> I did fairly deep research on this beforehand, looking into actual pharmacological aspect of interactions with things like dopamine, etc
While you can read about mechanisms and in vitro this and that all day, this is not the same as quality applied clinical research, which frankly just doesn't exist in any meaningful quantity. I am a practitioner, and I am very sympathetic to the movement of alternative treatments counter to established standards of care, however at the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that the controlled research is non-existent or poor, and things like the MAPS manual are essentially woo.
And specifically the problems I have is that ironically, these alternative treatments which are supposedly trying to overcome boundaries of established care are extremely proscriptive themselves.. they're limited, just differently, and the justifications have very little evidence based backing.
While you can read about mechanisms and in vitro this and that all day, this is not the same as quality applied clinical research, which frankly just doesn't exist in any meaningful quantity. I am a practitioner, and I am very sympathetic to the movement of alternative treatments counter to established standards of care, however at the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that the controlled research is non-existent or poor, and things like the MAPS manual are essentially woo.
And specifically the problems I have is that ironically, these alternative treatments which are supposedly trying to overcome boundaries of established care are extremely proscriptive themselves.. they're limited, just differently, and the justifications have very little evidence based backing.