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."
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.
Well. So are we gonna have to start taking drug tests before final exams?
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
Get your own free personal location tracker
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.
I for one welcome our new Emergent overlords!
:)
Sorry a bit obscure
Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
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.
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
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.
Seastead this.
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)
...and not a single mention of Paul Erdös?
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
... even if it is 'natural' ...
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
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
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!"
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.
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/
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
...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.
Alright, try to keep up on this logical march. Keep in mind, some of this is speculation, but all have a basis in fact.
/would love to volunteer for a clinical trial investigating the above scenario.
//The Matrix has you.
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.
That's right. All your base.
I am fed up of seeing such make-believe articles only to encourage drug abuse.
.. since when pharmaceutical companies care about telling the truth? ...
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
People prefer easy answers, readily buying into their propaganda
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...