It’s the Little Things that Count: A Deep & Evolving Dive into Microdosing
Garnet > Lucid Studios
August 5, 2023; amended August 6, 2023
Introduction
In culture, there are trends and there are fads.
Trends are waves of social evolution and change that grow and swell into communities. They often have lasting cultural impact.
Fads are splashes that dramatically crash onto shore and quickly disappear into the mist.
Is “microdosing” a trend or a fad?
There is evidence that “microdosing” is a trend.
Let’s have a look and see if you agree.
Current Concept
This is the description from the Microdose Institute. It reflects the most common understanding and attitude among the active psychedelic community as well as, at least in part, what most persons in the general population may understand from social media and friendly conversation.
“Microdosing is best described as the practice of regularly consuming a very small amount of a psychedelic substance, usually 5–10% of a regular dose, with the intention of improving one’s quality of life.
Microdosing does not cause classic psychedelic effects such as visual disturbances; instead, microdosers experience more subtle, ‘sub-hallucinogenic’, effects from the practice.
Microdosing is a practice that yields best results when it’s done over an extended period of time following a dosing scheme, or protocol.
The exact effects and results of this practice depend greatly on the person, the substance, the dosage and many other personal factors such as their intention, their expectations and mindset.”
Historical Context
There is good evidence that psychedelic compounds have played a significant role in developing human civilization.
Archeological evidence and anthropological analysis all give credibility to the idea that psychedelic compounds in human use have been around a very long time.
They seem to have been often restricted to special persons within the community and also limited to special groups at ceremonial gatherings.
There is evidence derived from current indigenous cultures to support these ideas.
The emerging impression is that the compounds were used at higher doses to induce stimulating and sometimes dramatic altered states.
Broad popular “recreational” use is much harder to assess and is less likely.
It is also not clear that practices representing “microdosing” have a real place along this historical timeline.
Microdosing Emerges
The modern concept of microdosing is relatively new.
While psychedelic substances have been used throughout history, the deliberate practice of taking very small, sub-perceptual doses has emerged more recently as a distinct approach.
The current microdosing movement has been influenced by renewed scientific interest in psychedelics and growing public curiosity about their potential effects.
Unlike traditional high-dose psychedelic experiences, microdosing focuses on subtle changes that may occur without producing significant alterations in perception.
The practice has attracted interest from a wide range of people seeking to explore creativity, mood, focus, personal insight, and general well-being.
However, the experience and outcomes can vary significantly depending on the individual, the substance, dosage, expectations, and surrounding circumstances.
A Changing Conversation
The conversation around psychedelics has changed considerably in recent years.
What was once largely associated with counterculture and recreational experimentation is now increasingly being discussed in scientific, medical, therapeutic, and wellness contexts.
Microdosing has become part of this broader cultural shift.
Its growing popularity has encouraged people to reconsider the relationship between consciousness, brain function, personal development, and the role that small interventions may play in influencing experience.
At the same time, many important questions remain.
What exactly produces the reported effects of microdosing?
Are these effects primarily biochemical, psychological, behavioural, or influenced by expectation?
And could similar principles of subtle stimulation and adaptation be explored without relying entirely on chemical substances?
These questions lead to a broader exploration of what microdosing may actually represent—and why small changes may sometimes have meaningful effects.
The Mid-20th Century
The mid-20th century represents an inflection point in the awareness in popular modern society of psychedelic compounds.
Anthropological interactions with indigenous cultures began to create new levels of curious interest in psychedelic plants.
Around the same time, Albert Hofmann, a Swiss pharmacological researcher, accidentally synthesized LSD in 1938 from the ergot fungus and experienced the ever-first LSD trip.
LSD was first utilized in psychotherapy and scientific study in the 1950s, mostly to treat anxiety, depression, addiction, and psychosomatic diseases.
LSD was the subject of intensive (psycho) pharmacological study, which resulted in almost 10,000 scholarly papers.
In the years that followed, medical experts, scientists, and even the U.S. government expressed an interest in the novel chemical.
The CIA’s infamous MK ULTRA program looked at the use of LSD for “mind control”.
To stay on target regarding “microdosing”, it is time to introduce James Fadiman.
James Fadiman: The Father of Microdosing
Fadiman is often credited as being the Father of Microdosing.
James Fadiman is an American writer known for his research on microdosing psychedelics.
Fadiman received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard University in 1960 and a Master's degree and a doctorate (both in psychology) from Stanford University, the PhD in 1965.
