Leary Senate Testimony on LSD (1966)

[Friday, May 13, 1966, morning session. Senator Thomas J. Dodd (1907–1971) presiding; Senator Edward M. Kennedy (1932–2009) of Massachusetts also questioned the witness. Printed pp. 238–258. Speaker labels, printed in small capitals, are rendered here in title case.]

Senator Dodd. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Tannenbaum, for your helpful testimony.

Our next witness is Dr. Timothy Leary. Dr. Leary, we are glad to welcome you. I want to state for the record that as all witnesses, you are appearing here today at our request and invitation on behalf of the Castalia Foundation of Millbrook, N.Y.

Since 1963 Dr. Leary has been president of the foundation directing extensive studies on the mind-expanding drug LSD-25.

Prior to this, from 1960 to 1963, Dr. Leary was a lecturer at Harvard University.

From 1953 to 1959, Dr. Leary was research director at the Kaiser Foundation for Psychotherapy, Oakland, Calif.

I am informed that you have written many articles, 15 scientific articles and 2 books, and perhaps more, on psychotherapy.

I also want to state that Dr. Leary has been very cooperative with the members of our staff. They have talked with him at great length. I don't want you to feel that you were invited here to be put on trial or display or anything of the sort. We are grateful for the information that you have provided already. Our interest is to ascertain whether or not this drug is what it is alleged to be by witnesses who have already testified, and by others who have written articles, by medical scientists and other scientific personnel.

We want to find out whether or not we should draft legislation to prohibit the unrestricted use and abuse of this drug, and we asked you to come because you know a great deal about it. So, I hope you feel that you are welcome here and that you are not in any way considered by us as anything other than a helpful witness.

STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY LEARY, LSD EXPERIMENTER, TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE CASTALIA FOUNDATION OF MILLBROOK, N.Y.

Dr. Leary. I do have a few comments I would like to make, Senator.

Senator Dodd. All right, fine.

Dr. Leary. I am grateful for your invitation. I am particularly grateful and honored to come before this committee, because I think the most constructive legislation that has been produced in this admittedly complex field has come from this committee, and I might say I am very aware of the work done by the chairman of the committee in constructive remedy to the narcotic drug problem, as well as other groups attempting to come up with positive answers.

Senator Dodd. We have had quite a hard time.

Dr. Leary. The use of LSD by young people, the occasion of our deliberations today, has provoked a crisis. I think this is not a crisis of peril but a crisis of challenge and promise.

Psychedelic drugs are nonaddictive, nontoxic, and antinarcotic. We don't know exactly what they do. They seem to release neurological energies.

Now my position is that energy is not dangerous if it is used wisely. There is nothing to fear in LSD. There is nothing to fear from our own nervous systems or from our own cellular structures.

On the basis of the statistics so far, I would say there is more violence, insanity, friction, terror, in the cocktail lounges and barrooms of any large American city on any one Saturday night than in the entire 23-year history of LSD use. The so-called peril of LSD resides precisely in its eerie power to release ancient, wise, and I would even say at times holy sources of energy, which reside inside the human brain.

Senator Dodd. I didn't hear that.

Dr. Leary. I am suggesting that the energies which are released which come, of course, from the human brain are ancient energies, I would say even sacred, because they evolve from our physiological structure. That is what we are talking about here today, not a drug but what the drug does in opening up, accelerating, and expanding consciousness.

Now who is ready or even eager to deal with this eerie power? Apparently, in the United States today it is the young. LSD is frightening, but mainly to those who have not taken the drug. During the last few months of heated publicity and of occasional bureaucratic hand wringing about LSD, one simple question has remained unanswered. Why? Why are hundreds of thousands of our most intelligent, gifted, best educated young people choosing to expose themselves to this new and admittedly strange experience?

I have come here today to suggest an answer to this question. My answer, like the LSD experience itself, may be a stiff dose for those who are unwilling to look at the record of history. We are faced today in America, and we are faced today in this room with sociobiological problems which are rather unique in human history. We have at hand now energies easily available which are accepted eagerly by one generation, the young, and which are abhorred by the older generation, and what is worse, we have a communication breakdown between the two generations, which I think is obvious from the testimony we have listened to today.

The use of psychedelic drugs such as marihuana, mescaline, LSD, is out of control in the United States today. We have been told today and we read in the papers reports from sociologists that from between 15 to 50 percent and in some cases up to 65 and 70 percent are college students who are experimenting with these mind-opening chemicals, and whatever the statistics were last year, I think we can be assured that they are going to be larger next year. The growth rate so far is staggering.

Now, I am not alarmed by this situation per se. There are many sources of energy in the United States today which are out of control; alcohol, nicotine air polluting engines. The challenge of the psychedelic chemicals is not just how to control them, but how to use them. Restrictive legislation which creates a new class of millions of college educated white collar criminals is obviously not the answer.

Research, training, knowledge, are the only solutions to this problem. But who should use these substances? Who should be trying them? Who should do the research? Here we reach the center of the problem, a communication breakdown between the generations. In part it is semantic, because to the older generation the word "drug" has two built-in neurological connections. The word "drug" means medicine, disease, doctor, or the word "drug" means dope fiends, dope addict, crime.

But to the vast majority of the young people who are experimenting with these new psychedelic chemicals the word "drug" obviously means something different. It means many positive things. It means possible growth, it means opening up the mind, it means beauty, it means in some cases a religious revelation. It may mean sensual awareness and enhancement of our nerve endings.

