> On the other hand, just because someone has a difficult experience it doesn't mean that on the whole the experience was detrimental. A lot depends on who the person is, what kind of help they have, and how they react to and integrate the experience.

I was referring to those with long-lasting negative effects that persist for weeks, months, or even years after the trip.

These negative effects are frequently downplayed (or downvoted) in online discussions. They tend to be dismissed through victim blaming, such as suggesting that the person was unprepared, had latent psychiatric issues, or had improper set and setting.

The definition of "correct" preparation and set and setting seems to be defined as an impossibly high bar that few people actually follow. The impossibly high bar makes it easy to dismiss, ignore, or victim-blame the negative outcomes.

For example:

> All indications are that it is such an approach is what is responsible for the overwhelming positive outcomes of these studies, as opposed to the "acid casualties" that happen in informal, usually uninformed or even self-destructive casual use.

How many of the people reading this article or this comment section will be following the MAPS therapeutic protocol with trained professional supervision? Realistically, that number is zero. How many HN readers do you think are searching the darknet right now to buy some 5-MeO-DMT or Psilocybin for ad-hoc personal drug use under the belief that they are self-medicating? Probably quite a few.