Palliative & End-of-Life Distress
Distress at the end of life, the fear, depression and loss of meaning that can accompany a terminal diagnosis, is the oldest indication in modern psychedelic research and the source of some of its most famous results. Two landmark 2016 trials found that a single dose of psilocybin produced rapid, large and lasting reductions in anxiety and depression in people with life-threatening cancer. The findings are striking, but the evidence base is small, the trials are hard to blind, and no psychedelic is approved anywhere for this use.
Data updated
Key Insights
- 1
Existential distress at the end of life is common and under-treated: around 30 to 40% of people with cancer experience a clinically significant mood disorder, and globally only about 14% of the people who need palliative care actually receive it.
- 2
This is the most-cited indication in psychedelic medicine. Two 2016 randomised trials (Johns Hopkins, n=51; NYU, n=29) found a single psilocybin dose produced large, rapid reductions in anxiety and depression, with roughly 60 to 80% of patients still improved six months later.
- 3
The effects look unusually durable for psychiatry: long-term follow-up of the NYU cohort found most participants still responding 4.5 years after one dose, and attributing positive life change to the experience.
- 4
The honest caveats are large. The pivotal trials are small and use crossover or active-placebo designs that cannot fully blind a drug with unmistakable effects, so expectancy almost certainly inflates the results. There is no Phase 3 trial and no regulatory approval for end-of-life distress anywhere.
- 5
Psilocybin dominates the evidence; LSD has a smaller modern signal and a long history, while ketamine and MDMA in this setting rest on open-label, retrospective or null trials and should be read as early, not established.
By the numbers
- 53
- Trials tracked
- 183
- Papers tracked
- 2,271
- Trial participants
as of June 2026
as of June 2026
as of June 2026
What is Palliative & End-of-Life Distress?
A life-limiting diagnosis brings more than physical symptoms. Many people facing the end of life experience profound psychological and existential distress: depression, anxiety, hopelessness, a sense of demoralisation, and a loss of meaning or dignity. This distress is common and frequently goes untreated. A meta-analysis of 94 studies found that around a third of people in oncological and palliative settings meet criteria for a mood disorder[1], and the World Health Organization estimates that 56.8 million people need palliative care each year while only about 14% receive it[2].
Standard antidepressants often work too slowly to help someone with weeks or months to live, and existential distress, the fear of dying and the struggle to find meaning, is not something a pill was designed to treat. That gap, between a real and pressing form of suffering and the limits of conventional care, is why psychedelic-assisted therapy was first studied here. The idea is not to sedate distress but to occasion a single, supported experience that can shift a person’s relationship to their own mortality.
This page covers psychological and existential distress in the context of life-threatening illness, most of the evidence is in advanced cancer, alongside hospice, palliative and prolonged-grief settings. It is scoped to distress at the end of life rather than to depression in general, and it leads with what the landmark trials found and, just as importantly, what their limitations are.
Current Treatments
Good palliative care already addresses psychological distress through skilled symptom control, psychotherapy (including dignity therapy, meaning-centred psychotherapy and cognitive behavioural approaches), chaplaincy and social support, and, where indicated, antidepressants or anxiolytics such as SSRIs and benzodiazepines. For many people this combination helps. But it has real limits at the end of life: standard antidepressants can take four to six weeks to act, which is too slow when prognosis is short, and they were not designed for existential fear or loss of meaning.
It is against that standard of care that psychedelics are being tested, and the contrast is the whole point: a single supported session that acts within hours rather than weeks. None of the compounds discussed below is approved for end-of-life distress anywhere in the world. They are investigational, available only inside clinical trials or, in a few jurisdictions, through tightly controlled compassionate-access routes. Even Australia’s 2023 reform, which lets authorised psychiatrists prescribe psilocybin, covers treatment-resistant depression only, not end-of-life distress[1].
This report summarises what Blossom’s database shows about psychedelic-assisted therapy for distress at the end of life, and what it does not show. The short version: this is the indication where the modern field began, and it produced some of its most striking and durable results. It is also a small, old, and methodologically fragile evidence base that has not advanced to the confirmatory trials it needs, and no psychedelic is approved for this use anywhere. The famous findings and the serious limitations are both real, and an honest reading holds them together.