As you have listened to the reports from some of the enthusiasts, I think you have picked up some of the reasons why young people have a positive image about the word "drug." Now I think it is important to realize that the word "drug" covers a very wide range of psychoactive chemicals. On the one hand you have the narcotic drugs, opiates, heroin, barbiturates, and, of course, our national narcotic, which is alcohol. Now, these are escape drugs. These muffle consciousness and contract awareness. They are very different, both pharmacologically, psychologically, and sociologically from the psychedelic drugs, marihuana, mescaline, which seem to open up consciousness and accelerate awareness.

You might say that the narcotic drugs are like blindfolds that tune off reality, whereas psychedelic drugs, whether you are prepared for it or not, open up reality, like the microscope or the telescope, and, of course, like these instruments, you have to be trained to use them or you are confused or even terrified.

It is interesting that the psychedelic drugs could be, might be the national antidotes to the addictive narcotic drugs. There has been much research done showing that LSD is an effective cure of alcoholism.

We must also be clear that the theories and the laws and the folklore rumors about these two classes of drugs are quite different. The theories and the laws which are necessary to control narcotics may not have any application to these other substances.

As, for example, in Mr. Tannenbaum's testimony, you notice that the LSD users are very eager to talk about their experiences. They weren't like junkies. They didn't feel like criminals. They wanted to have this committee and have Mr. Tannenbaum know why they were using these drugs.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Mr. Leary.

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I am trying to follow the best I possibly can some themes that must be coming out of your testimony here this morning, and I am completely unable to do so. You talked in the beginning about the communications problem which exists between different generations, and then you indicate and describe why that exists. Then we hear a description and analysis, as valuable as that might be, about the different reactions to different drugs. You talk about the statistics which are going to be larger next year. Then you say you are not alarmed by them because if they are in training, people have them, and there is a careful distribution, then this isn't really a problem. And then I hope we are going to have at least a discussion on who those trained people might be and what the regulations might be.

I am completely unable to follow any thing other than just sort of a general hyperbole of discussion here. Since your testimony isn't written, and this is a matter with which we are deeply concerned, I hope at least for those of us who are not inimitably as familiar as apparently you are with LSD, that you will try and see if you can analyze this somewhat more precisely. At least I would find that helpful. As I say, I haven't had the background or experience in this area as I am sure the other members of the committee have, but I think it would be extremely valuable to the members of the committee if you could at least outline to some extent what you are going to try and demonstrate here today, and then if you could somewhat more precisely and exactly come to those points.

Dr. Leary. I was, Senator Kennedy, just about to do that. I am pointing out the differences that exist among drugs, and I am going to suggest that special types of legislation are needed.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Are you going to talk about the lack of communication between the generations before that or after that ?

Dr. Leary. I finished doing that. I hope that that is clearly on the record. I feel that constructive legislation is obviously and badly needed, and I recommend respectfully to this committee that you consider legislation which will license responsible adults to use these drugs for serious purposes, such as spiritual growth, pursuit of knowledge, or in their own personal development. To obtain such a license, the applicant, I think, should have to meet physical, intellectual, and emotional criteria.

I believe that the criteria for marihuana, which is the mildest of the psychedelic drugs, should be about those which we now use to license people to drive automobiles, whereas the criteria for the licensing of LSD, a much more powerful act, should be much more strict, perhaps the criteria now used for airplane pilots would be appropriate.

I further and finally urge this committee to make some provision for young people to be trained in the use of these powerful instruments. If a high percentage of our college students are using these instruments, we have two choices. We will drive them underground or we can legitimize its use in carefully controlled circumstances.

College students I believe should be authorized, or colleges should be authorized to offer laboratory courses in which these internal microscopes are used under supervision. If such courses of systematic consciousness expansion are offered, I predict they will end the indiscriminate use of LSD by young people, and in addition will be probably the most popular and productive courses ever offered in any educational institution, because here we are opening the mind, not just teaching concepts to students.

Our American society and our educational institutions are not so perfect that new means of accelerating and expanding consciousness can be ignored or forced underground.

That is my statement, Senator Dodd.

Senator Dodd. I would like to ask you some questions, if I may. How long has LSD been in use for legitimate purposes, if at all?

Dr. Leary. The research in LSD dates back about 23 years. There are over 1,000 scientific articles that have been published on the subject.

Senator Dodd. I take it that this has been used in medical or psychiatric treatment, is that correct?

Dr. Leary. Some of this has been pharmacological, some has been on animals to demonstrate its physical safety. As you probably know, there is no lethal dose of LSD yet known in human beings. Some of this has been psychiatric, some has been therapeutic and some has been research activity.

I might make a comment here. Everyone says give LSD to the medical profession. The facts of the matter are that the medical profession has had LSD for 23 years and hasn't known what to do with it, because LSD is not a medicine. It is not a drug that cures physical problems. It is a psychological educational tool.

Senator Dodd. It would be helpful if you could tell us how you manufacture it? How is it made?

Dr. Leary. Senator Dodd, I am not a chemist and I know very little about its manufacture. I don't think I could add anything to the testimony of Mr. Tannenbaum or to the gentleman from Los Angeles.

Senator Dodd. Well, you have been concerned about it for some time. Don't you know how it is made?

Dr. Leary. My concern is not chemical or pharmacological, sir, but its use. I am a psychologist by profession, and I am interested in its educational and psychotherapeutic value.

Senator Dodd. If you don't know how it is made, you don't know what is in it, how can you tell us that it is all right?

Dr. Leary. I didn't say I didn't know what was in it. I am aware of how to make it. I am not a chemist. I couldn't sit down and make it or I couldn't tell anyone how to make it, but I am very aware of its pharmacological qualities. I am also aware that LSD and other psychedelic drugs are very similar to chemicals which are naturally produced in the human body, in the human nervous system.

Senator Dodd. Can you tell us where it is manufactured?

