Voters in droves rejected question 4. Readers say ‘it’s really a shame.’

Readers say

“It’s really a shame for people suffering from PTSD and CPTSD, who can benefit greatly from therapy with these drugs,” said one respondent.

Massachusetts voters rejected the ballot Question 4 in Tuesday’s state elections, which would have legalized several plant- and mushroom-based psychedelics. But Boston.com said the measure should have passed and expressed disappointment with the state for the decision.

While about 87% of counties reported, 57% of residents voted against the measure, according to the Associated press. Had it passed, it would have legalized several psychedelic substances for therapeutic use.

“It amazes me that 57% of MA residents feel they have both the right and benefit from standing in the way of patients and medical professionals,” said reader Matt from Boston. In a Boston.com poll, he voted that he disagreed with the results of Question 4.

“There is increasing evidence that these substances have medical benefits in numerous ways. As before, the legalization of mushrooms is a fait accompli: it will happen,” he added.

Specifically, the measure would have allowed adults to purchase psychedelic substances such as psilocybin, psilocyn, dimethyltryptamine, mescaline and ibogaine at approved locations for use under the supervision of licensed facilitators. Retail would be prohibited.

The proposal would have created a state-appointed commission and advisory board to regulate the substances. Also included in the law was a provision allowing adults over the age of 21 to grow these substances in their homes in an area measuring 10 feet by 14 feet, the law said.

Massachusetts for Mental Health Options, the campaign supporting the demand, said the domestic aspect of the proposal likely led to its rejection by voters. Several Boston.com readers agreed, arguing that the bill’s homegrown provision prevented them from voting yes.

“I was going to vote yes (on question 4) until I saw that it included the opportunity for personal growth,” said Boston.com reader Joe.

When we asked Boston.com readers to share their thoughts on the results of Question 4, the majority (66%) of the more than 150 voters said they disagreed with the results, arguing that psychedelics had been legalized should be for therapeutic use. Thirty-three percent of readers agreed with the results.

Below, readers share their feelings about the results of Question 4.

Do you agree with the results of question 4?

No, I don’t agree with that

“I’m disappointed; people didn’t understand that this was only for medical use. People I talk to had no idea that after extensive research published in numerous peer-reviewed scientific journals, patients suffering from severe PTSD or depression were helped more than any other form of treatment. These people need help, and it is now being denied. More should have been done to explain this. People thought it was like marijuana that everyone would have easy access to, and that people would just trip everywhere. If they had known what it was really about and how useful it is, especially for veterans with severe PTSD, I think they would have voted ‘yes’.” – Margaret, Billerica

“Continued criminalization of mushroom possession is an outdated concept. It is a personal choice that has no effect on others.” – Bill, Northborough

“It’s a real shame for people suffering from PTSD and CPTSD, who could benefit greatly from therapy with these substances.” – Juana, Jamaica Plain

“I am a veteran and have seen firsthand how psychedelic use (under proper medical supervision) can have incredible therapeutic benefits. Not to mention the peer-reviewed research being published showing its effectiveness is likely far superior to prescription medications in treating PTS, depression and anxiety.” – Liam C., Beacon Hill

Yes, I agree

“It was a poorly written law. The aspect of own development and sharing has completely undermined the regulatory part. Without that I probably would have voted yes. I believe that these substances have potential therapeutic value, but for this purpose they should only be used in a controlled environment so that they do not cause harm to anyone not under care.” – ME, Boston

“If it had been a yes vote for medical use with a prescription and dose controlled by a psychiatrist, I would have voted yes. But a law that allows 21-year-olds to grow and share mushrooms? No way. Society can do better.” – JL, Boston

“Psychedelic substances should never be legal, even under supervision.” – Wayne, Tewksbury

“There are many options for mental health treatment and we cannot continue to allow a small minority to change the drug law. There are too many medicines flowing. The fact that the patient was allowed to ‘grow their own at home’ was the deal breaker, as one could expect that friends, pets and children could have illegal access. There was no strict supervision by a doctor.” – Beverly B., Reheboth

Boston.com occasionally communicates with readers by conducting informal polls and surveys. These results should be read as an unscientific gauge of readers’ opinions.