[ishtu]

I read it that way too. Maybe it should be of instead of for? Not a native speaker, just wondering.

[hrnnnnnn]

It's not the best-written title ever, but in general when you see "therapy for X" it means "therapy to cure X", rather than "therapy to cause X".

[theEXTORTCIST]

This is definitely a confusing sentence, especially for a non English speaker. You can reword the sentence and add something in front (e.g. "The researchers"). "The researchers are using psilocybin assisted group therapy for demoralization in long term AIDS survivors."

AIDS surviors have "demoralization in them". The psilocybin assisted group therapy is being used for that demoralization.

[brepl]

> especially for a non English speaker

If you don't speak English, every word will be confusing.

[always_good]

I'd change "for" to "to treat".

[sova]

Even "group therapy OF demoralization" would add clarity imho, for non-native speakers.

[QuercusMax]

That phrase doesn't mean anything to me, I've never heard some one talk about "therapy of depression"; it's always "therapy for" or "therapy to treat".

(Native American English speaker here.)

[fao_]

To me, a native-english speaker from Britain, it groups like:

> (Psilocybin-assisted group therapy) for (demoralization) in (long-term AIDS survivors).

The 'for' reads to me as 'to induce', rather than 'to treat'. Changing it to 'to treat' is MUCH easier to read imo

[sova]

How do you feel about "addressing"

[fao_]

That too, would work.

[sova]

So you speak Navajo? Hehe just poking fun. "Therapy for the treatment of.." is much more common, yes.

[wavefunction]

You go through therapy for an issue.