Our Mission
Psilobase exists because accurate information about psilocybin mushrooms is difficult to find and unevenly distributed. Most of what exists online is either overly cautious to the point of uselessness, or enthusiastic to the point of recklessness. Neither serves the people who actually need it: someone trying to understand a medical cannabis interaction, a family member supporting a loved one through a difficult experience, a healthcare provider wanting to understand what their patient may have taken, or a researcher looking for an accessible summary of the latest clinical findings.
Our mission is to provide comprehensive, evidence-based, harm-reduction-centred information about psilocybin mushrooms — their biology, pharmacology, therapeutic applications, risks, history, and legal context — in language that is accessible to a general audience without sacrificing accuracy. We believe that the best protection against harm is accurate information freely and clearly communicated. Vagueness, censorship, and moralising cost lives; clarity and honesty save them.
What We Stand For
Harm Reduction Above All
Harm reduction is not a philosophy we apply selectively to content we find comfortable. It means meeting people where they are — including people who have already decided to use psilocybin, people who are curious but undecided, people whose family member has used it without their knowledge, and professionals who need to understand it in a clinical context. All of these people deserve accurate, non-judgmental information. Psilobase is committed to providing it.
Harm reduction, in practice, means: clear dosage guidance with explicit uncertainty ranges; prominent, detailed contraindication information; honest discussion of bad-trip risk and how to mitigate it; emergency procedures written for real-world use; and integration guidance for after an experience. It also means not overstating benefits or minimising risks to make psilocybin seem safer or more beneficial than the evidence supports.
Evidence-Based Content
Every factual claim on Psilobase should be traceable to a cited source — a peer-reviewed study, a recognised harm-reduction organisation's guidelines, or a government health agency's published data. We draw primarily on research from:
- Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research
- Imperial College London's Centre for Psychedelic Research
- NYU Langone Health's psychedelic research programme
- MAPS (Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies)
- Peer-reviewed journals including JAMA Psychiatry, The Lancet Psychiatry, Psychopharmacology, and Neuropsychopharmacology
- Government agencies: NHS, NIH, TGA, and EMA for clinical safety data
When evidence is mixed, contested, or preliminary, we say so explicitly. When the research base is thin — as it is, for example, for microdosing efficacy — we represent it as thin rather than inflating certainty. We do not treat personal anecdote as equivalent to clinical evidence, though we may include experiential perspectives as illustrations of phenomena that research has separately identified.
Editorial Independence
Psilobase does not accept advertising, sponsorship, or commercial relationships of any kind. We do not link to or endorse suppliers of any substance, equipment, or service. We do not receive funding from pharmaceutical companies, psychedelic retreat operators, or advocacy organisations. This independence is not incidental — it is foundational. Commercial relationships create conflicts of interest that are incompatible with our commitment to honest, safety-first content.
Our editorial team contributes on a volunteer basis. The project is sustained by the belief that this information should be freely available and impartially presented, not by financial incentive.
Accessibility and Clarity
Information that cannot be understood by the people who need it is not useful information. We write for a general adult reader, not for specialists. Technical terms are defined when they are introduced; complex pharmacological concepts are explained with analogies and plain-language summaries; clinical findings are translated from academic language into actionable understanding. Where specialist depth is needed, we provide it in secondary sections so it does not obscure the key points for general readers.
Accessibility also means technical accessibility: the site is designed to be navigable with a keyboard, compatible with screen readers, and readable at high contrast. We aim to meet WCAG 2.1 AA standards throughout.
Editorial Policy
Content Review Process
Content is developed through a multi-stage process. Subject-matter researchers draft material; science writers edit for clarity; specialist advisors review for accuracy; and a final editorial pass checks consistency, citations, and tone before publication. No content is published without at least two independent reviews.
Major sections are reviewed on a quarterly cycle as a minimum. Significant new research findings or legal changes trigger immediate reviews of affected content. Readers who identify errors or outdated information can report them via the contact page; substantiated corrections are reviewed promptly and published within the current review cycle.
What We Include and What We Do Not
We include:
- Species biology, identification, and — critically — toxic lookalikes
- Pharmacology, mechanism of action, and pharmacokinetics
- Dosage guidance with explicit uncertainty ranges and inter-individual variability acknowledgement
- Contraindications, drug interactions, and population-specific risk factors
- Clinical trial summaries with methodology, findings, and limitations
- Harm reduction for recreational, ceremonial, and therapeutic contexts
- Emergency procedures — both psychological support and physical first aid
- Legal status by jurisdiction, updated regularly
- Integration frameworks and post-experience support
- Cultural and historical context
We do not include:
- Advice that constitutes medical, legal, or psychological professional advice
- Species identification services — misidentification can be lethal, and we are not qualified to assist
- Links to or endorsements of suppliers of any substance
- Content that encourages illegal activity
- Personal anecdote presented as equivalent to clinical evidence
Tone and Values
We write without sensationalism in either direction. We do not catastrophise psilocybin as inherently dangerous or transformative as a guaranteed cure. We write as if our reader is a competent adult who deserves honest, complete information — not a patient who needs to be protected from facts, and not a consumer who needs to be sold a story.
We acknowledge legal status without moralising. Psilocybin is a controlled substance in most jurisdictions, and we are clear about that. We do not treat legal status as a moral verdict. We note the legal landscape, explain what it means practically, and leave value judgements to the reader.
Our Commitment to Users
Psilobase commits to:
- Never publishing a claim we do not believe to be supported by credible evidence
- Acknowledging uncertainty and limitations openly, including limitations in the research base
- Updating content when evidence changes, and flagging significant updates
- Responding to substantiated corrections from readers promptly and without defensiveness
- Maintaining editorial independence from commercial interests
- Treating readers as competent adults deserving of complete, honest information
- Providing crisis resources prominently and without qualification
- Collecting only anonymised analytics data; no invasive tracking
Disclaimer and Legal Notice
All content on Psilobase is provided for educational and informational purposes only. Nothing on this site constitutes medical, legal, or professional advice. Psilocybin is a controlled substance in most jurisdictions; readers are solely responsible for understanding and complying with applicable laws. Psilobase does not encourage, facilitate, or endorse illegal activity. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional for personal medical questions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does Psilobase cover a topic that is illegal in most countries?
Legal status and harm are separate questions. Psilocybin is illegal in most jurisdictions, but it is also the subject of substantial clinical research and is used by a significant number of people regardless of legal status. Accurate harm-reduction information reduces real-world harm regardless of the legal context. The alternative — leaving people without reliable information because the topic is legally sensitive — is more dangerous, not less.
How does Psilobase ensure content accuracy?
All factual claims are traced to cited sources. Content undergoes multi-stage review before publication and quarterly review thereafter. Readers who find errors can report them with a source reference, and corrections are published promptly. We do not treat our own content as infallible — ongoing scrutiny from readers and advisors is part of how accuracy is maintained.
Does Psilobase take a political or advocacy position on psychedelic legalisation?
No. Our mission is harm reduction and accurate education, not advocacy. We describe the legal landscape and the policy debate as objectively as we can, but Psilobase does not campaign for any particular legal outcome. We believe that people across the spectrum of views on drug policy can benefit from accurate harm-reduction information.
Who funds Psilobase?
Psilobase is a volunteer-run project with no commercial funding. We do not accept advertising, sponsorship, or donations that could create editorial conflicts of interest. The project is sustained by the editorial team's commitment to the mission.
How do I report an error or suggest a topic?
Use the Contact page. For corrections, please include the page URL, the specific passage, and a credible source for the correction. Topic suggestions are welcome and directly shape our editorial backlog.