Novel treatment of opioid use disorder using ibogaine and iboga in two adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ibogaine is a naturally occurring psychedelic medicine with anti-addictive properties. While research on ibogaine is limited, several observational studies have shown ibogaine can mitigate opioid withdrawal, as seen with reductions in clinical and subjective opioid withdrawal scores and reduced drug use severity (Noller, Frampton, & Yazar-Klosinski, 2018; Brown & Alper 2018). Furthermore, the psychoactive experience may help individuals to realign their values, purpose and sense of connection, as seen with post treatment reductions in depression scores (Noller et al., 2018; Mash et al., 2000). Case series This case series describes two cases of individuals accessing ibogaine through private unregulated clinics in the Vancouver area to treat their opioid use disorder. Conclusions In case 1, the client achieved total abstinence from all opioids within 5–6 days of starting ibogaine treatment, did not experience any opioid withdrawal symptoms after ibogaine treatment and maintained abstinence from opioids for 3 years. In case 2, the patient took ibogaine/iboga in multiple treatments over a short period of time (<4 months). The patient stopped all non-medical opioids after the first iboga treatment and then used ibogaine to aid with further dose reductions of her opioid agonist therapy (OAT) and has maintained abstinence from opioids for 2 years. Ibogaine offers a unique and novel therapeutic approach to treating opioid use disorder. Further studies are needed to establish the safety, risks and potential role for ibogaine as a mainstream, evidence-based addiction treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it