Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Psychoactive Drugs. 2024 Feb 10;57(2):181–192. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2024.2313684

Psychedelic Microdosing among Young Adults from Southern California

Alyssa F Harlow a,b, Peter S Hendricks c, Adam M Leventhal a,b, Jessica L Barrington-Trimis a,b
PMCID: PMC11315810  NIHMSID: NIHMS1964547  PMID: 38341607

Abstract

Despite common depictions in the media, there is little scientific evidence on microdosing psychedelic drugs. We assessed awareness, prevalence, and dosing practices of microdosing psychedelic drugs among young adults 18-22 years old from Southern California (2018-2019). We examined whether sociodemographic factors, personality traits, mental health, or other substance use behaviors were correlated with having ever microdosed. Among 2,396 participants, 293 (12%) had heard of microdosing and 74 (3%) ever microdosed. Among those who had heard of microdosing, 79% correctly defined microdosing as taking an amount of a psychedelic much lower than a standard dose, whereas 15% misperceived microdosing as a standard psychedelic dose. Psilocybin was the most common drug ever microdosed (70%), followed by lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD, 57%). Among those who ever microdosed, ~18% reported using psychoactive doses far higher than would be generally considered a microdose. White race, male/masculine gender identity, bisexual identity, past 6-month other drug use, greater attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms, mindfulness, and sensation-seeking were positively associated with having ever microdosed in multivariable models. Young adult microdosing merits further attention from scientific and public health professionals to help prevent misperceptions and potential adverse consequences as well as explore its potential therapeutic applications.

Keywords: Psychedelics, Microdosing, LSD, Psilocybin, MDMA, Young Adults

INTRODUCTION

Microdosing is the ingestion of psychedelic drugs, such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) or psilocybin, or less commonly the entactogen 3,4-Methylenedioxy methamphetamine (MDMA), at doses that do not generate transcendent mystical-type effects or limit functionality, often on a repeated basis (Hutten et al., 2019; Kuypers et al., 2019). There is no scientific consensus on the dosing threshold of a microdose. However, microdoses are anecdotally in the range of 5-10% of a standard psychoactive dose that would generate salient psychedelic experiences (Kuypers et al., 2019).

Microdosing has been covered in news and magazine articles describing the experience of Silicon Valley executives who microdose to increase productivity and creativity (Kelly, 2020; Nast, 2019), and in books describing microdosing to treat depression and anxiety (Waldman, 2017). Most observational studies on microdosing describe motivations, perceived benefits, and side effects of microdosing and/or dosing practices (Anderson et al., 2019; Hutten et al., 2019; Johnstad, 2018; Kaertner et al., 2021; Lea, Amada, Jungaberle, et al., 2020; Polito & Stevenson, 2019; Rootman et al., 2021; Rosenbaum et al., 2020). Findings from observational studies suggest microdosing is associated with improvements in self-reported wellbeing, attention, depression, and stress (Anderson et al., 2019; Hutten et al., 2019; Johnstad, 2018; Kaertner et al., 2021; Polito & Stevenson, 2019; Rootman et al., 2021; Rosenbaum et al., 2020). Randomized trials report positive effects of larger psychedelic doses (combined with psychological support) of MDMA (Mitchell et al., 2021; Varker et al., 2021), psilocybin (R. Carhart-Harris et al., 2021; R. L. Carhart-Harris et al., 2016; Griffiths et al., 2016; Grob et al., 2011; Ross et al., 2016), and LSD (Fuentes et al., 2020) on treatment of substance use and mental health disorders; however trials of microdosing have not demonstrated improved mood and cognitive outcomes (Bershad et al., 2019; Cavanna et al., 2021; Family et al., 2020; Yanakieva et al., 2019), with the exception of one recent study reporting positive effects of microdosing LSD on reward processing (Glazer et al., 2023).

Few studies have estimated microdosing prevalence. One online convenience survey reported that 17% of adult participants had ever microdosed (Cameron et al., 2020). However, because study recruitment materials described the research as “recreational drug and alcohol use,” the sample may overrepresent people who use drugs and overestimate microdosing prevalence. No studies exist on prevalence or awareness of microdosing among young adults. Young adulthood (i.e., the period immediately after high school) is a key phase of development during which many individuals initiate or escalate drug use (Bachman et al., 1996). National data indicate psychedelic drug use is increasing over time among young adults (Killion et al., 2021; Livne et al., 2022; A. R. Yockey et al., 2020). Additionally, among individuals who report past-year LSD use (in any amount), a majority (57%) are young adults 18-25 years old (A. R. Yockey et al., 2020). Microdosing psychedelics may be of interest to young adults because of depictions in the media by individuals that they admire or aspire to emulate.

Little research exists on whether certain sub-populations of young adults are more likely to microdose. Prior research shows lifetime use of psychedelic drugs (at any dose) is most common among individuals who are White, male, and/or have higher education, and is correlated with sensation-seeking personality traits and use of alcohol and other drugs (Killion et al., 2021; Livne et al., 2022; Yockey & King, 2021; Yockey et al., 2020). However, microdosing is often framed in popular discourse as therapeutic and/or a cognitive enhancer distinct from other drug use (Webb et al., 2019). Thus, sociodemographic and behavioral profiles of young adults who microdose may differ from those who use psychedelics at larger doses. It is also important to understand dosing amounts used among young adults who report microdosing. Microdosing is meant to represent very small quantities taken over a regimented period of time (e.g., every three days). For example, 10-20 micrograms (μg) of LSD and 0.43-0.73 milligrams (mg) of psilocybin have been reported as common microdoses (Kuypers et al., 2019). In contrast, for a full psychedelic experience, an individual might take 200μg or more of LSD (Holze et al., 2021) or 20mg or more of psilocybin (Griffiths et al., 2011). However, prior research suggests that adult microdosers are often unaware of their dose quantity or may take doses higher than would be generally considered a microdose (Hutten et al., 2019). Psychedelic drug use at greater quantities in poorly controlled environments can sometimes result in adverse effects (i.e., “a bad trip”), including acute feelings of paranoia, anxiety/panic, and increased heart rate and blood pressure, as well as longer-term psychological distress (Schlag et al., 2022; Simonsson et al., 2023).

Little is known about how common microdosing is among U.S. young adults, whether certain subgroups are more likely to engage in microdosing, which drugs are used most often by young adults who microdose, and what doses young adults use during the practice of microdosing. If microdosing prevalence is appreciable and elevated among certain subgroups, or if its practice is imprecise or misunderstood, further attention might be warranted in public health research to prevent potential unwanted consequences for young adults. Furthermore, an initial evaluation of the potential causes and consequences of microdosing can also point to possible clinical applications for further exploration in randomized trials. In the current study, we examine awareness, prevalence, dosing practices, and correlates of psychedelic microdosing among a sample of young adults 18-22 years old from Southern California.

