Reports surfaced Wednesday that an independent scientific advisory committee to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) overwhelmingly recommended that the risks of using the party drug MDMA (commonly known as “ecstasy”) to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) outweigh the benefits. Experts are welcoming the decision as a positive step in restoring common sense within the field of trauma care that has increasingly promoted the use psychedelic drugs in recent years.
“Ecstasy is a synthetic party drug, not a pharmaceutical,” FRC Senior Fellow Meg Kilgannon told The Washington Stand. “This decision seems to reflect this reality. Instead of the latest fad, people suffering from PTSD deserve the best treatments and therapies available and our prayers for their peace and recovery.”
In reaching its decision, the FDA advisory committee cited numerous troubling aspects of studies purporting to prove the effectiveness of MDMA in treating PTSD, including “flawed study data, questionable research conduct and significant drug risks, including the potential for heart problems, injury and abuse.”
The decision reportedly came as a “shock” to observers, as psychedelics advocacy groups have gained widespread traction by steadily engaging in a decades-long effort to push the supposed benefits of the drugs as a way to help those struggling with trauma to open up to therapists about their experiences.
The shocked reaction of those within the field of psychology did not come as a surprise to Dr. Jennifer Bauwens. In comments to TWS, the clinical psychologist, licensed therapist, and clinical researcher explained how the march toward the institutional acceptance of psychedelics has been blatantly clear for some time.
“I first starting hearing about the use of psychedelic drugs like MDMA for trauma treatment in 2020,” she recalled. “Coming from the psychology field, I was seeing some of the top researchers in the trauma field touting this treatment. My alarm bells were going off. As I’ve done some of my own research and written about it, there’s been such a concerted effort to socialize the idea of psychedelics as a good thing. I don’t have any way to confirm it, but it certainly seems like the fix has been in for a long time.”
Bauwens continued, “The fact that there were already certifications available for therapists to get trained in psychedelic assisted treatment — I see it all over my continuing education courses — tells me that there is a lot of effort that’s gone into this. The psychologists and researchers that have been proponents of this since the Nixon administration, you won’t see them backing off. But this is a welcome turn of events. Finally, there’s some sanity amongst those looking at the research.”
Bauwens, who serves as director of the Center for Family Studies at Family Research Council, went on to detail some of the shortcomings of the studies on MDMA that were reported by the FDA advisory committee.
“What was encouraging to me was that the review actually mentioned that the studies used people who already have exposure to MDMA, and the research never addressed the high dropout rates or those who had adverse effects,” she observed. “They didn’t address the fact that the drug would actually mimic PTSD symptoms. For some people, they said it was the absolute worst experience of their life. Those types of responses were just brushed over. Truthfully, that should be a warning to all of us. When we see research that shows results that are borderline miraculous and it doesn’t involve God, then you have to wonder what is really going on. That should be a clue to us.”
Of note, the FDA is not required to follow the advisory committee’s recommendation, but previous precedent suggests that the agency is unlikely to approve the drug. “I think with this one, it is a tall order [for MDMA’s approval],” Bauwens said. “Psychedelics have a long history of social harm. It would seem that they would want the endorsement of the advisors, but these days, you can never tell.”
As to how those struggling with PTSD can find healing, Bauwens emphasized that the spiritual component of authentic recovery must not be ignored.
“There are available treatments that are backed by good research,” she noted. “But we must remember that trauma has a spiritual component to it. If you look at what Scripture says, ‘God has not given us a spirit of fear.’ So anything that comes to bring fear and terror, which is what the nature of trauma does, is outside of His kingdom. It is exerting a spiritual component. So if we only deal with the physiological or the psychological effects of trauma and we don’t ever bring God into the situation, we’re going to have a partial healing.”
Bauwens continued, “That’s one thing that’s missing from our secular interventions. They are good, there are some things that can bring healing that have been backed by research. But one missing component — and this is why psychedelics have gained traction — is that there is a spiritual component to them, and we’re looking for that. But it’s the wrong spiritual door — we want to bring God into it.”
Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.