While in Paris in 1961, his friend and former Harvard undergraduate adviser, Ram Dass (then known as Richard Alpert), introduced him to psilocybin.
In the early sixties Fadiman was also part of the team in the psychedelics in problem-solving experiment at the International Foundation for Advanced Study, which was abruptly halted in 1966.
Fadiman’s 2011 book The Psychedelic Explorer’s Guide discussed the use of psychedelics in sub perceptual doses and unknowingly helped to drive the modern microdosing movement.
Psychedelic Agents and Creative Problem-Solving
“In 1966, a team of scientists under the leadership of Dr. James Fadiman studied the influence of psychedelic agents on participants’ creative problem-solving skills.
In the “Psychedelic agents in the creative problem-solving” experiment, they tested 27 people working in creative professions such as engineers, architects, scientists, and designers.
They gave them 200 milligrams of mescaline sulfate (This is comparable to 100 micrograms of LSD, so hardly a microdose) and had them work on a work assignment or problem.
The results were positive, leading many participants to come up with technologically advanced project proposals, products, and solutions that have been mostly accepted by their clients.
Participants reported various forms of increased performance:
- Less burden of inhibitions and fears
- The ability to see a problem in the right context
- Increased idea generation
- Better ability to visualize and use fantasy
- Better concentration
- Increased empathy for external processes and issues
- Increased empathy for people
- Access to unconscious information
- Increased motivation to complete a project
- Visualizing solutions
Shortly after this experiment, the FDA banned all scientific research on psychedelics.
The influence of psychedelics on our creativity and problem-solving ability could not be investigated further for decades that followed.
A Broader Understanding of Microdosing
It is apparent that the current concept of “microdosing” is inseparably linked to the chemical nature of psychedelic compounds.
The definition above, supplied by the Microdose Institute, states:
“The exact effects and results of this practice depend greatly on the person, the substance, the dosage and many other personal factors such as their intention, their expectations and mindset.”
As you can see, there are a lot of factors and variables involved with the process of “microdosing”.
Is it possible that there exists some unrecognized unifying principle that allows for a more cohesive understanding of “microdosing”?
Spoiler alert – the answer is YES, and it is hidden in the actual neurology of our brain.
It is now time to also introduce both the Grandfather and Great Grandfather of “microdosing”.
An Unexpected Lineage
These two Canadians may or may not be familiar to you, especially in the context of “microdosing”.
Meet Hans Selye, the Great Grandfather and Donald Hebb, the Grandfather.
We will start with Hans Selye (1907 – 1982) – The Great Grandfather of Microdosing.
Hans Selye & Stress
To start with Selye is known more commonly as the Father of Stress Research.
Hans Selye & Stress
To start with Selye is known more commonly as the Father of Stress Research.
Here, he is also recognized as a key link in the evolution of the neurological foundation of “microdosing”.
Hang in there, we will make this clear down below.
Selye’s relentless work ethic was evident in his publications, which numbered more than 1,600 scientific articles and about 40 books.
He was a nominee for the Nobel Prize in 1949, won many accolades, and published his best-known book, The Stress of Life, in 1956.
So, what does “stress” have to do with “microdosing”?
Now is the time to put on your “thinking cap” for a little while.
Today, the concept of stress and the word itself have a strongly negative connotation.
In 1939, Selye introduced his landmark theory of stress.
Selye saw “stress” in more complex ways and was very inventive in his exploration.
He is most famous for what is known as the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS) but we will not focus on that major insight.
Rather we will look at a few of his more fundamental understandings.
These are the factors that link Selye/stress/neurology to “microdosing”.
Selye #1 – Stress in and of itself is neither good or bad – its nature depends on a number of related factors.
Selye #2 – Some type of “agent” acts to introduce challenge into the system – if the degree of challenge (aka “stress”) is sufficient to match and slightly exceed the minimal level of excitation, it will result in an arousal of the adaptive response in the system.
Selye #3 – The stressor “agent” perturbs the “status quo” of the system – the “agent” acts to disrupt or de-stabilize the system and provoke an adaptive response.
Selye #4 – The stress “agent” is not the main factor but instead it is the degree or amount of challenge that is at the core of its action.
Selye #5 – Depending on the context, the challenge may be either a “eustress” (positive) or a “distress” (negative).
Selye #6 – As much as “distress” is definitely a negative, “eustress” is not only positive...it is critical for growth, learning, adaptation and even survival itself.
