Will a member of the UK Parliament be known to have used a psychedelic drug by the end of 2024?
resolved Jan 31

Psychedelic here means a classic psychedelic, such as LSD, psilocybin, DMT (including in ayahuasca), mescaline. This excludes MDMA and ketamine. 2C-B is also excluded as its action is not primarily as a 5HT-2A agonist.

Edit: I mean someone who is an MP today (19/12/22), or is an MP at some point between today and market close. I do not mean someone who has been an MP in the past but is no longer.

They can have used the drug at any point in their life, including childhood and their current term.

The use must be intentional.

Get Ṁ1,000 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:
bought Ṁ100 of YES
predicted NO

@ArekStryjski I think you mean "the lord's", unless you're implying that Jesus got caught using LSD

@ArekStryjski The Lords is part of the UK Parliament, yes. I resolved 'yes' on this basis as there is adequate evidence from Lebedev. However, I realised afterwards that I wrote that I meant 'MPs', which is used to mean Members of Parliament, specifically members of the House of Commons. Therefore I think my resolution is questionable and possibly wrong. I tried to unresolve the market to close it and seek debate, but this feature did not work for me. I apologise to anybody who feels this resolution is incorrect. I will set up another market specifying the House of Commons.

I'm interested to hear people's reasons for their trades on this reason, particularly those who think it's likely. Are you aware of any individuals or rumours?

predicted NO

@ArekStryjski Understood. Anyone can organise those events by the way, you only need one member of the house of lords to sponsor it.

Used while they were an MP, or when they were younger?

@Duncan At any point in their life

@WXTJ To clarify, you mean that: there must be at least one person, who at some point in their life has been an MP, and at some point in their life been known to use, or admitted to using psychedelic drugs, in any order, not necessarily with any overlap?

@edef Not quite. I mean that there must be:

  • One or more people who have been an MP at some point between today and the close date of the market.

  • It becomes known from a reliable source (subjective judgement by me) that they have used a psychedelic drug.

More related questions