I split the 2 pills into 4 doses for each hour from midnight to 4 AM. 3D driver issues in Debian unstable prevented me from using Brain Workshop, so I don’t have any DNB scores to compare with the armodafinil DNB scores. I had the subjective impression that I was worse off with the Modalert, although I still managed to get a fair bit done so the deficits couldn’t’ve been too bad. The apathy during the morning felt worse than armodafinil, but that could have been caused by or exacerbated by an unexpected and very stressful 2 hour drive through rush hour and multiple accidents; the quick hour-long nap at 10 AM was half-waking half-light-sleep according to the Zeo, but seemed to help a bit. As before, I began to feel better in the afternoon and by evening felt normal, doing my usual reading. That night, the Zeo recorded my sleep as lasting ~9:40, when it was usually more like 8:40-9:00 (although I am not sure that this was due to the modafinil inasmuch as once a week or so I tend to sleep in that long, as I did a few days later without any influence from the modafinil); assuming the worse, the nap and extra sleep cost me 2 hours for a net profit of ~7 hours. While it’s not clear how modafinil affects recovery sleep (see the footnote in the essay), it’s still interesting to ponder the benefits of merely being able to delay sleep19.
I stayed up late writing some poems and about how [email protected] kills, and decided to make a night of it. I took the armodafinil at 1 AM; the interesting bit is that this was the morning/evening after what turned out to be an Adderall (as opposed to placebo) trial, so perhaps I will see how well or ill they go together. A set of normal scores from a previous day was 32%/43%/51%/48%. At 11 PM, I scored 39% on DNB; at 1 AM, I scored 50%/43%; 5:15 AM, 39%/37%; 4:10 PM, 42%/40%; 11 PM, 55%/21%/38%. (▂▄▆▅ vs ▃▅▄▃▃▄▃▇▁▃)
I follow Jesus and use nootropics to help me glorify God with my mind. Many conservative Christians would say that micro-dosing on LSD is a sin because it is somewhat mind altering and we are called to be sober-minded (1 Peter 5:8). I am just curious. I have a follow Christian brother who uses cannabis as a supplement to help him do work on a daily basis..yet I worry about him sometimes because his tolerance is so high. It’s a grey area for sure because the Bible isn’t explicit about the topic.
To our partners, community supporters, and funders: The Brainfood journey has taken us many places, and at each fork in the road we discovered an amazing network of youth advocates ready to help lift our work to the next level. Whether you donated pro-bono consulting hours, connected us to allies in the city, or came in to meet our students and see a class, you helped us build something really special. Thanks for believing in us.
As it happened, Health Supplement Wholesalers (since renamed Powder City) offered me a sample of their products, including their 5g Noopept powder ($13). I’d never used HSW before & they had some issues in the past; but I haven’t seen any recent complaints, so I was willing to try them. My 5g from batch #130830 arrived quickly (photos: packaging, powder contents). I tried some (tastes just slightly unpleasant, like an ultra-weak piracetam), and I set about capping the fluffy white flour-like powder with the hilariously tiny scoop they provide.
How exactly – and if – nootropics work varies widely. Some may work, for example, by strengthening certain brain pathways for neurotransmitters like dopamine, which is involved in motivation, Barbour says. Others aim to boost blood flow – and therefore funnel nutrients – to the brain to support cell growth and regeneration. Others protect brain cells and connections from inflammation, which is believed to be a factor in conditions like Alzheimer's, Barbour explains. Still others boost metabolism or pack in vitamins that may help protect the brain and the rest of the nervous system, explains Dr. Anna Hohler, an associate professor of neurology at Boston University School of Medicine and a fellow of the American Academy of Neurology.
Price discrimination is aided by barriers such as ignorance and oligopolies. An example of the former would be when I went to a Food Lion grocery store in search of spices, and noticed that there was a second selection of spices in the Hispanic/Latino ethnic food aisle, with unit prices perhaps a fourth of the regular McCormick-brand spices; I rather doubt that regular cinnamon varies that much in quality. An example of the latter would be using veterinary drugs on humans - any doctor to do so would probably be guilty of medical malpractice even if the drugs were manufactured in the same factories (as well they might be, considering economies of scale). Similarly, we can predict that whenever there is a veterinary drug which is chemically identical to a human drug, the veterinary drug will be much cheaper, regardless of actual manufacturing cost, than the human drug because pet owners do not value their pets more than themselves. Human drugs are ostensibly held to a higher standard than veterinary drugs; so if veterinary prices are higher, then there will be an arbitrage incentive to simply buy the cheaper human version and downgrade them to veterinary drugs.
