Editorial: Question 4 opens door to psychedelics abuse

Supporters of Ballot Question 4 laud the benefits of psychedelics in treating mental health issues as the impetus for voting yes. They maintain that access to psilocybin (found in “magic mushrooms”) would be a boon for those suffering from depression and PTSD.

Legalizing psychedelics would also be a boon for black market sellers out to make a buck. That’s enough reason to hit the brakes.

Unlike the cannabis industry, the ballot question does not call for retail sales of psychedelics. Instead, a state natural psychedelic substances commission would regulate the licensing these substances and their administration to people 21 and older. Here it gets murky.

According to the Coalition for Safe Communities, while these psychedelic centers would licensed, they are not required to be run by medical professionals. This is concerning — what happens if a client has an adverse reaction and needs medical intervention?

What about cost?

“The yes side of this ballot question is touting veterans and other people that have various sicknesses,” Chris Keohane of the Coalition for Safe Communities told WBUR . “I’d like to know how many people in the state of Massachusetts are going through the painful issues that they talk about can afford $750 to $3,500 per visit. They are providing false hope to the people that need it the most.”

That steep price tag is a powerful incentive to get into the licensed facilitator business. It also benefits the state’s bottom line, as Question 4 also calls for the imposition of a 15% excise tax on the sale of psychedelic substances at licensed administration facilities. A profit motive and drugs make a dangerous combination.

Which brings us to the most egregious element of Question 4: Bay Staters 21 and older would be permitted to grow the substances in a 12-foot by 12-foot area at home, consume them without supervision, and give away small amounts to friends and family members ages 21 and older, the State House News reported.

This a golden ticket to black market operators who could have a steady supply of homegrown product to sell. A product it would be legal to possess. Being able to consume psychedelics without supervision also begs the question: isn’t the point of licensed facilities to administer psilocybin and other such drugs under watchful eyes?

Psilocybin isn’t a low-dose marijuana gummy. According to the DEA, its psychological effects include hallucinations and an inability to discern fantasy from reality. Panic reactions and a psychotic-like episode also may occur, particularly if a user ingests a high dose.

Imagine if a child got into the psilocybin-growing area at home. .

Those suffering from severe depression and PTSD who could benefit from therapies using psychedelics are undermined by Question 4 as it stands. If it called for legal use supervised by medical professionals in medical facilities, that would be one thing. But the DIY approach facilitated by Question 4 upends any positives.

A yes vote on Question 4 opens the door for illegal sales of powerful substances as well as the ability to grow, ingest and distribute these substances by virtually anyone, as long as they’re 21 and older.

The Boston Herald endorses a No Vote on Question 4.