METHODS

Data are from the Happiness & Health study (H&H), an ongoing prospective cohort study of behavioral health in Los Angeles. Data collection began in 2013-2014 when participants (N=3,396) were in 9th grade. Participants completed semi-annual surveys throughout high school and were subsequently followed through young adulthood. Data for the current study come from paper questionnaires administered to participants (n=2,548) when they were young adults between October 2018 and November 2019. The analytic sample was restricted to 2,396 participants with non-missing data on two microdosing outcomes: 1) ever heard of microdosing and 2) ever tried microdosing. The majority (88-99%) of missing data on one or both microdosing outcomes (n=152) occurred among participants also missing data on other covariates (Supplemental Table 1). Participants provided consent prior to data collection. The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board approved study procedures.

Measures

Awareness and prevalence of microdosing

In a survey section titled, “Psychedelics”, participants reported whether they had “ever heard of microdosing psychedelics.” Those who responded positively were asked questions about experiences and perceptions of microdosing. Participants were prompted to select the definition that best describes microdosing, with the response options: “I don’t know what microdosing is”; “Taking an amount of a psychedelic that will cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or images”; “Taking the amount of a psychedelic that is much larger than the amount needed to cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or images”; “Taking the amount of a psychedelic that is much lower than the amount needed to cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or images.” Participants also reported how they had heard about microdosing (news reports, drug-oriented websites like Erowid.org, from a friend or someone you personally know, or other [specify]), whether they know anybody their age who has microdosed (yes, no, don’t know), and whether they themselves have ever microdosed (yes, no, don’t know).

Participants who reported ever microdosing specified what drugs they have microdosed (select all that apply: LSD, magic mushrooms [psilocybin], ecstasy [MDMA], or other [specify]), and which drug they microdosed most often. Participants reported the number of times they ever microdosed (1 time, 2-5, 5-10, 10-50, 50-100, or >100 times), and after microdosing how long they typically wait before microdosing again (1 day, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days, 5 days, 6 days, 1 week to a month, >1 month). In an open response question, participants described how much of a drug they took when they microdosed with the question, “Please describe, as best as you can, how much of the substance you took. For example, the number or milligrams of dried mushrooms, or the fraction of blotter paper or pill that you took.”

Sociodemographic factors

Participants self-reported race/ethnicity (Hispanic, Non-Hispanic Asian, Non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic all other races [American Indian/Alaska Native, Black/African American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, multiracial, another race, were assessed separately and collapsed in analysis]), sexual identity (heterosexual, bisexual, other sexual minority identity [asexual, gay, lesbian, pansexual, queer, questioning], prefer not to disclose), gender identity (male/masculine, female/feminine, transgender/non-binary [transgender male, transgender female, gender variant/non-binary, another gender], prefer not to disclose), personal finance (live comfortably, meet needs with a little left, just meet basic expenses, don’t meet basic expenses), and enrollment in a degree program (yes/no).

Other substance use

Survey items assessed any past 6-month use of combustible cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cannabis, alcohol, cocaine, and ecstasy. We assessed ever and past 6-month use of LSD or psilocybin at any dose at the previous data collection wave (measures were not included in the current survey wave).

Personality and mental health measures

We assessed depressive symptoms using the 10-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10) (Björgvinsson et al., 2013), anxiety symptoms using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7) (Mossman et al., 2017, p. 7), ADHD symptoms using the 18-item adult ADHD self-report scale (ASRS) (Kessler et al., 2005), mindfulness using the 15-item mindfulness attention awareness scale (MAAS) (Brown & Ryan, 2003), and sensation-seeking using the 4-item Urgency, Premeditation, Perseverance, Sensation Seeking, Positive Urgency (UPPS-P) scale (Whiteside et al., 2005). Each scale was scored and summed according to validated scoring guidelines resulting in continuous variables for each scale. Greater values represent greater indication of symptoms (CESD-10 [range 0-30], GAD-7 [range 0-21], ASRS [range 0-36]) or personality traits (MAAS [range 1-5], UPPS-P [range 3-16]). The ASRS produces two separate continuous scores for inattentive (part A) and hyperactive (part B) ADHD symptoms.

Analysis

We examined the distribution of responses on microdosing behaviors, and examined sociodemographic factors, past 6-month substance use behaviors, and psychometric measures among participants who reported ever and never microdosing. We fit separate unadjusted logistic regression models for the association of each sociodemographic factor, past 6-month substance use behavior, personality and mental health variables (independent variables) with ever use of microdosing (dependent variable), and multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for all sociodemographic factors. Evidence of associations were interpreted based on the magnitude of odds ratios (OR) and whether 95%Cis overlapped with 1. Missing data ranged from <1% (gender identity) to 4.8% (ASRS score). Missing covariate values were assigned a missing indicator and included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Sample descriptive statistics

Among 2,396 young adults from Southern California surveyed between 2018-2019, the mean age was 19.3 years (SD = 0.53; range = 17.9-22.0); most were Hispanic (55.7%) or Asian (18.6%); 56.7% were female, 1.4% identified as transgender or nonbinary; 8.3% identified as bisexual, and 9.4% identified as another non-heterosexual identity (Table 1). Overall, 45.0% reported living comfortably financially and 64.8% were enrolled in a degree program.

Table 1.

Characteristics of Sample and by Microdosing History among 2,396 Young Adults in Southern California, 2018-2019

Covariate Total Sample (n=2,396) Ever microdosed (n=74) Never microdosed (n=2,322)
Age, years
 Range 17.9-22.0 18.6-20.7 17.9-22.0
 Mean, SD 19.3 (0.53) 19.3 (0.51) 19.3 (0.53)
Race/ethnicity
 Hispanic 1,334 (55.7) 39 (52.7) 1,295 (55.8)
 Asian 446 (18.6) 8 (10.8) 438 (18.9)
 White 303 (12.7) 16 (21.6) 287 (12.4)
 Multiple Races 169 (7.1) 9 (12.2) 160 (6.9)
 Black/African American 99 (4.1) 1 (1.4) 98 (4.2)
 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 23 (1.0) 1 (1.4) 22 (1.0)
 American Indian/Alaska Native 4 (0.2) 0 (0) 4 (0.2)
 Another race 16 (0.7) 0 (0) 16 (0.7)
Perceived Financial Situation
 Live comfortably 1,077 (45.0) 30 (40.5) 1,047 (45.1)
 Meet needs with a little left 672 (28.1) 27 (36.5) 645 (27.8)
 Just meet basic needs 502 (21.0) 12 (16.2) 490 (21.1)
 Don’t meet basic expenses 126 (5.3) 4 (5.4) 122 (5.3)
Enrolled in Degree Program 1,553 (64.8) 41 (55.4) 1,512 (65.1)
 Yes 1,553 (64.8) 41 (55.4) 1,512 (65.1)
 No 837 (34.9) 33 (44.6) 804 (34.6)
Sexual Identity
 Heterosexual 1,927 (80.4) 52 (70.3) 1,875 (80.8)
 Bisexual 199 (8.3) 13 (17.6) 186 (8.0)
 Asexual 64 (2.7) 0 (0) 64 (2.8)
 Gay 44 (1.8) 2 (2.7) 42 (1.8)
 Questioning 42 (1.8) 2 (2.7) 40 (1.7)
 Pansexual 38 (1.6) 2 (2.7) 36 (1.6)
 Lesbian 17 (0.7) 0 (0) 17 (0.73)
 Queer 15 (0.6) 2 (2.7) 13 (0.6)
 Another identity 5 (0.2) 0 (0) 5 (0.2)
 Prefer not to disclose 35 (1.5) 1 (1.4) 34 (1.5)
Gender Identity
 Female/feminine 1,359 (56.7) 32 (43.2) 1,327 (57.2)
 Male/masculine 977 (40.8) 40 (54.1) 937 (40.4)
 Gender variant/non-binary 18 (0.75) 2 (2.7) 16 (0.7)
 Transgender male 6 (0.26) 0 (0) 6 (0.3)
 Transgender female 4 (0.17) 0 (0) 4 (0.2)
 Another gender identity 5 (0.21) 0 (0) 5 (0.2)
 Prefer not to disclose 26 (1.1) 0 (0) 26 (1.1)
Past 6-month substance use a
 Cigarettes 218 (9.1) 28 (37.8) 190 (8.2)
 E-cigarettes 807 (33.7) 61 (82.4) 746 (32.1)
 Cannabis 899 (37.5) 65 (87.8) 834 (35.9)
 Alcohol 1,258 (52.5) 60 (81.1) 1,198 (51.6)
 Cocaine 104 (4.3) 18 (24.3) 86 (3.7)
 Ecstasy 129 (5.4) 19 (25.7) 110 (4.7)
LSD or psilocybin use at prior wave a,b
 Past 6-month LSD or psilocybin 39 (1.6) 8 (10.8) 31 (1.3)
 Ever LSD or psilocybin 153 (6.4) 18 (24.3) 135 (5.8)
Anxiety
 Mean GAD-7 score, SD 5.8 (5.5) 6.3 (5.5) 5.8 (5.4)
Depression
 Mean CESD-10, SD 9.5 (6.2) 9.6 (5.9) 9.5 (6.3)
ADHD c
 Mean ASRS part A score, SD 11.4 (7.8) 13.4 (7.5) 11.4 (7.8)
 Mean ASRS part B score, SD 9.0 (7.1) 11.3 (7.2) 8.9 (7.1)
Mindfulness
 Mean MAAS, SD 2.5 (0.8) 2.8 (0.6) 2.5 (0.8)
Sensation seeking
 Mean UPPS-P scale score, SD 10.1 (3.2) 12.2 (3.1) 10.0 (3.1)
Open in a new tab

SD=standard deviation; GAD-7= Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale; CESD-10=Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; ASRS=Adult ADHD self-report scale; MAAS=mindfulness attention awareness scale; UPPS-P= Urgency, Premeditation, Perseverance, Sensation Seeking, Positive Urgency scale. Estimates presented as n(%) except where indicated. Counts of missing data were as follows: race/ethnicity (n=2); financial situation (n=19); degree program (n=6); sexual identity (n=10); gender identity (n=1); prior LSD/psilocybin use (n=392); GAD-7 (n=98); CESD-10 (n=25); ASRS (n=118); MAAS (n=135); UPPS-P (n=17).

a

Categories are not mutually exclusive.

b

Measured at prior data collection wave. Refers to any dose.

c

Part A assesses “inattentive” symptoms, and part B assesses “hyperactive” symptoms.

Microdosing awareness and perceptions

When examining microdosing awareness (Table 2), 12.2% had ever heard of microdosing psychedelics, and 7.5% knew someone of a similar age who had microdosed. Among participants who had ever heard of microdosing (n = 293), 79.2% reported the most widely used and accepted definition (“Taking the amount of a psychedelic that is much lower than the amount needed to cause psychedelic effects”), 15% reported the definition as a standard psychedelic dose, 1.7% reported the definition as higher than a standard psychedelic dose, and 3.4% reported not knowing the definition of microdosing. Among participants who reported ever microdosing (n = 74), 82.4% correctly identified the most widely used definition (data not shown).

Table 2.

Awareness and Prevalence of Microdosing among 2,396 Young Adults in Southern California, 2018-2019

Microdosing Measure n(%)
Ever heard of microdosing
   Yes 293 (12.2)
   No 2,103 (87.8)
Ever tried microdosing
   Yes 74 (3.1)
   No 2,322 (96.9)
Know someone your age who has tried microdosing
   Yes 180 (7.5)
   No 112 (4.7)
   Don’t know what microdosing is 2,103 (87.8)
   Missing 1 (0.3)
Definition of microdosing a
   Don’t know 10 (3.4)
   Taking an amount of a psychedelic that will cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or images 44 (15.0)
   Taking the amount of a psychedelic that is much larger than the amount needed to cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or images 5 (1.7)
   Taking the amount of a psychedelic that is much lower than the amount needed to cause psychedelic effects, such as seeing intense colors or imagesb 232 (79.2)
   missing 2 (0.7)
How did you hear about microdosing a
   News 38 (13.0)
   Drug-oriented websites 27 (9.2)
   From a friend or someone you know 168 (57.3)
   Otherc 59 (20.1)
   missing 1 (0.3)
Open in a new tab
a

Calculated among 293 participants who have ever heard of microdosing

b

A common, widely used definition of microdosing

c

Other repeated sources include YouTube (n=10), Internet/Social Media (n=9), Joe Rogan podcast (n=4)

More than half (57.3%) of participants who had heard of microdosing reported hearing about it from a friend or someone they know, 13.0% from the news, and 9.2% from drug-oriented websites. Among those who reported hearing about microdosing from other sources (n = 59, 20.1%), Youtube (n = 10), internet/social media (n = 9), and the Joe Rogan podcast (n = 4) were cited as other sources of hearing about microdosing.

Prevalence and characteristics of microdosing practices

Overall, 3.1% reported ever trying microdosing. Among participants who ever microdosed (n = 74), mushrooms (i.e., psilocybin) were the most common substance most often used (43.2%), followed by LSD (36.5%), and MDMA (16.2%) (Table 3). One participant reported microdosing DMT (i.e., N,N-Dimethyltryptamine) and one reported microdosing EME (i.e., 2,5-diethoxy-4-methoxyamphetamine). One-fifth (20.3%) of participants reported microdosing just one time, and 50% had microdosed 2-5 times in their life. A majority (56.8%) of participants reported typically waiting between one week and more than one month after microdosing until microdosing again.

