 And I think that there's also something about psychedelics where it's like, so in that paper that I mentioned, the Rebus paper, kind of the main argument that they make is that you normally have, like, I think that the corollary to that, or at least what I know from Carl Friston's other work is that, yeah, there's no free will. What happens is that you develop patterns of behavior and thought. And so there's an emergent topography in your mind where you have like channels where it's much easier for your thoughts to run through because you've done that before. And the more you think that... Yeah, you build a newer pathway. Exactly. And so what psychedelics do, they kind of flatten this landscape. Ooh, that's a good way of putting it. So it's kind of like, I know, I think it's really, really good. And I think it's intuitively anyone who's done psychedelics is going to be like, yeah, for sure. So, and that kind of gives you more choice. Whether or not that's true per se, I think like we would need to kind of sharpen the technical use of the words. But if we use just like the lay person idea of choice, I think that it does just that. And so, and I think this is something that we don't discuss enough about psychedelics. That could be used for good. That could be used for you to say, oh, shit, I'm like, I'm in an abusive relationship. I abuse drugs. I am not doing whatever I really want to do with my life. And I want to do something else. Like, but you could buy it by the same token. You could be in a perfectly healthy relationship. All of a sudden, you're like, wait, this maybe this is an abusive relationship. You may be, you know, drinking a coffee once in a while. And you're like, oh, no, I'm addicted to coffee. And so, so I think that this could be also dangerous. And this again brings in the integration piece. It's like, sometimes people have weird thoughts when they're on psychedelics. Oh, yeah. Right. Sometimes those weirds, weird thoughts are totally brilliant and insightful. And sometimes they're damaging potentially. And that's when you come to integration, you like bounce that off your therapist or shaman or sitter or whatever. And I'm gonna be like, you're fine. You need to like, you need to be. I think I remember hearing this definition of intelligence that I really like, that it's the ability to entertain a thought without accepting it. And I think that if we could train people to do that for psychedelics, you know, you like things come up and you're like, this is an interesting thought. It's not necessarily a part of me. I don't necessarily believe in it. This is an interesting thought. I'm gonna keep it and I'm gonna look at it later and see if it makes sense to me or not. So I think it's really hard to evaluate the skill. So intelligence too, what they say, a person that can entertain two thoughts, opposing thoughts without actually incorporating it. Yeah. So I think mindfulness would be really good for that kind of thing to be, like to create a certain distance between whatever you experience on psychedelics and who you are. But in lieu of a comprehensive training protocol, just have someone to integrate with. Yes, the key is this integration partner of yours. Yeah, especially somebody that knows you, knows your history and knows what the problems you're trying to address. Yeah, you're a therapist. Yeah. Now, what kind of therapist would this be? There's a... I'm aware of one training program that's out of California right now. They have a huge wait list. I don't know what their program is like. There's also another model coming out of the imperial group that's called ACE, Acceptance Commitment... Accept, Commit and Body. Okay. And I think it has a bunch of useful things in it, but I think that it's really fine-tuned for large doses and I think that we... I'm really interested in developing a protocol that would work for micro doses or psycholitic doses, so smaller doses. This was something that Albert Hoffman was really interested in, in psycholitic doses. And yeah, this was pretty hot in the heyday of psychedelics research before. So I think that there's a lot we could do with that because for some situations, I think maybe, yeah, what you need is a full-blown trip because there's a lot of work to do or whatever, maybe that's your personality structure. Have you ever... Has there been research or have you given thought to... Okay, so... Kind of like you go to the gym, let's say you get your body in order, but then you have a maintenance of going to the gym. So instead of just starting with micro dosing, you do a full dose. That's the catalyst, but then you continue the micro dose. Has there been research done into that? Has not been researched, but I've heard people propose that. Yeah. I would actually say for people who've never done psychedelics, I would start... The opposite. Well, no, more like a bell curve. Start with a micro dose and then do a half dose, do a full dose, if you want, then you can do a heroic dose and then go back to a half dose and then do micro doses. Okay. Because yeah, for maintenance, I don't know if that... There's no scientific evidence for this. Mm-hmm. But I think that it would be an interesting thing to study, for sure. Yeah, that's my biggest thing. It's just the dosaging and then also combination, stacking. Mm-hmm. And then the word psychedelic itself, it's broad. It's like, are we talking about shrooms? Are we talking about LSD or ayahuasca, iboga? Some people have been grouping MDMA, even though it's not a psychedelic. It's a chemical or 2CB, anaglox. It's like, it's a very broad universe. Mm-hmm. For sure. And so each one is very different. Shrooms are extremely different than LSD. In my experience, extremely different than MDMA. Mm-hmm. Doing iboga, it's like, that's a whole different ball game. Mm-hmm. And so, I don't know, it's for me, I'm... Let me ask you this, what do we need right now in order to get more studies happening? Money. Money. For sure, money. I've had... So, our first kind of major donation came from the Sengal Health Foundation. So, it's $350,000, which is a major sum. What? It's nice. But it's not enough to run as many participants as we would want. So, Molecule are going to help us raise more money and then there's another Toronto-based company that has an app that they're giving us for free and they may also be able to fund some of our research. So, we're kind of like, you know, cobbling donations. But at least for now, local, federal, and even private funding is kind of hard to come by in terms of, you know, well-established grants. Yes. For example, our group applied for a Templeton Foundation grant. Like, they do a lot of cool stuff. Like, they did this, the Great Prayer Study, I think maybe 10 years ago, where they compared, like, across, I don't remember, 16 hospitals, people who had the exact same heart condition. And we're going to go into surgery. Half of them were prayed for and half of them were not prayed for and they compared their recovery. And that costs, like, I don't remember, $4 million. And in case you're wondering, prayer did nothing. Go figure. But yeah, so we applied for funding from them, actually, last year and this year. And we just heard back from them, they're like, you guys look cool, but this is too hot a potato. It's too taboo for them, yeah. Yeah, so, yeah, so there's still, I know that there are people out there with money that want to help out with this research. So, I think donations, either to us or whoever else, like, Johns Hopkins just got a major donation. I read about that. Yeah, $17.5 million. That's how you get science done at least. Maps got $4 million from the pineapple guy in crypto. Nice. Yeah, they also, the pineapple guy also gave $100 million to ChemH a couple years ago. We did give them. Yeah, so, yeah. So, I think donations would be incredible for anyone, really. What else do we need? We need regulation. We need help with that. So, there's, I don't know if you know of Nathaniel Erskine-Smith. He's, I don't know if he's still an MP for the beaches. Okay. But he was really pushing for kind of loosening the constraints on doing research on psychedelics. I don't know where things stand with that, but I think if we had more like stuff going on with the government, that could be amazing. It's kind of like a sandbox, giving more freedom too. Exactly, because right now, like I was saying before, it's incredibly difficult to get through the regulatory maze. There's a lot of stuff that needs to happen, and yeah, it's difficult. I will say that Health Canada have been incredible. Like, I know what you expect, but when I think about working with public servants, I'm like, oh, they're going to take forever to respond. They're going to be lazy, whatever. Health Canada have been outstanding. Interesting. I am so impressed. Yeah, they respond quickly and just like, it feels like they want us to succeed, which is really encouraging. It's awesome. Yeah, and I think finally what we need is, we need researchers to do their work properly, i.e. pre-register, use open science, and we need people who are doing underground therapy and shamans and all them. If they insist on doing it, which I understand and I can sympathize with, just like, don't fuck it.