++What we lose when psychedelics are medicalized. +
++It’s been quite the journey for psychedelics, and it’s just getting started. First, they were sacred and ceremonial plant medicines for millennia. In the 1960s era, they traversed an American culture of mind expansion, which used them as wild tools for transcending ordinary states of consciousness. Then came the backlash in the 1970s when they were outlawed by a nervous Nixon administration. Now, psychedelics are emerging from the underground as a new generation of researchers amasses evidence that mind-altering drugs offer new and effective therapies to help stem the rising tides of mental illness. +
++Funding for research and legalization efforts on psychedelics are ramping up across the US. In January alone, seven states introduced new psychedelic legislation that ranges from decriminalization to supervised adult use to psychiatric treatment. Abroad, Australia became the first country to legalize psilocybin — psychedelic mushrooms — and MDMA as prescribable medicines by psychiatrists. The US looks poised to follow, with the FDA potentially set to approve MDMA for therapy later this year. +
++These tectonic changes in drug policy are taking place against the backdrop of a US mental health crisis, one where existing treatments have fallen short: The World Health Organization’s (WHO) largest mental health report this century has termed current interventions “insufficient and inadequate.” Turning to psychoactive fungi for treatment-resistant mental illness is a sharp pivot, a sign of both the impoverishment of current approaches and the excitement around a genuinely novel remedy. +
++But as important as anything that can turn the tide on mental health is, the frenzy over transforming psychedelics into new treatments for illness obscures — and may even interfere with — their further potential to expand our understanding of what healthy minds could be. The deep history of psychedelics shows they have far more to offer than simply the next generation of psychiatric treatment. +
++Conventional psychiatry looks at mental disorders: clinically significant disturbances in areas that are important for day-to-day functioning, like emotional regulation, behavior, and thinking. But psychedelics, when used carefully, can do more than heal disturbances. The WHO’s founding constitution defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Psychedelics can help shift attention toward reconfiguring the baseline of ordinary, non-impaired experience in ways that enrich what we call “normal.” +
++But fully harnessing these drugs may require a very different set of research and regulatory approaches than current conventional efforts focused on turning psychedelics into the next generation of therapeutic medicines. To make the most of what psychedelics can offer to the more expansive project of human flourishing, medicalizing isn’t enough. Regulators should consider allowing access outside a doctor’s office. +
++“The problem with the current biomedical vision is that it’s very much based on an individualistic understanding of mental health and human flourishing,” said Claudia Schwarz-Plaschg, a social scientist and visiting scholar at the University of Edinburgh’s Usher Institute who spent three years studying attitudes toward psychedelics in the US. “Medical interventions are geared towards making the individual fit better into society through therapeutic and substance-based interventions, but other approaches are more open towards a broader vision of how mental health issues and societal structures are producing each other,” she said. +
++Leaving psychedelics in the hands of the biomedical industry and state-regulated facilities can undermine their potential by excluding more diverse “sets and settings” (a term describing how psychological, social, and cultural factors all profoundly shape the kinds of trips one might experience) while leaving inequalities across race, culture, and class unaddressed. +
++But there is little consensus among researchers and policymakers on questions of access — from who gets access to where and how — in ways that could make the most of psychedelics’ benefits while balancing the potential risks. +
++Given the extent of the mental health crisis, policymakers should embrace new treatments to help those who suffer from mental illness. But in that embrace, we shouldn’t lose sight of what psychedelics can offer beyond psychiatry. Used holistically, these drugs can help expand our understanding of what healthier, richer, more flourishing states of consciousness might be like. The smothered dream of those hippies and former Harvard psychology professors who called on Americans to expand their minds with psychedelics could be revived in more prudent, diverse, and informed ways — provided we don’t box them in. +
++Why the psychedelic renaissance is focused on mental illness +
++In 1943, the Swiss chemist Albert Hofmann first discovered the effects of LSD, which is part of the family known as “classical” psychedelics. These also include psilocybin (magic mushrooms), mescaline (from the peyote cactus), and DMT. Classical psychedelics are non-addictive and bind to the brain’s serotonin receptors. That makes them unlike “non-classical” psychedelics such as ketamine and MDMA, which have different mechanisms of action in the brain and higher risks of side effects and abuse. (For example, in warm environments coupled with dehydration, MDMA can cause death via heatstroke, while ketamine could exacerbate existing heart conditions). +
++Like the psychedelic experience itself, there is no single narrative that fits the midcentury American trips that followed LSD’s introduction. It was a blooming, buzzing, revelatory confusion. LSD psychotherapy leaped into the Hollywood elite, the CIA experimented with the drug for mind control, and Jimi Hendrix front-manned a culture of Black psychedelia. But that experimentation largely came to an end in 1971 when President Richard Nixon’s Controlled Substances Act banned psychedelics (among other drugs) and stifled psychedelic research. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24654159/515118580.jpg)
Bettmann Archive/Getty Images