Dr. Leary. The original patent holder in LSD was Sandoz Laboratories in Switzerland, although we are now told by such people as Mr. Tannenbaum that it is made in Czechoslovakia and Mexico, but I don't know anything about this.

Senator Dodd. Do you know whether or not it is difficult to produce, or to make?

Dr. Leary. I am told that if you have the starting material, that is the lysergic acid base, that the subsequent procedures are not difficult.

Senator Dodd. Do you know how it is put into dosage form?

Dr. Leary. Well, of course, LSD comes from the chemist in a powder. This powder is extremely powerful. One dram of LSD powder can produce between 10,000 and 20,000 doses. One dram will produce about 20,000 doses. The powder is then usually diluted in some form of liquid, and then broken down and used in that form.

Senator Dodd. I take it from what you say that the manufacturing process is not easy. It must be difficult. Wouldn't you agree?

Dr. Leary. No, sir. I said that once the lysergic acid base is made available, then the manufacturing process, I am told, is rather simple.

Senator Dodd. Let me ask, is there a danger of overloading a dose?

Dr. Leary. There is no known lethal dose of LSD. One of the dangers of black-market LSD as in the case of any black-market purchase, you are never sure what you are getting, so that when LSD is put on sugar cubes, this is not considered an amateur way of packaging, you never know whether you are getting 100 gamma or 300 gamma. This accounts for some of the problems in indiscriminate black-market use.

Senator Dodd. Have you ever used it yourself?

Dr. Leary. LSD?

Senator Dodd. Yes.

Dr. Leary. I have used LSD or similar drugs 311 times in the last 6 years. I consider LSD to be a microscope. Each time I take LSD I keep careful records and I have a specific purpose in mind why I am doing it, the way a scientist would look at different objects through his magnifying lens.

Senator Dodd. Do you take it in injection form?

Dr. Leary. It is a liquid.

Senator Dodd. Have you given it to other people?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir. Since 1960, I have been the director of a research project at Harvard and later at Millbrook, N.Y., in which about 70 professional psychologists and philosophers, religious leaders have collaborated.

I have under my personal supervision witnessed over 3,000 injections of LSD.

Senator Dodd. Over 3,000?

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Dodd. Well, can you briefly describe the effect of it?

Dr. Leary. No, sir. LSD is hard to describe because each segment of an LSD experience is very complicated. Thousands of memory cards or thousands of sensory molecules are firing off. You remember all of this. There is no amnesia, but it would take 20 hours to describe, maybe 3 or 4 hours, an LSD experience. You definitely go out of your mind, there is no question of that. Of course, to some people this is ominous. To most philosophers, mainly eastern philosophers, going out of your mind is one of the goals of the human being. You are going beyond your symbol system. You are going on to concepts which is the source of great creativity and discovery.

Senator Dodd. If it is going to take 20 hours I will tell you right now we are not going to get to that today. But it is helpful at least to hear—

Dr. Leary. I could give you one example, sir, which would perhaps point up some of the paradoxes. I think psychiatrists in particular are alarmed by reports from LSD subjects, and psychiatrists have been trained in all sorts of psychopathology. He has read about sexual abnormalities and about hallucinations and then one day into his office walks a person who describes a LSD experience.

He might say: "I was sitting there and suddenly I began to dissolve. Every cell in my body began to break down and I was afraid I would become a puddle on the floor. Then I saw a huge serpent coming up. The serpent swallowed me. I went in the serpent's stomach. Later I was excreted and I exploded. Then I became an animal. I could feel hair and claws growing on my body. Then I could lookdown and see fishy scales as though I were a reptile. Then I was floating as though I was a single-celled organism." Now by this time, even the most experienced and hard-bitten psychiatrist is likely to be crouching under the table saying: "In 30 years of my practice I have never listened to anything so frightening and so far out." Now, actually if he told this story to a Hindu, he would say, "Oh, yes; the third dream of Visnu." Or, "Oh, yes; that is like the 11th chapter."

We also have neurological and anatomical explanations for the so-called hallucinations of LSD. They are not supernatural. They are experiences for which we don't have words. I think in the future the word "hallucination" won't be a mysterious or frightening word. LSD research will allow us to understand and control and even produce hallucinations.

Senator Dodd. It is very interesting. How long does the effect last before the person returns to normal?

Dr. Leary. The LSD effect lasts about 12 hours. On the other hand, a person does not return to normal for several days pharmacologically. You can't take LSD every day. It takes 5 or 6 days for your nervous system to get to the situation where you can have an LSD session again. But the direct effect lasts about 8, 10, or 12 hours.

Senator Dodd. Then how frequently would you say it can be used?

Dr. Leary. If you wanted to use LSD as much as possible, your nervous system tells you you can't use it more than every 5 days. You have to wait 4 or 5 days between sessions.

Senator Dodd. And what do you consider a normal dose?

Dr. Leary. It depends on your purpose. If you want to take LSD and go to the ballet, you take 20 gamma. If you wanted to have a deep, out-of-the-mind experience, you would have 300 gamma. We are talking here about magnifying lens. LSD,

of course, has a tremendous range. A small amount of LSD is like marihuana. A large amount of LSD is a full-fledged, 12-hour, out-of-the-mind experience.

Senator Dodd. You must be aware as we are that there are eminent physicians and scientists who say that the use of this LSD causes permanent brain damage. What about it?

Dr. Leary. There is no scientific evidence in any published journal which indicates that long-term physical damage results, nor is there any evidence in the psychiatric or scientific literature that long-term psychoses develop any more frequently than chance. The New Republic this week has an article by an FDA Government scientist which I think is an excellent summary of the danger-benefit issue in LSD.

He says that the suicide rate is surprisingly low, less than 1 in 1,000 considering the circumstances under which LSD is given.

