Over two dozen people, many clad in white lab coats, gathered outside the State House on Tuesday morning, some holding signs with a bright yellow graphic of Massachusetts. The state on the signs was filled with bright rays of yellow and gold sunshine, and below, it read: “YES on 4, HOPE AND HEALING.’’
Exactly a week before the US election, advocates and doctors from the Yes on 4 campaign, including actor-turned-psychedelics-champion Eliza Dushku Palandjian, urged the public to vote yes on Question 4, a proposed law that would allow people 21 and older to grow, possess, and use five natural psychedelic substances under certain circumstances.
Dushku Palandjian, who was raised in Watertown and previously acted in cult classics like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer’’ and “Bring It On,’’ has been outspoken about how psychedelic treatments helped her recover from trauma.
She and her husband, businessman Peter Palandjian, have been involved in other causes related to mental health, including a 2023 donation of $7.5 million to Brigham and Women‘s Hospital to support substance use disorder treatments.
A “yes’’ vote on the Legalization and Regulation of Psychedelic Substances Initiative, or Question 4, would support the creation of a Psychedelic Substances Commission and Advisory Board to regulate the licensing of psychedelic substances and services, authorize individuals 21 years of age and older to grow, possess, and use a personal amount of psychedelic substances and allow for licensed centers that could sell psychedelics for on-site consumption under the supervision of a trained facilitator.
A “no’’ vote would maintain the status of the five substances as illegal in Massachusetts. (Psychedelics have already been decriminalized in eight Massachusetts communities, including Amherst, Cambridge, Medford, and Salem.)
Those against Question 4, such as Dr. Nassir Ghaemi from the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society, say that the known harms of psychedelics are too high and that the possible benefits are too low for them to be legalized.
Dushku Palandjian and other advocates for Question 4 say the measure will allow people to access a wider array of mental health treatment options. The campaign touts evidence that psychedelic therapy can help people, including veterans, with depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
“A yes vote on Question 4 will help to fulfill the obligation we owe to those who put their lives in harm’s way in service to our nation, and it will allow doctors to provide the best mental health care possible to all Massachusetts residents who need it,’’ Dushku Palandjian said.
Under Question 4, two substances found in mushrooms, psilocybin and psilocyn, and three substances found in other plants, dimethyltryptamine, mescaline, and ibogaine, would be legalized.
“Psychedelics are not free of risk but nothing is,’’ said Dr. Franklin King, director of training and education at Mass. General’s Center for Neuroscience of Psychedelics, at the Tuesday event. “This measure could open the door to much greater opportunity for public education and harm reduction with respect to these powerful substances.’’
Ghaemi, who is also a professor at Tufts University, said the drugs allowed on the ballot are not drugs that have been studied or proven to help with PTSD and other mental health conditions. While he and some others against Question 4 still support decriminalization, Ghaemi thinks the push to legalize psychedelics stems from a cultural wish among younger generations that they are totally safe.
“It is massive denial to think kids and teens couldn’t get a hold of this if available in the house,’’ he said.
Dushku Palandjian was joined by three other speakers, including King, physician and psychiatric facilitator Dr. Hannah McLane, and Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, professor emeritus at the Boston University School of Medicine and author of “The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma.’’
Peter Barbuto from the Gavin Foundation, a mental health treatment facility that serves more than 10,000 people annually at its South Boston location, said in a statement that he opposes Question 4 because it allows for unchecked home growth and use, which risks a public health crisis.
’’Any and all mind-altering substances create the potential for abuse by those that may be struggling and increasing that supply for the eventual benefit of those profit-seeking individuals that are funding this question is never the correct path,’’ Barbuto said.
At the press conference, Dushku Palandjian also disagreed with the idea pushed by the opposition that the bill would make changes too quickly.
“Question 4 will establish a two-year rule-making process leading to the establishment of a state agency that will be guided by an expert advisory board to provide oversight and guidance,’’ she said. “That is not too fast.’’
Izzy Bryars can be reached at izzy.bryars@globe.com.