++While the legislation forced those interested in psychedelics underground, they didn’t stay there long. By the 1990s, a mostly new generation of researchers had begun revisiting studies from the 1950s, while attitudes toward psychedelics within the FDA and DEA were softening. Regulators no longer saw them as exotic substances with unknown long-term consequences, but increasingly, just another potentially dangerous drug. By 1991, a series of legal challenges, together with the perseverance of researchers who believed psychedelics were worth studying, led to the first approval for human psychedelic research since the 1970s. +
++Regulatory hurdles to obtaining approval remained steep, and young scientists still risked their reputations by working with psychedelics. But a landmark paper published in the journal Psychopharmacology in 2006 on mushrooms and mystical experiences — where recipients reported mystical experiences with high personal significance that endured for months afterward — signaled the above-ground renaissance in scientific research was professionally viable, institutionally acceptable, and already underway. +
++This time, however, the focus was not directed toward expanding the mind, Timothy Leary-style, but alleviating mental illness. In part, this shift was a strategic response to the 1960s moral panic and 1970s legal action against psychedelics. By reintroducing psychedelics through the most accepted and controlled channels — medical research — scientists aimed to minimize the risk of another backlash. +
++The shift toward psychiatry was also a response to a clear need. By 2019–2020, approximately a fifth of all adults — over 50 million Americans, up from 39.8 million in 2008 — were reporting some kind of mental illness. The growing body of psychedelic research suggested significant promise in treating precisely the illnesses that were most widespread: depression, anxiety, and addiction. That list may continue to expand as research fans out into new areas, like eating disorders. +
++No single group of chemicals can solve the complexities of mental health, which extend beyond the individual mind to include social and political elements. But if recent research holds course, psychedelics may well provide much-needed relief while inspiring entirely new approaches to psychiatry. That’s especially vital given the lack of innovation in mental health treatments since SSRI antidepressants like Prozac were approved in the 1980s. +
++Still, a singular focus on making psychedelics into pharmaceutical medicines carries its own drawbacks, in part by isolating the psychoactive molecules themselves from the wider cultural practices that have traditionally been inseparable from the experience. +
++“Mainstream culture hears about psychedelics primarily through a medicalized or therapeutic lens,” said Ariel Clark, an Odawa Anishinaabe regulatory attorney based in California and a founding board member of the Psychedelic Bar Association. “But the use of sacred medicines in Indigenous paradigms of access really eclipse the medical use by far.” +
++As the Harvard theologian Rachael Peterson put it: “Important wisdom is lost when technologies of transcendence are stripped from their spiritual and religious contexts and presented as psychological treatments.” Now, a new generation of researchers is seeking to return a wider spiritual lens to targeted questions of therapy and neuroscience. +
++How psychedelics can enrich your mind +
++Until recently, there was little funding for psychedelic research on volunteers without diagnosed mental illness, what researchers sometimes call “healthy normals.” That’s why Roland Griffiths, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research, recently launched the Griffiths Fund. The fund supports research and a professorship at Hopkins to study the effects of psychedelics on well-being and secular spirituality in healthy volunteers. Griffiths, whose research has been pivotal in advancing the field since his 2006 paper helped launch the psychedelic renaissance, has called this “the most consequential direction for future psychedelic research.” +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24654058/461026286.jpg)
Andre Chung/Washington Post via Getty Images
++The first recipient is David Yaden, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins who works in the Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research. Prior to studying psychedelics at Hopkins, Yaden’s work focused on “self-transcendent experiences,” or altered states of consciousness achieved through drugs or other means, ranging from meditation and brain stimulation to simple walks in nature. While most research on psychedelics and spirituality has treated elements like mystical experiences as secondary to therapeutic outcomes, Yaden told me he plans to “confront the issue of spirituality” head-on, rather than as a side quest. +
++“I think it’s essential that the study of well-being is not lost in this emphasis on therapeutics,” Yaden told me. He calls this focus on whether and how psychedelics can improve well-being (even for those who aren’t mentally ill) the “positive program” of psychedelic research. +
++Although the Griffiths Fund is the first effort specifically dedicated to these questions in healthy volunteers, there already exists a small foundation of academic research on the subject. Most of it can be divided into two buckets: the observable effects of psychedelics on the brain and their subjective effects on the mind. This blurry relationship between the brain and the mind is one of the many mysteries psychedelics may help clarify. +
++We can record objective data on how LSD changes patterns of electrical activity in the brain with neuroimaging technologies like EEG and fMRI. But to capture the feeling of the psychedelic dissolution of the boundary between yourself and the world, we can only rely indirectly on people’s recollections. Mainstream psychedelic research leans toward what you can directly measure, but Yaden told me that the subjective experiences are a necessary part of any full explanation of the lasting benefits on well-being some psychedelic users report. +
++In the brain, psychedelics are associated with at least three groups of observable effects. They boost neuroplasticity, which supports the rewiring of existing neurons. They promote neurogenesis, which supports the creation of new brain cells. And they increase brain “entropy,” or the diversity, randomness, and unpredictability of electrical activity across brain regions. +
++Neuroplasticity likely plays a key role in addressing mental illness by enhancing the brain’s ability to rewire patterns of thought. Especially when paired with psychotherapy, psychedelic-induced neuroplasticity can help reshape harmful habits — from mental patterns of self-criticism to forms of addiction — into more beneficial ones. +