A note before the evidence
This page is a research summary, not medical advice, and nothing here is a treatment recommendation. Every compound discussed is investigational for end-of-life distress; none is approved for it. Distress at the end of life is treatable through established palliative and psychological care, and decisions about that care belong with a qualified clinical team. If you or someone you love is struggling, a palliative care service or mental-health professional is the right first port of call.
A word on the numbers. Blossom tracks 186 papers and 53 trials tagged to this topic, and those counts appear on this page. The tag is leaky: it pulls in general-depression studies, near-death and mechanism work, provider-attitude surveys, history pieces and reviews, so the genuinely end-of-life-specific clinical core is much smaller, on the order of a dozen modern trials enrolling perhaps 140 randomised patients in total. Read the counts as a measure of how much has been written, not as a tally of completed end-of-life treatments.
What "end-of-life distress" means
Distress at the end of life is more than sadness. It encompasses clinical depression and anxiety, but also demoralisation, hopelessness, loss of meaning and dignity, and the specific fear of dying, what clinicians call existential or spiritual distress. It is common and under-treated. A meta-analysis of 94 interview-based studies found roughly a third of people in oncological and palliative settings meet criteria for a mood disorder[1], and the WHO estimates 56.8 million people need palliative care each year, with only about 14% receiving it[2]. Conventional antidepressants help some people but act too slowly for those with a short prognosis, and they were never designed for existential fear. That gap is the unmet need this research targets.
Why psychedelics were tried here first
The logic is distinctive. Most psychiatric drugs aim to suppress symptoms day by day; the psychedelic approach pairs a single, carefully prepared and supervised high-dose session with psychotherapy, aiming to occasion an experience that changes a person’s relationship to their own death. Patients in these trials often describe a shift from terror and isolation to acceptance and connection, frequently framed in terms of a mystical or transcendent experience. Whether that is a specific drug effect or a profound placebo response is exactly the question the trials struggle to answer, but the clinical target, a person’s stance toward dying, is unusual and is why this field began in the hospice and the cancer ward rather than the psychiatric clinic.
The landmark trials: psilocybin in cancer
The modern evidence base rests on two trials published on the same day in 2016. The Johns Hopkins study randomised 51 patients with life-threatening cancer in a double-blind crossover design, comparing a very low placebo-like dose against a high dose; at six-month follow-up around 80% still showed clinically significant decreases in depressed mood and anxiety[3]. The NYU study randomised 29 cancer patients to single-dose psilocybin or niacin (an active placebo), both with psychotherapy, and found rapid, substantial and sustained reductions in anxiety and depression out to 6.5 months[4]. Both were preceded by a smaller 12-patient pilot that established safety and a positive trend[5].
What makes these results remarkable for psychiatry is not just their size but their persistence from a single dose. A long-term follow-up of the NYU cohort re-assessed survivors at a mean of 3.2 and 4.5 years and found roughly 60 to 80% still met criteria for an antidepressant or anxiolytic response[6], with most attributing positive, lasting life change to the experience. A separate analysis found reductions in suicidal ideation and in loss of meaning appearing within hours and holding for years[7]. For a field where most treatments fade in weeks, durability of this kind is the headline.
The asterisks, stated plainly
The qualifications matter as much as the results. The samples are tiny: the entire modern randomised base is around 140 patients. The designs are hard to blind, a high dose of psilocybin or LSD is unmistakable, and both 2016 trials used crossover or active-placebo comparators that cannot hide which arm a patient is in. Because the intensity of the subjective experience also predicts who improves, expectancy and the drug effect are tangled together. Pooled analyses are encouraging but built on the same small studies: a meta-analysis of five trials found psilocybin superior to placebo for end-of-life trait anxiety at six months (Hedges’ g around −0.84)[8], and a broader meta-analysis of nine psychedelic-therapy RCTs reported a large between-groups effect (Hedges’ g 1.21)[9], while noting the same small-sample, blinding and heterogeneity limits.
Two further cautions. Trials select for psychologically and physically robust volunteers, excluding active suicidality, a personal or family history of psychosis or bipolar disorder, and serious cardiac instability, so the sickest and most distressed are often screened out. And no Phase 3, adequately powered, registrational trial exists in this indication. A decade after the landmark studies, the confirmatory evidence that would move psilocybin from "promising" to "proven" for end-of-life distress has not been produced.
