What Is the Stamets Stack? Psilocybin, Lion’s Mane, Niacin and What the Science Says

Search for psilocybin microdosing long enough and one combination appears again and again: psilocybin, lion’s mane mushroom, and niacin. It is commonly known as the Stamets Stack, after mycologist Paul Stamets, who popularized the idea that these three components might work together to support neuroplasticity, nerve growth, cognition, and neurological function. The concept is easy to understand. Psilocybin is being investigated for its effects on serotonin signaling and neuroplasticity. Lion’s mane contains compounds that have generated legitimate scientific interest in nerve growth and cognitive function. Niacin affects blood vessels and, in its nicotinic acid form, can produce the familiar “niacin flush.”

Combine those ideas and a compelling story emerges: one component encourages neural change, another supports nerve growth, and the third helps distribute the effects throughout the nervous system. But there is a problem. A compelling mechanism is not the same thing as evidence that the combination works. The Stamets Stack has become far more established in microdosing culture than it has in clinical science. Researchers have studied its individual components, and one large observational microdosing study specifically examined people combining psilocybin with lion’s mane and niacin.

That gives us more than speculation. It still does not give us a clinically proven neuroregenerative protocol. So what is actually in the Stamets Stack? Why is lion’s mane included? What is niacin supposed to do? Does the combination work better than psilocybin alone? And what does the best available human research tell us in 2026?

What Is the Stamets Stack?

The Stamets Stack is a combination associated with Paul Stamets that brings together:

• Psilocybin-containing mushrooms at amounts generally described as microdoses
• Lion’s mane mushroom, Hericium erinaceus
• Niacin, or vitamin B3, generally referring to the flushing form nicotinic acid

The central hypothesis is that these ingredients could have complementary effects on the nervous system. Psilocybin is proposed to promote forms of neural plasticity. Lion’s mane contains compounds investigated for effects involving nerve growth factor and neuronal development. Niacin is proposed within the stack as a way to influence circulation and potentially extend the effects of the other components into the peripheral nervous system.

Those are proposed roles. They should not be mistaken for three clinically demonstrated parts of a proven treatment. That distinction is the most important thing to understand about the Stamets Stack.

Why Has the Stamets Stack Become So Popular?

The stack sits at the intersection of several rapidly growing areas of interest. Psilocybin research has expanded dramatically. Lion’s mane has become one of the most recognizable functional mushrooms. Microdosing has moved from a relatively obscure psychedelic practice into mainstream conversations about mood, focus, productivity, creativity, and mental health.

And neuroplasticity has become one of the most frequently discussed concepts in psychedelic science. The Stamets Stack ties all of those subjects together in a single idea. That makes it memorable. It also makes it unusually vulnerable to what we might call evidence stacking.

Evidence stacking happens when research supporting separate ingredients is combined rhetorically to imply that the combination itself has been proven. For example: Psilocybin affects neural signaling. Lion’s mane contains compounds that affect nerve-related pathways.

Niacin affects circulation. Therefore, combining all three must produce superior neurological effects. That conclusion does not automatically follow. To demonstrate that the combination produces a unique benefit, researchers have to study the combination.

What Is Psilocybin Supposed to Do in the Stamets Stack?

Psilocybin is the psychedelic component. After consumption, psilocybin is converted into psilocin, which interacts with several serotonin receptors and is particularly associated with activity at the 5-HT2A receptor. Modern research involving psilocybin has examined changes in perception, mood, cognition, emotional processing, brain-network organization, and neuroplasticity. Preclinical research has also generated considerable interest in what are sometimes called psychoplastogenic effects: the ability of certain compounds to promote structural or functional changes in neurons.

That research provides a plausible reason to investigate psilocybin in relation to neural plasticity. But two distinctions matter. First, much of the strongest clinical research uses substantially larger, precisely measured doses of pharmaceutical psilocybin in controlled settings. That is different from microdosing dried mushrooms.

