Recognitions Research investigates individualized dosing, subjective experience, facilitator decision-making, and longer-term outcomes in work with 5-MeO-DMT.
The first programme of inquiry begins with a substantial archive of one-to-one 5-MeO-DMT sessions documented since 2020.
Rather than beginning with the claim that dynamic dosing is superior, the research begins by asking what can actually be observed: patterns in dosing trajectories, subjective states, facilitator decisions, interventions, and outcomes. Those patterns can then generate more precise research questions, prospective data collection, and collaborative studies.
distinct sessisons
individuals
years of sessions
The dataset, initiated in 2020, contains variation in dosing while major contextual variables remain stable: set, setting, route of administration, delivery method, substance batch, and facilitator.
Because dosing was adapted in real time rather than determined by a fixed sequence, the archive preserves variation in how sessions unfolded across a substantial number of individuals. The dataset was created as practice documentation, not as a clinical research protocol. Its research value is therefore different: it provides material from which patterns can be identified, hypotheses developed, and prospective studies designed.
Jonas brings expertise in computational neurophenomenology, cognitive neuroscience, and the study of altered states and subjective experience.
Recognitions Research welcomes conversations with researchers, institutions, clinicians, and collaborators interested in individualized dosing, 5-MeO-DMT phenomenology, facilitator decision-making, longitudinal outcomes, and related questions arising from real-world practice.
Send A Research Inquiry
We will get back to you as soon as possible.
Responsive dosing is already present within published 5-MeO-DMT research.
One published observational study documented individualized one-to-one sessions in which participants received between one and four administrations. Dose size, timing, and cumulative exposure varied between participants, with additional doses administered after discernible effects of the preceding dose had diminished.
For Recognitions Research, this is one example of dosing variability already present in the field—and of a variable that warrants more direct investigation.