I'd call "net-zero trauma by 2070" overly conservative rather than grandiose. Rick is clear that he's not saying we will eliminate trauma, the reaction to overwhelm which is built into our human system. He's talking about "net-zero" in the same sense as net-zero carbon, reducing the load of trauma from past experience at a rate equal to the addition of new traumas.

In my opinion, based on over 30 years as a trauma specialist, we can and must do better than "net-zero trauma". The quality of life on this planet depends upon it.

Here's why it's possible:

*Years of suffering can be resolved within hours under the right conditions. We have the math (fuzzy as it is at this point) in our favor.

*Highly effective methods of trauma resolution are known-- although most therapists are using relatively weak and sometimes even harmful approaches.

*Future mind-body methods and technologies are likely to make our current practices look sadly primitive.

*Psychedelic therapies, while facing accessibility issues and certainly not a magic bullet, have shown promising results in studies by MAPS and others. There are signs that the Drug War-- one significant source of trauma-- is giving way to science.

*Relieving the burden of trauma leads to individuals and families ending inter-generational cycles and inflicting less suffering upon each other. Those small steps of safety and compassion add up.

*Healthier individuals and families create more sane and compassionate institutions and communities.

*Ultimately this can lead to more beneficial relationships among nations, rather than the current situation with bombs under the control of fight-flight "lizard brains".

*Since trauma is both a cause and an effect of so many other problems--violence, addiction, suicide, incarceration, divorce, many more-- dealing with trauma is a key to creating positive cycles rather than the negative ones we see.

The bottom line: humans are resilient and we know how to heal. While quality of services is an issue, the greater challenge we face is availability on a wide scale. It's a big shift from "what will my insurance pay for-- if I can find it?" to creating systems of people helping people. Yet most people want to help if they can see how to do it.

Rick and I will both be 116 years old in 2070. I don't expect to stick around that long, but I'd like to leave a livable world for future generations. Since Rick has stimulated this conversation with his catchy phrase, let me offer another target that we might be around to see on our 90th birthdays: 20% reduction in net trauma in the next 20 years.

Go ahead and call this grandiose; it certainly is. But we have the knowledge. Do we have the will?

Expand full comment

The difference between this and carbon is that it is fine to have carbon in the atmosphere, just not excess. With trauma we would probably want to aim for zero, not net-zero. Either way a lofty goal, but one we should aim for or move towards regardless.

Expand full comment

I have to agree with AP on this one - grandiose. He lost me at " net-zero"

Expand full comment
Sep 15, 2023·edited Sep 15, 2023

What a noble goal.

Expand full comment

The concept that trauma is something that can be reduced to near zero is a lofty goal, but unrealistic to the realities of human nature, failings, and mortality. We will all suffer, whether it is the drudgery of difficult work, or more realistically, the suffering, decay, and death of those around us, and ultimately ourselves, as we grow through the natural aging process. Suffering, trauma, and death are inescapable, and it feeds a false sense of security that these discomforts can be escaped or done away with. Inner peace is found by wrestling with your demons and feelings about the situations you encounter, and the encouragement of the easy pill/drug significantly increases the difficulty of helping clients in my profession accept that even with something like MDMA, there will be additional stressors that challenge them throughout life. The problem is they look at this as a magic pill that fixes it all, and that simply will never be the case for treatments like this. It doesn't teach them distress tolerance.

Expand full comment

I was actually really inspired when he said this in his talk. I thought what an amazing idea! So what if it's lofty or an "elusive" goal. We haven't even tried yet. I think it's a really interesting topic that needs to be talked about over and over and over again. Mental health support at all ages is so important. I have conversations all the time with my clients whom are mainly elderly slowly opening up about their childhood or their parents going through the war. They also didn't find out many of these things until either they were drunk or their mother told them. We all need to make time to slowly create that safety and compassion for people we love so we can have those conversations, so then trauma isn't being passed down. Start small being curious and comforting. We all want to be seen even if it's terrifying at first. We need to teach others how to recognize the circle of trauma and how to break it. People really need to be more trauma informed. Anything can be trauma and cause someone deep pain. It can start earlier in life or later in life. I recently did a mental health first aid course that was fantastic and honestly everyone should do that course.

Expand full comment

Is there info about microdosing MDMA?

Expand full comment