2021)
Northampton (Apr.1, 2021)
Easthampton (Oct. 20, 2021)
Provincetown (Dec. 11, 2023)
Medford (Feb. 6, 2024)
These cities passed versions of our measures telling their police departments to end arrests for growing, non-commercially sharing, and using naturally occurring psychedelics AND issued statements that the entire "war on drugs" is a flawed approach from a public health and justice perspective:
Amherst (July 18, 2022)
Salem (May 11, 2023):
Only psilocybin mushrooms, not DMT, Mescaline, nor Ibogaine
Berkeley, CA (July 12, 2023):
Only possession and cultivation, not sharing
Portland, ME (Oct. 2, 2023)
Worcester, MA (Apr. 4, 2022):
Human Rights Commission acknowledged benefits for veterans and police and urged the police department to treat this as the lowest priority of law enforcement
No. They are important and can benefit society but will not make much profit.
There are really just five venues for revenue generation in a psychedelic economy. None of them are going to make anyone very rich. They range from benign to outright rent-seeking (that is, manipulating government rules and regulations to profit off of flaws in public policy).
Selling the psychedelics themselves, such as mushrooms
This venue is and will remain for likely a long-time illegal. Ironically, it is that barrier between potential buyers and sellers that is keeping the sale of mushrooms possible at all by deterring more people from growing their own. This is because they are extremely inexpensive to grow. With a standard grow bag from Amazon, for example, and legally accessible spores, a person can grow hundreds of grams of mushrooms (which is far more than they would ever use personally).
This is actually true of most plants, produce, crops, etc. The prices crash because they are easily overproduced. However, unlike any other crop that is in-demand all the time to make the food we eat every day, people rarely do mushrooms. Most people will only do several grams of mushrooms their entire lives. That makes it very different from cannabis, which many of its users smoke every day or at least several times per year.
The illicit market price of mushrooms varies from place to place but is usually no more than $10. In many places, mushrooms are as little as $0.50 per gram. A lot of people also just give them away. Let's assume that there are no costs to selling them and growing them (and there are so that's a generous assumption). That means this business is only making $30 at best of off each consumer in their lives under the rosiest of assumptions. Not a hot investment.
In Oregon and Colorado, legally grown mushrooms are 5-8 times more expensive per gram. There is mandatory testing and other bureaucratic requirements. As more people become educated on this, that type of regulated regime won't be able to compete (Great article on this analysis featuring our work in USA Today).
Selling therapy or guidance services
The number one thing that people prioritize in this... TO BE CONTINUED.
Our grassroots community group, Bay Staters for Natural Medicine, has partnered with the communities of Somerville, Cambridge, Northampton, Easthampton, Amherst, Salem, Medford, and Provincetown to pass local measures making arrest for growing and sharing mushrooms the lowest priority of law enforcement.
As a result of this work and public education on mushrooms more broadly, there are very few arrests that happen across Massachusetts for growing and sharing mushrooms. People who are growing personal use amounts are at low risk of criminal prosecution because police departments, even in cities that have not passed measures, are more focused on violent crime.
That being said, there are still serious legal consequences for selling controlled substances. We urge people to follow state and local laws and exercise careful judgement to be safe with their use if they chose to break those laws.
As a result of our work, these cities unanimously voted to tell their police departments to end arrests for growing, non-commercially sharing, and using all naturally occurring psychedelics AND possession of all controlled substances:
Somerville (Jan. 14, 2021):
Abolished its entire narcotics unit (Nov. 2021)
Cambridge (Feb. 3, 2021)
Northampton (Apr.1, 2021)
Easthampton (Oct. 20, 2021)
Provincetown (Dec. 11, 2023)
Medford (Feb. 6, 2024)
These cities passed versions of our measures telling their police departments to end arrests for growing, non-commercially sharing, and using naturally occurring psychedelics AND issued statements that the entire "war on drugs" is a flawed approach from a public health and justice perspective:
Amherst (July 18, 2022)
Salem (May 11, 2023):
Only psilocybin mushrooms, not DMT, Mescaline, nor Ibogaine
Berkeley, CA (July 12, 2023):
Only possession and cultivation, not sharing
Portland, ME (Oct. 2, 2023)
Worcester, MA (Apr. 4, 2022):
Human Rights Commission acknowledged benefits for veterans and police and urged the police department to treat this as the lowest priority of law enforcement
Maybe. Not all forms of "legalization" are positive. For example, a system under Question Four that models Oregon's system would steer a lot of use into an underground facilitation space where there are scam artists and spiritual narcissists who take advantage of people.
