Slashdot Mirror


Cognitive Enhancement Drugs

Neil Halelamien writes "The LA Times has an article on various cognitive enhancement drugs which are currently undergoing clinical trials. These include ampakines which amplify the strength of electrical signals between neurons, HT-0712 which enhances the transfer from short-term to long-term memory, and gene therapy which revitalizes existing neurons. The article also describes successes with the drug Modafinil, which seems to sharpen attention and mental agility. The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness."

592 comments

  1. Mentat by BWJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Quote: It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

    ~Thufir

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Mentat by BWJones · · Score: 5, Informative

      As a followup to this, there are always "unintended effects" of supplemental drugs/molecules/herbs, whatever your X of choice. The stains on the lips from the sapho juice in Dune were relatively benign and a sign of the Mentat, but there are other effects of real world "additives" that one must be aware of and careful of when partaking. Celebrex should be the latest warning in a long line of possibly dangerous side effects.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:Mentat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, Celebrex

    3. Re:Mentat by Guppy06 · · Score: 5, Funny
      I always prefered:
      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
    4. Re:Mentat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quote: "I don't need Intelligence Drugs because I don't know what they are. But I will put anything into my mouth that is given to me, weather it's supposed to go there or not, because I'm different. Is that clear with everyone?"

      ~Space Ghost

    5. Re:Mentat by Recovering+Anonymous · · Score: 0

      I don't know if lip stains were the only side effects, Piter seemed awful twitchy.

      --
      There's no shame in being a pariah. -Marge Simpson
    6. Re:Mentat by Feanturi · · Score: 4, Funny

      I must drink beer.
      Beer is the painkiller.
      And beer is the little drink that brings total satisfaction.
      I will drink my beer.
      I will permit it to pass through me.
      And where the beer has gone there will be nothing.
      Only a hangover will remain.

    7. Re:Mentat by rossdee · · Score: 1

      This was in the 1984 film, but not in the book.
      And it was recited by Piter De Vries (Baron Harkonnen's Mentat) rather than Thufir Hawat.

    8. Re:Mentat by cshark · · Score: 1

      I'm sold. Sign me up for the trials!

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

    9. Re:Mentat by Coyoteold1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      One of the things I have to consider, as a person suffering from brain injury that inhibits my memory, attention, and sometimes cognition, is whether the possible side effects of the drugs, even if they include decreased lifespan, are better or worse than the "side effects" I already have as a result of my brain injury.

      I can go days, or even weeks at a time, with severely reduced functioning.

      There's a _lot_ in the way of side effects that I would be able to put up with if I were able to get a return of functionality that let me return to doing the work and creative pursuits I'd like to do.

      The problem, of course, is that often we discover that various medications or treatments simply let us trade one set of symptoms that decrease our ability to function normally with different ones that decrease our ability to function normally. If we're lucky, the side effects we experience (as an individual) may be something that we _prefer_ to our normal illness or injury.

      I'm personally _very_ leery of chemicals that may affect my brain or it's chemistry. I already have irreparable problems, and I'm very cautious about doing anything that could leave me worse off.

      At the same time, I'm always _very_ eager to hear of anything that might possibly give me some relief, and help me to be a more functional member of society and my family.

      I would be willing to put up with lessened physical activity, pain, or even a shorter life, if it would let me just function again. My concern is always that something I take that affects my brain will give me all that... as well as some other effects such as headaches, nausea, (things that would reduce my functionality also), or long-term effects that may last even after I stop taking the meds that might make my existing symptoms even worse.

      And, of course, my biggest fear is that the companies that make these drugs don't strike me as being concerned about anyone's health _first_. They are concerned about making _money_ first. I worry that they'll apply "the formula" (a la Fight Club) to any new medication, rather than stringent and ethical testing. I see a lot of what looks like drugs that get pushed through like "fads" that seem to provide little additional benefit, but lots of new problems, for more money. I'd hate to take risks with an arthritis or heart medication... and I'd _really_ hate to take risks with something that messes with my brain.

      Cautious, but hopeful, nonetheless,

      Coyote

    10. Re:Mentat by qualico · · Score: 1

      lol!

      I busted a gut after reading the intro and this is the first post I see, ..."I set my mind in motion".

      Now will we have to watch out for fat floating guys? :->

    11. Re:Mentat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that quote is NOT by Thufir Howat!! Try Pieter DeVries! on second thought, just watch the movie again.

    12. Re:Mentat by samohTnhoJ · · Score: 1

      The problem that I have with this whole premise is that there is one "right way" to think/perceive/understand regardless of circumstance. Not true. The notion of "cognitive enhancing drug" presumes that there is one (among hundreds) of cognitive functions which deserver to be enhanced. Reality is more complicated. Sometimes, it is useful to be paranoid. Sometimes, it is useful to be focused. Sometimes, it is useful to be a wild-eyed dreamer. Sometimes, it is necessary to bring together diverse viewpoints. Other times, it is really useful to encourage diversity of viewpoint and thought. The whole meme of A "cognition-enhancing" drug is terrifying because it so misses the reality and complexity of real world problem solving.

    13. Re:Mentat by Stopher2475 · · Score: 1

      Beer can make you smart. It made Bud wiser.

  2. All I can say is... by SilentUrbanFox · · Score: 1

    Where do I sign?

    1. Re:All I can say is... by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know. This Ampakine sounds real interesting to me. Especially since I have trouble getting stuff into my longterm memory. But once it's there, I have no problem with it.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:All I can say is... by Xerp · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just wait for the spam to come through. You can sign up there. Get your m0d@f1n1l here...

    3. Re:All I can say is... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 4, Funny
      The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness.

      Nonsense. I've been taking them for years. No they don't. No they don't. No they don't. No they don't. No they don't. No they don't.

    4. Re:All I can say is... by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Umm... I've been border line OCD and I am OCP (personality, not disorder) for years. This won't be anything new for me.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    5. Re:All I can say is... by SeanTobin · · Score: 1
      This Ampakine sounds real interesting to me. Especially since I have trouble getting stuff into my longterm memory. But once it's there, I have no problem with it.
      Perhaps you have no problem with your long term memory for the exact reason that everything doesn't get dumped into it. Think of it like a pagefile. The less of them you have, the faster everything goes.

      Of course, you could take this and remember the number of ceiling tiles in your janators closet from last week, and it might take you 3 minutes to remember your home phone number.

      In any event, don't screw with your head.
      --
      Karma: SELECT `karma` FROM `users` WHERE `userid`=138474;
    6. Re:All I can say is... by krautcanman · · Score: 1

      I wonder if these are considered nootropics, which is a class of drugs that's supposed to enhance brain function slightly, especially learning tasks. I hear they're fairly common in Europe.

    7. Re:All I can say is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      ever since i started taking math i have no problems in remembering telephone numbers anfter reading them once. i remember them for like a minute

    8. Re:All I can say is... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Most of my classrooms in high school had ~814 tiles in them (depending on how you counted partial tiles), and each tile had 316 small holes in it.

      I haven't been in high school in 12 years.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    9. Re:All I can say is... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Ever since I got my new job (where I have to remember numbers) I've been able to create a buffer. So when someone calls and they're talking too fast for me to write down the number straight away, I get a 2 second delay and then my brain can interpret what they've just said so I can write it down.

      Quite nifty I think.

    10. Re:All I can say is... by he-sk · · Score: 1

      I remember doing that in high school, English class no less (I am German). I would chit-chat with my neighbor and the teacher would ask me what he had just said. Sometimes I had no clue and got an F, but most of the time I could just rewind that last two or three sentences he just said in my head and quote him literally.

      This still works today, but I'm not that good at it anymore. Hurrah, I get old!

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
    11. Re:All I can say is... by geigertube · · Score: 1

      There's plenty of stuff you can use now, that's OTC. Piracetam, Aniracetam, ALCAR, R-ALA, Huperzine, Vinpocetine, etc etc.

      These two forums,

      http://www.imminst.org/forum/

      http://forum.avantlabs.com/

      are good places to learn about them.

    12. Re:All I can say is... by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Is it bad that I took the time to count the repetitions? Twice?

    13. Re:All I can say is... by Wog · · Score: 1

      That's interesting.

      I'm an undergraduate studying Computer Science with a minor in Accounting. In my Comp Sci and Math courses, I find that I need to pay close attention and focus on not letting my mind wander, because if I do I'll miss explanations that are better than what I can get studying on my own.

      In my Accounting/Economics courses (not counting the tax ones) I get so bored that my mind drifts aimlessly. Though I find the subjects pretty easy, I can still miss large portions of classes through daydreaming and have serious catching up to do at exam time. :)

      No solutions yet to the inadequacy in the math courses, but I figured out that if I do something mindless but entertaining while in class, I follow at just the right pace. This usually means a simple game on my PDA, but for the really dry stuff I've resorted to eBooks. I have to hide the fact that I'm playing around, because the classes at my Uni are usually under 20 students, and I can't imagine the proffesor's reaction to my argument that I learn more in his class with a distraction.

    14. Re:All I can say is... by iwan-nl · · Score: 1
      ever since i started taking math i have no problems in remembering telephone numbers [..]

      I think you misspelled 'Meth' ;)

      --
      I'm trying to improve my English. Please correct me on any spelling/grammar errors in this post.
    15. Re:All I can say is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Counting them twice isn't bad. The fact that you missed one is very bad.

  3. Does this mean... by four2five · · Score: 5, Funny

    the Nobel prize committee will have to start testing for brain doping?

    --
    -or so you'd think
    1. Re:Does this mean... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clinical studies have already shown plenty of evidence of dopey brains.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:Does this mean... by cshark · · Score: 1

      Clinical studies have already shown plenty of evidence of dopey brains.

      Many of which can be seen right here on Slashdot.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

  4. Drug Tests by bob65 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well. So are we gonna have to start taking drug tests before final exams?

    1. Re:Drug Tests by marshall_j · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well side effects include task obssesivness so just look for the guys filling out extra copeise of the exam.

    2. Re:Drug Tests by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ginko Biloba, Gurana, Caffiene, Taurine... hell, even assorted amphetamines. Or maybe some E if you *know* you're gonna fail it. Drug use for exams is as common as dirt already.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    3. Re:Drug Tests by ivar · · Score: 1

      It's quite possible.. and depending on the organization pass or failure might be dependent on a negative result.

      A slate of the myriad deep-running issues and their implications on our freedom and society are discussed at
      the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics.

  5. more drugs for tests and to fear by fozzy(pro) · · Score: 1

    Well i wonder what the long term effects of drugs could be to your brain...also drug tests on Jeopardy and other quiz shows seem to be likely if these medicines get approved ever.

    1. Re:more drugs for tests and to fear by banuk · · Score: 1

      long term effects = cancer or Alzheimer's prolly gonna get that anyways oh well

    2. Re:more drugs for tests and to fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why drugs tests?

      From the sound of it, these drugs improve your recall - it's not giving you anything you don't already have, just improving your ability to access it

      They will still have to sit down and learn things - so they will work just as hard as they did before and just as hard as everyone else

    3. Re:more drugs for tests and to fear by Gherald · · Score: 1
      it's not giving you anything you don't already have, just improving your ability to access it
      Umm... right... so certain body steroids don't necessarily give you anything you don't already have -- such as, the ability to build muscles! They just improve your ability to build them . . .
    4. Re:more drugs for tests and to fear by inkey+string · · Score: 1

      Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but that's pretty much how steroids work. It's not like you take steriods and start growing muscles, there remains the prerequisite of physical activity.

      It's not like they fit 25 lbs of muscle in a tiny syringe...

    5. Re:more drugs for tests and to fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I UNDERSTAND THAT"S HOW THEY WORK

      I'm was just making an analogy that if we consider sterois to be bad, we should consider mind-enhancing drugs to be bad too... because they both essentially improve abilities we already have (in unfair ways).

  6. They seem to be lacking information. by dteichman2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These guys seem to be looking at lots and lots of drugs. They still seem to be ignoring the tried-and-true caffine. *jitter*

    Caffine wakes you up, gives you more energy, speeds up your metabolism, and gives you a headache. Plus, it's been in use for years.

    Excuse me, I need to go drink more Bawls now.

    --


    Silence is golden... and duct tape is silver.
    1. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by kistral · · Score: 1

      Modafinil can wake you up, give you more energy, make you think more clearly, but not speed up your metabolism or give you a headache (usually).

    2. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by dteichman2 · · Score: 1

      The headache is the buzz.

      --


      Silence is golden... and duct tape is silver.
    3. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by WomensHealth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, caffeine is better known for its ability to relieve headaches. Just check the ingredients on a bottle of Excedrin. Caffeine withdrawal headaches are very common in post-operative hospitalized patients who might not be getting the amount of coffee to which they are accustomed.

    4. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That's what I was thinking, this sounds like caffine without the jitters. What do you bet that the first round of brain enhancing drugs will be released for people with measureable chemical imballances. But it will then be advertised as a 'mental Viagra'. It will then be released and dangerous side effects will be discovered by the first round of 'human guinea pigs' that take this. This will be just like the recent issues raised about all the cox-2 inhibitors (e.g. Celebrex) that address arthritis pain by giving you a heart attack.

      So, we Americans are not only get to pay more than the rest of the world for drugs, we also get to be the guinea pigs.

      --
      Think global, act loco
    5. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by anagama · · Score: 1

      • Caffine wakes you up, gives you more energy, speeds up your metabolism, and gives you a headache.

      I wish! (except for the headache part). Coffee has no affect on me except in really high doses, and even then, none of the positive ones. So, I can drink a latte then hit the sack, fall asleep in 15 minutes. That part is ok - coffee tastes good. But it doesn't do a thing for me in the morning, it doesn't do a thing for me if I'm trying to stay awake. If I drank 5 or 6 espressos in a row to tru staying up, I'd get shakey hands, then fall asleep.

      Caffeine is way overrated.
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    6. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by MrP-(at+work) · · Score: 1

      same here, i can go to bed right after drinking coffee/soda/anything with caffeine even those energy drinks like red bull do nothing (although i get like a tingle in my fingers for a few seconds after i down a can, but then nothing happens)

      --
      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    7. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I don't know. There is some grief in Africa regarding an impression that Africa is being used as a laboratory by American Pharma for "testing" AIDS drugs... (or a dumping ground).

    8. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by Malawar · · Score: 0

      Caffeine seems to take a long time to "grip" me. I can drink a whole pot of coffee and won't feel the effects for a couple hours. Is that normal? :P In other news, Orange Juice seems to work wonders for me.

    9. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      ...address arthritis pain by giving you a heart attack.

      At least you've forgotten about your arthritis...

      --
      What?
    10. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      I know for me, caffeine can often trigger a migraine, especially if used in conjunction with a lack of sleep. 'Course, I have heard rumours that the Demon Weed helps prevent migraines and relieve symptoms, but due to the views held by our society, I'll never be able to find a reliable study (or self-medicate, for that matter).

    11. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i have a raging brain-on, RIGHT NOW

    12. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 1

      mmm, you are right and wrong; caffeine does appear in some medications for migranes. It contracts blood vessels which can, in some cases, reduce the suffering of a migrain. However, for the most part drugs that include caffeine do so to speed the uptake of the actual pain relieving drug.

    13. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known

      So have the creators of the drugs taken them so they can think better while they work on them further?

    14. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regarding weed and migraines...

      I too get migraines, sometimes from caffeine. If I drink two cups of coffee, I will get a "pre-migraine" feeling. It sort of feels like tension or stress on my scalp (but not in my head). This tension isn't painful, but I've learned to fear it because it often preceeds a migraine. Sometimes this feeling will develop into a full-blown migraine.

      I should mention that I never get very severe migraines. For me, a bad migraine will start with visuals. Thirty minutes later the pain starts. Rolling-on-the-floor pain. Shortly after the pain starts I will get nauseous and start throwing up. At this point I'm very disoriented and walk like I'm drunk. Driving isn't possible. Several times I've become dehydrated from vomiting. BUT, this only lasts for 8 hours or so. I've never had a migraine last overnight.

      Enter weed. Weed may be the strongest anti-nausea medication ever. It kills my nausea in under 30 seconds (smoked). No shit. If you're like most people, you're only familiar with orally administered medications. Smoking is orders of magnitude faster, second only to injection. 30 seconds is not an exaggeration.

      Weed also helps the pain, but it takes a bit longer and you need to smoke more. After about 15 minutes, I find the pain is no longer "urgent" and fades into the background. It still hurts a lot if I shake my head or walk around. But if I lie in bed, I barely notice it. Also, it's much easier to stay in bed when stoned--you don't get restless or bored. After a half hour I'm usually well enough to watch a movie. I'll also start getting hungry.

      As far as the law is concerned, I simply don't care. For me, weed is the difference between just feeling crappy and 8 hours of crying and puking. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than imitrex, too.

      BTW, I found weed to be quite a bit less potent the first couple times I smoke it. It may not help your migraine much if you've never used it before. YMMV, etc.

    15. Re:They seem to be lacking information. by jasno · · Score: 1

      YMMV...

      I get hangover-like headaches every so often when I don't drink enough water(3 liters a day or so). I get nauseated, light sensitive, feel like I'm either freezing or burning up, and generally want to die for about 4-5 hours. I tried cannabis but it only seems to make it worse.

      Now I'm not claiming I have a typical migraine, so maybe its better for what most people experience. But aren't migraines caused by overdialated blood vessels in the brain? If so, I would think THC could make it worse, given one of its side-effects is to dialate the blood vessels in your head.

      --

      http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
  7. been there done that by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 1

    We already have Ritalin. Is this one closely related to methamphetamine, too?

    debasement of human existence in order to "treat" a "disease" that's just an excuse for bad parenting.

    1. Re:been there done that by rainman_bc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We already have Ritalin. Is this one closely related to methamphetamine, too?

      A psych prof of mine, Dr. Wilma Marshall, explained to me that Ritalin was like Cocaine for kids.

      In a related story I worked with this guy who stole his kids Ritalin for a trip once. Said the exacty same thing - it's like Cocaine without the hangover the next day.

      Does cocaine make people smarter?

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    2. Re:been there done that by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does cocaine make people smarter?

      They certainly seem to think so, don't they.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    3. Re:been there done that by benna · · Score: 1

      Having done both, i'd definatly say that ritalin lacks the euphoria you get out of cocaine. I think ritalin is probobly alot closer to speed.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    4. Re:been there done that by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Cocaine and all of its stimulant cousins don't make you smarter, but they focus all of your attention on one thing. Your nervous system gets turned up a notch and you're ready to get stuff done. I know of people smoking meth and cleaning their apartment for 14 hours.

      South Park does a great parody about ADD. The test to see if the 8 year old kids have ADD is the doctor reading all of Moby Dick. If the kids don't pay attention to all of it, they have ADD and need Ritalin.

      -B

    5. Re:been there done that by denthijs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ritalin loses all its euphoria when taken orally, when snorted however (Not the slow-release kind though) it gives off a nice almost coke like buzz.
      Almost related: Ritalin killed my creativity so now I've switched to Dextro-Amphetamine Sulphate (Dexedrine/Adderall). Which has a nicer overall feel, rush, controllability but most of all doesn't automatically makes you a pencil-pusher (Methylfenidate did)

    6. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know of people smoking meth and cleaning their apartment for 14 hours. ...but how actually clean was their apartment afterwards, and did they do more than just reshuffle all of the stolen crap that they have accumulated?

      People with bipolar disorder also do similarly manic things.

      The fall inevitably sucks.

    7. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Does cocaine make people smarter?

      Cocaine's a hellova drug.

    8. Re:been there done that by vwjeff · · Score: 2, Funny

      Cocaine's one helluva drug.

      I'm Rick James, Bitch.

    9. Re:been there done that by master_meio · · Score: 0
      A psych prof of mine, Dr. Wilma Marshall, explained to me that Ritalin was like Cocaine for kids.

      Does that mean Cocaine is like Ritalin for Spics?

    10. Re:been there done that by The_Wilschon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ritalin may make kids without ADD or ADHD high... But trust me. I was on Ritalin for 9 years. It never once made me high. Quite the opposite in fact. People who actually have ADD find that Ritalin, instead of making them high, actually slows them down, enabling them to concentrate and actually get something done for once in their life.

      In fact, Ritalin is sometimes used as a diagnostic for ADD. You give it to someone, and then, if it makes them stoned, they don't have ADD, if it does not make them stoned, then they probably do.

      That said, it does still keep some stimulant side effects even for people with ADD. When I took it, it kept me awake, so that I had to do my homework in the afternoon instead of the evening, because if I took a dose late enough to do it in the evening, I wouldn't sleep most of the night.

      I am well aware that Ritalin does help everyone concentrate, but if it makes you high DON'T take it. Please. It is a mind-altering drug, very very similar in fact to speed, and it can be dangerous. It is addictive, and once somebody is addicted, they tend to go to great lengths and great expenses to get it. We used to get my Ritalin through a mail-order pharmacy that my pediatrician recommended, and about 1/3 of the time, the prescription would get stolen somewhere in transit.

      Now, today, I wouldn't in fact recommend Ritalin for anybody... Because there is a new, non-stimulant alternative drug out called Strattera. Some people don't like it, because "It doesn't give me the rush and energy that Ritalin does." Well, if thats the case... go talk to your doctor. You almost certainly don't have ADD, and shouldn't be taking Ritalin in the first place (See above). Strattera works for 24 hours, so theres no sudden coming off the dose midday, and since it's not a stimulant, it doesn't keep you up at night, and it doesn't kill your appetite nearly as much as Ritalin or Concerta (really slow release Ritalin variant). So, on the whole, I think it is a much better drug.

      ADD has been so overdiagnosed in the last decade or so (oh, your kid is having problems in school? ADD. Watches too much TV? ADD. You (the parents) are schmucks who have no idea how to raise a kid? The kid has ADD. get the picture?), that Ritalin has kind of become crack for kids. So many kids are on it who shouldn't be, and consequently go through a large part of their childhood stoned a mile high. But properly used, Ritalin is definitely not crack for kids, and for the sake of those who do have ADD... resist the stereotype. It may be true in a large number of cases, but correct those cases rather than condemning Ritalin (and those who use it) in general.

      Rant.end();

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    11. Re:been there done that by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      smart people rock up their coke and smoke it.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    12. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't conflate your stimulants! Each has it's own personality.

      For instance, coke is a fun, social drug. It's great for parties. I also like to write when I snort coke. Coke is much more euphoric than the amphetamines (adderall, dexadrine, meth, etc.). But I can't imagine doing coke and writing software. Might as well get stoned.

      The amphetamines are totally different. Meth will make you Get Shit Done. If you try to clean your house, then your house will be Clean. If you're a programmer, then you will code like God Himself. It's much less social than coke.

      HEY KIDS: Try taking meth and riding a sportbike. Awesome.

    13. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's A Farewell to Arms, not Moby Dick. Get it right!

    14. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The calm feeling from Ritalin is the high. The descriptions of meth, ritalin, etc. make you feel are often very, very wrong. I've used caffeine, dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine), methylphenidate (Ritalin), and Cocaine, and I can tell you that all of them "calm" you down. Take too much and you become jittery, but in general they bring a sense of calmness and easy concentration.

      Why do you think all math wizzes here on campus have halos around their noses? It's about the Ritalin Son!

      Too bad these kids will burn and crash hard like I did in high school.

    15. Re:been there done that by japhmi · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that all people with AD(H)D have the same reason behind the disease. Like almost everything having to do with the brain, AD(H)D may have several biological things going on behind the scenes causing similar symptoms.

      --
      "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
    16. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try a mix.. 50% cocaine,
      25% piracitam
      a hydergine tab
      and round it out with a bit of baking soda
      maybe a little vitamin C

      It cuts the harshness of the cocaine, and smoothes
      out the buzz so you dont get the cravings, but
      man, you're thinking at lightspped for hours.
      And no nasty coke hangover the next day.

    17. Re:been there done that by wild_berry · · Score: 1

      Troll: "debasement of human existence in order to "treat" a "disease" that's just an excuse for bad parenting."

      My partner is doing research into family and ADHD, and has to fight against this myth going round the population. True ADHD is a chemical deficiency in the brain making it difficult for the person suffering to concentrate on tasks. This can be relieved with medication and there are plenty of studies that show medication to be helpful to kids who need it. Also, the recommendation is that, the earlier a child is medicated, the better the outcome of the medication.

      Family, diet, exercise and so on all play a factor in the development of every child, no more for those with attention deficit disorder. Perhaps it isn't safe to assume that parents are up to the challenge of bringing children into the world...

      I understand that it may currently be a fix-all cure for the trials of parenting at the moment, much like selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs like Prozac) are the fix-all for dull living. But that doesn't mean that these drugs are not helpful to people who really need them.

    18. Re:been there done that by Brando_Calrisean · · Score: 1

      Good thing they had a hefty supply of Ritalout - for the love of god, they had those children listening to Phil Collins!

      --
      Don't call me a cowboy, and don't tell me to slow down!
    19. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My ex-girlfriend had a prescription to Adderall an ADD medication which was basically a mix of amphetamines, including dexedrine the stuff that the air force gives to pilots. Anyway, I'm a college student and having adderall to help me through finals is a lifesaver. The drug doesn't make you smarter but allows you to focus on one task for upwards of 8 hours on a dose. You can't get discouraged with a tough subject, on adderall you WILL work it through till you understand it completely. Now that we're broken up and my supply is gone, I'd have to say that it's both a blessing and a curse. I could easily see myself getting addicted to the stuff, for the euphoria and focus, but on the other hand studying without adderall is an incredible depressing pain for me. All I know for sure about the stuff is that I would NEVER EVER let my kids get a prescription for what is essentially medical grade speed. Well, except maybe if the only one taking it was me :).

    20. Re:been there done that by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point. There is a qualitative difference in the effect of Ritalin on people with ADD and people without ADD.

      crash and burn? I haven't yet. I've been on ADD medication for 11 years now. Ritalin for 9, Strattera for 2. I think if I were going to burn and crash hard, I would have done so by now. Those who actually have ADD and have the drug correctly prescribed to them, and then use it responsibly (ie as prescribed) find that they are able to function for the first time in their life as a normal human being, and also that they do not "burn and crash hard".

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    21. Re:been there done that by rainman_bc · · Score: 1

      Sorry dude, but it's the most over-prescribed drug in N. America next to Prozac. She's written tonnes of papers on how terrible that drug is, and that most of the kids on it really shouldn't be on it.

      As a whole, it's a terrible drug. It may have helped you, and I'm sure you're greatful. Truth is that most of the kids on it shouldn't be.

      America is the #1 medicated country in the world.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    22. Re:been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'smoothes
      out the buzz', he why not cut it with some speed at the same time.

      your not going to get the pure psycotic thought patterns that let you know what the governments up to with that crap.

      Why do you think they ban drugs? maybe it's to stop people from working out what the fuck there upto.

      George Bush getting re-elected was just mathamatical calculation, Tony Blair doing the same in the UK, factoring in that shitting on 40% of the population is ok fuck the people you only need 51% of the vote in a democracy.
      your lucky in the US, at least you can still buy guns

  8. Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Nine+Tenths+of+The+W · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The perfect worker:incapable of thinking of anything but the job he's concentrating on. Expect these to be mandatory by 2015.

