SummaryIn ‘Wake-up call for British psychiatry’ Craddock et al explained how recent attempts to improve psychosocial care for people with mental illness focus on non-specific psychosocial support. This has been at the expense of proper diagnostic assessment and prescription of treatment by psychiatrists aimed at treatment of specific disorders and recovery. They describe a creeping devaluation of psychiatry which is caricatured as narrow, biological, reductionist, oppressive, discriminatory and stigmatising. Some trusts have implemented ‘New Ways of Working for Psychiatrists’ in a way that undermines the central importance of psychiatrists in mental healthcare. Consequently, patients may be treated in secondary care without ever being seen by a psychiatrist. We consider a number of different changes that have interacted in unforeseen ways, with unintended adverse consequences for psychiatric services in England. We aim to continue the debate here.

Background: Evolutionary research on drug abuse has hitherto been restricted to proximate studies, considering aetiology, mechanism, and ontogeny. However, in order to explain the recent emergency of a new behavioral pattern (e.g. ‘the e-psychonaut style’) of novel psychoactive substances’ (NPS) intake, a complementary evolutionary model may be needed.ObjectiveA range of evolutionary interpretations on the ‘psychonaut style’ and the recent emergency of NPS were here considered.MethodThe PubMed database was searched in order to elicit evolutionary theory-based documents commenting on NPS/NPS users/e-psychonauts.ResultsThe traditional ‘shamanic style’ use of entheogens/plant-derived compounds may present with a range of similarities with the ‘e-psychonauts’ use of mostly of hallucinogen/psychedelic NPS. These users consider themselves as ‘new/technological’ shamans.ConclusionIndeed, a range of evolutionary mechanisms, such as: optimal foraging, costly signaling, and reproduction at the expense of health may all cooperate to explain the recent spread and diffusion of the NPS market, and this may represent a reason of concern.

In this article, ontogenetic and phylogenetic causes of drug abuse and links to human emotional development are considered. Some evolutionary perspectives (e.g. that under certain conditions, consumption of otherwise toxic alkaloids may confer both physical and cultural advantages) are reviewed. As described in the 'mismatch theory', the capacity of the human genome to evolve defences against toxins has been outstripped by the pace of cultural change and technological development, such as purposeful fermentation of alcohol and more recently distillation of alcohol; purification and chemical manipulation of plant alkaloids; and the engineering of entirely novel psychoactive substances (NPS). The functions of the neurobiological substrates that mediate substance misuse and dependence are reviewed. Reasons are given why NPSs present greater cause for concern than plant-derived substances of abuse. We argue that evolutionary biology provides an important orientation for the research agenda in substance misuse.

SummaryThis article outlines proximate (physical and mental) and ultimate mechanisms of placebo effects. Interpersonal processes contributing to placebo effects are reviewed and illustrated through research into the process of psychotherapy. Evolutionary theories of how and why the capacity for placebo effects might have evolved are described. The components of treatment and placebo effects are defined. It is concluded that maximising therapeutic placebo effects is effective and a valid clinical goal.

SummaryThis article, the first of two on placebo effects, provides a broad overview of placebo in the field of medicine. A brief conceptual history is followed by some basic facts about placebos. Problems of definition are identified. Additive and non-additive models of treatment effects, and problems of measurement of placebo effects are described. The role of placebo in the pharmacotherapy of depression and complementary and alternative medicine is discussed. The ‘efficacy paradox’ (that placebo treatments can have larger effects than ‘evidence-based treatments’) is introduced. Finally, ethical issues are discussed.