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."
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*
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.
I respond to your sigs
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.
Now the competitors in the national spelling bee tournaments will have to rake a piss test.
What?
Yup, won't be longer before passing a drug test for employment means your results have to come back positive.
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.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
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.
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
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
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
"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
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.
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/
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Help fight spam
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
but if I unplug my computer, it will die :(((
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.
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.
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'.
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."
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.
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.
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.