Ibo Forum @ Alex Grey's Feb 20, 21; FDA Trial Resumes

Kay Lee kaylee1 at charter.net
Sat Feb 12 20:07:02 EST 2005


Ibo Forum @ Alex Grey's Feb 20, 21; FDA Trial ResumesFrom: Dana Beal 
To: narda at lifefood.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 2:57 PM
Subject: Ibo Forum @ Alex Grey's Feb 20, 21; FDA Trial Resumes

Ibogaine Forum Schedule
February 20-21
(Sunday-Monday)

Alex Grey's Gallery
Chapel of Sacred Mirrors
540 West 27th Street
Fourth Floor
Registration: $20 per day
212-677-4899

Sunday, February 20, 2005;
Noon to 7 pm

12:00 noon-12:45 pm Registration; Introductory remarks: Rommel Washington, Benu Project.


12:45 pm-3:15 pm
Ibogaine and the Search for Lost Sacraments. Moderated by Alex Grey,  with Dana Beal, author, The Ibogaine Story, Carl Ruck, PhD, author, The Apples of Apollo, Rev. Ron Sala, Unitarian, Rob Gordon, Cures Not Wars.

Discussion


3:15 pm-3:45 pm Break

3:45 pm-5:45 pm Hands-on Ibogaine Treatment: Tips and Pointers with Howard Lotsof, Patrick Kroupa, Dimitri Mugianis, Adam Nodelman, Chris Laurance and Andrea Aplementos


5:45 pm-7:00 pm
Screening of Ibogaine: Rite of Passage
with Ben De Loenen

Monday, February 21, 2005;
10 am to 7 pm
 
10:00 am-10:30 am
Registration;
Introductory Remarks:
H.S. Lotsof

10:30 am-11:30 am
New Findings: Dopamine, Craving, and the Ibogaine Effect. Carl Anderson, PhD

11:30 am-1:15 pm
Medical Ibogaine Therapy
Jeffrey Kamlet, MD, with intro by Patrick Kroupa.

1:15 pm-1:45 pm Break


1:45 pm-3:15 pm Scientific Panel: Assessing the New Possibilities of Ibogaine. Kenneth R. Alper, MD, Emmanuel Onaivi, PhD, John Freelander. Discussion


3:15 pm-3:45 pm  Break


3:45-5:15 pm Ibogaine Anti-Viral Effects
Vic Hernandez, PhD, Chris Laurance, Jason Farell, Richie D. Discussion

5:15 pm-7:00 pm
Final Wrap-up Panel. Kenneth Alper, MD and principal
panelists.


The Monday session will be attended by representatives of various city and state agencies.

Jeffrey Kamlet, MD, is chief attending physician at the Healing Visions clinic in St. Kitts, and the president of the Florida Society of Addiction Medicine.

Kenneth Alper, MD, is an Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology at NYU School of Medicine, and organized the 1999 First International Conference on Ibogaine and co-edited (w. Stanley Glick) the Proceedings of that conference (The Alkaloids Vol. 57, Acad. Press, 2001). 

Emmanuel Onaivi, PhD, Assistant Professor at William Paterson College, M.Sc. in Pharmacology, Ph.D. in Neuropharmacology. He will present on NIDA-
funded studies of the effects of ibogaine on gene expression activated by alcohol and addictive drugs.

Howard Lotsof Discovered Ibogaine as an effective drug detox treatment. Holder of patents for ibogaine's
use vs.: * Narcotics * Stimulants * Nicotine
* Alcohol * PolyDrug Dependence.

What is Ibogaine?
Ibogaine, derived from the African root Tabernanthe iboga,  has a novel mechanism of action that is different from other pharmacotherapeutic approaches to addiction. Relevant issues to be addressed by this forum include  the distinctive social and ethnographic aspects of the informal ibogaine treatment context, its cost-effectiveness as a treatment option, and the policy implications of ibogaine's status as a Schedule 1 substance.

