Traditionally, these pain-killing benefits were used mainly by native South Africans to treat headache pressure, abdominal pain, toothaches, for pain in the respiratory tract, and as a local anesthetic. In 2014 mesembrine’s analgesic properties were tested in rats, which were given up to 5000 mg/kg per day, with no adverse reactions. Investigators concluded that mesembrine “appears to have analgesic properties without abuse liabilities or ataxia.”

Human research into kanna safety

Before the rat study in 2014, a study came out in 2013, which investigated how safe and tolerable two different doses of kanna are for humans. The study, called A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Extract Sceletium tortuosum (Zembrin) in Healthy Adults used doses of 8mg and 25mg, which were given to participants once a day. The study lasted three months, and used all healthy adults. 37 people participated in the study.

The investigation was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, single center study. Let’s break this down. First off, there was a placebo group, which means some participants were given the kanna, and some were given an inactive compound. The randomized part means participants were randomly picked for the kanna or placebo groupings; and the double-blind part means neither the researchers nor participants knew which group they were in.

In terms of the parallel group part, this refers to some in the kanna group getting a smaller dose, and some getting a bigger dose; and that individual participants were given the same amount throughout the study. The last part, single center, refers to the study being conducted in only one location. 12 participants received 8mg kanna daily, 12 received 25 mg kanna daily, and 13 received the placebo daily.

Researchers found both doses of kanna to be tolerable. The most complained about adverse response was headache, followed by abdominal pain, and infections in the upper respiratory tract. However, more complaints came from the placebo group than either kanna group; indicating the complaints had little-to-nothing to do with the kanna.

In terms of unsolicited positive benefits (written in the journals of some participants taking kanna), these indicate increased feelings of wellbeing, and an improved ability to manage stress and sleep. As the study didn’t technically look into the effects or benefits of the drug, these unsolicited journal responses are the most that the study can show on the therapeutic front. Otherwise, it was mainly to assess safety and tolerability.

According to the researchers about this survey, “Respondents tended to perceive hallucinogens as potentially hazardous and appropriately illegal for recreational purposes.” Many fewer saw hallucinogenic therapies as a positive form of psychiatric treatment; amounting to what researchers called a “large minority,” who did express some optimism.

This investigation found that resident-fellows, and male respondents, were more likely to have greater optimism toward using these treatments, and less overall fear; than female respondents and attending psychiatrists. The results also indicate that younger respondents were more positive about these treatments; which might indicate a generational divide when it comes to the acceptance of these therapies. Younger respondents may have experienced less negative jargon surrounding these drugs and their therapeutic uses, than older respondents.

Are hallucinogenic and psychedelic therapies the same?

If you’ll notice, both study titles involve the word ‘hallucinogens,’ not ‘psychedelics.’ However, in a lot of media reporting, its only the term ‘psychedelics,’ that’s used. What’s the difference? The truth is, there is overlap in the meaning of these words; but they do not mean the same thing.

Basically, all psychedelics are hallucinogens, but not all hallucinogens are psychedelics. This automatically means that all psychedelic therapies, are included when looking at hallucinogen treatments; which encompass psilocybin (from magic mushrooms), DMT, mescaline, and LSD. Even MDMA, which is often included in the ‘psychedelics’ category, is technically classified as a ‘psycho-stimulant.’ However, its still relevant to this study, since it’s a hallucinogen. ‘Psychedelics’ is often used as a catch-all phrase these days, to represent hallucinogenic drugs in general.

Psychedelics are one of three main classes of hallucinogens; together with deliriants (like datura or Benadryl), and dissociative (which include ketamine, PCP, and DXM.) They are generally separated by their mode of action in the brain, and the neurotransmitters they affect most. Psychedelics cause the biggest force at serotonin receptors, deliriants do at acetylcholine receptors, and dissociative drugs at NMDA receptors. These are simplifications, as the drugs can affect different parts of the brain; but it gives an idea of the classification breakdown.

Other hallucinogens exist, which are not in these categories. Like MDMA, which for the most part works similarly to psychedelics, but with a greater stimulant effect; salvia, which affects opioid and dopamine receptors; and amanita mushrooms, which have a strong effect at GABA receptors. These are up-and-coming substances, but the plant world offers tons of other compounds; some of the names of which, are barely recognizable to the public. And some, like blue lotus, and ibogaine, which are starting to enter the conversation, too.

The reason is that ketamine isn’t a Schedule I drug. It’s a Schedule III drug which is clear for medical use as an anesthesia. The thing is, the FDA allows off-label prescribing of any authorized drug. This means “the use of pharmaceutical drugs for an unapproved indication or in an unapproved age group, dosage, or route of administration. Both prescription drugs and over-the-counter drugs (OTCs) can be used in off-label ways, although most studies of off-label use focus on prescription drugs.”

The way it works is that “Once the FDA approves a drug, healthcare providers generally may prescribe the drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient.” As it can only be prescribed by a doctor, the current FDA letter is essentially trying to tell doctors, what they should and should not prescribe. In fact, its attempting to tell medical professionals, what is safe and what is not.

Ketamine clinics function as legal medical clinics; that’s why this is not a cease and desist letter. All warnings within are fear warnings over safety, with no evidence offered to back anything up; and no warning of punishment. It does not include anything about legal backlash. It’s more like an attempt to put pressure on doctors to stop prescribing, and to get consumers afraid of going to ketamine clinics.

This is likely because the US government isn’t regulating the industry, which also means it can’t attach extra taxes, or regulatory fees. Much like with the vape industry, and the weed industry; no government wants products out there that it can’t collect on. While standard taxes are paid by ketamine providers, there is nothing supplemental attached for the use of ketamine, like sin taxes; and no specific costly regulatory fees to collect. And let’s be honest, considering the government approved version requires the user be on standard antidepressant to access it; few people are likely to care about it.

Is a letter like this likely to change anything? Not really. It only exists as a means of reigning in something that is already popular; and for which enough people have found benefit, to keep it going. These letters have done nothing to stop vape manufactures, cannabinoid manufacturers, or providers of these products; and that’s with cease and desist letters. A simple request with no threat? It’s like it didn’t happen at all.

Conclusion

Ketamine therapy might not be right for everyone; but there’s plenty of evidence of its usefulness; and it certainly isn’t associated with death or destruction, with addiction, or with bad behavior. The biggest negative of the ketamine industry is that its high pricing often rules out clientele; something which is most certainly an issue in the burgeoning mushroom industry as well.