    --
    Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
    1. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by physicsphairy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, if they are *actually effective* they won't be a requirement, but you'll take them if you want to effectively compete for jobs against other people who are taking them.

    2. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by tobias.sargeant · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or does this getting disturbingly close to Focus?

    3. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by phasm42 · · Score: 1

      A very insightful observation -- mod parent up. This is an interesting/scary box to open. But it's happening, so we'll have to adapt.

      --
      "No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
    4. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness"

      Sounds much like the average nerd, doesn't it? :)

    5. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by thelandp · · Score: 1
      I started thinking "You could say the same thing about having a degree. " since for both the drugs and a degree, you get a productivity increase.

      But in some jobs a degree is an official requirement. So maybe we will reach a point where the drug-taking will be too.

      --

      -- the only thing we have to fear is really scary things
    6. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I started thinking "You could say the same thing about having a degree. " since for both the drugs and a degree, you get a productivity increase.

      Huh? You're new on this planet aren't you?

    7. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already some kids are required to take Ritalin, in a "put your kid on Ritalin or we'll expell him and/or call social services" kind of way.

      Some pilots are required to take amphetamines. The American who bombed the Canadians in Afghanistan was under the influence of some kind of amphetamine at the time.

    8. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by greenplato · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Along the same lines, there is a remarkable amount of drug abuse in universities by whose who would like an advantage over their peers. Beside the joke that grad students use more meth than bikers, the ADD/ADHD (Adderall, Ritalin) drugs are gaining in popularity as they help with concentration and fatigue:

      • Adderall is still first and foremost used as a study drug because of its ability to enhance concentration and the ability to focus for long periods of time. http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/drugs/addera ll.htm
      • Elizabeth, 17, a high-school senior in the Washington area, credits Adderall with helping her post her best-ever score on the March SAT. "Why work harder to get a 1260 when you can take something . . . ?" Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Nov 8, 2004. pg. A.1

      Indeed.

    9. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Biogenesis · · Score: 1

      Of course though, these would only help for jobs where someone actually has to *think*. You need to remember that not everyone is a fellow nerd and there are many jobs that are fairly robotic or artistic. I can see little help from IQ enhancing for people like builders, butchers, plubmers, ...etc. Although there is thought in a lot of these jobs, most of it is plain old experienc. "Abnormally long grass in the back corner of your yard hey? Looks like a sewage leak".

    10. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      to be completely honest with you, after observing so many people who are not doing their jobs well at work at all, I would like to see some of these drugs make it into the job force. I don't believe that those will make much difference for those of us, who can concentrate on their jobs already and who do well at work, but for the rest, who cares if they take drugs to be more productive/effective?

      I, personally, am for everything that makes the highways go faster, so I would like to see those used by the inatentive drivers.

    11. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Nah, I'll just use my non-focussed mind to figure out ways to fuck up the jobs of the people who can't think of anything else. They'll never figure out what's happening to them, and my work will look good by comparison :-)

    12. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      The perfect worker:incapable of thinking of anything but the job he's concentrating on. Expect these to be mandatory by 2015.

      And expect me to hang myself in the event that your prognostication comes true.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    13. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by caswelmo · · Score: 1

      And along those same lines, I would imagine that these memory/neuron/brain enhancing drugs would be legally available only by prescription. Then, just like Ritalin or Adderall, unauthorized users would be committing a crime. Naturally, the social stigma associated with illegal drug use will help to curb abuse somewhat. But then, if problems arise more legislation would probably be passed for testing and other control measures. Ah the wonders of modern medicine.

      I wonder if I can blame my high BrainBoost(TM) levels on poppy seeds?

    14. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "are many jobs that are fairly robotic or artistic."

      Coleridge. Laudunum?

    15. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by sckeener · · Score: 1

      if they are *actually effective* they won't be a requirement, but you'll take them if you want to effectively compete for jobs against other people who are taking them.

      Odd choice for companies. If the enhancing chemicals cause someone to test positive for drugs, would the company want to hire the person? I see a chemical Gattaca.....

      --
      "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
    16. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by CreatureComfort · · Score: 1


      That only applies if you accept the dogma that hard work and dedication leads to advancement within your company. Personally, most of the places I've worked, the shape of your butt and your ability at witty conversation has far more to do with how fast you advance compared to whether you can actually do your job or not.

      --
      "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
      Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
    17. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by Parandor · · Score: 1

      The perfect worker:incapable of thinking of anything but the job he's concentrating on. Expect these to be mandatory by 2015.

      -Humor-
      In other news, we now count 124 854 victims from serial killers wich though about death and violence right before starting work. At least 120 of these compulsive killers are still at large. We wish to remind our readers that thoughs related to aggresiveness are now a capital crime...
      -/Humor-

    18. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Coffee and the 80-90 hour work week. Already here.

    19. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      That would never work in my line of work... programming. As a matter of fact, all I would like is some amount of time longer than 15 minutes to devote to even thinking about one (and only one) project.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    20. Re:Mental clutter and task obsessiveness? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      I think there's considerably more social stigma associated with declining illegal drug use than there is with the opposite.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  9. This is dangerous by SauroNlord · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We are stepping into a world where intelligence can be bought. Where we can manipulate our own biology to make us stronger and smarter. Will they do drug tests for college/univ students ?

    Is intelligence worth anything? If so, is it fair to give people an advantage because they have money?

    Mark my words, this is a dawn of a new era.

    1. Re:This is dangerous by Legato895 · · Score: 1

      i agree fully. from an evolutionary stand point we're screwing our genetics over giving people what they don't deserve. and as usual, it only goes to the rich instead of the untapped minds of the poor :(

    2. Re:This is dangerous by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's not an evolutionary stand point. That's a eugenics stand point.

      There are giant obvious problems with these drugs, imho likely due to them ignoring the current results of evolution.

      But saying that dumb people should be evolutionary unsuccessful is bullshit eugenics. There's no "should". Evolutionarily successful people are evolutionarily successful. If you want evolution to prove some kind of worthiness of some kind of trait, that's your vanity speaking.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    3. Re:This is dangerous by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      Well here goes my karma

      I am not sure these drugs produce "intelligence".

      Mental acuity maybe, but intelligence? methinks that one is achieved only via hard work and exposure.

      Well.... back to the books

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    4. Re:This is dangerous by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Is intelligence worth anything?

      Intelligence is precisely as valuable as its application; no more, no less. If it's used well, it has worth; if it's used poorly or not at all, then it doesn't. Where it comes from is irrelevant.

      If so, is it fair to give people an advantage because they have money?

      Is it fair to give people an advantage because they can afford a nice car, a business suit, tuition at a prestigious university, blah blah blah?

      The bullshit "good things are bad because the rich can afford it and I can't!" thing is cute the first twenty thousand times or so, but really now, it's old. It's funny how things work; they start out unreachably expensive at first and then become more accessible.

      Provided, at least, that myopic, jealous Luddites don't get them banned or suppressed because they're offended that they can't reap the benefits on day one like someone who has a few more zeroes in their bank account.

      So, what else do you rail against just because some people can benefit from affording it while others can't? Education? Computers? Housing in the good part of town?

      -PS

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    5. Re:This is dangerous by c · · Score: 1
      It's funny how things work; they start out unreachably expensive at first and then become more accessible.

      And in the meantime, the rich people can work out the really nasty bugs.

      c.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    6. Re:This is dangerous by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1
      And in the meantime, the rich people can work out the really nasty bugs.

      I consider this a fringe benefit. ;)

      -PS

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    7. Re:This is dangerous by servognome · · Score: 1

      Mental acuity maybe, but intelligence? methinks that one is achieved only via hard work and exposure
      I agree these probably won't increase "intelligence." But they may be the mental equivalent of steroids. Taking the drugs and staring at the wall won't make you more intelligent. However, drugs may increase how quickly connections are made and how they become more "active."
      Maybe instead of doing 1000 addition drill problems you only have to do 100 to "master" that activity; or they allow you to concentrate or stimulate your brain such that it takes you 5 seconds instead of 20 seconds to solve a problem

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    8. Re:This is dangerous by phasm42 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      But saying that dumb people should be evolutionary unsuccessful is bullshit eugenics. There's no "should". Evolutionarily successful people are evolutionarily successful. If you want evolution to prove some kind of worthiness of some kind of trait, that's your vanity speaking.
      A good point. Suppose you evolved to be so intelligent that you became depressed by the state of the world and killed yourself. Then being dumber would be an evolutionary advantage :-] Or, in a somewhat relevant scenario, we evolve enough to allow one person to create and set off a big bomb that wipes out all complex organisms, and leaves only bacteria. Bacteria win!
      --
      "No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
    9. Re:This is dangerous by phasm42 · · Score: 1

      Price of being an early adopter ;-)

      --
      "No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
    10. Re:This is dangerous by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      Point taken.

      It was only a matter of time before "being smart" would be replaced by "buying" smart.

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    11. Re:This is dangerous by servognome · · Score: 1

      what's wrong with buying smart? We already buy "beautiful"
      Technology is the great equalizer.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    12. Re:This is dangerous by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      Evolutionarily successful people are evolutionarily successful

      Humanity IS evolved. Think of it as a whole. It's not the survival of the INDIVIDUAL, but the survival of the SPECIES.

      From this point of view, mankind is the ultimate success. (We're here, aren't we?)

      However... when we start competing against EACH OTHER, is when things start getting scary.

    13. Re:This is dangerous by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      Technology is the great equalizer

      No. Money is.

    14. Re:This is dangerous by emjoi_gently · · Score: 1

      Getting off topic, but Evolution is all about survival of the Individual.

      Do you do things for the sake of the "Species"? Most of us, no, we don't. We do what's good for ourselves and our immediate family.
      We want our personal traits, genes, to survive and the fate of Everyone Else is of far lesser importance. Competition within the species is the normal way of things.

      As for the Drugs? Eh, Evolution is too slow. We still have these bodies designed for living in the Prehistoric Era. They don't fit Modern Life very well at all. What we do have is enough intelligence to circumvent those limitations, and we have been doing that for hundreds of years. I'd love a Mental Focusing drug.

    15. Re:This is dangerous by emjoi_gently · · Score: 1

      Bacteria already have won.
      Alot more bacteria in the world than Humans.

      Humans, indeed mammals in general are a niche market. We're the iMacs of Life. All cool and sophisticated, but overpriced and outnumbered by simpler systems that do the job just as well.

    16. Re:This is dangerous by anonymous+cowherd+(m · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I, for one, welcome our new rich, buggy overloads.

      --
      http://neokosmos.blogsome.com
    17. Re:This is dangerous by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Provided, at least, that myopic, jealous Luddites don't get them banned or suppressed because they're offended that they can't reap the benefits on day one like someone who has a few more zeroes in their bank account.

      And, of course, that's the only reason anybody could question the safety or utility of "the next big thing".

    18. Re:This is dangerous by ifwm · · Score: 1

      "is it fair to give people an advantage because they have money"

      Because that's not happening right now. Better schools, better health care, better nutrition, and better extra-curricular activities won't help a child be more successful.

      No chicken-little antics please.

    19. Re:This is dangerous by ifwm · · Score: 1

      "outnumbered by simpler systems that do the job just as well" I would argue there are many significant accomplishments of humans that have yet to be approached by ANY other species.

    20. Re:This is dangerous by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      fair to give people an advantage because they have money

      In electronics, if you amplify a good RF signal, you will get a good, amplified RF signal. If you amplify a noisy RF signal, you just get louder noise. People who are already sharp could gain additional focus that they would be able to really *do* something with. A 'norm' would get less of a benefit, and someone reasonably 'challenged' would probably not gain much of anything, maybe they could come up with dumb ideas faster.

    21. Re:This is dangerous by iamatlas · · Score: 1

      You should check out Rawl's theories of Justice. Incredibly insightful and vastly different way of thinking about social obligation from all points of view, but specifically for people who have some sort of inherent gift, such as high inteligence. I can not even attempt to do his work justice by explaining it in so brief a forum here.

    22. Re:This is dangerous by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1
      And, of course, that's the only reason anybody could question the safety or utility of "the next big thing".

      Actually, as often than not it is the main reason people are attacking "the next big thing," at least in the case of things like genetic engineering or civilian access to spaceflight. There's the mindset that if I can't have it, then nobody should, which is ironic considering these people are supposedly attacking other peoples' selfishness.

      A lot of the justifications pay lip service to the precautionary principle and other things - and some people actually mean it and don't wrap it up in "butbutbuttherich!" type language - but at its heart there's a whole lot of sour-graping going on - much like the post I responded to, in which that was the only complaint.

      There's a lot of other silly arguments in favor of proscribing gengineering out there; that's just one of the silliest, up there with "playing God" being considered an actual rebuttal.

      -PS

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    23. Re:This is dangerous by emjoi_gently · · Score: 1

      (though the topic is now long dead)
      As someone else said, Intelligence is just a tool to help the creature survive and breed. And it is very useful... we do rather better than most other higher lifeforms, that we are rapidly making extinct.

      But as far as making sure genes replicate, which is the Meaning of Life, writing Shakespere or putting a man on the moon is neither here nor there.

  10. Sex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm posting this AC because slashdot mods tend to be prudes, but seriously -- I find that sex really opens up my mind and enhances my cognitive abilities (yeah I've seen the Seinfeld episode).

    Studying for your exams and making no progress? Call up your significant other, or make a surprise visit. Single? Get some porn if you're a guy or some of that erotic literature if you're a girl, and you'll be well relaxed and sharper than ever before.

    1. Re:Sex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, it clears your head, but what about the rest of us who get an irresistable urge to smoke a cigarette and zonk out?

    2. Re:Sex by saskboy · · Score: 1

      More likely, the benefit the Parent poster derives from sex is from the post-coitus sleep. If he's like most /. readers, he's a computer programmer, and thus is very sleep deprived from coffee and staying up until 5am to fix bugs or add features.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  11. There's always a price. by Isldeur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You know - of all the things I've learned in medicine and in life in general, there's always a price. The orientals had so much right with their yin and yang idea.

    There was a time a few years ago where I was at this incredible ball/party and had the time of my life - it was such a high. The next day I was strangely a bit mellow and depressed. Perhaps all of the neural cascades that had let me have that high the night earlier were now a bit depleted.

    I have this espresso machine which I love and the drinks give me this lovely little warm feeling inside - but if I drink too many, when the effect is gone I feel cold and tired.

    Same thing for narcotics. We all know about the highs of some of those drugs - which are invariably followed with lows that force people to do anything to spare that.

    O.k., so you take a drug that makes you concentrate a bit better. What happens later? Are you a bit dumber for a while afterwards? I respect Cephalon's attempts to stave Parkinsons' but be careful about other "enhancing" drugs.

    For every action there's always a reaction. Just live a healthy life - eat well and exercise.

    1. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Damn straight. There's a habit that's sometimes seen in the Ivies involving the use of Adderall for studying before finals. Everyone knows the problem is there. I used to use Ritalin from fourth through seventh grade. I quit because it made me twitchy. I suspect Adderall has the same effects, based on a person I know who uses it.

    2. Re:There's always a price. by Hoch · · Score: 2, Funny

      I knew my cat would be smarter than me some day, to make up for all the times he peed on my socks.

      --
      2*31*37*263
    3. Re:There's always a price. by Icephreak1 · · Score: 1

      The orientals had so much right with their yin and yang idea.

      Yin and yang doesn't exist.

      - IP

    4. Re:There's always a price. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      The next day I was strangely a bit mellow and depressed.

      In technical terms, that is called a "hangover".

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:There's always a price. by terrymaster69 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh and Dude, oriental is not the preferred nomenclature...

    6. Re:There's always a price. by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the Ramen noodle people.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    7. Re:There's always a price. by koreth · · Score: 5, Insightful
      For every action there's always a reaction.

      Well, yes, but unlike Newton's Laws, in medicine the reaction is often neither equal nor opposite. Sometimes the price is small compared to the benefit. For example, aspirin can cause an upset stomach in some people -- but it's also been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease. If I were in a high-risk group, I know I'd rather have a grumbling stomach than a malfunctioning heart.

      There is no physical law that requires the aftereffects or side effects of a performance-enhancing drug to be severe in proportion to the benefit. Nor, of course, is there a law that requires them to be mild -- if you're interested in this sort of thing you need to evaluate the risks and benefits on a case-by-case basis and wait for as long as your comfort level dictates to watch for any long-term effects.

      To use one of the article's drugs as an example: for a while I was taking modafinil for a sleep disorder (which I no longer have, happily.) The only negative side effect I found was that if I took it in the morning, my eyes were a bit on the dry side by the end of the day. That's a small price to pay for being awake and alert. Are there other long-term effects that will only appear years after the fact? Maybe, but I'll take my chances.

    8. Re:There's always a price. by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      Just remember that not everyone is healthy, and sometimes the price is small compared to the benefit. Mental illness can be more horrible to the one who's sick than a physical illness. Most of these drugs that try to make you "smarter" or "happier" are designed for those who have imbalances that are making life needlessly hard. I support all research toward mental illness medications.

    9. Re:There's always a price. by eille-la · · Score: 1

      seeing the brain as a complex software made of physical particles, there could be a way not to have the negative side of a temporary or long term of his modification. We just don't know it enough yet to modify it this way.
      But like you say, its true that every complexification of the matter have a price. It cost more energy. Currently the result of us trying to be better cost us not only energy but bad feelings and diverse health problems, because we dosent know enough well how to do it.

    10. Re:There's always a price. by thelandp · · Score: 5, Insightful
      there's always a price

      Not always. Thought experiment: you break your leg, then you're faced with the choice of:
      A. Use typical medical technology to fix it with a cast
      B. Avoid the use of the cast and accept the broken leg. After all, like all medicine, there will probably be "a price" (there will be a monetary cost, but I don't think that's the kind of price you were talking about)

      Just live a healthy life - eat well and exercise
      No offense, but that's a non-specific platitude and sounds like a boring life.

      Like coffee, cognitive enhancements should be treated that same way we treat all things that may be used to ehnance our quality of life - we establish a reasonable level of "moderation" and go with that, always being careful to watch for potential pitfalls. Don't write them off out of hand just because they are new and unfamiliar.

      --

      -- the only thing we have to fear is really scary things
    11. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't eating well and exercising have a price as well?

    12. Re:There's always a price. by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      If this is half as clever as I think it is, that's damn impressive, Icephreak. If on the otherhand, you're just insulting asian culture and stumbled onto a rather amusing sort of pun, well thats even funnier.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    13. Re:There's always a price. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1
      ...establish a reasonable level of "moderation"

      Not me, dude! I take moderation... [flashes surfer sign]

      ... TO THE EXTREME!

    14. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is likely to be the possibility for a long term side effect, especially if the memory enhancing drugs are abused.

      AMPAkines facillitate glutamatergic neurotransmission, which is implicated in excitotoxicity and some forms of neural degeneration. Increasing the AMPA/glutamate transmission must be done with care so as not to shift the equilibrium towards more degeneration. This isn't a necessary side effect, but a possible one.

      There is also the question as to what happens to someone who is using the drugs and stops suddenly, will they be slightly forgetful/retarded. Tolerance arrises when the body downregulates the effects of an exogenous substance to return towards the baseline (pre-exogenous substance level). As this occurs, more drug is needed to achieve the same effect. This occurs with morphine and this occurs with caffeine among other drugs. When you remove the exogenous substance, the body is still in the depressed state and downregulating the responses so that the person may perform sub-par. This provides the possibility of psychological addiction... if you're twice as forgetful after stopping as before starting, you are likely to continue using the drug. ...just a thought... not that people haven't been doing this with caffeine for years.

    15. Re:There's always a price. by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      I was keen on the idea of these kinds of drugs etc when they first came out years ago. But I started thinking: "Evolution would prefer humans to operate at optimal levels. Why then haven't we evolved to make use of this extra potential all of the time?" The answer can only be that there is a price. Under stress we can do amazing things and not just physically, but stress itself is damaging ... endure it long enough and it will kill you. For the brain perhaps there is also a price for operating at a higher level ... more data required I think. br.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    16. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, everyone in China shall now be known as "Asian-American".

    17. Re:There's always a price. by swb · · Score: 1

      I wonder about the long-term physological effects of modafinil use, simply from the perspective of what happens to the mind when you have more awake experiences than is normal.

      For example, if you skipped sleeping for 40 hours per week, would you "age" your brain prematurely? Would you get burned out psychologically on things you found pleasurable?

      There's some interesting psychological ramifications.

    18. Re:There's always a price. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

      The difference is, humans have been widely consuming things like tea, coffee, tobacco, alcohol and certain narcotics for centuries. We're pretty clear on the long-term effects. Even aspirin took nearly a century after Bayer was introduced before it was established how the hell it works, but it had at least 1300 years of use preceding its commercialization. This stuff? We have no idea...

    19. Re:There's always a price. by austad · · Score: 1

      My ex is asian. She'd always catch people saying oriental. Her response was always "Oriental is for rugs and food, not people." :)

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    20. Re:There's always a price. by master_meio · · Score: 0
      You know - of all the things I've learned in medicine and in life in general, there's always a price

      Really? That's so interesting; please- tell us more.

      There was a time a few years ago where I was at this incredible

      ok, you can shut the fuck up now.

    21. Re:There's always a price. by blindbat · · Score: 1

      I think he was saying, "Don't bugger up your leg to begin with." :)

    22. Re:There's always a price. by Prune · · Score: 1

      A Google search will reveal that even with Modafinil you cannot decrease sleep time arbitrarily. I think something like a week was the maximum. Eventually sleep deprivation causes not only psychological problems, but physiological ones, including immune system failure and death in extreme cases (think Nazi experiments).

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    23. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that is a specious analogy. You can't compare a broken leg to the complex interaction of a relatively untested drugs long term side effects with the most complex object in the known universe.

    24. Re:There's always a price. by Jeremi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Her response was always "Oriental is for rugs and food, not people." :)


      Did she explain why? AFAICT the only thing wrong with that word is that it was used by benighted people in the benighted past.... but maybe I am missing something.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    25. Re:There's always a price. by Jeremi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Evolution would prefer humans to operate at optimal levels. Why then haven't we evolved to make use of this extra potential all of the time?" The answer can only be that there is a price.


      That's not necessarily the whole answer.... it could be that until recently (evolutionarily speaking) there wasn't that much more to be gained by being a genius. If your whole life consists of foraging for grubs or subsistence farming, being too smart could even be quite a detriment (you'd be at risk of going crazy from boredom :^)). In the modern world, being smart can be a very big advantage, but of course it's going to take evolution a few hundred generations to catch up... so in the meantime we are stuck in the modern world while inhabiting bodies that are still optimized for the simple life....

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    26. Re:There's always a price. by suyashs · · Score: 1

      It's gotta be one light-ass hangover to be described as 'mellow'....

      --
      http://chrono.posterous.com/
    27. Re:There's always a price. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if smoking pot makes you stupid for some time, should I get smarter afterwards?

    28. Re:There's always a price. by Omestes · · Score: 1

      And now, IMHO, there is even less advantage to 90% of the population for being a genius. I think the ball lies in the average court still. If your a genius you might think "out-of-the-box" (I hate that expression, BTW), which is frowned upon. We need drones, not more original thinkers.

      I think the amount of genius' as compaired to the average joe is a relativly fixed percentage.

      This is evolutionary, as related to culture, because above that percentage, your appeal (income, status) drops, and thus your reproductive appeal.

      And if you notice, stupid people breed more. Which is all that matters. The educated wait longer for children, and have less. I'm using education as a metric for intelligence, which is slightly flawed, but not too much.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    29. Re:There's always a price. by Spurion · · Score: 1

      You're spot on. I always feel a significant comedown the day after a really good party, even though I mostly have nothing more than food and alcohol at a party. And, if you're aware that this is all that is happening, and that it will pass, it makes the low much more tolerable.

      Sometimes you can burn yourself out just by having to deal with lots of people.

      --
      Any sufficiently self-referential snowcloned .sig is indistinguishable from nonsense.
    30. Re:There's always a price. by Icephreak1 · · Score: 1


      Icephreak. If on the otherhand, you're just insulting asian culture and stumbled onto a rather amusing sort of pun, well thats even funnier.

      No insult whatsoever. Dualism can only take a person so far. It's fine for science and philosophy, but outside that sphere, "yin" and "yang" don't exist. You may call it 'hishiryo'.

      - IP

    31. Re:There's always a price. by swb · · Score: 1

      There was an interesting article on modafinil in the New Yorker a year or so ago and what was so surprising to researchers was that it apparently broke a lot of the "rules" regarding lack of sleep; extended duration on it didn't lead to psychosis the way extended periods without sleep on traditional stimulants (amphetimines, cocaine, caffeine, simply being kept awake) and there was no apparent come-down as is associated with stimulants, either -- the people who took it simply went to sleep per normal and woke up without feeling weak or sleep deprived.

      I think at the time the people investigating modafinil weren't willing to go beyond a week's awake time, and had some reservations about what would happen with extended use of it, but by all indications there were none of the obvious problem associated with sleep deprivation -- the people who took it weren't sleep deprived, they just appeared to not *need* sleep.

      Previous studies of sleep deprivation almost don't count with regard to modafinil, since they all rely on psychosis-inducing stimulants or merely forcing people to stay awake through environmental means.

    32. Re:There's always a price. by ponos · · Score: 1
      there's always a price

      Not always. Thought experiment: you break your leg, then you're faced with the choice of: A. Use typical medical technology to fix it with a cast B. Avoid the use of the cast and accept the broken leg. After all, like all medicine, there will probably be "a price" (there will be a monetary cost, but I don't think that's the kind of price you were talking about)

      Funny, but even in this case, you are not completely correct. A cast has some (very low) chances of causing what is known as "compartment syndrome" which may lead to very very serious consequences if left untreated. Several other unwanted effects like muscle atrophy or deep venous thrombosis (with prolonged immobilization) are quite common.

      Choosing whether therapy is appropriate and which therapy is appropriate is a very complex question that involves the scientific skills of the doctor and the wishes of the patient. Generally speaking, one is supposed to trust scientific medicine so you are--in that sense--correct.

      P.

  12. Celebrex? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    Wait, Celebrex? Don't you mean Vioxx?

    --grendel drago

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
    1. Re:Celebrex? by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Vioxx and now Celebrex. The COX-2 inhibitors are revealing additional side effects like heart attack and kidney damage in a couple of studies now. Look, drugs are not benign things despite what marketing campaigns would have you believe and they should not be taken lightly. Apparently 44% of Americans are now on prescription drugs of one sort or another and one might start to wonder when the other shoe is going to drop.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:Celebrex? by dhakbar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Marketing campaigns are required by law to include information about the dangers of taking the drug. I don't think that any amount of butterflies and flowers makes that voice listing the possible side effects seem less insiduous. I don't think that most people take drugs so lightly anymore.