Ibogaine is currently without formal approval as a treatment option in the U.S. However, a distinctive unofficial treatment network, created by international self-help movements in response to the demand of the addicts, has provided ibogaine treatment in non-medical settings such as an apartment or country house.

Participants in this forum will represent the basic and clinical neurosciences, the disciplines of ethnography and sociology, and the FDA, NIDA and the pharmaceutical industry. The promotion of discussion and exchange of information and views among the participants receives significant emphasis in the forum program and agenda.

Topics to be covered include ibogaine's mechanism of action, safety and efficacy, interaction with memory and neurophysiology, and ethnographic and policy perspectives. The proposed presenters have accumulated significant new data on neurobiological, clinical, and sociocultural aspects of ibogaine. 

Advocacy Groups:

Cures not Wars 1-212-677-7180
www.cures-not-wars.org 
cnw at cures-not-wars.org 

MindVox http://ibogaine.mindvox.com 

Benu Project 1-212-304-0035

Dora Weiner Foundation 1-718-442-2754


Positive Health Project 1-212-465-8304

Harm Reduction Coalition
 1-212-213-6376

Sponsored in part by:
CURESnotWARS
www.cures-not-wars.org * 9 Bleecker St. NYC 10012
(212) 677-7180 e-mail: info at cures-not-wars.org


-----------


CBS 5 Special Reports
http://www2.cbs5.com/specialreports/local_story_034171611.html 

U. of Miami Set to Resume FDA-Approved Phase I Ibogaine Trial

Feb 3, 2005 2:12 pm US/Pacific
(CBS 5) For millions of people who suffer from alcoholism and drug addiction, rehabilitation is a long painful struggle.

For Greg Douglass, being a rock star and being a drug addict seemed to go hand and hand.

"Monday, discovered heroin. Tuesday, started making more money. Wednesday, started making a lot more money, which of course buys a lot more drugs. It was an ill-timed career move," he says.

The Oakland native was a guitarist for the likes of Steve Miler, Van Morrison, and the Greg Kihn Band, playing to huge crowds. He even wrote the hit single "Jungle Love" for the Steve Miller Band. But eventually, the bright lights came crashing down around him.

"During 1977 -- top of the charts, playing in front of 100,000 people at a time," Douglass says. "Ten years later I was virtually homeless living in my car."

Douglass struggled with heroin and methadone addiction for decades until two years ago, when he discovered a different kind of drug in a clinic just over the San Diego border. The drug could help him kick his addictions with a single treatment. It was called ibogaine.

"I went to the clinic in Mexico and took ibogaine once, and everything changed," Douglass says. "Twenty-year addiction to opiates, heroin, methadone, you name it, ended in one eight-hour period."

Even more startling is the drugs' origins. Ibogaine is an ancient root found in the jungles of Africa, where it's been used for centuries in tribal rituals. Researchers believe it contains chemical properties that may affect key receptors in the brain.

"We think it is very powerful in terms of blocking cravings and helps individuals during the early stages of recovery," says Dr. Deborah Mash of the University of Miami.

A new study conducted with rats and mice at U.C. San Francisco found further evidence that ibogaine may have a similar effect combating alcohol abuse. So if the drug has so much promise, why is it illegal here in the United States? Possibly because of something that Douglass also experienced in the clinic in Mexico. Ibogaine causes hallucinations.

"All of the sudden, I was laying there with my eyes closed and a huge whoosh of red light, little particles of red plankton. Then from out of that was a picture of my own face when I was 11 years old," Douglass says. "When I opened my eyes, I was in Mexico. I knew exactly where I was. I knew what day it was. I knew why I was there. I would close my eyes and I would be in a whole other world."

But far from being a controversial side effect, Mash believes that the hallucinations may be beneficial.

