Skip to content

Psychedelic public health: State of the field and implications for equity.

Heather Kuiper, Christopher Alley, Zoë Harris, Cordelia Kuiper Rauch, Marlena Robbins, P. Rodriguez, Paula Tomczak, Julian Urrutia, Veronica Magar

Social Science & Medicine (1967) July 1, 2024 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117134 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Observational web-based survey (webpage content analysis) Peer reviewed
Population 228 university webpages housing accredited Schools and Programs in Public Health (SPPHs) and 59 Psychedelic Research Centers (PRCs) in the US and globally
Key findings Public health schools showed limited engagement with the growing psychedelic field: fewer than 10% of SPPHs engaged with psychedelics (2.6% substantially), only 10% of PRCs reported SPPH collaborations, and fewer than 3% of PRC personnel held public health degrees. The authors argue this absence of population-level public health approaches represents a missed opportunity to maximize benefits and protect against harms of psychedelics.

Abstract

Background: Psychedelic Public Health is an emerging discipline uniting the practices of public health with the potential benefits of psychedelics to reduce harm and promote health, wellness, and equity at community and population levels. Little is known regarding the current state of psychedelic public health despite rising psychedelic usage, evidence of its health efficacy, opening policy environments, and concerns regarding equity and potential harms.

Methods: To characterize the current state of psychedelic public health, this survey reviewed relevant webpages from 228 universities housing accredited Schools and Programs in Public Health (SPPHs) and 59 Psychedelic Research Centers (PRCs) in the US and globally. The scan corresponded to the Prisma 2020 checklist, identifying URLs through keyword searches by Beautiful Soup python package and Google search engine web application. Measures were coded through webpage text analysis.

Findings: Fewer than 10% (9.6%) of SPPHs engaged with psychedelics (2.6% substantially), while half (52.6%) of universities engaged (28.1% substantially). Among PRCs, only 10% indicated a collaboration with SPPHs, and fewer than 3% of PRC personnel held public health degrees. PRCs were preponderantly affiliated with medical schools. Although Indigeneity significantly contributes to Western therapeutic psychedelic protocols, only approximately one-quarter of active universities, SPPHs, or PRCs visibly addressed Indigeneity and only one PRC included Indigenous leadership. 92% of PRCs were led or co-led by people characterized as White-European and 88% by men. Only 20-43% of SPPHs, universities, and PRCs visibly addressed social determinants of health.

Conclusions: Public health schools, which train, study, and advise the future of public health, showed limited involvement in the growing psychedelic field, signifying a gap in psychedelic science and practice. The absence of public health's population-level approaches signifies a missed opportunity to maximize benefits and protect against potential harms of psychedelics at community and population levels.

Citations in the library

Cited by 15

and 10 more in the library

Cites 49

and 44 more in the library