Selye #7 – Eustress occurs when the gap between what one has and what one wants is slightly pushed, but not overwhelmed.
The goal is not too far out of reach but is still slightly more than one can handle.
This fosters challenge and motivation since the goal is in sight.
The function of challenge is to motivate a person toward improvement and a goal.
This brings us closer to understanding the relationship between stress, challenge, and microdosing.
The central idea is not necessarily the nature of the agent itself, but the degree of challenge introduced into the system.
When the challenge is too weak, there may be little adaptive response.
When the challenge is too strong, the system may become overwhelmed and experience distress.
But when the challenge is marginal—slightly beyond the current state of the system—it may stimulate adaptation, growth, and change.
This principle of a marginal demand becomes increasingly important when considering the neurological mechanisms involved in learning and adaptation.
Donald Hebb: The Grandfather of Microdosing
Donald Hebb (1904–1985) was a Canadian psychologist and neuroscientist whose work fundamentally influenced our modern understanding of neuroplasticity and learning.
His most famous contribution is commonly summarized by the phrase:
“Neurons that fire together, wire together.”
Although this phrase is a simplified interpretation of Hebb’s original ideas, it captures an important principle of how repeated activity can strengthen connections between neurons.
Hebb proposed that when one neuron repeatedly contributes to the activation of another neuron, the relationship between them becomes stronger.
Over time, repeated patterns of activity can therefore influence the structure and function of neural networks.
This process provides an important neurological framework for understanding learning, memory, adaptation, and neuroplasticity.
The brain changes in response to experience.
But importantly, not every experience produces the same degree of change.
The intensity, repetition, timing, attention, and context of stimulation all influence whether a neural pattern becomes reinforced.
Donald Hebb: The Grandfather of Microdosing
He is best known for his theory of Hebbian learning, which he introduced in his classic 1949 work The Organization of Behavior.
He has been described as the father of neuropsychology and neural networks.
Hebbian Learning is now called “neuroplasticity”.
Neuroplasticity is the concept that states that the adult human brain is capable of positive neurological growth, change and new adaptive learning.
Adult brain neuroplasticity occurs predominantly in the hippocampus area of the brain which is responsible for learning, long term memory formation and memory retrieval.
The basis of the theory is when our brains learn something new, neurons are activated and connected with other neurons, forming a neural network.
These connections start off weak, but each time the stimulus is repeated, the connections grow stronger and stronger, and the action becomes more intuitive.
Above, we asked what does Selye and “stress” have to do with “microdosing”?
It is fair to ask the same basic question now.
What does Hebb and “neuroplasticity” have to do with “microdosing”?
These are the factors that link Hebb/neuroplasticity/neurology to “microdosing”.
Hebb #1 – the adult brain can change in positive ways if it is induced to change with effective stimulation.
Hebb #2 – to get the neurology to change you must “fire it to wire it” (which goes very nicely with “use it or lose it).
Hebb #3 – in neuroplasticity, “the brain changes what matters” – which means you have to “get the attention” of the brain by inducing a disruptive or de-stabilizing challenge (aka a “stressor”).
Hebb #4 – the challenge must not be too great and all at one time – the challenge must act at a low level and create just “marginal demand”.
Here you may recall from above Selye #7 – “Eustress occurs when the gap between what one has and what one wants is slightly pushed, but not overwhelmed.”
Hebb #5 – a “eustressor” is a gentle but effective trigger for neuroplastic adaptation and positive change – other than the low level of stimulation, the amount of regular repetition and reinforcement is mandatory for actual integration – the “firing” must repeat for the “wiring” to stabilize.
Putting Selye and Hebb Together
Now we can start to see a common neurological principle emerging.
Selye explains the importance of challenge.
Hebb explains how the brain changes in response to repeated stimulation.
Together, these principles suggest that positive adaptation can occur when the brain is exposed to manageable challenges that are repeated over time.
The challenge must be sufficient to gain the attention of the system and create an adaptive response.
However, it must not be so intense that it overwhelms the system.
The process must also be repeated and reinforced.
This is the essential neurological framework behind the broader concept of microdosing.
The important question may therefore not be simply:
“What substance is being used?”
Instead, the more important question may be:
“What type and degree of stimulation is being introduced into the brain?”
If a stimulation is capable of creating a marginal demand, gaining attention, introducing manageable disruption, and being repeated over time, then it may potentially participate in the same general neurological principles involved in adaptive change.