"It is a psychotropic drug, mind altering," she says. "I say we ware replacing a negative with a positive. If this is a spiritual wake up call, bring it on. If this helps the individual grab the demon and motivates them to work with a counselor and to stay in treatment, who cares if it is mind altering. It is mind altering and it is a good thing that it is."

But the stigma of a hallucinogenic drug made it hard for Mash to find the funding. So she was forced to move her clinical trials offshore. While the FDA still doesn't allow ibogaine use in the U.S., a growing number of patients are receiving treatment in clinics like the one we visited in Mexico.

"I feel great," said Wilda Penney, an alcoholic. "Hopefully I can get on with my life."

Despite the promise of ibogaine, there are still some hurdles. Critics worry about potentially lethal side effects and lack of long-term studies. Still, the early results are so encouraging, Mash has found enough money to start FDA trials again in the spring. The cost of a typical treatment with ibogaine runs anywhere from $3000 to $10,000.

"If there is anybody out there listening to this, there is hope," Douglass said. "Ibogaine changed everything. It is not a miracle cure, but it worked for me."
--------------------------


From:     dana at phantom.com
Subject:        [Ibogaine] Science, not a Cult

I don't usually comment on every topic on the list, but my actions and words were cited (semi-inaccurately) in the Peter Cohen thread, so here goes. Peter and his ilk have blacklisted  me  in legalization circles for more than a decade based on his arguments, so it was telling that he ducked out of the room so he wouldn't have to go on in his assigned order, which would given me a chance to refute his screed point by point.

Peter Cohen Wrote:
...my short-too short- argument in Nw Orelans was that using ibo is not much else than using methadone or some other drug or treatment, to excorcise these 'diabolical' drugs and use-patterns some people seem to attach to.

The position that "all drugs are created equal" and that different drug effects and addictiveness don't matter is every bit as ignorant and bigoted coming from a legalizer as from the twelvesteppers who say "ibogaine is just drug, all drugs are the same." Peter displays absolutely no sensitivity to the fact that in the U.S., methadone represents the establishment, and that Ibogaine is illegal, and stigmatized solely because it's "hallucinogenic." Or that methadone is an exquisite instrument of social control, and that Ibogaine frees you from that control.

I think that our main fight should be to fight for self determination in the choice of drug we like, and the way we use it ( given we do not harm others more than the normal amount). Its the same fight that started in the Enlightment for freedom of religeon ( quite unthinkable even in the times of  Calvin and still a weird and ultra dangerous idea in the 17th century and now in e.g. Iran

Like most European intellectuals, Peter is so ultra-secular that he is quite bent out of shape on the subject of religion (still recovering from the Spanish Inquisition, I guess). His use of the word "Cult" to describe the ibogaine movement was particularly obnoxious, given that it is calculated to provoke an official crackdown by the Bushoids.

But, the ibogaine game puts us in the same league as these weird addiction doctors that need to cure us. Just today I bought a 1948 book about the cure of homosexuality. Imagine a group of people who said USE IBOGAINE TO GET RID OF YOUR (CURSED) HOMOSEXUALITY.

They always trot this one out... This red herring was so effective  in '94 in derailing support in ACT UP for NIDA's own inhouse trial of Ibogaine (which, as distinct from Mash, was our only guarantee of a reasonable development timeline and transparency of results) that I suppose Cohen and his camp will never stop using it. There was possibly one half of a degree of separation between Ernie Drucker and John Morgan at the DPF and Dan Raymond and Donald Grove of the HRC at the time, so there's no doubt this inflammatory bullshit leaked over to the ACT UP floor. On the floor, Raymond and Grove described the position of the Cures not Wars Parade (i.e, the Dutch model, with an emphasis on market separation of cannabis and hard drugs--PLUS ibogaine) as "the potheads get their pot, and all anyone else gets is ibogaine." (Which would be a major advance, when you think about it--but we also called explicitly for legalization of personal use amounts of ALL drugs.)


(Actually, a medically discussed 1948 method of cure was to inhale a mixture  of some gasses-right after the war!!-,can you imagine how short ago maxi primitive ideas reigned about homosexuality!)

