I'm interested that Johns Hopkins is finally taking notice. I'll be even more interested if they actually do anything substantial with the research, which isn't a given, having some knowledge of Johns Hopkins, and the sometimes ridiculous restrictions they put on researchers.

I knew a grad student at UCLA years ago, who was trying to drum up funding for research in the same area, and no one would give him the time of day. He was actually given a dressing-down by one of his professors for being interested in a "worthless" area of research.

I'll bet that professor, who I suspected of having dementia at the time, might have been more interested had he realized that low-dose DMT may have profound beneficial effects for Alzheimer's and dementia patients.

Or not, as he may well have been too far gone to care.

Then again, much of the medical science community is only now coming to the realization - at least, publicly - that cannabis has real and effective medicinal applications, despite there having been literally dozens of commonly used, and clinically proven, prescription drugs that were cannabis-based, prior to it being demonized and made illegal in 1937.

Not to mention literally thousands of years of anecdotal evidence, from all over the world. And, as one of my professors correctly stated, anecdotal evidence is still a form of evidence, and often turns out to be scientifically valid.

There is so much more to the physical world than we can possibly explain, and that begs the question of the spiritual world, though at least now more scientists are beginning to acknowledge that it exists.

In any case, Terence McKenna would be pleased, and I hope for everyone's sake that the research they do is objective, scientifically valid, intellectually honest, and not merely medical sleight-of-hand.