Saskatchewan · Prague · Britain · Maryland
1950s–1970s
Hospital psychiatry, alcoholism treatment, psycholytic therapy and Spring Grove/Maryland research developed the room, music and high-dose “psychedelic therapy” forms that still shape current protocols (Dyck, 2005; Oram, 2016).
Menlo Park · IFAS
1961–1965
Myron Stolaroff’s International Foundation for Advanced Study joined engineering culture, creativity research and guided LSD/mescaline sessions. Willis Harman, James Fadiman, Robert Mogar and others worked within its orbit (Oram, 2016).
Underground therapy · California · Russia
1970s–1990s
Leo Zeff transmitted MDMA and other methods through informal therapist networks; Stolaroff later recorded this lineage. In Leningrad/St Petersburg, Evgeny Krupitsky and Andrei Grinenko developed ketamine psychedelic therapy for addiction from the late 1980s (Stolaroff, 2004; Krupitsky and Grinenko, 1997).
Johns Hopkins · Imperial · Zürich · academic centres
2000s–present
Modern psilocybin research rebuilt controlled trials, safety standards, neuroimaging and mystical-experience measurement around academically acceptable indications (Griffiths et al., 2006; Johnson, Richards and Griffiths, 2008).
MAPS network · multinational trial sites
1990s–present
MAPS, founded by Rick Doblin in 1986, coordinated a long campaign to move MDMA from underground therapy into clinical development. Michael and Annie Mithoefer, Marcela Ot’alora, Jennifer Mitchell and many site teams translated that project into manuals and trials.
Infusion clinic · KAP practice · telehealth · REMS centre
2000s–present
Ketamine expanded through multiple economies: generic off-label treatment, psychotherapy practice, venture-funded clinic chains, at-home compounded products and Johnson & Johnson’s proprietary esketamine system (Drabiak, 2025).
Psychodynamic / transpersonal: Grof’s cartography organised sessions through biographical, perinatal and transpersonal domains and treated intensified experience as a process with its own direction. This model remains influential among practitioners but is not a consensus neuroscientific account (Grof, 1980).
Peak and mystical experience: Pahnke’s categories—unity, transcendence of time and space, sacredness, deeply felt positive mood, paradoxicality and ineffability—were revised into modern mystical-experience scales. Correlations between such scores and outcome are important, but do not by themselves prove a single causal mechanism (MacLean et al., 2012).
Trauma processing and social safety: MDMA protocols describe an “inner healing intelligence” while research also examines fear extinction, autobiographical memory, affiliation and therapeutic alliance. The manual’s organismic language coexists with biomedical and psychotherapeutic models (Mithoefer, 2017; Mitchell et al., 2021).
Neuroplasticity and critical periods: Contemporary neuroscience frames psychedelic and entactogenic treatments through network dynamics, synaptic plasticity, reopening of learning windows and context-sensitive updating. These mechanisms remain differentiated by compound and are not interchangeable with subjective meaning.
Ketamine’s plural models: The infusion clinic emphasises NMDA blockade, glutamatergic cascades and rapid symptom reduction. KAP adds loosened defences, dissociation, imagery and therapeutic relationship. Krupitsky’s KPT deliberately used an immersive altered state within addiction psychotherapy. Lilly’s “metaprogramming” imagined the mind as a self-modifying biocomputer; it is historically influential in technological psychedelic culture but not a validated treatment mechanism (Krupitsky and Grinenko, 1997; Williams, 2019).