The Use of Psychedelic Agents
with Autistic Schizophrenic Children
Robert E. Mogar & Robert W. Aldrich
from Psychedelic Review Number 10, 1969
Evidence from seven independent studies indicates LSD
may help free the most severely imprisoned minds.
In recent years, a number of exploratory investigations have
been reported involving the administration of psychedelic agents to young children
suffering from severe forms of psychological disturbance (Abramson, 1960; Bender,
et al., 1962; Bender, et al., 1963; Fisher & Castile, 1963; Freedman, et
al., 1962; Rolo, et al., 1965; Simmons, et al., 1966). As either therapeutic
or experimental undertakings, these studies are extremely fragmentary and suffer
gross shortcomings. As a case in point, wide diversity along major dimensions
known to influence drug response and treatment effectiveness characterize this
work. These include the agent employed, dosage level, number and frequency of
administrations, therapist expectations and previous experience with psychedelic
drugs, and finally the setting and circumstances surrounding the drug-induced
state. With regard to patient characteristics, the children treated were demographically
varied and covered a broad age range. More importantly, the samples were markedly
heterogeneous with respect to the nature, severity, and duration of modal symptoms.
The major experimental shortcomings included small samples, subjective and vague
criteria of drug effects and improvement, and grossly inadequate follow-up.
Despite their diversity and severe limitations, these seminal
explorations in an extremely complex area of research seem worthy of wider reportage
and more serious attention than they have hitherto received. Almost without
exception, these reports have appeared in obscure publications or remain unpublished.
A more significant reason for their relative neglect has been the polarized
controversy surrounding psychedelic agents which has all but completely curtailed
In this critique of the use of psychedelic agents with severely
disturbed children, the various studies conducted thus far will be comprehensively
reviewed and integrated. Particular attention will be given to their similarities
and differences along known relevant dimensions in order to detect communalities
and possible reasons for inconsistent findings. While some attempt will be made
to resolve seemingly contradictory results, the heuristic value of this work
will be emphasized rather than its conclusiveness . Hopefully, the tentative
conclusions derived from these initial efforts will point the way for more definitive
studies into the therapeutic efficacy of psychedelic agents with childhood disorders.
A fairly exhaustive search of clinical and research reports revealed
a total of 91 severely disturbed children who have been administered one or more
psychedelic agents for experimental and/or therapeutic purposes. As detailed in
Table 1 , this collective group of patients ranged from
five to fifteen years of age, with the large majority between six and ten years
of age. Careful examination of the seven independent studies disclosed little
basis for assuming a significant relationship between age and drug response. However,
tentative relationships were suggested by both Bender (1963) and Fisher and Castile
(1963). Bender noted that in contrast to pre- adolescents, younger children manifest
consistently different reactions to a variety of medical and pharmacological treatments.
For this reason, she hypothesized that her older patient group (12-15, N = 8)
would not show the dramatic positive changes obtained with the younger children.
Contrary to expectations, comparable favorable effects were found irrespective
of age differences. Fisher and Castile, on the other hand, concluded that older
children were better candidates for psychedelic therapy because verbal communication
was possible and also because they tended to be less withdrawn, more schizophrenic
than autistic, and displayed more blatant symptomology. While these patient features
were obvious advantages for the particular therapy technique employed by Fisher
and Castile, it is unlikely that this symptom picture consistently distinguishes
older from younger psychotic children. Thus, on the basis of the available evidence
concerning the immediate and subsequent effects of psychedelic drugs on children,
age per se appears to be an inconsequential variable.
All of the patients treated in these studies were described as severely
and chronically disturbed with a primary diagnosis of autism or childhood schizophrenia.
With regard to duration of illness, most had been hospitalized for periods ranging
from two to four years. Many were afflicted since birth. An apparent exception
was the single patient studied by Rolo and his co- workers (1965). This twelve
year old boy had been hospitalized for four months. No estimate of the duration
of his illness was reported. At the opposite extreme, the twelve children treated
by Fisher and Castile were probably the most severely disturbed with an average
illness duration of 7.6 years.