Table 3.

Dosing Practices among 74 Young Adults who Ever Microdosed

n(%)
What substance ever microdosed
    LSD 42 (56.8)
    Mushrooms/psilocybin 52 (70.3)
    MDMA 27 (36.5)
    Othera 2 (2.7)
What substance microdosed most often
    LSD 27 (36.5)
    Mushrooms/psilocybin 32 (43.2)
    MDMA 12 (16.2)
    Missing 3 (4.1)
How many times ever microdosed
    1 time 15 (20.3)
    2-5 times 37 (50.0)
    5-10 times 13 (17.6)
    10-50 times 7 (9.5)
    50-100 times 0 (0)
    >100 times 1 (1.4)
    missing 1 (1.4)
After microdosing, how many days have you typically waited before microdosing again?
    1 day 8 (10.8)
    2 days 5 (6.7)
    3 days 3 (4.1)
    4 days 0 (0)
    5 days 0 (0)
    6 days 0 (0)
    7 days to 1 month 19 (25.7)
    >1 month 23 (31.1)
    Only microdosed one time 15 (20.3)
    missing 1 (1.4)
Dosing amount for substance used most often b
    LSD used most often (n=27)
        One-eighth of a tab 1 (3.7)
        One-quarter of a tab 6 (22.2)
        One-third of a tab 2 (7.4)
        One-half of a tab 5 (18.5)
        Full tab 3 (11.1)
        Other 7 (25.9)
        Missing 3 (11.1)
    Mushrooms/psilocybin used most often (n=32)
        <0.1 grams 1 (3.1)
        0.1 grams 1 (3.1)
        0.3 grams 2 (6.3)
        0.5 grams 4 (12.5)
        1 gram 4 (12.5)
        1.5 grams 2 (6.3)
        1.75 grams 1 (3.1)
        2 grams 3 (9.4)
        3-5 grams 2 (6.3)
        Other 7 (21.9)
        Missing 5 (15.6)
Open in a new tab
a

Includes one person who microdosed DMT and one person who microdosed EME

b

Participants categorized based on substance microdosed most often; in some cases participants reported dosing amounts for multiple drugs. See eTable 2 for all open-response answers. MDMA answers not included in table because no standard unit of measurement was used across participants.

Nearly two-thirds of participants who reported microdosing LSD reported their dose in “tabs” (common slang for a full dose)(Wilcox, 2021); 51.8% reported using “half a tab” or less when they microdose; 11.1% reported taking a full tab (Table 3). One-quarter (25.9%) were classified as “other” for their LSD microdose, including participants who described eating LSD-infused candy (e.g., “dap on a sweet tart”; “a sour patch of lsd”). Most (62.6%) participants who reported microdosing mushrooms reported their dose in “grams”; 25% reported using less than one gram, and 31.3% reported using 1-2 grams. Participants classified as “other” for their mushroom microdose (21.9%) mostly described eating imprecise amounts of dried mushrooms (e.g., “a small bite”; “two small caps and stems”). There was no common dosing unit reported by participants who microdosed MDMA; response options ranged from “”1/8th of a pill”, “350 mg”, “2-3 lines of powdered molly”, among others. See Supplemental Table 2 for open response answers on typical doses.

Correlates of microdosing

In descriptive analyses, compared to participants who never microdosed, participants who ever microdosed were more likely to be White (21.6% vs. 12.4%), bisexual (17.6% vs. 8.0%), and male/masculine (54.1% vs. 40.4%) (Table 1). Participants who microdosed were substantially more likely to have used alcohol (81.1% vs. 51.6%), cigarettes (37.8% vs. 8.2%), e-cigarettes (82.4% vs. 32.1%), cannabis (87.8% vs 35.9%), cocaine (24.3% vs. 3.7%), or ecstasy (25.7% vs. 4.7%) in the past 6-months, and LSD or psilocybin at any dose at the prior study wave (24.3% vs. 5.8%). Participants who microdosed had higher mean scores for anxiety, ADHD, mindfulness, and sensation-seeking than those who never microdosed.

In multivariable adjusted models, having a bisexual identity vs. heterosexual identity (adjusted OR [aOR]: 3.10, 95% CI: 1.59, 6.06), a male/masculine gender identity vs. female/feminine identity (aOR: 2.09, CI: 1.26, 2.45), and having used alcohol (aOR: 4.14, CI: 2.27, 7.54), cigarettes (aOR: 5.62, CI: 3.36, 9.42), e-cigarettes (aOR: 9.41, CI: 5.04, 17.6), cannabis (aOR: 12.9, CI: 6.32, 26.3), cocaine (aOR: 8.99, CI: 4.89, 16.5), and ecstasy (aOR: 7.67, CI: 4.28, 13.8) in the past 6-months, and LSD or psilocybin at the prior data collection wave (aOR: 8.34, CI: 3.50, 19.9) were associated with significantly greater odds of having ever microdosed. Compared to White participants, Asian (aOR: 0.33, CI: 0.14, 0.80) and Hispanic participants (0.52, CI: 0.28, 0.95) were significantly less likely to have ever microdosed in multivariable models. A one-unit increase in ADHD (aOR=1.03, CI: 1.00, 1.07 for part A/inattentive symptoms; aOR=1.05, CI: 1.01, 1.08 for part B/hyperactive symptoms), mindfulness (aOR=1.69, CI: 1.21, 2.35), and sensation-seeking scores (OR=1.27, CI: 1.16, 1.38) were associated with significantly increased odds of having ever microdosed in adjusted models.

DISCUSSION

In this study of primarily non-White young adults from Southern California, 12% of participants had ever heard of microdosing psychedelics and 3% had ever tried microdosing. Psilocybin was the most common drug microdosed, most participants reported typically waiting ≥1 week in between microdosing episodes, and some reported using psychoactive doses far higher than would be generally considered a microdose. There were sociodemographic differences in who reported ever microdosing, and microdosing was correlated with past 6-month use of other drugs, greater mindfulness, sensation-seeking, and ADHD symptoms.

Consistent with National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) data on lifetime use of LSD and psilocybin for any purpose (not for microdosing), White race and male/masculine gender identity were associated with slightly to moderately greater odds of having ever microdosed (Hendricks et al., 2018; Yockey et al., 2020). There may be sociocultural factors contributing to greater microdosing prevalence among White males. For example, most proponents of microdosing in the media (e.g., Joe Rogan) and historical psychedelic figureheads (e.g., Aldous Huxley, Timothy Leary, Terence McKenna, Michael Pollan) are White men, and people of color have been underrepresented in scientific publications on psychedelics (Davis et al., 2022; Williams et al., 2020). Additionally, commodification of psychedelics and disproportionate arrests and incarceration for drug-related offenses may contribute to stigma around psychedelic drug use in communities of color (Ortiz et al., 2022; Smith et al., 2022; Williams et al., 2020).