    3. Re:Celebrex? by BlakeLupa · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well it was just on the evening ABC news 40% of arthritis patints take Celebrex while about 5% should. If you really want to understand how the new drugs reach the market read http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pres cription/hazard/independent.html

    4. Re:Celebrex? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In magazine ads for drugs, drug companies are required to print a massive ammount of text, sometimes a whole page, listing side effects and potential problems. With TV ads, sometimes they do mention a couple side effects, usually dry mouth, but at the bottom of the screen they show the text "see our ad in whatever magazine" where they have that full page of text. I've noticed the magazine "Cooking Light" a few times, presumably becaue the full page ad is dirt cheap. Unless you happen to have a copy of this month's Cooking Light in your house, you have no idea what the full list of side effects and complications are.

      If I was in charge, I would get rid of TV perscription drug commercials tomorrow. If you have a real medical problem, go see a trained doctor. If that doctor thinks you need medication, he'll write you a perscription. That's how it worked until just a few years ago. Chris Rock does a brilliant bit about drug ads. He talks about the ads just naming symptoms until they hit on something that rings a bell with you. "Do you get sleepy at night? Do you wake up in the morning? I got that. I'm sick!"

      -B

    5. Re:Celebrex? by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      Drug manufacturers should _not_ be advertising their drugs (unless they are over-the-counter) to the general population. Doctors are there to diagnose your problem and prescribe the correct medication. You have no business going to a doctor and telling him/her what drug you want to take to cure what ailes you, because unless you are a doctor, you probably don't really have a clue. The only people receiving advertising from the drug companies should be doctors and only doctors.

    6. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The flaw with this is also obvious. Many docs do not spend time reading all of the drug adverts that are sent to them. They may work for big medical corps [visual sic] that are pretty slow to update their pharmacopeia, their list of drugs they're able to prescribe.

      Your insurance coverage (or lack thereof) might also affect which drugs get prescribed to you as well.

      Doctors used to be the "front-line" advertising agents for drugs. Ever go to the doctor who has then given you a plentiful handful of whatever drug he wants you to take, instead of writing you a prescrip? Where did he get those freebies?

      Too bad 95% of patients don't know, don't want to know, or are incapable of understanding drugs and their bodies. "Doctor, I don't care about all that. Just give me a pill to make it all better!"

      I think with the Cox-2 inhibitors, there were signs during or just after their clinical trials were finished of these recently disclosed heart problems, but this info was left out of or seriously discounted when reported to the FDA.

    7. Re:Celebrex? by Owndapan · · Score: 1
      This is currently the law in Australia. Pharmas can only advertise direct to doctors. They can provide general information to the general population (such as information on arthritis, followed by a "See your doctor for information"), but even just publically mentioning a product name in relation to advertising can get them in lots of trouble.

      Seems like a good idea to me.

    8. Re:Celebrex? by incom · · Score: 1

      Prescription drugs ads are baned from TV in canada, it's hilarious watching them on american TV when your not as used to them.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    9. Re:Celebrex? by Syriloth · · Score: 1

      The only people receiving advertising from the drug companies should be doctors and only doctors.

      Pharmaceutical companies do spend a tremendous amount of money wooing doctors, of course, and that's a problem in its own right. My father (a doctor) frequently gets invitations from pharmacos to attend whatever ultra-extravagant event they are having in order to "make the doctors aware" of some new pill that they're pushing. He (almost) invariably declines, because he's already aware of new drugs coming out (part of his job, after all) and doesn't want some company spending millions of dollars that could be better used toward research in order to try and make him think that their new chemical is some kind of amazing magic bullet.

      A little bit off topic at this point, but I thought it might be worthwhile to show a side of pharmaceutical advertising that most people don't see.

    10. Re:Celebrex? by bLindmOnkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Chris Rock does a brilliant bit about drug ads. He talks about the ads just naming symptoms until they hit on something that rings a bell with you. "Do you get sleepy at night? Do you wake up in the morning? I got that. I'm sick!"

      Acually it was Greg Giraldo in his stand up acts-not Chris Rock. You can also hear that bit in the song by lazyboy called "Underwear goes inside the pants"

    11. Re:Celebrex? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have no business going to a doctor and telling him/her what drug you want to take to cure what ailes you

      It's my body, I think I do in fact have a right to decide what's going to go into it. And you're seriously overestimating most doctors grasp of pharmacology. It's just one aspect of many, many, things they have to attempt to keep up with. It's not that difficult for someone with even a moderate background in the area who has out of interest in their condition spent time druging through databases to know more about a particular drug, or class of drugs, than a gp.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    12. Re:Celebrex? by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      no one says that you shouldn't have the right to research what the doc is putting in your body. These advertisements give hardly any information that you would find useful.

    13. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, he did mention something to that effect in his Never Scared Comedy Special

    14. Re:Celebrex? by msgregory@earthlink. · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thanks for the link! Here it is linkified: How Independent is the FDA? Karma whoring, of course! :-)

    15. Re:Celebrex? by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Uh.. I should have no say in what goes into my body? Even if my doctor is perfectly informed, he/she can not be perfectly in tune with my priorities. I should be able to take a dangerous drug to enhance my life quality as opposed to making unpleasent lifestyle changes or just tolerating the symptoms that are less physically threatening than the drug. But how many doctors will inform me about that drug unless I heard of it from an advertisement first? How many patients will hear about birth control, day after pill and viagra in religious states?

    16. Re:Celebrex? by Rangataua · · Score: 2, Interesting

      New Zealand and the USA are AFAIK the only two countries that permit advertising of prescription medicine on TV. It would be interesting to compare how these ads have evolved and how they work differently within the health frame work in the two countries.

    17. Re:Celebrex? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you know what the real problem here is?

      doctors are afraid to precribe narcotic pain killers. which, if used as directed, only have constipation as a long-term side effect, and possible addiction.

      and for a cancer patient - who the hell cares if they get addicted to percocet?

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    18. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doctors are pretty liberal with pain killers for terminally ill patients. I don't know where you get your info.

    19. Re:Celebrex? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      not all doctors are liberal with pain killers for terminal patients, or patients that obviously *need* them.

      for example

      specifically, from the article:
      This consensus statement is necessary based on the following facts:

      * Undertreatment of pain is a serious problem in the United States, including pain among patients with chronic conditions and those who are critically ill or near death.
      * Effective pain management is an integral and important aspect of quality medical care, and pain should be treated aggressively.
      * For many patients, opioid analgesics--when used as recommended by established pain management guidelines--are the most effective way to treat their pain, and often the only treatment option that provides significant relief.
      * Because opioids are one of several types of controlled substances that have potential for abuse, they are carefully regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration and other state agencies. For example, a physician must be licensed by State medical authorities and registered with the DEA before prescribing a controlled substance.
      * In spite of regulatory controls, drug abusers obtain these and other prescription medications by diverting them from legitimate channels in several ways, including fraud, theft, forged prescriptions, and via unscrupulous health professionals.

      ----

      so while you may know "good" doctors who use every tool at their disposal in their practice, many, many, many people in the US do not.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    20. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "only have constipation" ... "only" my ass. You've obviously never come off the things after a week, hit the john, and lost 10 pounds. Its probably better than many of the alternatives but "only" is way way too dismissive. see the "nastiest toilet in scotland" scene in Trainspotting.

    21. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think that you seriously over-estimating YOU'RE grasp of pharmacology, unless you are a pharmacist, or possible a biochemist/(engineer).

    22. Re:Celebrex? by Aaron_bootiemd · · Score: 1

      Narcotics are not appropriate for many kinds of pain: musculoskeletal pain, neuropathic pain, inflammatory pain, etc. Ibuprofen, COX-2 inhibitors and Tylenol are better for inflammation, arthritis, etc. Giving people narcotics for these problems is inappropriate and can cause severe side-effects in addition to constipation (which can be severe): urinary retention and mental status changes(especially in the elderly).

      Addiction is not something to take lightly, and is a growing problem -- 8.4% of kids 12-17 have taken pain killers for nonmedical purposes in their lifetime. Just wait until your kid finds that presciption for percocet in the medicine cabinet and starts experimenting with it...

    23. Re:Celebrex? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a biotech background from school. With a few weeks of research, I can pretty consistently find out more about my condition and the most up-to-date treatments than my doctor knows.

      Often, I'm aware of side effects that they don't inform me of, or the drug companies don't inform me of.

      The problem is that doctors get far too much advertising from drug companies already, and they aren't always the most critical consumers of information. Moreover, they're frequently in a hurry, trying to minimize costs because of their relationship with insurers, etc.

      Ultimatly, people are responsible for their own health. If they're dumb about it, that's their own fault. But I'd like to see Pfizer (to give one example) fined for failing to disclose its sponsorship of research that it published in JAMA. (on female sexual dysfunction, when Pfizer makes Viagra)

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    24. Re:Celebrex? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      ...brilliant bit about drug ads.

      Another excelent one was the "Doggie Downers-Puppy Uppers" skit on SNL a long, long time ago.

      --
      What?
    25. Re:Celebrex? by austad · · Score: 1

      That is a great song. I laugh my azz off everytime I hear it. Satellite radio is great.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    26. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's bull. A doctor is a professional, who has been through years of training to be your over glorified drug dealer. The least you can do is give them the respect they diserve.

    27. Re:Celebrex? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      But an advertisement has no business being used as research!

      There are really 3 possibilities here:
      1. The patient is uninformed, and the doctor perscribes whatever he thinks is best
      2. The patient is informed, which necessarily means they've learned about all the different drugs though reputable channels (not advertisements)
      3. The patient says "give me <wonder-drug-du-jour> because the TV says it's good!"
      Now, which of these three possibilities is bad?

      There is absolutely no good reason for there to be perscription drug advertisements, and in fact I believe they are dangerous and should be illegal!
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    28. Re:Celebrex? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      If you have a real medical problem, go see a trained doctor. If that doctor thinks you need medication, he'll write you a perscription.

      Unfortunately, a massive amount of the drug company's marketing campaign is targeted at doctors - they do everything from completely inundating the doctors with propaganda (to the point of keeping the doctor from being able to hold any mindshare about honest sources of information), to almost completely blatant bribery - lots of gifts (tokens of appreciation/samples), meals (for business of course), trips (seminars, honest!). For all but the most conscientous doctors, they can't help but be affected by this marketing blitz.

    29. Re:Celebrex? by suyashs · · Score: 1

      Yep, and there's a ton of free stuff to go along with all the meetings at the Marriot and whatnot (from clocks, to mints, tons of pens, notepads etc. and occasionally something more expensive)

      --
      http://chrono.posterous.com/
    30. Re:Celebrex? by jeremycx · · Score: 1

      Actually, Canada allows TV advertising of prescription drugs as well, but, IIRC, the ads cannot say the name of the drug AND what it does in the same add.

      This leads to some really puzzling TV ads:

      Feeling anxious? Call 1-800-xxx-xxxx to speak to someone about possible treatment.

      (I assume it's the drug company at the other end of the 800 number)

      Very surreal commercials to watch at 4am.

    31. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a real medical problem, go see a trained doctor.

      This used to be sound reasoning, but these days it's less and less appropriate. There is a real problem these days with Doctors staying current with all the new drugs that are being introduced. Doctors are busy people and the sheer number of drugs that have been comming to market is overwhelming for most doctors. Pharmacists do a better job since it's what they do, but they can only really catch interactions with other drugs.

      By advertising on television, drug companies are advertising to consumers to get them to ask their doctors about their drug. But just as much, they are advertising to doctors. Since doctors cannot stay abreast of every drug that is released, they know that more doctors will learn about their drug if the doctors think patients might ask about it.

      Pharma is transforming the medical field. Medicine is radically different today than it was 20 years ago. The tools for managing everything haven't caught up yet. I doubt they ever will on their own. Practices will have to change as well. It's just too much information for anyone to absorb. The solution, as much as people will probably hate to hear this, is likely to be big-brother like databases run by insurance carriers (HMOs/PPOs). When the systems are in place, perscriptions will most likely be non-drug-specific. They will include a diagnosis (some indication code), patient allergies and a list of drugs which aren't acceptable. Then the provider will cross reference this with the patient's file, current prescriptions and their own formulary to determine the correct drug to provide to the patient. Drug interactions will be caught automatically. And the marketing hype will be screened by doctors who's only job is to make decisions on forumlaries and medical equivalence.

      FWIW, I used to work for a PBM and worked with their online prescription fulfillment systems.

    32. Re:Celebrex? by zCyl · · Score: 1

      I have a biotech background from school. With a few weeks of research, I can pretty consistently find out more about my condition and the most up-to-date treatments than my doctor knows.

      Right, but I bet you don't get any of that information from television commercials with people jumping and dancing and singing the name of a pill.

      There's a difference between publishing information for people to look up, and pushing a product.

    33. Re:Celebrex? by dr_d_19 · · Score: 1

      Listen, you have to assume that people can think and take responsibilty for themselves.

      Drug companies makes very good ads. Often, they help governments create good informative campaigns about general health issues (like signs for depression, VDs, etc) as long as they get to stick their cute little logo at the bottom.

      On the other hand, they are also very good at creating needs for something (often enough) not needed at all.

      Still, informing the public about these signs are good. As you say, if they have a real medical issue, they'll go see a doctor (which they perhaps wouldn't if they didn't even know they had a problem!) But that doctor still has to give his/her ok before the patient can get his drug (this is the prescription part). Now, if this doctor doesn't think that this patient needs this particular drug (health benifits vs complications) then they simply shouldn't write the prescription!

      Now, if he or she does, after informing the patient about complications, the responsibiliy lies on the patient. And if they patient still takes the drug and has severe complications, it's the patient and NOT the drug company / doctors fault.

      We are only making people dumber by making the choices for them all the time. And even worse, by creating legislations for this purpose, we are also removing the responsibility part from them, which allows them to sue everyone simply because they couldn't think for themselves.

      If you don't want the government to be Big Brother, then for god's sake, don't make them your mother!

    34. Re:Celebrex? by TechnoLust · · Score: 1

      No, 44% of Americans may be PRESCRIBED prescription drugs, but I can guarentee the number of Americans TAKING prescription drugs is a lot higher.

      --
      "Da ist ein Technölüst in mein Unterpanten!"
    35. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultimatly, people are responsible for their own health. If they're dumb about it, that's their own fault.

      That leads to a slippery slope. I pay a (good) doctor because they have the training and experience to be informed. I don't have the time to become a doctor. Where does the self responsability end? Besides a computer expert, now a doctor, do I need to be a mechanic, a home builder, a certified lawyer, a gardener, ad nausium? We live in a society where we can count on the expertise of others to help us make choices for ourselves. That is the benefit of a society. Your proposal that everyone needs to be an expert about everything that involves themselves, or else 'that's their own fault' does not fit with the way things work.

    36. Re:Celebrex? by aminorex · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you have a real medical problem, you probably shouldn't see a doctor, for at least two reasons:
      (1) You probably can't afford it, and
      (2) There's about a 10% chance he or she will kill you.

      If, on the other hand, you have some minor, trivial, and standardized medical problem, for which any required drugs are long since off-patent, you'll do about equally well with a physician or a nurse practitioner, or looking stuff up on web sites and getting drugs from pakistan.

      When you really need someone with some skill is when you need some cutting done. Especially the
      anesthesiologist. Of course, you still probably can't afford it, and should just die instead,
      but if you're one of those lucky few who make enough money to justify the inevitable massive loss, do, please get the best surgical team money can buy.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    37. Re:Celebrex? by luna69 · · Score: 1

      "Greg Giraldo" may have done a bit about this, but the OP is correct: Chris Rock DID do a number on it. It was aired last year and this, if I remember correctly, on HBO.

      --
      No gods, no demons, and no masters. Secular Humanism!
    38. Re:Celebrex? by MegaFur · · Score: 1

      If I was in charge, I would get ride of TV perscription drug commercials tomorrow.

      Two ways to answer this
      1) That's why you'll never be allowed in charge or
      2) Wrong! You'd set out to try and get things changed, but you'd be headed off either through bribery or coercion. </cynic>

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    39. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Prescription drugs ads are baned from TV in canada, it's hilarious watching them on american TV when your not as used to them

      one implies the other

    40. Re:Celebrex? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      There's also the problem that the list of side effects was generated from clinical trials and observed reactions. If a side effect takes 10 years to develop by someone who's been taking it every day for 10 years, well, you won't see that in the ad until much later.

      Even worse when it's the interaction of two drugs that cause it - perhaps a certain herbal remedy plus the drug. In a way, it's a lot like software - all the various little interactions and changes one does to one's computer makes it almost impossible to know all the possible conflicts and interactions beforehand. Except, this living computer doesn't have a reset button.

    41. Re:Celebrex? by smacktits · · Score: 1

      They are? I recently spent three months in Canada and I distinctly remember seeing adverts for prescription drugs, several times.

    42. Re:Celebrex? by incom · · Score: 1

      That's probably because a few american TV channels are avialable in canada. My cable company provides atleast 10 direct feeds of US channels.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    43. Re:Celebrex? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      there is a huge difference between pain, and PAIN.

      while Tylenol, and other NSAIDS do work on minor pain and reduce inflamation, many surgeries/injuries/psychic pain just wont be touched until you throw Opiates (and Steroids, if there is inflamation) at it.

      doctors should never be afraid to prescribe appropriate medication to their patients, due to overzealous law enforcement (that would be mr. ashcroft - yeh yeh, he resigned).

      the problem lies in dealing with abusers, and pill-seekers. however, i would rather that doctors err on the side of prescribing too many narcotics to people who dont need them, than too few to people who do.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    44. Re:Celebrex? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Actually, Canada allows TV advertising of prescription drugs as well, but, IIRC, the ads cannot say the name of the drug AND what it does in the same ad.
      >
      >This leads to some really puzzling TV ads:
      >
      >Feeling anxious? Call 1-800-xxx-xxxx to speak to someone about possible treatment.
      >
      >(I assume it's the drug company at the other end of the 800 number)
      >
      >Very surreal commercials to watch at 4am.

      Drug company, phone sex operator, really, what's the difference? :)

    45. Re:Celebrex? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      Right, but I bet you don't get any of that information from television commercials with people jumping and dancing and singing the name of a pill.

      Actually, I don't even watch TV any more, but still...

      My response was to the notion that people shouldn't be telling doctors what their treatment should be, and that control should rest entirely in the hands of the medical profession. That kind of passive attitude is not good.

      There's a reason they say that doctors make the worst patients. The medical profession doesn't know how to deal with informed patients.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    46. Re:Celebrex? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      Who suffers the consequences if your doctor screws up. I've known plenty of people who've gotten hurt and haven't filed malpractice suits. One friend got drastically more insulin injected than was good for them while in the hospital and went into a coma. You don't have to double check, but you're the one who suffers if somthing goes wrong. That's what I meant by 'it's your responsibility.'

      Besides a computer expert, now a doctor, do I need to be a mechanic, a home builder, a certified lawyer, a gardener, ad nausium?

      To some degree, yes. You need to be able to critically evaluate information from those sources and go against their reccomendations if they don't match your needs. Just because a gardener tells you that you need a garden doesn't mean that you do. If you fail to do make good decisions, you're the one who gets hurt.

      If you're going in for a procedure where your life is on the line, you should make the time to be informed, get a second opinion, etc.

      Look at it from a legal sense. It's not good for any profession to have too much power. Most decisions should be in the hands of the individual, so long as they can take responsibility for their actions, and unless they choose to give up that responsibility. It's the job of professionals to diagnose the situation, to lay out the options, analyze the costs and the benefits of a decision, and give this information to the client. It's not their job to say 'here, do this because I said so.'

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    47. Re:Celebrex? by ponos · · Score: 1
      Look, drugs are not benign things despite what marketing campaigns would have you believe and they should not be taken lightly. Apparently 44% of Americans are now on prescription drugs of one sort or another and one might start to wonder when the other shoe is going to drop.

      Very well said! I really wonder, do people EVER read the possible side effects of the drugs they are taking? Everyone considers surgery a very serious intervention but very few people actually understand that drugs can also have very important consequences/side effects. Absolutely safe drugs do not exist. (they do exist, in the land of the unicorn, together with absolutely secure computing)

      P.

      P.S. As a side note, the medical community has been aware of the possible risks associated with celecoxib (celebrex) and other anti-inflammatory agents for quite a long time (see for example Lancet 360(9339):1071-3). The list of drugs that can cause renal damage is unbelievably long, for example. However, the question always was (and always is) whether those risks are acceptable for the disease those medicines treat.

    48. Re:Celebrex? by portforward · · Score: 1

      Actually I remember Chris Rock on HBO doing stand-up saying something exactly like that. I don't know that other guy, or who came up with it first, but Rock did say that.

    49. Re:Celebrex? by pikakilla · · Score: 1
      I can vouch for this. The drug reps get paid a great sum of money to go to the local doctors (upwards of 80k when all the benefits are included -- car, health insurance, etc...) and give them lotsa stuff. I never had to pay a dime for school supplies, the drug reps always gave my father pens/pads/notebooks/sacks/calculators/(whatever you want here). Hell, we rarely had to make dinner. The drug reps came by every day and dropped off food.

      The number of samples they give doctors is absolutely gross (think cabnets full), and they dont mind giving you more. With all the samples they give out its amazing that they have the balls to charge as much as they do. However, I never have to pay the horrid drug prices that everyone else does (if i took any drugs) :)

    50. Re:Celebrex? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      Actually, that wasn't a troll, it was sound medical advice.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    51. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's bull. I work with doctors all the time. They're idiots.

      Most of them got into it because it's good money.

    52. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're seriously underestimating his grasp of pharmacology, unless you're a psychic.

      Most likely, you're also seriously overestimating the average doctor's grasp of pharmacology as well. They aren't the gods you seem to think they are.

    53. Re:Celebrex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you DO need to have some knowledge of those other areas before you hire an expert. If you don't, you'd better be really lucky, or you're going to end up with a car that doesn't run right, a house that falls apart, a seriously botched divorce, the ugliest or most toxic yard on the block, ad nauseum.

      We live in a society where we cannot count on our "experts" to be expert, and we have to know enough to verify what they want to do. And to an extent it IS your fault if you don't get the quality of work you hoped for from your "expert".

  13. Oh, YEAH! That's what I'm talkin about!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give it to me, neurons, give it me!

  14. OCD Obsessive compulsive disorder by saskboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm going to bet that regular use does lead to OCD, and perhaps they will find that people with OCD have higher levels of brain chemicals that these drugs enhance.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:OCD Obsessive compulsive disorder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it depends on just what these drugs do. OCD people have higher levels of certain brain chemicals because of physiological chemistry disturbances.
      These drugs could actually do the opposite of OCD after the person has stopped taking them because of the brain's regulation of receptors in relation to neurotransmitter levels. Like what happens to people taking party pills who have warped neurochemistry for months afterwards.

    2. Re:OCD Obsessive compulsive disorder by mutterc · · Score: 1

      My gut feeling is that it would lead to ADD instead, given that the way ADD feels is like having thoughts pinging around the inside of your head, at great speed, all the time.

  15. Drug testing for the SATs ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (probably redundant by now, but I got to try).

  16. schophrenia? by SoSueMe · · Score: 1
    The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness."
    Sounds like some of the symptoms of a serious mental disorder, but 'Oh, wait. We have drugs for that'.
    1. Re:schophrenia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness."

      Sounds like some of the symptoms of a serious mental disorder, but 'Oh, wait. We have drugs for that'.


      Sounds like me when I'm reading slashdot. Oh wait. We have slashdot for that.

  17. Lack thereof... by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I suppose saying that a lack thereof makes me twitchy and irritable is the same thing. So, I second the thought. (Though it's also a great way to just plain procrastinate...)

    --grendel drago

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
    1. Re:Lack thereof... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I suppose saying that a lack thereof makes me twitchy and irritable is the same thing.

      Well, either that or somebody switched your coffee with decaf. My ex-fiancee did that to me once ... "it's for your own good" she said. Things went downhill from there.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  18. I just have to... by MrRuslan · · Score: 1

    Red Bull gives you Wings!!!

    1. Re:I just have to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's commie propaganda, ie Red Bullshit.

  19. Chess by FiReaNGeL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I heard somewhere that caffeine was frowned upon in high-class chess tournaments... will this new discovery get tested for? Brain-doping for chess? :)

    1. Re:Chess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was caffeine frowned upon because of an implied unfair advantage or because it deteriorates performance? For something like chess at that high a level it would seem that caffeine would be a negative influence since one rushed move can cost a game.

    2. Re:Chess by hunterx11 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The chess professionals already have this. The president of FIDE, the world chess federation, wants chess to be an Olympic sport. It is never going to be one. But now the Grandmasters have to submit to drug tests.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
  20. LSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Umm... I already take LSD.

    1. Re:LSD by benna · · Score: 1

      XD

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    2. Re:LSD by saskboy · · Score: 1

      LSD was invented at the University of Saskatchewan, in Saskatoon. It was initially intended for use as a theraputic drug for people suffering from mental illnesses. However, its use as a street narcotic and long lasting bad effects pretty much makes it a bad invention in my opinion.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    3. Re:LSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely. I have taken LSD a number of times, it has increased my intelligence thousands of %. I went in one day from a ratty 16 year old to the Genius I am today :) I haven't stopped learning or thinking clearer since that day. I recommend LSD to anyone. Legalize LSD once again!

    4. Re:LSD by msgregory@earthlink. · · Score: 0

      What are LSD's long lasting bad effects?

    5. Re:LSD by saskboy · · Score: 1

      http://www.bawbag.com/drugs/lsd.php

      There are several sites that say repeat "trips" can occur years later, or the drug can even trigger forms of mental illness. Personally I wouldn't consider using it, any more than I'd consider smoking a cigarette.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    6. Re:LSD by KrugalSausage · · Score: 1

      death

    7. Re:LSD by swb · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't say I've experienced any, but I might not have been a long term enough user to have experienced any.

      I took it recreationally in college, 20 years ago. Freshman year it was a 4-5 times a month drug, sophomore maybe 1-2 times a month, with only maybe a dozen doses the rest of my college years.

      At my peak in my freshman year, I was taking 2-3 hits of blotter (small bits of paper soaked in LSD about 1/8 the size of a stamp) maybe twice a week. The more we took the greater the dose required to really get more than a stimulant-type effect from it.

      I knew a couple of habitual users who took half or quarter hits for the stimulation effect only before a night of heavy drinking. LSD makes you feel immune to liquor's psychological effects. I used to not drink as a rule when taking LSD, although once I did go to a party where the booze was free and drank so much that I could barely walk, despite not feeling drunk at all.

      The effect was generally intense halucinations for about 2-3 hours and tapering off after that depending on dose, unbelievable physical energy (we often walked 10 miles in a night, in any weather), and an intense feeling of really "getting it" and achieving intense understanding which was forgotten once it wore off. A portable dictation machine affirmed the fact that we didn't actually achieve anything beyond the feeling of getting it -- insights were gibberish.

      The downside was "coming down". It'd be 4 in the morning and we'd start to feel physically tired, a little bored, and mainly just wishing it was over. But sleep was hard to come by -- usually you'd doze for 4-5 hours around 5-6 AM and the next day was just shot. I think something like Xanax, Ativan or Valium would have helped. Booze and/or pot really didn't.