Senator Dodd. We have heard about all this bizarre behavior. You heard it spoken of, people jumping out of windows and eating bark off trees and grass off of lawns and committing crimes and so on as a result of the use. Do you agree with this?

Dr. Leary. There is no doubt that in some cases, particularly in these times, when LSD is being used by people who are not trained, under very poor circumstances, that bizarre behavior is developed. As more people are trained in how to use this, and as they know where to use this drug, these episodes will be cut down in frequency.

Of course, the law enforcement officers and the psychiatric clinics see that 1 case in 1,000 or the 1 case in 10,000 who is having trouble. I get about 100 letters a week from people who rhapsodize about the positive aspects, so it may seem at times we are talking about two entirely different experiences.

Senator Dodd. I understand that, but if it is a fact that the use of this drug causes people to do these dreadful things, don't you consider such a drug a mighty dangerous one?

Dr. Leary. I would say these things are bizarre, sir, but not dreadful.

Senator Dodd. Well, it's dreadful if a homicide is committed, isn't it?

Dr. Leary. There is no evidence that any case has resulted in homicide.

Senator Dodd. We have had evidence before this committee regarding such cases.

Dr. Leary. I am learning something. I have a case in New York which was well publicized, has produced no evidence as yet that LSD was involved. It is true, however, that LSD can and does create bizarre behavior. But such cases—

Senator Dodd. Weren't you here this morning when Captain Trembly told about the youngster who tried to kill her mother after using this LSD? Dr. Louria told us yesterday about the homicidal tendencies of users, their destructive conduct with respect to their physical surroundings. Doesn't this make it perfectly clear that the use of it brings on such activities by people?

Dr. Leary. There is no doubt that these things are occurring. However, of all the forms of energy that are available to the American citizen today, I would say that LSD is statistically producing fewer cases of violence or destruction than alcohol or some of our more popular—

Senator Dodd. You don't offer that as a very good argument. It just doesn't do as much damage as something else.

Dr. Leary. The problem with me, sir, is this 1 case of LSD panic gets headlines, whereas 9,900 cases of LSD revelation nobody cares about, so that we have—to be scientific about this—we have to have some rules of the game. We have to say what is the percentage. Now, granted that 1 moment of one unprepared person taking LSD and having a panic or a horror, if it could have been avoided, we all want to see that prevented. On the other hand, if you are going to talk about danger, you have to have some criteria, some batting average, and the batting average statistics of LSD as opposed to all the other forms of energy we have around show it to be our least dangerous form of energy. In any 1,000 people, 1 of them is likely to become violent within the next 6 months. Naturally, if he takes LSD it may happen.

Senator Dodd. Would you agree that uncontrolled experimentation, as you put it, or use by young people, is dangerous? If one young person jumped out a window or did some other dreadful thing, wouldn't this be enough to say that this is a dangerous drug, and that there is need for some control or restriction as to the use of it?

Dr. Leary. No, sir; I can't agree with that. I would say of all the forms of energy available to college students today—and I include the motorcar and alcohol—LSD not only is the least dangerous but is most likely to prevent acts of violence.

Senator Dodd. Don't you think that the drug needs to be put under control and restriction?

Dr. Leary. Pardon, sir.

Senator Dodd. Let me rephrase my question. Don't you feel that LSD should be put under some control, or restriction as to its use?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Dodd. As to its sale, its possession, and its use?

Dr. Leary. I definitely do. In the first place, I think that the 1965 Drug Control Act, which this committee, I understand, sponsored, is the high water mark in such legislation. But, of course, that is a control act, and I am urging—

Senator Dodd. That has only to do with amphetamines and barbiturates.

Dr. Leary. Psychedelic drugs are the third category.

Senator Dodd. That is right.

Dr. Leary. That, of course, is a control measure. I am urging constructive licensing measures so that responsible adults who want to change their consciousness for serious purposes should be allowed to do so. We have to have some form of licensing, or we will have another era of prohibition in this country which will be much more onerous and more anguishing than the alcohol prohibition in the twenties, because the thing I must call to the attention of this committee is that the people who are using LSD are not criminal types. They are middle class people. They are college people who are very aware of their constitutional rights, and to change their consciousness as long as they are not visibly harming society.

Senator Dodd. You heard Captain Trembly this morning. He testified here just an hour ago. He told us that they were finding in Los Angeles, these were delinquents with criminal records who were using this drug.

Dr. Leary. I thought he said that it was mainly around the universities.

Senator Dodd. No, I don't think so at all.

Dr. Leary. I think he was talking about sale.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Mr. Leary, since you have been quoting the New Republic article, it says right in there rather clearly:

It is more likely that the individuals who use this are usually already psychiatrically deranged before talking LSD. This, of course, emphasizes even more the absolute necessity of competent psychiatric screening of every person who is to use any kind of hallucinogens.

Dr. Leary. I agree with that conclusion. I am urging that there be some kind of licensing.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You know you are the one who is quoting this. I thought the point made by the chairman about the types of people who are using it substantiates not only what the chairman observed but it was also previously testified to, and so I think there has been substantial evidence to that matter, that those that do use it are already psychologically deranged or can be, or at least the predominance that are using it lean that way. At least that is the testimony which has been presented to this committee. Now if you have different conclusions on that, I think that from either your years of study or others, I think it would be helpful to have that material.

Dr. Leary. Yes. Senator Kennedy, I cannot allow the University of Stanford students to be described as psychotic or as criminals. A sample in the New Republic article by Dr. O'Chota :

A sampling of students at Stanford University showed that at least 40 percent have been taking hallucinogens.