The modal symptoms characterizing the majority of children given
psychedelic treatment were well summarized by Simmons and his coworkers (1966):
(1) preoccupation with and stereotyped manipulation of objects (toys, etc.); (2)
isolation of the self from contact with animate objects (including minimal eye
contact); (3) failure to acquire general social behaviors (including speech);
and (4) bizarre rhythmic repetitive motor patterns. This syndrome conforms closely
to the classical picture of infantile autism (see e.g., Rimland, 1964). As suggested
earlier, the symptoms picture of the older children treated by Bender and by Fisher
and Castile resembled adult schizophrenia more than infantile autism. This was
also true of Rolo's single patient. Although autism was invariably present, the
"schizophrenic" children were less withdrawn and manifested a greater
variety of symptoms including overt aggression, hallucinations, paranoid delusions,
and psychosomatic disturbances. Almost without exception, long-standing mutism
was characteristic of all 91 patients prior to psychedelic treatment.
Despite these significant communalities among the seven groups of
children studied, individual differences in patient characteristics extended over
a fairly broad range. Without discounting the possible importance of individual
differences, there is little indication in the work reviewed here of differential
response or benefit as a function of age, diagnosis, duration or severity of illness.
As will become apparent in subsequent sections of this paper, the failure to detect
such relationships seems partlydueto fragmentary patient data and the crude estimates
available of drug response and subsequent changes in behavior. Consistent with
this hypothesis, the differential findings reported by Fisher and Castile appear
to reflect their more detailed assessment of personal history information and
individual differences in both pre- and post- treatment symptomology. They also
applied more stringent criteria of improvement than the other investigators.
RATIONALE AND HYPOTHESES
Explicit hypotheses or theoretical bases for administering psychedelic
drugs to disturbed children are almost completely absent in these exploratory
studies. The lack of a definite rationale is hardly surprising when one considers
the enigma surrounding both schizophrenic behavior in children and response to
psychedelic drugs. Despite great diversity in expectations andtechnique,there
was one point of departure shared by all investigators, namely, that all known
forms of treatment had been attempted without success. Thus, the use of a potent
experimental drug with the particular chronic patients selected seemed justified.
With regard to the purpose of these studies, all were to some extent
exploring the therapeutic potential of psychedelic drugs rather than their psychotomimetic
properties. This was least true of Freedman and his coworkers (1962) who viewed
LSD primarily as a means of studying the schizophrenic process by "intensifying
pre-existing symptomology." This orientation contrasted sharply with Bender's
view. Noting that withdrawn children became more emotionally responsive while
aggressive children became less so, she hypothesized that psychedelic drugs "tend
to 'normalize' behavior rather than subdue or stimulate it." This basic difference
in expectations seems at least partially responsible for Bender's extremely favorable
outcomes and Freedman's rather poor results. Regarding all forms of psychotherapy,
it has become a truism that " where there is no therapeutic intent, there
is no therapeutic result" (Charles Savage in Abramson, 1960, p. 193).
Consistent with their explicit therapeutic intent, Bender, Fisher,
and Simmons each offer essentially the same hypothesis based on a psychological
interpretation of childhood schizophrenia: " The working hypothesis of this
study is that the psychosis is a massive defensive structure in the service of
protecting and defending the patient against his feelings and affectual states"
(Fisher & Castile, 1963). Psychedelic drugs were viewed as a powerful means
of undermining an intractable defense system and thereby making the patient more
receptive to contact and communication with others. In attempting to explain the
predominantly positive results in this area of research (see Table 1), it is worth
emphasizing that the collective work of Bender, Fisher, and Simmons accounts for
over 75 per cent of the 91 children treated with psychedelic drugs. Although their
techniques differed considerably, these investigators shared a psychological conception
of autistic symptoms and a psycho-therapeutic orientation to drug treatment.
Although Freedman was prompted to use LSD primarily as an experimental
device to study psychosis, he did mention that he was influenced to some extent
by the dramatic improvement in autistic children reported by Peck and Murphy (in
Abramson, 1960) and by the apparent success of Cholden, Kurland, and Savage (1955)
in their work with adult mute catatonic patients. As will become apparent in the
discussion of results, a partial and often transient alleviation of mutism by
LSD treatment has been one of the most consistent effects reported in the children
A final secondary objective worth mentioning is that the more recent
studies (Rolo, et al., 1965; Simmons, et al., 1966) were influenced by Bender'
s earlier reports of successful LSD treatment. These studies were attempts to
replicate Bender's findings using various control measures and other methodological
As indicated in Table 1, LSD-25 has been by far the most frequently
employed psychedelic agent in work with psychotic children. An exception was Benders
s second study (1963) in which she gave one-half of her patients LSD-25 and the
other half UM L491. The experimental drug UML-491 was described as a more potent
serotonin inhibitor without the psychedelic properties associated with LSD-25.