Beyond psilocybin: LSD, ketamine and MDMA
Psilocybin dominates, but it is not alone. LSD has the longest history, reaching back to 1960s work with dying patients, and its modern revival is a 2014 active-placebo pilot in 12 patients that found anxiety reductions sustained for 12 months[10], supported by a larger 2023 Phase II trial (n=42), though that study mixed life-threatening-illness with general anxiety[11]. Ketamine offers something different, rapid antidepressant action when time is short: an open-label palliative trial reported 70% response by day 8[12], but the cancer evidence is open-label or retrospective, short-lived, and in one pilot null on depression. MDMA rests on a single randomised pilot that missed its primary endpoint (p=0.056)[13]. Each of these is earlier and thinner than the psilocybin story, and should be read that way.
Demoralisation, grief and special populations
A strand of work targets distress beyond classic depression and anxiety. Psilocybin-assisted group therapy reduced demoralisation in older long-term AIDS survivors in an open-label pilot[14], and a hospice pilot found reduced demoralisation even as patients’ illness progressed[15]. Group models in cancer patients with major depression have shown sharp symptom reductions with a two-year durability follow-up[16], and trials in prolonged grief and caregiver distress are under way. These are mostly small, open-label and feasibility-stage, but they widen the question from "does this treat depression?" to "can a supported experience ease the broader suffering of dying and loss?"
Safety in a fragile population
On the evidence so far, supervised psychedelic sessions in carefully screened, medically supported patients have a reassuring safety record: serious adverse events are rare across the trials, and an individual-patient-data meta-analysis found psychedelic therapy reduced suicidality, with acute elevations uncommon[17]. That should be read in context. These are intensive, hours-long experiences delivered with two therapists in a controlled setting, with cardiovascular monitoring and exclusion of higher-risk patients. Transient anxiety, blood-pressure rises and challenging experiences do occur, and the safety profile of a fully supervised trial says little about unsupervised use. In a population that is already vulnerable, the supervision is not an optional extra; it is part of the treatment.
Access, ethics and the law
No psychedelic is approved for end-of-life distress anywhere. They remain investigational, available through clinical trials or, in limited places, compassionate-access schemes. Even Australia’s 2023 reform, which lets authorised psychiatrists prescribe psilocybin, applies only to treatment-resistant depression, not end-of-life distress[18]. This creates a genuine ethical tension that the field openly debates: dying patients have the strongest possible claim to try a promising treatment and the least time to wait for evidence, yet they are also among the most vulnerable to hype, to financial exploitation, and to consenting under the pressure of a terminal prognosis. "Right to try" arguments are powerful here and also need guardrails.
Reading this honestly
So where does end-of-life distress sit? It is the field’s origin story and the home of its most durable, most humane-sounding results, a single supported session that, in small trials, lifted depression and the fear of death and kept lifting it for years. That is genuinely moving, and it should not be waved away. But it is built on a handful of tiny, hard-to-blind studies that have not been confirmed at scale, and the gap between the strength of the claims and the strength of the evidence is wider here than almost anywhere else in psychedelic medicine. The honest position refuses both the cynicism that dismisses a real and repeatedly observed effect and the enthusiasm that treats a decade-old pilot literature as settled. For people facing the end of life, the most truthful thing the evidence supports is hope held carefully, a promising approach that deserves rigorous testing, not a proven cure.
Psychedelic Effect Matrix
Compound efficacy and evidence levels for Palliative & End-of-Life Distress.
| Compound | Magnitude | Evidence | Consistency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psilocybin The most-studied option, with two landmark 2016 RCTs and several pilots reporting large, durable reductions in anxiety and depression. But every trial is small (n=12 to 51), most use crossover or active-placebo designs that cannot fully blind, and there is no Phase 3 confirmation. | Large | Moderate | Moderate |
| LSD A long history (1960s Kast onwards) plus a small modern active-placebo trial (Gasser, n=12) showing sustained anxiety reduction. A larger 2023 Phase II trial supports the signal but mixed life-threatening-illness with general anxiety, so the end-of-life-specific evidence stays thin. | Medium | Low | Moderate |
| Ketamine Rapid antidepressant action is attractive when time is short, and open-label cancer trials report high short-term response. But the palliative evidence is open-label or retrospective, the benefit fades within days to weeks, and one pilot found no significant effect on depression. | Medium | Low | Low |
| MDMA A single randomised pilot (n=18) in life-threatening-illness anxiety missed its primary endpoint (p=0.056). The direction of effect was favourable but the study was tiny and not significant, so MDMA here is a hypothesis, not a result. | Small | Very Low | Low |
Psilocybin and Palliative & End-of-Life Distress
Psilocybin is the flagship compound for end-of-life distress and the source of the field’s most cited results. In 2016, two double-blind trials reported large effects from a single high dose given with psychotherapy: the Johns Hopkins crossover trial in 51 cancer patients found roughly 80% still showing clinically significant reductions in depressed mood and anxiety at six months[1], and the NYU trial in 29 patients found rapid, sustained improvements that persisted to 6.5 months[2]. An earlier 12-patient pilot in advanced cancer (Grob) established safety and a positive trend[3].