Second, evidence that psilocybin can affect neural plasticity does not establish that adding lion’s mane and niacin makes that effect stronger. For the broader microdosing evidence, start with our cornerstone guide: What Is Psilocybin Microdosing? What the Science Actually Says in 2026 (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/what-is-psilocybin-microdosing-what-the-science-actually-says-in-2026)

Why Is Lion’s Mane in the Stamets Stack?

Lion’s mane is arguably the component that gives the Stamets Stack much of its biological appeal. Hericium erinaceus is an edible mushroom that contains several groups of compounds of neurological interest. Two names appear especially frequently in discussions of lion’s mane:

Hericenones

and

Erinacines

Research involving these compounds has explored pathways related to nerve growth factor, commonly abbreviated NGF, along with other processes potentially relevant to neuronal growth and function. This has created the popular shorthand that lion’s mane “grows nerves.” That phrase is much stronger than the human evidence supports. Laboratory evidence showing that isolated compounds influence neuronal growth or NGF-related pathways is scientifically interesting.

It does not mean that taking an arbitrary lion’s mane supplement regenerates the human nervous system.

Does Lion’s Mane Have Human Research Behind It?

Yes. This is an important distinction because lion’s mane is not supported exclusively by test-tube and animal experiments. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study published in 2009 examined adults between 50 and 80 years old with mild cognitive impairment. Participants receiving lion’s mane showed improvement on cognitive-function measurements during the intervention compared with the placebo group.

After supplementation stopped, the improvements declined. That study is one reason lion’s mane remains an interesting candidate for further cognitive research. Other small human studies have investigated lion’s mane in areas including cognition, anxiety, depression, stress, and psychological well-being. But the human evidence base is still relatively limited.

A small clinical trial suggesting that a particular lion’s mane preparation affected cognition does not demonstrate that:

• Every lion’s mane supplement has the same effect
• Lion’s mane improves cognition in everyone
• Lion’s mane regenerates damaged nerves in humans
• Lion’s mane prevents neurodegenerative disease
• Lion’s mane amplifies psilocybin microdosing

That last claim requires research involving both substances.

Not All Lion’s Mane Products Are the Same

This becomes especially important when people try to apply lion’s mane research to the Stamets Stack. “Lion’s mane” can describe very different preparations. Products may contain:

• Fruiting body
• Mycelium
• Myceliated substrate or grain
• Powdered mushroom material
• Hot-water extracts
• Alcohol extracts
• Dual extracts
• Concentrated standardized preparations

Different preparations can contain different concentrations of biologically active compounds. Hericenones are commonly associated with lion’s mane fruiting bodies, while erinacines have received particular attention in research involving mycelium. Extraction methods also matter because different compounds have different chemical properties. That means a study involving one lion’s mane preparation cannot automatically validate every commercial product labeled Hericium erinaceus.

This is one of the recurring problems in functional-mushroom research: the name of the species is sometimes treated as though it describes a standardized drug. It does not.

Why Is Niacin in the Stamets Stack?

Niacin is the most controversial piece of the biological argument. Niacin is vitamin B3, an essential nutrient involved in cellular metabolism and energy production. The term can refer to different forms, but nicotinic acid is particularly relevant to the Stamets Stack because sufficiently large supplemental amounts can produce the well-known niacin flush. During a flush, someone may experience warmth, redness, tingling, burning, or itching of the skin.

The inclusion of niacin in the Stamets Stack has been proposed to serve several purposes. One idea is that its effects on blood vessels may help distribute the other compounds more broadly through the body or nervous system. Stamets’ patent materials also describe proposed roles involving peripheral nerve endings and include the idea that an uncomfortable niacin effect could discourage abuse of a psilocybin-containing product. These are hypotheses and proposed functions.

They are not evidence that niacin makes psilocybin or lion’s mane more effective.

Does Niacin Help Psilocybin and Lion’s Mane Reach the Brain?