++While anyone can benefit from a little more neuroplasticity, which tends to decline with age, increasing brain entropy offers another explanation for the spectrum of benefits beyond treating illness. In 2014, Robin Carhart-Harris, a neuroscientist who was then the head of the Centre for Psychedelic Research at Imperial College London, published a landmark work on what he called “the entropic brain.” The basic idea is that what any state of consciousness feels like — and in particular, what he calls the “richness” of its feeling — depends on the amount of entropy in the associated brain activity. Brain entropy is low in reduced states of consciousness, like when you’re under general anesthesia. During altered states, from psychedelic trips to deep meditation, entropy is higher. In ordinary waking consciousness, it rests somewhere in the middle. +
++Carhart-Harris argues that the brain evolved an ability to strike a useful balance of entropy levels. In particular, he believes that the collection of regions known as the default-mode network (DMN) is primarily responsible for suppressing entropy in the ordinary brain. Doing so favors forms of cognition that help us make sense of our environments in ways that are useful for survival. “Equally however,” he writes in the paper, “it could be seen as exerting a limiting or narrowing influence on consciousness.” +
++Psychedelics reduce activity within the DMN, loosening its hold over entropy levels. The resulting high-entropy states may not have been the most beneficial for our ancestors on the savannah. (Predators would welcome blissed-out prey, marveling at their surroundings rather than scanning for threats). But for a species where basic survival can now mostly be taken for granted, these states may have much to offer. Beyond mere vacations into “richer” states of consciousness, entropic states can cast new light on the ordinary ones we return to when a trip subsides. Sometimes it’s tough to imagine how different something that’s grown so familiar can be — like the habitual ways we experience ourselves, those close to us, and the world — until we’ve had the direct experience of it being otherwise. +
++But Yaden emphasized that entropy, neuroplasticity, and all the other factors that we can observe with brain-imaging technologies are only part of the story. He calls these “lower-level neurobiological processes,” and adds that higher-level ones, like the subjective content of the experiences themselves, play a key role in explaining the benefits of psychedelics. +
++These fall into the hazier category of effects on the mind, where scientific tools awkwardly grasp for measurements that don’t come easy. To describe these parts of a trip, you must rely on imperfect language: mystical experience, ego death or dissolution, unselfing, oceanic boundlessness. They can run the spectrum from blissful to terrifying, and the quality and intensity of these experiences shape the long-term effects. +
++For example, one study found that higher scores of oceanic boundlessness during a trip (a term reaching all the way back to the 17th-century philosopher Baruch Spinoza, describing the sense of separation between self and world melting away, like a water droplet losing its separateness as it rejoins the ocean) were more predictive of long-term clinical benefits than basic hallucinatory effects (like seeing undulating geometric patterns). The interpretation was that when it comes to psychedelics, the ordinary and predictable relationship between dose and outcome isn’t as simple as with other drugs. Sometimes, the kind of experience someone has — and the set and setting in which that experience takes place — is more important than the dose of psychedelics they take. +
++While the majority of clinical psychedelic experiences are positive, this is likely because researchers have a great degree of control over risk factors. But the very measures of control that help ensure more positive experiences can also suppress the wider range of possibilities, just like the default-mode network’s regulation of entropy levels. The clinically controlled environments employed in research trials and regulated psychiatric contexts have their own set and setting that will tend to reproduce particular kinds of experiences while discouraging others. Many within the psychedelic community believe that greater freedoms in where, how, and in what company we take psychedelics are crucial for maximizing their benefits, especially in already healthy users. +
++States across the US are introducing varieties of psychedelic legislation that will lay the groundwork for what psychedelic access may come to look like domestically while also informing global strategies. “From a global perspective,” Schwarz-Plaschg writes in her ethnographic study, “the US can be understood as a test bed from which lessons might be drawn for how to best build a post-prohibitionist world for psychedelics.” +
++The debate over how to expand access to psychedelics +
++There’s an unavoidable tension in legislative efforts to shape this post-prohibitionist world. Supporting wider uses and benefits of psychedelics by making them easier to access means raising the risks for individuals, as well as the chances of another legal backlash. As states continue introducing new bills, there is no settled blueprint. Each approach explores different ways of balancing benefits and risks. +
++One approach gaining traction is the “adult-use” model pioneered in Oregon, which took effect at the start of 2023. Anyone over the age of 21 who can afford the cost (early estimates suggest as much as $1,000 per session, which would keep out all but the well-off) can sign up for a psychedelic service session. These can only take place at a service center approved by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) under the supervision of facilitators who have completed one of the training programs vetted by the Oregon Psilocybin Services division of the OHA. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24667262/1230122191.jpg)
Cole Burston/AFP via Getty Images
++By eliminating the need for a medical diagnosis or referral, the adult-use model does expand access. But requiring the trip to occur inside a government-sanctioned room, under the supervision of a facilitator one may have very little relationship with, and without the company of others joining in the experience, can all run counter to the variety of social and nature-immersed ways Indigenous cultures have used psychedelics for generations. +