      Eventually I grew tired of the 'coming down' part and killing the next day completely. Finding people suitable to take it with was an issue, too. Initiating someone to LSD was a risky issue, as some people tended to get a little overwhelmed by the experience. It's also a pretty serious drug to get caught with -- two people I knew casually got caught with 50 some doses and ended up doing felony jail time. And then there's the whole issue of buying it, dosage, and so on.

      To this day, I have yet to experience a "flashback" or any of the other spooky tales associated with it. I don't have any real problems with focusing or anything else, and a recent MMPI test indicated that other than scoring high on the cynacism index, I don't have any obvious personality problems.

      I wouldn't take it again, though. I think it was enlightening to some extent as a college student, but I think now it would just be stress inducing.

    8. Re:LSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LSD has never been recorded to have caused any brain damage. As for calling it a narcotic... only opiates are considered narcotics. I think it's time you read Erowid.

    9. Re:LSD by zoltamatron · · Score: 1

      I can't find the article right now, but I remember reading something about a study of hallucinogens taken in low doses. The subjects reported a mild euphoria that was associated with greater productivity and creativity at work. The side effects were minimal.

      -z
      --
      Tolerance does not tolerate intolerance, or hypocrisy.
    10. Re:LSD by bhima · · Score: 1
      During college, years ago, I happened to find a quite good source. LSD became my drug of choice for most of my college career. All in all I suppose I've consumed thousands of doses and I can recall a couple of parties where most people there had consumed 50~75 'doses' that night. After finishing college and moving away from the source I found that what's on the street to be a pale imitation and a disappointment, so I gave it up...

      I still have my Ph.D.; I still have a part time job in my field; I don't suffer from "flashbacks", reduced mental capacity, or addiction. In fact I'm really enjoying my early semi-retirement.

      Come to think of it, I've never have met anyone who has suffered any of the problems that LSD has been accused of causing. That's not to say they've never happened, just to say that's it's typical for the FDA to A: Not like recreational drugs and B: not to like a drug that no corporation is making money on.

      Partial Discloser: I work for one the "Big Pharma" companies

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    11. Re:LSD by myke113 · · Score: 1

      HPPD - Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder. It's a real disorder.

      www.hppdonline.com

      Some people who take LSD, never come down all the way, some people aren't affected this way. Nobody knows for sure why this occurs, although there are theories out there...

      --

      -Myke
      myke@compassionatecoalition.org
      http://www.compassionatecoalition.org
  21. Already exist. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    They are derided, in today's cultures, as 'hallucinogens'. Strictly speaking, they're more like exploratory opportunities rather than enhancement. Handled maturely, they're much preferable to stimulants and similar agents.

  22. Overclocking the brain by dillon_rinker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This seems like a useful place to point out an interesting read on Jerry Pournelle's web site on overclocking the brain.

    I don't see a direct connection between the two articles, but perhaps someone more informed about neurochemistry could point one out.

    1. Re:Overclocking the brain by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Looking through the list of Cochrane's possible scenarios, it looks like I'm ahead of the curve.

      D2b. The incomprehensibly smart all convert to Catholicism.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    2. Re:Overclocking the brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow... I'm going to need cognitive enhancement drugs just to be able to read and comprehend that site.

  23. Piracetam by caluml · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have a look on Google for Piracetam. Similar thing. I tried to find out about side effects, but I couldn't find any. Someone I know takes a load before reading a whole set of Cisco coursebooks. It works for him - He's not a CCIE - yet, but he's a CCISP, and all the other ones.

    1. Re:Piracetam by UpnAtom · · Score: 2, Informative

      Piracetam is fantastic stuff.

      In my experience, it will generally do nothing for you. It no direct effect on my memory for example.

      In a stimulating environment however, the frequency and quality of those Eureka moments seems to be massively improved.

      So I only take it during predictably profound learning experiences eg self-improvement seminars.

      I take choline first thing and then 800mg both before the morning & afternoon sessions.

      I tried Aniracetam which is good but more expensive; and Hydergine, which provides a cheap synergistic boost but screws up my nasal breathing. Hence neither worth it. Piracetam is cheap enough.

    2. Re:Piracetam by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      A self-improvement seminar is a place where you predict to have profound learning experiences? Maybe your problem is somewhere hidden in that sentence...

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    3. Re:Piracetam by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Obviously you have some problem with self-improvement seminars.

      Not entirely sure why you wish to impose it on others.

      Since you certainly haven't been to the seminars I've been to, I'm also unsure why you think you're qualified to comment.

    4. Re:Piracetam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a CCIE and things like piracitam/hydergine/DMAE and deprenyl helped me get there in a major way.

      I have been taking these for over 5 years now, back when only med students knew about this stuff. The combination that I mention above act synergisticaly, and the dosage for each person vary widely.

      If you research carefully, you will see that drugs like Modofinil can have some very nasty side effects. I opted to go for the low risk, high reward drugs like I listed.

      The origional "smart drug", or nootropic, was Piracitam. There is no known side effects/contraindications/or even overdose levels (FDA trials had people take over a pound of it with no ill effects). Supposedly the FDA banned it for sale in the US because because it did not do anything. To the contrary, the list of benefits can be found doing a google search.

      Piracitam to this day remains the only true nootropic because of its positive cogitive effects without ANY side effects or risks whatsoever. I have been taking it and other cognitive enhancers for over 5 years now, and can vouch for its effects.

      If you are curious about what these things can do for you, I can give you a summary:

      1. Over time, you can increase your "brainpower" by about 30%. This includes retention, how long you can focus mentally, and mental energy.
      2. A side effect of this enhancement is that everything in your life is enhanced. So if you are unemployed and depressed, these drugs can make it worse. Use with caution. Think of it like a magnifier. If you are obsessive about something, then this can help you become even more obsessive.

      Finally, if you are curious about trying this out, be careful of the source of the drugs you try. There are plenty of low quality vendors out there. I have used LEF (Life Extention Foundation) for years now and can say that their quality is high.
      (www.smartdrugs.com).

      Good luck!

    5. Re:Piracetam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one of these days, you might even learn how to program! (a vcr)

    6. Re:Piracetam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm 43, and have been taking Piracetam (800mg TID) for nearly 3 years. It really makes a difference, and has no side effects for me. I was diagnosed over 15 years ago with ADD (3 separate MD's / 1 a Psychiatrist...I didn't believe them). Still have to take Concerta, but Piracetam is what makes the real difference. So much so that when my quaterly shipment from Britain didn't make it & I ran out, my wife drove me to Laredo from Houston to get it there...she definitely knows when I'm not taking it.

    7. Re:Piracetam by jesdynf · · Score: 1

      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

      If you'd like to tell us why /your/ self-improvement seminars are notably different from the sessions run by trendy scam-artists pitching to the desperate and stupid, you're of course welcome to.

      But if you're not... Well, don't be surprised if nobody leaps to defend your claims of drug-induced synergistic... hell, I can't even tell what you claim they did... whatevers at Stewart Smalley's boot camp.

      As an aside... it seems you're claiming that the drug increases either the frequency or intensity of the sensation of having a good idea. While not directly familiar with them, I'll note that there's lots of things out there that can make you think you just had a really good idea. Many of them come in six-packs.

      --
      Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
    8. Re:Piracetam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone I know takes a load before reading a whole set of Cisco coursebooks.
      For me, I find reading Cisco coursebooks while taking a dump is most effective.

    9. Re:Piracetam by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Showing your prejudices much? ;)

      Yes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I think saying that you can have profound learning experiences in a self-improvement seminar is somewhat less extraordinary than saying you can't!

      And you've still not explained why you think you're qualified to comment.

    10. Re:Piracetam by jesdynf · · Score: 1
      And you've still not explained why you think you're qualified to comment.


      You could've answered that challenge with facts you've known or witnessed, further explaining your changed perceptions. You also could've chosen to explain why self-improvement seminars are valuable, citing even one insight or anecdote concerning them.

      You instead chose to provide... nothing. Answering what could be taken as a question with another question.

      You can't argue that it wasn't worth your time because you chose to reply, and you can't tell me I wouldn't learn anything because this is a public forum; hopefully your valuable insights would be well received by those wiser than I.

      I'm going to have to stick with my original opinion on this one -- that if you've been to enough "self-improvement seminars" to have experimented with and settled on a drug of choice to imbibe during them, that I'm...

      Heck with it. Can you even focus enough to read this far down? I'd lay off the drugs and go see a therapist or something. Go to church. Call your mom -- or your kids, I don't care. Skip your next "seminar" no matter how much the Great One wants you to go.

      --
      Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
  24. Pfft by NetNifty · · Score: 2, Funny

    Screw cognitive drugs, I want drugs that give me pre-cognition!

    1. Re:Pfft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw pre-cognitive drugs, I want drugs for pre-mature ejaculation!

    2. Re:Pfft by themoodykid · · Score: 1

      Well, alls you gotta do is sign up for a hotmail account and you'll be well on your way.

  25. The best drug for cognitive enhancement is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...crack.

  26. modafinil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ordered some generic modafinil from India and decided to experiment. I slept a total of 3 hours in a 60 hour span. My body felt tired but my mind was alert the entire time. Doesn't make you hyper at all. A very odd experience.

    Modafinil is by far the ultimate stimulant for programmers, nightowls, air force pilots, college students, etc...

  27. So now they are making... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    white collar performance drugs?

    1. Re:So now they are making... by conteXXt · · Score: 2, Funny

      They used to call it "coke".

      But then Nancy Reagan messed that all up.

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    2. Re:So now they are making... by DiGG3r · · Score: 1

      it was, but to be politically correct they now call it 'Viagra'

    3. Re:So now they are making... by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      I missed that shift (due to lack of cognitive drug enhancement)

      The difference? They didn't OPENLY advertise coke on tv (ad nauseum).

      Aliens must think Americans are the most impotent people on Earth.

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
  28. Over-the-counter brain supplements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any personal experience with Ginko, Co-enzymeQ, and ...?

  29. Deepness in the Sky by beholder77 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I for one welcome our new Emergent overlords!

    Sorry a bit obscure :)

    --
    Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
    1. Re:Deepness in the Sky by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Dont forget to retune them bimonthly. Imagine the demand for NMR-scanners :)

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:Deepness in the Sky by maelstrom · · Score: 0, Troll

      Shut the fuck up with the "I for one welcome ..." jokes. The fact that this got a 5 interesting is turning me the same color as the awful IT section color scheme.

      Can we start talking about tech again? Or do we have to keep rehashing the same tired jokes? If it doesn't get any better, I'm going to get some god damned grits and pour them down my pants.

      --
      The more you know, the less you understand.
    3. Re:Deepness in the Sky by idlemachine · · Score: 1
      Can we start talking about tech again? Or do we have to keep rehashing the same tired jokes?

      In some ways, these should be (and sometimes, amazingly, even are) shorthand ways for this community to acknowledge/recognise repetitive, pointless arguments and cut them off at the pass. "I for one welcome..." should be the way to defuse the inevitable "But this just leads to mind control!!!!" hyperbole that some avid readers of SF seemingly have to take things to. So many posts constantly ignore the real topic simply to regurgitate a barely related quote...

      Unfortunately, it seems like the in jokes are becoming the conversation here.

      Which begs the question: can anyone recommend a forum where these issues are being seriously discussed? Preferably one where the participants are willingly to admit that they just might not be the ultimate fucking authority on everything. There's only so many "I'm comfortably mired in 1960s technology, I don't understand what your problem is" responses I can take.

    4. Re:Deepness in the Sky by karnal · · Score: 1

      Which begs the question:

      Oh, I've got you now.... you're just trying to hook someone into telling us all WHY begging the question isn't actually what you meant....

      You're a sneaky one!!!

      --
      Karnal
    5. Re:Deepness in the Sky by leftie · · Score: 1

      I for one welcome out grits in pants wearing overlords

    6. Re:Deepness in the Sky by idlemachine · · Score: 1

      Just swallow the goddamn pill.

    7. Re:Deepness in the Sky by beholder77 · · Score: 1

      Appologies. This is my first, and only "I for one..." joke. I agree with you entirely I get bored of the rehashed jokes, especially when they're well beyond their time.

      But this time I thought it actually made sense. The Emergents were overlords in every sense of the word, and any Ziphead slave ("refocused" individuals who have their lives turned into a human computing service... much like we are with Technology) did welcome them with open arms. To those who read the book, it might have been a bit more funny.

      --
      Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
    8. Re:Deepness in the Sky by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Wow - I just finished reading that last night. If I concentrate on it long enough, maybe I can see the causal relationship between my nightstand and Slashdot's front page.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  30. Super-Ritalin by juan2074 · · Score: 1

    This sounds more like 'Super-Ritalin'.

  31. Re:bawls is for fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can get bawls in wawa around here.

  32. wait 10 years and 10 million doses by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think I'll let others be the guinea pigs. Even after clinic trials (which only involve a few thousand people watched for only a year or so) doctors only have the barest of clues as to the effects and side-effects of a drug. It takes a long time, a bunch of studies, and a serious sample size to uncover the more subtle, rare-but-serious and long-term impacts of a medication.

    No short-term trial can prove a drug is truly safe and efficacious. Until much, much, more data is in, I think I'll wait.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think I'll let others be the guinea pigs. Even after clinic trials...

      It will be too late, you'll be looking for a new job after being replaced by someone with an IQ of 345 who finished all of your projects while waiting to be interviewed.

      The drug will probably cost $2000 a month, so its unlikely you'd be able to afford it on unemployment in order to catch up.

    2. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      now THAT'S funny (but eerily foreboding)

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    3. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by fatcat1111 · · Score: 1

      This is especially true given that the non-doped mind has millions of years of "trials".

      --
      How Politicians Lie: http://www.factcheck.org/
    4. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Curiously, that's pretty much how I feel about GE food. But everybody keeps trying to assure me it is safe and labelling their products as modified is a huge waste of money. *shrug*

    5. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by DustMagnet · · Score: 1
      No short-term trial can prove a drug is truly safe and efficacious. Until much, much, more data is in, I think I'll wait.

      While I don't have much hope for these drugs, since know too little about the brain to really understand what we are doing. We're learning more at an accelerating rate. Someday, probably earlier than 10 years from now, there will be such drugs (or cyber systems, whatever) and those that refuse them may find themselves second class citizens. What price are you willing to pay to stay "clean"?

      --
      'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
    6. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I agree. I have memories of the recent trials of anti-arthritis drugs have been cut short without a proper explaination as to why. The only reason this is widely known is because of the side-effects of Vioxx and such.

    7. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, wait till the "task obsessiveness" hits and he makes those twisty nail-type puzzles out of an entire box of staples and then proceeds to back up the computers harddrive to Post-it notes.

      You'll be back to getting paid to moisten your seat and read /. all day in no time.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    8. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by sl956 · · Score: 1

      wait 10 years and 10 million doses
      For Modafinil, we are almost there!

      The other ones may be new (i don't know) but Modafinil is a very old story :
      • in France, it was approved by the french equivalent of the FDA back in 1992.
      • in the USA it was approved by the FDA for the treatment of narcolepsy in 1998.
      I posted some informations about it on /. some years ago. If I may quote myself for your convenience :

      [swb(14022) wrote:] I forget what it's called
      You're probably refering to Modafinil (2-[(diphenylmethyl)sulfinyl]acetamide) or Adrafinil (2-[(diphenylmethyl)sulfinyl]acetohydroxamic acid). The brand names are Provigil, Olmifon or Modiolal. Beside narcolepsy, it is recommended for elderly patients who have difficulty staying alert. It has also been tested in various armed forces... and by some athletes (it's on the list of prohibited substances in anti-doping tests).
      It's not an amphetimine or a stimulant, but when you take apparently you just don't get tired.
      I'm not so sure that it's not a stimulant: The precise mechanism(s) through which it promotes wakefulness is unknown. What is certain is that it does not work like amphetamines (no dopaminergic activity.)
      From what I've read the side effects of the drug are virtually non-existant
      From what I've tried there are side effects (not always but sometimes). The most commons are headache, nervousness, and anxiety. A less common side effect is insomnia (often due to combination with alcohol). Insomnia is an adverse side effect because modafinil does not normaly prevent sleep: if you want to stay awake you're not tired, but if you want to sleep you fall asleep without problem.
      Anwyay, I think it'd be an interesting drug to have since it would effectively increase your free time.
      Never tried it that way. I only use it to meet schedule when a project is so late that coffee isn't enough.
      I wonder what the side effect of effectively experiencing 25% more free time would be over a few years
      Probably debts. Don't forget that these drugs are expensive (no generic yet). Count $30 per sleepless night if you've got a medical prescription and $100 per night if you buy it through the grey market.
    9. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll be sure to telegram the study results to your log cabin. Be sure to keep the tickertape away from your candle.

    10. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Jeremi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just out of curiosity, are there any documented cases of people being harmed by eating genetically engineered foods?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    11. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by 1_interest_1 · · Score: 1

      Oh quit your fucking bitching and moaning.

    12. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      I know of at least 1 well documented medical risk to humans from a gene-engineered food, if you count a dietary supplement and not just whole foods.

      http://www.nd.edu/~chem191/d3.html/

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    13. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      Thats exactly why I'm waiting for the dust to settle on this whole "Anesthetic" thing. They don't even know how the hell it works.

    14. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Piracetam has been tested for about 40 years with no side effects.

    15. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by zoeblade · · Score: 1

      I think I'll let others be the guinea pigs. Even after clinic trials (which only involve a few thousand people watched for only a year or so) doctors only have the barest of clues as to the effects and side-effects of a drug.

      Aren't these things tested on non-human animals first? There's this quote about how the reason scientists morally justify testing on animals is because they're not like humans, and the reason they claim to need to do it is because they are like humans. Wasn't tobacco allowed to be sold because it didn't appear to harm rats or something?

      I think I'll wait as well!

    16. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well what is it man?

    17. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Who knew that at ten years your eyes fell out?"
      -Stupid Flanders

    18. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by mutterc · · Score: 1

      This is especially true with brain chemistry - it's somewhat of a black art, and everyone's is different. This means that, even for something as relatively "simple" as antidepressants, a doctor typically has to fiddle around with drugs and dosages before finding out what works for a particular patient.

    19. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by danila · · Score: 1

      Duh! It causes 404 errors in non-GE humans. :)

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    20. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      The link originally went to a story about a Gene-Engineered bacterium that produced massive amounts of Tryptophan. Tryptophan harvested from this source and marketed as a dietary supplement killed at least 37 people (Note: some sites give this number as 27, some as 37, 37 appears to be the right figure) and made hundreds more ill and may still be contributing to premature deaths on the parts of hundreds more.
      I'm sorry the first reference got removed. Here's another one. If it gets taken down too, please try Googling for either "Tryptophan Fatalities" or "Gene Engineered Food Deaths" and see if you get some hits.

      http://www.neuro.wustl.edu/neuromuscular/mother/my otox.htm/

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    21. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by danila · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you ever use the preview function. And if you do, whether you also try clicking on links you post...

      In any case, I also read that the reason for these fatalities was that "with the higher tryptophan concentration in the culture medium, the purification process had also been streamlined to reduce costs, and a purification step that used charcoal absorption to remove impurities had been omitted. This allowed another bacterial metabolite through the purification, and this contaminant of the end-product had been responsible for the toxic effects".

      I fail to see how it can be called a "well documented medical risk to humans from a gene-engineered food". If this is the worst story GE-haters can dig up, I would require that from now on all food and drugs I consume be genetically engineered.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    22. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Thats exactly why I'm waiting for the dust to settle on this whole "Anesthetic" thing. They don't even know how the hell it works.

      Haven't you heard? - it works by forcing your soul to leave your body. No soul, no pain.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    23. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      Some Starlink corn wound up being made into supermarket burrito shells. Starlink was engineered to make its own pesticide and was intended only for animal feed and non-food uses. The problem was that it looks just like regular corn.

      Now the stuff didn't turn out to be seriously poisonous to humans but it was nonetheless not intended to enter the food supply.

    24. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      1. I used the preview function. I tested it again after I posted it. It worked then. Sorry it quit, but your remarks are uncalled for. I appologized once already. That you can't accept it is your loss, not mine.
      2. If you want to go check a few of the sites Perhaps starting with ones linked to Governments and Major Universities instead of Nutritional Supplement Distributers , you'll find that the claim that the purification step's being ommitted was the cause of the fatalities was proposed by the company at fault, and is hotly debated by any number of sources.
      Here's the link for an editorial which is part of the Mayo Clinic Proceedings:

      http://www.nemsn.org/Articles/editorial.htm

      You might want to read the multiple parts where the nature of the "contaminant" is contested, where it is revealed that there were multiple possible contaminants, with a minimum of two, and the section mentioning that the actual cause may actually be a third or even higher numbered substance unique to the particular process and unidentifiable by tests capable of detecting all the contaminants known to be produceable by non-GE synthesis of Tryptophan.
      Of course, that's just the Mayo Clinic. If some manufacturer of L-Tryptophan wants to claim that it was just a missing purification step that was responsible and they should be allowed to resume manufacture, I'm sure we should take their word over the Mayo Clinic.
      The FDA itself has since gone on record as refuseing to liscence any process for making GE L-Tryptophan, regardless of the number of tests and filtration system designs proposed by the companies to assure purity. That's in addition to a general ban on marketing it as a supplement even if made from natural sources.
      Of course the same sites that tell you it was just a corner cutting problem will also tell you how the FDA is just doing this to support the American Psychiatric Industry in its drive to get everyone hooked on Prozac.
      So, criticize my professionalism, then call me a GE Hater. Pass on what you've read without linking. Why risk revealing the extensive biases possibly inherent in your sources?

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    25. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      I hate to reply to my own post, but I went back and checked the earlier links again:

      FYI, Slashdot has a tendency to sometimes insert spaces into long URLS. This makes them invalid. I didn't put the space between my and otox, the system did. People who aren't clueless newbees know about this fault, and when it shows up, cut and paste to get a valid link.

      http://www.neuro.wustl.edu/neuromuscular/mother/my otox.htm

      What you see above just worked for me when tested in preview mode. If it quits working, cut and paste it, or quit yer bitchin.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    26. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by danila · · Score: 1

      Sorry it quit, but your remarks are uncalled for.
      Don't take it personally. It's just that you added a slash to the end of working links (and they end with with the filename) making them both invalid. If you clicked on them in preview, they shouldn't have worked. And I know about spaces on Slashdot. It's you who don't know where you can add slashes, but I am not implying that you are a clueless newbie. :)

      In regards to the rest of your post, that sounds reasonable. But even though I don't know the truth in the Tryptophan case, I tend to be very suspect of psychotic behaviour, such that was exhibited by the FDA (according to you). If Tryptophan is bad for you, why does it matter whether it was GE? If it's good, but could contain contaminants, why that stubborn refusal, even if good filtering schemes are proposed? I still fail to see that as well-documented evidence that genetic engineering was at fault.

      I am very much willing to accept that GE can, in principle, cause problems. It's just that I don't see it as likely and don't realise why normal rules should not apply. I don't see why an FDA testing and approval process that works with normal drugs should fail with a GE drug. I don't understand why we consider food companies capable of handling various dangerous chemicals in making our daily meals, but incapable of exercising some due caution in making GE products.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    27. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by LordMyren · · Score: 1

      thank god i'm young enough to let the boomer generation gladly pioneer yet another round of drugs for me and my friends.

      way to take one for science boomers. /duck
      Myren

    28. Re:wait 10 years and 10 million doses by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      I'd like to know where the slashes after filenames come from as well, but I'm not big on delving into the slashcode or whatever. I'll probably get modded flamebait for saying this, but just offhand it looks like I can cut and paste urls to slashdot without them in Mozilla (1.7.3) even if I paste from tabbed browsing only, and yet it may be screwing up that way in Firefox (that's on the wife's computer - I'm gonna have to ask her just what she put on there). I'm stuck on this problem - it seems incredibly unlikely that I went back and somehow added a slash after the link worked in testing, not just once but twice, but I can't reproduce the behavior reliably either so maybe I had an extended brain cramp.

      I'll grant you that the FDA seemed to be getting stubborn about not allowing l-tryptophan back on the market at all by about 2000 AD. I suspect offhand they weren't originally that stubborn in the late 90's.
      It looks (IMHO) like a particular response to the industry that pushed to market it in the first place. When problems showed up, some of those companies were both rather uncooperative, and got impatient with the pace of government investigations that they were slowing down. They started doing their own press releases and such which didn't always quote the other parties involved (both the FDA, and outside witnesses) accurately. I can't agree with your assessment of the FDA's behavior, because I don't think they started out distrustful and paranoid so much as reacted their way into it. Our individual experiences with government may make either viewpoint there rational from our own perspectives.
      As just one example, the FDA didn't have any reason to think that good filtering schemes were being proposed. All those proposals started with the assumption that the contaminants were all known, and in fact were really limited to just one well known contaminant, If that assumption were true, then both existing testing and existing filtering methods would be effective. Meanwhile, other advisors were stressing that there was a good possibilty of two or more contaminants, and noting that one of the likely suspects was only detectable by a relatively new test (invented 7 years before in 1991, but not tested to see how it would scale up to industrial size operations).

      Some of the more speculative ideas floated were that there could be more (maybe a lot more) than two related chemicals, or that the ones found by tests might be only the more complex variants on a simpler common molecule, and that base molecule (or maybe some variants) might be small enough that the standard processes either wouldn't detect or wouldn't filter it/them.
      One reason for this speculation that makes it more than just anti-industry alarmism is that materials grown in a bacterium just generally seem to show more varieties of end product than ones made in a reaction vessel.
      In living creatures, some chemical reactions that are statistically ultra-rare (due largely to time/energy constraints), become common, because they are mediated by enzymes that make the reaction happen literally billions of times faster than normal. Since some other enzymatic processes don't proceed at nearly such accellerated rates, intermediate products that are normally rare because the next step in the synthesis chain is an easy one (so they don't normally linger long) can also become 'disproportionately' common - if the bacterium is harvested at the right stage in its metabolism of the end product.
      Cells that naturally evolve to produce a chemical from a really fast enzyme also naturally evolve mechanisms for preventing the reaction heat for an exothermic process from damaging things internally. Without that, bacteria could easily kill themselves off prematurely making the finished product in exceptional amounts, and die with some large amounts of a particular intermediate stage compound still tied up in their internals. Scientists might observe that the GE cells lifespans were shorter without

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  33. I can't help but think of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  34. we've been able to buy "intelligence" for millenia by davidwr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While mind-enhancing drugs are novel, mind-enhancing diets and mind-enhancing environments have been the privilage of the well-to-do since time began.

    The privilaged generally eat better than the unprivilaged. They generally have less exposure to environmental toxins. They generally have a more education-centric environment growing up.

    Even measurements of mental ability can be manipulated by "teaching the test" or "teaching to the test." Someone with a "un-coached" SAT score of 1150 may score 1170 if they've been coached on how to take the test or if their parents or teachers focused on items likely to be on that particular test at the expense of other material.

    All in all, if your parents have the means, you are more likely to have a better raw iq, possibly an enhanced measured intelligence, and a better education than someone whose parents are not of means.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  35. Wrong focus by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    This isn't all that helpful. What I want is some way to spend more of my time awake, instead of wasting 8 hours a day sleeping. Why don't these companies work on that problem instead?

