Slashdot Mirror


'Mind Doping' Becoming More Common

runamock writes "The Los Angeles Times is running a story on the growing use of 'mind drugs': 'Forget sports doping. The next frontier is brain doping. ... Despite the potential side effects, academics, classical musicians, corporate executives, students and even professional poker players have embraced the drugs to clarify their minds, improve their concentration or control their emotions. Unlike the anabolic steroids, human growth hormone and blood-oxygen boosters that plague athletic competitions, the brain drugs haven't provoked similar outrage. People who take them say the drugs aren't giving them an unfair advantage but merely allow them to make the most of their hard-earned skills.'" There's an interesting comment on this topic in Fresh Air's top cultural trends of 2007 broadcast.

371 comments

  1. Flashback! by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    People who take them say the drugs aren't giving them an unfair advantage but merely allow them to make the most of their hard-earned skills.

    That sounds like what I used to say when I was dropping lots of acid and eating oodles of mushrooms in the '80s! Worked for me and never affect me in any way... gotta run, the xmas tree is breathing again.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Flashback! by nowhere.elysium · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well yeah, hallucinogens aren't really what they're suggesting here, I'd hope. Otherwise, TV Poker would be even more boring than usual, because all that'd be going would be a table of players going "Woah, that dude's, like, putting a sword through his head. Or maybe it's my head, maaaan. Y'know, like, uh, swords. Yeah. Swords are sharp man. Y'know, like cutting, right? Yeah."
      Actually, there's a chance that it may make it entertaining enough to actually watch... Who knows? On with the drug trials!

      --
      http://xkcd.com/313/
    2. Re:Flashback! by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      People have been talking about the smellovision for years. Well I now propose the sensavision. This will be used to inject drugs into people while they're watching depending on what the viewer wants to evoke in a scene. Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants. Want them to feel the adrenaline the protagonist feels in a car chase? In goes an injection of adrenaline. It will also be used for Olympic events to duplicate the drugs the Chinese swimmers are taking as well.

    3. Re:Flashback! by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      If youre a child of the 80s you may remember 'Wild Palms'

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Palms

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    4. Re:Flashback! by dattaway · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants. Want them to feel the adrenaline the protagonist feels in a car chase? In goes an injection of adrenaline.

      This is equivalent to giving the media companies root access to the entire population of the planet. Sometimes natural privilege separation is a good thing.

    5. Re:Flashback! by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      That sounds like what I used to say when I was dropping lots of acid and eating oodles of mushrooms in the '80s!

      HA! Liar! They haven't made good, clean acid since the 60s.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:Flashback! by grub · · Score: 1


      HA! Liar! They haven't made good, clean acid since the 60s.

      Having never done it in the '60s I wouldn't know. Most of the blotter we got in the '80s was certainly fun, microdot crap would just rot your guts.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    7. Re:Flashback! by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Funny

      A hundred comments and no Sapho/Mentat/Dune references? Who are you people, and what have you done with the real Slashdot?

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    8. Re:Flashback! by ehrichweiss · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Well yeah, hallucinogens aren't really what they're suggesting here, I'd hope."

      Funny you should say that. SOME hallucinogens behave like smart drugs at lower doses. LSD and mushrooms come to mind. LSD becomes a smart drug at 10% of the "psychedelic dosage" and behaves like it's cousin, Hydergine. Mushrooms start acting as an aphrodisiac at about 25% of the psychoactive dosage. Doesn't help me since the psychoactive dose puts my wife straight into sleepy/tired-land for the most part.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    9. Re:Flashback! by ehrichweiss · · Score: 2

      its=it's

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    10. Re:Flashback! by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Funny

      A hundred comments and no Sapho/Mentat/Dune references? Who are you people, and what have you done with the real Slashdot? What if we took a legendary Danish king, made some clones of him, then gave 'em all a dose of the drug, would that count as a Beowulf cluster?

      See, the Dune references were too easy. We dotters like a challenge, we want to work for our lame jokes.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    11. Re:Flashback! by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Funny

      A hundred comments and no Sapho/Mentat/Dune references? Who are you people, and what have you done with the real Slashdot? They've all crashed and burned after "mind doping" for the last 4 days straight.
       
      /hard & perscription stimulants are a nasty habit to have
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    12. Re:Flashback! by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They haven't made good, clean acid since the 60s.

      That's because Acid's for the plebes. You want the high done right, you hit the mushrooms. Cleaner, smoother trip.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    13. Re:Flashback! by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Apparently you've never had good acid either :-) It's actually one of the safest mind altering substances there is. But it's also impossible to find in its pure form anymore. In that context, you are right. It's shrooms and mesc for me. Back to nature.

      --
      What?
    14. Re:Flashback! by philwx · · Score: 1

      The difference between Steroids and Mind enhancers is that Steroids are actually proven to increase performance. Snake oil brain pills aren't a threat to anyone.

    15. Re:Flashback! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay for the mods modding him troll cause he corrects his own post.

    16. Re:Flashback! by proudfoot · · Score: 1

      People have been talking about the smellovision for years. Well I now propose the sensavision. This will be used to inject drugs into people while they're watching depending on what the viewer wants to evoke in a scene. Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants. Want them to feel the adrenaline the protagonist feels in a car chase? In goes an injection of adrenaline. It will also be used for Olympic events to duplicate the drugs the Chinese swimmers are taking as well.
      Now in a death scene...
    17. Re:Flashback! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Lawnmower Man?

    18. Re:Flashback! by cheeseboy001 · · Score: 1

      Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants. Want them to feel the adrenaline the protagonist feels in a car chase? In goes an injection of adrenaline.
      But movies can already make people sad and excited. They don't need drugs for that.
    19. Re:Flashback! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if we took a legendary Danish king, made some clones of him, then gave 'em all a dose of the drug, would that count as a Beowulf cluster?
      No, because Beowulf was a legendary Swedish king.* But you could probably call it a Hrothgar cluster.

      * Unless you're referring to the other "Beowulf" mentioned once in the early part of the poem, but when I studied the subject the scholarly consensus was that that was a scribal mistake for the Scylding king Beow.
    20. Re:Flashback! by rasputin465 · · Score: 1

      Doesn't help me since the psychoactive dose puts my wife straight into sleepy/tired-land for the most part.

      Sure... *cough cough*, THAT'S what puts her into sleepy/tire-land when you're gettin frisky.

    21. Re:Flashback! by jeremiahbell · · Score: 1

      ...Acid's for the plebes. You want the high done right, you hit the mushrooms. Cleaner, smoother trip.

      You've never had ALD-52.

      http://leda.lycaeum.org/?ID=3516

      --
      "Where have all the good people gone?" - Jack Johnson
    22. Re:Flashback! by CodeBuster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It is the holidays, most of us aren't hovering over Slashdot like we normally do, but on a somewhat different note,

      Why does Dune and its subsequent novels always get the low-budget treatment whenever they are done for film or miniseries? The sci-fi channel stuff is passable in most cases, the acting is generally good, but the sets and the costumes suffer tremendously. How hard is it to film in an actual desert? Computer generated sand looks TERRIBLE and what is with the multicolor still suits that look nothing like the natural environment? Dune has been done badly so many times now that one wonders if it will EVER get the Steve Jackson treatment ala LOTR...sigh well we can hope I suppose.

    23. Re:Flashback! by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Dude, why bother with the TV at that point? Just use the drugs. That's what it comes down to.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    24. Re:Flashback! by Mike89 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants
      Despite the name, depressants don't make you sad, they just 'depress' the nervous system (AFAIK..)
    25. Re:Flashback! by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      See, the Dune references were too easy. We dotters like a challenge, we want to work for our lame jokes.

      In Soviet Russia, lame jokes work for YOU!

    26. Re:Flashback! by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      If youre a child of the 80s you may remember 'Wild Palms' Highly unlikely since it was complete rubbish and nobody watched it.

      Although I have seen every episode :)
      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    27. Re:Flashback! by kalirion · · Score: 2, Funny

      I sure hope you configure your "preferences" correctly for the sex scenes.

    28. Re:Flashback! by blincoln · · Score: 1

      Highly unlikely since it was complete rubbish and nobody watched it.

      Have you watched it recently? I thought it stood up pretty well to the test of time. A lot of the predictions about the authoritarian society/terrorists-as-the-new-bogeyman and the growing popularity of the Scientology-esque cult were eerily accurate.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    29. Re:Flashback! by MorpheousMarty · · Score: 2, Funny

      I bow down to your superior geekiness, and your low ID number humbles me.

    30. Re:Flashback! by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      I just noticed that. This is a sign that modding negatively needs to be painful since the ignorance clearly is not.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    31. Re:Flashback! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its=it's

      Maybe you should take some more acid.

    32. Re:Flashback! by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

      Ah yes! The fictional Mimizine(sp?) derived from the Fugu or Puffer Fish.
      Although that was meant to allow views of holograms to sensually perceive the projected image.

      Very nice show. Somewhat prophetic, but a little leftist preachy for some. We'll see soon since the show was set in 2010.
      I don't think any of the technology will come about, but the political landscape is already here.
      The future is now!

  2. One word that we can all relate to; by name*censored* · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Caffeine.

    --
    Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    1. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by skeftomai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have another word: Guarana.

    2. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by MeditationSensation · · Score: 1

      You know that guarana produces caffeine, right?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarana

    3. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by drcoppersmith · · Score: 1

      And with how little is known about chronic usage of caffeine, I'd be very wary to try these things.

      Cognitive science will certainly take a few leaps forward (though that may be because the researchers have started taking some of these drugs)..

    4. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Caffeine is a known drug that can affect the mind in a positive way, like these other mind-enhancing drugs. Caffeine is also a drug that in abusive amounts of consumption can lead to negative effects, such as deletrious thinking. Can we ban this deplorable drug "caffeine" before it leads to more people getting energy and feeling good? This can lead to people possibly using their brains better.

      So if we want to ban mind-enhancing drugs from the global sport of intelligence, let's start with the devastating thought stimulant "caffeine".

      We can get even more ridiculous than this. We can go through the 1960s and relearn everything we just forgot as the old generation we turned our backs to dies off.

      Is all we really need love? I don't see much evidence of that in the way the world works, yet.

    5. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by lysergic.acid · · Score: 3, Informative

      it's said that Paul Erdos was a habitual coffee drinking and user of amphetamines and was one of the most prolific mathematicians of his time because of it. however, you can't just expect to use stimulants to automatically make yourself smarter--just ask all the burnt out meth/crack addicts at NA meetings.

      stimulants are definitely proven to improve one's general cognitive abilities, but only if used correctly. while moderate amounts of CNS stimulation can improve one's thinking, after a certain point you reach the point of over-stimulation and productivity drops dramatically with the increase of stimulation.

      so if you're using meth to get high you're probably not going to gain the positive cognitive effects of stimulant use. but if you're drinking 1-2 cups of a coffee a day, then it probably does help increase your productivity. but then there are still other trade-offs, such as hypertension/insomnia/dependency. for some people it's hard to strike the perfect balance, and it may be easier to just go the natural route altogether.

    6. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      This points to my theory that drugs don't make people dumb, but dumb people can be easily attracted to drugs. More intelligent and self controlled people can use drugs with little to no ill effects.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    7. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by doom · · Score: 1

      This points to my theory that drugs don't make people dumb, but dumb people can be easily attracted to drugs. More intelligent and self controlled people can use drugs with little to no ill effects.

      Funny, I would've said that the main advantage more intelligent people have is the ability to come up with clever, elaborate rationales to justify their drug habits.

      But then, it's so hard to think of examples of bright, intelligent people who've burned themselves out with drug addictions....

    8. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Further evidence of my point.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    9. Re:One word that we can all relate to; by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      Caffeine is a mood altering drug that tends to make you think worse with increased use. Not good for nootropics. ;)

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  3. Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by aussie_a · · Score: 2

    the brain drugs haven't provoked similar outrage. As messed up as this might sound, the above most likely is because it doesn't impact on entertainment and ignorance of the side-effects. The latter is obvious that if the side-effects were well known (among lay people) to be extremely dangerous, then there would be concern over teenagers using them.

    The former might not be quite so obvious. The reason people are outraged when sportsmen or Olympic competitors use drugs is because people watch it for entertainment and to admire the abilities that people and animals can reach. College tests or business meetings aren't televised for people to be entertained or to marvel at the natural abilities of the human brain, so it doesn't have the same effect. Many horse racing gamblers will often say they wouldn't mind drugs, if the stats were released. While they're probably joking, I think there is some truth to it.
    1. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by MrMunkey · · Score: 1

      business meetings aren't televised for people to be entertained
      There's a new idea for a reality TV series! (on a side note: good post)
    2. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by aminorex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You assume people care about the use of steroids by athletes. I don't think they do. As far as I can tell, only sports media and athletes care. Athletes care because they don't want to have to take dangerous drugs to stay competitive.

      I take piracetam, vinpocetine, adrafinil, and methylphenidate. Of course it gives me an "unfair advantage". That's why I take them. It also benefits society, because it makes me orders of magnitude more productive as an engineer and a scientist that I would be otherwise. It benefits my family, various people in need in my community, and the many children in third-world nations that I can support because my income is freaking enormous. If I were good at something more lucrative than what I do, I might feel less pressure to enhance my performance, but I doubt it. With power (to produce income) comes responsibility (to distribute income).

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    3. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      The latter is obvious that if the side-effects were well known (among lay people) to be extremely dangerous, then there would be concern over teenagers using them.

      Such knowledge isn't always necessary; take a look at cannabis, tranquilizers, ecstasy, etc.

    4. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Adrafinil, and methylphenidate both?

      What's your resting heart rate? 150 bpm? :)

      You might want to reconsider that.

      BTW, Merry Christmas!

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    5. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by pebs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I take piracetam, vinpocetine, adrafinil, and methylphenidate. Of course it gives me an "unfair advantage". That's why I take them. It also benefits society, because it makes me orders of magnitude more productive as an engineer and a scientist that I would be otherwise. It benefits my family, various people in need in my community, and the many children in third-world nations that I can support because my income is freaking enormous. If I were good at something more lucrative than what I do, I might feel less pressure to enhance my performance, but I doubt it. With power (to produce income) comes responsibility (to distribute income).

      While you're at it, you may want to take a drug to reduce that freaking enormous ego you have there.

      --
      #!/
    6. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

      You assume people care about the use of steroids by athletes. I don't think they do. As far as I can tell, only sports media and athletes care.

      Maybe you're right, but lawmakers care what the media says, otherwise we wouldn't have time-wasting baseball hearings conducted by the highest legislative body in the nation.

    7. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by selfdiscipline · · Score: 1

      Why? It'd probably interfere with all the drugs he listed.

      Anyway, I think that ego is a key ingredient in productivity. I'm jealous of those who have an over-sized opinion of themselves. I'm trying to become more egotistical myself.

      --


      -------
      Incite and flee.
    8. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by pebs · · Score: 1

      Why? It'd probably interfere with all the drugs he listed.

      I was speaking facetiously of course.

      Anyway, I think that ego is a key ingredient in productivity. I'm jealous of those who have an over-sized opinion of themselves. I'm trying to become more egotistical myself.

      Well of course striving for more productivity is something that involves your ego. Your desire to be a more productive person is fueled by your ego.

      If you honestly believe that pursuits of the ego are the best thing for you, then go right ahead.

      And you can see my ego is in full force here, since I am talking down to you.

      --
      #!/
    9. Re:Doesn't impact entertainment and ignorance by DoctorSpoo · · Score: 1

      You assume people care about the use of steroids by athletes. I don't think they do. As far as I can tell, only sports media and athletes care. Bingo. Record attendance numbers at MLB games last season proved this beyond the shadow of a doubt. Doubly so for attendance at games when Barry Bonds was going for the HR record.

  4. Right by Trailwalker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    'Mind Doping'
    Is this not a contradiction in terms?
    1. Re:Right by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Not for the dopes taking it.

    2. Re:Right by mstahl · · Score: 1

      It's like silicon doping, but instead of phosphorous you're doping things with greatness!

  5. Awesome by chuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Did anyone else RTFA just to see what they should be taking to enhance their brain?

    1. Re:Awesome by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yes,

      I was pissed off because they were all prescriptions.

      My Doc would not give those to me.

      I have however found that taking supplements does a decent job.

      I was very deficient in Vitamin D and Calcium because I do not eat foods high in those substances. I started popping D pills with calcium and now I feel a lot better, no more "crappy morning" syndrome. I think clearer too. I also take a B complex pill so I can make sure I get all my neurotransmitter precursors (B vitamins are used by the body to create almost all your neurotransmiters such as serotonin and dopamine, etc).

      I am also about to start a body cleansing regiment to remove toxins from my body such as aluminum, mercury, pesticides, etc. Hopefully that will make me feel even better.

    2. Re:Awesome by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness (I can't tell if you're being serious but I'll assume you are) that is perfectly alright as if that was considered cheating then so would exercising (which will also raise some of your neurotransmitters). I think you'd have a hard time convincing someone that drinking a glass of milk is alright but taking a calcium tablet is an unacceptable advantage.

    3. Re:Awesome by DigitalHammer · · Score: 1

      Vitamin D and Calcium? You could simply drink milk--it contains both ingredients and is cheaper anyway.

    4. Re:Awesome by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 1

      They used to sell such a product here (Netherlands) in normal shops (e.g. not Smart Shops or alike) until about 3 years ago (not legal anymore). I tried it for quite a while and it did work, but for my taste, a bit too good. Couldn't sit back or take a stroll down the block without thinking just about everything, instead of just clearing my mind and relaxing. Even getting to sleep became difficult. The label stated that the product shouldn't used longer than 30 consecutive days, followed by a 30 days off period, which made me wonder how safe it actually was.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    5. Re:Awesome by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      WTF?

      Dude, who the fuck said I thought it was cheating?

    6. Re:Awesome by aussie_a · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry I assumed your post was on topic which is about

      Despite the potential side effects, academics, classical musicians, corporate executives, students and even professional poker players have embraced the drugs to clarify their minds, improve their concentration or control their emotions. And the responses we as a society have to it, including

      People who take them say the drugs aren't giving them an unfair advantage If you were just ranting about not being able to take a drug, then don't mind me.
    7. Re:Awesome by Tim_UWA · · Score: 1

      I really want to know too, but nobody has posted it here, so I guess I'll die wondering

    8. Re:Awesome by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      1) I do not drink enough milk, or eat eggs, etc
      2) vitamin D pills and Calcium Pills provide more of both for a longer period of time than milk. 1 bottle lasts me 2 months, and costs me 10 bucks. in that same period of time, the amount of milk I would buy just for normal needs, let alone over supplementing, would costs more than twice that.

    9. Re:Awesome by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      I was on topic to the GP. he asked did others read the article just to see what to take. I affirmed his inquiry, Added some color commentary about what I found in the article, and then described what I do currently to help keep my mind sharp. It all follows pretty logicaly.

    10. Re:Awesome by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Maybe to your drug-addled brain ;)

      (Just kidding, I get what you're saying. Just didn't think the "WTF" response was called for when I thought it obvious I was responding to some of what you'd said in an on topic manner related to the story).

    11. Re:Awesome by Znork · · Score: 1

      Yep, I know, poor form to RTFA, but I wanted to see if it was something new and interesting.

      But basically it looks like the ordinary newspeak about 'mind-doping'. So, people use amphetamines and derivatives to enhance mental performance. Well, duh. That's been done for half a century, and it has well known side effects. The only difference is that these days they're prescribed for ADD instead of as diet pills. And the college chem-students twisting a molecule here and there to keep ahead of the DEA have grown up are working for Big Pharma, twisting a molecule here and there to keep ahead of the FDA and USPTO.