There is more than enough research to know that criminalizing these plants and criminalizing substance use more broadly is a failed public health strategy that makes unsafe use more likely. And psychedelics have proven benefits for relieving mental health issues, particularly when combined with life coaching, counseling, and talk therapy after an experience. A meta-analysis from two decades of clinical trials concluded that these plants have statistically significant effects for treating depression and PTSD (PubMed).
And while research is important on everything — including the known-carcinogen alcohol that kills tens of thousands a year—it is difficult for researchers to get money for clinical trials on psychedelics because of prohibition and stigma. That's why the former Chief Psychiatrist of Mass General Hospital, Jerry Rosenbaum, has endorsed decriminalization alongside Bay Staters (DigBoston). Bay Staters advocates for local and state measures to legalize research at our world-renown universities. We don't just talk the talk. We walk the walk.
The problem with the "needs more research" excuse for inaction on this issue is that it enables foreign companies, like Atai Sciences and Compass Pathways, to take advantage of the high costs of getting federal exemptions to the Controlled Substances Act while small entrepreneurs and scientists risk arrests for research. This system is creating a situation where billionaire-funded corporations like Compass Pathways and New Approach PAC to charge tens of thousands of dollars for strictly controlled version of psilocybin and MDMA therapy when we should instead decentralize this healing for affordability. There is no reason why you should be forced to pay that much or face jail time for sitting by yourself, a friend, or a trusted facilitator to have these experiences.
Access to life changing experiences. There are many countries and localities where the war on drugs has been ended in a variety of ways. Jamaica, Nepal, the Bahamas, the Netherlands, Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Costa Rica and New Zealand all allow decriminalized access to psychedelic plants—many Americans with the means to afford retreats already go to these countries for ceremonies and treatments, as do some veterans with the help of American nonprofits. Portugal has long decriminalized possession of all controlled substances, but the public health authorities have not embraced growing and exchanging psychedelic plants as a means to reduce addiction and improve mental health. Across the world, many laws are ambiguous or riddled with loopholes that allow creative entrepreneurs to offer retreats and services including in Spain, Poland, Italy, Iceland, and Austria just to name a few.
Similarly, laws against psilocybin in the United States have many loopholes that render prohibition an impossible proposition. In all but three states—California, Georgia, and Idaho—it is legal to buy psilocybin spores for microscopy research purposes (but obviously many people use them to grow). The cities of Denver, Oakland, Santa Cruz, Ann Arbor, Somerville, Cambridge, Northampton, Easthampton, Seattle, San Francisco, Arcata, and Detroit are among those that have deprioritized enforcement. Four of these are cities in Massachusetts that have also deprioritized possession of all controlled substances. The state of Oregon and City of Baltimore have functionally decriminalized possession of all controlled substances, and many localities across the United States unofficially adopt decriminalization because the addiction crisis is so acute.
In Denver, the first U.S. community to decriminalize, an official policy review panel of the city found that there were no adverse public health consequences. Denver hospitals have not reported any uptick in visits or accounts of people acting violently. They recommend training for first-responders in how to respond to people having uncomfortable experiences, strongly recommending harm reduction practices that are long overdue for all controlled substances including alcohol. There has been no detectable increase in calls to poison control, reported use by children, or any other adverse impact in other cities. In Oakland, California, which decriminalized shortly after Denver, the County Health Department reported that there were only two hospitalizations for hallucinogens — which is not a statistically significant departure from before the measure passed and could be due to random chance.
Increasingly, people are growing their own to ensure that they have a sustainable supply: especially people with neurological conditions like cluster headaches that require consistent access. For other controlled substances like ibogaine and ayahuasca, it is all about who people know. It can be very difficult to source or receive an invite to a ceremony. For our part, we cannot and do not condone any illegal activity.
Most people obtain psilocybin mushrooms by sourcing them from a mutual friend or acquaintance, and many of these distributors also sell illicitly grown cannabis or illicitly manufactured substances like LSD, DMT, MDMA, MDA and others. Many distributors connect with clients on platforms like instagram, using cryptocurrency or the dark web to facilitate purchases. These markets are far from ideal with many people vulnerable to being ripped off, sold a low-quality product, or very tragically sold controlled substances cut with fentanyl or methamphetamine. Fortunately, psilocybin mushrooms cannot be cut with these other substances
Most people who try psychedelics only do so a few times throughout their lives, making this a market very unlike cannabis or other controlled substances. This rare frequency of use makes profiting off the home growing of psilocybin mushrooms a difficult, low-margin proposition. We envision communities where people can grow their own and share with friends but do so in an informed and safe way with reverence for how powerful they are. This will always be preferrable to profit-focused, commercial sale like what happens in Oakland and Vancouver. More transparency means improved public safety & access
We recommend that, if you chose to use using psilocybin mushrooms, to do so for the first time with a trusted friend or trusted facilitator who has had the experience before, which is why our network of expert facilitators provide harm reduction and mentorship services. Our team is specially trained to help you determine if this experience is safe for you, help you set goals, help you set up a comfortable environment, serve as a source of comfort during the experience, and help you integrate lessons into your life style going forward. This experience is not for everyone, and many of the spiritual benefits are most pronounced when combined with coaching and ongoing mental health alternatives. That is why setting up an appointment with your therapist in the week following an experience, when the brain has neuroplasticity, is recommended.