What stands out is durability. A long-term follow-up of the NYU cohort found most participants still met criteria for an antidepressant or anxiolytic response 4.5 years after a single dose[4], and a secondary analysis found reductions in suicidal ideation and loss of meaning within hours that lasted years[5]. Newer work extends the signal: a 2025 Phase 2b trial (n=35) reported large effects on depression and anxiety sustained to 26 weeks[6], and group-therapy models in cancer patients with major depression cut symptoms sharply[7]. The consistent caveat is small samples and imperfect blinding.
LSD and Palliative & End-of-Life Distress
LSD has the longest history here: it was given to terminally ill patients in the 1960s and 1970s before prohibition halted the work. The modern revival is a 2014 double-blind, active-placebo pilot (Gasser) in 12 patients with anxiety associated with life-threatening disease, which found significant reductions in state anxiety (effect size around 1.2) sustained for 12 months[1], with no serious adverse events.
A larger 2023 Phase II trial (n=42) found a substantial anxiety reduction at 16 weeks[2], strengthening the signal, but that study enrolled people with anxiety both with and without a life-threatening illness, so it is not purely an end-of-life result. LSD’s longer experience (up to about ten hours) makes it more demanding to deliver than psilocybin, and the end-of-life-specific evidence remains a handful of small studies.
Ketamine and Palliative & End-of-Life Distress
Ketamine is the odd one out: a rapid-acting antidepressant rather than a classic psychedelic, and its appeal at the end of life is speed. An open-label trial of intranasal ketamine in 20 palliative cancer patients reported a 70% response rate and 45% remission by day 8[1], and a transdiagnostic meta-analysis confirms ketamine has genuine, if short-lived, anxiolytic effects[2].
The honest read is that the palliative-specific evidence is weak. The cancer trials are open-label or retrospective rather than randomised and placebo-controlled, the benefit typically fades within days to weeks (so it becomes a repeated treatment), and at least one small study found no significant effect on depression. Ketamine may have a pragmatic role for rapid relief, but it is not an established treatment for existential distress and does not carry the durable, meaning-centred effects reported for the classic psychedelics.
MDMA and Palliative & End-of-Life Distress
MDMA has been proposed for end-of-life anxiety on the theory that its capacity to reduce fear and increase emotional openness could help people face a terminal diagnosis. The evidence is a single randomised pilot (n=18) that missed its primary endpoint: the between-group difference in trait anxiety did not reach statistical significance (p=0.056)[1].
The direction of effect was favourable and the study was very small, so this is best read as an inconclusive signal worth following up, not as evidence that MDMA works here. It is the least-developed of the four compounds for this indication, and it would be misleading to present it as more.
Clinical Outlook
The near-term picture is a paradox: the indication with the most famous results has some of the least mature development. The pivotal trials are a decade old, yet there is still no Phase 3 trial and no regulatory filing specifically for end-of-life distress. Activity is picking up, with a 2025 Phase 2b trial[1] and a wave of pilots in hospice, demoralisation and prolonged grief, but the commercial centre of gravity in psychedelic medicine has moved to depression and treatment-resistant depression, where the trials are larger and the market is bigger.
That has consequences. Much of the running here is made by academic and non-profit groups rather than well-capitalised companies, which means slower, smaller trials. Where psilocybin does reach approval, it will almost certainly be for depression first, with end-of-life distress an off-label or later-indication question. And even an approval would not solve the delivery problem: a psilocybin session is a full day of supervised therapy, which is hard to provide to people who are seriously ill and short on time. The realistic outlook is continued, careful, mostly academic progress rather than an imminent approved treatment, and the unblinding question hanging over every result will not be resolved until larger, better-controlled trials are done.