Bisexual participants were slightly more likely than heterosexual participants to have ever microdosed. Bisexual populations have greater prevalence of most substance use behaviors compared to heterosexual and other sexual minority groups (Drope et al., 2018; Green & Feinstein, 2012; McQuoid et al., 2019; Schuler et al., 2019). NSDUH data shows that the prevalence of lifetime LSD use (at any dose) among bisexual adults increased by 16% between 2015-2018 (Yockey et al., 2020), and that bisexual identity is associated with greater lifetime use of psilocybin (at any dose) (A. Yockey & King, 2021). LGBTQ substance use disparities are often attributed to minority stress as a result of stigma, prejudice and discrimination (Meyer, 2003). National data shows a greater prevalence of psychological distress among bisexual young adults than heterosexual, lesbian, and gay young adults (Gonzales et al., 2016), and some bisexual individuals may microdose for the purported mental health benefits.

Having ever microdosed was moderately to very strongly correlated with other drug use, including past 6-month use of alcohol, cannabis, e-cigarette, cigarette, cocaine, and ecstasy. Microdosing is generally framed as a means of improving mental health and well-being; it is plausible that some individuals sought out microdosing as a means of improving behavioral health and potentially reducing use of other substances. This cross-sectional study does not provide evidence of reduced substance use, but future longitudinal studies could test the association of microdosing with changes in other drug use. Conversely, microdosing psychedelics may require knowledge of and access to illicit substances; prevalence was highest among participants who reported use of illicit drugs in this study. For example, 17% of participants who used cocaine in the past 6-months reported having ever microdosed (compared to 3% in the overall sample). Prior studies demonstrate that lifetime LSD and psilocybin use (of any dose) is associated with use of other illicit drugs (Hallock et al., 2013; Killion et al., 2021; A. Yockey & King, 2021). Additionally, shared unmeasured risk factors could explain the observed association between nonmedical drug use and microdosing.

Young adults in our study who ever microdosed had slightly higher ADHD symptoms, and slightly greater mindfulness and sensation-seeking personality traits. Sensation-seeking is a predictor of substance use among young people and is associated with psychedelic drug use in prior research (Carrol & Zuckerman, 1977). Additionally, larger doses of psilocybin and LSD can produce transient and profound changes to consciousness characterized by enhanced attentional scope and decreased self-focus, similar to self-transcendence tied to mindfulness meditation (Dourron et al., 2022; Smigielski et al., 2019). Enhancing mindfulness has been identified as a motivation for microdosing among adults (Lea, Amada, & Jungaberle, 2020; Rootman et al., 2021), however, at least one prior prospective study found no effect of microdosing on changes to mindfulness (Polito & Stevenson, 2019). Our findings of an association between microdosing and ADHD are consistent with a prior study that reported a higher prevalence of ADHD in an adult sample of microdosers than the general population (Rosenbaum et al., 2020). Increased attention and cognitive performance are often touted as benefits of microdosing, and microdosing has been likened to a “healthy alternative to Adderall” by James Fadiman, author of A psychedelic explorer’s guide (Leonard, 2015; Rosenbaum et al., 2020). Thus, some young adults with ADHD symptoms may turn to microdosing as self-medication. Given the cross-sectional nature of our data, we are unable to determine the temporal relationship between microdosing and ADHD symptoms, mindfulness, and sensation-seeking; future research could use longitudinal designs, including randomized controlled trials, to disentangle whether microdosing is a determinant or consequence of these variables, or whether there may be noncausal explanations for the associations.

Some participants reported taking doses far exceeding what would be expected for a typical microdose in this study. For example, five participants reported typically microdosing 2-5 grams of mushrooms; this dose would contain approximately 10-25mg of psilocybin, which can produce strong subjective psychedelic effects (Schindler et al., 2021). Similarly, 30% of participants who microdosed LSD reported microdosing 0.5 “tabs” of LSD or greater. Assuming a “tab” is a single dose unit corresponding to ~100μg (Hutten et al., 2019; van der Gouwe et al., 2017), even one half of a tab (~50μg) is likely enough to induce strong subjective psychedelic effects (Holze et al., 2021). It is also possible that individuals may not be accurately reporting their typical doses. In a prior survey study of North American microdosers (mean age = 28 years), more than two-thirds of participants did not know the dose that they consumed (Hutten et al., 2019). Additionally, some young people may equate the term microdosing with the act of taking psychedelics in any dosing regimen, rather than taking a small amount repeatedly to enhance mood or cognition. Indeed, more than 70% of participants who reported having ever microdosed indicated they had done so less than five times. Importantly, 20% of participants in our study who reported having heard of microdosing misperceived microdosing as more than or equal to a standard psychedelic dose or reported they did not know what the definition of microdosing is, including 18% of participants who reported that they had tried microdosing. Findings indicate that microdosing may be poorly understood and practiced by some young adults. Media depictions, public discussions, and survey research of microdosing should take care to clearly define microdosing or at least delineate microdosing from larger doses. Clear delineation of micro and macro doses is important, as larger doses could lead to distressing experiences, especially outside of safe and interpersonally supportive contexts and/or if individuals are not adequately prepared (Schlag et al., 2022).

There are limitations of this research. First, we classified participants as having ever microdosed psychedelics even if they reported only trying microdosing “one time.” Microdosing is often considered to constitute a cumulative effect of a series of repeated small doses. Furthermore, 20% of participants who had heard of microdosing reported the incorrect definition of microdosing, and several participants reported trying microdosing but reported large typical doses. Thus, it is possible that we overestimate the proportion of young adults in our sample who tried microdosing. Second, participants self-reported their typical dosing quantity. Results should not be interpreted as precise dosing measurements but rather as the language used by young adults when describing their psychedelic drug use. Third, our sample includes young adults from southern California, among whom prevalence of psychedelic drug use may differ from other regions of the United States. Fourth, we were unable to examine correlates of microdosing outcomes beyond ever use (e.g., drug type, dose, frequency) due to sparse data.

In this study of primarily non-White young adults from southern California, 3% of participants reporting having ever microdosed psychedelics, and microdosing was disproportionately used by certain demographic groups among whom recreational drug use is more common, including White, male, and bisexual participants. More than 20% of young adults who had ever heard of microdosing incorrectly defined microdosing, several participants self-reported doses much greater than the amount generally suggested for microdosing, and most participants reported microdosing on a limited number of occasions with relatively long periods of time between these occasions. Microdosing may be practiced by a small, but non-negligible proportion of young adults who disproportionately belong to some vulnerable populations, including those with mental health conditions characterized by behavioral disinhibition. However, the association of microdosing with greater mindfulness points to indications for future clinical trials. Young adult microdosing merits further attention from scientific and public health professionals to help prevent misperceptions and potential adverse consequences as well as explore potential therapeutic applications.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental Tables

Table 4.