Now I will defend very fiercely the sanity and the social constructiveness of the 40 percent of the Stanford University student body, even though I may be unpopular—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is not responsive to the question but I will accept the statement. Mr. Leary, I have been continually confused by your testimony. Maybe that is my own limitation of understanding as to the nature of the subject that we are considering here today. You mentioned earlier, and I am trying to clarify at least to some extent my own understanding, that you needed a microscope in order to indicate the degree or the quantity in which this LSD should be taken; is that correct?

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That you use a microscope.

Dr. Leary. As a metaphor; yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And do you use it to measure the quantity, to make up the consistency of the particular drug at a particular time to determine what kind of ride you want to have; is that right?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir; we can be fairly precise.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. No, this is all right if you can just answer these questions. So, you use the microscope each time you see the drug, is that correct, each time when you participated or at least observed or helped to administer the drug to the 3,000 cases; is that right?

Dr. Leary. I am using microscope here as a metaphor, sir. We ask a person, "Why do you want to take LSD?" and he tells us and then we give him the dosage that will get him to the level of consciousness that would be most likely to reveal what he is looking for.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. All right. Well now, how do you measure the different quantities that you are going to give him?

Dr. Leary. It is calibrated, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You calibrate them? How do you calibrate them?

Dr. Leary. Yes; Sandoz Laboratory pills come in 25 gamma or 100 gamma,

so you give him 1 or you give him 4.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And you don't have any problem in purchasing these pills?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir; for the last year, and I may be off here a few months, LSD has been illegal, and we have not purchased it.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And then they take these—you say that they get 25 grains?

Dr. Leary. Gamma.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Pardon?

Dr. Leary. Gamma,

that is 25 millionths of a gram.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Twenty-five gamma, and then they get 300 to go out of their minds by virtue of its use?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Now, when they go out of their minds, as I gather from your testimony that they certainly can, if they go out of their minds—let's just say if they go out of their minds do they know the difference between right and wrong?

Dr. Leary. No,

sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. They do not?

Dr. Leary. No.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. They do not know the difference between right and wrong:

Dr. Leary. Well—social right and wrong they do not. They are likely to think in an unconventional—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. In unconventional ways. And so if they don't really know the difference between right and wrong, still they are able to, as you say, perform normal kinds of activities, bodily activity or social activities?

Dr. Leary. That depends entirely on the experience of the person. You see you have to be trained to use LSD the way you are trained to use a computer.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is right.

Dr. Leary. An unprepared person is confused.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Therefore, you are suggesting that anyone who is going to administer LSD ought to be highly trained?

Dr. Leary. Absolutely.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And that there shouldn't be indiscriminate use of LSD?

Dr. Leary. No, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And that is why you want to give college courses in LSD?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And what is going to happen to the boy who doesn't get to college?

Dr. Leary. There would be special training institutes for him.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So we are going to train high school students? Are we going to have high school courses as well?

Dr. Leary. I would let research, scientific research answer the question as to at what age the nervous system is ready to use these new instruments.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Then what are we going to do now for the boys that, say, go into the Army prior to the time they get to that age? Are we going to have the Army give training courses too on how to use it?

Dr. Leary. I should think that in the Army of the future, we all hope there won't be, but in the Army of the future LSD will be used to expand consciousness so that these men can do their duties more effectively.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is very responsive. Now you feel that anybody who distributes this ought to be carefully trained, is that correct?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And you admit that it can leave an individual so that he does not know the difference between right and wrong in the socially acceptable terms, is that right?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So that he is relatively unaccountable for his actions?

Dr. Leary. Well, I don't think anyone.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Does he know the difference between right and wrong?

Dr. Leary. You are talking about hypothetical persons.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I am not talking about hypotheticals.

Dr. Leary. What are we talking about, sir?

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I am not talking about the hypothetical of somebody losing their minds and not being able to tell the difference between right and wrong. That is hypothetical.

Dr. Leary. I don't think such a person should be given LSD. Before you take LSD you should have weeks and weeks and months of—

preparation.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Where are they going to get this preparation?

Dr. Leary. For the last 5 years, my training institute, the Castalia Foundation, has been the only one in the world that has been conscientiously and systematically training people.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Now other people who haven't had the good opportunity or fortune to attend your institute, they have been taking LSD,

have they not?

Dr. Leary. There is no doubt about that, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So don't you think that until your institute is either able to expand its courses, that we ought to at least be conscious of the dangers which are presented by it?

Dr. Leary. The need for licensing legislation is desperate. We have got to get institutes trained and licensed so that people can receive training.

Senator Dodd. If I may interrupt, you do agree that there is a need for control?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir. I agree completely with your bill, the 1965 Drug Control Act. I think this is—

Senator Dodd. That the Federal Government and the State governments ought to control it?

Dr. Leary. Exactly. I am in 100 percent agreement with the 1965 drug control bill.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So there shouldn't be—

Dr. Leary. I wish the States, I might add, would follow the wisdom of this committee and the Senate and Congress of the United States and follow your lead with exactly that kind of legislation.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So there should not be indiscriminate distribution of this drug should there?

Dr. Leary. I have never suggested that, sir. I have never urged anyone to take LSD. I have always deplored indiscriminate or unprepared use.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And at least if it is going to be brought into this country, its entrance into this country ought to be carefully regulated.

Dr. Leary. Absolutely, I am definitely in favor of such legislation.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And there ought to be strict regulations then with regards to those who possess it?