This is one of the most common claims surrounding the Stamets Stack. It is also one of the weakest scientifically. The claim is often reduced to something like: Niacin increases blood flow, therefore niacin helps carry psilocybin and lion’s mane deeper into the brain or nervous system.

Human drug distribution does not work that simply. Where a compound travels depends on factors including:

• Absorption
• Metabolism
• Molecular structure
• Protein binding
• Blood flow
• Tissue permeability
• Transport mechanisms
• Receptor affinity
• The blood-brain barrier

Producing visible dilation of blood vessels in the skin does not demonstrate that another compound is being delivered into neurons more effectively. And niacin itself does not establish a pathway by which lion’s mane compounds or psilocin are preferentially transported into particular nerves. That would need to be experimentally demonstrated. At present, there is not convincing human evidence showing that niacin improves the neurological delivery of psilocybin or lion’s mane in the Stamets Stack.

Does the Niacin Flush Mean the Stamets Stack Is Working?

No. A niacin flush demonstrates that nicotinic acid is producing a known physiological effect. It does not demonstrate:

• Increased neuroplasticity
• Increased nerve growth
• Better psilocybin delivery
• Better lion’s mane delivery
• Improved cognition
• Increased therapeutic effectiveness

This is particularly important because the flush can make the stack feel biologically obvious. Someone takes several substances and then develops an unmistakable physical sensation. That sensation provides immediate confirmation that something happened. But the something we can confidently identify is the pharmacological effect of niacin.

It does not validate the proposed synergy of the entire stack.

Niacin Is a Vitamin, but That Does Not Mean Unlimited Amounts Are Harmless

Niacin is essential for human health. High supplemental exposure is a different matter. According to the National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements, supplemental nicotinic acid can produce flushing, burning, tingling, itching, headaches, and dizziness. Higher exposures can create more serious concerns, particularly with repeated use.

Potential problems associated with large supplemental amounts can include effects involving the liver, blood glucose, blood pressure, gastrointestinal system, and uric acid. Niacin can also interact with medications. This matters because describing something as a “vitamin” can make it sound automatically safe. Dose changes toxicology.

Water is essential too. That does not mean every amount of water is harmless. The same basic principle applies to vitamins.

Has the Stamets Stack Actually Been Studied in Humans?

Yes—but not in the way many people assume. The most important human evidence comes from a 2022 study published in Scientific Reports. Researchers followed 953 people microdosing psilocybin and 180 non-microdosing participants for approximately one month. The study examined mood, mental health, cognitive performance, and psychomotor performance.

Some microdosers used psilocybin alone. Some combined psilocybin with lion’s mane. Others combined psilocybin with lion’s mane and niacin. This makes the study directly relevant to the Stamets Stack.

But it was observational. Researchers did not randomly assign participants to receive standardized versions of psilocybin, lion’s mane, niacin, or placebo. People were reporting real-world practices they had already chosen. That dramatically affects what conclusions we can draw.

What Did the 2022 Stamets Stack Study Find?

The overall microdosing results were encouraging. Psilocybin microdosers showed greater improvements in mood and mental-health measurements after approximately one month than the non-microdosing comparison group. But when researchers examined stacking, an important finding emerged. Adding lion’s mane and niacin did not significantly change the improvements in mood and mental health.

In other words, that study did not show that the Stamets Stack produced greater mood or mental-health benefits than psilocybin microdosing without the additional components. That result is especially important because the stack is frequently described online as though the ingredients have already been shown to work synergistically. For mood and mental health in this dataset, researchers did not find evidence of that added effect.

What About the Psychomotor Finding in Older Adults?

This is where the study becomes more interesting. Researchers also used a finger-tapping test as a measure of psychomotor performance. Among older participants, particularly those aged 55 and above, combining psilocybin, lion’s mane, and niacin was associated with greater improvement in this psychomotor measurement than some other microdosing conditions. That finding deserves attention.