Correlates of Ever Microdosing among Young Adults in Southern California, 2018-2019

Covariate No. (%) Ever microdosed Unadjusted OR (95% CI) Adjusted OR (95% C)a
Race/ethnicity
 White 16 (5.3) REF REF
 Hispanic 39 (2.9) 0.54 (0.30-0.98) 0.52 (0.28-0.95)
 Asian 8 (1.8) 0.33 (0.14-0.78) 0.33 (0.14-0.80)
 All other races/ethnicities 11 (3.5) 0.66 (0.30-1.44) 0.66 (0.30-1.45)
Perceived Financial Situation
 Live comfortably 30 (2.8) REF REF
 Meet needs with a little left 27 (4.0) 1.46 (0.86-2.48) 1.36 (0.79-2.32)
 Just meet basic needs 12 (2.4) 0.86 (0.43-1.68) 0.82 (0.41-1.64)
 Don’t meet basic expenses 4 (3.2) 1.14 (0.40-3.30) 1.05 (0.36-3.11)
Enrolled in Degree Program
 Yes 41 (2.6) REF REF
 No 33 (3.9) 1.52 (0.95-2.41) 1.39 (0.85-2.26)
Sexual Identity
 Heterosexual 52 (2.7) REF REF
 Bisexual 13 (6.5) 2.52 (1.35-4.71) 3.10 (1.59-6.06)
 Sexual minority other than bisexual 9 (3.6) 1.33 (0.62-2.84) 1.31 (0.60-2.90)
 Prefer not to disclose 1 (2.9) 1.06 (0.14-7.90) 1.56 (0.20-12.1)
Gender Identity
 Female/feminine 32 (2.4) REF REF
 Male/masculine 40 (4.1) 1.77 (1.10-2.84) 2.09 (1.26-45)
 Transgender/nonbinary 2 (6.1) 2.68 (0.61-11.66) 2.54 (0.55-11.8)
 Prefer not to disclose 0 (0) - -
Past 6-month substance use
 Cigarettes Yes 28 (12.8) 6.83 (4.17-11.18) 5.62 (3.36-9.42)
No 46 (2.1) REF REF
 E-cigarettes Yes 61 (7.6) 9.91 (5.41-18.15) 9.41 (5.04-17.6)
No 13 (0.8) REF REF
 Cannabis Yes 65 (7.2) 12.9 (6.38-26.0) 12.9 (6.32-26.3)
No 9 (0.6) REF REF
 Alcohol Yes 60 (4.8) 4.02 (2.24-7.24) 4.14 (2.27-7.54)
No 14 (1.2) REF REF
 Cocaine Yes 18 (17.3) 8.36 (4.71-14.82) 8.99 (4.89-16.5)
No 56 (2.4) REF REF
 Ecstasy Yes 19 (14.7) 6.95 (3.99-12.11) 7.67 (4.28-13.8)
No 55 (2.4) REF REF
LSD or psilocybin use at prior wave b
 Past 6-month LSD or psilocybin 8 (20.5) 9.49 (4.16-21.65) 8.34 (3.50-19.90)
 No past 6-month LSD or psilocybin 52 (2.7) REF REF
 Ever LSD or psilocybin 18 (11.8) 5.74 (3.22-10.25) 4.96 (2.73-9.03)
 Never LSD or psilocybin 42 (2.3) REF REF
Anxiety
 Continuous GAD-7 score - 1.02 (0.98-1.06) 1.02 (0.97-1.06)
Depression
 Continuous CES-D score - 1.00 (0.97-1.04) 1.00 (0.96-1.04)
ADHD c
 Continuous ASRS part A score - 1.03 (1.00-1.06) 1.03 (1.00-1.07)
 Continuous ASRS part B score - 1.04 (1.01-1.08) 1.05 (1.01-1.08)
Mindfulness
 Continuous mindfulness score - 1.70 (1.23-2.35) 1.69 (1.21-2.35)
Sensation seeking
 Continuous sensation seeking score - 1.27 (1.17-1.38) 1.27 (1.16-1.38)
Open in a new tab
a

Adjusted models include main independent variable and all sociodemographic factors (age, gender, sexual identity, degree enrollment, financial situation);

b

at any dose;

c

Part A references “inattentive” symptoms, and part B references “hyperactive” symptoms

Acknowledgements:

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) under Grant [R01CA229617]; National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) under Grant [K01DA058084].

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: PSH was previously in paid advisory relationships with Reset Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Silo Pharma and is currently in paid advisory relationships with the following organizations regarding the development of psychedelics and related compounds: Bright Minds Biosciences Ltd., Eleusis Benefit Corporation, and Journey Colab Corporation.

Declaration of Interest

PSH was previously in paid advisory relationships with Reset Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Silo Pharma and is currently in paid advisory relationships with the following organizations regarding the development of psychedelics and related compounds: Bright Minds Biosciences Ltd., Eleusis Benefit Corporation, and Journey Colab Corporation.

