The corpus contains non-response, relapse and destabilization as well as positive reports. Historical ibogaine practitioners explicitly rejected simple “one treatment” cure narratives; an Erowid childhood-trauma report described material becoming “too much to deal with too fast,” while Fischer's underground practice itself raised supervision and boundary concerns. [1] [2] [3]
The corpus also shows why screening, aftercare and qualified medical/psychological supervision matter. Medically structured programmes screen for suitability, and contemporary CPTSD material explicitly notes situations such as acute instability, severe unmanaged dissociation, psychosis, mania and some medical risks in which proceeding may be inappropriate. Direct evidence for some combinations—such as KAP specifically for CPTSD—remains limited.
Finally, autobiographical or “regression” material should not automatically be treated as historically verified memory. The corpus contains both programmes using regression-oriented language and a historical participant who sought childhood recall but reported that detailed memories did not reliably return. [4]