The fact is, many of these compounds in small amounts and less frequent use can be relatively safe, but as you’re probably not surprised to hear, I’m not 100% convinced of the overall long-term safety or efficacy of most smart drugs used frequently or in moderate to high dosages for the reasons stated above. It is true that some are slightly less risky than others and are increasing in popularity among biohackers and medical professionals. They’re also becoming used with high frequency by students, athletes and e-gamers, three populations for which smart drug “doping control” is becoming more frequently banned and considered to be illegal use of performance-enhancing drugs. Yes, “brain doping” and “brain PED’s” (brain Performance Enhancing Drugs) are now a thing. But I’d consider carefully the use of smart drugs as daily go-to brain enhancing supplements, especially in light of the safer alternative you’re about to discover: the entire category of natural and synthetic nootropic compounds.
If you are a slow caffeine metabolizer and consume too much caffeine, you run the risk of mild to severe complications, such as cardiovascular disease. There’s also the sleep disruption problem of having too much caffeine left in your bloodstream late in the day as a result of a longer caffeine half-life, a problem not faced by fast caffeine metabolizers (it’s so unfair if you love your cup of joe, right?). In addition, fast caffeine metabolizers actually run a reduced risk of cardiovascular complications if they consume at least one cup of coffee per day. While anyone can be a slow caffeine metabolizer, there are certain ethnic backgrounds that are indeed associated with slower and faster caffeine metabolisms. For example, it’s known that people with Asian and African ethnic backgrounds generally have slower rates of caffeine metabolism. To find out if you’re a fast or slow caffeine metabolizer, you can have a relatively inexpensive salivary genetic test performed by a company like 23andme and then use the online dashboard to jump straight to your CYP1A2 gene. When you’re there, you type into the search bar “rs762551”. If your rs762551 SNP variant is AA, then you’re a fast caffeine metabolizer, but if your variant is AC or CC, you’re a slow caffeine metabolizer. Fortunately, many genetic testing companies will now simply report directly on your results whether you’re a slow or fast metabolizer, without you needing to go through the SNP searching trouble.
Like everything else in your body, the brain cannot work without energy. The ability to concentrate and focus comes from an adequate, steady supply of energy - in the form of glucose in our blood to the brain. Achieve this by choosing wholegrains with a low-GI, which release glucose slowly into the bloodstream, keeping you mentally alert throughout the day. Opt for 'brown' wholegrain cereals, granary bread, rice and pasta.
Finally, it’s not clear that caffeine results in performance gains after long-term use; homeostasis/tolerance is a concern for all stimulants, but especially for caffeine. It is plausible that all caffeine consumption does for the long-term chronic user is restore performance to baseline. (Imagine someone waking up and drinking coffee, and their performance improves - well, so would the performance of a non-addict who is also slowly waking up!) See for example, James & Rogers 2005, Sigmon et al 2009, and Rogers et al 2010. A cross-section of thousands of participants in the Cambridge brain-training study found caffeine intake showed negligible effect sizes for mean and component scores (participants were not told to use caffeine, but the training was recreational & difficult, so one expects some difference).
Paul McHugh, a psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins University, has written sceptically about cosmetic neurology. In a 2004 essay he notes that at least once a year in his private practice he sees a young person - usually a boy - whose parents worry that his school performance could be better and want a medication that will assure it. In most of these cases "the truth is that the son does not have the superior IQ of his parents", though the boy may have other qualities that surpass those of his parents - he may be "handsome, charming, athletic, graceful". McHugh sees his job as trying to get the parents to "forget about adjusting him to their aims, with medication or anything else".
Nootropics (/noʊ.əˈtrɒpɪks/ noh-ə-TROP-iks) (colloquial: smart drugs and cognitive enhancers) are drugs, supplements, and other substances that may improve cognitive function, particularly executive functions, memory, creativity, or motivation, in healthy individuals. While many substances are purported to improve cognition, research is at a preliminary stage as of 2018, and the effects of the majority of these agents are not fully determined.