Industrial Landscape
Unlike depression, end-of-life distress has no dominant commercial owner. The foundational work came from academic centres, Johns Hopkins, NYU and the Heffter Research Institute, and that academic and philanthropic character still defines the field. Much of the current pipeline runs through universities, hospices and non-profits rather than through a single drug developer racing to a label.
The current studies reflect that. Groups are testing psilocybin for demoralisation in hospice patients[1], for depression in cancer patients via group therapy (with a two-year durability follow-up)[2], and for prolonged grief and caregiver distress, alongside an LSD palliative-care trial and intranasal-ketamine work. Where companies are involved, their primary commercial bet is usually depression or treatment-resistant depression, with palliative care a secondary, mission-driven interest.
For an honest broker, the upside of this academic character is that the research is less hype-driven than the depression space; the downside is that it is slower and underfunded. Demonstrating efficacy in dying patients is also ethically and logistically hard, high dropout from disease progression, difficult consent, and a vulnerable population, which is part of why, ten years after the landmark trials, the field still lacks the confirmatory evidence it needs.
Quick Indicators
Related Topics
Organisations
Search →OPEN Foundation
Dutch nonprofit organizer in the psychedelic field, including stewardship of the ICPR conference series and related professional convenings.
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
U.S. federal institute defining mental-health research agendas and evidence-generation priorities including psychedelic-relevant studies.
MAPS
MAPS, the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, is a U.S.-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit research and educational organization founded in 1986. It works nationally and with a broader global audience to develop medical, legal, and cultural contexts for the careful use of psychedelics and marijuana. Its core activities include research, education, advocacy, and convening the field through large public events. In psychedelic medicine and policy, MAPS positions itself as an advocate for legal access, drug policy reform, harm reduction, and health equity. Its Policy & Advocacy work includes legislative advocacy, community organizing, and impact litigation, and it has also launched work on access for system-impacted people and broader health equity in the legal psychedelic ecosystem. Current documented initiatives include the Psychedelic Science conference series, the Health Equity Program, The Zendo Project, and Ask MAPS, which handles public inquiries about therapy, research, and policy reform.
University of Amsterdam
The University of Amsterdam (UvA) is one of the Netherlands' leading research universities, with its Amsterdam UMC Department of Psychiatry conducting clinical trials on psilocybin and psychedelic-assisted therapies for treatment-resistant mental health conditions.
Ketamine Research Institute
The Ketamine Research Institute is a US-based clinical research organization developing precision medicine approaches to ketamine infusion therapy, studying optimized dosing protocols to treat depression and offering clinician training in evidence-based ketamine practice.
University of California, San Francisco
University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) hosts major psychedelic research activity through the Translational Psychedelic Research Program (TrPR), Neuroscape Psychedelics Division, and psychiatry-led clinical research on psychedelic-assisted therapies.
University of Washington
At UW, researchers are working on clinical trials with psilocybin (provided by Usona). Dr Anthony Back, co-director of the University's Center for Excellence in Palliative Care, led a trial exploring the effects of psilocybin to alleviate the mental health burden inflicted on frontline healthcare workers throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. As Seattle became the largest city in the US to decriminalise psilocybin mushrooms in October 2021, and with ongoing legislative efforts at the state level, more research with psychedelics is anticipated and occurring at UW.
Vancouver Island University
In response to the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, a research group at Vancouver Island University (VIU) has been awarded funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the exploration of psychedelic therapies for front-line workers. Led by Dr Shannon Dames, the team are currently focusing on ketamine-assisted therapy for front-line workers experiencing symptoms of PTSD and emotional distress as a result of their experiences working through the pandemic.
University of Basel
The University of Basel Department of Biomedicine hosts the Liechti Lab research group, headed by Matthias Liechti. Research here is primarily focused on the pharmacology of psychoactive substances. Much of the clinical research exploring the effects of LSD is taking place at University Hospital Basel. Researchers here are exploring the potential of LSD to treat Cluster Headache, Major Depressive Disorder and anxiety associated with severe somatic diseases. Professor Liechti is also conducting studies comparing the acute effects of LSD, psilocybin and mescaline, and MDMA for fear extinction.