++Colorado recently went a step further, including a decriminalization component alongside adult-use legislation. This would allow citizens to possess, grow, and share psychedelics for personal use in whatever forms they see fit. But psychedelic researchers and practitioners disagree on permitting such unregulated access. Beyond concerns over the risks of psychedelic use in unregulated environments, there are further worries that decriminalization could undermine researchers’ ability to carry out rigorous clinical trials, or that an absence of restrictions on the quantity of psychedelics that can be grown for personal use will lead to a large black market supply for the drugs. +
++Beyond “where” and “how,” there is also the question of “when.” As Rick Doblin, director of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a nonprofit specializing in psychedelic research and education, told GQ in 2021, “medicalization precedes legalization.” But for how long? +
++There are two broad camps here. One (including Doblin) sees medicalization as the necessary path toward broader acceptance, arguing that mounting evidence of medical benefits will gradually turn public opinion in favor of wider access to psychedelics. The other camp sees medicalization as a sort of waiting room that will slow legalization efforts. +
++Clark echoed the idea that careful regulatory policy is essential, but rejected that medicalization is the best approach in the meantime. As she pointed out to me, holding psychedelics in an exclusively medicalized waiting room could worsen the existing diversity problem. “You want to talk about the history of Black people or Native people with the medical establishment?” Clark said. “Who’s driving the conversation around the medical and therapeutic being the safest and only way?” +
++There is also the uncomfortable matter of psychedelic capitalism. The reservation of early access to psychedelics for pharmaceutical companies, medical researchers, and opportunistic investors is transforming the psychedelic industry — including the drugs themselves — before it even reaches the public. Broadly, the concern is that capitalism’s profit motive won’t necessarily support the prudent research, rollout, and harm reduction measures that can help ensure a smooth and equitable reintroduction. +
++Schwarz-Plaschg said that a complementary non-biomedical focus (like decriminalization) would help maximize the benefits. “The broader the spectrum of psychedelic services and legal uses in society, the more people will be reached who can benefit in their own flourishing, and that will enable society to flourish more in the long term.” +
++But the sometimes strained move from biomedical to recreational legalization in cannabis suggests the need for prudence. Businesses that deal with a substance legalized by the state but still outlawed by the federal government face a variety of elevated costs (for example, they can’t deduct business expenses from their federal taxes and struggle to find willing insurers). The odds of success in the industry are stacked toward large corporate entities with money to blow. “We have to go slow to go fast,” Clark told me. “That is a huge lesson from cannabis, and with psychedelics, there’s even more reason to go slow at the beginning. It’s the foundational stages that matter the most because of these huge, important, intersectional issues.” +
++The current moment presents an opportunity to engage deep representation and participation from all stakeholders of psychedelic drugs and sacred plant medicines alike. Colonial tensions are baked into the psychedelic renaissance, but movements to decolonize the industry can elevate a commitment to equity while helping to expand the conversation around different models of access. +
++These Indigenous approaches vary by culture and place, but generally share a few themes. First, as Clark explained, psychedelics are not seen as substances you “take,” like an aspirin or an antidepressant, but as entities that you enter into relationship with. “It’s a deep and sacred relationship, grounded in veneration and relationality.” Second, many Indigenous models could not be carried out on a solo trip inside a cozy doctor’s office, isolated from larger communities of practice. +
++Finally, many Indigenous models do not recognize a distinction between therapeutic and spiritual. Illness and one’s existential relationship to the self and the world go hand in hand. The idea that you could extract the therapeutic mechanism from the spiritual context is seen as a peculiarly Western conceit. +
++Next stop on the trip +
++President Biden’s administration expects the Food and Drug Administration to approve MDMA and psilocybin for treating PTSD and depression, respectively, within the next year or two. This would increase pressure on the DEA to reschedule the drugs, which are currently categorized as Schedule I substances “with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” This status — widely considered out of touch with current research — restricts access to the substances, creating a major barrier to further studies and to those who could benefit from their use. +
++With or without rescheduling, the flurry of state bills for psychedelic access is likely to continue. One study based on cannabis legalization trends predicts that a majority of states will legalize psychedelics in the next 14 years. Whether these legal models will open up access for a wider range of potential benefits (and risks) or reinforce the conditions to explore only a narrow, more manageable band of their potential is still up for grabs. +
++So what could legalization efforts that extend access beyond psychiatry look like? It would require a diversity of sets and settings, not just clinical trials or government-approved cozy rooms. It requires a diversity of participants, beyond privileged subgroups who can afford access to expensive services. And it needs an equal investment in harm reduction alongside benefit maximization. +
++Doblin has sketched one idea: licensed legalization. Think of it like getting your driver’s license but for buying psychedelics. Once you are a certain age, you would become eligible for a supervised psychedelic experience at a licensed facility — a sort of initiation ritual where you learn the ropes. Perhaps there’s a written portion to ensure basic knowledge. Afterward, you receive a license that allows you to purchase psychedelics for use however you see fit. The license could be revoked for any number of infractions, just as we do for drunk drivers. +