Based on a variety of biochemical indices and observations of differential behavior
changes, Bender reported no apparent differences between the action or effectiveness
of the two drugs.
Fisher and Castile employed LSD-25 and psilocybin at times singly
and at times simultaneously. These investigators were unique in using a variety
of dosage leveldrug combinations both with the same patient on different occasions
and with different patients on the same occasion. The specific drug regime adopted
for a given session was determined by clinical criteria of the patient' s particular
defense structure and his expected resistance to psychedeliedrugs. Stated differently,
Fisher and Castile were the only investigators who attempted to optimize the psychedelic
experience for a given patient rather than mechanically administering a constant
dosage of the same agent to all patients. This feature of their method was consistent
with the greater attention paid to individual patient differences and their general
orientation to psychedelic therapy as a psychopharmacological process .
Concerning dosage level, most investigators settled on 100 micrograms
as optimal. Although this was the average dosage used by Bender, she differed
from the others by starting treatment at a relatively low level (50 mcgs.) and
gradually increasing the amount to as high as 150 mcgs. As suggested earlier,
Fisher and Castile usually administered multiple agents and employed a wide range
of dosage levels (with LSD, 50 to 400 mcgs.). As their work progressed, they developed
a definite preference for the prolonged high dose psychedelic experience, especially
with older schizophrenic children. Their most effective results were obtained
with pre-treatment medication of 10 mg. Librium, 10 to 15 mg. of Psilocybin given
approximately one-half hour later, followed by 250 to 300 mcg. of LSD administered
twenty minutes later. In addition, Fisher and Castile often gave "boosters"
during the session itself ranging from 25 to 100 mcg. of LSD. Boosting was considered
beneficial " (a) when the patient seemed to be caught up in a problem area
which he could not break through; (b) when the patient kept defending himself
from new experiences; (c) when the patient increased his defensive, stereotyped
behavior and the psychotic controls became intensified."
With regard to frequency and total number of treatments, the seven
studies varied widely ---from Freedman's single session per patient to Bender's
daily sessions over periods as long as one year. Although more frequent and prolonged
treatment was often impossible for non- clinical reasons, Fisher' s group averaged
five sessions per patient given preferably at two week intervals. With both Rolo'
s single patient and Simmons' pair of identical twins, experimental requirements
precluded an optimal therapeutic regime. Both investigators attempted double-blind
procedures and more objective observational methods. Rolo administered 100 mcg.
LSD on 28 consecutive days while Simmons gave a total of nine 50 mcg. LSD treatments,
approximately two per week, interspersed with inert placebo sessions and control
After citing extensive evidence indicating rapid tolerance of LSD-25,
Freedman concluded that repeated administrations would be ineffective with psychotic
children. Bender, on the other hand, found little indication of either rapid or
sustained tolerance to LSD using her method of continued daily adrninistrations
over extended periods. With her relatively large group of patients, Bender did
observe a leveling off of reactivity after several weeks or months of uninterrupted
treatment. She considered it unlikely, however, that this effect was due to physiological
drug tolerance. The impressive improvement rates obtained by Bender in contrast
to Freedman's results offer support for a high frequency regime of moderately
large doses. It is worth noting that Fisher and Castile arrived at a similar conclusion
without knowledge of Bender's work. Parenthetically, the significance of a possible
drug tolerance effect is further lessened by the findings of more recent experiments
indicating that tolerance to LSD diminishes almost as rapidly as it develops (Hoffer,
PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MILIEU
It should be emphasized that the findings obtained in these studies
are the result of an interrelated set of determinants, only one of which is the
ingestion of a particular chemical agent. The significance of seemingly contradictory
results has often been obscured by the persistent search for static, " drug-specific"
reactions to LSD. Inconsistent findings become more understandable if the psychedelic
experience is viewed as a dynamic configuration of intimate patient therapist-milieu
transactions. In short, the administration of LSD is inextricably embedded in
a larger psychosocial process which should be optimized in accordance with particular
Even a cursory examination of the work with autistic children clearly
reveals that at least some important aspects of the physical and psychological
milieu were considerably less than optimal. In the seven studies reviewed here,
only Fisher and Castile attempted to create a specifically non-medical atmosphere
that was minimally threatening to the patient. Modeled after the widely-adopted
Saskatchewan technique (Blewett & Chwelos, 1959; Hoffer, 1965), the procedure
developed by Fisher and Castile included the following key features: (1) a high
dose, 7 to 10 hour session; (2) the use of a variety of therapeutically-meaningful
or aesthetically- pleasing stimuli (music, flowers, pictures, food, etc.); (3)
a positive patient-therapist relationship formed prior to the session itself;
(4) the presence of both a male and female therapist who "had thorough acquaintance
with the phenomena of the drug through personal experience"; and (5) active
therapist involvement with the patient including role-playing (e.g., father, mother).