Ending the stigma around psychedelics benefits our communities' children and helps some parents become the best version of themselves and enables honest education with youth about the risks and harms of controlled substances. Bay Staters works hand in hand with youth advocates, including in Easthampton where our measure educated parents on keeping medications, cannabis, and these plants in lock boxes that children cannot access. Here are some additional benefits for kids:
Better Parents: a two-decade meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials has shown that mushroom assisted counseling can effectively treat PTSD, depression, and autism-linked anxiety. By easing intergenerational trauma, these compounds can help parents achieve more stable, nurturing environments for kids. In other words, these plants help heal the child within adults struggling with childhood trauma a chance to find peace and reconnect with their youthful innocence
No Increase in Use Among Children: Schools are educating kids about controlled substance use more honestly than ever before. Psychedelic use among teens is at 10 and 15 year lows despite social media and greatly increased social acceptance. Decriminalization in a dozen cities nationwide and one state has coincided with a 2% increase in use, and it is impossible to evaluate whether this effect has been causal: it likely has not been.
Honest Conversations: ending legal charges for using or distributing psychedelics will make kids less afraid to talk to their parents, teachers, and doctors. They will ask about the risks without fear of getting in trouble or call their parents if they do happen to try substances they shouldn't and are having a bad time. As with cannabis, supply chains will become more transparent with decriminalization so that telling on peers won't ruin said peers lives. This will make it easier for school administrators and parents to identify high-risk teens and take appropriate but non-criminal disciplinary action. Teens know that adults use drugs like alcohol and cannabis so "just say no" rhetoric makes us look hypocritical and makes drugs a "forbidden fruit."
Breakthrough Treatments: Parents of children suffering painful migraines, traumatic brain injuries, or terminal illness anxiety should be allowed to consult with care providers to help their children. Putting cluster headaches in remission for one in two sufferers and having an 80% clinical response rate for terminal illness anxiety, these plants may one day help countless suffering kids under the advisement of medical professionals. A study of 40 Brazilian adolescents who consumed the traditional plant ayahuasca (DMT) observed lower rates of substance use disorder and anxiety. Within indigenous traditions, breastfeeding women and young children are sometimes given small doses of these medicines, including peyote and ibogaine. Caution is extremely important but decriminalization allows greater research and education to occur: the threat of arrest is very real and holds back science.
Like any substance, psychedelics are not for everyone and are not suitable for all circumstances. People who have previously experienced psychotic episodes with cannabis or any controlled substances are well-advised to refrain from using these substances too. That being said, places that have decriminalized drugs, like Portugal, often see that decriminalization lifts the recreational “forbidden fruit” allure of drugs, reducing uncontrolled use and increasing the public’s awareness of harm-reduction.
People who experience a phenomena sometimes called “bad trips” often cite them as spiritually fulfilling experiences despite emotional discomfort. After all, processing trauma or the parts of ourselves that need improvement is never a walk in the park. In a controlled setting, like at home with a supportive friend, working through negative emotions, traumas, and fears can help people move past these feelings and heal. By normalizing these substances as the extremely powerful and spiritually-focused compounds they are, we can have honest and compelling dialogue with young people urging them to avoid use in uncontrolled settings. Maintaining an illegal market and “forbidden fruit” stigma only makes risks and unwise use more likely.
The phenomena of flashbacks, where some experience psychedelic visual distortions after an experience has occurred, is not well understood. Like any extremely positive experience in life, such as an amazing relationship or favorite song, users may recall similar feelings at later dates. Needless to say, these feelings are very unlikely to inconvenience people in the moment. That being said, our team advices urges people to use psychedelics, particularly LSD, in moderation: no more than once or twice a year in large doses as a precaution.
Yes. And Bay Staters regularly fundraises to support organizations across the state that work in criminal justice reform, reentry services for inmates, and mutual aid.