      I really dont see much news in this, other than the tendency to call it 'mind doping' and 'mind-enhancing' rather than 'doing drugs'.

    12. Re:Awesome by chill · · Score: 1

      Couldn't sit back or take a stroll down the block without thinking just about everything, instead of just clearing my mind and relaxing. Even getting to sleep became difficult.

      Ummm...wow. You just described my normal life. I have to practice meditation to get to sleep at a reasonable time. "Clear my mind"? I wish I could do that. I can't recall a time in my life where my mind wasn't racing along at 1000 MPH, thinking about everything.

      I'm working on some serious meditation just so I can focus on the task at hand. Only immersive tasks cause me to focus and not have my mind wander. Good books, movies, coding projects or sex -- everything else only gets a small slice of my attention.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    13. Re:Awesome by Glonoinha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cut back on the caffeine. A gram a day is a bit much. Don't ask how I know this.
      And if you want to really make a difference - try going ethanol free for a week. Eat dinner at least three hours before going to sleep, and during the two hours before bed drink three or four full glasses of water. Pee before climbing into bed. Go to bed eight and a half hours before you need to wake up, so you fall asleep over the next 30 minutes and still get eight solid hours of sleep.

      I'm not saying I do this all the time, but when I do do it I'm in a lot better shape the next day.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    14. Re:Awesome by chill · · Score: 1

      Thanks, but I'm not sure how to cut back on caffeine.

      I drink coffee about once a week. Same for caffeinated sodas. The tea I drink is all caffeine-free herbal, and I don't eat a lot of chocolate. My caffeine intake isn't a lot to begin with.

      I'll try the rest, though.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    15. Re:Awesome by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      no sweat, just wait a few days, after a couple of dupes someone will probably spill the beans

    16. Re:Awesome by Silver+Surfer+1 · · Score: 1

      Why yes I did!
      Seems you need to place a bowel with a whole in the middle and chase around a dog so you can place it over his poo and smell th fumes. They say it works wonders.

    17. Re:Awesome by aesiamun · · Score: 1

      Some people can't consume dairy products...

    18. Re:Awesome by entropy42 · · Score: 1

      I really dont see much news in this, other than the tendency to call it 'mind doping' and 'mind-enhancing' rather than 'doing drugs'.

      What's new - if not yet, then soon - is the quality of the enhancement. So far, for the most part, cognitive enhancement comes with high doses of uncertainty and risk, as well as tangible side effects. There's no reason to think we will fail to improve in those areas, and it's certainly time to raise awareness of what's coming.

        - Paul Phillips

      --
      -- Stop the violins!
    19. Re:Awesome by lubricated · · Score: 1

      time to change doctors

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    20. Re:Awesome by Kristopher+Johnson · · Score: 4, Funny

      "...during the two hours before bed drink three or four full glasses of water. Pee before climbing into bed."

      And then pee every half hour for the rest of the night. Or maybe you're still in your twenties.

    21. Re:Awesome by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Vitamin D, especially Vitamin D3 deficiencies have been implicated in a lot of conditions, often gruesome degenerative terminal autoimmune systems, the cost to benefits ratios make it a no-brainer; We're not getting melenoma, the easiest to detect and easiest to treat of all of the cancers, yet we're dropping like flies from all of the others, our skin looks younger as we're crippled with MS and arthritis.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    22. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or check to see if the brain drugs you're already taking were mentioned in the article?

    23. Re:Awesome by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about 15-30 minutes of whatever it takes to make you sweat. Best done in the evening, at least an hour or two before bed.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    24. Re:Awesome by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If we are going to hand out tips, here are a few: - Stay away from bright lightsources one or two hours before going to bed; e.g. dim the lights and don't sit behind a computer. - Try a herb like Valerian. It can help, but for some it also has the opposite effect. Start out slow and see if it works for you. - Do some physical workout an hour or half hour before going to bed. I don't get tired mentally (at least not on a 24 hour rotation), but physical tiredness can help you sleep. - Figure out your biological clock. Not everyone can live on a 24 hour rotation, in fact, there are some known sleep-disorders caused by having a biological clock running at 26 or even 30 hours. Mine isn't working at 24 hours either. Not easy to adjust your life to, but depending on your job, it might be doable. - Make sure you wake up properly. Alarm clocks do more harm than good, something like a wake-up light helps people wake up better and go to bed more easily. - If it becomes are serious problem, seek help of a professional, but be careful with meds. Some have serious side-effects in the long run.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    25. Re:Awesome by karnal · · Score: 1

      My doctor told me to just tie it in a knot. Saved hundreds off of a costly surgery!

      --
      Karnal
    26. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An hour or two before bed? You must be the one female on slashdot, because all the men here do it 1 minute before falling asleep.

    27. Re:Awesome by petronivs · · Score: 1

      Cutting back on any drugs is going to reduce the need for your liver et al to work on getting rid of potentially harmful products. As far as the rest of the things you mentioned, this requires someone to actually have downtime for about four hours in the evening, and actually get eight hours of sleep. How many people can fit that kind of leisure time in? I'd say it's the lack of running around and being stressed that helps more than the eating early and drinking copious amounts of water.

      --
      This is the real signature
      (Beats those shadows on the cave wall, don't it?)
  6. Sorry by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Doping is doping. If you're altering your state of mind you are still doping. And yes, if you were in an academic competition then taking a drug to make you more clear-thinking is an advantage.

    1. Re:Sorry by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine the media frenzy when the winner turns out to have used these drugs! Oh, I can just feel the ratings pouring in. Perhaps the WCF will require random drug testing!

    2. Re:Sorry by SlowGenius · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Jav1231 sez:

      Doping is doping. If you're altering your state of mind you are still doping. And yes, if you were in an academic competition then taking a drug to make you more clear-thinking is an advantage.


      Yes, to all of that. Your point is....?

      (I'm assuming you're trying to connect the concepts 'mind-doping' and 'bad'. I don't think you quite succeeded in that attempt.)
      --
      Listen to what I say, not what I mean...
    3. Re:Sorry by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what about places like MIT where they use norm referencing for grading their students? I would certainly be pissed off at a doper because it directly affects my grade in the class.

    4. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I agree.

      Quoting from TFA: "the drugs aren't giving them an unfair advantage but merely allow them to make the most of their hard-earned skills."

      That IS the unfair advantage.

    5. Re:Sorry by budgenator · · Score: 1

      You may consider it doping, but the are numerous medical conditions that these drugs are RX'd for and discriminating based on medical conditions is illegal in the US. If you skipped over everyone with an ADD drug in their system, the company would lose 1/3 of the workforce, then where would you get all of the loser-bots for the menial jobs?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    6. Re:Sorry by toddestan · · Score: 1

      what about places like MIT where they use norm referencing for grading their students? I would certainly be pissed off at a doper because it directly affects my grade in the class.

      I think that's more a problem with places that grade on a curve, rather than doping in general.

    7. Re:Sorry by potat0man · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile I'd be grateful for all the technological progress he contributes to. How petty to be concerned about your GPA. Are you in school to get a high GPA or are you in school to learn and help improve technology?

      Put them all on the enhancers, especially the AIDS and Cancer researchers; and video game designers please.

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

      And who gives a fuck if it's doping or not?

    9. Re:Sorry by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm not quite sure what constitutes doping, as opposed to just eating/drinking, and I'm really curious what the criteria are to label something a drug.

      Some natural foods are actually drugs (mushrooms, alcool...)
      Sometimes it depends on the dosage (one glass on wine vs one bottle).
      Sometimes it seems to depend on social standards (alcool/nicotine vs marijuana ?)

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    10. Re:Sorry by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      you mean that they should not be grading on a curve? MIT? If they criterion referenced they would have a A- school wide GPA average. Criterion referencing does not work in such places.

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

      Sure it is. You seem to imply that this is bad. As long as you don't hide the fact, what's the problem? Even eating or sleeping better than the others in a competition gives an "advantage", why should ingestion of chemicals be viewed so differently?

    12. Re:Sorry by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      If they didn't grade on a curve they'd have to fire half their teachers for incompetence.

      Sincerely,
      College Freshman who will only do well in CS201 because of curving because the administration assigned their incompetent bitch (as in "my bitch", "person who I fuck over") of a prof to teach the course.

    13. Re:Sorry by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Well that's the thing. Doping is using the drug without a prescription. I'm a diagnosed ADHD, and I can tell you it's a real condition. Now, I've been lucky. Most of my college work has been interesting enough to keep me concentrating decently (though I haven't seen my grades for the semester), and I hate the mood effects of my prescribed stimulants (they make you very serious and irritable, while I'm normally intense but humorous and happy). So I normally don't take the drugs my doctor gives me for my condition.

      But I damn well don't think anyone who doesn't need those drugs for a condition should take them to get ahead of everyone else. That's intolerably selfish, and it's the reason I refuse to sell my unused pills even though I could make a pretty good income from them.

    14. Re:Sorry by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      Playing devil's advocate... if everyone taking a class, at the end of it, has an excellent knowledge of the subject and is able to apply it well... why shouldn't they get an A?

    15. Re:Sorry by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I'm probably ADAH as well, but never diagnosed, I just know that during my drug abuse days, taking any form of speed or coke was a waste because they didn't do anything obvious to me while others was climbing the walls. There is probably a lot of us out there that are sub-clinical ADAHThe Other thing I've noticed is on the radio is advertisements for a "Christian Consolling and ADD Assessment Center" and that "all or part of the services are covered by most insurances" which seems to indicate to me that getting diagnosed ADAH is about as hard as getting Dx as having a "subluxation" at the chiropractor's office

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    16. Re:Sorry by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      take it from another side. MIT might possibly make classes impossable to pass based on criterion referensing, but since they are designed to be that hard to push students as far as possible, then norm refernsing is used to identify the best and worst performing students.

    17. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't just being smarter an "advantage"? So free thinking should be banned.

  7. Slashdotters Are Not Using the Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Judging from the quality of articles in this forum, I am sure that Slashdotters are not using the drugs.

    1. Re:Slashdotters Are Not Using the Drugs by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 5, Funny
      I have a most excellent elixir made from the blood of young virgins (you know, the ones under 12, the only ones left) and it sharpens my mind and clarifies my vision. Except for the times when I black out and regain consciousness holding body parts that are not mine. On the other hand, it enabled me to write a lot of Windows code at Microsoft until the day Redmond security came to my cubicle and showed me the surveillance cam footage with the black plastic bags and the shovel and the dirt... Then they took away my badge and my honor. But I got even. Now I work for Google. I like their motto: "Do no evil at which you can get caught". Now pardon me. I must go. There are little children outside on the street here in Mountain View. This cannot be tolerated.

      - Sweeney Torvalds, demon coder of Fleet Street

    2. Re:Slashdotters Are Not Using the Drugs by kalirion · · Score: 1

      you know, the ones under 12, the only ones left

      Not all Slashdot users are that young you know.

  8. Mind doping by SamP2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've been taking a mind doping drug every morning for decades. It's called coffee.

    1. Re:Mind doping by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thankfully your safe from coffee being outlawed as it isn't a threat to the rope industry.

    2. Re:Mind doping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the exciting thing about drugs like provigil is that they work as good or better than coffee for concentration, without raising blood pressure to the degree that coffee does or causing the amount of fine tremor that coffee does.

      drug design only gets better, better efficacy, less side effects. this is just the beginning.

    3. Re:Mind doping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was prescribed Provigil a few years ago for narcolepsy, which is one of the indicated uses for the drug. I took it for a couple weeks. Provigil did help with the narcolepsy and there was a noticeable improvement in mental ability. Unfortunately one of the side effects was loss of sensitivity/enjoyment during sex. If it wasn't for that I would have continued taking Provigil. I can understand why someone would want to take Provigil to increase their mental ability, it just wasn't for me.

    4. Re:Mind doping by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Thankfully your safe from coffee being outlawed as it isn't a threat to the rope industry.
      For those who don't recognize this, this is a reference to the allegations that marijuana was illegalized because hemp was a threat to the cotton and paper industries. It is salient to note that the first real complaints of marijuana were regarding how it made Mexicans commit crimes.
  9. incorrect underlying assumption by nguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The underlying assumption here is that being smarter helps people be successful, but the correlation between intelligence and success is relatively small.

    So, many of the drugs may not be doing a whole lot to help people achieve more success.

    1. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      uh, but obviously these drugs don't make you smarter, they just make you concentrate harder, work harder, and avoid distractions better, which certainly will help you achieve more success.

    2. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but the correlation between intelligence and success is relatively small.
      Only if you have the hackeneyed view of intelligence = good at math. Consider other intelligences like: spacial; Jimi Hendrix played the guitar like a genius. musical: Johann Sebastian Bach wrote and played the most intricate Fugues. The list goes on and on...

    3. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      Dunno, There are plenty of smart, unsuccessful people, but I've yet to meet a successful, dumb person.

    4. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 2, Funny

      George W. Bush

    5. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Is there a punchline I'm not getting here? Hollywood, professional sports, and the white house make your statement nonsensical.

    6. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might be true if the drugs actually made people smarter. They haven't discovered that one yet. The drugs talked about in the article make people more awake, more focused, more driven, more controlled, less nervous. The correlation between these and success is pretty obvious.

    7. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      You misunderestimated him! :)

      Merry Christmas!

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    8. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush may be a spoiled little fratty who isn't fit to be president, but I don't think that qualifies him for the 'dumb' or 'successful' label. It just makes him a mediocre little man raised to power by popular hysteria and blind luck.

    9. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by nguy · · Score: 1

      Only if you have the hackeneyed view of intelligence = good at math.

      No, I don't. Furthermore, the definition of "intelligence" isn't decided by "views", it's decided by the scientific community.

      Consider other intelligences like: spacial; Jimi Hendrix played the guitar like a genius. musical: Johann Sebastian Bach wrote and played the most intricate Fugues. The list goes on and on...

      Neither Hendrix nor Bach needed to have had exceptional intelligence to achieve what they did. See idiot savant.

    10. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what way was he supposed to underestimate him? IRREGARDLESS of his assumptions, is not his opinion valid?

    11. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      Bush is a political genius. I don't agree with his policies any more than most people on Slashdot, but the way he's going about getting things done is evidence of being extremely intelligent.

      The "Bushisms" nonsense is an act he puts on to make Joe Sixpack like him more, and thus vote for him.

    12. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      The numbers involved in all of those also make your definition of success statistically insignificant.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    13. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush isn't a political genius, he is a product with very successful marketing.

    14. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by nguy · · Score: 1

      Bush is a political genius. I don't agree with his policies any more than most people on Slashdot, but the way he's going about getting things done is evidence of being extremely intelligent

      No, it is not. Being able to get things done may be a sign of political and social skills, but those skills are not the same as "intelligence".

      Some people have been trying to muddy the waters by renaming "social skills" to "social intelligence"; if you like that terminology, then one can say that Bush may have high social intelligence, but there is little evidence that he has high general intelligence.

      The "Bushisms" nonsense is an act he puts on to make Joe Sixpack like him more, and thus vote for him.

      Well, dishonesty and deception also can be a path to success.

    15. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      how does one acquire skills? How does one apply learned information to the real world? How do you solve problems, especially ones that you've never seen before? Oh. Right. Intelligence.

      If it were just the 2000 election, I might have been willing to credit dumb luck and no small amount of cheating to the victory. In 2004, however, he somehow managed to get elected again despite having one of the lowest (might be THE lowest as I've seen some people claim, never seen that claim backed up though) - approval ratings for an incumbent president in history. That doesn't happen by accident.

      The way I see it, either he himself is a genius, or he's surrounded himself by genius advisors, in which case he's at least smart enough to take their advice.

    16. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by mstahl · · Score: 1

      yeah, I'm drunk

      So is he :-P

    17. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by nguy · · Score: 1

      how does one acquire skills? How does one apply learned information to the real world? How do you solve problems, especially ones that you've never seen before? Oh. Right. Intelligence.

      Wrong. Intelligence means something much more specific.

      The way I see it, either he himself is a genius, or he's surrounded himself by genius advisors, in which case he's at least smart enough to take their advice.

      Or, more likely, a political machinery picked a convenient figurehead; all he needs to do is read the teleprompter.

    18. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      You're either an Idiot or a troll.

      Probably both.

      Goodnight!

    19. Re:incorrect underlying assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're either an Idiot or a troll.

      Funny, I was just going to say the same thing about you.

  10. It's a bit sad by Martian_Kyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    how hard we try to 'fix' ourselves.
    Most of us aren't really as broken as we think.

    1. Re:It's a bit sad by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourslf. I'm damn good and aiming for perfection.

    2. Re:It's a bit sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're aiming for perfection, you better hope they have a drug to help with spelling.

    3. Re:It's a bit sad by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "The Perfect is the enemy of the Good." --Voltaire

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    4. Re:It's a bit sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't fix what's broke, but you can sure as hell make it better!

    5. Re:It's a bit sad by autophile · · Score: 1

      [It's a bit sad] how hard we try to 'fix' ourselves. Most of us aren't really as broken as we think.

      What if it isn't "fixing something that's broken" but "enhancing something that could be improved"?

      --Rob

      --
      Towards the Singularity.
    6. Re:It's a bit sad by Smordnys+s'regrepsA · · Score: 0

      From the feel of it, there are a lot of angry atheists here on SlashDot, and a lot of messed up folks that seem to feel they are perfect... maybe that Voltaire character was right!

      --
      Just -1, Troll talking to another.
    7. Re:It's a bit sad by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Noticed that, didja?

      Here's my theory: ALL children are schizophrenic. Normal kids outgrow it, starting in their teens. But some kids get stuck in that phase, and then we have "angry perfect geek" syndrome.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    8. Re:It's a bit sad by Elevator_Inspector · · Score: 1

      I don't think of myself as broken most days but after learning the hard way (ETOH and coke = bad news) I have to admit my most creative and productive times have usually involved moderate doses of prescribed amphetamines. I tried every ADD med in the book and straight dextroamphetamine, not adderall worked the best.

  11. Drugs to "enhance the mind"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *cough* Ritalin anyone?

    That's the real reason no one is going after these kinds of drugs, because Ritalin and other such drugs fall under the same category.

  12. speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it interesting that in these articles you always see in the news, you never see the word "amphetamine" used. It's always "ADHD drugs". When people term a drug "speed" in the majority of cases, they're referring to the stronger ADHD drugs. Adderall (d-l-amphetamine), dexedrine (d-amphetamine), and desoxyn (methamphetamine!) are all used for this purpose and yet you will never hear in the news that people 3 and up with a diagnosis of add/adhd are using amphetamine or methamphetamine. It's always euphemistically termed. Think about it.

    1. Re:speed by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      The people I know all realize that speed and ADHD tablets are pretty much the same thing (if not exactly the same thing). The difference is not in the drug, but how it is used. When it is used in those that suffer from ADHD, it helps them function in society, interact with others and lead a meaningful and happy life. When those that don't suffer from ADHD tablet take it, they begin to act like as if they're a child sufferer of ADHD.

      This means its quite simple to realize if someone has been misdiagnosed.

    2. Re:speed by Artifakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But people are being told by the media that meth users get horrible skin lesions from the drug, that it rots teeth, causes crash and burn onset anorexia, that even one exposure causes permanent brain damage, etc.

      If all this is false, then our drug laws are based on terrible lies, and we are putting lots of people in prison for lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for essentially nothing.