Importantly, these conditions have repeatedly been found to significantly enhance
the personal value of psychedelic experiences.
In each study, the circumstances under which the session was conducted
were consistent with the purpose and expectations of the investigator. Consistent
with his psychotomimetic orientation, Freedman' s patients were supervised by
a familiar psychiatrist primarily for the purpose of careful observation and note-taking.
No attempts to relate to the children or personal experience with the drug were
reported. The same applies to Bender's group although the intent in this case
was clearly therapeutic. She apparently administered LSD as a conventional daily
medication that did not require any special conditions of preparation, therapist
involvement, or setting. However, her reports are replete with descriptions of
spontaneous interactions between staff and children. Supervision of Bender' s
patients was performed mainly by ward attendants. The adults present in the sessions
conducted by both Rolo and Simmons were also ward attendants.
The primary purpose of the studies reported by Rolo and Simmons
was explicitly methodological. Both research projects employed the double-blind
method and attempted to follow a predetermined, uniform procedure during each
experimental and control session. As means of standardizing the sequence of events
and increasing objectivity, both investigators systematically presented various
playing objects, games, and tasks to the child. Rolo's single patient was encouraged
to engage in quite simple, familiar activities such as throwing a baseball or
playing cards. Simmons, on the other hand, created a far more elaborate series
of game-like situations that were novel and intrinsically interesting, requiring
sustained patient-adult interactions, and importantly were specifically designed
to simulate or elicit normal social behavior and emotional responsiveness.
A number of probable effects of the physical and psychological milieu
are suggested in these studies that bear a significant relationship to the investigator'
s orientation, on the one hand, and differences in benefit or outcome, on the
other. As indicated earlier, the expectations of a particular research team seem
highly related to various aspects of both drug regime and setting. With regard
to differential improvement rates, a major determinant seems to be the degree
of active therapist-patient interactions permitted during the drug-induced state.
Secondly, greater therapeutic benefit seems to occur in congenial settings offering
some opportunity to experience meaningful objects and interpersonal activities.
Finally, psychedelic therapy with psychotic children seems most effective in natural,
flexible settings that are reasonably free of artificiality, experimental restrictions
on spontaneous behavior, and mechanically administered procedures. Conversely,
barren medical or laboratory environments seem clearly anti- therapeutic.
As emphasized previously, each of these exploratory studies suffered
major shortcomings either as therapeutic or experimental undertakings. Almost
without exception, the findings reported consist mainly of observational data
obtained during the acute phase of drug reactivity. The use of pre-treatment baselines
against which to measure change either during or after psychedelic therapy were
generally absent. In most cases, follow-up data was not obtained. Although caution
in interpreting results is certainly indicated, it should be pointed out that
these limitations are shared by the bulk of research on drug- and psycho-therapies.
Furthermore, objective evaluation of improvement in severely disturbed children
presents unique problems due to the nature of autistic symptoms, especially the
ubiquity of mutism. Even the few cases not suffering from a complete absence of
speech were untestable by standard psychological assessment methods.
In their initial study, Bender and her coworkers (1962) administered
the Vineland Maturity Scale at the beginning of treatment and again three months
later. At the followup testing, ratings were qualitatively higher for all children.
In the second study (Bender, et al., 1963), the Rorschach, Draw-A-Person, and
Bender-Gestalt tests were given to the ten verbally responsive children on at
least two occasions; before treatment and again after a three to eight month interval.
In these aggressive, overtly psychotic patients, Bender reports that "there
were two major changes observed: (1) There was a decrease in personalized ideation
and a corresponding gain in accuracy of response; and (2) An inhibition of strongly
emotional or 'feeling' reactions to the cards." Other favorable changes reported
included decreases in hallucinations, negativism, and regressive defenses with
a corresponding increase in reality- contact. Similar types of improvement were
found in the older children treated by Fisher and Castile.