It does not establish that the Stamets Stack improves neurological function in older adults. There are several reasons for caution. The study was observational. The substances were not standardized.

People selected their own practices. Psilocybin mushroom potency was not controlled like a pharmaceutical dose. Lion’s mane products could vary. Niacin exposure could vary.

Other lifestyle variables could differ between participants. And the older-adult result emerged from subgroup analysis rather than a randomized clinical trial designed specifically to test the Stamets Stack. The appropriate conclusion is therefore: The result is an interesting research signal that deserves controlled replication.

It is not proof of neuroregeneration.

An Important Conflict-of-Interest Detail

Scientific evidence should also be read with attention to disclosed conflicts of interest. The 2022 study reported that Paul Stamets was an investor in Quantified Citizen and other companies and had commercial interests involving lion’s mane. The publication also disclosed his patent interests involving combinations of psilocybin mushrooms, lion’s mane mushrooms, and niacin. A disclosed conflict of interest does not invalidate a study.

Researchers and companies frequently study technologies in which they have intellectual-property or financial interests. Disclosure allows readers to evaluate that context. The correct response is not to discard the research. It is to interpret the study according to its design, replication status, limitations, and potential conflicts rather than relying on reputation alone.

Is There a Patent on the Stamets Stack?

There are patents associated with combinations involving psilocybin and lion’s mane, including formulations incorporating niacin. This fact is sometimes presented online as though obtaining a patent means the underlying medical claims have been proven. It does not. A patent is not FDA approval.

A patent is also not the equivalent of a successful randomized clinical trial. Patents protect intellectual property when the relevant legal requirements are satisfied. Clinical evidence addresses whether an intervention is safe and effective for a particular use. Those are separate processes.

Does the Stamets Stack Work Better Than Psilocybin Alone?

Based on available human evidence, that has not been established. The strongest directly relevant observational study found no added effect from lion’s mane and niacin on the measured mood and mental-health improvements. It did identify a potentially interesting psychomotor association among older participants using the complete combination. That result requires further testing.

The evidence therefore does not justify saying either: “The Stamets Stack definitely works better.”

or

“The Stamets Stack definitely does nothing.” The defensible conclusion is narrower. There is currently insufficient controlled human evidence demonstrating that psilocybin, lion’s mane, and niacin together produce superior outcomes to psilocybin alone.

Does the Stamets Stack Increase Neuroplasticity?

The ingredients provide reasons to investigate that possibility. That is different from demonstrating it. Psilocybin and related psychedelics have generated legitimate research interest in neural plasticity. Lion’s mane compounds have generated legitimate research interest in nerve-growth-related pathways.

Those findings make the combination biologically interesting. But there is not currently strong human evidence demonstrating that the complete Stamets Stack increases neuroplasticity more than its individual components. This is a classic example of the difference between mechanism and clinical outcome. A mechanism answers:

“How might this work?” A clinical trial asks: “Does it actually work in people?” Both matter.

The first does not replace the second.

Does the Stamets Stack Regrow or Repair Nerves?

Claims that the Stamets Stack has been proven to regenerate damaged human nerves go beyond the available evidence. Research involving psilocybin, lion’s mane, neuroplasticity, nerve growth factor, and neuronal signaling provides scientifically interesting hypotheses. But laboratory findings are often compressed as they travel across the internet. “Compound X influenced neurite growth under experimental conditions” can become:

“X grows nerves.”

Then:

“X regenerates the brain.”

Then:

“Combining X with two other substances repairs neurological damage.” Those are progressively larger claims. Each step requires additional evidence. The final claim cannot be established simply by combining findings supporting the earlier ones.

Does Lion’s Mane Make Psilocybin More Effective?

We do not currently have strong evidence showing that it does. Lion’s mane may have interesting effects of its own. Psilocybin has interesting effects of its own. That does not establish an interaction between them.