      If all this is true, then we are exposing currently upwards of 200,000 5 to 11 year olds to a drug that is incredibly risky for adults, and counting on once-a-year doctor visits to control it. The pharmaceutical industry is expecting to see the number of elementary school aged children on Adderal rise to about 1 million in the next 4 years. Somehow, the medical difference between ADHD and normal brain chemistry automagically protects the child's body from all the horrible effects we see in the rest of an adult's body.

      And yes it is exactly the same drug and not just pretty much - Adderal is a mixture of Methamphetamine and Benzedrine salts, with meth amounts similar to averages for adult recreational exposure. Parts of the pharmaceutical industry have tried to get around this fact by comparing the time release average dose in a child's system at any one time to the peak dose in a meth-junkie's system immediately after injection, which ignores three things.
          1. many meth users at least supposedly addict without injecting the drug.
          2. many adverse health effects depend on average dosage at least as much as peak.
          3. elementary school age children normally have a much lower tolerance for just about all drugs than do adults. We generally assume safe exposures are much smaller even for non-perscription drugs.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    3. Re:speed by flynns · · Score: 1

      It's cause they -aren't- methamphetamine, and "amphetamine derivative" seems to be needless fearmongering.

      --
      'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
    4. Re:speed by nxtw · · Score: 1

      Desoxyn is methamphetamine, in pill form. Methamphetamine is a strong stimulant, but in this form safe under controlled doses.

    5. Re:speed by bigdavex · · Score: 1

      The people I know all realize that speed and ADHD tablets are pretty much the same thing (if not exactly the same thing). The difference is not in the drug, but how it is used. When it is used in those that suffer from ADHD, it helps them function in society, interact with others and lead a meaningful and happy life. When those that don't suffer from ADHD tablet take it, they begin to act like as if they're a child sufferer of ADHD.

      I've seen that assertion several times, so I don't at all think you've inventing this idea. But don't normal people take speed to help their attentiveness?

      --
      -Dave
    6. Re:speed by gambolt · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's the impurities resulting from home manufacturing methods that cause most of the problems you hear about. Plus, the therapeutic doses used in psychiatry are hundreds of times smaller than those used recreationaly. Speaking as someone who has taken Dexedrine every day for ADD for fifteen years, I can tell you that I get more of a buzz and more side effects from a double espresso. If i were to snort a whole month's worth at a time, on the other hand, I'd probably have some nasty side effects.

      There is a world of difference between responsible use of stimulants for psychiatric purposes or even for cognitive enhancement and abusing them to get fucked up. At small doses cognitive functioning is enhanced and high doses it's inebriating. It's the difference between a cup of coffee and a box of no-doze.

    7. Re:speed by paulmer2003 · · Score: 1

      Adderal is a mixture of Methamphetamine and Benzedrine salts
      Uh, no. Adderall is composed of 3 amphetamine salts. Go read wikipedia.
    8. Re:speed by dbcad7 · · Score: 1
      I don't know about all the drugs in the article, but I do know that one of them "Ritalin" is basically nothing but speed.

      It's a freakin crime that we use these drugs on hyper-active kids. My nephew was one of those who took this crap for a couple years. In my opinion he didn't need it. Me and my brothers were also considered hyper-active too, and we grew out of it just fine without taking speed.. Attention Deficit Disorder .. what a crock.. It's called being a boy.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    9. Re:speed by gambolt · · Score: 1

      Desoxyn is almost never used anymore, FWIW. No pharmacy keeps it in stock and any MD who prescribes it has a good chance of being investigated.

      That's really a shame because for people who have both chronic ADD and chronic anxiety it's often the best thing to take, as I understand it. The lack of side effects is also what increases the abuse potential. If you take ten times the average therapeutic dose of Ritalin you'll be as sick as a dog. If you take ten times the therapeutic dose of Desoxyn you'll be a typical meth abuser.

    10. Re:speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who told you Adderal is comprised of meth?

    11. Re:speed by baronvonchickenpants · · Score: 1

      As an occasional methamphetamine user (Not to party, but to help focus while writing code.), Thank you for some real facts, as opposed to the DEA's "facts".

      --
      "The bad machine doesn't know he's a bad machine."
    12. Re:speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      isnt it far more likely your just seriously addicted to speed?

      ive done plenty of recreational dexedrine and let me tell you, one 15mg cap even taaken orally (time release) fucks one right the fuck up if your not used/addicted to it. just the next day you need two for a similar effect. im pretty sure if you snorted a month worth of dex you would die on the spot.

    13. Re:speed by corerunner · · Score: 1

      actually Adderall contains dextroamphetamine, which is quite different from methamphetamine.

      thanks for playing though!

      --
      "Don't hate the media, become the media." -Jello Biafra
    14. Re:speed by gambolt · · Score: 1

      I've done the addiction thing before and am as scared as hell of going there again. I take a few days off every now and then just to make sure. The biggest difference is that it's a lot harder to sleep without amphetamines.

    15. Re:speed by piojo · · Score: 1

      But don't normal people take speed to help their attentiveness? I don't think they would do it to help their attentiveness. I think they would more likely do it to stay awake. (I have a friend who's into "better living through chemistry", and he has never talked about using this type of drug to help him pay attention--just maintain alertness.)

      To answer the other part your question, I believe there is a chemical difference in the brains of those with AD(H)D and those without, and the drug really does have different effects. I'm too lazy to do some real research on this, unfortunately.
      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    16. Re:speed by Puff+Daddy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Adderal is a terrible plague afflicting the youth of this country, but it IS NOT methamphetamine. Not even a little bit, not a chance. Also, from what I've seen, shooting meth DOES cause skin lesions. It's debatable whether that's a direct effect or a result of the user picking at his face, but it is real. It does not rot teeth; it does cause the user to grind their teeth, potentially causing damage. This is exactly the same effect that ecstasy has - ever seen an E-tard with a pacifier? That's why. Both adderal and meth cause decreased hunger and, as such, can contribute to anorexia. As for permanent brain damage, one use isn't going to give you Parkinson's, but it's not helping. In short, giving kids adderal is bad, but giving them meth would be much, much worse. In fact, the worst damage I've seen adderal cause is the mindset that meth is a drug with similar risks.

    17. Re:speed by bigdavex · · Score: 1

      I don't think they would do it to help their attentiveness. I think they would more likely do it to stay awake. (I have a friend who's into "better living through chemistry", and he has never talked about using this type of drug to help him pay attention--just maintain alertness.)

      Dr. Hull on ADHD

      It was thought for years (back in the "minimal brain dysfunction" days) that children with ADHD had strange brains that reacted "paradoxically" to stimulant medications (the reverse of the expected effect). Actually, everybody reacts about the same to the medication. The medications stimulate any brain to focus better, as demonstrated by standardized tests meant to measure that ability. This better concentration reduces the fidgeting that "hyper" kids demonstrate and the distractibility of attention impaired children - the daydreamers.

      So what the medication really does is to move everybody to the right on the attention curve so that those kids who were functioning poorly now lie more in the normal range of attention ability.

      The medications simply improve the ability to concentrate and focus, shifting the poor attention kids up into the range of normal school function. To repeat, they have the same effect on everyone who takes them; people with good attending ability don't need help and so don't take these medications. I think it is important for every parent to understand this basic fact. There is nothing "weird" about your child, nor anything to be ashamed of, any more than you would be ashamed if he were a lousy singer.
      --
      -Dave
    18. Re:speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There is no methamphetamine nor benzedrine in adderall.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adderall#Chemistry

    19. Re:speed by piojo · · Score: 1

      That's logical, but it doesn't explain the anecdotes very well. According to that quotation, there is no reason to believe that these drugs would increase the attention span of a person with ADHD to a higher level than they would elevate the attention of a normal person. And presumably, they would have the same effect on each person's level of energy.

      I'll open my mind to the fact that this may be true/correct, that it's even likely. But I've heard at least one convincing story about two people taking an amphetamine or amphetamine-like drug, and one was hyper and talked, barely taking a break to breathe, and the other intently listened/payed attention. This doctor's research/interpretation (I don't really know where his data comes from) does not explain this effect.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    20. Re:speed by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      I actually agree with you somewhat, but your claim is essentially that dose is the thing that really matters most. The parent I replied to is claiming that ADHD kids brain chemistry is the biggest factor. At least one of you must clearly be wrong. It's possible, in purely logical terms, that you could both be wrong, but it's logically impossible that you could both be right. Both of you have given reasons that are used by our legislators and institutions to justify the current status quo. Ergo, at least some of the justifications being given are pseudo-logic.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    21. Re:speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      gambolt wrote:
      >
      > It's the impurities resulting from home manufacturing methods that cause most
      > of the problems you hear about.


      Where did you get that idea? Have any (preferably pubmed) citations?


      > Plus, the therapeutic doses used in psychiatry are hundreds of times smaller
      > than those used recreationaly. Speaking as someone who has taken Dexedrine
      > every day for ADD for fifteen years, I can tell you that I get more of a buzz
      > and more side effects from a double espresso.


      That's because the effect of amphetamines (and many other drug) depends greatly
      on the person taking them. Amphetamines tend to calm calm hyperactive people
      and help people with ADD to concentrate, while they can do the opposite to
      people without these conditions.


      > If i were to snort a whole month's worth at a time, on the other hand, I'd
      > probably have some nasty side effects.
      >
      > There is a world of difference between responsible use of stimulants for
      > psychiatric purposes or even for cognitive enhancement and abusing them to
      > get fucked up.


      What makes you think getting "fucked up" on drugs is an abuse of them?
      That sounds like a perfectly legitimate use to me.


      > At small doses cognitive functioning is enhanced and high doses it's
      > inebriating. It's the difference between a cup of coffee and a box of
      > no-doze.


      Oh no! Inebriation! Heavens forbid! Can't wait until our wonderful
      stewards of morality declare another Prohibitions and close all the bars.
      Worked out real well last time.

    22. Re:speed by flynns · · Score: 1

      Being both male and diagnosed with ADD, I can tell you that there are parts of childhood that most kids experience that are completely normal. It's tough to get small boys to sit down and do stuff. They're more inclined to run around and beat each other with sticks. This is natural, and should be encouraged. :D

      However, when you sit down and intend to focus and can't, over and over, and it becomes a problem...well, that's a problem, and there can be times when the cause is biochemical, and is best addressed pharmaceutically. That said, ADD is no excuse for lousy parenting. It's one of those cases when everyone is right.

      --
      'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
  13. aren't these amphetamine like effects? by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 1

    Don't a lot of these drugs have effects similar to amphetamines?

    I used to take ephedrine by the truckload until the government basically pulled it off gas station shelves and started tracking purchases of it at pharmacies despite the fact that it is OTC. It pisses me off because I was told that "only methamphetamine cooks buy ephedrine" by local pharmacists, which I know is completely untrue.

    After having read this article, I'm unclear as to why these drugs are "ok" with law enforcement, but my use of ephedrine is not.

    1. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by DarkProphet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The War On Drugs.

      The same way I can get more intoxicated from two beers than from a marijuana cigarette, yet only the beer is legal.

      --
      What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
    2. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by nxtw · · Score: 2, Informative

      A lot of the drugs *are* amphetamines, including Adderall (generic form - mixed amphetamine salts) and Desoxyn (methamphetamine).

      Others (Ritalin, Concerta & generics) are methylphenidate, which is very similar to amphetamine.

    3. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adderall IS amphetamine, and Ritalin is a similar stimulant called methylphenidate.

      Not only that, a lot of these are only obtainable by prescription, which means that this "mind doping" is being done ILLEGALLY in many cases.

    4. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methamphetamine harms society. Coffee doesn't. Time will tell whether these are the new coffee or the new speed...

    5. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I could see a meth cook buying ephedrine by the drum to get raw stuff, but taking pills apart purchased at retail prices, strains the imagination.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    6. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      and you know that they arent getting it prescribed??? They are doing it illegally? Jumping to conclusions a bit?

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    7. Re:aren't these amphetamine like effects? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Two beers? Do you weigh 80 pounds, or are you Asian?

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  14. About the money by fermion · · Score: 4, Interesting
    In sports and entertainment a million dollar contract does not buy you an employee, it buys you a product. A product that must be leveraged to earn several times that contract price, and that must be carefully controlled so that parents and the conservative will pay for the content as a wholesome product. Otherwise why would any pay the exorbitant fees when, at least from the point of view of the child, the band at the local club is much more entertaining and interactive. To complicate matters the sports and entertainment product is posited as a role model for children, which make PR control even more critical. If the sports product is seen as dressing, acting, and taking drugs just like the preferred, for instance, rapper, then how can the sports product be presented as superior product worthy of higher costs, even though the entertainment value is often less.

    So the sports product must be controlled with dress code, drug codes etc, and when the sports product does something wrong, something that any normal person would do, the product is released so as not to tarnish the lilly white reputation. The drug thing is not about the product, it is about the image of the product. This goes to non sports products targeted as family and conservative friendly, like the Disney creation Hannah Montana who commands a premium as the product is "wholesome".

    Now, if these other mental acts every become marketed as uber conservative family friendly, and the entertainers in these acts every become products, then we are likely to see them crack down on drug use, but that will be the smallest problem. Right now classical performances, art museums, indie public television, all of this type of entertainment, can get away with all sorts of stuff because they now the people who watch are not looking for the bland uber conservative family 'I am afraid of my body' entertainment. Bad or Good, the product is marketed toward a people with a wider view of the world, included families. For instance, parents send their kids off to these top rate colleges, and they must know full well that mistakes will be made in relationships and controlled substances, among other things, so there must be faith that the child has enough intelligence and a sufficiently good upbringing so the parents can let do.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:About the money by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Err.... what?

      There's a hell of a lot more to it than presenting a "lily white" or "wholesome" package when it comes to the ban on sports doping (couldya pack in the word "conservative a few more times? I didn't see it enough in there). There was a recent (and still ongoing) debate on the use of sports enhancers in friggin' golf FFS. (Having been stuck w/ frequently visting a hospital that doesn't have WiFi over the past month or so, I get to read the newspapers a lot). Okay... golf. We're not talking the Tiger Woods type of golfers incidentally; we're talking about old men who takes drugs to keep their knees and hips from coming apart - drugs which have a neat side effect of adding a measureable number of yards to their swing... yet for some odd reason, the entire golf industry is going apeshit over whether or not these old men, playing the various Senior tours, should be allowed to use these medicines and keep playing. The whole point had frig-all to do with image, or what the kids might think (I mean, c'mon - how many teenaged kids watch Senior Tour Golf)? No - the whole point was that golf, like any other sport*, is a measurement of how good at it a human being can get without any help of the chemical variety - they're measuring the man, not the chemicals he used to get the win.

      Point is, there are tons of people so obsessed and engrossed with sports (kids, adults, what-have-you), that it's all about the stats. It's all about the drive to eliminate 'cheating' of any kind.

      A good geek parallel would be a pro gamer being caught with a custom aimbot. Would you be so quick to dismiss that as a drive by the sponsors to present a "lily white", "conservative" image? Hell, no! You'd want the bum tossed. Similarly, you get shades of grey there, too - wallhacks, "custom" binds that enhance gameplay, things like that... all the sudden it's no longer a contest of skill, but a contest to see who can build the best hack, and the game is no longer the game.

      Sure, PR plays a pretty big role in the whole sports/drugs affair, no doubt about it, but don't fool yourself into thinking it's the primary goal of the whole anti-doping brouhaha.

      Academia is a whole other dimension - mostly because the question is... "what competition"? Sure, there is a level of competitiveness, but not in any organized sense of the concept.

      While the goal is certainly noble (more knowledge), there are a lot of side-effects that nobody understands. A researcher sucking down "mind-enhancing" pills may or may not come up with some new way to get a widget to do something neat, or they might manage to build an anti-gravity machine... but how many of these folks understand that they're facing a coctail of potential troubles down the road? The thought of accelerated Alzheimers' disease or chemically-induced mental illness down the road seems to be a hellishly high price to pay for something that may or may not come true.

      Pretty much the same deal with the whole "i'm afraid of my body" semi-taunt you posted... it isn't fear of the body (or mind), it's what happens much later on, when the demand/desire is over, and you're stuck trying to pick up the pieces with what you have left - mind, body, finances, social circle, etc. Some drugs (e.g. marijuana) can be taken over years without too much worry over long-term effects - provided that the one consuming it is at least halfway mature, does so in moderation, and exercises enough willpower to not let it affect (let alone dominate) all other aspects of his or her life. That said, most folks don't have these qualities, and tend to make a royal mess of things, even with the relatively harmless stuff (let alone the real dangerous shit like, say, methamphetamines). Same with alcohol, incidentally. (now the whole idea of legality and such is beyond the purview of discussion... personally, I believe the "war on drugs" is idiotic; there are far better ways to handle it - by actually profiting off of human stupidity (e.g. tax the shit) and at the same time

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:About the money by mapkinase · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Putting aside your clear political motivation, the real difference and the real reason why the original post is so overstretching is that sports IS entertainment which is based on certain rules, that every participant should meet certain standards to enter _competition_.

      Real life (business) is not about _competition_ and _winning_ _everyone_. It is about money. Who cares if Bill Gates is number one or number 10? As long as he does not violate rights of others, he can do to himself whatever he wants according to the rules of Western society.

      Sport is about "ultimate" justice, "honesty". That is why it is a model. A second life, an incubator, an artificial construct. Real world is not.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    3. Re:About the money by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 1

      It's about risk assessment and encouraging bad behavior. Conservatives are more likely to look for the downside, and we're quite often right. Steroids have some pretty nasty side effects so while pro athletes will likely benefit short-term and find the downside acceptable, having impressionable children who haven't developed their risk assessment skills yet try to emulate them would be Bad. Less high profile people are less of a concern.

      Don't think kids are that impressionable? Guess why the Left fights tooth and nail to maintain and control the government education monopoly.

      As for the cognitive enhancers, what's the downside? The upside is pretty obvious and certainly practical, people don't take them for mere amusement, and they're taken by people who are usually pretty good at risk assessment, so... we'll watch quietly until the downside is a bit more clear. If the grade school set gets a hold of them I expect we'll hear more of a fuss.

      The grade school use of prescription Ritalin, etc. is a much greater concern. It looks like ADHD is being driven by petrochemicals in the food supply, namely most artificial coloring, flavorings and preservatives. See feingold.org. This is one time when it's appropriate for the government to pull rank and ban stuff. The cost/benefit analysis is a no-brainer.

    4. Re:About the money by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 1

      I should have said the grade school use of unprescribed cognitive enhancers. Bad enough that the kiddies get them under doctor supervision.

    5. Re:About the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The left, as you say, tries to keep some control over education so that people are free to practice their faith rather than be indoctrinated into the prevailing cult. Think prayer is important? There are five minutes between classes when children can choose to pray instead of finding their next sex partner. No one needs the cult christianity when the bible so clearly says
      And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
      I think even the most hypocritical so-called christian knows the rest.

      And let's not forget the damage brought on day by persons, in my experience overwhelming conservative and christian, that value the shopping opportunities of the season rather than the peace and healthy relationships preached by the person for whom we celebrate.

      Children are impressionable, but reasonable children with reasonable parents can be raised primarily at home, not in school. The danger of school is not that they hear untruths, but that they ar persecuted by cult member and forced to participate in rituals that are not part of their faith. And the cultist like this because it peer pressure will force the student to live not in the faith taught by the parents, but in the self-serving antics forced upon the student by the cult members. Of course for the parent who does not wish to interact with the child, or has taught the child untruths in order to control the child, school poses all sorts of danger

      On this day we think of humility, and lovering our neighbor as ourselves, and not being greedy, and sacrifice. Part of this is accepting that we might be wrong, we are not the center of the universe, and g-d can and will do whatever pleases, no matter what arrogant humans have written on sheets of paper.

