moving goalpost? blatant dishonesty? pointless parameter? i want garbage?

Im going to be honest with you Im not even sure what are you implying here at this point. I was mostly joking when I commented and if its going to satisfied you, yeah, that was my first impression before i dived into the article. However, I dont see the need to edit my comment afterwards.

In medical setting, the term therapeutic use usually indicate that the drug was approved by a certified medical board. And the board will give the guideline for e.g indication of use. Its what i was implying at my first comment. The toad was simply something i add and poorly worded since i've been wondering if psychedelics can actually be of therapeutic use.

In this article, It indeed showing the promising potential for psychedelic with the findings and trials. Its not useable yet as its not board approved. not certified or added to guideline/medical literature. Why it matters? If a doctor prescribed a drug just from the all the findings and trials in this article when its not approved yet he can get sued for negligence, malpractice or even jail.