A study of more than 25,000 calls to a psychedelic support hotline has found that cannabis users reported the highest rate of distressing experiences, and documented 43 reports from callers of abuse by people providing psychedelics, according to a paper published Friday in Science Advances.
Researchers drew on 25,419 anonymized interactions with 220 trained volunteers on the Fireside Project's Psychedelic Support Line between April 2021 and February 2026, a dataset the study says is "the largest dataset of psychedelic support interactions ever assembled." The nonprofit Fireside Project, founded in 2020, connects people who are on bad trips or seeking information about psychedelics with volunteers offering confidential peer support.
The Fireside Project's hotline has filled a gap in psychedelic research, which has largely involved carefully selected patients in clinical settings while most use of the drugs takes place at home, at festivals, in ceremonial gatherings or in other uncontrolled environments. Félix Schoeller, who led the study and is a senior research scientist at the Institute for Advanced Consciousness Studies and CEO of ReWire Neurotechnologies, called the database a "treasure trove."
About 40.2 percent of callers were actively tripping, and 32.1 percent reached out after their trip, a period known as integration. The remaining calls fell into smaller categories, including informational inquiries, requests to prepare or buy drugs, and calls from "trip-sitters" assisting someone on psychedelics. Psilocybin was the most commonly reported substance, with 9,348 callers, followed by LSD with 2,247, cannabis with 2,004, ketamine with 1,194 and MDMA with 682.
Callers who had used cannabis reported the highest distress rate: 47.2 percent had bad experiences with the drug. Distress rates for the other commonly used psychedelics ranged from 40 to 42 percent. The study also identified 43 instances of "facilitator abuse" reported by callers, including at remote retreats or ceremonial gatherings involving ayahuasca, with reports that callers had deliberately been given extra doses without consent. The authors describe the cases as "the first quantitative documentation of this phenomenon in a community help-seeking sample," noting that the reports clustered in ceremonial settings and involved callers with elevated rates of prior PTSD diagnoses.
The study notes that its sample is biased toward people inclined to call a hotline and that self-reported dose accounts cannot be verified. Using 2,777 post-interaction surveys, the team found that the few negative experiences with the hotline tended to stem from callers feeling a volunteer was dismissive or did not care. Schoeller said the strongest predictor that a support call will not work is "the volunteer being perceived as genuine," and his team plans to follow up on the role of perceived care and empathy in treatment. "The hotline can truly be a lifeline for them," he said of people who need help navigating a difficult psychedelic experience and may not be required to go to an emergency room.
A massive database of over 25,000 psychedelic experiences holds insights about psychedelic use outside the clinic and how peer support can help those in distress. scim.ag/47L1TsP
The study offers a rare large-scale look at how psychedelics affect people outside carefully controlled clinical trials, where most use actually happens.
It documents harm, including a significant minority of distressing trips even with commonly used drugs, and the first quantitative evidence of facilitator abuse in unregulated ceremonial settings.
The findings have implications for how psychedelics are legalized and made accessible, and for how peer support and crisis services are designed.
Background
Psychedelics are attracting growing medical interest as potential treatments for conditions such as depression and PTSD, and are also widely used recreationally. Most research, however, has been conducted in clinical settings with selected patients, leaving real-world use under-studied. The Fireside Project, a nonprofit founded in 2020, operates a support line staffed by trained volunteers for people during and after psychedelic experiences, and its records form the basis of the new study.
Key Perspectives
Study authors: say the reports of facilitator abuse provide the first quantitative documentation of the phenomenon in a community help-seeking sample, showing that even modest surveillance through peer support can detect harm in unregulated psychedelic settings.
Félix Schoeller: says the data can inform arguments about legalizing psychedelics and making them accessible, and that the strongest predictor of a failed support call is the volunteer being perceived as genuine.
What to Watch
Schoeller and colleagues' planned follow-up research on the role of perceived care and empathy in treatment, including guidance for community-based peer support.
How the Fireside Project dataset is used in policy debates over psychedelic legalization and access.
Whether the documented facilitator abuse in unregulated retreat and ceremonial settings prompts changes in monitoring or regulation.
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
SupportedThe study covers about 25,000 psychedelic support calls.404 Media: “Researchers have amassed a trove of more than 25,000 calls to a support hotline for people during and after psychedelic trips”
SupportedCallers who used cannabis reported the highest distress rate.404 Media: “callers who had used cannabis reported the highest distress rate—47.2 percent had bad experiences with the drug.”
SupportedThe study documented 43 reports of facilitator abuse, including reports from ceremonial gatherings.404 Media: “The study also revealed 43 rare but disturbing instances of “facilitator abuse,” including at remote retreats or ceremonial gatherings involving ayahuasca.”
SupportedThe paper was published Friday in Science Advances.404 Media: “according to a study published on Friday in Science Advances .”
SupportedThe dataset contains 25,419 anonymized interactions with 220 hotline volunteers, collected between April 2021 and February 2026.404 Media: “The team has now published a compendium of 25,419 anonymized interactions with 220 hotline volunteers that took place between April 2021 and February 2026.”
SupportedThe study describes the dataset as “the largest dataset of psychedelic support interactions ever assembled.”404 Media: “making it “the largest dataset of psychedelic support interactions ever assembled—exceeding the combined sample sizes of all published psychedelic clinical trials by an order of magnitude,””
SupportedFélix Schoeller led the study and is a senior research scientist at the Institute for Advanced Consciousness Studies and CEO of ReWire Neurotechnologies.404 Media: “Félix Schoeller, a senior research scientist at the Institute for Advanced Consciousness Studies, a California-based nonprofit, who led the study”
SupportedAbout 40.2 percent of callers were actively tripping, and 32.1 percent contacted the hotline after their trip.404 Media: “About 40.2 percent of callers (10,208 interactions) were actively tripping, while 32.1 percent of callers reached out after they had tripped, a period known as “integration.””
SupportedPsilocybin was the most commonly reported substance, followed by LSD, cannabis, ketamine and MDMA, with the stated caller counts.404 Media: “Psilocybin was the most commonly reported substance (9,348 callers), followed by LSD (2,247callers), cannabis (2,004 callers), and ketamine (1,194 callers), and MDMA (682 callers)”
SupportedThe study’s authors call the abuse reports “the first quantitative documentation of this phenomenon in a community help-seeking sample.”404 Media: “Those reports “provide the first quantitative documentation of this phenomenon in a community help-seeking sample,” according to the study.”
SupportedUsing 2,777 post-interaction surveys, the team found negative hotline experiences tended to involve callers feeling a volunteer was dismissive or did not care.404 Media: “Using 2,777 postinteraction satisfaction surveys, the team found that the few negative experiences with the hotline tended to stem from feelings that the volunteer was dismissive, or didn’t seem to care about the caller.”
SupportedSchoeller said the strongest predictor that a support call will not work is “the volunteer being perceived as genuine.”404 Media: ““My takeaway is that the number one thing that predicts whether a support call will not work” is “the volunteer being perceived as genuine,” Schoeller said.”
