Exploring Access to Psychedelics Among Canadian Veterans: Pathways, Barriers, and Perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction:Psychedelic-assisted therapies have recently gained attention as potential novel treatments for various mental health conditions. In Canada, there has been particular interest from the veteran communities regarding the potential therapeutic impact of psychedelics. However, legal access remains limited in Canada, leading some veterans to explore alternative pathways. Here, we aimed to explore how Canadian military veterans learn about and access psychedelics for mental health treatment. Methods:Using a retrospective survey-based design in collaboration with the registered Canadian charity, Heroic Hearts Canada, we collected data from 30 veterans on their mental health history, prior treatments, information sources, and methods of access. Results:Our findings indicate that while some veterans accessed psychedelics through legal pathways (20%, N = 5), most sought them through underground options, including self-directed (64%, N = 16) and guided experiences within (44%, N = 11) and outside (20%, N = 5) Canada. Veterans primarily relied on peers (73.3%, N = 22) and media (53.3%, N = 16) for information rather than health care providers (10%, N = 3). Those who avoided discussions with their health care providers cited concerns about stigma (64%, N = 9/14), while those who did consult health care providers often found them to lack knowledge on psychedelic treatments (69%, N = 11). Conclusions:These findings highlight gaps in access and education surrounding psychedelic therapies for veterans. While interest in these therapies is growing, it is important to note that clinical use of psychedelics for mental health conditions remains investigational. We propose that addressing these barriers through improved clinician training and education, policy reform, and development of safer legal pathways may support more informed and cautious engagement with these treatments and is essential to ensuring informed and effective care for those seeking alternative mental health treatments, such as psychedelics. Moreover, these efforts will contribute to broader harm reduction strategies by equipping clinicians with the knowledge and tools to support individuals who may continue to access these substances outside legal frameworks.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".