La scelta migliore: la psilocibina per il trattamento della depressione farmaco-resistente e il paradosso psichedelico

[Machine translation] Let's start our brief reflection with this question: is it optional or mandatory to recommend to the patient (and caregivers) all the treatments available for an overt psychiatric condition? The answer, from an ethical and deontological point of view, seems obvious, nowadays. Just to give an example, faced with the detection of pathologies such as heart failure, neoplasia, retinopathy, practice wants the patient to be made aware of the diagnosis (with communication methods that should be adapted on a case-by-case basis) and of, treatment options that are appropriate both to the stage of the disease and to the overall picture of the patient himself. The patient, in fact, must be informed to make an independent decision on the treatment to be followed, because the therapeutic decision must be as much as possible participated by the patient or, when he cannot, by family members and caregivers. And the autonomous decision requires access to all reasonable options., 1 Yet there are some recent news events that problematize the issue. In the face of psychiatric illnesses, the choice seems to fail, as if there were, in the face of some diagnostic results,, a filter on the proposed therapeutic offers. In situations such as chronic forms of drug-resistant depression, for example, it is reasonable to wonder if patients are always informed of all options, therapies that exist, pharmacological and not.