Ironically, the same people who voted to throw us out 10 years ago are now looking for ways to stop binge crystal meth/unsafe sex. The recent finding about ibogaine upregulating the glial cell-line derived neurotropic factor that blocks binge behavior confirms that ibogaine ought to work for that, as I told Duncan Osbourne of GAY CITY NEWS. But Osbourne is another ACT UP alumnus, so he supports the original 1994 decision, and takes the position that there is no more effective medical treatment for cyrstal meth addiction than wellbutrin--that if you say ibogaine is any better than an SSRI, you're talking "miracle drug", and there's no such thing. Kind of ironic that the people currently getting enough money to FINISH testing ibogaine, and spending it on the "Crystal free and Sexy" ad campaign instead, voted against ibogaine back in '94, went on to get addicted to crystal, and ended up contracting a more more drug-resistent form of HIV...

We should have the right to use heroin or cocaine or whatever in any way we like for any duration, and we should not be forced into abstinence by a cumulation of social misery put upon us by a culture that for some reason I do not discuss here has created intense drug users into lepers, nuking their pride and self esteem.

What if drug users don't WANT heroin and cocaine? What if they'd chose a completely different menu of drugs if they could determine what was being produced instead of the Mexican mafia or Afghan warlords? We had a fullblown crystal epidemic in 1966--and then Owsley flooded the country with acid, and suddenly crystal became a problem only for the fringes of the drug scene.

So, fighting for ibo treatment is saying: we miserable creatures need treatment, only please let US choose the miracle treatment we attribute healing to.

But Facts are stubborn things, as I told Peter in the hall after the forum. Ibogaine heals, methadone makes yr teeth fall out. Different drugs have different effects, even though Peter replied that he never takes any of that neurochemical stuff seriously. Ibogaine was developed by the druggies themselves as an act of self-determination.

I say, fight first and foremost for the right to use drugs as long as we want in the amount and system we want ,against a State that maintains intense drug users as witches to be chased and burned. And for which the ibo clan now makes ibogaine available to burn on.

More appropriate was his comparison of ibogaine to exorcism. If it really is possible to replicate the physical processes in the brain induced by exorcism, what should be appropriate that it be controlled by drug users' movements instead of Jesuits?

Once we have this right, we will of course also have the right to seek any kind of assistence if we need help to change our ways,just as we seek assistence in any way if we somehow can not divorce this husband or wife we hate.
But this assistence only makes sense if divorce is not prohibited, as it was in christian Europe well into the 20th century in many countries for most (the rich excepted).

So like the Marxists, Cohen says that things have to become really terrible so that the system is overthrown--before they can become better-- no matter that the suffering that is going on right at this movement is totally unnecessary. The important thing is that his position be vindicated.

I see the ibo clan as a miserable symptom of defeat. As if they say lets not burn witches on a ( normal) stake, but in an (alternative) clay oven. I also said once that I see the ibo people as DEA agents,serving the cause of prohibition because their theme is getting rid of these 'ultra dangerous' drugs.

So now I'm a DEA agent! I see Cohen, Stanton Peele, Ernie Drucker and so-on as blackening our reputation so they can preserve their professional monopoly on the big bux from George Soros and Peter B. Lewis while we get squat to put on the forum at the Chapel of Sacred Mirrors. BTW, Patrick told me Allan Clear tried to get Peele to come to New Orleans, but he wanted too much money. All our people show up for free. But for Stanton Peele, it's just his career.

Now, most of the ibo clan people I know are sincere folk, likeable and smart. My anger is not so much focussed on them, but on their defeatist voodoo ideology.

I dunno. The straight left (ACT UP was taken over by Workers' World) isn't doing as well right now as we are. Lynn Stewart was just convicted for helping blind Sheik communicate with his followers in Egypt; Deborah Mash just resumed FDA-approved trials of Ibogaine. Lemme see-- Us forcing to system to legalize ANY psychedelic drug (even one as weird as ibogaine) doesn't sound defeatist to me. Not compared to going to prison.