This perspective expands the concept of microdosing beyond psychedelic chemistry.
It suggests that microdosing may represent a broader principle of introducing small, repeated, manageable challenges that encourage the brain and body to adapt.
The Microdosing Principle
Perhaps microdosing is not fundamentally defined by the substance.
Perhaps it is defined by the relationship between stimulation, challenge, adaptation, repetition, and time.
A small amount of challenge may not overwhelm the system.
Instead, it may gently disturb the existing pattern just enough to encourage a new response.
Repeated exposure to these marginal demands may allow adaptation to gradually accumulate.
Over time, this can potentially result in new skills, behaviors, perspectives, or neurological patterns becoming more stable.
Hebb #6 – Repeating the low-level stressor at regular periods will slowly move the “short-term state change” (which relies on the stimulus to be present) towards “long-term trait change” (which is now habituated and does not require the stimulus to be present) – this is the State to Trait principle of new neurological learning.
Now we have gathered from Hebb understandings about “neuroplasticity” that allow us to even further clarify the realistic linking of “microdosing” to our innate neurology.
- Actual neuronal connections and growth can change towards positive new learning and behaviors – this is a natural and innate capacity of our adult human brain.
- Repeated low-level, “marginal demand” “eustress agents” are capable of gently and reliably triggering positive neuroplastic change.
- The types of “eustressor agents” include psychedelic compounds while also including a wide range of other agents that are capable of triggering the “marginal demand” aspect of neuroplastic change.
Microdosing Beyond Psychedelics
The current popular understanding of microdosing is strongly connected to psychedelic compounds.
However, when viewed through the combined principles of Selye’s stress research and Hebb’s neuroplasticity research, the concept can potentially be understood in a much broader way.
The key factor may not necessarily be the specific chemical compound.
Instead, the important factor may be the introduction of a manageable stimulus capable of creating a marginal demand.
A small challenge can gently destabilize an existing pattern.
The brain responds by paying attention and attempting to adapt.
When this process is repeated, the new response may gradually become reinforced.
This creates the possibility that many different types of experiences could potentially function as “microdosing” agents.
These could include sensory stimulation, movement, cognitive challenges, environmental novelty, social interaction, and other experiences capable of creating manageable disruption and adaptive demand.
The neurological principle remains the same:
A small but meaningful challenge can stimulate the system to adapt.
The challenge must be sufficient to gain attention.
But it should not be so intense that it overwhelms the individual.
The challenge should also be repeated over time.
This combination of marginal demand, repetition, reinforcement, and adaptation may represent a deeper neurological foundation for understanding microdosing.
From State Change to Trait Change
One of the most important principles in neuroplasticity is the movement from temporary change to more permanent adaptation.
A stimulus can initially create a temporary state change.
The effect may depend on the continued presence of the stimulus.
But when the stimulation is repeated and reinforced over time, the temporary state may gradually become a longer-term trait.
The new behavior, skill, perception, or neurological response becomes increasingly integrated.
Eventually, the individual may no longer require the original stimulus to maintain the new adaptation.
This is the essential principle of State to Trait change.
And it may be one of the most important reasons why small interventions, repeated consistently over time, can potentially create significant long-term effects.
Putting It All Together
Like we say in the title of this paper...It’s the Little Things that Count.
Our adult brain is still capable of positive change.
Just nudge it along with a eustress agent of any kind at low-levels of marginal demand and repeat it often enough that the brain accepts it as a State to Trait integration.
A “eustress agent” must be able to gently perturb the “status quo” of our brain without triggering an outright defensive reaction (a “distress” instead of a “eustress”).
To better understand the brain, remember that our brain is physical.
So much of what you have learned about our physical body also applies to your brain...because our brain is physical!
Think about your experience in doing stretching exercise for your muscles.
A little bit every day and you will get progressively more flexible.
If you aggressively attempt to lengthen the muscle all at once, it will tear.
Major OUCH.
The same is true of strengthening your muscles.
A little bit of “marginal demand” on a regular basis will result in stronger muscles.
Try to heavy lift all at once...and again the result is injury.
So, perhaps think of making your brain stronger yet more flexible in small regular steps.
Consider microdosing.
Exploring the Fadiman Protocol as an Example
When looking at “microdosing” from a neurological brain point of view instead of solely focusing in the psychedelic compound as the stimulating agent, we have new fascinating information emerge.
Here the classic Fadiman Protocol serves as a great template.
Essentially, the human organism organizes itself around core principles.