++Advocates for this sort of regulated legalization still lack answers for how to keep purchasing costs down — one reason that some support decriminalization, where personal cultivation could afford cheaper access. The cannabis legalization experience shows how dealing in Schedule I substances entails regulatory compliances and tax burdens that drive up the price. +
++Costs aside, there’s still a bumpy road to licensed legalization. There is no getting around the fact that lowering barriers to access can raise the risk of harm, and safety measures in clinical settings are better developed than those for communities new to the drugs. Nor are there established business models for psychedelics that ensure benefit sharing with Indigenous communities. +
++Experiments are underway, though, like Journey Colab’s “Reciprocity Trust,” where they designate 10 percent of their founding equity to cycle back into Indigenous communities and other stakeholders working on equitable access. Finally, rising demand from widespread access would deepen exploitative pressures on the ecosystems where psychedelics grow. Synthetic alternatives developed in the spirit of open science could help. But whether synthetic alternatives are as effective as their naturally occurring counterparts remains under-studied. +
++Whatever rationale — or concern — one leans toward, a broader approach to psychedelics offers something that’s otherwise hard to come by. Disturbances in ordinary experience are easy to spot, like measuring the brain’s electrical activity. But how much richer ordinary experience itself can be is a camouflaged question that seldom arises unprovoked. +
++Psychedelics are one way of bringing the construction of ordinary consciousness into view, wherever one falls on a diagnostic rating scale of mental disorders. But regulatory environments and models of access are part of the wider set and setting that shapes or constrains psychedelic experiences. Hopefully, the burgeoning post-prohibition world for psychedelics won’t remain boxed in by lab coats and psychiatry alone, and we won’t deprive ourselves of the strange, fascinating, sometimes risky, and meaningful views a wider approach to psychedelics can offer. +
++Musk’s week of conspiracy theories, explained. +
++Despite criticism for continuing to engage with conspiracy theories, Elon Musk is posting through it. +
++In the past five days, Musk has doubled down on a conspiracy theory about the Allen, Texas, shooter; tweeted that billionaire philanthropist George Soros (who has long been the target of antisemitic conspiracy theories online) wants to “erode the very fabric of civilization” and “hates humanity;” and promoted a quickly debunked rumor that falsely claimed Washington Post journalist Taylor Lorenz was related to the founder of the Internet Archive. +
++When CNBC reporter David Faber asked Musk about his promotion of conspiracy theories in a live interview on May 16, Musk acknowledged that he does support these theories, like the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, because “some of these conspiracy theories” like the Hunter Biden laptop story “have turned out to be true.” When Faber pressed Musk about whether his promotion of conspiracy theories is hurting Twitter’s reputation with advertisers, Musk was defiant. +
++“I’ll say what I want to say, and if the consequence of that is losing money, so be it,” said the billionaire. +
++Musk’s argument is that because conspiracy theories can sometimes be true, it’s okay to entertain them. Musk is correct that the Hunter Biden laptop story did turn out to be real, even though many in the media questioned its initial veracity. Twitter, the company Musk now owns, even controversially blocked the New York Post story breaking the news. It’s also true, as my colleague Zack Beauchamp has explained, that there can be valid, non-antisemitic reasons to criticize powerful figures like Soros. +
++But many of the conspiracy theories Musk has promoted to his 140 million Twitter followers have proven false. And some argue there’s potential danger in Musk spreading misinformation or heated rhetoric. The way Musk characterizes Soros, for example, stands to “embolden extremists,” according to Anti-Defamation League president Jonathan Greenblatt. Musk accused Greenblatt of defaming him and vehemently denied he’s personally antisemitic, saying “if anything” that he’s “pro-semite,” in the recent CNBC interview. +
++Let’s clarify right out the gate that Musk has a First Amendment right to say what he wants, with some limited legal exceptions. And as the owner of Twitter, a private company, he has the final word on what speech is or isn’t allowed on Twitter. But because Musk is the leader of the platform and one of the richest, most influential people in the world, his actions have consequences, both tangible and symbolic. Moreover, Musk’s tweets serve as a hindrance to the very real challenges Twitter faces to win back more advertisers who have left the brand, in large part over concerns about Musk’s behavior. +
++A closer look at Musk’s “flirting” with conspiracy theories +
++Musk’s engagement with conspiracy theories in recent weeks hasn’t been direct. He’s been described as “flirting” with these theories, oftentimes replying to a conspiracy theory tweet rather than directly tweeting it himself. He’s often taken a “just asking questions” approach, especially on subjects where there’s an information void. +
++For example, the week of the recent Texas shooting, early coverage of the incident, including that of open source intelligence research group Bellingcat, claimed that the suspected shooter was a white supremacist, based in part on his social media activity. Soon after, Musk jumped into the fray. He responded to a cartoon meme posted by an account called “The Redheaded libertarian” that raised questions about whether the suspected shooter, who is of Hispanic origin, could really be a neo-Nazi, and whether his account on a Russian social media app was legitimate. +
++“Didn’t the story come from @bellingcat, which literally specializes in psychological operations? I don’t want to hurt their feelings, but this is either the weirdest story ever or a very bad psyop!” Musk replied. +