With regard to her major group of young autistic children, Bender
reported significant improvement in speech and verbal communication:
". . .the vocabularies of several of the children increased
after LSD or UML; several seemed to be attempting to form words or watched adults
carefully as they spoke; many seemed to comprehend speech for the first time
or were able to communicate their needs... Very few of these changes in communication
had been noted previously in such a large number of children, and at such a
relatively rapid rate" (1963, p. 91).
Since mutism is a cardinal symptom of autistic children and probably
the major impediment to successful therapy, it is worth emphasizing that at least
temporary speech improvement has been one of the most frequently reported effects
of LSD in the work conducted thus far. Other communalities include an elevated
mood, less compulsive ritualistic behavior, and increased interaction with others.
All investigators reported some favorable change in these major areas with the
exception of Rolo' s single patient . Rolo's group abandoned the attempt to estimate
improvement since their judges could not distinguish between LSD and non- LSD
trials. Bender, on the other hand, made the following observations:
" They appeared flushed, bright eyed, and unusually interested
in the environment... They participated with increasing eagerness in motility
play with adults and other children. . . They seek positive contacts with adults,
approaching them with face uplifted and bright eyes, and responding to fondling,
affection, etc." (1962, pp. 172- 3). "There is less stereotyped whirling
and rhythmic behavior. . . They became gay, happy, laughing frequently... Some
showed changes in facial expression in appropriate reactions to situations for
the first time" (1963, pp. 90-91).
As indicated earlier, Simmons' patients were subjected to a uniform
sequence of game- like situations that evoked a variety of measurable responses.
During each LSD session and non- LSD session, a total of 20 specific behavioral
measurements were taken by a recorder observing the patient through a one-way,
screen. The behaviors recorded included physical contact with the adult present,
vocalizations, destructive acts, laughter, stereotyped movements, and eye-to-eye
contact. In contrast to non-LSD trials, the most pronounced and consistent changes
observed during LSD sessions were: "(1) An increase in social behaviors manifested
by increased eye to face contact and increased responsiveness to adults, (2) An
increase in smiling and laughing behavior generally considered an indication of
a pleasurable affective state, and (3) a decrease in one form of non-adaptive
behavior demonstrated by a reduction of self-stimulation."
Considering the wide diversity in these studies, the major findings
of Bender, Fisher and Castile, Freedman, and Simmons are remarkably similar. Differences
in orientation, patient attributes, drug regime, setting, treatment technique,
research design, etc. seem to affect the frequency and stability of favorable
outcomes (see Table 1). The types of improvement, when and if they occur, appear
to be essentially the same in each study. In short, when LSD is effective with
autistic children, it is effective in characteristic ways.
The influence of non-drug factors is well illustrated in the work
of Fisher and Castile. Although they optimized the physical and psychological
milieu, their patients were the most severely disturbed and displayed the greatest
variety of symptoms. Furthermore they made conservative estimates of improvement
based on the extent and stability of favorable changes after treatment was terminated.
In contrast, most of the findings reported by the other investigators concerned
the immediate effects of treatment. These differences account in part for the
relatively modest improvement rates reported by Fisher and Castile.
The lack of even short-term follow-up data on the majority of children
treated with psychedelic drugs has been a major limitation of the work reviewed
bere. Follow-up information is particularly crucial because the available evidence
strongly suggests that when used alone, LSD produces only transient alleviation
of symptoms. In order to bring about enduring improvement, the drug induced state
requires active therapist patient interaction and/or subsequent psychotherapy.
In this connection, Simmons noted that:
" Therapeutic intervention in severely retarded or regressed
children utilizes to a great extent close physical interaction to which the
child must respond. In the usual state it is often difficult to intrude upon
the child because of a general lack of responsiveness... The results of our
experiments clearly demonstrate changes in exactly these areas with increased
attendance to physical and face contact with an attending adult and concomitant
reduction of competing self- stimulatory behavior... Thus, two possible criteria
for the successful intervention into autistic children are met... A third piece
of data which must be considered is the increase in smiling and laughing behavior.
. ." (1966, p. 1207).