To determine whether lion’s mane enhances psilocybin, researchers would ideally compare groups receiving standardized versions of:

• Psilocybin alone
• Lion’s mane alone
• Psilocybin plus lion’s mane
• Placebo

Additional groups could then test whether niacin changes those effects. Until experiments directly compare those conditions, synergy remains a hypothesis.

What Would a Real Test of the Stamets Stack Look Like?

A convincing trial would need to isolate the effects of each component. Researchers could potentially compare:

• Placebo
• Psilocybin alone
• Lion’s mane alone
• Niacin alone
• Psilocybin plus lion’s mane
• Psilocybin plus niacin
• Lion’s mane plus niacin
• Psilocybin plus lion’s mane plus niacin

The substances would need to be standardized. The amount of active psilocybin would need to be known. The lion’s mane preparation would need to be chemically characterized. The form of niacin would need to be specified.

Participants would ideally be randomly assigned. Researchers would need objective outcomes decided before the experiment begins. Depending on the hypothesis, those outcomes might include:

• Cognitive performance
• Motor performance
• Mood
• Psychiatric symptoms
• Biomarkers
• Neuroimaging
• Measures related to neural plasticity
• Adverse events
• Long-term follow-up

Only then could researchers begin answering whether the complete combination provides an advantage over its individual components.

The Expectancy Problem Is Especially Important With the Stamets Stack

Microdosing research already has a major blinding problem. People sometimes recognize whether they received an active psychedelic. The Stamets Stack adds another clue: niacin can produce a noticeable flush. That presents a serious experimental challenge.

Imagine someone in a study who believes the active combination includes niacin. Their skin suddenly becomes warm and tingly. They may immediately conclude: “I received the real stack.”

That belief can influence subjective measurements involving mood, focus, energy, motivation, and well-being. Researchers designing controlled studies would therefore have to take the niacin effect into account when attempting to maintain blinding. This is another reason observational results alone cannot settle the question.

What Do Real-World Microdosers Actually Stack?

Stacking is not rare in microdosing communities. A large 2021 survey of psychedelic microdosers found that people using psilocybin were more likely than LSD microdosers to combine their psychedelic with other substances. Among surveyed microdosers, lion’s mane was one of the most commonly reported additions. Niacin was also frequently reported.

Hundreds of respondents reported using lion’s mane and niacin together. This is valuable real-world information. It demonstrates that the Stamets Stack is not merely a theoretical formula discussed by a small number of enthusiasts. People actually use variations of it.

That makes the combination worth studying. But prevalence does not establish effectiveness. Lots of people doing something gives researchers a reason to investigate it. It does not tell researchers what the experiment will find.

What About the Stamets Stack Schedule?

Searches for the Stamets Stack frequently combine two different questions: What is in the stack?

and

How is the protocol scheduled? Those deserve separate treatment. Popular Stamets-style schedules are widely circulated online, but there is currently no universally established clinical schedule shown to optimize the effects of psilocybin microdosing or the three-component stack. Published research also does not use one universal microdosing protocol.

Rather than repeating a schedule as though it were a medical recommendation, we examine where the major schedules came from, what researchers actually use, tolerance, mushroom-potency variability, and the difference between community protocols and scientifically validated dosing in Article #5: Psilocybin Microdosing Dosage and Schedules: What Research and Real-World Use Show (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/psilocybin-microdosing-dosage-and-schedules-what-research-and-real-world-use-show)

Is the Stamets Stack Safe?

We do not have enough controlled long-term research on the complete combination to declare it broadly safe. Each component brings a different set of considerations. Psilocybin can produce psychological and physiological effects and may present additional risks for people with certain psychiatric histories or medication combinations. Lion’s mane appears generally well tolerated in the limited human studies available, but allergic reactions and individual sensitivity remain possible, and supplements vary substantially in composition.