    And no, caffeine is not the answer for this.

    1. Re:Wrong focus by atheos · · Score: 1

      This isn't all that helpful. What I want is some way to spend more of my time awake, instead of wasting 8 hours a day sleeping. Why don't these companies work on that problem instead?

      And no, caffeine is not the answer for this.


      No, but crystal meth sure will do the trick
    2. Re:Wrong focus by rpbailey1642 · · Score: 1

      I spent an entire summer on a polyphasic sleep cycle and I suffered no adverse effects. I managed to whittle myself down to an hour of sleep a day (5.75 hours awake, 15 minutes asleep) and I did not end up going insane. The most important thing is to keep yourself busy. I spent my time in a well-lit room reading almost constantly. Your mileage may vary.

  36. Reminds me of Xenocide by Flower · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With Qiang Zao and her line tracing. Immensely intelligent but just psychologically handicapped enough so as never to be a real threat.

    --
    I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
  37. amp up by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My PC isn't fast enough. I'll enhance it's electrical affinity by plugging it from the 110V socket into this 220V transformer! And my software isn't doing what I want: it's got too many 1s, and not enough zeros... I'll just enhance it with this hex editor...

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:amp up by whiny · · Score: 1

      Agreed. At our current level of understanding of the brain, pumping up the rate of one or two of its underlying chemical reactions is manipulation on an extremely course scale. May as well pound on a precision timepiece with a hammer. It's no surprise this "research" is being conducted by scientists who are whoring themselves to the military.

    2. Re:amp up by incom · · Score: 1

      That's a good sumation of modern clinical psychology.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    3. Re:amp up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My PC isn't fast enough. I'll enhance it's electrical affinity by plugging it from the 110V socket into this 220V transformer! And my software isn't doing what I want: it's got too many 1s, and not enough zeros... I'll just enhance it with this hex editor...

      Oh, come on! Everyone knows that PCs are very complex devices. The human brain is very simple in comparison, and scientists already understand how it works completely: basically seratonin and dopamine make you happy, nothing more to it. Have you ever seen the insides of one? It's all just wet gray goo. You should keep up with the mainstream press, where they report all the latests findings of the scientists who really want to know how the brain works and aren't at all interested in simplistic explanations over lingering unknowns.

  38. Re:bawls is for fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, I withdraw my harsh comments, then. Please forgive me.

  39. Evoked Potential Multimedia Biofeedback by Baldrson · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Something I've wondered about is whether the evoked potential correlation with general intelligence could be used to enhance intelligence.

    The way it would work is this:

    A neural network is set up to control a audio-visual environment. You dynamically measure IQ via the proxy of the (highly correlated) evoked potential response of the subject and backpropagate an error signal through the multimedia neural net inversely proportional to the dynamic IQ of the subject.

    Simple in concept. With a little luck we'd have people whose brains had been stimulated to a high IQ state without ending up with something like the lawnmowerman taking over slashdot.

  40. The Establishment won't let this happen... by commieboyredux · · Score: 1

    It upsets the balance between the Alphas and Betas!

  41. I just can't resist by macdaddy · · Score: 0, Troll
    "The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or 'task-obsessiveness' ."

    You mean it will make me think like a woman?!

    Sorry, I couldn't resist. No offense to all you lovely geek ladys out there.

    1. Re:I just can't resist by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1
      Well it is supposed to make you smarter;-)

      I couldn't resist the opening you left when you couldn't resist;-)

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    2. Re:I just can't resist by macdaddy · · Score: 1

      LOL! Good one. I missed that hole in the theory. ;-) I've known some pretty damned smart women in my time too.

    3. Re:I just can't resist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...yeah, the ones who turned you down!

      (ba-dam-BOOM!)

    4. Re:I just can't resist by macdaddy · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you know it. Something that's funnier than hell (all my friends have laughed their asses off at it) gets modded "troll" by of course a troll for a moderator. Go figure.

  42. I've been using donepezil by Sooner+Boomer · · Score: 1

    I've been using donepezil (Aricept) for about the past year. I've definitly noticed an increase in mental function. It doesn't give a buzz or put me on edge like caffine or other stimulants. There was the study mentioned in the article. I took a copy of the study to my doctor, and, after some discussion, he has been giving me samples of the drug he gets for free. I haven't noticed any side effects, just increased memory and mental acuity. It's worth talking to your doctor about to see if he'll agree to let you try it out too.

    --
    Chaos maximizes locally around me.
    1. Re:I've been using donepezil by narcc · · Score: 1

      Is a perscription necessary?

    2. Re:I've been using donepezil by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you really feel that way?

      Perhaps you are under the influence of DRUGS and are not cognisant of your true reality?

      Sounds like a great scam to me. Drugs that tell the user they are smarter than everyone else.

      mmm never mind.

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    3. Re:I've been using donepezil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PREscription. A prescription is written by a prescriber.

  43. EA Games by Weyoun · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder how long it will be before EA starts slipping these drugs into the curly fries at the company cafeteria. Why should employees be allowed to sleep when we can reprogram them not to need it?

  44. All I am is my brain... by nickgrieve · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My brain is the seat of my consciousness, my consciousness is all that "I" am. It is a very fragile thing, a hard knock to my head will destroy it. Where as my body is in comparison substantially robust, it can survive limbs being broken, and flesh torn apart... but it is not "me", it is my vehicle. It exerts a great deal of control over my brain/consciousness, as all it cares for is its own reproduction... I fight with it every day, as a parent fights the child at only wants to eat candy...

    Given this (personal) view who and what I am, I am very very careful of looking after of my brain, for it is all I am. I have done drugs, I have found their effects on my consciousness somewhat,.. novel... but I don't trust that we know enough to mess with the underlying substrate of what makes Me. A small injury to my frontal lobe can turn into OCD. These Cognitive "enhancement" drugs may sound like overclocking your brain to some... but how many key rings have been made from CPUs by over enthusiastic overclockers...

    I will leave this stuff to the psyconauts... if that are happy, smart and enjoying there new consciousness at the age of 80... then fine... but I know that the default configuration of my brain is tried and tested over 100,000s of years... I know it will still be (with good care of my body that feeds it) in good working order until my body packs it in from cancer/heart disease, what have you...

    2c

    1. Re:All I am is my brain... by extra+the+woos · · Score: 1

      psyconauts... these people aren't the psyconauts... these people are the ones who want an easy way out, a way to make themselves smarter with no effort, a way to make all the mindless jobs bearable. (can't really blame them for the latter)

      A psyconaut is one who explores their own mind, with meditation or psychedelic drugs like mushrooms, seeking greater understand about how their brain functions. Sort of like taking the case off your computer and looking at the parts :) Not overclocking it to get free performance ;p

      --
      replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
    2. Re:All I am is my brain... by nickgrieve · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected...

    3. Re:All I am is my brain... by zuzulo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Unfortunately, under the hood your brain changes in fairly profound ways in both the short and long terms - the underlying neurophysiology is quite a bit more flexible than most folks realize. Dendritic growth, atrophy of unused sectors, retasking existing sectors toward processing other sensory inputs and outputs or adjusting for damage, there are literally hundreds of examples of ways in which the brain changes fairly seriously as a result of 'normal' functioning.

      Now, the link between brain and mind, that is the link between the underlying physical structures and changes in those structures and resulting changes to your identity or what it is 'you' are, is very poorly understood. In fact I would venture to guess that this remains one of the things humans understand *least*. Despite a great deal of effort.

      However, you should get comfortable with the fact that both the brain and the mind change in fairly serious ways on a regular and continuing basis.

      So it might make more sense to think of your consciousness as like a river. The river remains the same even though the water is different and the details have all changed. As they say, you cannot step in the same river twice, and in the same vein 'you' are only the same 'you' as yesterday or last year in some fairly abstract sense.

      As far as your brain being in good working order until your body packs it in, you may not be familiar with senile dementia, alzheimers, and a host of other mental illnesses associated with aging and brain or mind dysfunction. So in general there are no guarantees - your body could give out first, or your brain, or your mind, or all of them could give out together. In fact one of the main things pushing development of these classes of drugs is attempting to ameliorate the mental effects of aging - its all about delayed senescence both physically and mentally, and in many cases the fact that these drugs potentially enhance function in younger patients is a side effect when the goal is really to maintain function during the aging process.

      You see, the enhancement market is a small one for many of the reasons you state, but the market for drugs which delay the mental effects of aging is *huge*.

      What will you do when you feel your brain aging, especially since it seems your specific sense of self as related above is so clearly tied to how your brain functions? I suspect that you might quickly reevaluate your position on 'natural' brain function when you feel your mind start to go ... even if it is 'natural' ...

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    4. Re:All I am is my brain... by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      My brain is the seat of my consciousness, my consciousness is all that "I" am. It is a very fragile thing, a hard knock to my head will destroy it. Where as my body is in comparison substantially robust, it can survive limbs being broken, and flesh torn apart... but it is not "me"

      It's not that simple.

      Your "body" has glands, that act with your brain. And you might not know this, but liver injuries/illnesses can make you blind.

      I had a friend who liked to say that the brain isn't the body's master, the brain is slave to the liver, and only a tool to get the true master, the liver the food it wants.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    5. Re:All I am is my brain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And you might not know this, but liver injuries/illnesses can make you blind.
      You can knock someone out with a liver punch too... maybe not unconscious but you can immobilize 'em.
    6. Re:All I am is my brain... by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > I had a friend who liked to say that the brain isn't the body's master, the brain is slave to the liver, and only a tool to get the true master, the liver the food it wants.

      And lo, the two shall be forever locked in conflict. The enslaved brain rebels by obeying the liver's tyrannical dictates to the letter: by consuming precisely that which causes the liver the most pain.

      I must drink beer. Beer is the liverkiller.

  45. Re:bawls is for fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i bet you shop at thinkgeek you faggot, go jack off while wearing your binary watch before you cry yourself to sleep in your tux blanket

    It sounds to me like a certain anon poster has extensive knowledge of the Thinkgeek website.

  46. Piracetam: thumbs up, Modafinil: thumbs down by currivan · · Score: 1

    Piracetam (and variants like Aniracetam) were pleasant for me. I'm not sure if they really boost IQ or anything similar, but they do give the impression that they help both focus and creativity. Not by an incredible amount, but worth trying.

    Hydergine is another along the same lines, but I could only take half a pill without upsetting my stomach. It's supposed to work well with Piracetam, and that's consistent with my experience.

    Modifinil was awful. It recreated the experience of insomnia even when I hadn't been up very long. It certainly didn't make me feel like I didn't need sleep, just like I couldn't sleep.

    1. Re:Piracetam: thumbs up, Modafinil: thumbs down by jacksonwest · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have pretty wide experience with stimulants (and depressants, mucle relaxants, opiates, cannibinoids, etc.) and I found modafinil, AKA Provigil, to be a nice, long, peppy buzz with a relatively mild comedown-depressive effect. I still prefer methylphenidate because of the stronger buzz and shorter-term effects. It's interesting to note that the IOC recently banned it as a performance-enhancing stimulant, and Victor Conte of BALCO has accused Marion Jones of being a user. It's definitely something I prefer to take in the morning or with lunch, though, as the effects last six to eight hours and are not easily overcome by taking depressants (alcohol, marijuana) to counterindicate the effects.

    2. Re:Piracetam: thumbs up, Modafinil: thumbs down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've tried several different combinations of the so called "smart drugs/nootropics"...origionally I was researching about them to help my grandmother who was failing from advanced dementia....though found several relations to them being used to treat depression too...they work...well for me at least...never tried Modifinil.....though it's weaker sister drug andranifil works quite well....I was most pleased...nice for once in a while useage...ie..long drives or studying binges....always mixed and matched....none of the drugs on their own seem to have any single boosting effect....have to combine.

  47. LSD by narcc · · Score: 2

    Expand your mind, man!

  48. It's called beer by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 2, Funny

    They've already developed a mind enhancing drug, and it's called beer. It helps me understand women with precise clarity, something that I can't do when I'm totally sober and supposedly "thinking straight".

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:It's called beer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it all works fine until you put on the "goggles", and realize the mistake you made the next morning...

    2. Re:It's called beer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:It's called beer by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      its interesting to note that beer can turn some people into dynamic sociable party monsters and others into withdrawn violent antisocials. If you are going to play with your brain take care to keep an eye on the effects it has on you. Chemical stimulation does not have the same affect on different people. Someone mentioned yin and yang earlier on in the thread, a sense of balance is a usefull touchstone.

      Mind you catnip seems to do it for cats.... any cat...

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    4. Re:It's called beer by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

      "Alcohol, by releasing at large primeval instincts and leveling ranking potentials, eases sexual intimacy, thus increasing the chance for low ranking people, however negative consequences of alcohol consumption are widely known. Since instinctive sexual selection does not know anything about alcoholism, symptoms of alcohol abuse do not hamper subconscious preference of the potential partner. "

      The Treatise of Love

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    5. Re:It's called beer by zCyl · · Score: 1

      They've already developed a mind enhancing drug, and it's called beer. It helps me understand women with precise clarity

      That's probably a unidirectional effect...

  49. Re:cannabis by benna · · Score: 4, Insightful

    agreed. I've been alot more insightful since I started smoking weed, even when I'm not high.

    --
    "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  50. Been there by Keighvin · · Score: 1

    I've been on Modafanil before (market name Provigil) to counter narcolepsy - and never saw a marked effect. YMMV, but it would seem to me that drugs targetted toward the relief of some deficiency may not provide the desired effects when used for purposes of enhancement.

    To point (though abused in context), hearing aids can interfere significantly with the hearing of a non-impared individual rather than granting super-human capability.

    --
    Any spoon would be too big.
  51. Short/long term by anethema · · Score: 1

    While it may lead to stuff like task-obsessivness or clutter or whatever if someone kept taking them. I wonder how well they would work in the short term for somehting like final exam period, or SAT's, etc. Some single test or period where mental acuity is very important.

    I'm willing to bet you would either be or at least feel stupider when you stopped taking them though. Seems like the body has many reactions like that.
    Take dopamine or melatonin boosting drugs and your body produces less of these naturally..etc.

    --


    It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  52. Cognitive drugs and memory by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 2, Funny

    All I can say, is well, um, uh, I don't remember what I was going to say.

    Damn.

  53. Less sleep, more pills by quaker5567 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I can see this leading to people sleeping less, and just popping pills in the morning to increase alertness, memory etc. Since sleep research is still in it's infancy, no one knows the long term effect this will have.

    The pressure to work longer hours, or to do more after work then just sleep for a couple of hours and take a couple of pills will eventually take a toll on the brain, and after years and years of doing it, we may be in a worse state in our old age.

    Another problem may be that the pills start losing effect after a while and you need to take more and more to get the same effect, then you notice that if you don't take them, you aren't as alert as you used to be without the pills, and you end up just taking them to reach a "normal" level. Have any studies been done looking into whether these drugs are addictive???

  54. Creatine by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 1

    Creatine has been shown to improve IQ test scores...in vegetarians. Don't know the effects in us meat eaters. But it may not be too shabby.

    1. Re:Creatine by bstadil · · Score: 1

      Creatine does not strengthen the synaptic connections per se. What Creatine does is allow the cell to quicker regenerate ATP and thereby increase its ability to produce the needed neuro transmitters for a longer period. Kind of like a mental Powerbar

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
    2. Re:Creatine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll make you HYOOOGE too!

  55. I doubt these would end up like steroids... by Paradox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least in the US, we have some kind of weird "honor"-related relationship with someone's physical abilities. We have a deep-seated feeling that it's "unfair" to dope up in order win physically. This might be because people believe that with enough excercise and hard work, anyone can be an Olympic Athelete.

    I think most people don't have the same kind of feelings about intelligence, because we regard it as an inborn thing. Either you're smart or you're not, and that's all there is too it, right?

    I know that my intellect takes a lot of work to maintain. I'm quick, but my short-term memory isn't great and my logical abilitiy isn't much above average. I have to work very hard to keep my brain in a state where I can program computers, solve math in my head, remember things, and generally keep my nickname as "that smart guy." I may be predisposed to intelligence, but that doesn't mean that I can slack off.

    In the US at least, I doubt we'd ever see "brain testing" because people don't regard intelligence as something you can build, unlike physical aptitude. People don't associate that weird puritanical "honor"-relationship with Matheletes. :)

    --
    Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
    1. Re:I doubt these would end up like steroids... by Surt · · Score: 1

      People may think that intelligence is an inborn thing, but the scientists who have actually done research would probably suggest to you that it is far more dependent upon training.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    2. Re:I doubt these would end up like steroids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have a deep-seated feeling that it's "unfair" to dope up in order win physically. This might be because people believe that with enough excercise and hard work, anyone can be an Olympic Athelete.

      No, I think it's because if we allowed doping, the Olympics would become a freak show accessible only to atheletes willing to virtually destroy their bodies and health to be number one.

    3. Re:I doubt these would end up like steroids... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      retard

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:I doubt these would end up like steroids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, truly the King of Insightful Comments. I bow down before the glory of your grammar and immagination, looking over your previous posts it's obvious that you are a gem in the rough of slashdot.......

      NOT!

    5. Re:I doubt these would end up like steroids... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      dude, I guess you do not get sarcasm.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  56. Chambraine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I believe every word that that man just said, because its exactly what I wanted to hear."
    or another space ghost classic
    "I dont need intellegence drugs tom, because i dont know what they are, ok tom!? but i will put anything in my mouth that is given to me whether its supposed to go there or not, because, im different...."

  57. This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs... by saforrest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...and not a single mention of Paul Erdös?

  58. Provigil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    One of my friends is narcoleptic, and has a prescription to Provigil (Modafinil). I took some, mostly out of curiosity, on a road trip once. It's very similar to methamphetamine, although less physically invigorating. You talk a lot; have a lot of--seemingly insightful--ideas which are considerably foggier the day after. Of course, I was driving for 12 hours straight so I didn't have the opportunity to do many cognitive tests. It'd be more interesting to take some and then play a pile of online FPS games, or work on a programming project, or something more measurable. I've heard of people taking Modafinil before publicly speaking or doing a big pitch. It certainly does provide the illusion of charisma.

  59. Happy pills by retro128 · · Score: 1

    What is with this happy pill culture we're getting into? Are you tired and depressed? Take this pill. Are you fat? Don't exercise, take this and lose weight while you sleep. Kids hyper because you plant them in front of the TV all day? Must have ADD, here's a pill. Jesus, the world is starting to look like an Isaac Asimov novel.

    And now, we have "smart pills". I can't wait to see where THIS goes.

    --
    -R
  60. Re:Drug testing for the SATs ??? by Xeo+024 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unfortunately, people are already taking drugs to perform better on the SATs and other tests.

    Adderall, a drug meant to treat ADD and ADHD, is one of the most commonly abused drugs. Its purpose is to help people with disabilities "focus" better, but it is more often than not used by people who don't even have mental handicaps, increasing test scores and giving some students an unfair advantage. This highly addictive drug, as with most drugs, requires more usage to get the same buzz or energy boost as previously obtained by the abuser.

    Some side effects of the drug are: increased paranoia, delusions, and heart attacks or strokes.

    Interestingly enough, the drug mentioned in the article seems to be fairly similar to the way Adderall works (the whole point about making the user more focused).

  61. e,n|_@rge yuor bra1n by robogun · · Score: 4, Funny

    But given our culture, penis pills will still outsell brain enlargement pills 10-1

    1. Re:e,n|_@rge yuor bra1n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      America: FUCK YEAH!


    2. Re:e,n|_@rge yuor bra1n by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      I took both and ran out of blood.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  62. Just another case of hype... by FlatCatInASlatVat · · Score: 1

    Ampakines simply turn up the gain on a large fraction of the synapse in the brain. Is that going to make you smarter? There is NO good evidence for it. Imagine indescriminately increasing the output voltage of every transistor in some complex electronic device. This will likely play havoc on the orignal design, not improve function. The drugs are interesting as research tools, but the path to a viable drug is very long, and very fraught. I'm not signing up for their clinical studies any time soon.

    1. Re:Just another case of hype... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like overclocking!

  63. Side effects? by Nemo+Black · · Score: 1

    So if you take too many of these drugs do you end up wanting to buy your underwear at K-Mart?

  64. Dubya by Door-opening+Fascist · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can we enroll Dubya in the trials?

  65. by whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who elected you to select people's word choices for them?

    1. Re:by whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big Lebowski quote you cultural illiterate!

  66. Brain Steroids = OK. Muscle Steroids = EVIL???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So it's ok to pump up my brain with NO KNOWN SIDE EFFECTS, but it's illegal to pump up my muscles with minimal side effects in small dosages?

    The hypocrisy and ignorance of the media proves that money and marketing is the only concern to the pharmecuetical industry - and the media in general. Sell more, because the idiots will buy it, until you say not to. (i.e., celebrex; fen-fen)

    PS

    Ephedra has yet to be proven to be harmful in dosages less than 60mg a day (the actual dosage is only 8mg). So why is it banned again? Oh, that's right - it's readily available, not hard to extract it's main nutrient - ephedrine - not hard to synthetically engineer, and is currently used as the modality of choice in China and most other asian nations as a treatment for Asthma. Yet somehow it's banned now.

    Brain Steroids which have not been university double-blind placebo-controlled studied - OK!

    Muscle Steroids which have been proven to be effective in low dosages with minimal - or no - side effects - Illegal

    Stupidity in the media and general public? Priceless.

  67. You also need something that will help you RTFA by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1
    What I want is some way to spend more of my time awake, instead of wasting 8 hours a day sleeping.

    Maybe you could use some drug that will help you read articles before complaining about their content. Their focus is the same as yours.

    Among its [the Pentagon's] aims: to develop stimulants capable of keeping soldiers awake, alert and effective for as long as seven days straight. The armed forces have taken leading roles in testing modafinil and donepezil as performance enhancers for pilots and soldiers.

    What happens when you don't sleep? Among other things, you find it difficult to focus and concentrate. These drugs aim to allow you to continue alert and focused without sleeping for long periods of time, and as expected, you can focus even more if you take them in a natural state.

    Some of these may be available for consumption as early as 2008 (in some form, most likely not as powerful as you want them). I'd be wary of side-effects before you take these things and start sleeping once a week though.

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  68. He he, reminds me of.. by BerntB · · Score: 1
    For every action there's always a reaction. Just live a healthy life - eat well and exercise.
    Reminds me of all the bodybuilders dissing stereoids while obviously using them. :-)
    --
    Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
  69. Sapho Juice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Juice of Sapho

    "It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion,
    It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
    The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning,
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
    (author unknown)
    with thanks and apologies to Frank Herbert "

    1. Re:Sapho Juice? by sjames · · Score: 1

      The version I saw:

      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion,
      It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
      The shirt acquires a stain, the stain becomes a warning,
      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

  70. Serial Experiments Lain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Wasn't it named Accela? Life imitating anime again?

  71. I feel.... by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    ...Accelerated...

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  72. Similar Drugs With Different Interactions by Beautyon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    These drugs are not in fact novel; there are already drugs with the same conventration enhancing effects; Penural and Etracine are both in wide use, and are specifically designed to improve concentration and eye hand co-ordination.

    There might be some utility in developing these new drugs further, since they may not interact with Intervol, which is sometimes a problem.

    --
    ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
  73. Nootropics by srain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nootropics (aka "Smart Drugs") have received a lot of attention in recent years. While many skeptics remain, there are quite a few avid followers of the nootropic "fad". Two great resources for the beginner are Smart Drugs and Smart Drugs II, although a few issues have been pointed out by some people.

  74. Ob. Simpsons Ref. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    % Homer and Marge decide to pay a visit to The Pharm Team, makers of
    % Focusyn. Two pharmacists take them on a tour.

    Marge: I don't want to pump my little boy full of drugs.
    Pharm. 1: Yeah, yeah, we get a lot of that.
    Pharm. 2: But then they see our results.
    [shows the Simpsons some guinea pigs, running around in a
    cage like idiots]
    Pharm. 1: These are normal guinea pigs, running around like idiots.
    Now I'll give them some Focusyn.
    [spritzes some of the drug on them. The become docile, and
    run into an adjoining cage. The second cage has rows of
    schooldesks in it, and the guinea pigs take their seats]
    Marge: That's amazing -- and darling.
    Pharm. 2: Check this out. [puts on a guinea pig hand puppet (with a
    mortarboard on its head), and sticks it in the cage. The
    eyes of the drugged pigs follow its every move]
    Homer: They've become your slaves.
    Pharm. 2: Yes, but it's not about slavery, it's about helping kids
    concentrate. This pill reduces class clownism 44%.
    Pharm. 1: With 60% less sass-mouth.
    Pharm. 2: The only thing more effective is regular exercise.
    [Homer shudders]

  75. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by Nspace13 · · Score: 1

    okay sure, but can you coach an 1150 kid into getting a 1430? dont think so. but with these drugs the kids might actually learn how to do the work well enough to do that well on the test.

    --
    steal this sig
  76. Useful to compare/contrast with autism? by Two99Point80 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I am autistic, and seem to have some of the "enhancements" being discussed here such as very good situational focus and access to unfiltered detail. However these come at considerable cost, for example susceptibility to sensory overload, sometimes-extreme difficulty with unscheduled or illogical changes, and so forth. (Perhaps these attributes could be analogous to "side effects" of the cognitive enhancement drugs?) While it could be argued that "everybody does/has/experiences this", the degree of it can be extreme for some of us, and may point to caveats regarding the meds.

    FWIW I've come up with a number of metaphors for my experience of being autistic, and it might be useful to examine these in the context of "cognitive enhancement". There are in the "self-awareness" article directly accessible here (URL may change in the future) or through my domain.

    In any event, it may be prudent to go back to the movie "Charly" and ponder his answer to the question, "What do you see?" and the ensuing dialog. Seeing more clearly comes at a price...

    1. Re:Useful to compare/contrast with autism? by kryzx · · Score: 1

      This might be a good place to mention the suspected links between autism/Asperger's and the tech world.

      This article in Wired explored the connection, including the explosion of cases of a/A in silicon valley, probably due to geeks interbreeding.

      The suggestion is that autism is a spectrum, and a little of it can make you a better programmer, or at least uniquely suited to the programmer's environment. However, the trait is highly hereditary, so when programmers start marrying and having children they have a very high incidence of autism.

      --
      "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
  77. Re:This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs. by bstadil · · Score: 1

    What's your point, That he retained ability into fairly old age or what? I read The Man who loved only numbers but curious if you have a different point.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  78. Vinge's Focus by lousyd · · Score: 1
    This sounds like Focus, in Vernor Vinge's A Deepness In The Sky. They have the biotechnology to "focus" people's minds into one task. They perform the task they're focusing on to the extreme detriment of everything else. They're not mindless, they're just... focused... The result is that they do the task they're focused on extremely well. It's so creepy in the book. It's so realistic, I can totally see it happening.