++Bellingcat founder Eliot Higgins has long denied theories about his organization having ulterior motives, saying in a past interview that its contributors are just “people with laptops and free time.” But even if you don’t believe Higgins or Bellingcat on the subject of the Texas shooter, you don’t have to take their word for it. That’s because Texas law enforcement confirmed on May 9, the same day Musk posted his initial tweet casting doubt on the shooter’s white supremacist ties, that the suspected shooter had “Neo-nazi” ideation as confirmed by patches and tattoos on his body. +
++Despite this additional evidence, Musk doubled down on his disbelief about the shooter’s ideology a week later in the CNBC interview, saying there is “no proof” that the shooter was a white supremacist. Either Musk doesn’t know about or is choosing not to mention law enforcement’s account here. That doesn’t mean there’s never reason to question public officials’ account of a crime, but Musk didn’t do that here; he just avoided acknowledging a notable piece of evidence that contradicts his theory. +
++Race and crime seem to be points of particular interest for Musk. Last week, he replied to a tweet that contained a chart claiming to show that Black-on-white crime is higher than that of other categories of crime by race. Many have criticized the chart for being skewed, but Musk seemed to endorse it. “Odd, why would the media misrepresent the real situation to such an extreme degree?” Musk tweeted. +
++Others have said that the chart Musk is referencing is misleading because it’s adjusted for percentage of the population: Because white people account for a larger percentage of the US population, it makes sense that they are victims of crime in larger numbers. Also, the chart didn’t include white-on-white crime, which is among the highest buckets of crime broken down by race in the US. +
++As with many of Musk’s conspiracy-theory-flirting tweets, when put together, we start to see a fuller picture emerge: a specific grievance. In this case, it’s how the media portrays race and crime. +
++What’s going on with Twitter and Musk’s businesses +
++It’s notable that Musk is tweeting controversial tweets during a particularly critical moment for the future of Twitter. +
++The company has lost more than half of Twitter’s top 1,000 advertisers since Musk took over in November, according to January data from analytics company SensorTower. Some major companies, like Disney, Amazon, and Apple, have continued to spend money on the platform, and Musk has said other advertisers are coming back. But he’ll need more advertisers in his corner if he wants to turn Twitter’s business around. +
++Musk announced last week that former NBCUniversal advertising executive Linda Yaccarino will be replacing him as CEO. Given her street cred in the advertising industry, she’s seen as someone who can help repair Twitter’s reputation with major brands. +
++“If anyone can do it, it’s Linda,” one advertising executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told me last week. It looks as though Yaccarino has already managed to help bolster Twitter’s image with GroupM, one of the top advertising agencies in the world. The agency, which is owned by WPP, had designated Twitter as a “high-risk” company for its clients to advertise with, but, according to the Financial Times, recently removed the designation. +
++If Musk’s tweets were gaining him positive attention or drawing attention away from some other, bigger issue, you could say his tweets serve as a useful distraction or a savvy way of gaining free media coverage. Instead, Musk’s behavior is self-destructive. His controversial tweets could exacerbate the most pressing problem with Twitter: its relationship with advertisers. +
++Musk’s continued conspiracy theory flirtation threatens to stymie any progress Twitter is making on that front. Back in November, Musk’s tweet promoting a conspiracy theory about the violent attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband was seen as one of the turning points for many advertising industry insiders in their assessment about whether or not to continue advertising on Twitter. +
++It’s clear that Musk’s repeated promotion of conspiracy theories has real consequences for his business. If there’s a deeper reason for why Musk continues to promote these theories despite the consequences — beyond merely saying what he wants to say — is anyone’s guess. Whatever the reasoning, Musk is posting through the firestorm and getting all kinds of attention for it. Maybe that alone is worth the trouble. +
++The nationwide epidemic of catalytic converter thefts, explained. +
++When Josy turned the ignition on her 2010 Prius one morning this February, she heard an unsettling rattle coming from underneath her car. Her girlfriend, Glory, unfortunately knew the sound all too well. +
++Once again, thieves had targeted the cars parked at Glory’s Indianapolis apartment complex, searching for catalytic converters — the valuable, canister-like part of the car responsible for transforming harmful emissions into less-polluting gas. Glory, a 23-year-old librarian, already had her “cat” stolen from her 2016 Kia Sportage twice, once in April 2021 and another time in March 2022. Now it was Josy’s turn. +
++Glory and Josy — whose last names are being withheld to protect their privacy — are not alone. From San Diego to Boston, nationwide catalytic converter thefts appear to be at a historic high. Insurance claims for these thefts increased from 16,660 claims in 2020 to 64,701 in 2022, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau’s latest report released last week. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24666260/Screen_Shot_2023_05_18_at_12.01.46_PM.png)
++At first glance, catalytic converters seem like a weirdly specific part to steal. But there’s a reason for that — they’re rich in precious metals, such as platinum, palladium, and rhodium. A thief can earn a couple hundred bucks from a typical catalytic converter. (In the US, secondhand converters aren’t reused in cars. Rather, these parts eventually end up at refineries that process the metal.) +
++The thefts are brazen and can occur in under 90 seconds, and have even taken place in broad daylight. Police historically have had a hard time tracking thefts because it’s near impossible to identify catalytic converters once they’re stolen. In some rare cases, when someone has caught a thief red-handed, it has ended in bloodshed. +