REFERENCES

  1. Anderson T, Petranker R, Rosenbaum D, Weissman CR, Dinh-Williams L-A, Hui K, Hapke E, & Farb NAS (2019). Microdosing psychedelics: Personality, mental health, and creativity differences in microdosers. Psychopharmacology, 236(2), 731–740. 10.1007/s00213-018-5106-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bachman JG, Wadsworth KN, O’Malley PM, Johnston LD, & Schulenberg JE (1996). Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood: The Impacts of New Freedoms and New Responsibilities. Psychology Press. 10.4324/9780203763797 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bershad AK, Schepers ST, Bremmer MP, Lee R, & de Wit H (2019). Acute Subjective and Behavioral Effects of Microdoses of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide in Healthy Human Volunteers. Biological Psychiatry, 86(10), 792–800. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.05.019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Björgvinsson T, Kertz SJ, Bigda-Peyton JS, McCoy KL, & Aderka IM (2013). Psychometric Properties of the CES-D-10 in a Psychiatric Sample. Assessment, 20(4), 429–436. 10.1177/1073191113481998 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown KW, & Ryan RM (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cameron LP, Nazarian A, & Olson DE (2020). Psychedelic Microdosing: Prevalence and Subjective Effects. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 52(2), 113–122. 10.1080/02791072.2020.1718250 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Carhart-Harris R, Giribaldi B, Watts R, Baker-Jones M, Murphy-Beiner A, Murphy R, Martell J, Blemings A, Erritzoe D, & Nutt DJ (2021). Trial of Psilocybin versus Escitalopram for Depression. New England Journal of Medicine, 384(15), 1402–1411. 10.1056/NEJMoa2032994 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Carhart-Harris RL, Bolstridge M, Rucker J, Day CMJ, Erritzoe D, Kaelen M, Bloomfield M, Rickard JA, Forbes B, Feilding A, Taylor D, Pilling S, Curran VH, & Nutt DJ (2016). Psilocybin with psychological support for treatment-resistant depression: An open-label feasibility study. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(7), 619–627. 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30065-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Carrol EN, & Zuckerman M (1977). Psychopathology and Sensation Seeking in “Downers,” “Speeders,” and “Trippers”: A Study of the Relationship between Personality and Drug Choice. International Journal of the Addictions, 12(4), 591–601. 10.3109/10826087709027247 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cavanna F, Muller S, Fuente L. A. de la, Zamberlan F, Palmucci M, Janeckova L, Kuchar M, Pallavicini C, & Tagliazucchi E (2021). Microevidence for microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: A double-blind placebo-controlled study of subjective effects, behavior, creativity, perception, cognition, and brain activity (p. 2021.11.30.470657). bioRxiv. 10.1101/2021.11.30.470657 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Davis AK, Arterberry BJ, Xin Y, Agin-Liebes G, Schwarting C, & Williams MT (2022). Race, Ethnic, and Sex Differences in Prevalence of and Trends in Hallucinogen Consumption Among Lifetime Users in the United States Between 2015 and 2019. Frontiers in Epidemiology, 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fepid.2022.876706 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Dourron HM, Strauss C, & Hendricks PS (2022). Self-Entropic Broadening Theory: Toward a New Understanding of Self and Behavior Change Informed by Psychedelics and Psychosis. Pharmacological Reviews, 74(4), 982–1027. 10.1124/pharmrev.121.000514 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Drope J, Liber AC, Cahn Z, Stoklosa M, Kennedy R, Douglas CE, Henson R, & Drope J (2018). Who’s still smoking? Disparities in adult cigarette smoking prevalence in the United States. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68(2), 106–115. 10.3322/caac.21444 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Family N, Maillet EL, Williams LTJ, Krediet E, Carhart-Harris RL, Williams TM, Nichols CD, Goble DJ, & Raz S (2020). Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of low dose lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in healthy older volunteers. Psychopharmacology, 237(3), 841–853. 10.1007/s00213-019-05417-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Fuentes JJ, Fonseca F, Elices M, Farré M, & Torrens M (2020). Therapeutic Use of LSD in Psychiatry: A Systematic Review of Randomized-Controlled Clinical Trials. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00943 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Glazer J, Murray CH, Nusslock R, Lee R, & de Wit H (2023). Low doses of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) increase reward-related brain activity. Neuropsychopharmacology, 48(2), Article 2. 10.1038/s41386-022-01479-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gonzales G, Przedworski J, & Henning-Smith C (2016). Comparison of Health and Health Risk Factors Between Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults and Heterosexual Adults in the United States: Results From the National Health Interview Survey. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176(9), 1344–1351. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3432 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Green KE, & Feinstein BA (2012). Substance use in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: An update on empirical research and implications for treatment. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors: Journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 26(2), 265–278. 10.1037/a0025424 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Griffiths RR, Johnson MW, Carducci MA, Umbricht A, Richards WA, Richards BD, Cosimano MP, & Klinedinst MA (2016). Psilocybin produces substantial and sustained decreases in depression and anxiety in patients with life-threatening cancer: A randomized double-blind trial. Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 30(12), 1181–1197. 10.1177/0269881116675513 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Griffiths RR, Johnson MW, Richards WA, Richards BD, McCann U, & Jesse R (2011). Psilocybin occasioned mystical-type experiences: Immediate and persisting dose-related effects. Psychopharmacology, 218(4), 649–665. 10.1007/s00213-011-2358-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Grob CS, Danforth AL, Chopra GS, Hagerty M, McKay CR, Halberstadt AL, & Greer GR (2011). Pilot study of psilocybin treatment for anxiety in patients with advanced-stage cancer. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68(1), 71–78. 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.116 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hallock RM, Dean A, Knecht ZA, Spencer J, & Taverna EC (2013). A survey of hallucinogenic mushroom use, factors related to usage, and perceptions of use among college students. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 130(1–3), 245–248. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.11.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hendricks PS, Crawford MS, Cropsey KL, Copes H, Sweat NW, Walsh Z, & Pavela G (2018). The relationships of classic psychedelic use with criminal behavior in the United States adult population. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 32(1), 37–48. 10.1177/0269881117735685 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Holze F, Vizeli P, Ley L, Müller F, Dolder P, Stocker M, Duthaler U, Varghese N, Eckert A, Borgwardt S, & Liechti ME (2021). Acute dose-dependent effects of lysergic acid diethylamide in a double-blind placebo-controlled study in healthy subjects. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(3), Article 3. 10.1038/s41386-020-00883-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Hutten NRPW, Mason NL, Dolder PC, & Kuypers KPC (2019). Motives and Side-Effects of Microdosing With Psychedelics Among Users. The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 22(7), 426–434. 10.1093/ijnp/pyz029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Johnstad PG (2018). Powerful substances in tiny amounts. Nordisk Alkohol- & Narkotikatidskrift : NAT, 35(1), 39–51. 10.1177/1455072517753339 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kaertner LS, Steinborn MB, Kettner H, Spriggs MJ, Roseman L, Buchborn T, Balaet M, Timmermann C, Erritzoe D, & Carhart-Harris RL (2021). Positive expectations predict improved mental-health outcomes linked to psychedelic microdosing. Scientific Reports, 11(1), Article 1. 10.1038/s41598-021-81446-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Kelly J (2020). Silicon Valley Is Micro-Dosing ‘Magic Mushrooms’ To Boost Their Careers. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/01/17/silicon-valley-is-micro-dosing-magic-mushrooms-to-boost-their-careers/ [Google Scholar]