University of Zurich
Within the 'Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics' at the University of Zurich, Dr Milan Scheidegger is leading a team conducting psychedelic research and therapy development. Researchers here are investigating the therapeutic potential of psychedelics to reverse maladaptive neurobehavioral patterns in stress-related mood disorders and to enhance psychotherapeutic learning capabilities.
University of Auckland
The University of Auckland hosts academic psychedelic research activity, including work led by Professor Suresh Muthukumaraswamy on LSD microdosing and related mental health applications.
Usona Institute
Usona Institute is a US-based 501(c)(3) non-profit medical research organisation headquartered in Madison, Wisconsin. Usona develops and supports clinical research on psilocybin and other consciousness-expanding medicines with a mission-driven access model. Its psilocybin programme received FDA Breakthrough Therapy Designation for major depressive disorder in 2019. After completing the Phase 2 PSIL201 study, Usona launched the Phase 3 uAspire trial in 2024, a 240-participant randomised, double-blind multicentre study of 25 mg psilocybin with psychosocial support for adults with MDD. In April 2026, industry reporting said Usona confirmed it had received an FDA Commissioner National Priority Voucher for psilocybin in MDD, potentially shortening review if an NDA is filed and accepted. Usona is also exploring 5-MeO-DMT in early-stage research.
People
Search →Attila Szabo
Researcher in psychoneuroimmunology and psychedelic science; affiliated with the University of Oslo
He is a notable contributor to psychedelic immunology research, including widely cited work on DMT, 5-MeO-DMT, psilocybin, and immune modulation.
Henrik Jungaberle
Dr. sc. hum., CEO and founder of the MIND Foundation; Head of Development at OVID Clinic Berlin
He is a prominent European psychedelic research and implementation figure contributing to psilocybin clinical trials, harm reduction, and healthcare integration work.
Joost Breeksema
Postdoctoral researcher and Executive Director of the OPEN Foundation
He is a prominent psychedelic researcher and advocate whose work helps shape evidence-based psychedelic policy, ethics, and patient-centered understanding of psychedelic and ketamine/esketamine treatments.
Mathieu Seynaeve
Senior Medical Director and Head of Psychotherapy at Beckley Psytech
He is a clinical development leader behind multiple human studies of 5-MeO-DMT and psilocybin, including trials in alcohol use disorder, treatment-resistant depression, and headache disorders.
Michiel Van Elk
Associate Professor of Cognitive Psychology at Leiden University
Michiel van Elk is a prominent psychedelic science researcher known for rigorous, skeptical work on psilocybin, microdosing, expectancy effects, and the psychological mechanisms and risks of psychedelic experiences.
Jolien Veraart
Psychiatrist and PhD researcher at the University Medical Center Groningen / University of Groningen
She is a leading clinical researcher on ketamine and oral esketamine for treatment-resistant depression, including safety, efficacy, and real-world implementation.
Philippe Lucas
Director, Research and Safe Access at MAPS
He is a prominent Canadian psychedelic and cannabis researcher whose work has helped establish early evidence on ayahuasca-assisted therapy, psychedelic survey research, and harm-reduction policy.
Frederick Sundram
Associate Professor and Deputy Head of the Department of Psychological Medicine at the University of Auckland
He is a psychiatrist and clinical researcher contributing to psychedelic and novel-antidepressant studies, including LSD microdosing and ketamine/depression research.
Yvan Beaussant
Instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School and palliative care physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
He is a leading clinical researcher in psychedelic-assisted therapy for serious illness, especially cancer-related depression, demoralization, and existential distress.
Neşe Devenot
Senior Lecturer in the University Writing Program at Johns Hopkins University
Neşe Devenot is a notable critic and scholar of psychedelic medicine whose work examines ethics, public discourse, and the social meanings of psychedelic-assisted therapy.
Christopher Davoli
Associate Professor of Psychology at Central Michigan University
He is a cognitive psychologist whose work with colleagues has helped document acute and longer-term effects of psychedelics on perception, experience, and psychological outcomes.
Heith Copes
Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Alabama at Birmingham
Heith Copes is a criminologist whose research connects drug use, identity, and narrative meaning, including multiple collaborations on classic psychedelics, microdosing, and related social/behavioral outcomes.
Connected Evidence
The latest clinical data and verified academic findings associated with Palliative & End-of-Life Distress.