    6. Re:About the money by Oddster · · Score: 1

      Academia is a whole other dimension - mostly because the question is... "what competition"? Sure, there is a level of competitiveness, but not in any organized sense of the concept.

      I'm sorry, what? Have you never heard of a Grade Point Average? Valedictorian? Magna cum laude? The Fields Medal? How competitive it can be to get a position, from student through professor, at a prestigious school? How competitive it can be to get research funding?

      There is plenty of organized competitiveness in academia. Just none of it is on the publicity scale of professional sports.

    7. Re:About the money by gambolt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you kidding me?

      There are tenure track jobs available for maybe 5% of new philosophy phds. Otherwise you spend years in the brutal world of publish or parish, moving from state to state taking short term jobs at community colleges while trying to pay of tens of thousands of dollars in student loans.

      This is why so many people with philosophy degrees end up doing geekwork. It pays the bills.

    8. Re:About the money by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      No - the whole point was that golf, like any other sport*, is a measurement of how good at it a human being can get without any help of the chemical variety - they're measuring the man, not the chemicals he used to get the win.

      How far are you really willing to take this? Athletes use nutritional science to optimize their performance. For instance, marathon runners, leading up to a marathon, will carb-load (go on a low-carb diet for a few weeks and then gorge themselves on spaghetti the night before the marathon) to maximize their glycogen storage. Athletes devise (or have their trainers devise for them) exercise strategies that push their ability to the limit. Injured football players often use painkillers to help play through injuries. Golfers and baseball players often get LASIK surgery to enhance their vision beyond 20/20. At what point does it become cheating?

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    9. Re:About the money by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
      And yet, there is no organized competition among academics that I'm aware of, at least not of the scale and culture-soaking reach that FISA, NFL, NBA, MLB, PGA, and the like have. Not too many post-grads can negotiate 7-figure (let alone 8-figure) contracts with any sort of talent scout, let alone the right one. Even on the prize level - a Nobel Laureate for Physics or Philosophy, vs. a Super Bowl Quarterback, or the MVP? Geddafuggouttahere... :)

      Dude - you're talking tenured positions here as the Big Goal... barely a six figure salary if you're lucky and find a first-rate university (a salary that would barely match the back-bench last-string position of almost any national-league sports team).

      I won't say there is no competition at all, but really... nobody chooses Philosophy (or Physics, or Engineering(mine), or Music, or...) as a major because of the money or fame. That's what the kids who take Law, Business, CS*, or Medicine do. We pick the weird subjects simply because we like doing it.

      That said, shit... I'd rather do it honestly, than live in constant (justified or not) fear of having my brain go 'splat' smack in the middle of my career...

      /P

      * yeah, I know... gonna catch hell for that one. Then again, I taught CS for six years at a state-level college... I can count less than ~20% of the kids in my experience who got into it because they were no-shit geeks who loved tinkering with code, silicon, or wires. Most did it for the "money" (even in the dot-bust... go figure).

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  15. diet and lifestyle too by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Caffeine, certain foods, certain diets, certain lifestyles, even having a religion can all affect mental qualities.

    Am I cheating because I consume certain foods and avoid others before the Scrabble tourney so that I'm at my mental best?

    Am I cheating because I live a low-stress lifestyle which makes me better able to train for my charity poker tournament?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Let's be honest here. If athletes are cheating when they consume chemicals that will help them perform at their best, so are you, whenever you do something that others don't.

    2. Re:diet and lifestyle too by Nullav · · Score: 1

      Even when the opposition can easily do the same? Should I be disqualified for taking a short nap before a chess tournament? Preempt: You can't compare that to steroid use, that would be more like reading a move book before a game.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    3. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Even when the opposition can easily do the same? Should I be disqualified for taking a short nap before a chess tournament? Preempt: You can't compare that to steroid use, that would be more like reading a move book before a game. And ... is reading a move book before a game illegal in chess tournaments?

      If it is, well, it's the first time I heard of it.

      The fact is, the whole "substance abuse" deal in professional athletics is an anomaly. In no fields of endeavor is anyone so handicapped in exactly what they can do to improve their performance.

      I understand why that's the case, but it's mostly economics (i.e. professional athletics is an industry worth millions and billions of dollars in advertising and such), and that's another social issue altogether. As far as why "substance abuse" is really bad in the natural, non-situational sense goes, the only plausible argument I heard is "It's bad for health", and even that doesn't hold water---by that same logic, we should prevent college students from holding overnight cram sessions since that is bad for their health as well.
    4. Re:diet and lifestyle too by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really, There are all sorts of ways to clear your mental process and focuss on the task at hand. In sports, the drugs give special advantages like refining muscle mas and tone towards a specific goal or increasing your oxygen levels on the blood so you can perform longer or faster.

      In mind doping, the enhancement isn't something that wasn't there before. It doesn't effect how intelligent or creative you are, it only removes obstacles hampering your ability to tap into that already existing mental capacity.

      The differences are clear in this respect. It would be like running a race and having someone clear hurdles from your lane (performance enhancements) as apposed to having someone remove pieces of gravel, plastic cups and other debree in your lane(mind doping). The causes and effect are really that different. One helps you do something better while the other helps you do something without distractions that shouldn't be there.

    5. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But what if part of that "mental capacity" is really ... measuring how well you can concentrate? That'd be true for a professional poker player, and the same would be true for a student taking an exam. Yes, other mental faculties still matter, but ability to concentrate is an important one (and there is a whole lot of personal difference there).

      The same exact thing you said about "mind doping" holds true for "substance abuse" of athletes. Steroids don't magically give you a bulkier body. You still have to work out. You could almost say that all steroids do is compensate for lack of hormonal inclination towards building higher muscle mass. The exact same way caffeine helps you stay awake more and other substances help you concentrate (beyond what you'd "normally" be able to do).

      You can draw as many lines in the sand and split as many hairs as you want. There is a definite double standards towards "substance abuse" of athletes and substance abuse of other professions that are, in nearly all aspects, including health of participants, exactly the same.

    6. Re:diet and lifestyle too by popmaker · · Score: 1

      "It's bad for the health" is a perfectly good argument if you are talking about a competition. If you decide to use steroids you ARE getting an unfair advantage, unless the opponent does the same. You can't expect the opponent to WANT to damage his health playing the game, even if you do. In a way you are forcing him to do - if he really wants to win. Allowing those substances in sports and other strictly competitive things ("games") is only natural. If we did not, everyone would start taking them, they would cancel each other out and professional athletes (or some equivalent to that) would have a shorter lifespan - or end up with a pair of knockers and a beard. College isn't strictly competitive (you can argue against that statement, but please don't waste my time) and who cares, so long as you're only doing it to yourself?

    7. Re:diet and lifestyle too by rossifer · · Score: 1

      Let's be honest here. If athletes are cheating when they consume chemicals that will help them perform at their best, so are you, whenever you do something that others don't.
      Not so fast. If he is doing something that is against the rules, or for whatever other reason, completely unavailable to others, then perhaps he is cheating. Making changes to a car before racing is cheating in some races, but not in others. "Stock" cars don't have a single stock part any more and that's no longer cheating. Most of these anti-doping rules are intended to prevent sports from becoming a rich-man's game, to pretend that "anyone" can compete, as long as their body has the natural ability. This is a fiction. The truth of the matter is that better physical coaching, training, and diet are still only available to those who have access to wealth.

      Personally, I think that it's all a losing battle. Just as happened in auto racing, I think we should allow non-stock modifications to the underlying machinery and that the sports will eventually adapt to the reality of how people are competing.

      Specifically, I think that we should have a transhuman olympics, or transhuman classes/events at the regular olympics. And for academic/intellectual competition, the same sort of tolerance or acceptance is already occuring.

      In a large sense, anyone in a creative job (software, design, engineering, art, writing, etc.) is in competition with others to maximize their attractiveness to potential employers/clients/buyers. Is it cheating to get the job by taking a drug to be smarter than the other guy? The pressure to take these is not entirely negative, and may in fact become a dramatic positive for those with access and interest:

      These substances are quite interesting in their ability to not only temporarily increase mental activity, creativity, focus, wakefulness, simultaneously compared details, etc. but in moderation, they're good for your long-term mental health, "curing" depression or OCD (by upregulating catecholamine neurotransmitters), preventing Alzheimer's and Parkinson's (by protecting the dopaminergic glial cells, raising PEA levels, and/or reversing age-related MAO increases), reversing mitochondrial markers of aging (increasing the number and reducing the size of mitochondria), solubilizing age-related intracellular pigments, helping your body eliminate advanced glycation endpoints (restoring flexibility and adaptability to aging tissues like arterial walls) or by any number of other means.

      These drugs are the same drugs that may allow us to extend our middle age another ten or twenty years and may allow us to finally break through the theoretical maximum human lifespan. Preventing "mental athletes" from taking these substances may be preventing them from joining a class of people with increased quality and quantity of life. Which would be a destructive and horribly misguided policy decision.

      I guess you can tell how I feel about nootropics. I'm still determining my own stack, but I'm taking those things that I can legally obtain without the cooperation of a doctor and many of them have notable positive effects. I am a creative person in a creative job and they help me with my productivity. My bonus this year is likely to increase by more than I have spent on the various supplements I started to take this year.
    8. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Well, since you seem to have hardened your opinion that college is not competitive (despite the usual "bell curves" and such---in fact, this is the main incentive college professors can use to entice you to report your cheating classmates), let me bring in a different case:

      I argue that lawyers not be allowed to drink coffee or consume any substance that allows them to keep unfair advantage (of better concentration and more waking hours) over their opponent. After all, caffeine and other prescription drugs designed to improve concentration are not good or health in large doses (in small enough doses ... well, nearly everything is O.K. Even steroids), and they can't expect the opponent to want to damage his health in order to win the lawsuit, even if they do. In a way, they are forcing the opponent's lawyer to do the same. Unfairly.

      So, there you go. Let's stop lawyers from destroying their health and family with their substance abuse and 100-hr workweeks.

      I understand that athletics is usually more competitive than other fields of endeavor. But substance abuse is only a symptom of a much larger problem of society. You cannot simply treat the symptom by applying bizarre and unusual rules (after all, if you thought what I suggest for lawyers above is ... unreasonable, how can you argue that what we already require for athletes is reasonable in any sense of the word?) about what they can and cannot do and hope that the real cause goes away on its own.

      I haven't figured out exactly which problem of society generates these symptoms, but it probably has something to do with top athletes raking in millions of dollars.

    9. Re:diet and lifestyle too by fiddley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      anybody else up for a no-holds-barred olympics where people can do whatever they like to themselves in order to win?

      --
      If medicine were ever perfected, we'd all be the same.
    10. Re:diet and lifestyle too by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      But what if part of that "mental capacity" is really ... measuring how well you can concentrate? That'd be true for a professional poker player, and the same would be true for a student taking an exam. Yes, other mental faculties still matter, but ability to concentrate is an important one (and there is a whole lot of personal difference there).
      Well, the mind doping isn't increasing your ability to concentrate or the levels of concentration your brain can manage. It isn't altering how much concentration you can apply, just how much stuff stops you from applying it. It isn't like your taking a smart pill and all the sudden becoming smarter.

      And if your ability to concentrate, effected by distractions, would be cheating, then telling a player that you T-baged his sister while his dad held her down would be cheating too. Wouldn't it? I means wouldn't trash talking and stuff designed to punk out an opponent and cause him to loose concentration or make it harder for them to think straight, be cheating? Because it is artificially adding distractions and compromising their ability to concentrate or think; where the mind doping is taking them away. Think about how far we are willing to go with this strategy.

      The same exact thing you said about "mind doping" holds true for "substance abuse" of athletes. Steroids don't magically give you a bulkier body. You still have to work out. You could almost say that all steroids do is compensate for lack of hormonal inclination towards building higher muscle mass. The exact same way caffeine helps you stay awake more and other substances help you concentrate (beyond what you'd "normally" be able to do).
      Well, besides the fact that steroids are used for more then muscle building, they end up unnaturally amplifying the results of the work outs. You end up with the same results in 10 minutes that would take 45 minutes without. So it is doing more then taking negatives away. But steroids also increase the oxygen content of blood making people who should be worn out fresh as if they just started playing. They do quite a few other things that get around actual limitation of the human body artificially. As far as I know, the mind doping doesn't add to anything already there.

      You can draw as many lines in the sand and split as many hairs as you want. There is a definite double standards towards "substance abuse" of athletes and substance abuse of other professions that are, in nearly all aspects, including health of participants, exactly the same.
      They are only the same if you lack the understanding behind them. If they are bad for the users health, then take them off the market. Mind doping doesn't enhance anything, but when it does, ban it. Right now, as far as I know, this isn't the concern. It seems that people with little clue about the processes involved are saying, if we cannot do it, they shouldn't be able to either. Maybe their right, maybe we shouldn't be able to do anything anyone else cannot do.
    11. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 1

      And if your ability to concentrate, effected by distractions, would be cheating, then telling a player that you T-baged his sister while his dad held her down would be cheating too. Wouldn't it? I means wouldn't trash talking and stuff designed to punk out an opponent and cause him to loose concentration or make it harder for them to think straight, be cheating? There are such things as "unsportsmanlike conduct", and I believe you can get a red card for that in soccer. The rules are probably different for each sport, but I would imagine most sports ban such trash-talking.

      Can we now please ban mind doping, or will you lower the bar again for what ought to count as cheating in sports if mind doping is to be disallowed?
    12. Re:diet and lifestyle too by JamesP · · Score: 1

      OOoh man!

      I SO want to see the "on drugs" version of the Chewbacca defense...

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    13. Re:diet and lifestyle too by magisterx · · Score: 1

      Perhaps a more apropos distinction is that steroids are specifically banned and generally illegal while (with a prescription) most of those discussed in the article are not. We can have a reasonable discussion about if they should be banned or at least more tightly controlled within the prescription channels, but the athletes who used steroids have clearly and absolutely broken laws and regulations where the flutists mentioned have not.

    14. Re:diet and lifestyle too by soren100 · · Score: 1

      The same exact thing you said about "mind doping" holds true for "substance abuse" of athletes. Steroids don't magically give you a bulkier body. You still have to work out. You could almost say that all steroids do is compensate for lack of hormonal inclination towards building higher muscle mass. The exact same way caffeine helps you stay awake more and other substances help you concentrate (beyond what you'd "normally" be able to do). This is absolutely true. I remember college kids taking Ritalin to help them study. The things that it does for ADHD kids it also does for regular people -- it stimulats the brain and makes it easier to focus and concentrate on studying.

      Meditation creats the ability to concentrate just like weight-lifting increases muscle mass. Ritalin and Amphetamines can give the same kind of shortcut to mental athletes (students and coders), but also at a high price. Studies have found that Ritalin has a greater effect on some brain systems than cocaine, leading some to call it kiddy cocaine .

      Some side effects (just the central nervous system side effects) ilsted on an adhd website include :

      5.Altered mental status (psychosis)
      6.Hallucinations
      7.Depression or excitement
      8.Convulsions / seizures (excessive brain stimulation)
      9.Drowsiness or "dopey" feeling
      10.Confusion
      11.Lack of sleep (insomnia)
      12.Agitation, irritation, anxiety, nervousness
      13.Hostility
      14.Unhappiness (Dysphoria)
      15.Impaired mental abilities (cognitive impairment on tests)
      16.Jerky movements (Dyskinesias, tics, Tourette's syndrome)
      17.Nervous habits (such as picking at skin or pulling hair)
      18.Compulsive behavior
      19.Depression/over-sensitivity
      20.Decreased social interest
      21.Zombie-like behavior

      So there are very definite parallels between steroids and brain doping. Both can significantly enhance short-term performance in exchange for potentially high costs. Personally I have found that paying the price up-front in terms of time and effort spent in meditation has tremendous long-lasting benefits in terms of enhancing concentration, memory, reaction-time while also lifting moods and creating happiness.

    15. Re:diet and lifestyle too by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Drugs, steroids and HGH chemicals are not illegal in sports merely because they give an unfair advantage. They are so because the give an unfair advantage and are proven to have detrimental side effects.

      Otherwise a healthy diet, exercise and practice would be outlawed in sports as well.

      One silly sarcastic straw man builder said, "We have found that players who breath have an near infinite advantage of players who do not breath. From now on players will no lonber be allowed to breath while under contract with the NSL (National Sports league)."

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    16. Re:diet and lifestyle too by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Sweet, I'm having my arm replaced with a minigun.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    17. Re:diet and lifestyle too by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Sweet, I'm having my arm replaced with a minigun. I must admit, I'm having a hard time seeing how that'll help you.

      It's "anything to yourself". I'm pretty sure shooting your opponent will still be just as much a foul as kicking him in the balls. ;)
  16. I'm on mind-doping chemicals right now... by Progman3K · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    So I'm getting a kick out of all these replies...
    Wait. wrong web-site. //Fark

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  17. Three Little Letters by flyneye · · Score: 1

    LSD
    and other archeological precidents.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  18. a good turn of phrase from "blade runner" by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    having nothing to do with this subject, but applicable nonetheless

    "accelerated decrepitude"

    here's another one:

    "How much of my long-term health am I willing to sacrifice for the sake of short-term glory?"

    from nytimes science section

    now enjoy your mind doping

    you have been warned

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:a good turn of phrase from "blade runner" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How much of my long-term health am I willing to sacrifice for the sake of short-term glory?"


      Yes, never mind that the moderate use of steroids has little detrimental effect over the long term and the the morons you see who actually have mental and physiological issues from their use generally are taking multiple drugs at numerous times the recommended dosage.

      On many things you're dead-on and often thought provoking. On this topic you've missed the boat.
    2. Re:a good turn of phrase from "blade runner" by budgenator · · Score: 1

      That guy is newspaper reporter, intellectually that make him open-minded about the same as a trash-can is open-minded, any trash is accepted equally. He's mixing up a whole bunch of very different biochemicals and are assuming they are equivalent because they have the same basic backbone shape.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  19. Healthier is better. by ttroutma · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think that a normal healthy person can get better results with proper sleep, diet and exercise and a daily power nap or meditation. Saying this as a former brain doper that now has better results the natural way.

    1. Re:Healthier is better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have time for that.

    2. Re:Healthier is better. by Deaddy · · Score: 1

      It depends. If you need to learn something or have long-term projects, I fully agree, because your mind works a lot while sleeping and therefor a healthy way of life (which I think enhances quality of sleep like nothing else) results in much better performance. But if you have short-term objectives, like a test or a short deadline, some drugs may help a lot for this short period of time.
      However, I don't think that concentrating on short-term goals is efficient, so maybe mind doping is only useful to the useless masses.

    3. Re:Healthier is better. by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      How does one make the brain STFU so you can get a decent night sleep?

      I ask as someone who slept restfully one night over the recent long weekend, and that was saturday because I enjoyed some Xmas cheer at a party. The rest of the time, my brain was going apeshit working on a decent-scale problem for work.

      This is not new to me, either.

    4. Re:Healthier is better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guy, I'm on the same page as you. I dunno why my brain never shuts down, but I generally have to put it into submission using alcohol/drugs to go to sleep. Since I'm 13, I've had problems shutting my brain off when it's bedtime. I stayed up until 0100, or later, nearly every weeknight during high school. I went to West Point for about a year and a half and that place was awful with my sleep habits. I would literally average like 22-24 hours of sleep during the week and I'd crash on the weekends to catch up. It sucked.

      I don't know what to tell you. Xanax works fairly well for me, but unfortunately I'm pretty sure I'm physically addicted to alcohol and taking those 2 together is a bad combo. So I have no advice, but I can share in your frustration...

