Solquinox sounded great, until I found out I wasn't invited
an open letter to the Psychedelic Society of Vermont
by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher
August 9, 2025
A few days ago, I saw a Tweet by Dr. Rick Barnett inviting his followers to check out an upcoming annual event that he is hosting in Vermont in September of this year. The profered link took me to a page entitled "Soulquinox: Psychedelic Science and Spirituality Summit," sponsored apparently by the Psychedelic Society of Vermont. The site intro was enticing to me as someone who "has skin in this game," given my intention of using psychedelics to get off of Effexor in the coming year. It was written by Rick himself and begins as follows:
"Each year our community gathers in the Green Mountains of Vermont to "cerebrate" (think deeply about something; ponder) and celebrate the role psychedelics may have in personal growth, healing, and health."
"Great," I thought to myself, "Those topics are right up my alley. I'm going through my own decisions right now about healing with psychedelics." So I clicked on the link that said "register now"... and got a rude awakening. It turns out that mere patients are not welcome at this event, it's only for "health professionals." To be exact, the pop-up notice admonished me as follows:
"This event is for health professionals only. This applies to you and any/all of your +1 attendees."
Well, let me tell you, my "+1 attendees" were not too happy to read THAT!
Okay, I can kind of understand the restriction: the guys want to talk shop. But it seems to me that they are "reckoning without their host" if they do not at least hear from one person who speaks for the millions (including the 1 in 4 American women) who are dependent on Big Pharma meds for life. What is the psychedelic renaissance doing for them -- and more importantly, what do THEY have to say about protocols that THEY believe will work? When it comes to using psychedelics for drug withdrawal, the patients are the experts because they can tell you what would work for them from a psychological point of view, rather than you telling them what should work for them. Perhaps I'm touchy having been ignored for years now, but I get this message all the time from psychiatrists: I should be taking my meds, not speculating on protocols. That's THEIR job, thank me very much. As Professor Lilloman said after interrupting a doubtful Mel Brooks in "High Anxiety":
It IS "nece"! I know what is "nece." Don't tell ME what is "nece." I tell YOU what is "nece."
So thinking, I sent the following message to the Soulquinox sponsor, the Psychedelic Society of Vermont..
I appreciate that you want to have a meeting with service providers only, but shouldn't you be open to the ideas of long-term recipients of mental health services in the USA, so that you can get an idea of what THEY think might work for THEM?
I'm a 65-year-old trying to get off of Effexor and I have a plan that I'd like your folks to discuss: namely, the compounding of Effexor such that I get off it in a year while the dose drops 364/365th every day -- during which time I microdose on psilocybin and any other godsend that makes sense and is (or becomes) legal (for a wonder), such as huachuma cactus.
When I presented this idea to my psychiatrist, he said he had never heard of such a thing and thought I should drop my Effexor dose by 35 mgs every month instead, and then start "counting pilules," though he himself said this would cause brain zaps and the possible return of my depression.
Now, I am not a doctor, but my plan makes perfect psychological sense and does not try to turn me into a compounding pharmacist. Psychological misgivings are minimized, first by the low almost imperceptible changes in dose and second by the fact that one knows they are getting help from natural medicine. For we all know how high recidivism rates are for getting off such drugs without the help of plant teachers. Yet no one wants to hear from me because I'm just a patient.
I have written hundreds of essays on this topic as the Drug War Philosopher at abolishthedea.com and I am still looking for someone in the healing business who thinks a patient is worth listening to on such topics. Too many of them think we should just shut up and take our meds -- that we should have no role in deciding what would work for us.
The healthcare business needs to do better by the millions that it has turned into eternal patients, and one start would be for counselors to actively solicit ideas from those who have been disempowered for decades now by the pill mill of materialist science.
Open Letters
Check out the conversations that I have had so far with the movers and shakers in the drug-war game -- or rather that I have TRIED to have. Actually, most of these people have failed to respond to my calls to parlay, but that need not stop you from reading MY side of these would-be chats.
I don't know what's worse, being ignored entirely or being answered with a simple "Thank you" or "I'll think about it." One writes thousands of words to raise questions that no one else is discussing and they are received and dismissed with a "Thank you." So much for discussion, so much for give-and-take. It's just plain considered bad manners these days to talk honestly about drugs. Academia is living in a fantasy world in which drugs are ignored and/or demonized -- and they are in no hurry to face reality. And so I am considered a troublemaker. This is understandable, of course. One can support gay rights, feminism, and LGBTQ+ today without raising collegiate hackles, but should one dare to talk honestly about drugs, they are exiled from the public commons.
Somebody needs to keep pointing out the sad truth about today's censored academia and how this self-censorship is but one of the many unacknowledged consequences of the drug war ideology of substance demonization.
There are plenty of "prima facie" reasons for believing that we could eliminate most problems with drug and alcohol withdrawal by chemically aided sleep cures combined with using "drugs" to fight "drugs." But drug warriors don't want a fix, they WANT drug use to be a problem.
Drug War censorship is supported by our "science" magazines, which pretend that outlawed drugs do not exist, and so write what amount to lies about the supposed intransigence of things like depression and anxiety.
According to Donald Trump's view of life, Jesus Christ was a chump. We should hate our enemies, not love them.
The UK just legalized assisted dying. This means that you can use drugs to kill a person, but you still can't use drugs to make that person want to live.
If opium were legal, then much of the nostrums peddled by drug stores today would be irrelevant. (No wonder the drug war has staying power!)
I think many scientists are so used to ignoring "drugs" that they don't even realize they're doing it. Yet almost all books about consciousness and depression (etc.) are nonsense these days because they ignore what drugs could tell us about those topics.
In 1886, coca enthusiast JJ Tschudi referred to prohibitionists as 'kickers.' He wrote: "If we were to listen to these kickers, most of us would die of hunger, for the reason that nearly everything we eat or drink has fallen under their ban."
I'm told that most psychiatrists would like to receive shock therapy if they become severely depressed. That's proof of drug war insanity: they would prefer damaging their brains to using drugs that can elate and inspire.
Jim Hogshire described sleep cures that make physical withdrawal from opium close to pain-free. As for "psychological addiction," there are hundreds of elating drugs that could be used to keep the ex-user's mind from morbidly focusing on a drug whose use has become problematic for them.
The drug war is is a multi-billion-dollar campaign to enforce the attitude of the Francisco Pizarro's of the world when it comes to non-western medicine. It is the apotheosis of the colonialism that most Americans claim to hate.