Microdosing - a New Moral Imperative of Well-being?..

Since well-being of employees has been identified as a top priority by many, let's look at the context as this year is promising to be a big year for microdosing.

1. Mental health issues on the rise - According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), mental health conditions are increasing worldwide. In recent times the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the increased use of social media have been implicated.

2. Drug abuse on the rise - the way to tackle it is to open safe-use sites. Colorado cities could let “overdose prevention centers,” where people would be allowed to openly use illicit drugs under the supervision of health care workers.

There are safe-use sites in New York City and efforts are underway to open similar centers in other parts of the U.S. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat.

3. The ongoing opioid pandemic in the US and what CDC can do about it: From 1999–2020, more than 564,000 people died from an overdose involving any opioid, including prescription and illicit opioids. CDC fights it with monitoring, research, data collection, improve in prescribing and increasing public awareness.

Next, what did we learn from decriminalizing pot? Forbes is upbeat: As more research is done on marijuana, it has become clear to many that this drug should not be in the same class as other more dangerous drugs.

Medics are less upbeat: The U.S. is seeing an increased use of cannabis resulting from its legalization for recreational purposes, according to a study conducted at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.

These results show consistent evidence of an increase in the occurrence of newly incident cannabis use for adults aged 21 years and older after the removal of prohibitions against cannabis retail sales.

Canada then? While cannabis legalization brought an apparent increase in use among Canadians older than 25 years of age, results for youth are mixed.

So meet the new kid on the block - microdosing. Microdosing is the practice of taking very small amounts of a psychedelic substance, typically one-tenth to one-fifth of a typical recreational dose, in order to achieve subtle therapeutic or cognitive benefits.?"People who microdose may avoid hallucinations but still experience other positive effects."

Seems like lawyers and shrinks are all in favor, again according to Forbes: In October 2022, a survey of 181 psychiatrists conducted by researchers at Ohio State University found that many of the professionals did not agree with the federal classification of psilocybin as a Schedule I controlled substance.

Since I was unable to find any ethical considerations on the web, let's look at some for the work environment. Especially when many are being told to come back to office spaces these days.

Microdosing looks more appealing to the professional force since it is organic: Mother Nature made sure it has less stigma attached than the weed. So what are those potential dangers, if any?

Lack of standardization: There is currently no standardized dosing protocol for microdosing

Possible long-term effects: It is possible that regular microdosing could lead to negative effects on brain function or mental health over time

Unpredictable reactions: Everyone's body chemistry is different, which means that even small amounts of a substance can have unpredictable effects on different individuals. Some people may experience anxiety, paranoia. Getting back to offices feels a bit like that.

Legal risks: In many parts of the world, including the United States, possession and use of psychedelics is illegal.

Informed consent: This raises questions about whether people who engage in microdosing fully understand the potential risks and benefits of the practice

In the societal context:

Social justice: this raises questions about whether microdosing is only available to those with the resources to obtain illegal (for now) substances

Personal responsibility: individuals who engage in microdosing may be placing too much emphasis on self-experimentation. That's why researchers gladly draw their insights from the informal feedback of such levelheaded folks?

Stigma and discrimination: The use of psychedelic substances is still stigmatized in many parts of the world, and individuals who engage in microdosing may face discrimination as a result. Increased public awareness could help to reduce the stigma. But would it apply to the work environment?

Misinformation: Due to the illegal status of psychedelic substances, there is a lack of reliable information and resources available, it could lead to confusion, misinformation, and potentially harmful practices

Medicalization and commodification: There is a risk that the therapeutic benefits could be commodified, leading to a situation where access to these substances is limited to those who can afford it

To say nothing of those industries that could be directly affected:

Self-help industry: Microdosing offers an alternative approach to self-improvement, one that relies on the use of psychedelics to achieve therapeutic benefits. This could disrupt the self-help industry by challenging the effectiveness of traditional self-improvement techniques

Coaching industry: it could disrupt this industry by providing an alternative means of achieving personal growth that does not rely on coaching

Pharmaceutical industry: Microdosing could disrupt this industry by providing an alternative, non-pharmaceutical approach to treating mental health disorders

So what are those ethical concerns anyhow?

Equity: If it is allowed in the workplace, it may raise questions of equity. Not all employees may be able to afford the substances used, and some employees may be at a disadvantage if they are unable to engage in microdosing or, at least, help determine if the dosage is indeed micro

Safety: depending on the substance used and the dose, it could impair an employee's ability to perform their job safely and effectively

Productivity: While some microdosers claim that it improves their productivity, this claim is not supported by rigorous scientific research. Employers may be hesitant to allow microdosing in the workplace if there is no clear evidence that it leads to improved productivity or performance. Even if it does, how can it ensure equal treatment of those who perform under the influence and those who do their best in the old fashioned way? Making it mandatory to ensure inclusivity?

Workplace policies: Employers should have clear policies around drug use in the workplace, including microdosing. Employees, who engage in it, should be aware of these policies and understand the consequences of violating them. Still unclear how could it be regulated by policies when individuals themselves determine what dosage is micro for them on any particular day. Unless it is coordinated by HR or knowledgeable indigenous tribal leaders

Communication: Employees who engage in microdosing should communicate with their coworkers and supervisors about their altered state and any potential effects it may have on their work. Their altered state should not exceed the altered state of their superior, be that a natural or self-induced one. Open communication can help alleviate concerns and ensure that employees are able to perform their job duties safely and effectively. The latter to be determined by some designated and non-engaged party

Ethics and values: Employers may also have concerns about the ethical implications of allowing or condoning microdosing in the workplace, particularly if it conflicts with their organization's values or mission. However, if it further enhances the values adopted by the organization, it may be deemed ethical, if, of course, the Ethics & Compliance function is fully onboard.