    5. Re:Healthier is better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      avoid the computer and the tv (avoid staring at anything that emits light) for an hour or two before bed. That, and drop the caffeine, might help

  20. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by aussie_a · · Score: 2

    You assume that it is our lifestyle which is the better and so those that cannot operate as effectively in it are of lower intelligence. The problem with this is their lifestyle (Aboriginal lifestyle anyway, I'm not particularly knowledgable of African or Hispanic people before the spread of white man and the trends they were moving towards) didn't and wouldn't have created global warming. Their society was not severely impacted by droughts. They didn't need to desalinate water or recycle it in order to simply be able have enough for their society. They did not have to go to war simply to use the tools of their society.

    To me the Aboriginal who lived in their old ways sounds much more intelligent then myself and most of my fellow Australians and Americans.

  21. lolikun.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  22. Not really new by el_munkie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Paul Erdös seemed to be quite productive on uppers:

    His colleague Alfréd Rényi said, "a mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems", and Erdös drank copious quantities. (This quotation is often attributed incorrectly to Erdös.)[3] After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdös won the bet, but complained during his abstinence that mathematics had been set back by a month: "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." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine habit.

    1. Re:Not really new by Penguinisto · · Score: 0, Troll
      Shows exactly what's wrong with it too... he began to rely on the chemical to do all of his thinking for him, as the results show plainly.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Not really new by David+Jao · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Shows exactly what's wrong with it too... he began to rely on the chemical to do all of his thinking for him, as the results show plainly.

      It's actually hard to find anything wrong with the results. Erdos is one of the greatest mathematicians of all time. I work in applied mathematics (cryptography) and some of my work relies on his discoveries. I'm not going to exaggerate and say he invented the internet, but there is foundational material in computer science that derives from his findings. I'm personally glad that Erdos took amphetamines, regardless of whether he depended on it. His drug use harmed at most one man, compared to the six billion others in the world who benefited from his work.

      Also, you'd be hard pressed to argue that amphetamine use was harmful to Erdos. He lived a long life.

    3. Re:Not really new by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2, Funny

      but there is foundational material in computer science that derives from his findings

      That explains a lot.

    4. Re:Not really new by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Cynical sarcasm maybe but hardly flamebait. Merry Christmas mods :P

    5. Re:Not really new by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      It's actually hard to find anything wrong with the results. Erdos is one of the greatest mathematicians of all time.

      Fair enough in his specific case, though we both end up correct in a way... again, in his specific case.

      The problems come when we start taking his case (as an arguable statistical outlier), and assume that we can apply it as a generic rule. Very few individuals have the maturity and willpower to lay off the stuff long enough to consistently do the vital things in life (pay the bills, go to work, feed the kids, etc), let alone do it on a bet. I only pointed out that it had gone from being an enhancement to becoming a crutch, as he himself had pretty much admitted to during the withdrawal period that he underwent on a bet.

      You're right though - the results are hard to argue - he managed to be very productive about the whole thing. OTOH, would he have been even more productive had he never used it in the first place, or less? ...and why? The operating assumption I gathered from it was that Speed was the factor which gave him the wisdom and insight; question is... can that be qualified as an actual fact, or just conjecture on his part brought on by coincidence?

      I only pointed out the one thing that does ring true - that without Speed, he became incapacitated in a tangible measure, and by his own admission.

      /P

      *(modded "Troll"? sheyah... I just love mods who can't think past their knees).

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  23. not stupid at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in fact the 'new format' helps robbIE hide (as in censored) 'unpreferred' comments whilst garnering more&more clicks for his (the sourceforgerIE's) decaying blog, just the way the corepirate nazi advertisers like it. all for a few more stock markup FraUD dollars. we could think of other more appropriate adjectives to describe the behaviour.

  24. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by aussie_a · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I realize I'm being trolled (and on Christmas nonetheless! I hope you're Jewish, a Jehovas Witness or live in a country where Christmas has finished), but this is fun.

    The fact of the matter is that people of lower IQ do not fit into western society very well. Blacks and hispanics do poorly in our society but Whites and East Asians succeed very well. Really? So how many East Asians have been presidents or vice presidents in America? Just as many as there have been black and hispanic people in those positions? Then you might find it is not related to the ability to perform agriculture, but is instead related to how a white powerful elite treat people of other races. Black and hispanic people are treated poorly, and as such a lot of them (although I hope its lessening as the government and society works to righting past wrongs) are in the lower classes.

    Oh and as for agriculture being a sign of intelligence: Egyptians (which have a largely "black" makeup with "southwest asian" influences) also mastered it. And yet they are not a superpower today. Funny that, isn't it?
  25. Semantics by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1

    I just think that the biggest advantage is to already possess a skill. Just because any idiot can take some sort of pharmaceutical does not mean that any idiot can be good at thinking. I'm not sure I even understand this strange distinction that people make between prescription drugs such as Prozac, and "performance enhancing" drugs.

    Every foreign chemical introduced into the body is bound to have some sort of unknown or undesirable side effect on someone. The question is how much is the individual willing to balance the risks with the desirable outcome, IMHO. Prozac = artificial happiness. Steroids = artificial physical prowess. Mind dope = artificial clarity.

    So what?

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

      removing steroids doesn't cause your muscles (obtained by going to the gym, not sitting on your ass, waiting for the steroids to kick in and grow your muscles) to disappear. mind dope does give you artificial clarity, but who cares? you've done what you needed to in a more efficient manner. prozac indeed gives artificial happiness in a happiness-deficient (ie mentally diseased) person. artificial is bad? artificial hip or wheelchair for the rest of your life, what would you pick? being depressed all the time or being normal and able to get on with the rest of your life? fucking around on slashdot for 2 hours a day, 5 days a week, or avoiding the distraction that is slashdot with the help of provigil, and spending that 10 hours a week at the gym (doing steroids, of course) so you can be in shape?

    2. Re:Semantics by nxtw · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is a difference, mainly in operation.

      These stimulants (Adderall, Ritalin, other amphetamine/amphetamine-like drugs) have an effect as soon as the chemicals reach your brain. Much like caffeine or nicotine, the effects last for awhile and taper off. They can be consumed whenever without any withdrawal (at normal doses). For example, someone might take these drugs twice a year for finals.

      Prozac and other antidepressants tend to take a few weeks before results are felt at all. Those kinds of drugs rely on altering brain chemistry and generally must be taken on a schedule to remain effective, and can even have negative effects if you miss a dose. You can't just take them whenever you're feeling upset and get an effect 20 minutes later.

  26. Nicotine by bryanp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This isn't entirely new. The fact that nicotine enhances short term memory has been known for quite a while. I know someone who doesn't smoke but does buy the nicotine gum just so he can get that specific boost.

    --
    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
    1. Re:Nicotine by MrDERP · · Score: 1

      Well I can say that on occasion, I take Modafainil (Provigil)[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modafinil [/url] It is supposed to only be prescribed for narcoleptic and shift workers. I fall into the second group. It gives you good mental energy even if you only slept 3-4 hours the night before. Although I find using it more than a few times a month causes it to looses it's effectiveness, Ginkgo Biloboa + Running (cardio exercise) seem to help my memory and concentration, Also L-theanine is great with caffeine (like green tea) because you get the stimulant effect without the jitters. In college I would take 1/2 of and adderal sometimes to study it really helped, but it wa as if I was "borrowing" my focus from the next two days. I Always felt sluggish and slow for 2 days after the adderal but that is amphetamine. There is a new class of non-jittery stims out there. They do work but are not sustainable if that makes sense, Derp

  27. Re:If a chemical makes you genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do you really think Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Bach, Aristotle, Plato, Newton, and Huxley were wrong?

  28. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I did use italics, dumbass!

    Anyway, here is meat of my thesis. Either attack my argument or admit defeat!

    Very poor Chinese people have come to America over the years and have managed to become very successful in their endeavors here. I am sure you agree with this. Black people who have been much longer than they have not managed to enjoy the same amount of success. It is also true that Chinese people, like many major immigrant groups, have experienced discrimination and abuse at the hands of the people already here. Yet, the Chinese overcame that adversity quickly. Same with the Irish or the Italians.

    Race and average IQ are very much correlated. Assuming that we are all equal has not worked and will not work.

  29. Re:If a chemical makes you genius by Cylix · · Score: 1

    That sounds like a great band name... "My Chemical Genius"

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
  30. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by aussie_a · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I did use italics, dumbass! Given you are incapable of admitting the reality of this, I would find it laughable to respond to the rest of your post. While its possible what you say is true, its also possible a monkey will create Shakespeare on a typewriter. It doesn't mean I'm going to read everything a monkey says on the off chance they do somehow produce Shakespeare.
  31. Being President Is Unrelated to the Issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    East Asians are still a small percentage of the American population, so the lack of East-Asian presidents does not indicate oppressive racism. The USA has racism, but the degree of it is not sufficient to explain the woeful academic underperformance of Blacks and Asians.

    By the way, there have been a handful of Japanese-American politicians in Congress. Despite the World-War-II internment of Japanese-Americans, they succeeded well after release from the internment camps. Several Japanese-Americans were elected to Congress by districts that were predominantly Caucasian.

    On a larger geographic scale, we can see the woeful failure of nations in Africa and South America. Compare their failure to the success of Japan (or even racist South Korea). There is no "white racism" to oppress the South Americans or the Africans. They destroyed their own societies via their intelligence-quotient (IQ) deficiency. These drugs boosting IQ may help them.

  32. Good to be dumb by jmpeax · · Score: 2, Interesting
    FTFA:

    There are not too many occupations where it's really good to be dumb

    Actually, many non-graduate jobs prefer people to be pretty dumb, academically at least. The jobs they offer only require a small amount of training which doesn't require much intelligence or academic ability, and doesn't offer much other than tedium. They don't want to employ someone who has academic prospects for fear that they might leave or just start not caring. This was a problem when I was a high school student - retailers didn't want me because of my straight As - they knew I'd be going to university, while the guy who failed three of his subjects would have much more potential as a long-term employee.

    When you're 16 and you've just got As and A*s at GCSE and then you can't even get a summer job, it's pretty disheartening. I'm in my final year of university now and at the beginning of the year I got a part-time (and damn well-paid, for a student at least) job as a PHP developer, though, so I guess it has evened out!
    1. Re:Good to be dumb by dilute · · Score: 2, Funny

      The jobs they offer only require a small amount of training which doesn't require much intelligence or academic ability, and doesn't offer much other than tedium. . . .I'm in my final year of university now and at the beginning of the year I got a part-time (and damn well-paid, for a student at least) job as a PHP developer . . . .

      Come, on, PHP isn't THAT bad!

    2. Re:Good to be dumb by jmpeax · · Score: 1

      Haha indeed. A client of the company's tech support service was asking whether a job tracking/accounts system could be made for them, and my boss asked me to come up with suggestions. I kept trying to push a compiled solution because that's where my real interest lies. Alas, for many reasons (including "it needs to be accessible from anywhere with an Internet connection"), the PHP option won.

      I'm still determined to change the job title to C/C++ developer!

    3. Re:Good to be dumb by vbraga · · Score: 0

      At first, I'm not a native english speaker, so, I'm sorry for any errors. Corrections and grammar nazis are actually welcome =)

      I never got straight As or a nice GPA (it's real bad). I'm a full time C++/Qt Developer for one of the best companies in the region I live (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). Maybe the market I'm in isn't as competitive as yours (well, it probably isn't), but maybe, you difficulty in getting goods jobs isn't only due your high achieving academic results: interview skills, teamwork capacity and other "human resources"-like skills are also needed too.

      I understand your point and, if your academic history is like you said, a company or two may prefer other candidate because you're most likely to go to grad school and leave them. But for the average high tech company, it would be a nice hire. You may check up other things, besides the academics stuff, for getting better jobs.

      And sorry for the bad english, it's really shitty today, I know.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    4. Re:Good to be dumb by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Since you asked :)

      (it's real bad)

      That should say "really" bad. That's a common error, even among native speakers. ...a company or two may prefer other candidate

      "candidates". That one may be just a typo.

      All in all, your English is quite good. Don't judge yourself so harshly! :) Happy Holidays.

    5. Re:Good to be dumb by jmpeax · · Score: 1

      Your English is actually very good, it's not shitty at all. I'm surprised you're not a native speaker.

      The jobs I was going for when I was a high school student were the typical student jobs - I was applying for things such as waiting jobs, till work, bar work, etc. It was employers needing these kind of jobs that seemed to be put off by my academic record.

  33. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given you are incapable of admitting the reality of this, I would find it laughable to respond to the rest of your post. While its possible what you say is true, its also possible a monkey will create Shakespeare on a typewriter. It doesn't mean I'm going to read everything a monkey says on the off chance they do somehow produce Shakespeare.

    Why don't you LOOK at my post, moron? Every quote of yours is in italics.

    You find it laughable to attack my argument with substance, like I have done with yours, because you have NOTHING to offer to counter it.

    Thanks for hilariously making your defeat.

  34. Brain doping? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if you dope your brain with Boron you get a P-type brain, and if you dope your brain with Phosphorus you get an N-type brain. Makes sense.

  35. on the same topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are not too many occupations where it's really good to be dumb

    On the same topic, I remember hearing about a story where an applicant to a police department was rejected because he was too intelligent:

    http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_56314.html

    I wonder how common this practice is? It might explain the currently sorry state of law enforcement.

  36. Drunken lemurs don't need your dope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are not too many occupations where it's really good to be dumb. yeah, like.. upper management
  37. Re:Sorry..but..ummm... by bleaked · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By your logic, a well-balanced meal, tea, coffee, or even a good nights sleep would be considered doping.

  38. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you sir are a moron, firstly Spain is in Europe ergo all Hispanics are of European descent and secondly some people define success as being productive and self-supporting, and others define it as being lazy and have others support them. Egypt was a perennial superpower, until the new kids on the block, the Romans, kicked their asses up around their ears.

  39. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by mclaincausey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How come White people do not have much in the way of political power in non-white countries? Riddle me that!

    Oh, you mean like Apartheid or the Belgian Congo or Imperial Egypt or Imperial India or.... (list goes on FORVEVER...)

    Retard, Hispanics are descended from European culture, ever hear of Spain? Conquistadors? Get a clue. Won't bother responding to the rest of your diatribe because I already proved you don't know what you're talking about, and thus anything that follows out of your cowardly mouth is unreliable.

    --
    (%i1) factor(777353);
    (%o1) 777353
  40. Not Quite Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Spaniards invaded South America and inter-married with the local populations. The term, "Hispanic", refers to the resulting offspring.

    What is interesting is the following. Due to possessing some European physical features, Hispanics resemble Caucasians more than Asian-Americans. So, Hispanics have experienced less racism (from Caucasians) than Asian-Americans. Yet, Asian-Americans outperform Hispanics, academically.

    The inevitable conclusion is that Hispanics suffer from an intelligence-quotient (IQ) deficiency.

  41. Cheating isn't the problem... by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    It's desperation for success. This drives people to want that extra 10% out of themselves and they'll do anything to get it rather than learning to be content with who they are. Using 'mind-enhancing' drugs may bring brief success, but dependence follows and ultimately the person loses themselves.

    I'd agree that a bit in moderation is ok, and perhaps quite good (I'm thinking of coffee and tea here).

    --
    John_Chalisque
    1. Re:Cheating isn't the problem... by entropy42 · · Score: 1

      I like how it's "perhaps quite good" right up to the line you personally draw, and after that it's "desperation for success" along with inevitable unpersonhood. People draw different lines. Even you might draw a different line someday, at which point you will of course move the "desperation vs. quite good" delineation to match.

        - Paul Phillips (the guy in the article)

      --
      -- Stop the violins!
  42. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That blacks have failed to assimilate well in the large scale exploitative hellhole that is America is no insult to black men. All you appear to be telling me is that Chinese culture involves the same desire for control and class on a massive scale as American - which can be confirmed by looking at China, the most successful fascist state the world has ever seen.

    Most Slashdot posters forget just what a small, privileged population of their country they are. There's nothing "great" about America, unless you are part of that privileged elite; sure, there's a greater proportion of satisfied customers than you'll find in North Korea, but you really have to look at tribal cultures (and their modern derivatives) to witness advanced society. To wit, one where the Slashdot elite don't tell the other 95% how good they have it.

    (I'm fairly certain you're not a troll, as no troll would put repeated effort into such poorly-built argument.)

  43. The proper term is... by kimanaw · · Score: 2, Informative
    nootropics

    Interesting the term never surfaced in the article...perhaps the author needs some. OTOH, the number of misspelled, grammatically flawed entries here would indicate many of us could use a little mental boost.

    --
    007: "Who are you?"
    Pussy: "My name is Pussy Galore."
    007: "I must be dreaming..."
  44. These drugs are old and don't make you smarter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drugs like Adderall -- Adderall is amphetamine, pure and simple -- aren't making anyone smarter, they're just keeping you up longer.

    And amphetamine (and Ritalin, aka methylphenidate, which more resembles cocaine than amphetamine) both cause terrible brain damage when used for long periods. Or, call it brain change if you like, but the facts are that when you quit you're left with changes that last years to the brain, and which are associated with nasty neurological problems like lethargy, depression, and a lack of mental vigilance. (I.e., exactly the opposite of the effects the drugs have on people who like them.)

    And drugs like Aricept and others, i.e. everything but the stimulants, are very much unproven.

    So, nothing new here.

    If anyone really wants a mind booster that's likely safe, try Piracetam.

    And, I also should add, the beta blockers are in no way mental boosters -- if anything, they slow you down a bit! There effect, as the article described, is very much physical, not mental. The only reason it eases anxiety is that the drugs stop the vicious circle of anxiety provoking physical nervousness provoking further anxiety, and so on.

    And remember, if you take Adderall, don't consider yourself any better than a crystal meth head -- the difference between methamphetamine and amphetamine, which is what adderall is (mixed amphetamine salts, to be exact, both dextro and levoamphetamine), is about four hours of effectiveness, and the need to take a slightly higher dose by weight to achieve effects. And Ritalin users -- you're no different than a coke user.

    Enjoy yourself, and remember that if you use these drugs, all the anti-drug messages the government pumps out about coke and meth apply equally to these prescription stimulants.

  45. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That blacks have failed to assimilate well in the large scale exploitative hellhole that is America is no insult to black men

    So their inability to form even a cohesive society within their own neighborhoods is something to be proud of? Sorry buddy, but if you can't even build a local community, you have nothing to say for yourself.

    All you appear to be telling me is that Chinese culture involves the same desire for control and class on a massive scale as American - which can be confirmed by looking at China, the most successful fascist state the world has ever seen.

    What exactly do the Chinese control within the United States? Are we living under Chinese rule in America? LMAO.

    There's nothing "great" about America, unless you are part of that privileged elite

    Yeah, I guess access to running water, food, jobs, and relative safety and security are not great things, huh?

    sure, there's a greater proportion of satisfied customers than you'll find in North Korea, but you really have to look at tribal cultures (and their modern derivatives) to witness advanced society

    Tribal cultures are not advanced, they're simple. Their social interactions are very plain and simple, they have built very little in the way of original culture, and they have failed to manipulate their surroundings beyond basic procurement of food and building of shelter. How is that advanced?

    To wit, one where the Slashdot elite don't tell the other 95% how good they have it.

    The other 95%. Please, you're silly. I am a middle class American. 95% of the world does not live in "tribal culture" or otherwise live in squalor.

    (I'm fairly certain you're not a troll, as no troll would put repeated effort into such poorly-built argument.)

    The pot calling the kettle black?