Niacin can cause flushing and other adverse effects, and higher supplemental exposure creates additional health concerns. Then there is the combination itself. Safety information about three individual substances does not automatically prove that repeated use of all three together has the same risk profile. Our detailed safety review covers these issues separately:

Is Psilocybin Microdosing Safe? Side Effects, Risks, and What We Still Don’t Know (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/is-psilocybin-microdosing-safe-side-effects-risks-and-what-we-still-dont-know)

Is the Stamets Stack a Proven Treatment?

No. The Stamets Stack is not an established medical treatment for depression, anxiety, cognitive decline, neurological injury, dementia, or other medical conditions. That does not mean its components are scientifically uninteresting. Quite the opposite.

What makes the Stamets Stack worth covering is that it combines several legitimate areas of research with claims that have moved considerably faster than the clinical evidence. This is exactly where careful science communication matters. We should be able to say: “This hypothesis is interesting.”

“This ingredient has evidence behind it.” “This result deserves replication.”

and

“This has not been proven.” Those statements can all be true at the same time.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Stamets Stack

What is the Stamets Stack?

The Stamets Stack is a microdosing combination associated with mycologist Paul Stamets that combines psilocybin-containing mushrooms, lion’s mane mushroom (Hericium erinaceus), and niacin or vitamin B3. It is proposed as a combination that may affect neuroplasticity and nervous-system function, but the full stack has not been established as a clinically proven treatment.

What are the three ingredients in the Stamets Stack?

The three commonly described components are psilocybin mushrooms, lion’s mane mushroom, and niacin. Each has a different proposed role and a different level of scientific evidence.

Does the Stamets Stack work?

There is not currently enough controlled human evidence to conclude that the complete Stamets Stack produces the neurological, cognitive, or mental-health benefits commonly attributed to it. A large observational study found improvements among psilocybin microdosers but did not find that adding lion’s mane and niacin improved the measured mood and mental-health outcomes. An exploratory finding among older participants linked the complete combination with greater psychomotor improvement, which requires controlled replication.

Why is lion’s mane included in the Stamets Stack?

Lion’s mane contains compounds including hericenones and erinacines that have attracted research interest for their relationships with neuronal growth and nerve-growth-related pathways. Some small human trials have also investigated lion’s mane and cognition. There is not yet strong evidence demonstrating that lion’s mane enhances psilocybin microdosing in humans.

Why is niacin included in the Stamets Stack?

Niacin has been proposed as a way to influence circulation and potentially distribute the other compounds more broadly through the nervous system. That proposed delivery effect has not been convincingly demonstrated in humans. Niacin can also produce a noticeable skin flush, which is a known physiological effect rather than proof that the entire stack is working.

Does niacin help psilocybin cross the blood-brain barrier?

There is not convincing human evidence showing that taking niacin with psilocybin causes psilocin to cross the blood-brain barrier more effectively. Claims that niacin “pushes” psilocybin or lion’s mane compounds into nerves should be treated as hypotheses rather than established pharmacology.

Does the Stamets Stack increase neuroplasticity?

The complete combination has not been shown in controlled human research to increase neuroplasticity more than its individual components. Psilocybin and lion’s mane both have separate research relevant to neural plasticity and neuronal growth, which makes the combination scientifically interesting but does not prove synergy.

Is there a scientifically proven Stamets Stack schedule?

No universal Stamets Stack schedule has been clinically established as optimal. Popular schedules circulate widely in microdosing communities, but community protocols and validated medical dosing are not the same thing. Our dedicated dosage and schedule article examines this distinction in detail.

What the Evidence Actually Says in 2026

The Stamets Stack is neither proven neuroregenerative medicine nor meaningless internet folklore. The evidence sits somewhere more interesting. Psilocybin is a legitimate subject of neuroscience and psychiatric research. Lion’s mane contains compounds that justify continued study of neurological effects and has some small human trials behind it.