Dr. Leary. No, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Well now wait a moment, Dr. Leary. You just stated somewhat earlier that you thought anybody who was going to use it ought to be carefully trained, ought to understand. Do you think now that we ought to have indiscriminate possession? I don't find the consistency of your argument when you say that we ought to have careful restrictions on LSD when it comes into the country, that we ought to have strict control over its production, but that we shouldn't have strict control over who has it. How do you—

Dr. Leary. Because I am facing, as I urge all of us to face, the reality of the situation, that millions of Americans are using this drug indiscriminately in their own pursuits. Now I am not in favor of this, but I am not in favor of passing laws which would put 40 percent of the Stanford University student body in the category of criminals—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. But you are not in favor of it getting that far.

Dr. Leary. I feel there should be no law for the possession of any substance the main function of which is to alter consciousness.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Well, you are not in favor of indiscriminate possession of this drug, are you?

Dr. Leary. No,

sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. All right.

Dr. Leary. I am against laws which would put people in prison.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is a decision, but here is someone who has had the experience that you have had, and the study, and have been associated with this institute coming down here as one who believes in as strongly as you have who says that you do not believe there should be indiscriminate possession.

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. There is a question, you feel, whether we can legislate or not legislate on it, but that is a matter for legislators to consider, whether we feel, as legislators, that any law can achieve the desired end. But your testimony as I understand it extremely clearly, it is becoming more clear now, you feel there shouldn't be indiscriminate possession. It is something that you do not support.

Dr. Leary. For 6 years, sir, I have been against indiscriminate use.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Indiscriminate use, all right.

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Dodd. Do I understand correctly that the research with respect to this drug is still going on?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir. Research has been almost halted because of the present hysteria. There are very few Government-approved grants now because of the grand motherly panic that is sweeping over the country. Doctors and psychiatrists who should be doing studies are afraid to.

Senator Dodd. My point is a different one, however. If it is still in the research stage, obviously it may turn out to be a most dreadfully harmful drug. Certainly, you would not advocate in that event its production or its use or anything of the kind?

Dr. Leary. No, sir. If research shows that there are any serious physiological side effects, or irreversible psychological effects, I would be the first one to urge its ban. I assure you, having taken this drug perhaps more than any scientist in the world, that I am more curious than anyone else as to any report as to its physiological effect or possibilities of brain damage. Every time I meet someone who says this I say, "Well where did you hear that?" and they say, "Well, my cousin, the doctor told me." I say, "Will you please wire me collect if you have any personal information on brain damage."

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You read the New Republic article quoted earlier?

Dr. Leary. Pardon, sir?

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Did you read the New Republic article that you quoted earlier?

Dr. Leary. Yes, I did, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Are you in general agreement? Do you think it is a fair analysis of it?

Dr. Leary. Dr. O'Chota's article is, I think, a very sound middle position on the benefits of LSD.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Did you note that in that article he says, and I direct your attention to page 22, the third paragraph:

There is one uniform agreement among the investigators of LSD; namely, that LSD can be extremely dangerous when used improperly.

Dr. Leary. Sir, I agree with that.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Yes.

Dr. Leary. Any form of energy, alcohol, and the motor car is dangerous if used improperly.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is right.

Dr. Leary. I couldn't be in more agreement.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. It is dangerous then?

Dr. Leary. If used improperly.

Senator Dodd. That is why there is control over alcohol.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Isn't that why the pilot is licensed as well?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir. The danger here is human stupidity and ignorance. That is the only danger with LSD. That is the only danger human beings face in this world.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Is this justified in view of the severe prolonged psychotic reaction some of which resulted in suicide and other terms of long-term hospitalization. Mr. Leary, you had better read this, because I found it—particularly the fact that you thought it was a middle road position—I found it extremely alarming.

Dr. Leary. It says:

After reviewing over 1,000 medical publications, the author was unable to confirm reports that a psychosis can develop in the hitherto mentally healthy individual several months after LSD is taken.

This article is certainly not violently on the danger side nor the other side. He does mention several of the benefits in the treatment of mental disorders and contributions to creativity.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I could not agree with you more, that he mentioned in there about when it was used, particularly for terminal cases, administration in the case of intractable pain, mostly in patients with terminal cancer, we do not question that.

We do not have any dispute about that, Mr. Leary. But I think what you have testified to is indiscriminate possession of this, as well as use, that it is dangerous, and I think the question now is for legislators to determine whether it can be controlled by legislation or whether it cannot be.

I think that you have testified as well that you want to see the control over its being brought into the United States, its production, and you have also testified that you think the indiscriminate use of this is dangerous, and I think you have pointed out what you feel personally are some of the advantages of it. You feel as well that it is a matter which cannot be legislated over. I think that is a question for the Congress.

But it seems to me that your testimony has been extremely convincing about the dangers of this drug, as well as its opportunities. And I think for someone who has been associated as long as you have been, have been intimately involved in it as long as you have been, I think that is extremely weighty evidence which you have given to this committee this morning, and we want to thank you.

Dr. Leary. I cannot agree with that summary, respectfully.

I must disagree, Senator Kennedy, with your statement.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Let's take the various aspects of it.

You feel that there ought to be control over at least importation?

Dr. Leary. The sale, manufacture or distribution, yes.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. The sale and manufacturing?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Why do you think that this should be?

Dr. Leary. Because these are matters of commerce and manufacture.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And that is the only reason you think this because it is a matter of interstate and foreign commerce ? Is that the only reason? I mean, we have things which are produced, textiles in Massachusetts, furniture in Massachusetts that are not restricted, Dr. Leary. You have testified. Now why do you think they should be?

Dr. Leary. I feel that activity, particularly commercial activities involving the manufacture, sale, and distribution of these substances definitely should be controlled because you do not know about quality, you do not know about safety, you do not know what you are buying. Obviously you have to have laws, just as you have laws about the amphetamines. I want the amphetamines and the barbiturates controlled.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Let's go back.

Dr. Leary. I do not want people who use these, who have a handful, put in jail.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You said you do not know about the quality. What is it about the quality that you are frightened about?