  46. Non-level playing fields by darCness · · Score: 1

    "Martha J. Farah, a bioethicist who teaches undergraduates at the University of Pennsylvania, said she was beginning to detect resentment toward students who used the drugs from classmates who did not. She has wondered whether improving productivity through artificial means also might undermine the value of hard work.

    In an article published today in the journal Nature, Morein-Zamir and University of Cambridge neuroscientist Barbara J. Sahakian say that clear guidelines are needed to decide what's fair."


    The problem with this is the assumption that without these drugs, there exists a level playing field. Financial resources, environment, and genetics are all things which put people on a non-leveling playing field, yet who would think of considering whether someone had access to good books or money for tutors as a child as part of any fairness guidelines?

    The playing field is amazingly lopsided as-is; assuming these drugs are affordable to many/most, they should be allowed, if not encouraged. On the flipside, if they are aren't particularly affordable, they're likely to exacerbate the situation.

  47. Not for multi-tasking... by iknownuttin · · Score: 1
    ...and avoid distractions better, which certainly will help you achieve more success.

    Every job that I see these days says something like "ability to multi-task" in their descriptions. Avoiding distractions will make it harder to "multi task" because multi tasking is just moving from one distraction to another and doing all your job functions poorly. I really hate the corp types who insist that they can multi task well when all of brain science says otherwise.

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    1. Re:Not for multi-tasking... by krunk7 · · Score: 1
      Multi-tasking is impossible. You can only do one thing at a time. But if you adjust the definition a bit, it makes perfect sense in a work environment.

      For example, say your a programmer on a large project. What do you do while you build the latest changes? Browse slashdot, stare at the text scrolling by, or work on the latest TPS reports?

    2. Re:Not for multi-tasking... by gambolt · · Score: 1

      There's a whole lot more to ADD than attention and not all of it is negative. I can't do just one thing at a time. Some people say I'm easily distracted because I can't be productive unless I'm also playing nethack and listening to NPR at the same time. I'm not distracted, i'm just letting the other task cook for a bit.

      It was the virtual desktop paradigm that sold me on linux.

    3. Re:Not for multi-tasking... by pasha2891 · · Score: 1

      I agree mostly, but if I need to give some deep thought on something, I'll read it, move on to something else and then comeback. Not sure if this is multitasking though.

  48. Conclusion of article : by ancient_kings · · Score: 0

    "Just think what it would do to anybody's career in about any area. There are not too many occupations where it's really good to be dumb." Uh. President? anyone?

  49. thought the story was going to be about nootropics by nido · · Score: 1

    Nootropics, popularly referred to as "smart drugs", "smart nutrients", "cognitive enhancers" and "brain enhancers", are substances which are claimed to boost human cognitive abilities (the functions and capacities of the brain). ... Typically, nootropics are alleged to work by increasing the brain's supply of neurochemicals (neurotransmitters, enzymes, and hormones), by improving the brain's oxygen supply, or by stimulating nerve growth.


    This stinks like pharmaceutical white-wash to me: "lookie, people are using our Meth to become smarter! Pay no attention to the children who experience sudden death while using our product!"

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  50. What will the side-effects be by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

    Sure, you might be able to think like Einstein but will you end up growing bigger testicles, better-defined pecs, and increased sperm motility? Where will the self-respecting geek be then?

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:What will the side-effects be by corerunner · · Score: 1

      ha thanks for the laugh!

      --
      "Don't hate the media, become the media." -Jello Biafra
  51. First hand experiences by jago25_98 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have experimented with Nootropil.

    It worked, in a subtle way. And bear in mind the down is bigger than the up, useful for getting out of a dopey mood. Could be a lifesaver if you had to perform. However, you should be able to make yourself alert without drugs.

    However:

    - it doesn't fix confidence, just the ability to think quick if you want it
    - you can still feel sleepy or lazy. If at a party it just prevents that mind freeze
    - the next day I felt as dopey as I felt alert before; i.e. the low is a little greater than the high so you have to be prepared for this
    - it creates dependency. You notice the times of not being on it more, obviously, the drugs don't work

    I now keep just a few half tabs in case I need to drive back from somewhere for work / prevent getting stranded and for emergencies.

    That's my experience on the subject.

    1. Re:First hand experiences by KZigurs · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.
      Nootropil (or piracetam) type of shit takes quite a long time to actually start to act. Think about two weeks of use before it builds up to any kind of effect. There is basically no way you could just grab a few tabs and get any noticeable effect (or you could as well be taking placebos and making the shit up).

    2. Re:First hand experiences by dave562 · · Score: 1

      I experimented with it about 15 years ago. Did you take the large attack dose of about 4500mg and then follow that with 1000-1500mg a day? Most importantly, were you taking any choline supplements? I remember the wonky feeling you described. I've heard it comes from choline depletion. I've been wanting to take some piracetium lately to see if the increased right-left brain synergy helps with martial arts training.

  52. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Spaniards invaded South America and inter-married with the local populations. The term, "Hispanic", refers to the resulting offspring.

    What is interesting is the following. Due to possessing some European physical features, Hispanics resemble Caucasians more than Asian-Americans. So, Hispanics have experienced less racism (from Caucasians) than Asian-Americans. Yet, Asian-Americans outperform Hispanics, academically.

    The inevitable conclusion is that Hispanics suffer from an intelligence-quotient (IQ) deficiency.

    Also, all of us are descended from the original inhabitants of Africa. However, simply sharing some genetic material does not then mean that everyone has the same IQ. What counts is the difference in genetic makeup. That difference explains the difference in IQ.

    Hispanics of 2007 are not genetically identical to the original inhabitants of Spain in 1606.

  53. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how someone quick to defend one set of ethnic groups from attack is more than happy to make a grossly bigoted statement about the Chinese. Hypocrisy, itz.

  54. HST knows best... by dasPlookenMeister · · Score: 0

    We had two bags of grass, ... seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a saltshaker half-full of cocaine, and a whole multi colored collection of uppers, downers, laughers, screamers... Also, a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether, and two dozen amyls. Not that we needed all that for the trip, but once you get into a serious drug collection, the tendency is to push it as far as you can. The only thing that really worried me was the ether.

    So there you have it. All you need to worry about is the ether... Next.

  55. Blocking the adrenaline rush????? by dindi · · Score: 1

    You still have adrenaline flowing in your body, but you don't feel that adrenaline rush so you're not distracted by your own nervousness," said Dr. Bernd F. Remler, a neurologist at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee.
    OK, so if I block all the adrenaline rush when I want to concentrate on an event, work on an emergency project etc etc.... when I go out on a bike ride and have that fun downhill, when I drive my car and drift out on some black ice, or when whatever out of the ordinary happens, that requires my body to give me an adrenaline boost: am I going to under-react under influence, or am I going to get a quick heart attack without the drug? Sometimes I try to work (programming or planning infrastructure) and my brain is toast. I try coffee, sit in the garden a little, but sometimes nothing helps. But I think my brain is toast at those times because it needs a rest. Because the day before I spent 16 hours on the computer, or stayed up till 2 am playing on Xbox live. These drugs seem to be very attracting to office/creative workers. It kept my brain ticking. However I am unsure of the consequences of taking such crap. 0 research, 0 clinical studies. Beta blockers? Suppressing adrenaline? Come on people !! But really! Does it worth it? Messing yourself up with steroids is one thing, but if you make your living with your brain I am not sure it is worth experimenting on it.
  56. Submarine marketing by Gen.Anti · · Score: 1

    sinister. Sb mentioned "Vitamin D".

  57. Go to your university library. by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1

    I graduated in '02, back then most of these drugs were taken for pleasure.
    I have friends who graduated in '04. In the two year timespan they described a very different situation. Already a shift had occurred where you can literally hear sniffing of all kinds in the university library of people taking amphetamines. Nasal consumption is more direct so a lot of people just snort.
    By my friends' estimates greater than 90% of the students in my old uni's library were on these amphetamine-like compounds to study before their exams or write a big paper. A lot of them describe a feeling that they can no longer study well without taking them and are somewhat dependent.

    Who knows where this will lead? The only thing I know is that there are side effects and people are kidding themselves if they think they can get away with increased performance and decreased need for sleep in any long term way. These are not new drugs, they have been around for a long time and they were given to soldiers of every faction in WW2; Germans, Americans, Japanese etc. Furthermore, a lot of people think they contributed to the Japanese who were willing to kamikaze in their planes. I'm not sure if being high as a kite on amphetamine helps, but I would suspect it does. Hitler himself used to get daily amphetamine cocktail injections.

    Nevertheless I do believe universities are the place where most of this use is currently taking place. But how much of a new phenomenon is it? There have always been people who think getting high on cocaine gave them the same benefits, didn't wall street run on cocaine in the 80's? And cocaine has been around a shitlong time. So have amphetamines. What's changed? I think the factor is that they're now prescribed en masse to kids who have 'ADD' and it filtered into the uni populous this way.

    --

    Liberty.

  58. The List of Drugs by ukemike · · Score: 3, Informative

    The medicine cabinet of so-called cognitive enhancers also includes Ritalin, commonly given to schoolchildren for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and beta blockers, such as the heart drug Inderal. Researchers have been investigating the drug Aricept, which is normally used to slow the decline of Alzheimer's patients.

    Sharon Morein-Zamir, a psychologist at Cambridge University who writes about the ethics of brain enhancement, said her interest in the medications was largely academic. But when someone she knew who had been taking Provigil for a neurological condition offered her some pills, Morein-Zamir's curiosity was piqued.
    "I knew the literature and wondered what it felt like," she said.
    The drug helped her focus as she worked at her computer for hours straight. But she wondered if it was a placebo effect.

    Prescriptions for Inderal and other beta blockers can be readily obtained from physicians. Tuck said some doctors had told her they used the drugs themselves to calm their own nerves before making presentations at medical meetings. Musicians say their drug use is all aboveboard.

    and finally a few comments on negative side effects...

    But cosmetic neurology, as some call it, has risks. Ritalin, Adderall and other ADHD drugs can cause headaches, insomnia and loss of appetite. Provigil can make users nervous or anxious and bring on headaches, while beta blockers can cause drowsiness, fatigue and wheezing.

    One Stanford University study found that low doses of Aricept improved the performance of healthy pilots as they tried to master new skills in a flight stimulator, but the side effects -- dizziness and vomiting -- were less than desirable in a pilot.
    --
    -- QED
    1. Re:The List of Drugs by jstott · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and finally a few comments on negative side effects...

      But cosmetic neurology, as some call it, has risks. Ritalin, Adderall and other ADHD drugs can cause headaches, insomnia and loss of appetite. etc.

      And this is just the short-term stuff. What happens when your brain gets used to all those beta-blockers/whatever in your veins and starts to re-adjust its own chemical output (aka, drug tolerance)? If you're using doping to work at a level beyond your normal ability, that's a pretty powerful incentive to keep upping the dose---an ugly potential feedback loop to get into, especially since it can take months to years for brain chemistry (and thus job performance) to return to baseline after periods of heavy use.

      -JS

      --
      Vanity of vanities, all is vanity...
    2. Re:The List of Drugs by YodaYid · · Score: 1

      FYI, some over-the-counter stuff: Vinpocetine, Phosphatidylserine, and of course Gingko. IANAD.

    3. Re:The List of Drugs by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting that betablockers are on the list, and, I'm certain they do offer such advantages from personal experience during my high school years. Back when I was in my freshmen year, my track record was continuously D or F range in most instances, despite repetitive IQ studies on me often placed me at a college senior, intelligence wise.

      Then, around my sophomore year, I was placed on the betablocker, Atenolol to help offset a heart murmur I have. After about a year on the stuff, I went from my old D-F range to an A-B range in my overall grades. By my senior year, I finished out both semesters with a straight A average across the board, and did so only being present for half that time due to a major surgery I had performed on my spine about halfway in. Of the improvements, some of the most impressive results I achieved in that time includes finishing out the entire curriculim for English/Literature classs in only four weeks (which resulted in a document of about 90 pages on things like Shakespeare and various aspects of creative writing) and achieving an understanding of advanced computer programming and business law studies almost instantly. (Most likely, my ability to understand logics problems recieved a significant boost from the drug.)

      However, the Atenolol did have an odd side effect of creating vivid dreams of almost completely abstract concepts. Almost like have Salvador Dali-goggles. Eventually, I did figure out how to mentally control this effect to achieve lucid dreaming and eventually was able to offset solving real world problems to my sleeping hours and recording the results after waking up. I probably did some of my best computer programming work back in those days because of it.

      I've since been taken off the Atenolol in favor of Metoprolol. Unfortunately, the benefits I get from it are nowhere close to what I did get under the Atenolol. However, this could be caused partly by a former two year battle with chronic congestive lung and heart failure preventing proper oxygen flow to the brain. I'm definitely much slower now than I was before that point.

      --


      8==8 Bones 8==8
    4. Re:The List of Drugs by sjames · · Score: 1

      The most significant risk is probably the Alzheimer's drugs. Consider that the risk-benefit analysis for those is based on an elderly patient who will suffer profound dementia in a few years. Compared to that even horrific side effects can be acceptable risks. It also means that longer term risks will be unknown in conventional medical practice since the only patients receiving it "officially" will not be likely to live long enough to demonstrate long term risks.

  59. Focusyn by FlopEJoe · · Score: 1

    Bah... I can't take the article seriously when they don't mention The Simpsons' Focusyn: Summary and details.

  60. Adderall and Inderal on the same page? by pentlappy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Stimulants (amphetamines, modafinil) can be addictive (or have potential to be--modafinil is Schedule IV), beta-blockers (Inderal, aka propanolol) cannot. There is a huge, huge difference between the two. Beta-blockers have long been indicated for anxiety and are well tolerated in most patients, your grandfather is probably on beta-blockers, I'm not really sure what relevance they have to TFA. I guess the journalist here doesn't know the difference or just doesn't care.

    (Not a doctor, not a pharm anything, just an ordinary medical student speaking. Merry Christmas!)

    1. Re:Adderall and Inderal on the same page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoops, there's no edit button...Your grandfather is probably on beta-blockers for heart disease or high blood pressure (or tremor), not anxiety. Still, they're relatively safe, with a proven decrease in mortality after heart attacks. Propanolol's a good drug, in fact if it piques your interest I'd suggest reading the wikipedia article on it or maybe the AAFP's stuff. --pent

    2. Re:Adderall and Inderal on the same page? by yamamushi · · Score: 1

      Modafinil is in widespread use because of its non-addictive properties. And it has also been used as a means to help people who are addicted to amphetamines. Just because Modafinil is schedule-IV , doesn't mean it has addictive properties.

      --
      - Aetheral Research -
    3. Re:Adderall and Inderal on the same page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the article's point. It wasn't so much about the danger of any of the meds so much as it was about the culture of taking the meds in the first place.

    4. Re:Adderall and Inderal on the same page? by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

      Steroids aren't physiologically addictive (and cannabis isn't either, for that matter.) Caffeine is HIGHLY addictive. And as someone else pointed out, the same drug that's too dangerous for adults to use even occasionally (Adderall) is routinely forced down the throats of millions of teens/preteens everywhere FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON COLLEGE STUDENTS MANY COLLEGE STUDENTS TAKE IT--poor academic performance.

      I think that the article makes a very valid point. There's a lot of hypocrisy to be found here.

  61. ALC + ALA + Selegiline by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    Acetyl-L-Carnitine plus alpha lypoic acid plus Selegiline (or here). ALC plus ALA is a memory improvement therapy for aging rats. I figure that if it's good enough for our elected "representatives", it's good enough for me. Selegiline inhibits the breakdown of the neurotransmitter dopamine, which is frequently associated with "pleasurable" activities, such as food, sex, or slash-dot. In doses higher than 20mg, Selegiline can have side effects, such as high blood pressure and hypertension (a hypertensive crisis) when certain foods are consumed. The biggest offenders are pickled and fermented items.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  62. coffee? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Should coffee produce outrage? It has similar effects. It is more addictive than adderoll. Why is there this religion of "natural"? Just because the random nature has produced one chemical in a plant by accident but didn't produce the other we should assume that the one produced by nature is more "natural"? Well, then cocaine is natural. It's just an extract. I wouldn't recommend it instead of adderall.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  63. Big in India by TheNarrator · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bacopa, Brahmii, and others....herbs of the Ayruvedic tradition, all used now and for thousands of years by many students and engineers all over India to give them an edge... and steal your job ;) . Bacopa at least has a fair amount of clinical studies to back it up too and these herbs have a long history of safety.

  64. It IS ceating by gweihir · · Score: 1, Funny

    Taking drugst to improve your performance is cheating. Of course the ones doing it allways deny this. Befere that they deny taking anyting. It is typical for the mid-set of the cheater to allways believe they are justifed and not doing anything wrong. Even most common pick-pockets believe that "circumstances drive me to do it".

    These people are scum. They lower standards. They try to create the impression of talent, were there is none. However, typcally, these people do serios and often irreperable damage to themselves and gets their punishment automatically. Of course then they claim they "dod not know" or that "they are not responsible for what happened to them". Of course they are.

    Dishonesty is one of the ugliest possible human characteristics. Being dishonest and proud about is is about the only possible way to make it worse.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:It IS ceating by glwtta · · Score: 1

      Taking drugst to improve your performance is cheating.

      Oh, get off it. Cheating at what, life? Like the article said, the real world isn't an organized competition - if you are willing to risk your health to improve your performance at something, that's entirely your business. As long as it's legal, of course.

      These people are scum. They lower standards. They try to create the impression of talent, were there is none.

      Poppycock. First of all, they raise stanards, if anything; it's just that some people are whining that they raise them "unfairly" (a completely meaningless term in this context). Secondly, no amount of Ritalin is going to produce talent. It's not like you can pop a pill and suddenly become an engineer without training, it just lets you sit at your computer longer.

      None of this is fundamentally different from the massive amounts of caffeine that people chung every day, it's just a more extreme version of the same idea. So, are people who use caffeine to stay up later also scum, then?

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    2. Re:It IS ceating by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Taking drugst to improve your performance is cheating. Of course the ones doing it allways deny this. Befere that they deny taking anyting. It is typical for the mid-set... Hmm... looks like taking drugs is the opposite of cheating... :)
      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    3. Re:It IS ceating by sholden · · Score: 1

      Is studying to improve your performance also cheating?

      How about taking stimulants so you can study more, like coffee or caffeinated soda?

    4. Re:It IS ceating by turing_m · · Score: 1

      If you call drug use cheating, I suggest you avoid watching professional sports. They are businesses competing to provide the conflicting goals of exciting, record setting athletics while giving the public the impression that anyone can be a professional athlete, all it takes is drive and discipline while the only sacrifice you'll make will be to your free time.

      Maybe movies are more to your taste? I hear Blockbuster is renting The Mighty Ducks, and several wholesome, fun packed sequels for the whole family!

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    5. Re:It IS ceating by symbolic · · Score: 1

      I'd mod this up if I had points.

  65. mistaken assumptions.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and counting on once-a-year doctor visits to control it

    Ritalin and Adderall (etc) are Schedule II Narcotics in the USA, meaning no more than a 30 day supply may be prescribed or dispensed. One time my doctor prescribed me a 35day supply, and the pharmacist could only fill 30 days worth, which is how i first learned of this. I must see the doc every 4 weeks-- not a cheap proposition for a geek without health insurance. I spend about $300 per month between cost of generic Adderall and doctor visit bill. :( ...but the benefits of not being a complete spaz anymore are worth it to me.

    As for meth causing lesions etc.. I think this is a sideeffect of descending into total addiction, where one fails to observe basic hygiene, or even to eat with regularity, and the immune system becomes taxed, etc.

    Apologies for the AC post.