  29. Kessler RC, Adler L, Ames M, Demler O, Faraone S, Hiripi E, Howes MJ, Jin R, Secnik K, Spencer T, Ustun TB, & Walters EE (2005). The World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS): A short screening scale for use in the general population. Psychological Medicine, 35(2), 245–256. 10.1017/s0033291704002892 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Killion B, Hai AH, Alsolami A, Vaughn MG, Sehun Oh P, & Salas-Wright CP (2021). LSD use in the United States: Trends, correlates, and a typology of us. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 223, 108715. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108715 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kuypers KP, Ng L, Erritzoe D, Knudsen GM, Nichols CD, Nichols DE, Pani L, Soula A, & Nutt D (2019). Microdosing psychedelics: More questions than answers? An overview and suggestions for future research. Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 33(9), 1039–1057. 10.1177/0269881119857204 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Lea T, Amada N, & Jungaberle H (2020). Psychedelic Microdosing: A Subreddit Analysis. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 52(2), 101–112. 10.1080/02791072.2019.1683260 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Lea T, Amada N, Jungaberle H, Schecke H, & Klein M (2020). Microdosing psychedelics: Motivations, subjective effects and harm reduction. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 75, 102600. 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.11.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Leonard A (2015, November 20). How LSD Microdosing Became the Hot New Business Trip. Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/how-lsd-microdosing-became-the-hot-new-business-trip-64961/ [Google Scholar]
  35. Livne O, Shmulewitz D, Walsh C, & Hasin DS (2022). Adolescent and adult time trends in US hallucinogen use, 2002–19: Any use, and use of ecstasy, LSD and PCP. Addiction (Abingdon, England). 10.1111/add.15987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. McQuoid J, Thrul J, Ozer E, Ramo D, & Ling PM (2019). Tobacco use in the sexual borderlands: The smoking contexts and practices of bisexual young adults. Health & Place, 58, 102069. 10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.12.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Meyer I (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1, 3–26. 10.1037/2329-0382.1.S.3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Mitchell JM, Bogenschutz M, Lilienstein A, Harrison C, Kleiman S, Parker-Guilbert K, Ot’alora G. M, Garas W, Paleos C, Gorman I, Nicholas C, Mithoefer M, Carlin S, Poulter B, Mithoefer A, Quevedo S, Wells G, Klaire SS, van der Kolk B, … Doblin R (2021). MDMA-assisted therapy for severe PTSD: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Nature Medicine, 27(6), Article 6. 10.1038/s41591-021-01336-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Mossman SA, Luft MJ, Schroeder HK, Varney ST, Fleck DE, Barzman DH, Gilman R, DelBello MP, & Strawn JR (2017). The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale in adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder: Signal detection and validation. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry : Official Journal of the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists, 29(4), 227–234A. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Nast C (2019, November 16). Silicon Valley’s extreme new productivity hack: Ayahuasca. British GQ. https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/lifestyle/article/microdosing-lsd [Google Scholar]
  41. Ortiz CE, Dourron HM, Sweat NW, Garcia-Romeu A, MacCarthy S, Anderson BT, & Hendricks PS (2022). Special considerations for evaluating psilocybin-facilitated psychotherapy in vulnerable populations. Neuropharmacology, 214, 109127. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2022.109127 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Polito V, & Stevenson RJ (2019). A systematic study of microdosing psychedelics. PLOS ONE, 14(2), e0211023. 10.1371/journal.pone.0211023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Rootman JM, Kryskow P, Harvey K, Stamets P, Santos-Brault E, Kuypers KPC, Polito V, Bourzat F, & Walsh Z (2021). Adults who microdose psychedelics report health related motivations and lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to non-microdosers. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 22479. 10.1038/s41598-021-01811-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Rosenbaum D, Weissman C, Anderson T, Petranker R, Dinh-Williams L-A, Hui K, & Hapke E (2020). Microdosing psychedelics: Demographics, practices, and psychiatric comorbidities. Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 34(6), 612–622. 10.1177/0269881120908004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Ross S, Bossis A, Guss J, Agin-Liebes G, Malone T, Cohen B, Mennenga SE, Belser A, Kalliontzi K, Babb J, Su Z, Corby P, & Schmidt BL (2016). Rapid and sustained symptom reduction following psilocybin treatment for anxiety and depression in patients with life-threatening cancer: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 30(12), 1165–1180. 10.1177/0269881116675512 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Schindler EAD, Sewell RA, Gottschalk CH, Luddy C, Flynn LT, Lindsey H, Pittman BP, Cozzi NV, & D’Souza DC (2021). Exploratory Controlled Study of the Migraine-Suppressing Effects of Psilocybin. Neurotherapeutics, 18(1), 534–543. 10.1007/s13311-020-00962-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Schlag AK, Aday J, Salam I, Neill JC, & Nutt DJ (2022). Adverse effects of psychedelics: From anecdotes and misinformation to systematic science. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 36(3), 258–272. 10.1177/02698811211069100 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Schuler MS, Stein BD, & Collins RL (2019). Differences in Substance Use Disparities Across Age Groups in a National Cross-Sectional Survey of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults. LGBT Health, 6(2), 68–76. 10.1089/lgbt.2018.0125 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Simonsson O, Hendricks PS, Chambers R, Osika W, & Goldberg SB (2023). Prevalence and associations of challenging, difficult or distressing experiences using classic psychedelics. Journal of Affective Disorders, 326, 105–110. 10.1016/j.jad.2023.01.073 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Smigielski L, Kometer M, Scheidegger M, Krähenmann R, Huber T, & Vollenweider FX (2019). Characterization and prediction of acute and sustained response to psychedelic psilocybin in a mindfulness group retreat. Scientific Reports, 9(1), Article 1. 10.1038/s41598-019-50612-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Smith DT, Faber SC, Buchanan NT, Foster D, & Green L (2022). The Need for Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy in the Black Community and the Burdens of Its Provision. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.774736 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. van der Gouwe D, Brunt TM, van Laar M, & van der Pol P (2017). Purity, adulteration and price of drugs bought on-line versus off-line in the Netherlands. Addiction, 112(4), 640–648. 10.1111/add.13720 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Varker T, Watson L, Gibson K, Forbes D, & O’Donnell ML (2021). Efficacy of Psychoactive Drugs for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Systematic Review of MDMA, Ketamine, LSD and Psilocybin. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 53(1), 85–95. 10.1080/02791072.2020.1817639 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Waldman A (2017). A Really Good Day: How Microdosing Made a Mega Difference in My Mood, My Marriage, and My Life. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. [Google Scholar]
  55. Webb M, Copes H, & Hendricks PS (2019). Narrative identity, rationality, and microdosing classic psychedelics. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 70, 33–39. 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.04.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Whiteside SP, Lynam DR, Miller JD, & Reynolds SK (2005). Validation of the UPPS impulsive behaviour scale: A four-factor model of impulsivity. European Journal of Personality, 19(7), 559–574. 10.1002/per.556 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Wilcox A (2021, July 9). Acid Slang: The Real Story Of Mellow Yellow and Orange Sunshine. DoubleBlind Mag. https://doubleblindmag.com/lsd-vs-acid/ [Google Scholar]
  58. Williams MT, Reed S, & George J (2020). Culture and psychedelic psychotherapy: Ethnic and racial themes from three Black women therapists. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 4(3), 125–138. 10.1556/2054.2020.00137 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Yanakieva S, Polychroni N, Family N, Williams LTJ, Luke DP, & Terhune DB (2019). The effects of microdose LSD on time perception: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Psychopharmacology, 236(4), 1159–1170. 10.1007/s00213-018-5119-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Yockey A, & King K (2021). Use of psilocybin (“mushrooms”) among US adults: 2015–2018. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 5(1), 17–21. 10.1556/2054.2020.00159 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Yockey AR, Vidourek RA, & King KA (2020). Trends in LSD use among US adults: 2015–2018. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 212, 108071. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108071 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Tables
NIHMS1964547-supplement-Supplemental_Tables.docx (20.2KB, docx)

RESOURCES