You're right. Generally the best way to complain about a title is to suggest a better one. When people do that we frequently take the suggestion. "Better" here means accurate, neutral, and using representative language from the text itself.

In this case, though, it's a bit hard because the article is cobbled from multiple sources that aren't all about the same thing.

Edit: we changed the URL from https://qz.com/1196408/scientists-studying-psilocybin-accide.... Turned out that its two most substantive mainstream sources were about the same study. They threw in a Ted talk and some Alan Watts and made a vague mash. My self either found this annoying or imagined that it did, so it changed the URL to one of the articles about the ongoing study.

Yeah. It seemed to say that researchers are doing a study about magic mushrooms and finding positive effects. Then the next paragraph says "Anil Seth", who I don't know is even connected with the study, said some philisophical things in a TED talk. Then seems to wander through some more philisophical ideas before ending.

Suggested Title:

Study with small sample size suggests that brief drug-induced mystical experiences change people over time, leading them to report better moods, heightened altruism and forgiveness, more closeness with others, and a sense of connection six months later

Too long, how about "Scientist report psychoactive drugs leading to long term positive effects".

In this case it should say “psilocybin” (as it now does) as there are very particular (IMO significant) differences in its’ effects as compared to other 5ht2* agonists, such as LSD. For example it typically has about 1/4 to 1/2 the duration of LSD which is therapeutically significant.

Sample size isn't small if the power is high. Biological studies are generally (and correctly) done with 8-20 subjects. All the ones I and my lab published in grad school were around here, and there's no arbitrary line over which a sample size is no longer small.

Maybe even, "Here's a reasonable sounding, but unproven, possible explanation for why some people report that certain drugs give them life-changing experiences."

And the TLDR: The part of your brain that some claim "invents your identity" is temporarily shut off, leading you to see alternate possibilities.