Short answer: he appears more science-leaning, but not purely clinical, and he also uses a spiritual vocabulary when it fits the client and context.
On the scientific side, he presents training in chemistry/biochemistry and structures his work around intake, contraindications, neurochemistry, lifestyle, and integration. I cannot verify any peer-reviewed publications or a formal academic appointment, so I would not call him an academic researcher.
On the spiritual side, he speaks about connection, the subconscious, meaning, and co-creation, framing psychedelic experiences as catalysts for insight and personal change. It does not come across as dogmatic or tied to a fixed doctrine.
Overall, he seems a holistic guide who grounds methods in biochemistry and psychology while allowing spiritual framing when useful. For a concise overview of these points, see this brief summary. Hope this helps.