The collective work reviewed here supports the main conclusion reached
by Simmons and his co-workers and argues strongly for more extensive and systematic
applications of psychedelic drugs in the treatment of autistic schizophrenic children:
" LSD-25 appears to offer a useful adjunct to psychotherapy because of its
positive effect in the areas described which are closely related to the process
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1. Seven independent studies are reviewed involving a total of 91
austistic schizophrenic children who had been given psychedelic drugs for therapeutic
and/or experimental purposes.
2. The large majority of children treated in these studies were
between six and ten years of age and were completely refractory to all other forms
3. There was only slight indication of any differential response
or benefit as a function of age, diagnosis, duration or severity or illness.
4. A variety of psychedelic agents, dosage levels, frequency of
administrations, and treatment schedules were employed. The most effective results
were obtained with at least 100 microgram doses of LSD-25 given daily or weekly
over relatively extended periods of time.
5. Concerning the physical and psychological milieu, greater therapeutic
benefit was related to: (a) the degree of active therapist involvement with the
patient; (b) an opportunity to experience meaningful objects and interpersonal
activities; and (c) congenial settings that were reasonably free of artificiality,
experimental or medical restructions, and mechanically administered procedures.
6. The most consistent effects of psychedelic therapy reported in
these studies included: (a) improved speech behavior in otherwise mute children;
(b) increased emotional responsiveness to other children and adults; (c) an elevation
in positive mood including frequent laughter; and (d) decreases in compulsive
7. Differences in patient attributes, treatment technique, research
design, and other non- drug factors seemed to effect the frequency and stability
of favorable outcomes. The types of improvement found were essentially the same
in each study.
8. Although each of these studies contained serious therapeutic
and experimental flaws, it was concluded that the collective findings argue strongly
for more extensive applications of psychedelic drugs in the treatment of austistic
(Back to Text)
Summary of Patient Samples, Drug Regime, and Improvement
|| Excel. (a)
| Abramson 1960
|| 3 - 6
| Freedman 1962
| Bender 1962
|| 45 (b)
| Bender 1963
|| LSD, UML
|| 50-150 4-12mg
|| 60 (c)
| Fisher & Castile 1963
|| LSD, psilo
|| 50-400 10-20mg
|| 1-11 (d)
|| biweekly / monthly
| Rolo 1965
| Simmons 1966
|| twice weekly
Abramson, H.A. (Ed.). The Use of LSD in Psychotherapy. New York:
Josiah Macy Foundation, 1960.
Bender, L., Faretra, G., & Cobrinik, L. LSD and UM L treatment
of hospitalized disturbed children. Recent Advances in Biological Psychiatry,
1963, 5, 84-92.
Bender, L., Goldschmidt, L., & Sankar, S.D.V. Treatment of autistic
schizophrenic children with LSD-25 and UML-491. Recent Advances in Biological
Psychiatry, 1962, 4, 170-177.
Blewett, D.B., and Chwelos, N. Handbook for the Therapeutic Use
of LSD-25: Individual and Group Procedures. Unpublished Manuscript. Saskatchewan,
Cholden, L., Kurland, A., & Savage, C. Clinical reactions and
tolerance to LSD in chronic schizophrenia. J. nervous and mental disease, 1955,
Fisher, G. & Castile, D. Interim report on research project:
An investigation to determine therapeutic effectiveness of LSD25 and Psilocybin
on hospitalized severely emotionally disturbed children. Unpublished Manuscript,
Fairview State Hospital, Costa Mesa, California, February 10, 1963.
Freedman, A.M., Ebin, E.V., &Wilson, E.A., Autistic schizophrenic
children: An experiment in the use of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD-25). Archives
of General Psychiatry, 1962, 6, 203-213.
Hoffer, A. LSD: A review of its present status. Clinical Pharmacology
and Therapeutics, 1965, 183, 49-57.
Rimland, B. Infantile Autism: The Syndrome and Its Implications
for a Neural Theory of Behavior . New York: Appleton-C enturyCrofts, 1964.
Rolo, A., Krinsky. L.W., Abramson, H.A., & Goldfarb, L. Preliminary
method for study of LSD with children, International Journal of Neuropsychiatry,
1965, 1, 552555.
Simmons, J.Q., Leiken, SoJ., Lovaas, Q.I., Schaffer, B., & Perloff,
B. Modification of autistic behavior with LSD-25. TheAmerican Journal of Psychiatry,