Deprioritizing arrests for cultivation and exchange of plant medicines as well as minor possession for all controlled substances marries this movement to the causes of racial and economic justice as well, since an Oregon Criminal Justice Commission report found the state’s policy of deprioritized arrests will reduce racial disparities in drug crime arrests by 95%. After all, controlled substances are often legal in practice for people of higher socioeconomic class. Officers do not incidentally find cocaine in the Porsches lining the streets of Beacon Hill brownstones. They find drugs on people caught up with the law for petty offenses, usually in high-crime and minority neighborhoods like Roxbury and Dorchester. Financially advantaged people are far less likely to have high stakes interactions with police despite using drugs at higher rates than people in poverty
Our team's analysis of three years of Boston Police Department data from a public records request found a near two to one racial disparity in controlled substances arrests, despite people of all demographics using drugs at similar rates. Witnessing racial disparities makes many officers feel a sense of guilt enforcing drug laws that were written by national politicians over five decades ago. Many understand encounters for controlled substance possession can go tragically wrong, endangering civilians and officers alike while further eroding trust in law enforcement.
Arrests are not a public health strategy. They strip people of jobs when they are not able to show up the next day, traumatize and degrade people who serve time in jail (where fentanyl is ironically quite accessible), and further marginalize people who cannot afford huge fines associated with possession. A single possession charge can result in years in jail and thousands in fines. For those who are already incarcerated, however, plant medicines can be a godsend. A 2014 study of over 25,000 people found entheogenic plant therapies reduce the likelihood of recidivism. This in-turn will lighten the load and reduce the scope of local law enforcement.
Yes, and the legal departments of Somerville, Cambridge, Northampton, Easthampton, and others found no problems with our measures. Psychedelic plants are in the same federally controlled substances list as cannabis, and hundreds of cities have a rich legacy of experimenting with drug policy enforcement despite draconian federal and state laws. These federal drug laws were explicitly implemented to target Black Americans, anti-war protesters, and other politically threatening groups as Nixon's top domestic policy adviser John Ehrlichman admitted. Many federal drugs laws have questionable legality under the U.S. constitution, as the manufacture and distribution of many controlled substances often does not cross state lines and thus does not qualify as interstate commerce. Ironically, it is already legal both federally and in most states, including Massachusetts, to purchase psilocybin mushroom spores across state borders to study them under a microscope. But possession, cultivation, and ceremonies remain illegal. Our cities should decriminalize prevent corporate takeover of plant medicine locally and create momentum for equitable, statewide reform.
Following cannabis legalization by Colorado and decriminalization across many U.S. cities, President Obama’s Deputy Attorney General James Cole issued the “Cole Memorandum” which clarified that the federal government was going to direct scarce resources to explicitly focus on interstate commerce and violence caused by the underground markets that prohibition creates. It notes that outside these federal priorities, “the federal government has traditionally relied on states and local law enforcement agencies” to determine how to allocate scarce resources to enforce their own narcotics laws. This has reaffirmed a strong precedent and intention by the federal government to lean toward the constitutional value of federalism in allowing states and local governments to determine enforcement priorities. Moreover, statewide change can only gain the momentum in needs cities demonstrate leadership.
The support for this policy is overwhelming in Massachusetts. A poll of likely Massachusetts voters in 2017 by MassInc found 66% support for decriminalization, with another 10% undecided. Since then, views on drug policy across the nation have shifted substantially to the point where 66% nationally now support the same. A Boston Globe poll on our work suggests that nine in ten Massachusetts residents support our work
Many—yes. We believe that there are serious adverse consequences to drinking alcohol, using cocaine, using opioids, using methamphetamine, overusing cannabis, and huffing gas as just a few examples. But we do not pass moral judgement on people who do these things, and we believe that criminalization will always make use of these substances far, far less safe. We need to educate, not criminalize. Any substance, legal or not, can be misused. Many of us have first-hand lived experience with addiction and painful experiences with our loved ones. We take these issues very seriously and treat them with the reverence they deserve.
We also strongly discourage non-indigenous people from using peyote at this time because this sacred plant is on the verge of extinction. We strongly discourage the use of venom from Bufo Alvarius toads (so-called “Bufo”) and Phyllomedusa bicolor tree frogs (so-called “Kambo”). We urge people to leave these animals alone and instead explore man-made versions of these compounds that are far safer and more sustainable. Tree frogs and toads are not only on the edge of extinction, they are thinking, feeling beings who are exploited horribly in the supply chains. They are burned, stretched, run over, thrown in bags, crushed in transport, and dragged away from their families. No spiritual experience that comes from exploiting or torturing animals will make you a more enlightened person. Moreover, "Bufo" and "Kambo" experiences are extremely intense, sometimes inducing fatal vomiting. We recommend sticking to psilocybin mushrooms — a simple alternative
Like any substance, mushrooms are not for everyone and can have unintended effects. If taken without proper preparation, they can be dangerous. There are really three primary risk categories, and each category can be addressed by further ending stigma, educating people, and offering accessible services for therapeutic and spiritual use
Improper (Mind)Set and Setting
Every year, thousands of people injure themselves drinking alcohol excessively at parties, driving under the influence of sleep medications, and stepping down stairs carelessly while using prescribed medicines. For two to five hours on average, a moderate dose of psilocybin (2-3 grams) can lead to visual distortions and synesthesia ("mixing of the senses") that can make the user feel disoriented. Mushrooms can also bring up uncomfortable emotions that can lead to yelling, crying, and panic about the environment around us. To this end, we recommend that people only use a moderate dose of mushrooms when they are in a positive headspace and in a calm, relaxing environment — such as with a trained facilitator or a trusted friend in an environment like a house without much going on or a beach without a lot of people around. This reduces the risk of feeling physically disoriented during the experience. If you are nervous about these potential drawbacks, you may want to try microdosing (0.1 to 1g) to see how your body and mind feel before taking a moderate dose
Gastrointestinal Issues
Many mushrooms, including psilocybin, contain "chitin" in their fibers, which is the same material that exists in bugs' and lobsters' exoskeletons. These fibers can trigger mild to moderate allergic reactions for some individuals, which can lead to sharp pain in the intestines after the experience as the mushrooms are processed by our guts. One way to alleviate this pain include eating a high-fiber diet before and after your experience (think fruits, veggies, and grains over animal products). Another way is to take mushrooms with lemon and ginger, which anecdotally many have found reduces feelings of nausea. If you are worried about being allergic to mushrooms, it is recommended that both for psilocybin and gourmet varieties you start by eating just a small amount to see how your body feels and give it time to adapt before a moderate amount. While they are more difficult to source in the United States, some varieties of truffles also produce psilocybin too if you feel your allergies would jeopardize an experience.
Lasting Psychological Issues
One of the reasons why psilocybin and other psychedelics can have such strong benefits for mental health is that they can catalyze intense spiritual experiences that improve our connection to our sense of self and others. With this strength comes responsibility to take them in a mindset and environment that is conducive to personal growth. While rare, there are some people whose mental health and sense of wellbeing declines after using a psychedelic. For those who felt that a psychedelic experience was their "last hope," they can feel disappointed that it did not catalyze change in their lives. This underlines the importance of seeing these substances as one tool among many to live more grateful and engaged lives: not a cure-all. Others may have had adverse experiences during an experience, such as receiving tragic news in the elevated state, witnessing someone getting hurt, or having a fall themselves. There is also a disorder known as "Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder (HPPD)," an extremely rare condition in which patients who have had previous exposure to a psychedelic feel as though the visual and perception effects last for days, weeks, or months after. We're here to be a supportive mentor if you are worried about these potential side effects and want to learn more
The first thing to do is to laugh at yourself. Mushrooms are delicious, and that's just too bad for you (just kidding).
If our society embraces food science, I am sure there is a work around to be optimistic about. And also keep in mind that there are many MANY different types of mushrooms (including truffles) that have massively different molecular and allergen profiles
Start Low, Start Slow
If you believe that you are allergic to mushrooms of any variety but want to test that out, one option to consider is trying a small piece to see how it makes you feel. Since there are so many different varieties of mushrooms, there are many different potential allergens. Even if you have never had allergies before, it is a good idea to try a minor amount of a gourmet mushroom to give your gastrointestinal system (ie. stomach and gut) a chance to adjust. Remember the all important principle that is applicable to psychedelics too: you can always eat more but you cannot eat less.
Minor Reactions
Many mushrooms, including psilocybin, contain "chitin" in their fibers, which is the same material that exists in bugs' and lobsters' exoskeletons. These fibers can trigger mild to moderate allergic reactions for some individuals, which can lead to sharp pain in the intestines after the experience as the mushrooms are processed by our guts. One way to alleviate this pain include eating a high-fiber diet before and after your experience (think fruits, veggies, and grains over animal products). Another way is to take mushrooms with lemon and ginger, which anecdotally many have found reduces feelings of nausea. If you are worried about being allergic to mushrooms, it is recommended that both for psilocybin and gourmet varieties you start by eating just a small amount to see how your body feels and give it time to adapt before a moderate amount. While they are more difficult to source in the United States, some varieties of truffles also produce psilocybin too if you feel your allergies would jeopardize an experience.