Dr. Leary. We do not want amateur or black-market sale or distribution of LSD.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Why not?

Dr. Leary. Or the barbiturates or liquor. When you buy a bottle of liquor—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. This is not responsive. As to LSD, why do you not want it?

Dr. Leary. On possession?

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Why do you not want the indiscriminate manufacture and distribution? Why not? Is it because it is dangerous?

Dr. Leary. Because you do not know what you are getting.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Is it because it is dangerous? Are you interested only in the consumer and whether, like truth in packaging, whether there are too many strawberries or not enough strawberries in the pie, or is it something more dangerous than that, Dr. Leary?

Dr. Leary. No, sir; I think LSD is much less dangerous than the amphetamines and barbiturates.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I am not asking that. The reason, as I would gather it, is because this is a dangerous drug; is that right?

Dr. Leary. No, sir; LSD is not. a dangerous drug.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Why have you admitted then, why you have latched that onto the other questions of the control and distribution and manufacturing of drugs?

Dr. Leary. I feel the same as I do with alcohol, you want to know what you are getting. It has to be supervised by Government FDA standards of health and packaging.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Do you not agree that alcohol can be dangerous?

Dr. Leary. I think that alcohol is probably the most dangerous drug around.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. All right, it can be dangerous, can it not?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir; if it is used improperly.

Senator Dodd. I think Senator Kennedy's point is that there are all kinds of drugs. It is the abuse of them.

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Dodd. That makes them dangerous; is that not it?

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Exactly right, indiscriminate abuse. So, in any event, you agree that there should be restrictions with regard to the manufacture and production of these drugs; is that right?

Dr. Leary. I am in complete agreement.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And you are not satisfied that there is sufficient Federal legislation that is going to do that job?

Dr. Leary. I think the current legislation that came out of this committee in 1965—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Is completely sufficient?

Dr. Leary. Is adequate; yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You support that?

Dr. Leary. I support it and have supported it.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. But with regard to LSD, you still feel that there should be careful control and supervision in those areas which we have just described?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Now you also feel that anyone who distributes that ought to be carefully trained; is that correct?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. And ought to be extremely knowledgeable about its use?

Dr. Leary. Yes, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Now, why do you think that?

Dr. Leary. Because LSD opens up powerful neurological energies. Again I use the example of the microscope.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Well, we know that, but what is so wrong? Why does a fellow have to be so carefully trained if this is like taking a drink or something like that? Why does he have to be carefully trained?

Dr. Leary. If he is not carefully trained, he will be using it for kicks and ecstasy and amateur religious confrontations with God, and so forth. But for scientific and educational—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Well, if you are interested in sort of the consumer on that, that is desirable, but that should be something which an individual ought to determine, would you not say, rather than that there should be regulation? That is why I do not understand why you are for regulation, or why you feel that the person who distributes it ought to be carefully trained.

Dr. Leary. Well, I think—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Because you see if it is just because he is not going to get everything that he really wants by this, then that is really his disadvantage, is it not?

Dr. Leary. I agree, yes. I think we need laws about controlling the possession and the individual's use of barbiturates, alcohol.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I will accept your statement that there is a need for that. I will accept it rather than argue about that, because I agree with you.

Now the question comes, I think, which was certainly the third aspect, and that is the indiscriminate possession of the drug. Now if we follow your logic, which you just mentioned earlier, you feel that the fellow who distributes the drug ought to be carefully trained so he can make sure he gives this fellow the right ride, as I understand it. Maybe that is an oversimplification.

Dr. Leary. Like your brewers have to be trained to make beer.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is right, sure.

Do you not think whoever has the drug should be controlled so he will know as well what kind of ride he is going to get?

Dr. Leary. Because the use of LSD goes into every aspect—

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. If you use the same logic, Dr. Leary, you say that the fellow who distributes it ought to be carefully trained, so that the person that he gives it to is going to know exactly, so he will not use it frivolously?

Dr. Leary. Yes.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. We could get those records exactly from the record.

Dr. Leary. That was the idea.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Now, using the same logic, I wonder why you do not say that the person who just has possession of it ought to be licensed, because you do not want him just taking a frivolous ride either, do you?

Dr. Leary. It is none of my business what he does.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Then why is it any business of yours that there be a trained fellow to administer it?

Dr. Leary. I am just urging that. It is not up to me.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You are suggesting that we consider legislation on that line.

Dr. Leary. Constructive legislation, licensing.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Constructive?

Dr. Leary. The situation is this, Senator Kennedy: Here is a primitive tribe, which we are. You give them a microscope, and they might use that microscope just to look at the pretty things, and say please, members of this tribe, use this microscope to cure illness and use it to discover science. But they might use that microscope just to have kicks.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. That is right.

Dr. Leary. I do not think we can pass laws forcing them to use the microscope.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You do not think that is a desirable end? I mean you are such a believer in this drug that you do not think that it should be used for frivolous means, do you?

Dr. Leary. It is none of my business. If a person wants to use the automobile for kicks, if a person wants to use any form of energy for kicks, as long as they are not hurting anyone else it is not my business to tell him how to do it. I would deplore his use of the microscope in some way that does not use its potential, but it is none of my business if he buys the microscope and has it home in his possession and does not take advantage of its wondrous possibilities.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Yet it is an injurious drug if it is used improperly.

Dr. Leary. I have not said that, sir. I have said that of all the forms of energy available to the modern American, LSD is the least dangerous that I can see.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. Even accepting that, Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others tried. I mean just accepting that as being the least dangerous, it is still dangerous, is it not, its indiscriminate use?

Dr. Leary. Anything is dangerous if it is misused or unwisely used.