    It works best on scientific skills, but works on a few people with social talents as well. Focus, employed by the Emergents, allows them to combine the power and speed of a computer with the reasoning and intuitive skills of a tireless, dedicated human, although the human infected seems decidedly less "human" to the unfocused.

    See here.

    --
    If aspiration is a virtue, achievement cannot be a vice.
    1. Re:Vinge's Focus by elwinc · · Score: 1

      Yep, I noticed that connection with "Focus" in Vinge's science fiction world too. In the book, "Focus" can be used not just for brain enhancement, but for enslavement. It seems to turn people into a combination of obsessive-compulsive on their assigned task, and autistic in their emotional lives (these two traits may be on the same spectrum in undrugged people too). In the book, enslavability seemed to be the major negative side effect of the drug.

      --
      --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  79. Re:Drug testing for the SATs ??? by man_ls · · Score: 1

    My best friend takes Adderall for a legitimate case of ADD - it works wonders for its purposes.

  80. Cognitive Enhancement? by neilyos · · Score: 1

    My uncle was taking some 'cognitive enhancement' medication http://www.iherb.com/cogni.html, Cogniflex, recommended by his girlfriend. He stopped taking it because, well, he forgot to take it.

  81. Old Age by FJ · · Score: 1

    It would be interesting to see how these types of drugs would impact the elderly. One of the worst things about aging can be the loss of mental function. With all the medical advances people are living very long, but the brain still continues to age. Most 80 year olds are not nearly as mentally capable as your average 60 year old. If these drugs make an elderly person more self sufficient the impact is enormous.

    As a young & healthy person I doubt these types of drugs would be recommended for me. Steroids have been available used in a medically safe way for years, but doctors don't prescribe them easily because of the side effects. I would bet that these types of drugs would be any different.

    1. Re:Old Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If these drugs would result in people with dementia getting one more point in AMTS tests...
      "Enormous impact" wouldn't cover it.

  82. That is so cool. by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    I am on a simialr program. I went to my doctor about a year ago, with a complaint that I was feeling thickheaded and mentally fuzzy all the time. He ran a few tests on me ang gave me a perscription for this great drug that enchances mental capacity, called Placebo. Now, I am WAAAAY smarter than everybody I meet. You should try it!

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:That is so cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure you're not just angry because you didn't think of this idea first?

  83. You are wrong.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    The nootropic movement is quite strong in America and I don't know if you've even been to a bulk supplement site, but it might be an eye opener for you:
    www.beyond-a-century.com
    1fast400
    www.smi2le.biz
    performancenutritionals.com

    Hell, go to your local health food store or a GNC and take a look.

    I had an English friend once who told me he was surprised by how much your average American knew about pharmaceuticals. I don't think we are particularly bashful about boosting (just about getting caught!).

    --
    Quack, quack.
  84. I laughed out loud... by scaramush · · Score: 1

    ...when I saw the phrase "task-obsessiveness".

    As a programmer in the middle of a death march (I'm not taking a break, it's compiling, I swear!), I don't think I've ever seen a better description of the process of development in my life :P

    I mean seriously, what do programmers do? They get a requirement, and then they obsess over how it can be broken down into its component tasks until either they go mad, or the fucking thing works.

    Okay, back at it...

    --
    "...you can steal my woman, but you ain't done nuthin' smart."
  85. Social Dependence by rmd6502 · · Score: 1

    How will this affect the really competitive majors like medicine and law? Will I have to take these drugs now just to stay on top of the curve, once most of my classmates start taking them? Then, when I pass the bar exam and stop taking the pills, what happens to the chemically enhanced memories? Will I have to keep taking these the rest of my career and damn the side effects?

  86. Long term effects of drugs on the brain? by tdhillman · · Score: 1

    I got this one handled.

    After 47 years of extremely personal and individual research on this I can most assuredly tell you that indeed, drugs do have a substantial effect on your brain.

    After 47 years of extremely personal and individual research on this I can most assuredly tell you that indeed, drugs do have a substantial effect on your brain.

    --
    befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
  87. There is nothing "wierd" about anti-doping control by WotanKhan · · Score: 1
    If a supplement was shown to be completely healthy, with no debilitating side effects, it would not be illegal (at least in theory). The point in preventing doping in sports, is to allow the non-dopers to compete on a level playing field. Otherwise, all competitors would be forced to take harmful drugs to have a fair shot at competition. Unfortunately, that is much the case in many sports, cycling, track and field and football among others.

    The same issue will be very much a reality with these drugs in the workplace.

  88. On Tinkering with the Human Condition by sam_handelman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As any engineer can tell you, there are always trade-offs in any design change. In this case, those trade-offs are "side effects".

    It may be possible to optimize human beings for some particular task using drugs of various sorts - but what criterion will we use to determine what changes we will make?

    I envisage a sort of corporate dystopia, in which people optomize themselves to maximize their utility to their employers, altering their own brain chemistry to make themselves into perfect employees - we can argue what traits such a human tool would have, but they're probably not very laudable.

    On the other hand, people ought to be able to have any neurochemistry they want; under more generally egalitarian social arrangements, such drugs would simply enable people to do that, which would be good.

    Maybe I've just been reading too much science fiction.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
    1. Re:On Tinkering with the Human Condition by Gob+Gob · · Score: 1

      Like any drug there will always be the gap between those who take it and those who don't.

      No matter how benifical it may be to some in certain circumstances there will be many were it is just not a factor of relevantcy.

      We can assume to "us" that this of good in our lives but what do we explain to those who have no can opener nor McDonalds?

      Good intentions...yes. Good ideas...yes. Another new chasm yes. Be careful what we wish for.

    2. Re:On Tinkering with the Human Condition by Mortgage.ysp · · Score: 1
      I envisage a sort of corporate dystopia, in which people optomize themselves to maximize their utility to their employers, altering their own brain chemistry to make themselves into perfect employees - we can argue what traits such a human tool would have, but they're probably not very laudable.
      Uh, coffee? This reminds me of the spider web study where they gave the spiders a variety of chemicals. Oddly enough the spiders given coffee and Meth were similar indeed.
    3. Re:On Tinkering with the Human Condition by jswalter9 · · Score: 1

      I find that a strong anti-depressant makes me a much better employee. Effexor is a reuptake inhibitor of seratonin, norepinephrin, and dopamine.

      The result is artificially high morale and an incredible tolerance for insult and abuse. :)

      --
      Retired from software... maybe. Sort of.
  89. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by grazzy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, namedropping of some famous nerdbooks books is always relevant.. no?

  90. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Fareq · · Score: 1

    That is a very interesting parallel... to me anyway, as I have read and re-read these books obsessively myself.

    Its true though... in that case it was deliberate, but I bet we will do worse by accident...

    Imagine, for instance... some medicines for your stomach/digestive tract can cause things like diarrhea.

    Could you imaging what a bout "mental diarrhea" might be like?

  91. Edge of a slippery slope by Drunken_Jackass · · Score: 1

    If at all possible, and if there are no side-effects, would you take a drug that could make you smarter? I'm not saying that these examples could, but if there were something that passed clinic trails and was safe - viagra for your brain.

    Would you take it?

    Would you want to know if someone else is taking it?

    --
    There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
  92. Will Barry Bonds be kicked out of Mensa by srobert · · Score: 1

    Bonds may have taken some intelligence enhancing drugs, but did not know at the time he took them that they were intelligence enhancing drugs.

  93. What about those that might actually need them? by Incoming9000 · · Score: 1
    Drugs are a two edged blade, they can do harm but also help healing if used properly. Instead of looking at what these drugs will do to a healthy person, look at what they could mean to a those that suffer from neurologic illnesses, like Parkinson and Alzeimer.

    These conditions are caused by problems in the way neurons work, and as a result they stop sending signals. For those that suffer from these, and many other mental related problems, such drugs could very well be the light at the end of the tunnel.

    1. Re:What about those that might actually need them? by jangobongo · · Score: 1
      ...Instead of looking at what these drugs will do to a healthy person, look at what they could mean to a those that suffer from neurologic illnesses, like Parkinson and Alzeimer.

      These conditions are caused by problems in the way neurons work, and as a result they stop sending signals. For those that suffer from these, and many other mental related problems, such drugs could very well be the light at the end of the tunnel.


      There will be a huge market for these kinds of drugs. Baby boomers will be clamoring for anything that will delay or halt demetia and alzheimers. I know of someone who's father, uncle, and grandfather all suffered from alzheimers so the odds of his avoiding this aren't looking too good.

      HT-0712 sounds like it has promise for delaying the onset of these brain-related illnesses. From the article:
      • The most important market, however, could be healthy people in their forties and fifties whose memory is deteriorating. "There are an awful lot of people who'd like a drug that could do something about that," he said.

        The drug, code-named HT-0712, helps to retain information in the short-term memory. It works by activating a gene called Creb, contained in every human cell. Once activated, it allows brain cells to make the connections vital for memory formation.

        In many people, these memory-forming processes slow with age, leading to forgetfulness. About 15 million Britons are thought to suffer from memory problems.

        This summer, 100 people in the United States with mild memory loss will receive the drug to test its safety and efficacy. Prof Tully hopes it will help patients to develop improved memories and will compensate for damage done by the early stages of dementia. If the study is successful, larger trials will be carried out with the aim of producing the drug commercially within five to seven years.
      Researchers and drug companies are scrambling to try and find "the" drug for this huge market.
      --

      Sig cancelled due to lack of interest
  94. Re:cannabis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /nods wisely

    "Curtains, man, that's what it's all about. Curtains."

    /nods quietly to himself again

  95. I don't know about you... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    But every doctor I have ever seen will only deal with cheap and easy ailments. I had chronic problems for years that several doctors insisted were "low grade allergies" dispite clear evidence to the contrary. I could get no relief until I started reasearching the symptoms myself. I have found doctors only to be useful after you have already diagnosed yourself.

    Have any of you been suprised by what a doctor has diagnosed you with???

    1. Re:I don't know about you... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Really though, most of the time those doctors are probably right - almost by definition, most of the sicknesses people approach them with are one of the common sicknesses. If those doctors are following the "I can predict the weather pretty well by assuming tomorrow's weather will be the same as today's" principle, they will probably be right a lot of the time.

      Of course, you'd really like your doctor to be alert enough to recognize when your symptoms are just a little different than the standard, and that a simple test or two might distinguish an unusual but potentially dangerous condition...

  96. Re:This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs. by volsung · · Score: 1

    I think he's referring to Erdos' use of amphetamines to improve his work. Search for it in the Wikipedia article.

  97. task-switching by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 1

    the drug Modafinil, which seems to sharpen attention and mental agility

    Cool, faster task-switching, now I'll *really* be able to multi-task!

  98. Obligatory Red Dwarf reference: by NMEismyNME · · Score: 1

    Rimmer: Lister, what's this? Learning drugs? They're illegal matey!
    I'm afraid you're in very serious, grave, deep trouble, Lister. Where did you get them? I want names. I want places. I want dates. Lister: Arnold Rimmer. His locker. This morning.

  99. Ritalin by msgregory@earthlink. · · Score: 0

    Back in my day, the only cognitive enhancer involved by bare butt at the end of a paddle!

  100. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Flower · · Score: 1
    The topic of possible side-effects is what made me think of the Xenocide reference. The character I mentioned is engineered to be super-intellegent along with possessing OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.) In the book this was done on purpose. I don't think this would be done in reality but the possible side-effects of these new drugs mentioned in TFA could hinder a person's potential.

    I sent off a quip that I found interesting and I had enough time to make that specific comment. I assumed that someone who had at least read the byline here on /. would get the gist of my comment. Obviously out of the 500,000+ readers here I overlooked the possiblility that you might not get it and I would touch on some preXmas cynical pique you were currently experiencing. My most sincere apologies.

    --
    I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
  101. Focus Factor by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 1

    There have been a lot of commercials for the over-the-counter Focus Factor. Anyone here try it? Is it worth anything?

    1. Re:Focus Factor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think focus factor is a perfect example of the genius being in the adertising, not the product itself... its got a cool graphics enhanced bottle, and claims to do all sorts of neat things... i have taken it myself and have only found a to experience a feeling similar to a cold or something when i take it...

  102. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Funny
    Could you imaging what a bout "mental diarrhea" might be like?


    Anyone who reads Slashdot regularly has no need to imagine it.... ;^)

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  103. LSD invented by Albert Hoffman. He wrote a book... by Admiral+Burrito · · Score: 1

    LSD may have been used at the Univeristy of Saskatchewan, but it certainly wasn't invented there.

    LSD was invented by Albert Hoffman while he was working at Sandoz laboratories in Switzerland. It's quite an interesting story.

  104. Re:This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs. by bstadil · · Score: 1
    Thanks

    Here is the link to Wikipedia for people that might be interested.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  105. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by tobias.sargeant · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is true for educational and social achievement, but raw IQ appears remarkably stable. See this Minnesota twin study for an example. I was honestly rather surprised when I started looking at studies like these by just how much of a role genetics plays in IQ.

  106. My favorite... by dep01 · · Score: 1

    My favorite is the prescription drug commercial for an allergy medication... "Side affects may include sore throat, itchy nose, coughing, and sneezing." wtf? aren't these allergies?

    --
    "hey, could you pass me a paper towel? er.. I mean... DEPLOY ABSORBTION PANEL!"
  107. Yay! by dep01 · · Score: 1

    I hope these work! I can stop spending all my money on cocaine! Whee!!

    --
    "hey, could you pass me a paper towel? er.. I mean... DEPLOY ABSORBTION PANEL!"
  108. Stimulant slow-down by Decimal · · Score: 0

    In AD/HD brains, certain stimulants have been found to actually help better regulate brain activity. Ritalin is the most famous of these. In effect, they do the opposite of what would happen in a normal brain, and slow down the thinking process of a AD/HD-er long enough to let them think before they act, and to concentrate on certain things better. Worked wonders for me as a kid, though at the time all that was available was the non-extended release version. Man, did that throw me off at the end of the dose.

    Caffiene has the same effect on many AD/HD brains. When I'm feeling a little too jittery, I grab a cola.

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
    1. Re:Stimulant slow-down by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Caffeine and drugs like Ritalin are known amongst people who study these things as "rate dependent drugs." It means what it sounds like. Which is to say, I'm backing you up on this, and so is science.

      It's not just a phenomenon of "AD/HD brains," either. Most people are rate-dependent on caffeine, at certain times of the day, or when certain amounts are consumed.

      Have a good one.

      C

    2. Re:Stimulant slow-down by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      What's the test for an ADHD brain and what's the test to show whether it's better regulated?

    3. Re:Stimulant slow-down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Behavioral observation.

    4. Re:Stimulant slow-down by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Correct. So we can say that some people who took ritalin improved their behaviour. Not that ritalin regulated their brain or that it's rate dependent or even that it improved their behaviour.

      Maybe the mere taking improved their behaviour? Noooo, surely the placebo effect only applies to the other 40+% of the ritalin takers?

      Why does Prozac have the same behavioural effect, even though it has a completely different effect on the brain?

      Has the double blind ever been tested in a study showing ritalin works better than placebo?

      Something to think about...

    5. Re:Stimulant slow-down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Has the double blind ever been tested in a study showing ritalin works better than placebo?
      Yes, many times.
    6. Re:Stimulant slow-down by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Then you'll be able to cite just one of those studies very easily.

      I'll bet you can't.

      BTW, I'm specifically looking for one where the double blind was tested by eg asking the patients to guess
      whether they were on placebo or drug, where the blind was intact and hence the ritalin really did outperform the placebo.

    7. Re:Stimulant slow-down by Decimal · · Score: 1

      By "better-regulated", I was saying that the AD/HD users were able to think clearer, as evidenced by various cognitive tests and life experience by many people who went on the drugs. We are our brains.

      --

      Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
    8. Re:Stimulant slow-down by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      All of which is very worthwhile..

      However, it's a long way from proving the Ritalin had anything to do with it.

      And since almost everyone here will have some ADHD symptoms, I wanted to point out that this wasn't a scientific point of view and warn against a medication & support group lifestyle.

      Our brain is a sophisticated device... even if we're still learning the controls.

  109. Truth following fiction? by mpsmps · · Score: 1
    The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known, although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness."

    Exploiting cognitive-enhancing drugs' task-obsessiveness is the main theme of Vernor Vinge's Hugo-Award winner, A Deepness in the Sky. This would not be a good prediction to come true.
  110. The Real Dope on Smart Drugs by UnkyHerb · · Score: 2, Informative

    I would like to make a few points myself, as an avid nootropic ("smart-drug") user. Nootropic: a word coined by Dr. Giurgea to describe a new class of drugs that act as cognitive enchancers with no side effects or toxicity, from Greek words noos, meaning mind and tropein meaning toward. The December 6th issue of newsweek had in huge font on the cover "Memory Drugs", and talked of ampakines, but also called the older nootropics "shots in the dark". If they are shots in the dark, I highly recommend shooting in the dark. A lot of pharmy companies would rather come up with more patentable/profitable drugs and chemicals.

    There are a lot of drugs now adays that are considered smart drugs. Some are the 'racetams (piracetam, aniracetam, pramiracetam, oxiracetam). I have taken piracetam and aniracetam to my personal benefit, as I do suffer from attention, concentration, and general mental-clarity problems. Piracetam is super non-toxic and I highly recommend trying it (Do your research, google it!). It is thought to increase oxygen in the brain and act as a neuroprotectant, especially in environments with decreased oxygen.

    There are also amino acids that are considered smart drugs, like l-theanine which produces a calm-concentrated mood, the amino is found in green tea, and is thought to be why green tea hardly gives the jitters. Try it for yourself by taking l-theanine with caffiene (coffee as a most likely source). So all of the posters who say "Hey, coffee/caffiene is all I need!", why not try supplementing with a natural amino acid. Vinpocetine is also a very usefull suppliment, it increases the blood flow to the brain, and is derived from the periwinkle plant. DMAE is also considered a smart-drug (dimethyl-amino-ethanol). DMAE is a precursor to acetyl-choline, one of the most used neurotransmitters. There are a whole lot more out there, so I highly recommend checking it out. Re-quoting a quote from http://smi2le.biz ( who also happens to be a cheap supplier of such suppliments [no affliction] )

    "In 2004 Out-Caste agents started circulating the rumor that Intelligence was the most important factor in human life.

    They said: "What else do you value? Love? Virtue? Money? Power? Freedom? Truth? All of these can be enhanced by increasing intelligence. A failure to increase intelligence can only diminish our ability to obtain and enjoy those goods.""

    --
    Your Momma's so fat she makes emacs look like nano!
    1. Re:The Real Dope on Smart Drugs by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Informative

      taking 1-theanine with caffeine....try it yourself by taking 1-theanine with caffiene (coffee as a most likely source)

      heh, I guess all the world must be coffee drinkers, for green tea already has the caffeine and I-theanine together! Use water just under boiling for green tea. Go to a Chinese tea shop/pharmacy and ask for a rich, strong green tea.

    2. Re:The Real Dope on Smart Drugs by TheLink · · Score: 1

      So that's why green tea keeps me awake but in a more "normal" sort of wakefulness - unlike coffee - which often makes me a bit more edgy.

      --
    3. Re:The Real Dope on Smart Drugs by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

      ! I'd been taking this as a way to avoid chocolate. Now I know why I was buzzing after drinking a litre a day cold!

  111. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by grazzy · · Score: 1

    Your comment was irrelevant and unintresting to the subject. The girl in Xenocide suffered from a birth defect introduced by the goverment to control her actions. To punish her like a guinea pig when she tought thoughts not "suitable", "dirty" or "unclean". Hence the following of woodlines, obsessive washing of hands etc. Now, that has absolutely nothing todo with this topic.

    I dont see how a birthdefect in a science-fiction book is relevant to a soo very real drug that can alter your state of mind, giving a longterm memory boost - the holy grail of all learning.

    Feel free to flame all you want, bicker about christmas piques or whatever you wish.

  112. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Zangief · · Score: 1

    You are doubting the power of the drug!

    You will trace all the lines on your bedroom!

  113. Caffine by OldButNotWise · · Score: 1

    What about good old Coffee?

    --
    :WQ^H^Hwq!^M^M
  114. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, then, what about Speed Of Dark, where the local pharma-corp wants to study autistic individuals in order to provide similar "focused abilities" for regular workers to make them more efficient (not to mention, more docile.)

  115. Bring on the Weed! by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    I don't have to worry about making myself stupid from smoking gonj all day. A few pills and I'll be able to remain stoned while working on that phd.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  116. Well.... lessee.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... when you catch some trash making racist slurs, you're 100% justified and right to call the SOB on it.

  117. Flowers for Algernon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a movie version called 'Charlie'.

  118. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Flower · · Score: 1
    It wasn't a birth defect. They cure Qiang Zao however she has so bought into the party line about being blessed by the Gods that she continues her OCD behavior even though there is no psychological imperitive to do so anymore. By the end of the book the people of Path find her to be something akin to a Planetary treasure or saint due to her devotion.

    You delivered the flame. This is a correction.

    --
    I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
  119. Grounding and Freeing Drugs by datawar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would be very interested in using any safe mind-enhancing drug. However, the brain is not a computer and life is not a pre-mediated routine.

    If people start using memory and attention enhancing drugs to ground themselves more in reality and their current world view/direction, I think it's important that people also start using psychedelics and other mentally-opening/freeing drugs to make sure they don't get bogged down in the now-now-now.

    Basically psychedelics allow you an escape from grounding forces (like attention, or memory) to go and question important, overarching meta-questions -- where am I going? what does the world mean and what's my place in it? who are my friends and how do I feel about them? how do I feel about the future? etc. These would be a good counter-balance to the mind-enhacing drugs, which help you achieve goals formed from reflection upon your insight, more efficiently.

    I'm not really advocating psychedelic drug use for everyone in general (well, not in this post at least, heh). But as "regular", not cognitively-enhanced people we supposedly have some sort of balance of 'free-thought' with which we question and reflect on Big, Important Matters and 'attentive/constrained thought' with which we make short-term goals happen. The two are a feedback process. If we're shifting the balance by increasing the duraction of our 'attentive/constrained thought', we need to have a way of increasing the intensity of our 'free-thought' so that we don't loose sight of the big picture.

    1. Re:Grounding and Freeing Drugs by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
      I would be very interested in using any safe mind-enhancing drug. However, the brain is not a computer and life is not a pre-mediated routine.

      My boss seems to think my mind is a computer, and my days all seem like pre-mediated routines.

      If a drug can help me to avoid burnout and get things done faster, great. Now if you'll excuse me, I have 35 hours of work to do before the end of the day Wednesday, or I don't get to have a Christmas Break.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  120. Chemicals making intelligence?! by 10000000000000000000 · · Score: 1

    whether this is it or not, one day humanity will greatly augment it's own intelligence.

    I mean, far beyond the ways we've already managed to do.

    Chemicals are all that intelligence is. You are nothing but chemicals.

    well, the same way a painting is nothing but paint, of course.

    But really the big differences between human brains and the other smart creatures of earth is our chemical makeup.

    nuerochemicals are some of the most complicated naturally occuring chemical structures known - right alongside scents (hydrocarbon chains I think - that's what Fry said anyway).

    Of course, the neurochemicals of the human brian aren't actually more complex than those of any other creature. But they are different.

    and my my if the outcome of their interactions in the environment of the brain isn't something.

    I mean, how interesting that something can analyze itself. That these chemicals mix together to figure out how to make themselves mix together better :)

    is this starting to sound exponential to anyone else?

    let's see, we use machines to build better machines,we use computers to design faster and better computers and now we use our brain chemicals (as thought) to find out how to get better chemical reactions in our brain.

    We've got something interesting going on now don't we?

  121. Measurable chemical imbalances by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    There are no measureable neurotransmitter imbalances. Not unless you're prepared to have your brain sliced very thinly.

    No, this doesn't make the whole of psychopharmacology a crock. You also have to prove that neurochemistry isn't dependent on state of mind and that medications work better than placebo -- both unproven ;)

  122. Co... by slumpy · · Score: 1

    ...caine??

    --
    http://www.commaecho.com
  123. Re:LSD invented by Albert Hoffman. He wrote a book by saskboy · · Score: 1

    I see. I confused hearing of it's first use in clinical studies, with it's invention.

    http://www.nfb.ca/hofmann/

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  124. Milk Plus by AtillaTheKilla · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sharpens you up for a bit o' the old ultra-violence.

  125. Missing Option... by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Marijuana. Now don't laugh.

    Remember the incident a few years back at the Winter Games in Nagano with the US snowboarder getting in trouble for the pot? He said he smoked grass before he rode because it helped him relax and focus. Now, up till that point, marijuana had not officially been on the Olympic Commitee's list of banned substances, but that all changed when their research concluded that yes indeed, getting stoned may increase athletic performance. So now, if you're an Olympic athlete, marijuana is verboten.

    I would add my own personal anecdotes in support of their findings, but I seem to have forgotten them for some reason...

    --
    "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    1. Re:Missing Option... by CupBeEmpty · · Score: 1

      Hahaha... to think that all this research money is being wasted on improving our intelligence and athletic ability when all most of us want to do is dissolve our neural tissue in ethanol and jack our synapse activity through the roof with herbal remedies.

      And now they tell us that a couple of drinks a day will reduce heart disease and getting high will improve our athletic ability!? Just what are these "scientists" trying to pull here. Just give me the days when booze killed you a little every sip and weed was a mind altering hellstorm that was only fit for beatniks and hippies (excluding of course our favorite Grateful Dead lyricist and EFF wunderkind)

    2. Re:Missing Option... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember the incident a few years back at the Winter Games in Nagano with the US snowboarder getting in trouble for the pot?

      Errr, no, but I remember the Canadian snowboarder who lost the gold and then got it back after they found small traces of pot in his test. He claimed it was from a party he went to not long before the event.

    3. Re:Missing Option... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ross Rebagliati, the gold medalist at the Nagano winter olympics is Canadian. FWIW, a few other Canadians known worldwide (and this is just scratching the surface) include:

      Avril Lavigne
      John Candy
      Barenaked Ladies
      Joni Mitchell
      Tom Green
      Bryan Adams
      Jim Carrey
      Shania Twain
      Catherine O'Hara
      Matthew Good Band

      Not everything North American is from the US. ;)

    4. Re:Missing Option... by X86Daddy · · Score: 1

      Another anecdotal bit of evidence: When I was in college, one fellow student who I was on a Software Engineering team with would usually smoke a dose right before a presentation. The relaxation would kill her speaking phobias and she did very well each time. I did see her give a presentation "unprepared" and the difference was obvious.

    5. Re:Missing Option... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! It wasn't an American snowboarder, it was a Canadian snowboarder named Ross Rebagliati! He was stripped of his gold medal but it was given back after he appealed in court.

      http://snowboarding.about.com/od/snowboardingbackg round/a/Olympic_history.htm

      Yet again, Slashdot shows how US-centric it really is.

    6. Re:Missing Option... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Remember the incident a few years back at the Winter Games in Nagano with the US snowboarder getting in trouble for the pot?

      I wonder how the Jamaican bobsled team fared...