Harmonic relationships are one such principle.
First, let us consider the dynamics of fundamental neuroplastic change.
Fundamental Neuroplastic Change
First, let us consider the dynamics of fundamental neuroplastic change.
- Neuro-Stimulation (the "input reaction"): 0–2 hours
- Neuro-Modulation (the "reaction response"): 2–8 hours
- Neuro-Relaxation (the "response relief"): 8–24 hours
- Neuro-Differentiation (the "relief result"): 24–48 hours
Now let's break these down to better understand.
1. Neuro-Stimulation
Neuro-Stimulation is like giving information/food to a hungry brain.
It has an appetite and is hungry for the info/food because it is the way it can keep the learning going and solve the problem.
It is mandatory for self-organization and adaptation.
It triggers a mobilization of self-regulation and things immediately begin to improve even at this very early stage.
Yummy!
2. Neuro-Modulation
Neuro-Modulation now kicks into gear and all of the multiple Brain Networks have an improvement of functions.
This decreases the super-sensitivities that have formed as the Brain has been lacking certain Adaptive responses.
Perhaps most importantly, the Neuro-Modulation stage allows the Brain Stem "Reticular Activating System" (RAS) to "reset" which is wonderful because it means that the "arousal level" that was causing all those "super-sensitivities" to manifest gets "calmed down" and normalized (whew, that feels better:-).
3. Neuro-Relaxation
Neuro-Relaxation is the next stage of the process.
The brain has received the stimulation and completed the initial adaptive response.
Now the system begins to settle.
This is a period of recovery and relief following the increased activity of Neuro-Stimulation and Neuro-Modulation.
The nervous system gradually reduces its heightened state of arousal.
This creates an opportunity for the brain to rest, recover, and integrate the changes that have been initiated.
Neuro-Relaxation is therefore an important part of the adaptive process.
Change does not only happen during stimulation.
Recovery and integration are also necessary for the brain to stabilize and organize its new responses.
4. Neuro-Differentiation
The final stage is Neuro-Differentiation.
This is where the results of the previous stages begin to become more distinct.
The brain has moved through stimulation, modulation, and relaxation.
Now it has the opportunity to establish and differentiate new patterns of response.
The adaptive process can begin to move from a temporary state change toward a more stable trait change.
This is why time between stimulation sessions can be important.
The brain needs time not only to respond to a new challenge, but also to integrate and stabilize the changes that follow.
The Rhythm of Adaptation
When viewed together, these four stages create a cycle of adaptation.
First comes stimulation.
The brain receives a new input and becomes engaged.
Next comes modulation as the brain begins to organize and respond to the challenge.
This is followed by relaxation, allowing the system to recover and integrate.
Finally, differentiation provides the opportunity for new patterns to become more established.
This cycle offers another way of understanding why repeated, well-timed, low-level challenges may support long-term adaptive change.
The Fadiman Protocol and the Rhythm of Neuroplasticity
Now let's look at the classic Fadiman Microdosing Protocol.
The protocol follows a simple three-day cycle:
- Day One – Dose Day
- Day Two – Transition Day
- Day Three – Normal Day
The cycle is then repeated for several weeks.
When viewed through the lens of neuroplasticity, this three-day rhythm may reveal something interesting.
The Dose Day introduces the stimulating agent and creates the initial neuro-stimulation.
The Transition Day provides an opportunity for the brain to move into a period of neuro-modulation and begin responding to the stimulation.
The Normal Day allows the process to continue through neuro-relaxation and neuro-differentiation.
The brain is therefore not continuously stimulated.
Instead, the stimulation is followed by time for response, recovery, and integration.
This creates a rhythm between challenge and adaptation.
A Broader Template
The interesting possibility is that the Fadiman Protocol may represent more than simply a schedule for taking a psychedelic compound.
It may also represent a broader template for introducing marginal demand into the brain.
A stimulating experience is introduced.
The brain responds.
The nervous system is then allowed time to recover and reorganize.
The cycle is repeated.
Over time, repeated stimulation and integration may gradually move temporary state changes toward more stable trait changes.
This rhythm may potentially be applied to many forms of neuroplastic stimulation.
The stimulating agent does not necessarily have to be a psychedelic compound.
It could potentially involve sensory stimulation, movement, cognitive challenges, learning experiences, or other forms of manageable novelty.
The essential principle remains the same:
Small challenge. Meaningful response. Recovery. Integration. Repeat.