But then I was never big on the heroin solution anyway.

Tell me what you think and where I am not clear enough.
ciao
pc

PS .Howard, I'd prefer you add this as txt representing my New Orleans gig.


Vector Vector wrote:
I don't have the messages in front of me, but the after conference
reports were all negative about Peter Cohen. Dana Beal yelled at him or
threatened to hit him and there isn't anyone who agreed with what he
said.

Wrong! After he told me neurochemistry is irrelevant, and I said facts are stubborn things, I patted him on the back and said (in my best Hail Fellow Well-met voice) "Admit it, Peter, you support prohibition of Ibogaine!" And he does, because he seeks to ban it from discussion at  legalization forums, to cast this pall over it so as to hamstring any movement to legalize it in the U.S. (the onlybig country where it's illegal, and one pushing to prohibit everywhere else, as was just done in Denmark because Indra was sending it directly into the U.S.)

Sara wrote:
Peter Cohen is good for legalization of drugs.
For the rest he had no understanding of how Iboga works
Because he can't know until he will try it, and if he will than for sure
He will change his mind, but I guess he likes the party drugs better.
Anyway because Iboga/ine is presented as a medication and not as a sacrament
and a spiritual tool, then he gets to see only one side of the picture,
I'm sure that if it was presented as an amazing trip to the unknown
Then it will get another spot light.

When I speak to him I tell him , he should try it before judge it.


Actually I think he's bad for legalization. He is, for instance, also against  the Dutch separation of marijuana and hard drugs, because he said so when I tried to ask him where Dutch gov't fact sheets originated describing the decline of heroin use after the adoption of the current system. If you can't even tolerate personal use amounts of grass, forget about personal use amounts of everything else. What he seems to  be for is market anarchy without the social benefit of regulation--which never will help you sell any liberalization of the drug situation to the politicians. Or as I said to Donald Grove, does that mean that wherever marijuana and hashish are present, cocaine and heroin must be allowed also? Or that you hand over control of the marijuana market to people who will use the money to feel their habits, while turning on all their customers to smack?

Howard wrote:
I was called out of the session during the period that Dana is reported to
have yelled at Peter and therefore cannot comment on that except to speculate
that Dana's yelling may have been method of responding to Peter's method of
initiating discussion of ibogaine by confrontation.  It is all process and if it
gets people thinking, all the better.

The reason Howard never saw it was that it never happened. I think he may have actually walking down the hall with us when I was talking to Peter, so he wouldn't have seen any yelling, because there was none.

I admit being peeved that Peter dodged any actual debate. His rap would have focused my presentation on Ibogaine since 1990, which would have shortened it at least 40%.

Steve Anker wrote:
Dana - genious idea: do your own little initiation at the up-coming conference? The night before recreate as close a Bwiti initiation as possible, get twenty or so folk who have done it, pick a father, and take the plunge. I mean, what a cool place to do it and how often in NYC are there that many people who have been there all gathered together? Hell, I'd leave my wife, daughter and a temperate climate for a weekend in cold and misery to hear you talk about it. I'd be honored to be there while you go through it.

I was ready to do it in November, but my dose was hijacked by a relapsing junkie. It always goes that way.  I certainly don't want the $4,000 operation. But I won't be able to do it in the next 9 days, not unless you want to pay for some plane fares, Steve.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Cohen [mailto:cohen.cedro at uva.nl]
Sent: 03 February 2005 21:52
To: nick227 at tiscali.co.uk
Subject: RE: [Ibogaine] Re: the ibogaine clan

Nick, I am not sure I understand you.
You say

" So, you need to keep the arguments ideological and strictly in the mind.

Please explain.

