New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Americans are increasingly open to using psychedelics for medical reasons

A survey found that more than 60 percent of respondents “strongly support” making psychedelics easier to study, reflecting a growing consensus that some could have therapeutic use

Dry psilocybin mushrooms on bright blue background

Cannabis-Pic/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Most U.S. voters want to make it easier to study psychedelics, and almost half think psychedelics should be legalized for therapeutic use, a new survey finds. The results suggest a broad surge in support for loosening restrictions on research into substances such as psilocybin and MDMA to probe their potential for medical use.

The poll included more than 1,500 U.S. voters and was conducted by the U.C. Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics (BCSP) at the University of California, Berkeley, in April 2025. Some 63 percent of respondents said they “strongly support” lowering the barriers to study psychedelics—a jump of about 14 percent from a similar poll conducted in 2023, when 49 percent of respondents reported the same.

And 46 percent of voters also said they “strongly support” making the therapeutic use of psychedelics legal compared with 36 percent in 2023. Forty-one percent said they’d strongly support making psychedelics available by prescription, which polled at just 29 percent in 2023. Support for decriminalizing psychedelics, meanwhile, has remained relatively flat at around 28 percent. Currently, possession of psychedelics such as LSD, MDMA and psilocybin is illegal at the federal level in the U.S.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Bar chart that compares percentages of 2023 and 2025 survey respondents who said they “strongly support” four psychedelic policy proposals.

Amanda Montañez; Source: A Rising Tide of Cautious Support. Tyrone J. Sgambati et al. U.C. Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics, University of California, Berkeley, May 13, 2026 (data)

The findings reflect “increasing public acceptance” of psychedelic treatments, says Mason Marks, a senior fellow and project lead of the Project on Psychedelics Law and Regulation at the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School. But he notes that concepts such as “decriminalization” and legalization for “therapeutic use” may hold distinct meanings to different people, and further research could seek to understand why people answered those questions the way they did.

“People are being flooded with information, and increasingly so, it seems, about psychedelics,” says Tyrone Sgambati, a co-author of the report and a postdoctoral research scientist at BCSP. “I think that kind of piques people’s curiosity and spurs a desire for more information and potentially to better understand purported benefits.” Still, the findings suggest there doesn’t seem to be as great of an appetite for changing these drugs’ status under the law, he says, which suggests some caution remains.

More information as to these substances’ potential could be coming. In April President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at boosting research on psychedelic therapies, which experts say could help lower barriers to studying psilocybin, MDMA, ibogaine, and more.

Although the survey was conducted before Trump’s executive order in April, the results indicate that, from 2023 to 2025 at least, there was “increasing public appetite” for the kind of policies laid out in that order, Sgambati says. “They do seem to be pointing in the same direction.”

Jackie Flynn Mogensen is a breaking news reporter at Scientific American. Before joining SciAm, she was a science reporter at Mother Jones, where she received a National Academies Eric and Wendy Schmidt Award for Excellence in Science Communications in 2024. Mogensen holds a master’s degree in environmental communication and a bachelor’s degree in earth sciences from Stanford University. She is based in New York City.

More by Jackie Flynn Mogensen

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe