Slashdot Mirror


Cognition Enhancer Research

oschobero writes to tell us the Economist has a look at pharmaceutical research as it applies to cognition enhancers. While the research is obviously focused on things like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and schizophrenia, the resulting drugs may also have a benefit to healthy minds. "Provigil and Ritalin really do enhance cognition in healthy people. Provigil, for example, adds the ability to remember an extra digit or so to an individual's working memory (most people can hold seven random digits in their memory, but have difficulty with eight). It also improves people's performance in tests of their ability to plan. Because of such positive effects on normal people, says the report, there is growing use of these drugs to stave off fatigue, help shift-workers, boost exam performance and aid recovery from the effects of long-distance flights."

189 comments

  1. Oh, great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taking speed is EEEEEEEEvil, unless it makes more money for Big Pharma.

    1. Re:Oh, great..... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a gigantic difference between drugs like amphetamine and methamphetamine and drugs like modafinil (Provigil). They work in different ways, and decades of use by narcoleptic patients shows no significant addictiveness for modafinil (or its predecessor adrafinil, which metabolizes to modafinil). Amphetamine and methamphetamine have strong addictive potential as well as significant side-effects, including jumpiness, jitters, and irritability that are not found in modafinil. (That's not to say there are no side-effects to modafinil, but they are rare or uncommon.)

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    2. Re:Oh, great..... by aurispector · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are no completely safe drugs, there are no drugs without side effects. That being said, even if these drugs are significantly safer, it just seems to be a bad idea to depend on drugs to run your everyday life. The line between theraputic and recreational use is blurring.

      If I had to take non-theraputic medications to perform my job I'd get a different job.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    3. Re:Oh, great..... by davolfman · · Score: 1

      That said prescription level doses of Ritalin are pretty benign in most cases. Many of these drugs do little more than disrupt your appetite some when you aren't taking the massive overdoses that would be required to actually get a high. That said Adderol (sp?) scares me.

    4. Re:Oh, great..... by Hojima · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are no completely safe drugs, there are no drugs without side effects. Jut because it has a side effect does not mean it's unsafe. If the side effect of taking steroids was the sniffles (and nothing else), every athlete would be taking it (regardless of legality). That being said, natural drugs generally have little to no harm in comparison to many other synthetic drugs, mostly because huge pharmaceutical companies pay chemical engineers to find a cheap method to produce something found in nature, and thus their quantum structure, and even their chemical composition, can be altered so that the body does not respond well to it (but the drug works so they don't care). It's even the same deal with multivitamins.
    5. Re:Oh, great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have taken Provigil and, even if it keeps me awake, it gives me an awfull headache and increases my blood pressure.

      If it were not for the blood pressure issue, It would be perfect

    6. Re:Oh, great..... by NIckGorton · · Score: 3, Informative

      That being said, natural drugs generally have little to no harm in comparison to many other synthetic drugs, mostly because huge pharmaceutical companies pay chemical engineers to find a cheap method to produce something found in nature, and thus their quantum structure, and even their chemical composition, can be altered so that the body does not respond well to it (but the drug works so they don't care). Natural does not equal safe, and synthetic does not equal unsafe. That is the same logical fallacy that suggests that organic vegetables are safer than (inorganic?) ones. Personally I would rather my lettuce be farmed with synthetic fertilizer than cow shit teeming with E. coli.

      What suggests best whether something is safe or unsafe is its track record. Period. That's why, you are often better off with a drug older than yourself rather than anything that big Pharma is currently advertising on TV. Initial marketing of a drug is the 'Phase 4' of safety testing. Once something has been out there for a decade, enough people have taken it that we know what it does, how it does it, and what the risks are. At that point, you can better decide whether the risks for you outweigh the benefits.

      Also during post marketing surveillance, if the FDA finds that a drug is unsafe, they yank it. That same safety measure is significantly more difficult with 'natural supplements'. In fact, despite considerable evidence of danger the FDA is unable to stop the sale of aristolochia an herb conclusively linked to kidney failure and cancer, yohimbe a sexual stimulant linked to heart and respiratory problems, bitter orange whose ingredients have effects similar to the banned weight-loss supplement ephedra, chaparral, comfrey, germander, and kava who are all known or likely causes of liver failure.

      So don't make the logical error of assuming that just because something is natural, its safe. Hell, small pox is 'natural'.
    7. Re:Oh, great..... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The line between theraputic and recreational use is blurring.

      The line has never been real anyway. Like many arbitrary social lines, it's an artificial constraint imposed by moralists.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    8. Re:Oh, great..... by Hojima · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I don't think you read correctly. Natural is generally better than synthesized (when it comes to drugs) because of the deviations that synthesized have. Also, natural drugs achieve an optimized concentration as well. A perfect example was already mentioned: steroids. Humans generate a natural amount of testosterone. Some generate a LOT more than others. But when you synthesize a different concentration of a testosterone that your body is not used to, a lot of problems can occur. Yes, the difference between organic crops and normal crops is negligent, but when you look at drugs that are natural and synthesized, you can't deny that there is a difference in quantum and chemical structure, and if you think that it makes no difference in the chemical reactions in your body, you're fooling yourself.

    9. Re:Oh, great..... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      I've seen a teenager eat a whole bottle of ritalin and live. At school, no less. She ended up scratching sores all over her forearms and living a horrific trip, but she was fine the next day. A person who ingests a bottle of meth won't be so lucky.

    10. Re:Oh, great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC, Britney Spears has been using modafinil. She's probably taking a bunch of other stuff too but there may be some unknown contraindications with this stuff that will produce bizarre, self-destructive behavior.

    11. Re:Oh, great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are just disagreeing on what "natural drug" means. You are referring to things that are produced in the human body, which is kind of a wierd definition as steroids produced by a human body or naturally ocurring dopamine would not be defined as drugs. He is referring to "natural drugs" as things which are produced by plants (such as atropine by belladonna), as in the more accepted natural products definition.

      One major problem with administering chemicals vs. what you define as "natural drugs" is that it is often difficult to deliver them to the appropriate place without being metabolized in another part of the body first. As a result, taking a pill of, for example, adrenaline, clearly does not have the same affect as adrenaline that is snythesized naturally. But it is because adrenaline synthesized by your body does not undergo hepatic metabolism and is not subject to the blood brain barrier, as opposed to "quantum differences".

    12. Re:Oh, great..... by Pendersempai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That being said, even if these drugs are significantly safer, it just seems to be a bad idea to depend on drugs to run your everyday life.

      Okay, I'm going to push you on this one. If the drug makes you smarter with no unpleasant short or long-term side-effects, why on earth would it be a bad idea? Any time we can get a benefit that outweighs its cost, we should do it. Very little in our lives resembles "nature" in the true pre-technology sense, and that's a good thing. If there's a particular reason why it "just seems to be a bad idea" to take medication regularly, by all means, spit it out so we can critique it. Otherwise, it sounds like you're basically being a luddite.

      Besides, when you get right down to it, increasing your intelligence IS therapeutic in the sense that it helps you to avoid a surprising number of potential ailments.

    13. Re:Oh, great..... by Phoghat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Being a pharmacist allows me to speak with some authority on this. Many drugs have what are called " Off Label" uses. This means that doctors sometimes prescribe them for conditions that are not included in what the drugs were approved for. Having practiced in many a high-income neighborhood, Provigil almost since its introduction has been used as a performance enhancing drug. After filling prescriptions for an increasing number of obviously non narcoleptic patients I asked a few doctors what they were using it for. Most patients were men who were mid to high level executive positions who felt they needed an "edge" on their competitors in the business world, or were using the drug to combat jet lag. Yes EVERY drug has side effects. The thing is that when the benefits out weigh the side effects you use the drug for what it's good for.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    14. Re:Oh, great..... by osgeek · · Score: 1

      So if you could make the world just a bit smarter on average by making these pills as common as aspirin, you wouldn't encourage that?

      Maybe people could be smarter about how they vote, consume, invent, live with one another?

      You're saying that's a bad thing? Because it comes in pill form?

    15. Re:Oh, great..... by epine · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'm going to push you on this one. If the drug makes you smarter with no unpleasant short or long-term side-effects, why on earth would it be a bad idea?

      Are you being serious?

      I'm sure no harm can come to society or the planet from a bunch of reclusive geeks with a smartness fetish amping their brains.

      It's entirely possible 6 billion clever monkeys are already on board a runaway train. Our smartness seems to create new problems as fast as it solves the old ones.

      A drug for cluefulness might be interesting. Unfortunately, I've never encountered a questionnaire able to reliably detect cluefulness. Most of our intelligence testing apparatus is designed to exclude cluefulness, lest it contaminate the results.

      while (!cataclysm) {
          ++smart;
          --clue;
      }

      What could possibly go wrong?
    16. Re:Oh, great..... by aurispector · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are so deluded about pharmacology, biochemistry, human physiology and science in general as to be swimming in complete and total bullshit. Both of your posts reek of "truthiness" rather than actual information.

      A molocule is a molocule; why would a plant (or other "natural" source as opposed to a synthetic process) make a molocule better compatible with human physiology? Wouldn't the plant make molocules better suited to it's OWN physiology? The fact that naturally derived substances have any desirable pharmacologic effects on humans is entirely accidental. You get the same problems with undesirable by-products regardless of source. How do you know the plant doesn't produce OTHER substances that are pure poison to humans? Or what if the "poison" has desirable pharmocologic properties? Do you eat the plant in blind faith that all the contents are "natural" and therefore "safer" or do you attempt to isolate the desired molocule. Will you truly isolate it or will you have quantities of other undesirable substances. How do you remove the undesirable substances? What about stereochemistry? Often one enantiomer will have desirable properties while the other will not. Do plants magically produce the correct one for our use and edification? These are the same issues raised when producing a molocule synthetically.

      And what's this about optimized concentration? What the hell does this mean? Do you know what a DOSE is? None of this makes sense. And this nonsense about quantum structure - could you please cite some reputable sources for this claim, or at least explain what it's supposed to MEAN? Have you ever taken even an undergraduate-level chemistry course? All of the issues you raise are already accounted for in current medical practice, backed up by controlled studies. Just because something is found in a plant doesn't mean it's magically better.

      To quote Fat Freddy from the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers: "I don't trust anything that doesn't come in a nice, clean gelatin capsule"!

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    17. Re:Oh, great..... by Hojima · · Score: 1

      I can't find a reference to everything, but here is a good article I found: http://www.sangsters.com/nlm/natural.shtml

    18. Re:Oh, great..... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure no harm can come to society or the planet from a bunch of reclusive geeks with a smartness fetish amping their brains.

      Particularly if they somehow develop a workable method of bending the speed of light. I say, crank 'em up, let's see what happens...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    19. Re:Oh, great..... by aurispector · · Score: 1

      You have got to be kidding me. What the hell is an "ND"? And did you happen to notice that these people are trying to sell you something? Please, stop before you hurt yourself.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    20. Re:Oh, great..... by hdon · · Score: 1

      Starbucks.

  2. what has been seen... by bersl2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Paradoxically, another glutamate-booster, D-cycloserine, is being tested not to enhance memory, but to abolish it. The paradox is resolved because unlearning (or "extinction", in neurological parlance) is a process similar in its details to learning.

    By binding to certain glutamate receptors, D-cycloserine selectively enhances extinction, suppressing the effects of conditioned associations such as anxiety, addiction and phobias. According to Dr Robbins, experiments have shown that if a rat is given a cue that it previously associated with fear at the same time as it receives D-cycloserine, the bad memory can be eliminated. Not only may this help remove unpleasant memories... Does this mean that people might be able to unsee things *coughgoatsecough*
    1. Re:what has been seen... by Bryansix · · Score: 2, Funny

      Eternal Sunshine on the Spotless Mind.

    2. Re:what has been seen... by nawcom · · Score: 0

      And perhaps things like this: http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/5/5c/Tubgirlfinalform.jpg Bob!!! What did they do to you???
    3. Re:what has been seen... by Briareos · · Score: 1

      Does this mean that people might be able to unsee things *coughgoatsecough* Bah... that's nothing that can't be solved with enough sandpaper applied directly to one's brain... if only I could remember where I put it...

      np: Saul Williams - Coded Language (Amethyst Rock Star)

      --

      "I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole

  3. Provigil. by Bob+of+Dole · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've taking Provigil. It's an amazing and weird drug.

    On the one hand, It helps endlessly with functioning while sleepy. As a chronic insomniac, I'm never THAT awake, but after two hours of sleep and a provigil, I'm awake enough to drive and take exams. It doesn't even keep you up after it wears off, something every other sleep aid or wake aid I've ever taken does. It avoids the problem of body/mind disconnect, you're AWAKE, not brain awake/body tired or body awake/brain sleepy.

    On the other, it has an effect I can only describe as "positional". You can still tell that you're tired, but you only feel it in one part of your head, kinda towards the lower-right-back area. And yes, that's insane.
    What's weirder is that if you get a headache while on provigil, you'll feel it in that area too. It's kinda like it's turned off your brain's natural "error reporting" that tells you you're tired/headachey, but it doesn't do it for the whole brain.
    I also had some nasty experiences in the bathroom while on it. That's definitely a downside. (Wee, rather than being late for class because I can't wake up I'm late for class because I'm stuck in the bathroom)

    I only used it for about two weeks (despite the above praise, it didn't help with my main problem), but I'd definitely use it again if I had the chance. There's enough times where I've not gotten enough sleep for one reason or another but I really have to be at work the next day that it'd be quite handy to have around.

    1. Re:Provigil. by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've taking Provigil.

      That's a great first sentence to promote a cognition-enhancing drug.

      --
      An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
    2. Re:Provigil. by Bob+of+Dole · · Score: 2, Funny

      ugh. Well, I'm not taking it now, so naturally I'M SLEEPY!

    3. Re:Provigil. by Banquo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just started on a "neurotropics regimen" and one of the things I'm taking is modalert (cheap provigil) I've been taking that and other standard stuff (ginko, B-complex, amino's, dhea, C, etc..) for about 5 days @100MG/day.

      It's pushed that "post lunch drowsy need a nap" feeling back to about 7pm, and by then I'm up and around (not behind the desk)so there's no worries. My focus is better during the day. Haven't gotten any headaches but most people use 200mg a day from what I read. I've also noticed that I'm in a better overall mood. (of course with me tired=grumpy so...)

      I get roughly 5-6 hours of sleep a night and have had no issues at all. I did notice the "You know you're tired, but you don't think/act like you're tired" thing and yeah it's really odd. But I found that if you add a Monster Coffee in the morning it REALLY boosts the whole effect and the "ghost tiredness" is lessened a lot.

      Wired had an Article on "smart drugs" and they did a reader survey.

    4. Re:Provigil. by DCGaymer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I recently started taking Provigil for fatigue issues related to another condition. Without a doubt....I'm certainly more alert....but it does not help with fatigue. If you're tired and taking Provigil, you're simply going to be tired and awake. NOT a good combo. It's not a great panacea cure all .....but it does help make a formerly dysfunctional person a bit more functional. As mentioned above...it will give you a headache. It does me. They're worse in the beginning but seem to taper off to a mild headache as the weeks goes by. It's an unusual headache that Ibuprofen doesn't seem to really take the edge off of.

    5. Re:Provigil. by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      That odd state of numbed tiredness is something I've only ever experienced with it. Even with stimulants, I'm either tired and jittery or awake. With modafinil it's more like what ibuprofin is to pain. It's often still there, but numbed down to a point where one no longer cares.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    6. Re:Provigil. by Banquo · · Score: 1

      Hmm,..

      For me it negates the physical and mental aspects of fatigue, but there's (for lack of a better phrase) the memory of fatigue. I'm just as alert and functional as I would be if I was "fully rested"
      (actually more so because I'm usually a scatterbrain and this seems to help with that.)
      As I said I haven't had the headaches but then again, I am taking less than most people (so I assume) and I don't have any medical conditions. Maybe something else I'm taking with it (possibly the b12?) is negating the headache issue.

    7. Re:Provigil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can has Provigil?

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

      As a narcoleptic who is perscribed Provigil for sleeping issues, I have not experienced any of these side effects.

      Additionally, I believe it's not only immoral, but downright illogical to take mind-altering substances for the purposes of performance enhancement. Yes, this includes caffeine.

    9. Re:Provigil. by DCGaymer · · Score: 1

      B12 might be the answer then. Thanks, I'll give it a try.

  4. Ritalin is a great study drug. by urbanriot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've used it before and it increased cognition considerably, especially when I was tired and figured I'd have a wasteful night of studying. If I have less than 8 hours sleep, I have difficulty focusing on a single source at one time, and studying is impossible. Ritalin has helped me micro-focus, and not just cram for exams but actually learn topics. If I had a steady source of Ritalin, or a doctor that 'played ball', I might consider experimenting with it more often.

    1. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 0

      Isn't Ritalin just Speed? You could get that from your friendly neighborhood drug dealer if you really want to. Not sure it's healthy though just to cram for exams.

    2. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Original+Replica · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ritalin has helped me micro-focus, and not just cram for exams but actually learn topics.

      I was prescribed Ritalin throughout grade school for ADD by the end of freshman year of college I decided to stop taking it because I had learned to "fake" the cognitive effects. Ritalin takes effect so quickly, that I was able to perceive the difference and use that to learn ways to be almost as effective, but without the drug. 14 years later I still have ADD but can function pretty normally because of what I learned with Ritalin. I have to wonder if the same thing could be done with Provigil, learn the thought patterns that give you the increased cognition, but eventually have the benifit without the drug.

      --
      We are all just people.
    3. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ritalin is methylphenidate. Speed is amphetamine (and sometimes methamphetamine, but that more commonly goes by other names). They work in different ways and have different effects.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    4. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by hkmarks · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Cocaine, (meth)amphetamines, and methylphenidate actually have rather similar effects. They all boost dopamine. Ritalin is much slower acting, has a longer half-life, and is much less potent, and I think it has some other effects. Some kids crush and snort Ritalin for a cocaine-like high, and it's nicknamed "kiddie coke" IIRC. One of my junior high teachers told us she used to sell her pills when she was in school. I don't think addictiveness or anything have been fully studied. I was going to write a research paper on the subject a while ago, but I had trouble finding sources.

      I actually took Ritalin for a while in high school. It didn't do me much good, though it might now that I understand how it works. I wish I could try it again, knowing better, but of course it takes 8 months to get an appointment with my doctor.

      I've been taking melatonin for a little while to get myself to sleep (at a reasonable hour). The effect is so much better than any other sleeping pill I've tried that it's hard to believe. Feeling sleepy without feeling bone tired is so much more pleasant than feeling bone tired and drowsy, but not sleepy.

    5. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My dad takes melatonin for insomnia. It's made him much easier to be around, though he is almost always in bed by 8:30pm.

      I have a somewhat opposite issue. If I stop moving much and don't have to pay close attention to something active, I stand a good chance of falling asleep. I don't have this issue while driving, eating, typing, or reading websites, which tend to change on a rapid basis (switching tabs, browsing to new sites, etc), but reading books or sitting down to watch TV is difficult for me -- I can be out in a few minutes of TV, or in less than a page of a book. This makes studying and reading technical books -- already not terribly exciting -- tremendously difficult for me. I've been pondering asking about modafinil for about two years now to deal with it, but that means making an appointment with the doctor, and while it's not difficult to get in to see him, it's inconvenient, and so I keep putting it off.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    6. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Jaime2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First person anecdotes are pretty useless for this topic. Many people who have dropped acid will testify in front of the Supreme Court that it enhanced their perception. Only a well controlled, well designed double-blind test is acceptable in this context.

    7. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said.

    8. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...learn the thought patterns that give you the increased cognition, but eventually have the benifit without the drug. Shh! Don't warn them to prevent it from happening.
    9. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 1

      methylphenidate is a derivatized amphetamine, and works generally in the same sense by blocking monoamine transport from the synaptic gap into the presynaptic neuron. Although methylphenidate may show a higher affinity for dopamine over adrenaline or serotonin. I am not sure. But they all work generally in the same way.

      --
      the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
    10. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Beefpatrol · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I've been learning the same kinds of things with one of the ADD stimulants and an antidepressant for the last few years. One of the best things about these drugs is that they show you what "the other side" feels like. When you've been predominantly in one mode every day since puberty, it can be impossible to even understand what people mean when they ask simple questions about what you are going to do. For instance, there was always cognitive dissonance when a manager would ask me something like, "can you do thing X by deadline D?" My mental answer to a rhetorical question like that was always something like: "maybe." I usually answered verbally in the affirmative because I was aware that it was expected that I would, despite knowing that the actual answer was not so clear. In situations like that, I always felt like I had entered another dimension where people continuously behave in ways that don't make sense. The reason for this, I later found out, was because most of the time, normal people can say "yes" or "no" to a question like that and be sure that unless something extremely unusual were to happen, they would be correct; they either can do it, or they can't, and they know ahead of time which is true. Their reasons for saying "yes" or "no" didn't usually include thoughts like: "technically yes, and I've done it before -- it is actually pretty easy, but my track record for managing to do it is dismal for reasons that I don't understand, so an objective interpretation of the data suggests that a long-winded and unsatisfactory answer that indicates that I really don't know if I will do X by deadline D, and that the reasons for this are beyond my realm of comprehension, is what my reply *should* be, but I'm going to say yes anyway because any other response is going to piss people off. I absolutely hate corporate America -- this kind of weird asking of questions that are obviously unanswerable in an honest fashion must mean that either people are screwing with me or they are intensely stupid."

      I didn't realize all this in a concrete manner until somewhere in my late 20s after trying some of these drugs that made things like mental crises, and the utter inability to turn my brain off to focus or sleep optional. I've since taken them on and off as necessary, but being able to intuitively understand what it means to be able to cause one's actions to align with one's intentions on a regular basis is invaluable. I can say with complete honesty that I really didn't understand how the world worked before.

    11. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      Ritalin and amphetamines are stimulants. Ritalin is amphetamine-like but you are correct they work in different ways, but also in similar ways and both similar and different effects.

    12. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There is evidence that LSD and other psychedelics DO enhance cognition. Dihydroergotoxine mesylate is an ergot alkaloid (as is LSD) which is perscribed for various mental conditions. I hope that was not a lame attempt at a strawman.

    13. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by ScreamingCactus · · Score: 1

      Ritalin has similar effects as speed on a lot of people. But it works the other way on people who have ADD; it helps them focus. A lot of drugs seem to work "backwards" for people with AD(H)D, including caffeine.

      --
      The path to enlightenment is truly through homemade drugs!
    14. Re:Ritalin is a great study drug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LSD would be an interesting drug to examine in this context, as well.

      I know someone who took 2 hits of acid before a nasty physics quiz at Caltech, because "he figured he'd probably fail anyway." After what he thought was half an hour of working on the first problem, he looked up to find it had been 5 minutes.

      He ended up scoring a 9/10 on that quiz, and the next highest score in the class was a 3. After that, he took all his physics tests on 2 hits of acid, and graduated with a physics major.

  5. Holy crap, 7 digits? by Eudial · · Score: 1

    Being a physicist, I've got an excuse for being absent minded, but keeping SEVEN DIGITS in your working memory? Holy crap. I'm lucky if I can cram four of them in there.

    Seriously, it's an issue with me and older telephones -- I can punch three numbers, then I have to look on the number I'm calling to get the next batch, and by the time I've got it, the phone is already dialing.

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    1. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by crazybit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      it's probably because of how your brain works.

      Maybe you are trying to memorize 7 numbers (symbol + significance in our society) instead of memorizing a 3cm x 1.5cm illustration (the area in a paper where those numbers can be written) or instead of memorizing a 10 second sound (the aprox time in wich those numbers can be pronounced).

      The problem might not be your memory, but the way your brain processes and stores the information it receives.

      --
      - Human knowledge belongs to the world
    2. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think remembering 7 digits is primarily because of the need for knowing telephone numbers. Perhaps you just need to call people more often?

    3. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am a network systems engineer(among other things) and I have the same issue! remember 3 or 4 numbers and have to look for the next!

      I find that my multitasking and fast thought processes lower my memory recall. If I take a few days off from work and just relax or go riding or something I can then remember very long strings of info, like multiple phone numbers.

      Back when DVDs were being pushed by the likes of Futureshop and Bestbuy, I could memorize 2 or 3 serial numbers from the DVD players(free DVD with new player promos). Multitasking wrecks memory!

    4. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Try remembering two, three digit numbers and one single digit. I don't exactly know why it helps, but it makes numbers and their order a lot easier. Perhaps it's something about treating a three digit number like a single concept.

      --
      We are all just people.
    5. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by JimboFBX · · Score: 1

      Your probably like me and tend not to pay attention to what your reading. When you were assigned reading homework in school, did you find yourself 3/4 of the way through a page and completely lost as to what just happened earlier in the page?

      read a 7-digit phone number several times and you should be able to recall it easily and without confusion- as long as your focus doesn't go somewhere else.

    6. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by hkmarks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's totally normal, don't worry about it.

      Most people can retain 7 +/- 2 (5 to 9) semantic "packets" of information. A "packet" can be a part of a larger packet. Most people can reliably recall 5 random numbers or letters in a row. Or 5 groups of 5 numbers or letters. Or 5 random words. Or 5 unrelated phrases.

      But don't try to memorize a paragraph worth of random letters and numbers -- that's more than 9 packets so it's almost impossible without a lot of repetition. That's why phone numbers have a dash in them, to break the number up into smaller packets that are easier to remember.

    7. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by jma05 · · Score: 1

      7 is not the hard number the way the summary makes it sound. The range was claimed as 5-9.

      http://www.musanim.com/miller1956/
      A classic 50 yr old paper. Has been a subject of great debate since.

      But its trickier than that. It is 5 to 9 "items", not simply numbers. What constitutes an item can change. If you perceive the area code of your phone number as an item, it just counts as 1. So it all depends on how you "chunk" information. That is how experts are said to work better. They chunk at a different level than novices.

      As for your phone predicament, you are not alone. At least, I am no different from you in that.

    8. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      I've read that a typical person can only remember about 3 strings of 3-4 numbers at a time. This is why phone numbers, social security numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and a whole host of other numbers are in triplets or quadlets. Try remembering the number using the familiar place names like thousands, millions, billions, and you should be able to recall more of the information.

      --
      SRSLY.
    9. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by synaptik · · Score: 1

      keeping SEVEN DIGITS in your working memory? Holy crap. I'm lucky if I can cram four of them in there.

      Your problem is the radix that you choose to think in. Simply switch to base 10 million, and then you'll only have one digit to remember, not 7.

      --
      HSJ$$*&#^!#+++ATH0
      NO CARRIER
    10. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by greg_barton · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps it's something about treating a three digit number like a single concept.

      It's called chunking
    11. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can remember 10-11 digits. You remember first 3-4, remember speaking/listening 3-4, and remember "seeing" last 3-4.

    12. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by ScreamingCactus · · Score: 1

      The general rule is 7 +/-2 objects in working memory at a time (not just numbers). Seven is the average. Depending on how you treat the numbers, you can make it easier. For example, if you treat 56 as 1 number instead of 2, that allows more room for other things in your active memory. Having such a small cache is why multitasking makes it harder. Interestingly, I think the right side of your brain is better at storing large numbers than your left - I used "visual aids" and grouping to work with 10-digit numbers without having to write them down or memorize them. Of course, after I quit that job, I slowly lost that ability.

      --
      The path to enlightenment is truly through homemade drugs!
    13. Re:Holy crap, 7 digits? by loraksus · · Score: 1

      Case in point... FCKGW-RHQQ2-YXRKT-8TG6W-2B7Q8

      Then again, repetition may of have factored in there ;)

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  6. I don't like drugs by crazybit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    as much as scientist claim they can enhance or reduce certain abilities, it is also a reality science is just beginning to understand human metabolism.

    We don't know much about how each part the human metabolism affect the others, so it's very difficult to anticipate possible side effects.

    It's also widely known that many of the current drugs where discovered by accident while trying to cure something else (like the discovery of viagra, and the heart benefits obtained from aspirin). So, as much as we don't want see it, our scientist can be wrong.

    Let's hope we don't see our Universities bloated with new kind of "brain enhancement" drugs.

    --
    - Human knowledge belongs to the world
    1. Re:I don't like drugs by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "as much as scientist claim they can enhance or reduce certain abilities, it is also a reality science is just beginning to understand human metabolism."

      Bull.
      While we don't know everything, we are long past the "Just beginning " phase.
      What are you, posting from 1950?

      "It's also widely known that many of the current drugs where discovered by accident while trying to cure something else (like the discovery of viagra, and the heart benefits obtained from aspirin)"

      discovered through experimentation and observation. You make it sound as if they drop something accidentally and then it cured something.

      While they observed unexpected effect during the scientific process, it was the experimentation and testing that brought there discoveries to light.

      "So, as much as we don't want see it, our scientist can be wrong."
      This is nonsensical.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:I don't like drugs by Sigg3.net · · Score: 0

      Caution and skepticism are to be esteemed with our relation to drugs in everyday life. I see vegetarians taking all sorts of pills in order to "live in accordance with nature". I cannot begin to comprehend what confusion of ideas that would lead to such a misconception.

      But people will eat soylent green before they ask what it is. (And I'm not a scientologist, I'm completely for the use of therapeutic drugs where all other means are deemed unsuccessful, or where a balance of drugs and therapy can really help a human being, as a person, to live a sustainable life with his peers. Though it cannot be denied that some "diseases" are symptomatic of choice of society (a theoretical problem scientology cannot account for).)
      I'm a habitual smoker, meaning I fill myself with poisonous chemicals every day. But concentrated drugs to enhance abilities science has yet to give a satisfactory demarcation?)

      Sorry for the rant. I am also drinking beer.

    3. Re:I don't like drugs by dnwq · · Score: 1

      Do you drink coffee? Good god, caffeine! Or eat chilli? Or potatoes? Not exactly things your evolutionary predecessors would have snacked on. You eat strange new chemicals every day, this one just has the word "drug" slapped on it.

    4. Re:I don't like drugs by crazybit · · Score: 2, Informative

      from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viagra :

      "It was initially studied for use in hypertension (high blood pressure) and angina pectoris (a symptom of ischaemic cardiovascular disease). The first clinical trials were conducted in Morriston Hospital in Swansea. Phase I clinical trials under the direction of Ian Osterloh suggested that the drug had little effect on angina, but that it could induce marked penile erections. Pfizer therefore decided to market it for erectile dysfunction, rather than for angina."

      Evidently doctors had little idea this reaction would happen... why? because we are just beginning to understand our own bodies.
      They didn't knew some receptors will trigger when they encounter this substance.

      That discovery was completely random, they NEVER expected it. They just gave heart patients a testing drug for their hearts, and the patients ended up with a boner.

      --
      - Human knowledge belongs to the world
    5. Re:I don't like drugs by aurispector · · Score: 1

      This is great point. The dividing line between food and medicine can be vanishingly small. Food used to BE medicine and in some cultures it still is. Often medicines are derived from natural sources, some of which are foods. Caffeine is found a variety of "food" items. It seems that the difference might simply be the intent when ingested. Still, I eat food when I'm hungry and take medicine when I'm sick. There's a big difference.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    6. Re:I don't like drugs by Undead+NDR · · Score: 1

      What are you, posting from 1950?

      Do you realize how laughable the above comment will sound in 200 years?

  7. Oh no! by iminplaya · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now the competitors in the national spelling bee tournaments will have to rake a piss test.

    --
    What?
    1. Re:Oh no! by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      If you have to use a rake then you know something is amiss. Never mind the chemical analysis.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:Oh no! by Icarium · · Score: 1

      You jest, but the BBC had an article in the last few days about the possibility of testing students for these kinds of pharmaceuticals because it is viewed as an unfair advantage.

      Linky: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7412719.stm

    3. Re:Oh no! by vax · · Score: 1

      liquid raking is one of the more complicated zen arts.

  8. phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Vspirit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Based on what findings is it stated that most people can only hold 7 digits in memory?

    I wonder if there is a connection to how many digit you need to make a local phone call.

    In the states I assume you can or could leave out the area code, and then needed to remember xxx-xxxx.
    In Denmark as a kid and now, we need to remember 8 digits to make a phone call.

    I see a correlation, but.. heck, digits for thoughts.

    1. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Take a look at George Miller's seminal work:

      The Magic Number Seven, Plus or minus Two
      http://www.musanim.com/miller1956/

      This is psych 101 guys...

      -Anymouse

    2. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Phone numbers drop to patterns, where you may have a number of friends with a prefix of 995 and you only have to recall the last four digits, or where a pattern is available on the digit pad. The memory that they're discussing is being provided a random string of digits with a short time to memorize them, and then being asked at some point in the future (minutes or hours, sometimes longer) or while performing another task to recite the string of digits in order.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    3. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Working memory dude, aka "short term memory". Think of it like your brain's RAM.

    4. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that's the reason the phone #'s are 7 digit.

    5. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think you have a very good point. I can easily remember phone numbers for friends in Denmark and Sweden as well as freinds phone numbers with area code in the states.

      Maybe there is some sore of 'memory groove' from the size of numbers usually looked at?

      I watched some discovery channel some time ago and there is a tribe of poeple in south american that does not count. they have 4 numbers. none, one, some, and many. they can only remember how much of 1 or 2 things they have. like how many leaves and how many sticks but couldnt remember how many rocks. These people just didn't have the mental dexterity to remember some rocks, 1 leaf, and many sticks, probably because they typically only have to remember 1 or 2 pieces of information.

    6. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      In Denmark as a kid and now, we need to remember 8 digits to make a phone call.

      In Germany in '82, our phone number was 011-49-6571-20538, or dialed locally, 06571-20538...

      I don't have an eidetic memory, so why'm I able to remember every phone number from age 3 on? I'm not saying that Miller was wrong... It might be that we're more number oriented today than in 1950, h'wever. Cell-phones, credit cards, PIN numbers, passwords; none of this was really available at that time. Food f'r thought...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    7. Re:phone number 7bit 8bit digit theory by skraps · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can remember long sequences of digits with relative ease. For example, my credit card number is 4744-7200-2258-9834. For bonus points, the expiration is 05/12 and the CCV number is 092. Beat that, Provigil!

      --
      Karma: -2147483648 (Mostly affected by integer overflow)
  9. Garden Of Eden Model of Health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think religious people might metaphysically have a hard time with this because this goes against the whole "Garden Of Eden" model of health which is Humans were made perfectly and they fell from perfection when they got curious and ate the special apple hoping for some sort of benefit. Only disease is allowed to be treated in order to restore the system to what god intended.

    So you can't get a prescription for viagra because you want to have loads of sex, you can only get it for treating the dreaded disease known as "Erectile dysfunction".

    1. Re:Garden Of Eden Model of Health by vertinox · · Score: 1

      I think religious people might metaphysically have a hard time with this because this goes against the whole "Garden Of Eden" model of health which is Humans were made perfectly and they fell from perfection when they got curious and ate the special apple hoping for some sort of benefit.

      Eh. Its not really just modern day Christians.

      Most civilizations throughout history believed illness was a sign that God or the Gods didn't like you and you were being punished for your sins.

      During the Black Death of the 1340's most Europeans blamed the plague on everything from gambling, prostitution, tolerance of Muslims and Jews, witches, and of course lack of faith in the Christian community where in reality it was really because of lack of hygiene by the average contemporary European.

      Of course taking bathes and not throwing garbage and sewage into the streets being the reason for the disease never occurred to most people except the most observant fellows.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  10. Drug tests by jamshid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yup, won't be longer before passing a drug test for employment means your results have to come back positive.

    1. Re:Drug tests by jamshid · · Score: 1

      Maybe I need a little ritalin...

      Yup, won't be [much] longer before passing a drug test for employment means your results have to come back positive.

  11. The Crystal Meth-od by LM741N · · Score: 2, Funny

    Enhanced my cognition right into the homeless shelter. Now I'm a homeless genius and use the computer at the library to control vast bot nets. Eventually I will rule the world.

    1. Re:The Crystal Meth-od by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Enhanced my cognition right into the homeless shelter. Now I'm a homeless genius and use the computer at the library to control vast bot nets. Eventually I will rule the world. The homeless ruler of the world? If I was you I'd rather use your unfathomable genius to get in the spam business. You'll be so rich you'll never have to dive into a dumpster again!
      --
      You just got troll'd!
  12. One small problem... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Taking a somewhat little-understood psychotropic drug for treatment of illness is one thing (especially when prescribing it to children), but it is another thing entirely to start talking it up as a performance enhancer.

    What is the long-term (or even all of the short-term) effects of this? IIRC, Ritalin comes with a bucketload of side effects.

    I guess that drugs specifically made for the mind start (at least for me) creeping deeper and deeper into questions of morality and ethics than one designed to treat any other body part. Just something that makes me a bit wary about them... For instance, is an "enhanced" person more susceptible to suggestion than otherwise? Are they more focused on the task at hand, but not as aware of their surroundings? How does it affect multitasking? Emotions? Attitude and outlook?

    Dunno... but caffeine seems to work just fine for me, and I get to keep a clear mind which I retain full control of while I'm at it.

    /P

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:One small problem... by jsnipy · · Score: 1

      True, so being able to work faster is offset by the time you spend dealing diarrhea ...

      --
      -- if you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine
    2. Re:One small problem... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      I've wondered about the personal ethics of such drugs. I'm intrigued by them, especially the possibility of skipping a night or two of sleep each week, but are there ethical concerns with taking a drug that allows me, for example, to read an extra technical book every week, thus perhaps soaring past my colleagues?

      From a work standpoint, if my employer begins to depend on my ability to stay far ahead of others (maybe competitors, maybe just the tech industry in general), if I stop taking them, is it ethical for me to be disciplined because I chose to stop taking an optional drug?

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    3. Re:One small problem... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you aren't keeping a clear mind with caffeine.
      No doubt you believe you are.

      Coffee comes with a "bucketload" of side effects as well.

      The brain is a part of the body just like your heart, or hands, or belly button.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:One small problem... by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Perhaps, but the effects (side or immediate) of coffee/caffeine taken in moderation are well-known (and have been for literally over at least a century).

      The key term is "moderation" - if I were to suck down a case of Bawls in the morning (or even one bottle), then yes, the term 'clear mind' would not be perfectly accurate - just as taking any stimulant in large doses (or in the case of, say, Ampehtamines, in any but the smallest doses) would affect mental clarity.

      One cannot say the same for synthetic chemicals whose effects are not known fully.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:One small problem... by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      Not really on the side effects. It's only fairly recently that good studies have been performed on the subject. I had to sort through caffeine studies for a paper a few years ago, and it was amazing how bad most of the early methodology was. Bad as in taking someone who has three or more cups of coffee a day, keeping them off it two days, giving it to them again, and concluding that it's a cognition enhancer because they did better on tests during the last day than the two days they were off. The addictive side was horribly underestimated in a vast number of studies.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    6. Re:One small problem... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Perhaps, but the effects (side or immediate) of coffee/caffeine taken in moderation are well-known (and have been for literally over at least a century). "

      Which is why military pilots who need to stay alert on long missions take (under Flight Surgeon supervision) mild amphetamines instead.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    7. Re:One small problem... by Undead+NDR · · Score: 1

      The brain is a part of the body just like your heart, or hands, or belly button.

      With the only insignificant difference that it tells all the other body parts what to do.

    8. Re:One small problem... by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

      "I guess that drugs specifically made for the mind start (at least for me) creeping deeper and deeper into questions of morality and ethics than one designed to treat any other body part."

      Oh, they do, they do. Because in various forms, IQ is the Holy Grail.

      This is THE question of the 21st century.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    9. Re:One small problem... by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


      You really can't SKIP entire nights of sleep - long term, all you can do is cut them short.

      However, I recommend Nancy Kress "Beggars in Spain" for an entire novel built on this premise. (Note to self - go buy another copy.)

      What eventually happened is that "normal" became a ghetto that eventually withered and faded. In the novel, the "sleepless" mutation was "pure" - no drawbacks.

      A much more complex scenario is the "Algernon Phenomenon", in which someone trades long term health for short term bursts. THAT question is horribly complex. (Do you stay a nice healthy janitor for 40 years, or put in 5 sharp years as a researcher before you totally burn out??)

      This might be even worse in the Internet Age, because with good marketing, you can "Amplify" your good years' results, whereas society univerally looks down upon janitorial work and such.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    10. Re:One small problem... by expatriot · · Score: 1

      I saw a TV program recently on this (can't remember link) that used brain imaging to show blood flow before and after coffee consumption.

      The main result was that people who never (or rarely) drink coffee can get an observable improvement in blood flow to the brain, but regular coffee drinkers adjust and then need coffee to get back to normal state.

      So either don't drink much coffee and use it for a boost now and then or drink it all the time and lose the advantage.

    11. Re:One small problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you implying!? There's nothing wrong with coffee! Everyone needs a few shots to wake up in the morning. Why are you looking at me like that?

    12. Re:One small problem... by icegreentea · · Score: 1

      Or, drink it all the time, and when you really need it, spike your caffeine intake. I'm still a student, so this vicious cycle of (lack of) sleep, studying, and caffeine is pretty much my life.

    13. Re:One small problem... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      There have been some sleep-skipping studies, most of them by the military, where subjects have stayed awake using modafinil for up to about four days, and seem to be fully recovered after 8-9 hours of sleep, judging by various mental and physical tests. These haven't lasted for more than a few weeks, to my knowledge, so there may be other issues down the line, but it's still intriguing research.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  13. it's all about the spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

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

  14. it's getting them that's the problem... by crashandburn66 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These drugs would be immensely beneficial to the human race. And what sane person wouldn't want to be smarter? Unfortunately, they will be opposed by very powerful religious and conservative forces. it will probably devolve into a cyclic, pointless, and unyielding debate like the one about abortion.

    Caffeine is one of these substances; probably the most widely available, too. Personally I can think faster, clearer, and longer with about 300mg of caffeine in me. Unfortunately, I'm getting tolerant to it now... :(

    Regardless, these drugs have the possibility to change the world. Hopefully people will get these things on the market in time for my SATs!

    1. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by dnwq · · Score: 1

      Provigil has been on the market for ten years. Ritalin even longer. You can get provigil easily already.

      Notably, so far there has been no indication that people get tolerant to provigil. It appears to be be less toxic than caffeine. I think we're looking at the next college drug...

    2. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Unfortunately, they will be opposed by very powerful religious and conservative forces. it will probably devolve into a cyclic, pointless, and unyielding debate like the one about abortion. If these forces are so powerful, why is abortion legal throughout the US? Why is gay marriage legal in the largest state of the US -- even though a majority of the population opposes it?

      To put some things in perspective: The Roman Catholic Church is one of the largest and best organized branches of Christianity. But the total annual budget of the Vatican is only $190 million, which is about 20 times smaller than the smallest corporation of the Fortune 500. Barack Obama raised $90 million for his campaign in just the first two months of this year.

      Or, look at it this way: if you're a particularly devout person in the US, you'd probably spend an average of one to two hours per week doing specifically religious activities... and then you'd spend over forty hours a week in the office, slaving away for The Man.

      So who's likely to be more powerful: the religions, or the corporations, the CEOs, and their lobbyists?
    3. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 1

      Personally I can think faster, clearer, and longer with about 300mg of caffeine in me. 300mg? That's all? Do you drink your coffee from a sippycup, too? ;)

      Anything less than a gram isn't worth talking about.
      --
      "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
    4. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by crashandburn66 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why are these things legal when the population opposes them? The court system, of course. A person in a black robe can effectively dictate laws to the popular masses.

      And the religions have one weapon that no corporation or political figure can wield. If they can convince someone that doing something will bring someone eternal ecstasy or eternal damnation, they can make that person do anything. Most of the most horrific wars and killings in history have been brought about by religions telling their followers that god wanted them to go kill people.

      And nobody I know of is willing to martyr themselves for Halliburton, Wal-Mart or Exxon.

    5. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      I bout 10 oz of caffeine from unitednuclear.com

      I can take about 1g hit in the morning and not need any for the rest of the day. I just mix it with cold distilled H2O.And, it feels nice... Not as nice as the percocet I was taking for my shoulder though ;D

      --
    6. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you think that religious leaders are going to tell their legions of followers to go out and KILL KILL KILL in order to stop Provigil and Ritalin?

      Would you be willing to take a wager on this by any chance?

    7. Re:it's getting them that's the problem... by crashandburn66 · · Score: 1

      So, you think that religious leaders are going to tell their legions of followers to go out and KILL KILL KILL in order to stop Provigil and Ritalin?
      I sure hope not. But historically they sure seem willing to kill over much less, such as that the neighbors call god by a different name, or that the existence of other religions prevents the return of god and the others need to be exterminated. And if god made us in his perfect image, those who improve on it are effectively saying they can make better beings than god... something tells me that wouldn't be taken lightly.
  15. A musical interlude... by argent · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Richard Shindell's Confession...

    Hey Doc
    How's about a refill
    Hey Doc
    The pretty little blue pill...

  16. Incomplete measurement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    FTA:

    Provigil, for example, adds the ability to remember an extra digit or so to an individual's working memory (most people can hold seven random digits in their memory, but have difficulty with eight). Ok, so that's fairly interesting, but it's not enough. You also need to ask: would a placebo add an extra digit as well?

    Usually a placebo does have some minor effect, so I wouldn't be surprised to see an improvement in performance on the same order.
    1. Re:Incomplete measurement? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


      I'm sure a properly designed study at least tries to deal with the Placebo question. Notice the cautious conclusion "a digit or so"... meaning the effect is greater than zero, but complicated.

      However, if you go beyond the "placebo" concept into active training methods, you can add a capacity to remember MANY more digits.

      The medical study tried to figure out how much was a chemical enhancement alone without "training effects".

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  17. Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What happens to your cognition once you stop taking it, after you've gotten used to taking it? Do you get a tolerance, so you not only need higher doses for a smarts boost, but you also just return to your base performance after getting used to it?

    What's the withdrawal like?

    I suspect that maybe the many kids given Ritalin while growing up learn to depend on it for their baseline. When they outgrow their "hyperactivity" (AKA "childhood"), they quit the drugs, and sink into an unfamiliar dullness in which they can't think at their previous baseline without the artificial stimulation. And how much do they just get burned out from the steady drugging?

    Something's got to explain the evident steady decay in average intellect as the years wear on, despite these synthetic boosts.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by grammar+fascist · · Score: 5, Informative
      I can answer these questions on the average for Adderall and Dexedrine (dextroamphetamines) and Ritalin (methylphenidate).

      What happens to your cognition once you stop taking it, after you've gotten used to taking it? Do you get a tolerance, so you not only need higher doses for a smarts boost, but you also just return to your base performance after getting used to it?

      Tolerance is rarely an issue with the low doses given to treat ADHD. A couple of back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that an average dose of Adderall (20mg) is about 1/10 an average "first hit" of meth or cocaine. Prescription medications are also designed to metabolize much more slowly than recreational drugs.

      Tolerance mainly results from neurons being overexcited and altering receptor sites in response. (This is in fact how caffeine tolerance develops.) People who take these medications under a doctor's care are generally not overstimulated. In fact, with ADHD, because medication corrects understimulation it's usually not an issue at all.

      I would be more worried about tolerance if the general population started on them, though.

      What's the withdrawal like?

      Usually a little mentally fuzzier than before medication and maybe a bit crankier. It lasts about half an hour to an hour. People report that Ritalin and Dexedrine have "rougher edges" than Adderall, which makes sense since Adderall is a mixture of amphetamine salts that metabolize at different rates.

      I suspect that maybe the many kids given Ritalin while growing up learn to depend on it for their baseline. When they outgrow their "hyperactivity" (AKA "childhood"), they quit the drugs, and sink into an unfamiliar dullness in which they can't think at their previous baseline without the artificial stimulation.

      If they don't outgrow ADHD and they need medication to function, they shouldn't stop.

      However, often the medication does have a lasting effect, though not one that people with "OMG DRUGGIES!!!" in mind would predict. It can train your mind to mimic the patterns it gets used to while on medication. People will often lower their dosage over time, and some quit altogether. I'm not aware of anyone needing more until they're a prescription crack-head. Both anecdotal evidence and the literature (peer-reviewed studies) support this.

      It also tends to train behavior. While on medication, functional behavior is much easier, and people who learn to function effectively while on medication have an easier time off of it than they did before medication.

      Again, I wouldn't apply this to the general population, just to people who use medication to treat neurological problems.

      And how much do they just get burned out from the steady drugging?

      They only do if the dose is too high. The beautiful thing about stimulants at these dosages is that their cognitive effects don't last into the next day, except for the gradual effects I mentioned.
      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    2. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Overall I'd tend to agree with your calm assesment. But in my personal experience I've seen many many kids prescribed Ritalin or other drugs when what they needed was more time chasing each other around outside, less time playing videogames or just watching TV. And not just kids, but loads of adults on Prozac-type drugs, Xanax, and other stuff that's supposed to be prescribed by a doctor to give them a moment of clarity and a chance to work through their problems, but instead are just dosed into limbo. Psychiatrists who meet with patients just to represcribe them drugs, and never offer any actual therapy at all.

      So I expect that there are lots of people out there who aren't "understimulated" in any psychopharmacological sense requiring correction, but are rather just pawns of lazy parents, teachers and medical personnel, whose endocrinology and neurotransmitter balances have a synthetic wedge driven into their cycles. Who then spend adolescence and beyond with their heads ringing from growing up dosed. There's quite a lot of people like that around now, and more all the time.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are quite wrong, clearly not a doctor or pharmacist, and I hope you dont try to spread these ideas as fact easily. First, tolerance buildup in amphetamine (dexedrine and adderall) as well as amphetamine derivatives is very easy and happens very quickly. It happens with children all the time. By the time kids reach high school or college, if they have taken amphetamine for a while, they are definitely on a significantly higher dosage than before and/or redosing more often (twice a day, three times a day, or taking time released amphetamines to make up for it) just to achieve baseline.

      To compare first doses of amphetamine to cocaine and reach a conclusion is ridiculous, as they are completely different drugs. Are you serious? By the same standard you can say "a quick back of the envelope calculation suggests that first doses of MDMA are substantially lower than cocaine, so tolerance should not be an issue." Which is, of course, completely false. Amphetamine and amphetamine derivatives are notorious for having tolerance buildup as well as a substantial, though not terrible, comedown.

      As far as ritalin vs. dexedrine vs. amphetamine comedowns, your suggestion that its because of metabolism rates is at best greatly overly simplified. It may be, but it also probably lends more to the fact that different amphetamine salts tend to have different affinities for serotonin vs. dopamine vs. adrenaline levels and this would be expected to play a significant role.

      I agree that they can be used to train the brain though. Although, that is purely anecdotal and I dont know of any studies that have looked into this.

      But please, dont give advice about stimulants.

      --
      the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
    4. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amphetamine tolerance has been documented to regularly occur at levels as low as 10mg/day, 3 days a week. Amphetamine is a controlled substance because of its tolerance and cross-tolerance.

    5. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      First, tolerance buildup in amphetamine (dexedrine and adderall) as well as amphetamine derivatives is very easy and happens very quickly. It happens with children all the time. By the time kids reach high school or college, if they have taken amphetamine for a while, they are definitely on a significantly higher dosage than before and/or redosing more often (twice a day, three times a day, or taking time released amphetamines to make up for it) just to achieve baseline. I started on Ritalin in 3rd grade. I began by taking 5mg twice a day, as a trial dose, and within a month or so, the doctor recommended that I bump up to 10mg twice a day. A few years later, I switched to 20mg slow release once a day. By the time I was in high school, it is true that I did occasionally redose (with the doctor's permission, and only with 5mg normal release), but only on days where my homework was going to last more than a couple of hours past the end of school (because the 8hr slow release got me through schooltime, but not much further than that). If I had had high school levels of homework in 3rd grade, I would have redosed then too. Then I switched to Concerta (equivalent dose), which lasted for 12 hrs, and the redosing ended. During my senior year, I switched to Straterra, which I have been given to understand is a much more benign drug, and I'm on the same dose now, 5 years later, as I started out on.

      Now, tell me again about tolerance buildup, and significantly higher doses and all that...
      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    6. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 1

      So you are, lets say, 25 now. Probably weigh at least twice what you did when you were in 3rd grade, with completely different metabolism levels. And you are taking the same dosage you took when you were 10? If anything, the dose should have increased simply because of increased body mass.

      But regardless, its anecdotal evidence. Studies have shown amphetamines have a high abuse potential, which is defined by tolerance buildup and withdrawal. Its why its a controlled substance.

      --
      the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
    7. Re:Withdrawal and Other Downsides? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I started taking Adderall I was surprised by the low dosage required. For me, the maximum dosage was clear, because if I exceeded it by even a small amount, I got a horrible headache. I hear that is not an uncommon experience and for anyone who had considered abusing it, would certainly be a disincentive. Let me tell you, no one who is legitimately on it for ADD really wants to be on it. But unless you have ADD, it is probably as hard for you to imagine why we need it as it was for me to imagine why I needed it before I started taking it.

  18. Digits and Nootropics by DynaSoar · · Score: 4, Informative

    To first address the comments regarding number of digits in working memory: the "magic number" is 7 plus or minus 2, the variance being context dependent. To hold more items in memory, which people obviously do, they employ "chunking", or grouping them together and remembering the chunks in the necessary sequence. The 7 digit phone number was based on the original 7 digit idea, the grouping of area code XXX, prefix YYY, and last 4 ZZZZ was based on chunking. Since this chunking is a major action of attention and memory, simply adding a single digit to a single chunk is a weird way to claim improvement.

    Yet once again an article on cognition enhancement fails to note its origins and long standing history. The first nootropic, hydergine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydergine , was developed by Albert Hoffmann of Sandoz. While he is best known for LSD, his "problem child", he considered hydergine to be his most important discovery. He credited his longentivity (he died recently at age 102) to using hydergine regularly.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
  19. Speaking of which.. by Sigg3.net · · Score: 0

    What cognitive abilities do you decrease?

  20. legalize it by Deanalator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Modafinil (provigil) is safer, more effective, and less addictive than caffeine.

    Unfortunately, possession without a prescription can get you a year in jail. Strangly, it's chemical predecessor, Adrafinil is perfectly legal to buy over the counter (at about a tenth of the cost as well). It actually turns into modafinil in your stomach, but it takes longer to take effect, and the chemical byproducts cause stomach pains and liver problems.

    1. Re:legalize it by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Informative

      Adrafinil is legal to import for personal use. It is not legal to sell OTC (at least in the US).

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    2. Re:legalize it by bencoder · · Score: 0

      and yet adrifinal has more side effects and is potentially more harmful to the body than modafinil.

    3. Re:legalize it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't legally choose to buy Provigil. I can't assess the risks and rewards and make a decision about taking it. However, I can go out and have a triple cheeseburger and a large order of fries for dinner, smoke a couple packs of cigarettes, go out and get totally drunk and have unprotected sex with a stranger, and that's legally kosher. What a country!

      This is slashdot so the sex part is purely hypothetical, but you get my point.

      I have serious focus and fatigue problems at work. They're probably not enough to get a medical prescription, but they are enough to make my daily job much harder than it should be. Provigil or something like it could genuinely help me. Perhaps I need to go to the doctor and just exaggerate my symptoms. I just hope he'd prescribe what I actually want to take.

      Posting anonymously for career reasons.

  21. Ritalin: Mentats for the 21st Century by E.+T.+Moonshade · · Score: 1

    Best part is: Only a 15% chance of addiction, and you're unaddicted after a week!

    --
    "In caelum, illuc est libertas."
  22. Those aren't the only options... by slifox · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ritalin (methylphenidate), Provigil (aka Modafinil), Adderall (mixed amphetamine salts), etc are not the only options. In fact, there is a whole class of cognitive-enhancement drugs, called Nootropics.

    The best of these (and arguable one of the safest), in my non-medical opinion, is Piracetam. It is a cyclic derivative of the neurotransmitter GABA, and has been used extensively since the 1960s in clinical studies, for treatment of Alzheimer's (and more), and off-label as a "supplement." Many studies suggest it increases blood flow (and hence oxygenation) to the brain, and protects the brain against damage from alcohol poisoning. It has no known LD-50, and has been clinically tested in daily doses exceeding 50 grams!

    I personally use Piracetam to help study, and through my (obviously non-blinded and partially-biased) self-tests, I found that it really does help me learn things faster. After a cramming/studying session, I'll usually look back and realize how much material I've been able to learn in such a short time. All friends I've recommended it to have come to the same conclusion. My dosages vary from 1 gram up to 5 grams at a time, repeating every 3-4 hours.

    Unfortunately, the reason why Nootropics aren't used much is because they don't have the intense effects that *stimulants* such as Ritalin do. The effects of Piracetam are very subtle (though the first time is more noticable)--enough so that its easy to get discouraged. However, when you take Ritalin, the stimulation effect is VERY noticeable (and fun, for many people).

    The big problems with stimulants are that they aren't great for your body, they can encourage bad sleep habits, they are fun to use (possibly leading to irresponsible use), and they can lead to distraction for those not used to the effects at the used dosage. Additionally, they have terrible come-downs. A responsible stimulant user must recognize these aspects and make efforts to control them, otherwise they will not get any work done, or worse harm themselves!

    Disclaimer: I'm not licensed to give medical advice. These are my opinions and are for informational purposes only. Using the mentioned stimulants without a prescription is stupidly illegal (but illegal nonetheless). I won't get into how prohibition is stupid and doesn't work (I think free-use regulation and accurate dispersion of information is the way to go). More importantly though, using these drugs improperly can be unsafe. Make sure you thoroughly research any drugs you use, including over-the-counter drugs, and consult a medical professional when unsure about possible interactions with other drugs or your health conditions.

    Wikipedia on Piracetam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracetam

    Erowid on Nootropics: http://www.erowid.org/smarts/

    1. Re:Those aren't the only options... by Orbijx · · Score: 1

      That's some pretty interesting stuff.

      Before this topic, I was honestly in the dark on these drugs -- I didn't really notice any of their existence. Given how unable I am to focus on a topic, I don't think it'd hurt me too much to try out one of those.

      Plus, the links you've offered are a perk -- It gives me something to start with.

      Thanks. :)

      --
      One of these days, I am going to flip out. When I flip out, I'll be back in five minutes.
    2. Re:Those aren't the only options... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so where do I get it?

    3. Re:Those aren't the only options... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ritalin is not always noticeable. Even at high dosages I never felt any real significant effect. My personal experience may or may not be a statistical anomaly, however it should be taken into consideration that stimulates do not affect everyone the same way.

    4. Re:Those aren't the only options... by hxnwix · · Score: 1

      it should be taken into consideration that stimulates do not affect everyone the same way I wonder about this perception of methylphenidate (ritalin). Being a dopamanergic reuptake inhibitor, methylphenidate increases the amount of dopamine in the synapse.

      If you are sensitive to dopamine, which you most certainly are, then you should be sensitive to methylphenidate. Perception is complex; perhaps you fail to notice ritalin's effects or feel motivated to deny them.
    5. Re:Those aren't the only options... by slifox · · Score: 1

      I buy Piracetam very cheaply in powder form in bulk on eBay. The seller I buy from is Nutraceuticals, which seems to provide decent quality (and they do have a lab analysis report attached to their auctions--though how applicable it is to all their shipments is questionable). I haven't tried others, but I'm sure there are other quality sellers/stores. Nonetheless, be careful buying things you'll ingest from places that aren't regulated (and/or don't have proper quality assurance and analysis).

      I also buy 000-size empty gelcaps and pack the Piracetam into those. Some people mix the Piracetam into a drink, like OJ, but I find the taste to be way too disgusting. Gelcaps are much better, easier, and faster to use (with the downside being they take longer to prepare). Gelcaps also give you a more regulated dosage, though overdosing is not really an issue with Piracetam AFAIK.

      To fill a lot of gelcaps at once, you can get a capsule filler tool, which is basically a board with holes for half of the capsules to fit in, and which you pour the powder over and tamp (pack) down using a tamping tool. The cheap ones still require you to separate the gelcaps by hand, and replace the covers by hand at the end. It won't make it go much faster than packing the gelcaps one-by-one, but its a lot more enjoyable.

    6. Re:Those aren't the only options... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats just it.... people with ADD/ADHD may have naturaly LOW levels of dopamine which is why such stimulants including amphetamine don't produce the same type of high as they might in those with "normal" brain chemistry. This may also be why such people are more likely to "abuse" recrational drugs as most also increase dopamine levels.

  23. What? no soviet russia or overlord jokes? by ady1 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Slashdot is loosing its touch.

    In soviet russia, cognitive enhanced overlords welcome I?

    1. Re:What? no soviet russia or overlord jokes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Slashdot just regained its self respect

    2. Re:What? no soviet russia or overlord jokes? by david.given · · Score: 2, Funny

      Slashdot is loosing its touch.

      Remember, if you love something, set it lose...

    3. Re:What? no soviet russia or overlord jokes? by ady1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      but if I unplug my computer, it will die :(((

  24. Cognition Dehancer Research by jpmattia · · Score: 1

    Cognition enhancers just make your life more complicated. I'm currently engaged in cognition dehancer research. It's much tastier, too.

    Now if only I could get funding for it...

  25. Setting the Curve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As a few people have touched on above, there are some huge problems with the enthusiasm for these drugs. They are very poorly understood, not least with regard to side effects. So, let's say that the benefit outweighs the risk for people who truly need them (severe disorder, or what have you) - not only are they over-prescribed, but they are widely abused by people with no prescription ... any student at an American university can confirm. By my observation, people who have used too much legal-Speed (Ritalin, Adderall, etc) think and act a lot like people who have used too much Speed-Speed.
    It does improve their performance in the short run though. And what do you think a professor sees? More kids getting more work done in less time - time to assign more problems; it isn't necessarily quality work, but if it was just busy-work to begin with (or it's just a large class), that doesn't matter.

    1. Re:Setting the Curve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      {edit for AC}
      by 'touched on above', I esp. agree w/ penguinisto

  26. Ever tried sleep? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I get roughly 5-6 hours of sleep a night and have had no issues at all. I did notice the "You know you're tired, but you don't think/act like you're tired" thing and yeah it's really odd.
    Instead of drugs have you considered getting an extra 1-2 hours of sleep per night? This is cheaper than taking drugs, does not make you feel odd, and 10 years from now will not be shown to cause cancer/depression/heart disease/... If you are feeling tired during the day the message your body is trying to send you is 'sleep more' not 'take drugs'.
    1. Re:Ever tried sleep? by DeadChobi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, if you've ever been in school, you know that the demands it makes on a person are much greater than a full-time job. Plus there's also the need to have some type of social life outside of work, and for some people a need to cook in order to eat. These things combined mean that there isn't a lot of room in life to sleep.

      What I'm saying is that your solution, although the better one, is not the most feasible one.

      --
      SRSLY.
    2. Re:Ever tried sleep? by Banquo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most nights my job/life don't allow me the time to get extra sleep through the week. But even if it did,..I feel about the same with 5,8,10 or 15 hours of sleep. I'm trying to clean up my life, (eat better, work out more etc..) but feeling tired and unfocused through the day is just the norm for me.

      And yes I've had the full medical battery and exams, aside from needing to lose some weight and having some mild skin allergies I'm 100%

      Also I'm taking this mainly as a neuro enhancer than a "pep pill" and so far it's working great. It really does help out even if I'm fully rested.

    3. Re:Ever tried sleep? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude. I've gone to school full time and worked full time, at the same time. Strangely, I did it without drugs and even managed to get a full night's sleep most night - not to mention promotions and 3.8 avg for the duration.

    4. Re:Ever tried sleep? by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      If you had ever had a real full time job, then you would realise how ridiculous that statement was. I started work at 4 am yesterday, and didn't get home again until 8.30 pm. And that's just the time span, without taking into account the physical and mental nature of doing the job. I can assure you, there is plenty of time for sleep, because you will die without it.
      Work/school are choices, food and sleep are basic necessities. Ignore that at your peril.

    5. Re:Ever tried sleep? by loraksus · · Score: 1

      and 10 years from now will not be shown to cause cancer/depression/heart disease/...

      I can't vouch for cancer or heart disease (although modafinil has been on the market since '86), but modafinil is being used off label to treat depression related fatigue. While anecdotal, it worked incredibly well for me when I was spending 20+ hours a day sleeping and didn't have any of the rather horrific side effects of most of the antidepressants out there. A little heartburn was the only side effect for me.

      That said, working 20 hour days can't be good for your physical / mental health if it goes on for too long.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    6. Re:Ever tried sleep? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      Well, if you've ever been in school, you know that the demands it makes on a person are much greater than a full-time job.
      If you think school is hard wait until you get to University! The trick is to prioritize things - and sleep is something which you DO need to prioritize. A good 8 hours of sleep before an exam will have a far greater impact on your grade than trying to stay up half the night and cramming...at least in my experience both as a student and a prof.
    7. Re:Ever tried sleep? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much weight did you gain during this?

  27. Normal People by PPH · · Score: 1

    Because of such positive effects on normal people... The normal people referenced are Ciba-Geigy stockholders and the positive effects are primarily to their portfolio value.
    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  28. Not that ethically clear by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    These drugs would be immensely beneficial to the human race. And what sane person wouldn't want to be smarter?
    If the decision were that simple there would not be a problem. The question you should be asking is "What person would want to be smarter given the risk of unknown side effects from long term use?". These things are messing with your brain chemistry so side effects could be subtle: suppose they suppress happiness (not cause depression mind you)? Would you want to take them then?

    If there are long term effects, say like early dementia, is it fair for the rest of us to pay for the required health care? There is a big difference between taking drugs to restore normal functionality and enhancing performance of a perfectly healthy human being.
    1. Re:Not that ethically clear by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


      "The question you should be asking is "What person would want to be smarter given the risk of unknown side effects from long term use?""

      Lots.

      IQ has a crushing "Threshold" problem. Either you can perform some function in your enhanced state alone, or not at all. Thus if you ideally bank it properly, you stand to make much more money, and we all know how much fun it is to be poor in this world.

      It's made worse by the entire culture (at least in the US) of valuing short term gains - if our national leaders can't be counted on to follow a wise course and Social Security might not even exist 25 years from now, why should we bother to walk leisurely on the rat wheel?

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  29. Cognition improvement for MS by perkyx1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Personally I'm keen on the idea - from a selfish point of view :-) As I have progressive MS it seems like cognitive problems aren't due soon (hopefully) and will be less than with other forms (again, hopefully) but if there's a hope for something that'll help prevent this - then that's great. Not walking too well is ok, and being a wheelchair user is something I can surely cope with - but difficulty with thinking? That's the most terrifying thing I can imagine.

    1. Re:Cognition improvement for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been dumb all my life, my fear is that I'll lose the other eye ;)

    2. Re:Cognition improvement for MS by jayemcee · · Score: 1

      I worked for a biotech several years ago and we targeted cognition in MS for one smallish study (120 subjects, iirc). Mostly we were targeting mild cognitive impairment (pre-Alzheimers). We were using the left enantiomer of amphetamine (the right is dex) and we saw some decent results, but the company got shut down by investors who weren't happy with the bad press Adderal (a related compound) was getting at the time. On another note, citing number of digits recalled and improved planning is a fairly weak measurement of cognitive status.

    3. Re:Cognition improvement for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was prescribed Provigil to combat MS-related fatigue. It's MOSTLY great. Sometimes actually adds to the fatigue, strangely enough, but usually keeps me sharper and less tired.

      When I don't need it, I don't crave it. More than I can say for coffee!

  30. most people can hold seven random digits by non · · Score: 2, Informative

    i disagree. people can hold however many digits in their head as they are accustomed to holding. to say that the number of digits just _happens_ to coincide with the number of digits in an american phone number is obviously ethnocentric.

    not only that, but people become accustomed to structuring that memory in different manners. is it 2-2-3, or 3-2-2. or 3-4. people remember strings of digits in the patterns that they learned as a child.

    i learned an 11-digit number on first go last weekend, its a swiss telephone number dialed from overseas; 414354#####. what is this bullshit about adding an *extra* digit to one's memory?

    --
    ...vividly encapsulates that post-Watergate/pre-punk/coked-up moment when you could trust no one, least of all yourself.
    1. Re:most people can hold seven random digits by edibleplastic · · Score: 1

      what is this bullshit about adding an *extra* digit to one's memory? Wow, chill out. First of all, the statistic about working memory span being 7+/-2 is simply the average amount that people can recall when given an unstructured list of numbers. Nowhere is anybody saying that one can't remember more than this: a) it's an average and b) it is divorced of context so the subjects may have a harder time chunking the numbers in order to store them hierarchically.

      Second of all, what does it mean to "add an extra digit"? It simply means that *on average* subjects were able to recall an extra digit than before. Guess what, when you're tired you probably recall a digit or two fewer, on average.
    2. Re:most people can hold seven random digits by Veggiesama · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The "magic memory number" is something like 7 +/- 2 digits. So how do you remember 11, how do you remember? How do idiot savants count cards or memorize a hundred digits of pi?

      For the most part, it's called "chunking." You might remember the first three digits of a number as a single part, like an area code. Maybe through repetition or some kind of pattern, those numbers become a single encoded, sometimes even rhythmic, symbol.

      The number you gave was "414354#####". That 414 is a palindrome, so maybe that gets chunked up. Maybe you see mathematical relationships between numbers. 4 + 1 + 4 = 9, and the last 5 + 4 = 9, and both of those sums of 9 are sandwiching a 3. It's nice that 3^2 is 9. Or maybe you flirt with the idea of 4-3=1, then 1+3=4. Then there's that 3 again. 4134. Or perhaps you start with 4, go down 2, up 2, up 1. Maybe you remember that your birthday party on 4/13/04 ended tragically because your 54-yr-old mother stepped on your dog, fell over, and broke her hip. I don't know.

      There's a million little ways you can play number games, and most of them aren't readily understood at the conscious level. We develop feelings and associations for numbers (or words, or other symbols), and sometimes a pattern is more visible in our minds because we've seen and used it elsewhere before. Those of us with more experience simply have a larger "vocabulary" of chunks (see grandmaster chess-players), despite intelligence levels (for the most part).

    3. Re:most people can hold seven random digits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are full of shit, but it's obviously simply because of ignorance. "7" has nothing to do with the length of a telephone number, it's experimentally demonstrated (and is in fact 7±2); as for how you're able to remember longer sequences, look up "chunking". The wrongness here is the assertion that you can remember that many "digits", when actually it's that you can remember that many "things", where what a "thing" is depends heavily on the way you view the information.

  31. My Experiences with Nootroics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have taken just about every nootropic I could get my hands on. It's my personal choice... better living through chemistry and all that. I would say that my favorites are Provigil and the racetams (Piracetam, Aniracetam and Oxiracetam). Provigil (Modafinil) is what I prefer, but when I can't get my hands on it, it's easy to order Olmifon (Adrafanil) legally online from overseas and import. Olmifon is a precursor to Provigil. There are waste by-products, so it's not recommended to use for more than three months without liver tests. In regard to the racetams... I've found the three that I've mentioned to be all useful and unique in their qualities. Piracetam is great for communication. Words flow much easier and eloquence is heightened. Aniracetam is good for anxiety. It's been likened to the relaxation of valium without any grogginess. Oxiracetam is the turbo-booster. Big, huge effects, very quickly. It's like clicking a light switch in your head. Great cognitive enhancer all around. I like this one a lot. For the newly initiated, i would recommend trying Olmifon and Oxiracetam. Also, a good multivitamin including Phosphidatyle Serine is good for overall brain health. I currently take "Higher Mind", which I find to be pretty good. Side effects from all the supplements I've mentioned can vary. At time, any may cause a slight headache which can usually be remedied by eating a carbohydrate loaded meal. Do I feel that the supplements are worth the considerable cost? If I am studying for an exam or if I want that boost, yes. No doubt. For daily use, probably not. Something to keep in mind is that the brain is very clever and can build tolerances to anything, so the effects can wear off or become less noticable with daily use. That's why I try to use Olmifon/Provigil no more than 2 - 3 times per week. The rest of the supplements can be used daily, if desired. Racetams have no known lethal dose and are considered very, very safe.

  32. Beta-blockers also work in this way... by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Beta-blockers medications commonly taken by patients with varying heart conditions, such as Atenolol or Metoprolol, can also generate similar effects in brain function and memory. For example, as a child, I was regularly a D to F student during my middle school and early high school years. But after having been diagnosed with a heart murmur and placed on Atenolol, I suddenly started generating A's and B's in my classes. Although I never really pieced it together until a few years ago, I do know I was able to focus on my work far more easily due to a perceived "slow-down" in my overall personality

    Also, it seemed to improve my ability to work with logic problems, making programming a far simpler task... especially when it came to tracing/debugging my own code.

    --


    8==8 Bones 8==8
  33. A wager? by Chmcginn · · Score: 1

    Gambling is from the devil... string him up, boys.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  34. This is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We used Ritalin to cram for exams in 1959!

  35. off-label use of provigil by acvh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I use it mon-fri as an attention deficit/cognition enhancement supplement. I am able to concentrate on a task more effectively when using it. For me the effects are like cocaine without the euphoria. I don't get jittery or wired, just focused. I have a shrink who has studied provigil extensively as an attention deficit drug, and while it is not yet approved in the US for that use, he believes strongly in it, as do I.

    As do the mice who will choose provigil over food when given a choice.

    Do we need drugs to make our lives "better"? Why not? Our society is no longer based solely on fulfilling basic needs. We work in fabric covered boxes performing tasks that have no direct connection to survival, other than earning money to buy food. If a drug helps us do that then, given the facts about it, we can make an informed decision.

    1. Re:off-label use of provigil by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      As do the mice who will choose provigil over food when given a choice.
      ... other than earning money to buy food. Seems like you demonstrated the problem right there.
      If the mice would rather take a drug than eat, and you think that earning money to buy food is an irrelevance, then I would quit the drug now.
    2. Re:off-label use of provigil by PottedMeat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's far beyond that too.

      This is no different than the insecure chick thinking she'll have a better life by pumping her breasts up with silicon.

      Just keep on payin them folks that are happy to sell you crap that'll make you better at your jobs. Hints of "breeding the big and strong ones" in all this.

      PM

    3. Re:off-label use of provigil by miraboo · · Score: 1

      As do the mice who will choose provigil over food when given a choice. This is not evidence of effectiveness; it is evidence of addiction.
  36. Niacin by wilec · · Score: 1

    I have taken large doses of a B complex for most my life as instructed by a physician in the early 60's as a treatment for hyperactive type behavior. From what I have read the primary active agent is Niacin. The original dose instructions equated to 50mg Niacin a day as a child of six. At age fifty my usual daily dose of Niacin varies from 100 to 200 mg. If I happen to miss a couple days I get noticeably fuzzy headed and sluggish. A single 100mg dose seems to help defuzz me in a couple hours or so. I have noticed similar if a bit slower to act results from Ginkgo as well and take it occasionally. I have also noticed Ginseng taken with either Niacin or Ginkgo seems to help level and extend the benefits as well as reducing the ammonia odor in my first urine of the day probably because it has a diuretic effect and thus simply dilutes my urine.

    wabi-sabi
    matthew

  37. Catch 22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the resulting drugs may also have a benefit to healthy minds.

    Catch 22: A sane person who chooses to fuck up his/her mind with psychoactive drugs is not a sane person.
  38. Re: Nodding off while reading by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Try some mini-experiments. You already have your baseline of "getting drowsy for these activities".

    My hunch is you run your life on the edge of a small chronic sleep-debt, which is the subtle cumulative effects of shaving off small fractions of each night's sleep.

    Pick a weekend and clear your entire schedule. Go to bed with a clock, but the alarm off. (That's so you can glance at the time during the "false-alarm wakeup that you know is too early, and refuse to get up.) Even if you feel guilty/lazy, insist on resting for at least an hour past your "regular" timing.

    Then when you do finally get up, do all your morning things, and have a large heavy-protein breakfast. Then take your coffee/soda/other beverage and lounge in your favorite chair with an *exciting* book.

    Wait for it ... Wait for it ... Ok look, you're drowsy! Okay, fine. That's why you cleared your schedule. "Call the bluff" - take the nap. It's okay to have a nap only 2 hours after you got up!

    So, you get up the second time, and maybe even a third. But eventually, your body will finally grudgingly admit it's rested, and call off the nap-attacks. Then if you succeed in getting through some 60/75 pages of your book, you'll have your key data point. However, the entire first trial could be a washout. That's okay.

    It will take a few weekend trials to learn/train to settle down properly. But eventually, your semi-conscious will start forming the first pathways to that signal of "getting ready to study".

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  39. Re:Corporate Timing Tricks by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


    There's a psychological side to this, separate from the pharma-medical side. It's about managing people's expectations, AND their "feel-good" needs.

    Starting from scratch, "sustainable" speed is always less than perfect top-power speed. So, yes at flawless form you might be able to do something in 2 hours, but corporate america forces workers to deal with weird distractions that for some of us seriously break the flow.

    So, if your manager one day wanders up and asks "can you do that again in 2 hours", the answer is ... NO! Because ... you have to DEPEND on having your flow broken, and the related slowdown. Decide your own timing and reply with the fool-proof timeframe you know you can deliver. (Say, 3.5 hours.)

    Busy managers often trick themselves into asking for things only when it is already a crisis. Gently promote trading "preliminary news" because chances are, they often hear the rumblings of things hours or even days before, but it's not clearly defined.

    I have done well with a "Shell First" approach. With the prelim news, I can start emailing necessary people for their fragment of the setup, build the blank forms, etc. Then when the manager gets his hands on the key data that flips it to "live", you have already done the *boring third* of the work. With only the interesting 2/3 of it left, chances are you can NOW make a deadline of "2 hours".

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  40. Re:Holy crap, (X) digits? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    ... Except it's now up to 10 digits, wih the advent of cell phones.

    For landline calls, you can usually fudge the area code, but cell phones introduce weird new cell-area codes, and half the time people giving you their number forget to even tell you.

    Re: dialing, you can always dial slower, giving yourself those extra seconds to keep looking at the number.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  41. Re: Multi-thrashing by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


    Absolutely, and this has even been in some high profile studies. Multi-tasking is at the employer's convenience. I think it's a weird form of "prisoner's delimma". It was all the vogue for about a decade for multi-T to be "the new wave of work", until the brutal evidence began mounting.

    All I have been able to do is batch similar tasks, and carefully micro-manage minutes of rest in the day.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  42. Re:phone numbers by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


    Your own phone number is in a different class - it's stable for a long time (until you move or change cells, etc.)
    So that single piece of data gets lots of repetition.

    The question at hand was how different people do with fresh new information *with no expectation of remembering it later*. Thus for a study, presented with 10 phone numbers your rate could be much lower. But if you're in an office and need to learn these numbers, then that motivation factor proves to make a difference in the results.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  43. Re: long sequences... by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


    That's hysterical.

    Is this the Lifelock guy's data?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  44. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    quantum structure

    wtF?

  45. Re:Corporate Timing Tricks by TheLink · · Score: 1

    If your middle manager actually does his/her job (i.e. manage), then it's fine giving nonpadded estimates.

    By default pad your estimates significantly (e.g. 3 x ), do not announce stuff is finished before time and assume you have to manage your manager.

    If you give your manager an estimate, and the manager later gives you something significant extra to be finished first, AND still expects your old estimate to hold true, then you know your manager cannot handle the truth.

    If you notice your manager does not pad your estimates when your manager reports to upper management, then you know your manager cannot handle upper management. If your manager tells upper management that X will be done by day Y and it isn't, your manager will end up in trouble, and you are likely to end up in trouble too.

    If after a month or so you notice that your manager actually has a clue, then you can _reduce_ (not eliminate - stuff happens ;) ) the padding on your estimates, and let your manager do his/her job more effectively.

    You don't need to give all managers extremely conservative estimates, some actually know how to do their jobs.

    A manager who does his/her job properly, can get far more work done than one who can't. The team won't need to give estimates like "3 weeks" for stuff that can be done in 3 days, because they can trust the manager to do the right thing.

    --
  46. Soon to be seen at the Science HOF? by PottedMeat · · Score: 1

    Dr. Bonds - Nobel Prize Winner*

    PM

  47. Available now without a prescription smart ! by FromTheAir · · Score: 1
    What is interesting is that there are many natural compounds available now. The drug companies spend a lot of money attempting to copy nature. They try to come up with a slight alteration that allows them to patent a "new" molecule that achieves the same effect as a natural compound.

    Common sense would have us just use the natural compounds but the Medical Industry is not interested because of the low profit margins. So they market that which brings the most revenue not what may be in the best interest of the consumer. Here is a collection of easy to read technical articles and the related chemistry on a number of cognitive enhancers that are already available. http://intelegen.com/nutrients/index.htm#Cognitive_Enhancers/ [intelegen.com] Galantamine, Huperzine, Vinpocetine Rock! This is a short summary of each one: Memory Enhancement and Cognitive Function http://intelegen.com/nutrients/memory_enhancement_and_cognitive.htm/%5Bintelegen.com%5D/

    --
    "an infinite player that has lost his finite mind" ~Infinite Play the Movie (it blends with reality)
  48. Ritalin is a much "cleaner" feeling stimulant.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..than caffeine is. Do some tests with both and you're likely to agree. Also, there are studies that show that caffeine actually decreases the performance of workers. It's also worth keeping in mind that coffee isn't just caffeine, it contains other stimulants (and hundreds of other chemicals).

  49. Quantum Education by toddhisattva · · Score: 1

    huge pharmaceutical companies pay chemical engineers to find a cheap method to produce something found in nature, and thus their quantum structure, and even their chemical composition, can be altered [emphasis added] How does bullshit like this get modded "4 Insightful" ?

    A chemical engineer is going to alter quantum structure?

    Without Heisenberg compensators?!

    Wait, wait, I think I see why an idiot would waste mod points calling this moron "insightful...."

    huge pharmaceutical companies There it is! What a perfect example of education we have here. Bitch about companies and you get an A in any subject!
  50. Mithra Zapine by toddhisattva · · Score: 1

    As a chronic insomniac, I'm never THAT awake, but after two hours of sleep and a provigil, I'm awake enough to drive and take exams. It was bumping into a concrete column in a parking garage that convinced me to get specialist advice regarding insomnia. It took a while to find the right specialist.

    After a year of experimentation with Classic Insomnia Medications we tried mirtazapine (brand is Remeron by Organon), which was invented as a tetracyclic antidepressant but is finding use otherwise, both on- and off-label depending on geography.

    For my insomnia, mirtazapine works as well as the Classics. But with one important distinction - no tolerance. The same dose every night! No need to start the week low, end high, and stay off for the weekend. I developed a regular sleep schedule, a luxury I had never before experienced in my life.

    My worst side effect is munchies, and I suggest keeping a box of low-calorie munchies like cheerios handy. If there are other side effects, I haven't noticed.

    For energy during the day, I don't need anything stronger than lo-carb Monster or coffee plus B vitamins. That's because I can sleep at night.

    Mithra-Zapine is my Savior.
  51. Quantum Discrepancies by hdon · · Score: 1

    Can someone please explain these "quantum" differences that allegedly exist in synthetic drugs and are somehow relevant to my physiology?