    1. Re:mistaken assumptions.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to look into Dexedrine. It's been available as a generic for a lot longer so it's a bit cheaper. A lot of people find that it works just as well as adderall with fewer side effects.

      Generic methyphenidate is dirt cheap if it works for you.

  66. But is it? by Layth · · Score: 1

    Is it still cheating if you're actually prescribed these drugs for a disorder? And I will avoid the easy trap of picking on your typo's.. (e.g. "ceating" =D)

  67. que the Red Dawrf quote by lineman60 · · Score: 0

    The more time Passes the more fiction becomes truth.
    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.

  68. Musicians by Nautical+Insanity · · Score: 2, Informative
    Mind doping is becoming more common? I'm a music performance major in college. For years classical musicians have been taking beta blockers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_blockers) to alleviate nervous tension and the shakes that come with high-pressure situations such as auditions and recitals. When you and a hundred other people each have fifteen minutes to perform the most difficult orchestral literature ever written in front of a jury that is searching for the most nanoscopic flaw in your playing just to make their lives easier, many people will do anything to get an inch of edge. Even for university ensemble auditions there are students who use them.

    Granted, not every classical musician you see on stage is taking pills. But there are a number who will not go on stage without them. Personally, I subscribe to the banana method. Large quantities of bananas eaten for a week before a high-pressure situation is a common "natural" practice amongst my peers as well.

    But mind doping something new? Bah! This practice has been going on for a long time in the music world.

  69. can you site sources for that comparison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "LSD and mushrooms come to mind. LSD becomes a smart drug at 10% of the "psychedelic dosage" and behaves like it's cousin, Hydergine."

    Can you site that? Interesting.... kinda cool...we were taking LSD a LOT when we were all 4.0 O-chem/Physics/adv. calc.... and of course we were also reading the DUNE books... so... we are sorta debating now what Herbert said in the 60's... "with this potion I set my mind in motion..."

    but I would really dig reading the citation of the people who found the activity of LSD versus smart drugs... kinda cool...

    1. Re:can you site sources for that comparison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Can you site that?

      Cite, cite CITE!

      Thank you, that is all.

    2. Re:can you site sources for that comparison? by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      This will get you started.

  70. Sounds like a Scientologist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way this article is phrased, it almost sounds like it was written by Scientologists. You know, those whacky people who claim that giving Ritalin to kids with ADD is dangerous (and, if you pay them enough money, they'll tell you it's part of an evil plot to take over the world.)

  71. Reminds me by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

    Of one of sliders episodes when drugs became mandatory (to control population and enchance human cognition etc) and being clear would be a crime.
    America could be heading this way.

  72. This is not new, it's retro. by delchi · · Score: 1

    I was into the smartdrugs scene back in the mid 1990s. I don't know why this is considered something new. This is as much of a new cultural trend as IRC.

    To me, it's amusing to watch the unwashed masses playing catch-up, and claiming they are breaking new territory.

    1. Re:This is not new, it's retro. by baronvonchickenpants · · Score: 1

      I recall reading an article in Rolling Stone on "Smart Drugs" in High School... 1990 maybe?

      --
      "The bad machine doesn't know he's a bad machine."
    2. Re:This is not new, it's retro. by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Older than that...

      I recall something around the turn of the 20th century...

  73. This is news how? by kypper · · Score: 1

    A good friend who shall remain nameless completed his Masters on speed/methamphetamines. As he recalled, everyone was doing it at the time... and this was in the 70s.

    This is not new.

    1. Re:This is news how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in undergradate at a top 10 university.

      And adderall/ritalin/concerta, and to a lesser extent provigil,are used by at least half of the student population at some point during a semester. I know plenty of kids who swear they can't even write a paper without popping at least a 5mg.

      I'll tell you whats worse than that is the fact that of those kids, the majority take the dosage nasally. Yeah, even the 30mg ER adderall, which should last all day, goes into their system all at once and really only lasts 3 hours or so at that point.

      All of that, and because supply and demand is so high, the things go for 500 - 1000% of their original prescription price

      The only other "drug" demand that competes is good ol' cannabis, and I know plenty of kid who would rather stay up 72 hours on addy than smoke a blunt.

  74. Equal levels would make things fair by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    I would support establishing a "baseline" level of various hormones for athletes, at the top end of the normal range and well within the margin of safety. Anyone who lacks sufficient natural quantities may enhance them up to but not beyond this baseline. Anyone who naturally exceeds the baseline must have medical documentation produced explaining why, once it is known.

    This would NOT be age-dependent -- that is, a 42 year old Roger Clemens would be entitled to 18 year old HGH and T levels, although there's no imaginable way his body would produce these levels on its own.

    Also, these athletes should be entitled to their privacy when it comes to short-term "performance enhancers", so long as they are not within their period of active competition. This means that if a football player wants to smoke eight joints (I'm looking at you, Ricky Williams), that's fine -- if it's off-season, or if he's on the Injured Reserve list for the rest of the season. This will have absolutely no effect on the athletic competition, and he should be given the freedom to make this choice. Come August, when the pre-season gets under way, he would be tested for short-term drugs again, so he'd know he had to stop toking a week (or a month depending how heavily he does it) or so before the first pre-season game. Unfortunately, it takes time for the body to clear these things and the testers have no easy way (remember they're testing dozens of people at a time) to distinguish heavy use a week ago from a puff yesterday. If this is your line of business, it's the sacrifice you have to make, but ONLY WHEN YOU'RE IN SEASON.

    Also, under reasonable medical circumstances, baseline levels could be exceeded in the case of injury or illness that would be helped by such treatment. There is conflicting evidence of whether HGH helps recovery from injury or not, but if it does it should be established what safe and prudent doses are, and they should be allowed -- but must be reduced back to the baseline levels some time prior to re-entering competition.

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    1. Re:Equal levels would make things fair by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I think the problem is in the society paying too much for entertainment, instead of doing something more useful with their spare money.

      If sport had remained what it was in Victorian England - the hobby of gentlemen, there would not be a problem of doping people.

      I bet there was no cocaine abuse at Wall Street either at that time.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  75. My Experience with Provigil by MrT1000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can attest to how effective Provigil is. It does have side effects, though.

    Firstly, it really *does* work as advertised -- when I take it, I feel like my IQ has jumped by 20 points. My brain feels like a well-oiled machine. Ideas flow, I work WAY more efficiently and with a much greater degree of focus, I'm wittier in conversation... it really is that good. Even if you've gone 24 hrs without sleep, you can take it and be fully functional. You'll still feel physically tired, but your brain will be humming along just fine. It's pretty remarkable. I would take it daily, if not for the side effects.

    That's the good... now the bad. You DO (or at least *I* do) crash, when it wears off. For the first 5 hours everything is fine, but then progressively my brain starts to get foggy and I start to feel a bit dizzy and spaced out. By T+ 7-9 hrs, I'm not doing so great, and I just want to sit or lie down someplace and veg. The drug has a long half life, so even though I'm feeling more and more tired as the evening progresses, I do have dificulty falling asleep that night, and when I do sleep, my sleep is crappy. Even the following day (if I haven't taken more), I'm sort of out of it and I'm still feeling foggy. The day after THAT, everything is back to normal.

    If not for the side effects, it really would be a miracle drug. As it stands, I take it only when I really have to (important deadline for work, etc.), & often I'll just take 1/2 or 1/4 of a pill.

    Disclaimers: YMMV, and in general I seem to be more sensitive than average to any drug I take...

    1. Re:My Experience with Provigil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My experiences mirror his. Provigil generally has more of a clear awake effect vs. the cracked-out feeling you get with the amphetamine family. The longest i've ever stayed awake on provigil is about 80 hours. (24 hours before using the first pill) at some point after my fourth consecutive (by which i mean an 8 - 11 hour gap between pills) I didn't even feel a comedown after the pill should have worn off, but was able to stay up longer than the pill should have lasted, assumedly due to buildup in my system My legs ached, I was sore over my entire body. However, the last 11 hours of said experience were spent in the woodshop crafting a final model, and I'm happy to say that I didn't get the shakes, as I do with the amphetamines. Needless to say, I slept for 16 hours after the ordeal was over (and my semester projects) My head was clear as day until it hit the pillow

    2. Re:My Experience with Provigil by mfender9 · · Score: 2

      I take Provigil on average about once a month, usually when I have a large amount of work to finish, and/or have to get up really early and be in a good mood in front of other people. It definitely does improve your workflow and disposition.

      I haven't experienced any of the pain-related after-effects, but I do have trouble sleeping after taking it. I never take one past 6am, but can only generally manage a couple of hours sleep about 18-20 hours later. So the next day, I'm really tired, but that's the only negative and can usually be fixed with coffee.

      Oh, and it makes your pee smell weird.

  76. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by turing_m · · Score: 1

    It's telling that all your examples are from decades ago.

    But then again, simply capitalizing the term "White" is enough to get you marked Troll or Flamebait here, while a PC non-argument is enough to get you modded insightful. Yay slashdot.

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  77. yes definitely scum by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    I agree. You should not do things to gain an unfair advantage for a competition. That;s why taking steroids is outlawed in professional sports. They should also outlaw eating right and getting exercise and practicing because those things also give an unfair advantage! Pro football games should be played by dumpy looking bald guys who spend their time on the couch in front of the TV like the rest of us!!

  78. Beta-blockers by Mirre · · Score: 1

    Beta blockers is a drug used by people who need to perform and handle their nerves. Its used by pasients with hart related diseases. As a side effect for healthy people it will help you to maitain your motoric controll even though you are extremly nervous. This is old news anyway.

  79. The Ethics Of Mind? by MrKane · · Score: 0

    One view is that an individual has the freedom/right to ingest any chemical,
    substance, "dopant", etc, to affect their own mind. (Usually pursuant to the
    idea that they do not adversely effect others in the process). One you can assume
    I agree with.

    However, a number of questions are raised, and not all are to be answered by the
    idea of individual moral freedom. The question of fair vs unfair advantage between
    competing individuals, might be an example.

    Let's consider a contrived example.
    A new mind drug called Computex, or CTex for short, is released to the market.
    It is found to enhance the ability in humans to perform basic mental arithmetic,
    and carries no known side-effects.

    Now consider two students, both of whom are just about to start an elementary maths exam.
    At the top of the paper it states very clearly that calculators of any kind are prohibited
    for the first part of the test.

    But let's say Student A does infact use a calculator, whereas Student B does not.
    However, Student B *does* use CTex.

    Do we count Student A as a cheat? or should we count them both? what if we relax the condition of using a calculator?
    etc, etc...
    So then, does it come down to the usual questions of natural vs "artificial" advantage (private vs public school debate anyone?),
    agreement vs disagreement on what constitutes social contract? the old arguments of centralist theory vs libertarianism?

    ....probably ;?)

  80. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then why do hispanics treat themselves as "oppressed brown people" whenever they want to pull the race card?

  81. careful what you wish for by epine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unlike the anabolic steroids, human growth hormone and blood-oxygen boosters that plague athletic competitions, the brain drugs haven't provoked similar outrage. People who take them say the drugs aren't giving them an unfair advantage but merely allow them to make the most of their hard-earned skills.

    That quote constitutes excellent evidence that you can improve mental performance without actually making people any smarter. Do you think that Barry Bonds connects with that pitch because of steroids? His eye for reading the pitch is as great a natural gift as any natural gift possessed by any poker player. What the steroids do is allow his body to exploit his natural gifts more fully, at a more advanced age than was previously possible.

    Ben Johnson had an explosively quick reaction to the starting gun, which had nothing to do with steroids.

    False Start Rules May Slow Athletes Down

    What would the attitude toward steroids be if a steroid was discovered with far fewer negative side effects? What athlete couldn't claim more complete exploitation of their "hard earned skills"?

    Consider the XY karyotype Spanish hurdler Maria Patino who was disqualified in 1985 for not being a woman, despite having a genetic androgen insensitivity (which I presume means that even if she took steroids, it would have no useful effect).

    Indeed, there are at least two well-known American movie stars who are XY women, according to researchers in sex differences, although neither of the actresses wishes her condition to be made public.

    Careful what you wish for. Some hyper-feminine women are a genetic dead end. This is fair in Hollywood, but not in sports?

    Now let's suppose we discover that some males are endowed with a suppressed genetic response to steroids that leads to the negative side effects of roid rage and liver disorder. Should these males, who can take large doses of steroids safely, be allowed to take these drugs? Or not, because other men can't? What exactly are we trying to prove here? Shouldn't the winners win, and the losers lose? Is any sporting event won in this era by an individual who was born with genetic assets that the rest of the population lacks?

    One of the consequences of taking steroids is that they allow the athlete to train "their hard earned skills" harder and longer. Of course, the athlete might wear their cartilage to a nubbin by the age of 30, but what's to stop the athlete from having that replaced with the latest miracle Teflon?

    Let's suppose a "memory" drug is invented. How does that work? You can memorize an encyclopedia by the age of 25, but by the age of 30 you can't remember what you had for lunch yesterday, because "all circuits are busy"? Maybe this side effect isn't discovered until twenty years later, as the first generation just-add-water-and-stir "geniuses" are never heard from again as they can neither find their car keys nor their cell phones.

    There's an age old adage in sport that if you aren't cheating you aren't trying hard enough. What modern competition will become is a battle to have your particular advantage, stimulant, or beneficial genetic abnormality declared competition legal, while your competitor's advantages are restricted.

    Our athletes are already groomed more like dancers and supermodels. With improved genetic testing, we'll be able to identify the superior individual (with respect to rules we are concurrently politicking to establish) at a preschool age. Defects in knees or bone structure can be repaired while the child is young enough to rebound quickly. Endorsement defects can be repaired with cosmetic surgery. Competitive drive can be supplanted with neurological enhancers.

    And for what? Why do we worship Tiger Woods to begin with? What has he ever done for me, or anyone else here? I personally feel the human race wo

    1. Re:careful what you wish for by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      When I was talking with Vic Braden, one of the greatest minds in sports psychology, he thinks it's exactly that hero worship and identifying "talent" at an early age that leads to many of the problems with atheletes. When he played football with OJ, he said people were always taking him out, buying him things, telling him he was great, and led to him believing the hype and ruined his personality.

      It would be the best thing for America if people all stopped worshipping "heroes" like Barry Bonds and OJ, and instead went out there and tried to make themselves great, at whatever they try.

  82. That word does not mean what you think it does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Want the audience to feel sad? In goes some depressants. They are depressants as in depressing certain nervous system functions, not as in making you depressed_(mood). They can be euphoric depending on the user.
    1. Re:That word does not mean what you think it does by xouumalperxe · · Score: 3, Informative

      They can be euphoric depending on the user.

      The canonical example is of course good old alcohol.

    2. Re:That word does not mean what you think it does by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      The canonical example is of course good old alcohol.

      It's true!

      I've just finished the last glass of Taittinger Prélude. Now I'm depressed.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    3. Re:That word does not mean what you think it does by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      It wasn't a joke. Alcohol *is* a depressant of the central nervous system. Bu,t given the right dosage, it generates euphoria (I think everybody here has seen an euphoric drunkard at least once).

  83. Be Precise by DynaSoar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article is about using psychotropics like amphetamines and methylphenidate (Ritalin) to "improve" brain power. In the short term they do. Then they bring on rebound effects like chronic depression. Continuing after that stresses the dopamine system (that these force to work harder) and can bring on Parkinson's. The Alzheimer's drug does the same, but they consider the long term drawbacks to be less than the immediate benefit. Using these drugs for the purpose stated in TFA is called "off-label use". This (mis-)use has been going on since the first stimulants (cocaine among them) became available over a century ago. These are performance enhancers, not true cognitive enhancers. The distinction is important, and there but buried in TFA.

    From TFA:
    > "Whatever company comes out with the first memory pill is going to put Viagra to shame," said University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Paul Root Wolpe.

    The first company to come out with a memory pill (a true cognitive enhancer) was Sandoz of Switzerland. The name is Hydergine. The person who discovered it was Albert Hoffman. If he hadn't also discovered LSD and become (in)famous for that, he'd probably been nominated for a Nobel for Hydergine (and a bucket full of other highly useful drugs of his day). He mentioned he takes Hydergine 4 or 5 times a day -- at his 100th birthday party.

    There have been many such drugs (nootropics; noh'-oh-troh''-pics) created since then. All of them are owned by companies that are owned by people not from the U.S. and so no U.S. companies can make profit from them. Thus, the FDA won't approve them, and pretend they don't exist. As evidence I point to recent Nobel recipient Eric Kandel (for his work on the dopamine system) who claimed he'd use his award money to create the first cognitive enhancing drug (nootropic), essentially publicly and purposefully ignoring Hoffman's discovery and the subsequent inventions.

    On my way to a PhD in neuroscience, I got a master's in healthcare administration. I learned way too much about the FDA and big pharma to ever be comfortable with them again. The above statement is only one reason for that. An excuse given for not approving it is that it can cause one to become dizzy if they stand up fast. In other words, it's an effective anti-hypertensive -- it lowers blood pressure. That's more a benefit than a drawback, and is more harmless than the "acceptable" side effects from recent drugs being advertised. Hydergine and the other nootropics have far fewer negative side effects than most drugs and virtually no interaction with any other drugs, and have beneficial side effects besides. These are approved in part by the FDA, but only for advanced brain degenerative diseases, where their benefit is fairly negligible and unrecognizable. Use by those without such disease is not approved, and actively discouraged.

    The good news is that due to the 1989 AIDS drug law, one can import from overseas 90 days worth at a time of any drug approved there for the on-label use. The bad news is that the USPS will try to confiscate any drugs coming from outside the US -- even those allowed by the 1989 AIDS law. This is due to pressure from the FDA, the corporate welfare office for big pharma.

    I myself took Hydergine and Nootropil for 2 years, instead of the levodopa prescribed for Parkinson's. After that I no longer needed the levodopa (and still don't, a decade later), which itself has a rebound effect, causing permanent and progressive degeneration of motor control. If it weren't for these nootropics I probably would never have been able to finish my PhD. They cost me about $150 per 90 days, sent from Portugal. I consider that to be the best value for money spent in my entire life.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    1. Re:Be Precise by nevaeh · · Score: 1

      I myself took Hydergine and Nootropil for 2 years, instead of the levodopa prescribed for Parkinson's. After that I no longer needed the levodopa (and still don't, a decade later), which itself has a rebound effect, causing permanent and progressive degeneration of motor control. If it weren't for these nootropics I probably would never have been able to finish my PhD. They cost me about $150 per 90 days, sent from Portugal. I consider that to be the best value for money spent in my entire life. After a few minutes of googling to find out what the hell they are and what they do, I'm seriously considering Hydergine and Nootropil, especially if they are not just "performance enhancers" but instead "true cognitive enhancers" as DynaSoar suggests. Although I'm seriously interested, I'm also a bit skittish as I've never imported drugs before. Is it really as simple as adding them to an online shopping cart?
    2. Re:Be Precise by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

      > I'm also a bit skittish as I've never imported drugs before. Is it really as simple as adding them to an online shopping cart?

      You can, yes. But if you don't have a prescription to show the FDAcops (they even have a SWAT team) via the USPS inspectors, you could get busted. Even with a script they confiscate them sometimes and make you produce the script, and then stall and make you do it again, delaying as long as they can. I've not bought any in few years, so the online places may require a faxed script (unlike the US painkiller sellers who'll let you pay them to get you a script).

      Collect all the information you can about them and present it to your GP then for a script.

      --
      "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    3. Re:Be Precise by Cu · · Score: 1

      Sorry to drift off-topic, but I found your response instructive.

      Do you have any recommendations regarding introductory texts to neuroscience?