Nick is actually atypical on the list, in backing the social "encouragement" of people to quit. Cohen, on the other hand, is a utopian anarchist. Myself, I'm a marijuana bolshevik, advocating that all soft drugs scenes separate themselves from hard drugs by pushing ibogaine.

Then, you are right that cutting off your feelings diminishes power people can have, but some feelings do so much more! Sometimes cutting the feelings may be a very healthy act, like cutting the physical pain people have when for instance, they have serious cancers.
I would agree that doing it longer than really needed may be counterproductive, and most people ense this and quit. Some way!
ciao
pc

Why not ibogaine?

Hi Peter,
 
I guess I wanted to point out, firstly, that it is hard to fight particularly for the right to use opiates unless one is not under the influence of the same. Apologies for not stating this more clearly. Secondly, and more generally, that, as I see it, you are promoting the rights of the individual to use any drug of choice but without much apparent concern for the addictive nature of some of these drugs.

Not exactly harm reduction.

For me, it's one thing to say people should have the right to access to psychedelics, for example tryptamines, drugs having a relatively low level of physically addictive characteristics. But another to say that people should just have constant access to analgesics, such as opiates, whenever they want without regard for the highly physically addictive nature of these drugs.

In the U.S., all that is allowed is methadone, buprenorphin, and SSRI's. No pot, no psychedelics, except peyote for Native Americans. People who want to change this are every bit as utopian as the 12 step fascists and the utopian libertarians, you understand. We just want a different outcome.

 Basically, underneath this, I do not understand your stance on ibogaine, a substance that can reverse unwanted drug usage. Can you make your position more clear? You have something against this substance?
 
About pain control, for sure opiates or any other medication are great for as long as needed.
 
Regards
 
Nick

His stance on Ibogaine is simple: it has always threatened to take over the legalization agenda, and to make all his favorite arguments obsolete. Why-- he might actually have to read up on neurochemistry. I remember one ibo forum at the Lindesmith Center: Ethan Nadelmann literally had to be told by everyone in the room that they wanted to continue the presentation on neuro-chem when he tried to stop it because he didn't understand it and he was getting bored. They're all the same.

Randy wrote:
I'm with you Sara. I figure the only way is to get the word out and make public demand so loud that Ibogaine can't be denied access to. It just seems so ludicrous that the government will subsidize Methadone, and then deny the only thing that helps you beat the addiction. Not to mention the easiest way for all prescription opiate addictions. That's just the legal drugs I'm talking about. What about Heroin? I'm not talking about fixing every addict, I'm talking about the ones who wanted out, like me. I often wonder how many people are sitting around thinking, " I wish I could quit doing this shit to myself," and don't know a thing about Ibogaine? They need to know that they have a choice. A good choice, the best choice I could find anyway, and I looked hard, very hard. If enough people are successful doing Ibogaine then it just can't be ignored anymore. For addicts that want to interrupt their addiction, the longer they have to wait, the longer they have to suffer needlessly. That just sucks. Looking back at my treatment I would have done it just for the addiction interruption aspects of Ibogaine, but man those trails were cool and the Holideck was incredible. I hope they never take the trip out of Ibogaine. I'm afraid that Steve is right.      Randy

I guess the ones who want out will just have to go on being cannon fodder in Peter's war of ideas. Too bad real people suffer and die. But for these academics, it's a living.

Cures not Wars has a simple three part program:

1) Turn control of all aspects of drugs policy including law enforcement over to ibogaine proponents. The other people had their chance, and they muffed it.

2) National Service (a draft) for all opponents of ibogaine and cannabis, in a kind of a cross between the peace corps and the civilian conservation corps.

3) Focus the effort on reversing global warming through water reclamation projects, replacing trees with hemp, etc. Tax every entity that had cannabis prohibition to pay for it.


Marijuana Bolshevism.

Dana/cnw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mindvox.com/pipermail/ibogaine/attachments/20050212/904e8451/attachment.html>


More information about the Ibogaine mailing list