4.4 Article

Acute and post-acute behavioral and psychological effects of salvinorin A in humans

期刊

PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 220, 期 1, 页码 195-204

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-011-2470-6

关键词

Double-blind; Hallucinogen; Hallucinogen rating scale; Human; Kappa opioid; Placebo-controlled; Psychedelic; Randomized; Salvia divinorum; Salvinorin A

资金

  1. Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, Santa Cruz, CA
  2. Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale Salvia divinorum has been used for centuries, and nontraditional use in modern societies is increasing. Inebriation and aftereffects of use are poorly documented in the scientific literature. Objectives This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study analyzed subjective experiences of salvinorin A (SA) inebriation and consequences of use after 8 weeks. Methods Thirty middle-aged, well-educated, hallucinogen-experienced participants smoked either 1,017 or 100 mu g SA 2 weeks apart in counterbalanced order. Vital signs were recorded before and after inhalation. A researcher rated participants' behavior during sessions. Participants completed the Hallucinogen Rating Scale (HRS) assessing inebriation immediately after each session. Differences were analyzed between groups as functions of dose and time. After 8 weeks, participants were interviewed to determine reported consequences and aftereffects. Results Participants talked, laughed, and moved more often on an active dose. All six HRS clusters were significantly elevated on an active dose indicating hallucinogenic experiences. No significant adverse events were observed or reported by participants. Conclusions The present results indicate similarities as well as differences between the subjective effects of S. divinorum and other hallucinogens. As a selective kappa opioid receptor agonist, SA may be useful for expanding understanding of the psychopharmacology and psychology of hallucinogenic states beyond serotonergic mechanisms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据