++It can cost up to thousands of dollars and weeks of waiting to get a converter replaced. Like any other car part, catalytic converters are specific to the make and model of the car. (While most cars have one catalytic converter, some have two and others can have up to four.) If you have an electric vehicle, you’re in luck — only combustion cars and hybrid vehicles have catalytic converters. +
++It’s easy to write off these thefts as random acts that occasionally get featured on the 11 o’clock news. But the scale is much, much bigger than that. Last November, the Department of Justice cracked down on a $545 million nationwide theft ring. Law enforcement arrested 21 people and seized “millions of dollars in assets, including homes, bank accounts, cash, and luxury vehicles.” +
++If neighborhood listservs, local news segments, and frustrated tweets are to be believed, it’s likely that 2023 will continue to see higher than normal numbers. Drivers can take some steps to deter theft — more on those below — but the problem has gotten to a point where lawmakers and car manufacturers have to act. +
++What is a catalytic converter anyway? +
++The science behind your catalytic converter is nothing short of incredible. +
++Crudely put, a catalytic converter is a small loaf-sized metal tube under your car that takes the gasses produced from your engine and makes them less harmful to the environment. If you crack it open, the insides resemble a honeycomb. Those insides — usually composed of platinum, palladium, and rhodium, alongside some other metals — are what chemically “converts” that gas. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24666241/1408112449.jpg)
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
++Let’s zoom out for a system-wide view. You’ve probably heard of a 4- or 8-cylinder engine. Every time you start your engine, thousands of tiny combustions in each of those cylinders give your car the energy to move, explained Talena Handley, a California-based mechanic and owner of Girlie Garage, a car education organization for women. +
++Those mini-combustions also create fumes that need some way to exit the engine. Your converter takes those fumes and transforms them into nitrogen, carbon dioxide, water, and oxygen. Then the exhaust travels through the muffler and out the tailpipe. +
++Before the invention of the catalytic converter, cars simply just … let those unchanged fumes into the atmosphere. It wasn’t until the EPA passed the Clean Air Act in 1970 that vehicle emissions were regulated in the US. By 1975, most cars had to be equipped with a catalytic converter in order to meet those emission goals. (A fun unintended consequence of that legislation? The widespread adoption of catalytic converters forced companies to remove lead from gasoline since it can damage the converter. By 1986, lead was fully eliminated from gasoline in the US.) +
++The crime uptick and how these thefts happen +
++One of the questions surrounding the meteoric rise in catalytic converter theft is “Why now?” The answer, as you may have guessed, has something to do with changes in the supply chain wrought by the pandemic. +
++Platinum, palladium, and rhodium are all scarce metals that have to be mined. Rhodium, the most rare and valuable of the three, is mined mostly in South Africa, followed by Russia. +
++Although thefts slowly began creeping up in 2019, they grew in 2020 and boomed in 2021 mostly because of the pandemic, the experts I spoke with told me. Like everywhere else in the world, workers couldn’t mine, process, and ship these metals due to restrictions. And if they did, it’s likely there were other hurdles and disruptions along the supply chain. +
++The fact that people weren’t driving their cars as often during the beginning of the pandemic combined with higher valuations for these metals created a perfect storm to incentivize catalytic converter theft. +
++“There’s other people who are illegally enjoying the ride saying, ‘Okay, if these precious metals are up high, we’re going to go and take them,’” says Donovan Bates, the owner of DMV Recycling, a metal recycling company based in Virginia. He buys converters from both individuals and mechanic shops, and then later sells to a refinery. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24667055/Screen_Shot_2023_05_18_at_4.54.28_PM.png)
++Catalytic converters range in price, depending on the year, make, and model. Those that have more precious metals — like hybrid cars, such as the Toyota Prius — are more likely to be targeted. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Prius is the number one hit car in the West (and California the number one state for thefts, per the NICB), with its two catalytic converters running up to a grand each, making it a double whammy for thieves. +
++Other cars that are likely to be hit include fleet vehicles (such as USPS trucks, school buses, and even Oscar Mayer’s Wienermobile, which tend to sit unmonitored in lots when not in use) and anything with a higher clearance, including trucks and SUVs. Since these vehicles have more room under them, it’s easier for thieves to slip underneath, slice the converter out, and slide out undetected. +
++(It doesn’t always go smoothly — in February, an unsuspecting driver of a Ford Excursion in California had been asleep in a retail parking lot when a thief crawled under and began sawing. Awoken by the sound, the driver accidentally ran over the thief, killing them.) +
++Thieves usually operate in teams, according to Handley and Bates. Give a team an hour, and rows of cars in a parking lot will get hit. All it takes is an electric saw or other metal-cutting tool. +
++After a cat is stolen, you’re at a greater risk of getting hit again once you’ve replaced it, said Handley. “Because then they know that you’re vulnerable and they know you’re going to fix it,” she explained. “And if your car is still sitting in your driveway a month later with a new catalytic converter, that new catalytic converter actually has more fresh material in it. They’re going to hit you again.” +
++The number of catalytic converters a thief has in their possession matters. Each converter only has a tiny amount of precious metals, so it’s much more worthwhile to steal dozens, if not hundreds. In the US, most thieves will sell converters to several metal recyclers or scrap yards that aren’t checking for identification. +