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    7. Re:Missing Option... by syukton · · Score: 1

      I hold the belief that the mind is a giant (infinite dimensions) relational database where everything can potentially be "related" to something else. Understanding the mind like this, I find that the effect of Marijuana is that it increases the number and diversity of relationships I'm able to mentally build between ideas at any given moment. This is what some would call "creativity." The caveat is that while my creativity is enhanced, those relationships become tenative at best. It helps to think of the mind as a chemical machine, and like any chemical machine there's a limited amount of energy it has to perform certain tasks, such as building these relationships between ideas. So the amount of a chemical used to build these relationships in your mind is being used to create more relationships than it usually would, making those relationships created under the influence of marijuana fragile and short-term. In short: Marijuana increases the diversity of thoughts you possess and how you relate them to one another, but it also reduces your ability to retain those thoughts related to one another in that fashion.

      You know how they say that in Perl there's always more than one way to do it? On Marijuana you run the risk of noticing every single way.

      --
      Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
  126. Classic Urban Legend by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a classic urban legend:

    A college student is obsessing about his final exams. In the week before his big exam, he starts staying up all night to cram, pounding down pots of coffee. Finally, he starts taking amphetamines to stay wired. He has a marathon 48-hour study session right before his big final, and finally heads down to take the big test.

    He's in the zone. He knows every answer and remembers every last detail. He flies through his exam, writing voluminous essays, and heads back to his room to crash.

    A few hours later, he is awoken from deep sleep by his professor calling. "There's a problem with your exam," his professor tells him. "Can you come by my office?"

    The student is freaking out, and runs right down there. He's greeted by his professor, who's giving him an odd look.

    "What's wrong with my exam, professor? Didn't I write enough on the essays?"

    The professor gives him another long look. "Young man, you wrote the entire essay in tiny letters on one line."

    --
    All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
  127. Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics by nosleep_tolkachi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here is a site that has been looking at this issue, among others in similar field for some years now. Among others, freedom of thought and pharmacotherapy (drugs used in therapy that "disable" the brains ability to get high off illicit drugs) are in discussion. http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/

  128. Jacobs Ladder? by Striker770S · · Score: 0

    Modafinil, which seems to sharpen attention and mental agility. The side effects of these sorts of drugs are not yet fully known This reminded me of a movie back in the early 80's called Jacob's Ladder. It was about post-nam and these soldiers had been tested with performance enhancing drugs that were not tested. Later in their life they had horrible sideeffects including lapses in memory, hearing voices, and hollucinations. The worst part of it was that this was a true story. Wouldnt be supprised if it happened again...

    --
    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes. - Catcher in the Rye
  129. Re:LSD FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    There's never been a fatal overdose on LSD. I started using recreational drugs after being bombarded this kind of innaccurate crap about pot and LSD, and decided I needed to find out for myself. Unfortunately there are really dangerous side effects of LSD and other recreational drugs- but only honest, accurate information will be helpful to anyone.

  130. Smart Drugs - Check here.... by fallen1 · · Score: 2, Informative
    The Cognitive Enhancement Research Institute

    Even after MANY years of testing, a lot of the drugs that fall under the heading Nootropics have few to no side effects even when taken at massive doses. Another drug to look into after Piracetam is Vasopressin. There are several others as well. Very interesting reading.

    --

    Dream as if you'll live forever.
    Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
    ~Anonymous~

  131. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by Linuxthess · · Score: 2, Insightful
    All in all, if your parents have the means, you are more likely to have a better raw iq, possibly an enhanced measured intelligence, and a better education than someone whose parents are not of means.

    Maybe you are looking at it the wrong way; IQ is only an inaccurate measure of intelligence, however it's a very accurate measure of success.

    So look at this way, the parents are more successful, because of their intelligence, and the corresponding indicator of that intelligence would be the IQ.

    --

    I sig, therefore I was.
  132. Re:cannabis by affliction · · Score: 2, Funny


    I've been alot more insightful since I started smoking weed, even when I'm not high.


    Your blog says otherwise...


    I am God!
    I see it perfectly clearly. Consider the laws of physics. Everything in the universe holds to them. I certainly do. BUT! What defines the laws of physics? It is clearly what I do that defines them. It is what everything does but me included. So then I am God! So is everyone else of course but really its ME!


    That is real insight for me. I decree that we shall all smoke weed. Then everyone can be as insightful as this fine gentleman.

  133. The Real Deal: Ritalin by pkhuong · · Score: 1

    Some doctors (in Quebec, anyway) are known to sometimes get a prescription for Ritalin (I'm not sure how they manage to do it subtly enough, since Ritalin is in the same drug class as Cocaine, here) when they have to drive a long time: it really does keep you extremely focused when you don't suffer for ADD. I've known a few guys who'd sell their pills, and others who'd *SNIFF* powdered ritalin when they had to cram. I'm not sure it's more effective that way, but, even taken normally, it's probably much better at putting you in the zone than amphets. It also leads to an habituation and psychological addiction (your mind doesn't feel as clear, probably because it isn't :). Side note: Ritalin really is a hard drug. I'd investigate every reasonable alternative before giving in to the pressure and drugging my child.

    --
    Try Corewar @ www.koth.org - rec.games.corewar
    1. Re:The Real Deal: Ritalin by mark-t · · Score: 1
      Ritalin is massively overprescribed, I don't deny that... but for the people that are genuinely ADD, Ritalin works. And in the proper dosage, without the nasty side effects that it would have on otherwise "normal" people.

      For example, did you know that a person who has ADD can take Ritalin and fall asleep long before the medication's effects begin to wear off? In fact, for a person with ADD, stimulants like Ritalin or even caffeine effectively act as relaxants, rather than stimulants, but still produce the side effect of being able to concentrate more effectively either way. Although a person who is genuinely ADD is no more likely to be kept awake by coffee or Ritalin than he would be by a glass of water.

      For any parent that is considering Ritalin for their child... try a simple and harmless experiment before introducing him to that medication. Without telling him or her the actual reason for the experiment, give them a cup of coffee (perhaps suitably sweetened) sometime fairly near (perhaps 30 minutes to an hour before) their bedtime (do this on a weekend, so they can sleep in). If within 20 to 30 minutes, the child is practically struggling to keep his eyes open, then you can be almost certain that your child actually has ADD, and may benefit from a properly prescribed dosage of Ritalin. If the child does not exhibit signs of drowsiness, and especially if the child seems to be "wired" from the caffeine, under _NO_ circumstances should that child be given Ritalin, or probably any other medication designed to treat ADD. In all likelihood, a child that does not react to caffeine as a relaxant is not ADD at all.

      I will agree with the parent poster on one point, however... Ritalin is indeed a very hard drug, and even if one could have actually benefited from it, taking too much can and almost certainly will do more harm than good. A wise doctor will almost certainly begin prescribing Ritalin at quite low dosages, and may slowly work the dosage up over a period of a number of months as required.

    2. Re:The Real Deal: Ritalin by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      Strange, I always found coffee put me to sleep.
      but the problem is, I used to wake in the night and sit at the top of the stairs for hours and hours making paper planes.
      hmm.. interesting

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    3. Re:The Real Deal: Ritalin by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      For example, did you know that a person who has ADD can take Ritalin and fall asleep long before the medication's effects begin to wear off? In fact, for a person with ADD, stimulants like Ritalin or even caffeine effectively act as relaxants, rather than stimulants, but still produce the side effect of being able to concentrate more effectively either way. ... except, of course, on the rest of the central nervous system, where the caffeine STILL works as a stimulant.

      Which means drink enough of it and you get very irritable and tectchy, and your heart rate goes up - but you won't get the jitters and you won't get wired. You will, however, get a caffeine "hangover" when you go through withdrawal in your sleep every night.

      Nasty stuff in large enough doses - namely the kind you might hit when self medicating.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    4. Re:The Real Deal: Ritalin by Tinidril · · Score: 1

      I hope this doesn't have to be said, but I'll say it anyways. The parent is not a doctor or a bio-chemist, or at least didn't claim to be. It sounds like his advice is purely anicdotal and shouldn't be given too much weight.

      --
      XML is the best data format; unless your data needs to be read or written by a human or a computer.
  134. A Smile? Zipheads don't smile. by leftie · · Score: 1

    Report yourself to a podmaster's office for proper re-focusing.

  135. Creativity by greg_barton · · Score: 1

    ...although many neuroscientists think that they may lead to 'mental clutter' or task-obsessiveness

    Oh, you mean creativity?

  136. World Bridge Federation by morcheeba · · Score: 5, Informative

    The World Bridge Federation already tests for drugs and some has already lost a medal for refusing the test.

    1. Re:World Bridge Federation by BridgeBum · · Score: 1

      The World Bridge Federation has since stopped the drug testing. There was an initiative within the bridge community to become recognized by the IOC to potential compete in the Olympic Winter Games. The IOC is considering opening up the Winter Games to 'mental sports' categories, such as bridge, chess, etc. The drug testing was part of the effort to match the IOC requirements for sports testing.

      The Bridge World, the leading bridge journal, had a long series of editorials on the subject. I think that their content isn't available publicly, unfortunately. However I can report that the expert bridge community was skeptical about the testing before any of the events happened and outraged by what did happen. For example, cafeine is a drug that is on the IOC's banned list for performance enhancers. Anyone want to guess how much coffee is consumed at a bridge tournament?

      The WBF changed these rules on their own whim without really seeing what the players wanted, and the parent's link points to some of the fall out. While the WBF has done some good things for bridge, this one is one of the many blunders by the WBF over the years, and I'm sure it will not be the last.

      Disclaimer: I have a silver medal in a WBF world championship, plus many top 10 finishes in North American championship events (including 1 gold), so I have direct experience with these types of events, the WBF and how their events operate.

      --
      My UID is the product of 2 primes.
    2. Re:World Bridge Federation by morcheeba · · Score: 1

      thanks for the followup!

  137. The Punchline... by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 1

    "Eat these, they're 'Smart Pills'."

    "Ewwww! These taste like rabbit turds!"

    "See? You're smarter already!"

  138. tried a caffine free diet for a month... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... as an experiment
    Supposedly it takes 48 hours to get caffine out of your system, so a daily drinker is never "clean".

    no chocolate, no soda, no coffee.
    no big deal.
    No noticable changes in temperment, energy, clarity. nothing.

    But when I had that first cup of java after a month long fast .... woo hoo - I felt the engines spool up.

    Never went back to the massive amounts of caffine I used to take, but it's more from adopting a new habit (fruit juice instead of coffee for the morning, etc.)

    caffine is no big deal.

  139. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by celtic_hackr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You mean if I'd been "coached", I could of raised my score from 1585 to 1600!? Damn! While thoughtful, this idea is flawed in many respects. First, there is is no doubt that well off families have more resources and thus have advantages. But there are many ways for less well off families to obtain the equivalent advantages. I would say that at least in America the only truly disadvantaged families are the very poor. Middleclass families all have sufficient means to have rich environments for children to learn. Secondly, just because a family is well off doesn't mean they will actually produce better environments for raising children with better intellect. Thirdly, anyone interested in getting "coached" in SAT can do so very simply, there are books and many schools also prepare students for SATs. In fact, many schools with historically poor SAT scores spend a great deal of time teaching exactly the information tested on SATs in hopes of getting better school marks. This of course produces students who are great at taking tests, but very poor at thinking independently. Unfortunately, SATs are one of the traditionally WASP based intelligence tests, and hence are written from a certain social perspective, and there is a limit to how well students from othe sub-cultures can reasonably expect to do on them. Were the SAT to be written by a group of professors who grew up in let's say Watt's Park, there would almost certainly be a very different distribution of scores nationwide. The problem with intelligence tests is they are all skewed to a particular perspective. Just because someone scores 1170 on an SAT doesn't necessarily mean that a person who scored a 1030 is not as smart. IQ tests, are only useful for judging people from a common societal background. Deaf people routinely fail the English section on SATs and graduation tests. Not because they are dumb but because they are not exposed to the idiomatic speech on a regular basis, and also they use a very reduced dictionary. There is no sign for gorgeous; the sign for beautiful is used instead. Well, I could continue with other flaws in the above post, but I need to go eat my brain building popcorn and get some brain rejuvenating sleep.

  140. Nicotine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Just thought I'd point out that nicotine has been found to have beneficial effects on memory and concentration. Unfortunately, it has the side-effects of being horribly addictive and killing pretty much everyone who uses it.

  141. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    The OCD meme here reminds me of Laney in William Gibson's novels. He is so set upon one thing he completely ignores his chronic illness and ends up dying for his 'cause' - watching the nodal formation come to a head and making sure it happens. It can be argued that this is natural for many people throughout history, some of us are just wired differently. I couldn't imagine taking chemicals to get to this state however.

  142. ALL NSAIDS!!! (including ibuprofen!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes, i was following the research and said, "duh, it's just cox-2" to people using celebrex or bextra (both by pfizer, as opposed to vioxx by merck).

    however, GUESS WHAT, turns out good ol' ibuprofen HAS THE SAME RISKS OF MI (heart attack)!!!

    i've also been saying from the beginning that merck should never have taken vioxx off the market to try and look like heroes from their shady cover-ups. they should have stayed quiet and put a warning label on the bottle and sent information to doctors and pharmacists.

    do you know what the reports SAY about blocking cox-2? that it prevents estrogen from taking a protective effect on the heart. aka, the reason why women have statistically fewer heart attacks than men. warning about cox-2 is like saying "oh god, you're a MAN?! you're SO gonna have a heart attack."

  143. What will you do when you feel your brain aging? by UpnAtom · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just wanted to say that your post was great apart from the above question which is somewhat unfortunate.

    If you expect to start feeling your brain age, what are the likely consequences of such an expectation?

    feel brain age -> believe getting old -> start acting old -> start bad posture -> start bad health

    Here's another:

    feel brain age -> notice normal brain underperformance -> expect brain to underperform -> brain underperforms

    Technically speaking, the question is both an embedded hypnotic command and a presuppositional pattern.

  144. I tried Modafinil.... by Jharish · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...and it does work similar to speed.

    The problem is that yes, it did sharpen my concentration and make me awake all night(I worked a grave shift in a NOC) but it also made me extremely frustrated, short on patience and irritable. I broke three mice and four keyboards before I stopped taking the stuff.

    1. Re:I tried Modafinil.... by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      You didn't happen to work at the UUNET NOC did you? Our entire team was using every over the counter drug we could think of and we went through mice and keyboards like mad, but someone on the other half of the week was an absolute beast to his workstation.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    2. Re:I tried Modafinil.... by Eddie_Buzz · · Score: 1

      I have been taking Modafinil for near on 18 months in the UK to work through my sleeping disorder. I have seen huge changes to my work ethic and effiency - besides not having to take any more naps at lunch time.

      I can't say that I have had problems with patience and irritablility - in fact quite the opposite, but there are other side effects that i get like indegestion. One of the strangest things that started to happen to me though has to be that I generated a stutter/stammer. I have never had one before.

      Despite a few set backs, I am a lot happier to know that when I wake up, i'm staying awake, i'm not constantly drowsy anymore and I can manage a conversation at 08:00am.

    3. Re:I tried Modafinil.... by langles · · Score: 1

      While I've never tried speed and can't compare the two, when I was on Modafinil for a couple of months, I didn't experience any bad sad effects. Taking it in the morning, I felt awake and alert during the day, and could still sleep at night. (This was about three years ago. My neurologist prescribed it to counteract a medication I was on for chronic headaces - novarsc - a calcium channel blocker - that was making me very tired.

      The only negative side-effect that I noticed was that my physical reflexes were more sensitive (or twitchy) than normal for the first few days. So I had to be more careful, for instance, when getting out of a wet bathtub/shower.

      As for the mental stimulation, I didn't feel overstimulated, but I did feel like my mind was the sharpest it had ever been at concentrated thinking and coding.

    4. Re:I tried Modafinil.... by jackrd · · Score: 1

      You need to get those huge old IBM keyboard with the big metal plate in them. I pound the crap out of mine constantly and it hasn't broken yet.

      I did break one of the newer, lighter, mostly-plastic ones, but it took grabbing it by one end and repeatedly smashing it into my desk.

  145. Ah yes... sappho juice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the collected and condensed vaginal secretions of underage virgins ... preferably from hentai'd bisexual Nip schoolgirls.

  146. Undermedication by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    The other side of it though is that the problem of undermedication is a probably bigger problem than it's opposite.

    The number of people who have a serious and perfectly treatable condition, such as high blood pressure, is astounding. One of the few ways to reach these not too initiative strong people is through TV commercials.

    So I suspect these ads, distasteful as they may be, actually save quite a lot of lives.

    1. Re:Undermedication by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      If people need drugs, their doctor should be the one to decide. If the problem is that people aren't getting checkups often enough, advertisements are not a solution!

      Doctors should be telling patients they need a drug, not the other way around.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:Undermedication by Gorimek · · Score: 1

      A lot of people never see a doctor, or if they do it's for some very specific and acute problem.

      You can say that it shouldn't be that way - even using italics - but that doesn't change the reality of the situation.

      If the problem is that people aren't getting checkups often enough, advertisements are not a solution!

      How do you know? Has there been a study made proving it?

    3. Re:Undermedication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Only if these ads are to encourage people to see a doctor. Those with perfectly treatable conditions who aren't being treated are not seeing a doctor. They don't need TV ads. What, do you work for the pharma. industry? Hmm?

    4. Re:Undermedication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do we need to save lives? All those old people who have untold riches and property and cars and a good cushy nice job. If they keep being unhealthy then when they die they will provide a nice inheritence to their children, thus making their lives a lot more richer and easy to live without working 70hrs/week. Besides we need more good job openings for new people so if the old ones 'die off' , that helps.

    5. Re:Undermedication by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      How do you know? Has there been a study made proving it?
      It's common sense. Advertisements are designed to sell things to you; they don't have your best interests at heart. Those drug companies would happily advertise Viagra to women if they thought they could get away with it. Doctors, however, do have your best interest at heart (theoretically, at least). If you're going to take some potentially dangerous medicine, wouldn't you want to be able to trust the person telling you to take it? Can you trust someone who's trying to sell you something?
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Undermedication by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      You spent a whole paragraph on not replying to what he said. He didn't say anything about best interests. He asked how you know that the ads do not prompt more people into seeing a doctor. Then you reply "common sense," and talk about something else. Well, if the companies are spending money to run these ads, and if getting the product requires seeing a doctor, then common sense tells me that it's likely that more people are seeing doctors because of these ads. Irrespective of "best interest."

    7. Re:Undermedication by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I realized I misunderstood him right after I hit "submit." Sorry about that.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    8. Re:Undermedication by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      Well you don't have to go and be so decent about it. ;-)

  147. Superhuman strength. by NarrMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Alright, try to keep up on this logical march. Keep in mind, some of this is speculation, but all have a basis in fact.

    1) Muscles are controlled by neurons.
    2) At any given time, only a fraction of muscle fibers are available in a given muscle. This is due to some neurons having high thresholds from never being used or used infrequently. The ratio of total fibers/useable fibers is called "neuromuscular efficiency", and the mechanism by which thresholds are lowered is called the "Hebbian Mechanism". (for this discussion, I am speaking mainly of fast-twitch fibers).
    3) It's possible to train and open up new neurons through heavy strength training, such as Powerlifting/Olympic Weightlifting (note: not Bodybuilding).
    4) Strength athletes (high jumpers, sprinters, weightlifters, powerlifters) in general have a higher degree of NM efficiency than untrained individuals (somewhere along the lines of 30-50% as opposed to 5%-10%). Case in point- Judd Biasotto, former powerlifter who, at a bodyweight of 132, bench pressed over 300 lbs. and squatted over 600 lbs. In some extreme life or death cases, effciency can be increased dramatically, by either drugs(PCP), adrenaline(mothers lifting cars on their sides to save their children trapped underneath), or mental disease. Basically, you can lift a car, your brain either
    a) doesn't know or
    b) won't let you.
    5) Increasing NM efficiency involves lowering present neural thresholds, making an activity "easier" in terms of neural drive, and allowing new neurons/muscle fibers to be recruited.
    6) Some of the drugs mentioned in the article strengthen neural connections.
    7) If these drugs affect motor neurons in the body as well, the thresholds for these neurons would be greatly lowered, and neuromuscular efficiency would increase dramatically, maybe past reachable norms. (>50%) (hell, if they affect motor neurons as well as neurons in the brain, any technical skill could be used as an example).
    8) Net result: dramatic increases in strength in a relatively short amount of time, without a significant increase in bodyweight. The ability to exert more force would come from using nearly all the available fibers in an existing muscle.
    9) ???
    10) Profit!


    I, for one, welcome our Volvo lifting overlords.

    /would love to volunteer for a clinical trial investigating the above scenario.
    //The Matrix has you.

    --
    That's right. All your base.
  148. Re:cannabis by benna · · Score: 1

    Actually I wrote that one not-high.

    --
    "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  149. bye by master_meio · · Score: 0

    So maybe your opinions aren't relevant?

  150. IRRESPONSIBLE Article by The+MESMERIC · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am fed up of seeing such make-believe articles only to encourage drug abuse.

    If you think you can solve everything by fad chemicals - ha think again
    (and am sorry if you've lost that ability).

    I find it shameful Cephalon allowing (if not secretely promoting)
    the spread of such myths concerning its main drug Provigil.

    I take Provigil(Modafinil), I hate it, I fight against it - but I have to at times.
    The side effects: nausea, headaches, being jittery and getting nightmares.
    Hardly a feeling of enlightenment:
    If anything your brain feels alert but in a "silent" state (unwilling to think much) -
    receptive but barely pro-active barely eager to take on intellectual challenges.
    Even a can of RedBull with a shot a vodka achieves better results.

    Wanna get more intelligent? Fucking read, fucking study, Learn a foreign language, adopt a healthy lifestyle, exercise, travel the world, experience life, mix with people, push your mind to the limit but you don't need these short-circuiting drugs that will only damage your nervous system in the long run.

    Still .. since when pharmaceutical companies care about telling the truth?
    People prefer easy answers, readily buying into their propaganda ...

  151. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

    Yes you can. If the kid does badly on tests but has the raw ability, you can coach them to get them up to higher scores.

    150 points is a normal jump. 300 is not unusual.

    Note that 200 points is a standard deviation, so this puts you in a new scholarship bracket.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  152. Re:This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs. by saforrest · · Score: 2, Informative
    What's your point, That he retained ability into fairly old age or what?

    I was referring to the following bit from the Wikipedia article. I haven't read The Man Who Loved Only Numbers, but I have read My Brain is Open, and his drug use was mentioned there.

    After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, who bet him $500 that he could not stop taking amphetamines for a month. He won the bet, but complained that mathematics had been set back for a month. He complained, "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." The bet won, he promptly resumed his habit.
  153. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
    You mean if I'd been "coached", I could of raised my score from 1585 to 1600!? Damn!
    A good breakfast and an extra hour of sleep could have raised your score to a 1600. Seriously, it's the difference of ONE question (or maybe two). The only difference between my 1510 and my 1590 was the amount of sleep I got the night before.
    Unfortunately, SATs are one of the traditionally WASP based intelligence tests, and hence are written from a certain social perspective, and there is a limit to how well students from othe sub-cultures can reasonably expect to do on them. Were the SAT to be written by a group of professors who grew up in let's say Watt's Park, there would almost certainly be a very different distribution of scores nationwide.
    What in the test reflects a WASP perspective? The analogies (i.e., vocabulary)? The reading passages (that even WASPs haven't seen before)? The math?!

    None of the questions on the SAT require any kind of prior knowledge except for logical reasoning and vocabulary. Even the reading comprehension questions are just that: questions to see if you comprehend what you read, not questions to see if you can relate that to some other knowledge. As for vocabulary, well, this is the United States of America, and to function in society you need to understand English. Not Spanish (except maybe in California and a few other places), and not ebonics. English. It could only be called cultural discrimination if someone prohibited you from reading Moby Dick (etc.).
    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  154. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Insightful
    All in all, if your parents have the means, you are more likely to have a better raw iq, possibly an enhanced measured intelligence, and a better education than someone whose parents are not of means.
    Couldn't you also argue that if your parents have the means, they probably got them them due to intelligence? And that you inherited your intelligence from them genetically?

    I think we can agree that there's a correlation, but I don't think there's enough evidence to prove causation (in either direction).
    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  155. Idaho PBS Show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The tagline was, "If you take a pill, you're participating in an experiment." If you're a believer in evolution, then you'll see that things like Prescription drugs weaken us. It allows the genes which are susceptible to keep producing. If you start making people smarter with a pill, then you will soon have to rely on that pill. Be careful, we're fuckin with Nature here.

  156. An even more relevant example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suppose that dumb people are more likely to be careless about using birth control. Voila! Stupidity is now an evolutionary advantage!

    Remember, evolutionary success consists of having lots of descendents. Nothing more, nothing less. Nothing about how worthwhile those descendents are, how intelligent, rich or good looking. They just need to exist.

    The mistake that the eugenics people made is to confuse evolutionary success with other kinds of success that our culture values. There is a simple way to notice this flavour of BS - where are the kids?

  157. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could argue whatever you want, but without proper statistical analysis I don't particularly care what you argue.

  158. Marijuana by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marijuana is an excellent way in small amounts to increase your ability to concentrate. Even a small amount too much will wreck your short-term memory though

  159. moderate parent by garbletext · · Score: 0

    I mod any clockwork orange reference up. A shame I have no points. Oh well, I'll just command someone else to do it.

  160. My cat, by flibberdi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    My cats breath smells like catfood :)

  161. Hogwash! by jgardn · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is absolute hogwash. What happens to the rich is they get lazy. And the lazy don't exercise their brain or bodies and they get weak. If there's one thing history teaches us it is that through competition and conflict and struggle humanity thrives. We need adversity, and we crave it, and it strengthens us.

    You can't buy intelligence. You can buy the appearance of intelligence, you can buy credentials, you can buy your way into accolades and titles, but that doesn't mean you are smart. What happens is that these people begin to conglomerate and pat each other on the back and tell each other they are doing a good job when they are miserable failures.

    Then they get setup for failure. Someone smarter, faster, more adaptive comes along and rocks their world to pieces. That's what's happening to the democrat party. They are sitting on their success of FDR, and haven't realized that sixty years of being second fiddle has given the republican party the ability and the blood and the intelligence to engineer a revolution. The funny thing is that the same thing happened to the republican party sixty years ago, led by an upstart called FDR!

    I keep thinking back to the Chinese illiterati writing poetry and drawing pictures, when Genghis Khan to the north was gathering troops and fighting for his life and for his future. When the two forces met, who was the conqueror? The well-bred rich illiterati with thousands of years of experience of ruling over millions of people? Or the Mongol hordes led by a brilliant general who knew how to win battles decisively? If the Chinese were so smart, they would've been training like the Greeks and the Romans and the British in their heyday.

    --
    The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
    1. Re:Hogwash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was with you until you added a shameless political statement that many will feel contradicts your entire point.

  162. Red Dwarf quote by hokanomono · · Score: 1

    Rimmer: What's this? Learning drugs? They're illegal, matey! Where did you get them? I'm afraid you're in very serious, grave, deep trouble, Lister. Where did you get them? I want names, I want places, I want dates. Lister: Arnold Rimmer, his locker, this morning.