Senator Dodd. I think you miss another important point. I think you have said, and certainly other witnesses have said that one of the elementary hazards involved in this drug is that it is odorless, colorless.

Dr. Leary. Tasteless.

Senator Dodd. And tasteless. Yet we have got a dangerous thing on our hands and it is not possible by the ordinary use of the senses to know what it is. I think that by itself, to me, would lead me to the conclusion that it should be very carefully controlled.

Dr. Leary. But it also raises incredible problems of control. It is like air. LSD is like water. In the first place, LSD is practically free. It cost about $100 to make 20,000 doses, and if it is put in mass production LSD would cost less than the chlorine in this water, so you not only have the problem of it being odorless and tasteless, but it is so easily available. It poses vexing problems.

Senator Dodd. I have the same problem Senator Kennedy is having.

If it is odorless and tasteless and colorless, if you can get it and it does damage to people—

Dr. Leary. I do not believe it does, sir.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. You did agree, you did admit that it can be dangerous if it is misused; is that correct?

Senator Dodd. That is what I meant.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. So we do not get into the question of semantics, I think the point of the chairman, at least it is my point, is that by your own admission you have got hundreds of thousands of people who are using it around the country, and who have not been trained in the college classrooms and have not had the opportunity to go to your institute, and are using the drug which by your own admission, perhaps a person who knows as much about this drug, certain aspects of this drug, and I take your testimony on this point, that it can be dangerous if it is misused, and I think this is the point.

The question remains now whether we feel, the members of this committee—we receive this expert testimony from you—the question remains whether this committee can effectively legislate controls on it. That is something that we have to wrestle with. But your testimony on these other factors about its distribution, its manufacture, the indiscriminate use of it, not being administered, or the dangers of it being administered by people who are not carefully trained. I think is extremely weighty evidence, and I think this gets back to where I was before, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Dodd. Yes.

How would you describe the use of LSD in the United States today? Would you say that it is widespread, for example? You can answer that just yes or no.

Dr. Leary. I have no hard research evidence on this, but letters I get and the people I talk to when I lecture at the universities would lead me to confirm the reports that I would say around one-third of our college students are experimenting with these drugs. Now this is very geographically spotty.

In San Francisco and Los Angeles it is very high. I am sure there are other States where there are very few people in colleges who use it.

Senator Dodd. But I am trying to get at something.

It seems to me from what I have heard you and others say that there are thousands of people using it, so I do not think it would be an exaggeration to say its use is widespread.

Dr. Leary. It is definitely widespread, sir.

Senator Dodd. All right, would you say that it is out of control?

Dr. Leary. Yes sir.

Senator Dodd. You do say there is need for control?

Dr. Leary. There is what?

Senator Dodd. There is need for control. Here is something that is widespread and is out of control. I think the conclusion is inescapable that there is a need for control.

Dr. Leary. Well, as I said earlier, there are many things that are out of control. Of all the energies out of control in this country, I would say that LSD is the least thing you have to worry about.

I am saying there should be licensing and I hope that Congress in the coming months will provide licensing so it can be used in addition to being controlled. For 6 years I have been in the unfortunate position of warning society that this was going to happen. We knew 6 years ago that there was going to be an LSD panic. We saw it coming like meteorologists can see a hurricane coming. We said energy is coming, energy is coming, let's be ready for it and use this constructively. But every attempt so far has been to put it underground, to push it down. All that energy just cannot be kept underground, and some sort of constructive licensing procedures and training courses in high schools possibly and certainly in colleges should be developed so that the youngsters who will want to grow and use this would be able to do it.

Senator Dodd. That remark about the schools leads me to a question. I want to be fair about it. I have read several times I think in the newspapers, a statement attributed to you, that students should drop out of school if they cannot find LSD teachers in universities. Did you say that?

Dr. Leary. About 2 weeks ago at a university I said that if students are seriously interested in expanding consciousness that they should get professors to teach them. If not, they should drop out of school and go some place where they will find people who will take their interests and needs seriously. I suggested they go to India and find a philosopher or a minister or a priest or someone who will help them go within rather than, as I think the American educational system is doing, focusing on the outside.

I will even go further than that, with your permission, sir, and step on another sacred cow of our American culture.

I believe that there are many aspects of American education which are addicting our youngsters to symbols, and I think my advice to young people, and I talked to them and they listen to me sir, my advice to young people is to turn on to the internal neurological energy, tune in, hook this up with the world around you, and drop out.

Now this may sound reckless advice today, but it is the oldest advice that philosophers and religious leaders have passed on. Detach, drop out, find what is within. And I stand by that statement which I made at the university.

Senator Dodd. I do not want to embarrass you, none of our questions are intended to. You are a researcher and you have said yourself that there is a lot that is not known about this drug.

What reasons as a researcher do you have to justify advising the youngsters to drop out of school unless they have the services of an LSD teacher?

Dr. Leary. I have been in psychology for 20 years, but I have not done any research on educational psychology, but it is the function of the scholar and the psychologist, in this country to pass on the conclusions from his research. My conclusions as of 20 years of psychological research are that modern university education may be doing neurological damage by focusing our attention on symbols.

Marshal McCluen is another person saying in his own measured prose, and I am saying here, that it is better to watch bad television than to read a good book because your nervous system which has been built up for 2 billion years is used to the multimedia flow of energy which you get on even a bad television show and what our colleges are doing is to make us think in straight square linear ways that have nothing to do with the reality around us.

Senator Dodd. Thank you, Dr. Leary, for coming before us.

Dr. Leary. Thank you, Sir.

Senator Dodd. We will now recess subject to further call.

(Whereupon, at 1 :05 p.m., the committee recessed, subject to call.)