++These middlemen, Bates says, will pay an individual or entity up front for a converter, and then sell to a refinery once they’ve accumulated enough worth selling. (To be clear, Bates’s company does track drivers and business licenses.) Because the processing machines are gigantic and require at least 2,000 pounds worth of material, most shops will need to sell around 800 converters at a time. Then the converters are crushed into dust and refined. The precious metals are then separated, sold to a final end user, and later recycled into new converters, dental fillings, jewelry, you name it. +
++How to protect yourself from catalytic converter theft +
++Beyond the typical safety tips of parking in a secure garage or in a well-lit place, there are a few steps you can take to give yourself an extra layer of protection. +
++The first thing you can do is contact your insurance company and see whether upgrading or changing your coverage makes sense for your needs. I spoke with several victims across the country, and the amount they paid for a replacement was contingent on their policy. It might mean you have a higher bill each month, but if you have a car that’s heavily targeted, don’t have a garage to park in, or live in an area that has had a spike in theft, it’s worth looking into. +
++Lyssa, a 39-year-old school teacher in Oakland, upgraded her insurance after her 2005 Toyota Highlander was hit three times in 2022. It wasn’t just her; her husband’s 2012 Prius was hit in 2020. At the time, they decided to take the buyout from their insurance instead of paying the $1,000 co-pay to replace the Prius’s converter. When the Highlander’s converter was cut out the first two times in September, they replaced it each time. But after round three, it was time to get better insurance (and an anti-theft cable welded to the converter — more on this below). +
++“It can be a really painful realization if you get the cheap insurance, like one of my coworkers did, and then lose your catalytic converter and then find out that you don’t have any coverage for that,” she says. “So you actually have to pay for the whole $3,000. Which, you know, if you’re driving an old Camry, that’s more than your car is worth.” +
++On the deterrence front, regardless of what model car you have, Handley recommends talking to your mechanic to install a “cat shield,” which is a sheet of metal that covers where the converter is. They range from $50-$500 (as with everything, the make and model of your car affect the price). Other options include cables that are similar to what you would see for a bike lock — those are a bit more affordable, but easier to break. +
++“The reason the cat shield actually deters people is because it takes a really long time and it’s very noisy,” Handley said. “It takes a longer time to cut through it, so if you have to linger to cut through it, you have a higher chance of attracting attention. If they’re really determined, they’ll still do it, though.” +
++The next course of action is etching your vehicle identification number (VIN) onto your catalytic converter, says Bates, the metal recycler. As mentioned above, converters don’t come that way. Recyclers who see an etched converter may be less likely to buy it, but it won’t stop a thief from stealing it. One company is creating VIN stickers and a database to track, but it’s not widely used among recyclers, Bates says. +
++“The real problem is that we don’t have a good infrastructure in place to stop catalytic converter theft,” Bates said. +
++He argues that either a state-based or federal government database for catalytic converters that is easily accessible for recyclers and repair shops could work. Manufacturers first would need to engrave VINs onto converters as part of their process to ease the cost and mental burden on drivers, but if there was a searchable database that allowed legal transfer of ownership, it would save a lot of headaches. +
++Sergeant Bob Carson of the Houston Police Department confirmed that identification is difficult for police, too. “If I stopped you with five catalytic converters in your car,” he said. “I couldn’t connect you to any specific vehicle.” Sometimes, he added, his reports could match a converter to the cut under your vehicle, but that is very uncommon. +
++The epidemic of thefts has prompted state and municipal governments throughout the country to act. In the past two years, several cities and states have proposed and enacted new laws or amended current ones to help combat theft, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau. +
++Houston’s city council passed an ordinance in 2022 that requires metal recyclers to check more identification from mechanic shops and individuals, such as a business or driver’s license as well as the car’s VIN. The law came alongside community education programs to allow the secondary market to catch up, says Carson. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24666268/Screen_Shot_2023_05_18_at_12.04.49_PM.png)
++Based on preliminary data provided by the Houston Police Department, these initiatives seem to be working. Last year, the city saw 9,637 reported thefts, a jump from 2021’s 7,822 thefts, and 2020’s 1,793. Projected rates for 2023 hover around 4,000 reported thefts. (January and February had fewer than 700 thefts combined.) The Texas State Legislature is also looking to make catalytic converter theft a felony. +
++Should your converter get stolen, it’s advisable to contact your local police department and insurance company right away. Making a report will help give lawmakers and law enforcement a clearer picture of what’s going on in your area, and your insurance may be able to cover the cost of the stolen converter. +
++As for replacing your converter or the whole vehicle, that’s up to you. An older car might have a long wait time for a replacement part and the vehicle’s value may be less than the repair. States that don’t have as strict pollution or aftermarket part regulations may have a shorter wait period for a new converter. When looking for a professional, be sure to call at least three mechanics to price check, says Handley. She urges customers to also get a shield installed immediately after a theft. +
++“There is absolutely no regulation on automotive pricing,” Handley says. “At all. There can be two shops in the same parking lot and they will charge you different prices for the same thing.” +
++In the meantime, stay vigilant. We’ll see if the flurry of legislation and growing awareness begin reversing the nationwide trend. +