I will eventually do a more in depth analysis of what the Church of Psilomethoxin wrote in response to the Usona paper. These are my initial thoughts.
Their whole endeavor is predicated on the assertion that they are producing, distributing and using psilomethoxin. That is the name of their church. Their legal claims for being able to use it are based on its alleged legality because it is not specifically listed as a scheduled substance (though this is highly dubious given that it’s pharmacological structure and phenomenological effects are so similar to other scheduled substances that it would likely be covered under the Analog Drug Act).
Their claim that a reference sample is needed to affirm or deny the presence of psilomethoxin appears to be sketchy. Here is how one of the papers authors answered that:
“Although psilomethoxin had not been produced as a standard (this is underway and hence why the manuscript is a preprint), we were able to search for the presence or absence of it based on its proposed molecular structure and its exact monoisotopic mass. By comparing the retention time and accurate mass of the ions detected in the sample with those of known tryptamines, it was quite clear that psilomethoxin was not detected in the sample (and would have been if present).”
The argument that the presence of psilomethoxin in their sacrament is a religious belief is specious and incredible. This is not a matter of belief. It is a matter of chemistry. Religious beliefs have to do with a wide range of metaphysical, theological and existential assertions. Whether or not a specific molecular configuration is present in a given substance is not in the domain of religion. It is the domain of physics and chemistry.
While no psilomethoxin has been found, psilocybin, psilocybin and baeocystin were found (this is at least the second analysis that has shown this). Their response was to call these "trace" amounts. I will have to look into what these levels are. People sometimes say there are only trace or small amounts of DMT in ayahuasca. This may be true in terms of absolute weight yet not in terms of efficacy.
I'll note too that on social media they are referring to the Usona paper as being AI generated. Of course, they are not backing that assertion up with any clear reasoning much less evidence!
Beyond this their claim to be a church with members who express sincere beliefs is also very shaky. Anyone will be sent the capsules as long as they answer the questions in an appropriate way. It is not required to have one on one much less face to face discussions and relationships to procure the capsules. And, of course, those who obtain them can store, use and distribute them in any way they want. If nothing else this would never fly with the likely federal regulations that may evolve (and this is a federal matter since they are using interstate mail).
FYI, I feel people should be, more or less, free to use psychedelics as they wish with whom they wish regardless of how that use is characterised as long as it is done in a safe and ethical manner. Yet, we are far from that social and legal reality. I think it is incumbent that we characterise our beliefs, use and engagements in an honest, authentic and integris way as we move forward in claiming our full freedom to use these powerful and amazing medicines, sacraments, agents....
More to come.