      Much obliged,
          Abe

      --
      I'm Abram Bender. You're not.
  84. Get to the point. by EnsilZah · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Can we please cut the ethical implication posts and have some how-to guides and risk/benefit lists?
    I'm afraid I don't have any experience in the field myself.
    I have been wondering lately whether recreational use of nicotine patches would work.

  85. Re:thought the story was going to be about nootrop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    exactly. me too. I'm trying to be into healthy lifestyle, good diet, exercise, plenty of sleep. And I'm interested in the possibilities of enhancement via milder/safer stuff like vitamins/herbs etc. nootropics... instead it's an advertisement for the sanctioned amphetamine drug dealers. I'm all for trying to achieve better performance but from what I've seen out of amphetamines they are not really good for you.

    I'll drop this link for fun, this site had something on it about brain enhancing supplements: Grasshopper Enterprises ... and long ago one of my friends had an interesting book on nootropics called Smart Drugs, here's a link to v2: Smart Drugs v2.

    I'm really surprised there's not more posts about this stuff. Like recommended reading, and talk about what others have experimented with. Maybe it works really well and they're guarding their secrets from increased competition? I ordered a few things while I was in school and I thought it was overpriced crap. Did me no good AFAIK. But I also think I had bigger issues with diet, eating, sleeping, depression, etc at the time. Maybe amphetamines could have helped me, or maybe that would have been the final push over into the abyss. I don't know :)

  86. Sheesh by raygundan · · Score: 1

    Are you actually suggesting that there is no difference between homebrewed meth chock-full of delicious impurities taken in massive abuse doses and standardized, tested drug doses prescribed after research proves efficacy? Meth users *do* get wonderful lesions and lose their teeth. Kids taking ADHD drugs don't, unless they're inhaling their pills at many times the prescribed dosage and not sleeping for days at a time.

    It's no different than painkillers-- the right dose helps people in pain. Too much taken chronically is addictive drug abuse. It's not difficult to see the difference.

    1. Re:Sheesh by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      I believe the point attempted to be made is that while it is ok for the drug companies to market the same drugs in essence as the illegal drugs, IF the illegal drugs were legal, they would not have the impurities as they would no longer be home brewed. If this is not the point the OP was making, its the point I am making to your response.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  87. Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There is no such thing as a "natural" state. We're all under the influence of hundreds of compounds that alter our performance, perception, and potential... most of which are in our food. There is no baseline state at which we can equalize people in order to compare them, and it's a silly idea anyway.

    Pills do not make you smarter. To the extent that pills allow your brain to function better, that's a good thing. Use the difference to ADVANCE HUMANITY.

    (Want to perform better than 80% of your peers? Sleep well and eat a solid breakfast. Is that cheating?)

  88. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by mercurialmale · · Score: 1

    How come White people do not have much in the way of political power in non-white countries? Riddle me that!
    Ever heard of Sonia Gandhi?
  89. Do Not Worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    commrade. They are only cheating themselves. When they cheat me in Counter Strike, they become dependant on the cheats so that when they are without cheats, they are even weaker than before they started cheating!
    If they want to cheat me with memory using drugs, they will have to suffer the downer of those and be weaker again in the long term at least. Plus, there is always raw nature on your side: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacopa_monniera - Bacopa Monnieri

    or PIRACETAM:

    Code Product Quantity Price/Ea. Total
    Pirac_PR Piracetam - 800 mg - 60 caps 2 $16.95 $33.90
          Shipping: Airmail-2: $15.00
          Sales Tax: $0.00
          Total: $48.90

    But don't fool yourself. We are all cheats in some way. Just don't lower yourself to cheat for your own selfish self promotion, self satisfaction - that's a lie.
    Be honest about with yourself and others that you're a cheat. Just to live life, we find numerous different ways to cheat. Investment in assets so that their value may increase in the future is a form of cheating. If you DO lower yourself to cheat DO be honest about it.

    Really, this is all going to have to come full circle in the end if we are to get out of this.

    1. Re:Do Not Worry by corerunner · · Score: 1

      finally, a rational response... I CONCUR!

      --
      "Don't hate the media, become the media." -Jello Biafra
  90. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by dasunt · · Score: 1

    To me the Aboriginal who lived in their old ways sounds much more intelligent then myself and most of my fellow Australians and Americans.

    From the wiki: Similarly Aboriginal people also seem to have lived a long time in the same environment as the now extinct Australian megafauna, stories of which are preserved in the oral culture of many Aboriginal groups (see Waugal, Rainbow Serpent and Bunyip). The recent European scientific belief that it was the arrival of the Australian Aboriginal people on the continent, and their introduction of fire-stick farming, that was responsible for these extinctions

  91. Kava anyone? by dristoph · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Surprised I haven't seen any mention of kava. In the western Pacific it is used as a very light social stimulant and sometimes even as a complete replacement for alcohol. Said to have a very mild sedating effect with light euphoria and talkativeness. I've read some studies from around the web which have even suggested that kava might be a suitable replacement for antidepressant medications which lacks the usual side effects and dependency. (Word of warning: I also read this drug has contraindications against certain kinds of brain drugs, so do your own research first!) The only known serious side effect is liver damage, but further research indicates that this only results in poorly-harvested kava which includes the aerial parts of the plant; traditionally, kava is prepared using only the root which doesn't seem to contain the liver toxins present in other parts of the plant.

    I've not tried it myself, but I've got a batch on the way. According to reports on Erowid, the effect is very subtle and is more like a gentle nudge in the right direction as far as thinking clearly and without anxiety. Sounds right up my alley, personally.

    1. Re:Kava anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kava is a suspect of causing liver damage. Actually a few countries (Switzerland and France have outlawed it).

    2. Re:Kava anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Kava occasionally to eliminate nervousness for job interviews, etc. It's perfect for that.

  92. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    I mentioned nothing about driving animals extinct (which white man has done as well). They did, however, manage to live quite comfortably in Australia for 40,000 years whereas Australians have difficulty living here in only a fraction of that time.

  93. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
    Err... The Maya and Anasazi were both wiped out by a combination of severe drought and overpopulation (yes, even the "rainforest" Maya were whacked by drought). The Inca, Aztec, Maya, and Toltec all were very vicious warriors who frequently went to war with each other, long before the Conquistadors arrived. Most North American tribes happily went to war with each other over hunting territory, took and kept slaves,

    Some scientists credibly attribute the extinction of the Woolly Mammoth, the North American Camel, and most other large ungulates of pre-historical North America - to over-hunting... by tribes who wouldn't have known who Spaniards (or Vikings) were, because this was waaaay before the likes of Ur, Babylon, and Egypt, let alone Rome, Spain, Danish warlords, etc.

    Point is, as a species we excel at making things miserable for everyone else. That said, Global Warming existed long before there were dinosaurs, let alone humans.

    Damn... please don't let yourself be so easily fooled by the likes of media and "non-profit political action" orgs... we as a species suck, and modern, current civilization is (until a better alternative arrives) IMHO the least sucky of the bunch, in spite of sucking pretty hard anyway.

    /P

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  94. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 1
    The parent post should not have been moderated "troll", and no, it wasn't flamebait either.

    How many whites have been President Of China or Emperor of Japan? How many have even tried to run?

    Could it be that most people want to elect someone who represents someone that resembles themselves? Chinese people do not resemble the White majority.

    These are both valid points. People vote for someone who they believe will respect their beliefs; this means that they are more likely to vote for someone of their own race, religion, system of ethics, etc.

    How come White people do not have much in the way of political power in non-white countries? Riddle me that!

    Someone has already brought up the Belgian Congo, South African apartheid, etc in another response. These are dated examples, and I don't know of any that are more recent.

    From the GP:

    Black and hispanic people are treated poorly, and as such a lot of them (although I hope its lessening as the government and society works to righting past wrongs) are in the lower classes.

    Can anyone supply a recent example of Blacks and Hispanics being mistreated in the US that 1. isn't an isolated incident involving a handful of people (or less), 2. doesn't involve illegal immigrants, and 3. doesn't apply to Whites as well?
  95. Detect That by cavebison · · Score: 1

    Excellent.. now I can pwn without being busted for botting in UT2004.

  96. The magic of Vitamin B by wilec · · Score: 1

    I have been taking very large doses of various vitamin B's (100mg+ of B6, Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, etc)and 1000mg of vitamin C somewhat regularly for nearly forty years. A family physician prescribed these for me at about age ten to counter ADD type symptoms. I don't know how they stack up against modern ADD drugs. I do know I long ago found the B vitamins vastly superior over amphetamines over the long haul.

    Back in the seventies amphetamines with street names like black beauties, yellow jackets and speckled pups were everywhere. I can attest to the dramatic positive effects these drugs have on ones short term abilities. I can also attest to the negative effects with longer term regular use. Mis/Overuse them and they will act to severely degrade your abilities and simply make you nuts or at least that was my experience and what had I seen in those around me. And of course the drop of abilities is precipitous when you come down, expect to lose several times the gain for several times the time you were 'up'. As a smoker and coffee/tea drinker I can also of course tell you that these these have similar short and long term effects and consequences though of course not as severe or pronounced. Though I am convinced nicotine is the most addictive drug I have personally encountered.

    I have a job that requires I often have to keep several fast paced crisis type of events and longer term projects in the air much of the time, and coordinate conflicts between the differing agendas and deadlines. It is also a job that requires extreme focus on technical issues often with several suits breathing down my neck. Needless to say both short term and learned memory plus mental clarity are important to me. Damn1 I am underpaid!

    I can tell if I have been off the vitamin B complex for several days or so, I get slow or thick in my mental abilities. The recovery is pretty quick, a daily dose and a few hours sleep and I am mostly back on track, in few days all is very clear again. I have tried various items like ginko, ginsing and melatonin, and I have seen some clearly positive effects especially with ginko, but none that compare to vitamin B. Like many other children of the 60's and 70's I had some limited experience with other items I won't go into here in depth. While some of these encounters defiantly affect my id or world views even today, none had the dramatic short term AND positive/harmless long term effect of vitamins on my information retention and mental clarity.

    I don't know how they work or if they work as well o others. It could very well be that they address a deficiency of my system that is not common to most folks. I tend to think that other stuff like nicotine, caffeine and various legal and illegal drugs many be so attractive to many people because they address a similar physical deficiency.

    Wabi-Sabi
    Matthew

  97. Societal influences by dave562 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You are right about the influence of millions of dollars. Lao Tzu would agree with you. One of the verses in Tao te Ching cautions against, "Holding up that which is hard to attain." because doing so will engender competetion and people going to extremes to oppose each other to attain it. If you haven't read the book, I highly recommend it. Despite being nearly 1000 years old the insights it presents into life are timeless.

  98. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are confusing Hispanic for Mestizo. They are not the same.

  99. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by daseinw · · Score: 1

    Sure...though people often seem to prefer to explain these things away--- even when the government can't.

    Study: Wealth doesn't stop minority loan bias

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19699330/

    Feds to probe discriminatory home loans

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959937/

  100. Sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny ? Seemed obvious to me. And you forgot that sugar is a "mind doper" too, especially in the white variety we use to "flavor" our coffee. It has "mind-altering" influences, just ask any parent what it does to their kids.

  101. Learning Drugs by Gleng · · 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.

    --
    "Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
    1. Re:Learning Drugs by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Rimmer: Lister, where's my revision timetable?
      Chen: Sir, it's Saturday night!
      Lister: Come on, no one works Saturday night.
      Rimmer: You don't work any night. You don't work any day.
      Lister: `Skive hard, play hard,' that's our motto!
      Rimmer: Look, I've got my engineering re-sit on Monday; I don't know anything. Where's my revision timetable?
      Lister: Wait, is this the thing in a- in all different colours, with all the subjects divided into study periods and rest periods and self-testin' times?
      Rimmer: It took me seven weeks to make it. I've got to cram my whole revision into one night.
      Lister: Hang on, this the thing with a note on it, in red, said, "Vital, valuable, urgent! Do not touch on pain of death!"?
      Rimmer: Yes!
      Lister: I threw it away.
      [laughter all around the table]
      Rimmer: Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, tee-hee. Where is it?
      Lister: Nah, I didn't. I pinned it up on the wall.
      Rimmer: What? Why?!
      Lister: To dry it out!
      [giggling]
      Rimmer: What do you mean, "dry it out"?
      Lister: Well I spilt a goat vindaloo on it. Don't worry, it's a little bit red, but you can read most of it, especially if you scrape the lumps off.
      [more laughter at the table]
      Rimmer: You spoilt my...! No, I haven't got time, I'm taking learning drugs and all I'm memorizing is this conversation.
      Olaf Petersen: They're illegal!
      Selby: Oohhhh!
      Rimmer: [trance-like] "Where's my revision timetable, Lister?" "It's Saturday night." "No one works Saturday night." "You don't work any night. You don't work any day." "`Skive hard play hard' that's our motto." "Lister where'd you put my revision timetable?" "It's Saturday night." "No one works Saturday night." "You don't work any...."

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  102. All Drugs Have Side Effects by StringTech · · Score: 1

    As a former pharmacist, I will point out that all drugs have side effects. The user and gerneral population should want to know about them. I am in no way disapproving of the use of drugs, just the abuse of drugs. Our society has for many years been in the throws of a "drug scare". I would like everyone interested to look at these links to help form a well rounded opinion. http://www.peele.net/ http://www.schaler.net/addictionisachoice/index.html

    --
    They who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. B.Fkln
  103. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The inhabitants of Easter Island (the one with with those large stone faces) cut down all the trees on the island, destroying their environment and dooming their civilization. It is silly to think that only Western culture can be environmentally reckless--there are many counterexamples. Remember that the "aboriginal" people in Australia and America were thousands of years behind the Old World, technologically. They didn't have the ability to drastically alter their environments. Eventually, they would have gained such technology, and would have followed the pattern every other animal (yes, humans are animals) follows--consume until the environment can no longer support the population.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  104. Snake Oil by SnailNobra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Piracetam and vinpocetine are just unverified dietary supplements.

    Adrafinil is fancy caffiene.

    Methylphenidate, also known as Ritalin, is primarily used for people with ADHD or in ordinary individuals who have sleeping and fatigue disorders.

    If you are healthy (which after that cocktail you may be sitting with quite an over active heart) might I suggest in all manner of kindness, you might find better results if you not work like a maniac and instead devote an hour of overtime to excercise and healthy eating. You may find that all those pills are just an expensive placebo.



    Now that I think about it, that second part of your comment seems more sarcastic than I had thought...
    --
    Nihilism means nothing to the dancing peasants
  105. And who sponsored this article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been studying these drugs a lot. Adderall has much more severe side effects than the ones they list. It has been linked to schizophrenia and suicides. In fact, once you are on it, it will be VERY hard to stop. It takes up to two years for brain to restore after amphetamine (what Adderall essentially is) usage. People who take these ADHD drugs are much more likely to become heroine or cocaine addicts.

    So the guy made two million dollars thanks to Adderall? I wonder why it did not work for military pilots who took Adderall-like drugs. And why it did not work for all those people who ended up in mental hospitals after trying to stop Adderall?

    Conclusion: so they are hiding side effects from you, are telling you "take this pill, make a fortune". The whole article seems to be sponsored by the Adderall maker.

  106. Celebrities aren't human by pafein · · Score: 1

    You don't need a drug to become immune to celebrity. Just get rid of your TV. Perhaps more like going off one drug than on another. I've been without a TV for over 5 years, and it's one of the 3 best things I've done in my life. And to answer the inevitable questions: no movies, videogames or YouTube either. Your time on this earth is a gift from $DIETY, and you spend it watching other people's lives?

    --
    --Pete
  107. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    It's telling that all your examples are from decades ago.
    10 years ago Hong Kong was ruled by Britons. Less than 10 years ago, Macau was still being run by the Portuguese. Oh, and Americans are running Iraq right now.
  108. Folk/Natural remedies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, I take kava occasionally. Kinda gives a relaxed concentration; sorta removes impeding anxiety and improves focus - makes things a little clearer. My g/f takes it once in a while for depression. Side effects include numb lips, and in larger doses, drowsiness & slightly slurred speech (makes your tongue numb). I'll sometimes mix a tablespoon of kava into my coffee - best of both worlds.

    As for liver toxicity, the best reports I've read seemed to confirm what OP says; you'd also need to take quite a lot of it over a prolonged period of time. To be extra safe, I avoid drinking alcohol for a few hours before & after. As with anything else you put in your body, purchasing from a reputable, trustworthy source is essential - I buy mine at natural food stores. Note that kava root is not water-soluble - you'll want it in powder form (ie, you can't brew tea).

    Other mind-altering natural remedies I'm fond of (all of these are legal). I usually brew infusions:

    • catnip - yup, the same plant you give to your cat. Good for anxiety, depression & digestion.
    • chamomile - anxiety, insomnia
    • skullcap - anxiety, improves focus.
    • valerian - severe anxiety & insomnia. Quite a bit stronger, smells terrible
    • exercise - probably anathema to most Slashdotters, but regular exercise will do wonders for your mental state.
    Yes, I'm a tense little bugger, if you couldn't tell. ;-)

    In general, I've found folk/natural remedies to be "just right" - more like a nudge as the OP says, and nowhere near as potent as lab drugs, with minimal side effects. People have been using plants as medicine for thousands of years. This book is a fantastic guide on such things - includes lots of references to scientific papers too.

    Posted anonymously so that when the State decides to outlaw some of these at the prompting of Big Pharma, they've got less evidence against me.

  109. Chemical fix for a crappy lifestyle by sjames · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that other than a few cases where there is a detectable clinical problem such as Alzheimer's, stroke, or some other circulatory problem, the effectiveness of most of the 'mind doping' drugs suggests that the real problem is a crappy 'lifestyle'.

    The big favorites are provigil (on-lable use is for narcolepsy) and amphetamine like stimulants (originally of interest to the military to combat mental performance loss due to prolonged wakefulness).

    Could it be that the real problem is that people are sleep deprived? Perhaps an equal positive effect could be had by turning the alarm clock off and going to bed at a decent hour so you don't need a jarring buzz to wake up in the morning? Personally, I find that that is a BIG booster for my mental sharpness. When, for various reasons, I must operate on short sleep, I get exactly the sort of mental fog that people claim these drugs lift for them.

    Factor in that there is a known correlation between mood disorders such as bipolar and depression and poor 'sleep hygene' and that depression seems to be on the rise in the west and chronic socially mediated sleep deprivation starts to look like a worthwhile theory.

    It's at least strong enough that people using mental performance boosting drugs might want to try stopping them, getting more sleep on a better schedule, and seeing how they do after a washout period. The benefits include being much cheaper and having a much lower risk profile.

    I suspect there's not a lot of research interest here for several reasons. For one, there's not much profit in telling people to go to bed. For another, managers don't want to give up "is his butt in the seat at 8A.M. sharp" as a metric of performance even though it's a really poor metric of performance or value in the first place. Certainly they don't want chronic sleep deprivation to become a diagnosable occupational disease or (god forbid) have shorter work hours become a legitimate public health discussion. Finally, it flies in the face of the work hard all day, party all night, never take a vacation, sleep is slacking mentality.

  110. Re:The Cure for Blacks and Hispanics? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    The inhabitants of Easter Island (the one with with those large stone faces) cut down all the trees on the island, destroying their environment and dooming their civilization. It is silly to think that only Western culture can be environmentally reckless--there are many counterexamples. That's one theory about Rapa Nui. A theory that sells well to the general public because it is simple to understand and is almost a parable for stupid humans doing stupid things.

    But there are other theories, theories that the anthropology community tend to find more plausible. One of them is that the trees were killed off by western introduced diseases, not the natives cutting them down to move big stone heads around.
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.