If there exists a "perfect" drug that could safely reproduce the exact same experience as the greatest happiness and pleasure possible for a specific candidate in every respect (hedonic, eudaemonic, cognitive, etc.) without reducing the probability of future happiness (no associated negative risks or increases in risks), are there any negatives for this candidate in choosing this drug over more "natural" processes of happiness and pleasure (such as through relationships, eating, listening to music, etc.) according to a ***hedonist***?

The only argument from ***hedonism*** I have seen against drugs is drug's negative instrumentality. How then would a hedonist argue against drugs if instrumentality was not an issue? This is a purely hypothetical situation, as there does not yet exist a "perfect" drug. However, this situation does feel similar to the situation where a person is capable of abusing drugs with a low probability of any negative outcomes. It seems difficult for a hedonist to argue against occasional, recreational drug use when the probability of negative outcomes is very low.