    --
    This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
  163. Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The incomprehensibly smart all kill themselves.
    Kind of puts a damper on the whole thing.

  164. MEDITATION GALORE by psytrance · · Score: 1

    Meditation is a risk-free brain enhancer.

    I would recommend practicing Samadhi meditation, the deepest meditative state of Yoga. It is taught by the India-based SSY. It is a state of "no-mind": supressing/dis-identifying with thoughts. Benefits set in with regular practice over several months. It's an easy practice - basically passive, allowing thoughts to blow away un-attended. You do it 3 times a day for 15 minutes and become *extremely* relaxed.

    Benefits include improved memory, near-perfect concentration, no inner conflict (!) and increased oratory skills. Health-wise it cures one from the oh-so-popular state of chronic excess of mental activity, which manifests as nervousness/anxiety, over-talkativeness, sleep problems due to inability to "let-go" of thoughts (known as "subjective insomnia"), etc. It is also good for psychosomatic related disorders, including asthma, joint pain (stress-related) and perhaps even diabetes (?).

    For a firsthand description of the experience read the intruiging "The Power of Now" by Eckhart Tolle.

    Search terms: Samadhi consciousness, unitary consciousness, unified consciousness, no-mind.

    enjoy :-)

    1. Re:MEDITATION GALORE by The+MESMERIC · · Score: 1

      how much does your guru charge?
      or is it just another soul it wants?

      aaah the powers of toxic lunacy ... spiritual energies - my arse.

      enjoy (while you can)

    2. Re:MEDITATION GALORE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "while you can" is a long time when tapping into infinite energy

    3. Re:MEDITATION GALORE by The+MESMERIC · · Score: 1

      enjoy while you can your embedded notions
      - you are but guru fodder soon to be recycled.

  165. Fair new world by jandersen · · Score: 1

    It seems odd to me that this kind of drugs are promoted so uncritically - considering that throughout history all the 'fatastic enhancement' drugs have gone the same way: cocaine, heroin, ...

    Perhaps it is valid to search for this kind of drugs - but as time passes it becomes more and more blatantly obvious that the current laws about recreational drugs (which is all these new ones are going to be in the end) are woefully inadequate; and written by wild-eyed paranoics too.

    Think about it: We all know that recreational drugs are more or less harmful in several ways. We all know that each year there are people who go down and even die because of them. We also know from our experience as a society with alcohol, that it is possible for most to avoid these sad effects, even though there are alcoholics who die every year.

    So wouldn't it be better to decriminalise drugs in some sensible way? In the current situation a large part of the devastation caused by drug use is caused not by the drug, but by the fact that it is a crime to buy or use it. In my opinion it would make sense in so many ways if these things did not have to be bought from unscrupulous dealers and used in dangerous environments.

    Firstly, however damaging the pure drug is, it becomes much worse when it is mixed with whichever rat-poison the dealer happens to have lying around. The health costs would be smaller if drug users had access to clean drugs and relatively safe conditions in which to use them, and many drug users would be able to pursue gainful employment rather than having to resort to crime, if they didn't have to raise hundreds of dollars each day.

    Secondly, the entire class of 'drugs related crime' would not exist or be greatly reduced, thus freeing up police and jails.

    Now I can't see anything wrong with these arguments - please point it out to me if there is anything obvious I have missed.

  166. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by japhmi · · Score: 1

    While there are problems with your overall argument, I have to agree that diet can have a drastic effect on intelligence.

    Example: lots of people feed infants and todlers low-fat diets. That's STUPID. Fat is required for brain development. If you feed a low-fat diet to a young child, it will have an effect on their brain development.

    --
    "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
  167. We need Nanotech for the ultimate no side efect ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The development of advanced nantoechnologies more than likely allow us to selectively turn on and off intelleigence boosting and vastly increase our brain power, for when you have the ability to use programmable nanobots that are probably going to be made of DNA and RNA machinery anyway and be programmable, we can then gain full control and capability to modify and improve every cell in our bodies and thus be able to soup up brain cells and, of course, control aging etc, so why get old, just develope nanotech and get younger, smarter...funny thing though, if everybody can be a nerdy genius, then what will happen to all the nerds, as being a nerd will no longer be "special" and most people will expect the nerd to re-program themselves to be normal people with occasional lapses into nerddom. It looks like we will need a bill of rights for the 24 hour nerd!!

  168. meth by mshurpik · · Score: 1

    They're watering down crystal meth now....what, full strength had some side effects?

  169. Re:cannabis by cnettel · · Score: 1

    Didn't you say that you were more insightful even when you were not-high?

  170. Re:cannabis by varjag · · Score: 1

    Maybe you're just growing up?

    --
    Lisp is the Tengwar of programming languages.
  171. Clearly by Presidential · · Score: 1

    Bush junior was stuffed full of these things on the second and third debates. I believe one of the side effects listed is blinking like a strobe light.

    --
    Whenever Mrs. Fitch breaks wind, we beat the dog.
  172. I just wanna be smart... by erroneus · · Score: 1

    ...but I don't want to devote the time, effort and most importantly the discipline required to bring order to a mind in chaos.

    There's something to be said for learning how to learn and how to think.

    On the other hand, there could easily be reasons why people are getting dumber and dumber. Could it be all the crap, enhancements and preservatives in most all of our food now?

    I know this woman who boasts of "Adult ADHD" and thinks she needs an assload of meds to function properly. I seriously suspect she needs to stop smoking, drinking alcohol and too many caffeine drinks, too much junk food and clean her body out before she thinks she should be taking a bunch of pills. I don't have any data to back my thoughts up, but I get a really strong feeling that people at large just need to clear the crap from their bodies instead of medicating... oh yeah, and exercise a bit. Christ! Stop circling the parking lot at the malls for two hours and just want the extra 30 yards!!!

  173. Re:Reminds me of Xenocide by HuguesT · · Score: 1

    Look up logorrhea (yes it's a real word).

  174. Really Dealing Ritalin by wild_berry · · Score: 1

    Ritalin is a Class A drug in the UK (alongside cocaine, esctasy, and heroin), and in its pharmacology it is an amphetamine.

    There's plenty of anecdotal stories of parents of ADHD kids using their kids' pills to help them concentrate on exams and the like. Crushed and snorted is more effective than swallowing the pill because it gets into the blood system quicker and in a more-concentrated dose.

    However, the same people who tell me about this abuse of the drug have studies coming out of their ears saying that, in the UK, medicating an adolescent with ADHD earlier rather than later has a hugely benficial effect upon the outcome of the treatment process. This may be a combination of socio-economic and familial factors as much as helping the child fit in with the academic goals set in school and consequent fitting-in in society.

  175. targetting the singularity by Augoeides · · Score: 1

    I'm intrigued by the idea of people taking nth generation smart drugs while working on resarching n + 1th generation smart drugs ad nauseum. This could quickly accelerate out of control. Maybe I'm being a bit too dramatic though.

  176. Drugs are not the only answer by bitswapper · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine has a brother who had a bad case of ADD, and he went on some kind of special ADD diet that is supposed to remove all kinds of substances, both naturally occuring and artificial (like preservatives). It was very successfull. He doesn't need to take ritalin.

  177. I take Modafinal (Provigil) and it's not all that. by Frankenmoro · · Score: 1

    It's not all that, let me tell you. I've not noticed any "sharpening" of my mental acuity, quite the opposite. I feel more distracted and less able to focus on it. Now, give me some good old tried and true stimulants, which mostly kick the brain into super-learning mode, and then we'll talk. Yep, my drug of choice is still Adderall (amphetamine salts).

  178. NSAID "stomach upset" can be fatal by linoleo · · Score: 1

    For example, aspirin can cause an upset stomach in some people -- but it's also been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease. If I were in a high-risk group, I know I'd rather have a grumbling stomach than a malfunctioning heart.

    Bad example. Aspirin and other NSAIDs can cause fatal stomach bleeding in some people - I know because I've been there: intensive care, blood transfusion, all because of a prescription of naproxen (= Aleve over-the-counter) for a torn ligament. This is not all that rare: several thousand people die from it each year in the U.S. alone. But NSAIDs are among the biggest money-makers for the big pharmas, so it's all nicely swept under the rug.

    "Upset stomach", my ass - that's like saying a bullet might give you abdominal pain. Technically true, but a bit of an understatement.

    --
    Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
  179. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by mutterc · · Score: 1

    I've heard the claim that better pre-natal nutrition makes a huge difference in the physical condition of a society's people.

  180. Re:we've been able to buy "intelligence" for mille by m0llusk · · Score: 1

    The privilaged generally eat better than the unprivilaged. They generally have less exposure to environmental toxins. They generally have a more education-centric environment growing up.

    That is partially true, but the situation is more complex than that. Rich people eat more seafood and tend to end up with unusually elevated levels toxins like mercury and dioxin and end up with correspondingly higher levels of risk for related complications. Rates of breast cancer are dramatically correlated with wealth, the current specific suspect being increased levels of saturated fat in the diets of the wealthy.

    The issues with COX-2 inhibitors are also interesting in that the drugs were created in response to observations of tea and other dietary components having a COX-2 inhibition effect combined with reduction of inflammation. The isolated drugs have not behaved exactly as the foods from which they are derived. The same is true of beta carotine which is healthy to eat in food, but appears to cause distruption when isolated and taken orally. Other vitamins also appear to cause problems if taken directly in pure form.

    All this leads me to remember that some of my best proofs when studying math in school came from early morning times when I was despirate and tired and poorly fed and just had to find a way. Somehow it seems that for me at least raw motivation is far more important than mental state.

  181. task-obsessiveness by espidre · · Score: 1

    Drugs of the future...making better employees

  182. tremors, Parkinsons by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Many Parkinsons-like tremors (dyskensias) are caused by certain chemicals like insecticides and PCP. Others are side-effects of SSRIs such as Prozac. Watch out, you are playing with "Mother Nature" here. Many such side-effects arent detected in clinical trials with only thousands of participants, but until millions use it, as with recent pain drugs.

    Irronically, there has been clinically measured anti-correlation between caffine, nicotine and Parkinsons. Its not clear whether these slow down progression, or whether people who have a Parkinsons-resistant brain are attracted to these stimulants.

  183. basic neurochemistry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Basic neurochemistry (me being a dumb med student): NMDA and AMPA -receptors of glutamate are what makes the brain tick. Mice with more receptors learn faster. Two much receptors (or receptor activity) leads to glutamate excitotoxicity (causing dead neurons).

    To balance the exciting glutamate, there are also inhibitory GABA-receptors of various types. Two much GABAergic inhibition causes sleepiness and poor mental performance (benzodiazepines (valium) and alcohol do, among other things, enchance GABAergic inhibition). Too little leads to epileptic fits.

    So I would see epileptic fits and excitotoxicity as possible side-effects, not just a wandering mind...

  184. HTML Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  185. I've seen this too. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    I knew a guy who went crazy whenever he ate junk foods. He was on ritalin, but he never managed to get off the stuff.

    A clean system and a good diet free of artificials is the first step to a clear mind. Many know this, but few act on it. Seems weird that this obvious step is so rarely observed or taken.


    -FL

  186. Excellent speculative fiction regarding this by bitterbastard · · Score: 1

    No, didn't RTFA, but I did read "Camp Concentration" which really makes one think about the eventual consequences of such endevours.

  187. Overclocking the brain voids the warranty by doublem · · Score: 1

    The moral of the story is simple.

    G-d locked the human brain at a specific speed to prevent over clocking. Apparently our brains are already operating at the maximum safe speed, and it's up to the user to optimize usage of the available processing cycles.

    Over clocking methods shorten the usable lifespan of the entire device, impacting wetware well outside the neural system itself.

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  188. Perfect example by mrbuttboy · · Score: 1

    because what happened for you is rare so it isnt going to change anyone else taking the drug. Just because 1 person in a million,or even one in 100,000, had a problem isnt going to stop most people from taking a drug epically if they are taking it for an extra edge.

    I have been waiting for Provigil (modafinil) to be abused for YEARS. It keeps you awake,for days at a time if you want, with what appears to be minimal side effects. Heaven help us if this every goes over the counter.

    --
    What do you say to the man that has nothing? Cast it away!!
    1. Re:Perfect example by linoleo · · Score: 1

      one in 100,000, had a problem

      Over 2 in 100'000 *die* within a year. Over 2 in 10'000 "have a problem" severe enough to land in intensive care in any given year. Makes a risk of about 1% over an adult lifetime of a life-threatening complication. Get your numbers straight.

      Chronic prescription of NSAIDs for blood thinning is controversial precisely because for many patients the risk of dying from the NSAID may be larger than that of dying from a stroke or heart attack.

      --
      Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
  189. AI had BETTER be possible... by alispguru · · Score: 1

    ... because if it isn't, it looks like Vinge-style Focus is possible, and might be really ugly.

    Who do you think would try it first, North Korea or China? Scary,,,

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
    1. Re:AI had BETTER be possible... by beholder77 · · Score: 1

      Probably the United States. It'll be poorly tested by big drug company X in hopes they are the first to get it to market, fast tracked to the general public by corrupt senators who get kickbacks from said company and brought into the media in a branding fenzy as yet unseen by our brand-burned retinas. It will pushed as the dividing line between a sucessful child and a failure in society.

      After all: "Won't somebody please think of the children".

      --
      Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
  190. Re:cannabis by renderhead · · Score: 2, Funny

    You might want to consider factors other than the moderation on your slashdot comments when you determine how insightful you are.

    --
    I wish that my inferiority complex were as good as yours.

    -RenderHead

  191. One advantage of being born in 1956... by alispguru · · Score: 1

    ... is that you have ten years of baby-boomer guinea pigs ahead of you.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  192. Yeah. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Part of me wonders if the negative health effects are to do with the nicotine, or the hundreds of poisonous additives included with corporate tobacco. These days, it is both largely illegal to grow your own, and almost impossible to find non-GM plants.

    The Nazi regime was the first goverment to start propagandizing against smoking. Interesting, that. . .


    -FL

  193. Re:This far into a thread on mind-enhancing drugs. by bstadil · · Score: 1
    Thanks for your answer. Someone else saw my question and mentioned the Wikipedia article.

    I do not recall the drug use being mentioned in Man who lowed only numbers but it is a few years since I read it.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  194. Re:There is nothing "wierd" about anti-doping cont by robertjw · · Score: 1

    The same issue will be very much a reality with these drugs in the workplace.

    Do you seriously think that Corporate America would test employees to see if they are using 'brain-drugs'? Ever wonder why Major League Baseball looks the other way so often on steriod use? Ever wonder why the NFL and NBA penalties for drug use are so (relatively) lenient? Performance enhancing drug use by professional athletes is good for business. The athletes are stronger, faster, perform better. All of this results in more exciting games and higher revenue. The biggest area(s) where you see drug testing is amateur athletics (olympics, NCAA, etc...), where no one (theoretically) is making any money on the athletes and the games are 'pure'. Professional sports organizations, at least in the US, ignore the problem until the press or government get involved.

    How can you possibly think the same thing won't happen in the corporate/scientific world. I'm sure many, many companies would endorse any chemicals that would significantly enhance cognitive abilities privately, if not publicly, at least until the side effects proved severly damaging.

  195. Some stuff that got left out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Human Growth Hormone and testosterone supplementation are both being used to limit age related mental decline.

  196. professional sports are already harmful by CaptainPinko · · Score: 1
    the amount of training it takes is already harmful. I was going out with a girl who was competing at the nation level trying to make it on the olympic team. She was constantly stressed out and never had time for me or her friends or her family. We broke up due to the lack of together time. She hooked up with a mutual friend of ours.... they broke up for the same reason. Whenever I see anyone from our highschool days I ask have they seen or heard from her? The answer is always no. How is this even remotely healthy? Athletics already requires a commitent that is emotional damaging... why not throw physically damaging onto the list too?

    I also have reservations whether putting your body through too much work is healthy. Excercise is healthy sure, and so are professional sports, but olympic athletes (those not involved in the more professional events) destroy themselves routinely trying to get first place, they have no concern over there own safety they just want to win. Let them.

    --
    Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
    1. Re:professional sports are already harmful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bitter much? nice sweeping generalization, btw.

  197. Re: Strattera is not "a better drug" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no such thing as "a better drug", and while I think it may be a good idea to try Strattera first, there's certainly no gurantee it will be effective, even in cases where Ritalin or Adderall are. Medication is an inherently personal thing, and you'll have to try different ones to find out which is most effective.

    Let me preface this by saying I was diagnosed with mild ADD when I was thirteen (and a few other things since then) and have generally avoided medication. I've never used any medication for more than a month. I've sampled all three, though Strattera was the only one I used for an extended period of time. On the occasions that I've borrowed the stimulant medicine from friends, I've found it to be quite effective, with Ritalin leaning more toward the focused side and Adderall more toward the stimulated side.

    I decided to try going back to school last year and thought some medication might be helpful, so I went to see a doctor. I was diagnosed in 45 minutes and he didn't seem like he was listening to me as much as telling me (we never even touched on the 8 pages of material I prepared). But still, I walked out with one prescription to start on and he wanted to add another one in a month. I'm kind of anti-meds, but I thought I should give it a shot. He wouldn't prescribe me any stimulant medication because of my personal history (ADD meds aren't the only thing I've sampled *ehhem*). I thought that was kind of silly since he was writing me a prescription to take it EVERY DAY, which was less than I ever had on my own, but whatever. I started at 40mg on the Strattera, and one week later I was automatically bumped up to 80mg (why?). After a few days one morning my heart seemed to be beating fast, so I checked my pulse - 130+ RESTING. I called him and he had me drop the dose back down. The rest of the month involved increased anxiety, panic attacks (which I hadn't had in a while), and a dazed feeling, during which I'd just stare at things (like the wall) for long periods of time. Needless to say, after a month I stopped, and I didn't go back to pick up that other script.

    I'm not saying that's going to happen to everyone who takes it. Maybe you'll freak out on the speed (Adderall is amphetamine), maybe strattera will work great for you, but you have to find out what works FOR YOU.

  198. Homer by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    And lo, the two shall be forever locked in conflict. The enslaved brain rebels by obeying the liver's tyrannical dictates to the letter: by consuming precisely that which causes the liver the most pain.
    I must drink beer. Beer is the liverkiller.


    "All right brain, I don't like you, and you don't like me. But let's just do this, and I can get back to killing you with beer!"
    "Deal!"

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  199. They are by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    All these ads include a "talk to your doctor about " part. Since they are prescription medicines, there is no other way for people to actually buy the product.

  200. LSD & Slashdot by Wescotte · · Score: 1

    The effect was generally intense halucinations for about 2-3 hours and tapering off after that depending on dose, unbelievable physical energy (we often walked 10 miles in a night, in any weather), and an intense feeling of really "getting it" and achieving intense understanding which was forgotten once it wore off. A portable dictation machine affirmed the fact that we didn't actually achieve anything beyond the feeling of getting it -- insights were gibberish.

    Hmm, this the above how a slashdoter describes "far out man"?

  201. Correct. by Decimal · · Score: 1

    You're absolutely right. I hope no one would take my mention of my disorder and how much certain medication (approved by the FDA for treating it) helped me as scientific proof for treating other people's disorders. If anyone suspects they or their children have AD/HD, they should see their doctors and ask them about the body of scientific evidence behind the disorder and recommended treatments. The same goes for clinical depression, anxiety disorder, aspergers syndrome and chronic migraines. Thank you for the advisory.

    Also, I am not a lawyer, and nothing in my posts reflect the views of my employer. Use any information you recieve from my post at your own risk. This poster takes no responsibility for any damage, injury or theft that occurs or is caused by looking at this text. Any resemblance to other posts, living or dead is unintentional and purely coincidental. If rash, irritation, redness or swelling occur, discontinue reading. Do not read while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Batteries not included. May contain nuts.

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  202. Singularity effect? by ponos · · Score: 1

    Well, the famous singularity effect is produced by the ability of progress to fuel even greater progress. I wonder, If drug designers start taking mind-enhancing drugs, will this mean even more succesful mind-enhancing drugs (and so on...)? Funny thought.

    Anyway, I suppose that with the life expectancy continuously increasing and many old people suffering from dementia this could mean a few more useful years. I can see a market for that, besides crazy, burn-out programming and studying.

    P.

  203. Buffered Aspirin by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Informative

    For example, aspirin can cause an upset stomach in some people -- but it's also been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease. If I were in a high-risk group, I know I'd rather have a grumbling stomach than a malfunctioning heart.

    The studies showing the protective effect were done with buffered aspirin to protect the participants' stomachs. The buffers are typically magnesium salts.

    There are claims that further studies using plain aspirin without the magnesium showed no protective effects and were not published. The implication is a simply magnesium supplement, or your daily vitamin is just as effective without the side-effects.

    Does anybody here know of some scientific study of this?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  204. mental gym.... by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    In a real gym, you put weights to slow you down to grow your muscles, so why not do the same with your brain. ie.

    Force your brain to slow down or give it 'weights' and then 'excercise' some mental tests, so perhaps try programming while under lsd or pot. Or try anything that requires a sharp mind, but do it while bent, that way you train your mind to perform better under 'difficult' conditions, so when your normal, you'll be flying with ease.

    If you dont like drugs, then do the mentally challanging stuff after not sleeping for 24hrs.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  205. Too small to matter for risk-takers by mrbuttboy · · Score: 1

    the point is numbers this small DONT MATTER. Not to someone who is trying to get an edge. Not to someone who doesnt care what the numbers are. All that will matter is that he know 200 people who have used the drugs and never had any side effects.

    "1 in 50,000? thats going to stop me? HA! It won't happen to me."

    --
    What do you say to the man that has nothing? Cast it away!!
  206. Flowers for Algernon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ugh -- sounds like
    Flowers for Algernon
    (see also the author's Web site).

  207. Now I know how the baseball players feel by ralphc · · Score: 1

    Even if I may be against using these drugs personally, will I be competing against others that do use them? Will those that don't use them, either at a personal or corporate level, someday be at a disadvantage against those that do?

  208. Opiods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EnderWiggnz wrote:

    > * For many patients, opioid analgesics--when used as recommended by established pain management guidelines--are the most effective way to treat their pain, and often the only treatment option that provides significant relief.
    ---
    They may provide pain relief, but opiods have many *sucky* side effects. I'm on 24x7 oxycontin and it sucks for cognition and memory impairment. Also, weight gain due to intestinal slowdown (multi-day constipation) and general decline of emotional and mental stability.

    Anyone who has been forced to be on opioids for pain-relief for over a year is likely to complain more about side-effects than 'benefits'. But constant pain really sucks too and isn't great for mood, concentration or a life blessed with, even moments of, happiness.

    Lack of pain treatment goes far beyond undermedication -- it extends way into the realm of research and finding non-mind numbing medications that can selectively block pain impulses as effectively as opioids -- NSAIDS like Vioxx (was on it) don't come even close to controlling severe and chronic pain.

    I don't want to 'out' myself as someone who is mentally impaired (thus anon), but I am, very noticably, impaired from my pre-injury, pre-opioid state. I have moments of variably lucidity, but not reliably enough to hold down a job.

    Bottom line -- rich american men who control research financing need to stop thinking that the need for pain medication is for "wussies" and spend more research $$ to find non-stupifying alternatives.

    -semi-regular (irregular?) slashdot poster-

  209. Re:cannabis by LuSiDe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Long-haul truckers and Air Force pilots have long popped amphetamines to ward off drowsiness. Generations of college students have swallowed over-the-counter caffeine tablets to get through all-nighters. But such stimulants provide only a temporary edge, and their effect is broad and blunt -- they boost the brain by juicing the entire nervous system.

    Its the law... how long till it gets demonized by FUD and becomes illegal, like MDMA, LSD and cannabis?

    --
    WE DON'T NEED NO BLOG CONTROL.
  210. Re:cannabis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    might i suggest that perhaps it is the socialization of marijuana which has benefitted you?

    the rastafarian tradition has a rite called the Reasoning whereby the person honored with the lighting says a short prayer, and the bowl is passed counterclockwise and people discuss ethical, religious and social issues.

  211. This isn't news by SoulSkorpion · · Score: 1

    I'm mildly ADD, and I've been taking Dexamphetamine for several years now. It was no secret that dex boosts the mental agility of anyone who takes it, rather than correcting the specific problems manifest as ADD. I was told that there were actually cases of kids with ADD selling part of their prescribed medication to other kids, who want it to help them study better.

    New trials my arse. This is something I was told about years ago.

  212. Re:cannabis by benna · · Score: 1

    While I would very much love to take part in a reasoning, my drug use has almost exlusivly been done alone in my own home.

    --
    "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  213. Only in the middle class rungs by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    You should read "The Millionaire Next Door" and "The Millionaire Mind." Both are basically books written about the results of interviewing people with over a million dollars in assets about their jobs, their lives, and their backgrounds. Few millionairs credit a superior intellect as having been important to success. Most were not great students in high school and college. The primary exception to this is the small percentage of millionaires who are doctors or lawyers.

    High IQ will get you far in the lower to middle class rungs, but work ethic, social skills, and a viable business idea is what is needed generally to get into the upper crust if you weren't born there (and most millionaires are first generation).

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  214. It's not just ADD/ADHD by WhiteDragon · · Score: 1

    My brother and his son have Bi-Polar disorder, and caffiene makes them sleepy too. On the other hand, something that makes normal people sleepy, like working a 16 hour day at the warehouse, makes him wide awake.

    --
    Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  215. I don't fight my body. by Inoshiro · · Score: 1

    Your body is part of your conciousness as much as your brain is, it's just that the nerves and related tissue in the rest of your body are at a much lower concentration level. If you are in-tune with your body, you can listen to it very well and know what's good. You won't have to fight with it, either. You'll know what foods are best for you (for example, junkfood may be tasty, but it doesn't leave you feeling as good as if you ate healthy). You'll know when you're tired, and be able to wake up naturally on time. Meditation and concentration are really good for this. The model of the human body as something to be conquered and medicalized is a pretty western viewpoint, and not as accurate as the more time-tested models that eastern philosophies (such as buddhism) teach.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  216. Personal Followup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I acquired a prescription for Modafinil a couple of days ago after reading this article - frankly, who wouldn't give it a go? I'm picking 30 days of the stuff up tomorrow. The dosage is the same as was used in the tests (which is normal for this drug anyway).

    I experience ADD and severe sleepiness at work as well (again, who wouldn't? ;) so there are some other possibly beneficial effects to be investigated too.

    I'll attempt to share my experiences and (hopefully vastly improved ;) thoughts with Slashdot in a few days if the editors will allow.

    - nih

    1. Re:Personal Followup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, yeah and before someone calls me 'one of the rich' as I keep seeing in the comments for this article - NZ doesn't have the fucking ridiculous (note spelling, slashdot) price controls that the US does. It cost me about US$65 for a month's supply.

      Anyhow, onward. The sooner I go to bed, the sooner the drug-santa comes.

  217. hmmm by c0p0n · · Score: 1

    He seems to have been in MDMA. It does exactly the same effect in my mind. The best drug I've ever tried.

    --

    Your head a splode