Niacin has well-understood physiological effects, but its proposed role as a delivery mechanism for the other ingredients remains poorly supported. Real-world microdosers commonly combine these substances. And one large observational study produced an intriguing psychomotor finding among older people using the complete stack. At the same time:

We do not have robust randomized human evidence showing that the full Stamets Stack produces the claimed synergy. We do not have strong evidence that niacin improves delivery of the mushroom compounds. We do not have proof that the combination regenerates damaged human nerves. We do not know whether adding lion’s mane and niacin makes psilocybin microdosing more effective for mood or mental health.

And we do not have adequate long-term safety data for repeated use of the complete combination. That is where the evidence stands.

The Bottom Line

The Stamets Stack—psilocybin, lion’s mane, and niacin—is a scientifically interesting hypothesis that has become a popular microdosing protocol before the combination itself has been rigorously proven. Research provides plausible reasons to investigate each ingredient. Human observational data provide a reason to investigate the combination further. But plausible mechanisms and community reports are not substitutes for randomized controlled trials.

The most useful question is therefore not: “Do you believe in the Stamets Stack?” It is: Which effects can actually be demonstrated, which ingredient is responsible, who experiences them, and do those effects remain when the combination is tested against appropriate controls?

Those are questions science can answer. And they are considerably more useful than turning either enthusiasm or skepticism into a conclusion before the experiments have been done.

Continue the MycoNews Microdosing Series

Start with the cornerstone guide: What Is Psilocybin Microdosing? What the Science Actually Says in 2026 (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/what-is-psilocybin-microdosing-what-the-science-actually-says-in-2026) Mental health: Does Psilocybin Microdosing Help Depression and Anxiety? What the Research Shows (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/does-psilocybin-microdosing-help-depression-and-anxiety-what-the-research-shows)

Focus, creativity, and productivity: Does Psilocybin Microdosing Improve Focus, Creativity, and Productivity? What the Research Shows (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/does-psilocybin-microdosing-improve-focus-creativity-and-productivity-what-the-research-sh)

Safety:

Is Psilocybin Microdosing Safe? Side Effects, Risks, and What We Still Don’t Know (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/is-psilocybin-microdosing-safe-side-effects-risks-and-what-we-still-dont-know) Dosage and schedules: Psilocybin Microdosing Dosage and Schedules: What Research and Real-World Use Show (https://www.mycohub.app/myconews/psilocybin-microdosing-dosage-and-schedules-what-research-and-real-world-use-show)

Sources

Rootman JM, Kiraga M, Kryskow P, et al. Psilocybin microdosers demonstrate greater observed improvements in mood and mental health at one month relative to non-microdosing controls. Scientific Reports. 2022. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-14512-3 Rootman JM, Kryskow P, Harvey K, et al. Adults who microdose psychedelics report health related motivations and lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to non-microdosers. Scientific Reports. 2021. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-01811-4

Mori K, Inatomi S, Ouchi K, Azumi Y, Tuchida T. Improving effects of the mushroom Yamabushitake (Hericium erinaceus) on mild cognitive impairment: a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Phytotherapy Research. 2009. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18844328/ Saitsu Y, Nishide A, Kikushima K, et al. Improvement of cognitive functions by oral intake of Hericium erinaceus. Biomedical Research. 2019. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31413233/

Nagano M, Shimizu K, Kondo R, et al. Reduction of depression and anxiety by 4 weeks Hericium erinaceus intake. Biomedical Research. 2010. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20834180/ Polito V, Liknaitzky P. The emerging science of microdosing: A systematic review of research on low dose psychedelics (1955–2021) and recommendations for the field. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35609684/

National Institutes of Health, Office of Dietary Supplements. Niacin: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals. https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Niacin-HealthProfessional/ Stamets PE. Integrative fungal solutions for protecting bees and overcoming colony collapse disorder and methods of use. U.S. patent materials describing combinations involving psilocybin, Hericium, and niacin. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20180021326A1/en