"Herbs will have several different compounds in them, as opposed to, let's say, a drug like amphetamine, which is basically one compound, one molecule," Sahelian says. "Herbs will have a set of several or several dozen compounds in them. It's difficult to pinpoint which one of them is the most active or whether it's the combination of many of them that are producing the result."
I decided to try out day-time usage on 2 consecutive days, taking the 100mg at noon or 1 PM. On both days, I thought I did feel more energetic but nothing extraordinary (maybe not even as strong as the nicotine), and I had trouble falling asleep on Halloween, thinking about the meta-ethics essay I had been writing diligently on both days. Not a good use compared to staying up a night.
There are plenty of brain supplements on the market, but none with the same combinations of potent and promising ingredients. If you want to maximize your ability to excel  – at everything you do – your brain must be firing on all cylinders – all day, every day. You must protect and preserve your brain function, as it will diminish – it’s the reality of being human.
Whole grains, which you digest slowly, provide fuel for your brain. (Although your brain accounts for only 3 percent of your total body weight, it uses 20 percent of energy.) Rich sources include brown rice, whole wheat bread, quinoa, bran flakes, oats, and barley. According to Science Daily, brain food containing whole grains can boost cardiovascular health, which in turn enhances the flow of blood to the brain. They contain more intact nutrients than processed white flour, including vitamin E, antioxidants, and fiber. When these work together to increase blood flow, the integrity of brain cells is better preserved. To keep your brain sharp, go beyond your diet and incorporate these healthy brain-boosting habits into your routine.

Another factor to consider is whether the nootropic is natural or synthetic. Natural nootropics generally have effects which are a bit more subtle, while synthetic nootropics can have more pronounced effects. It’s also important to note that there are natural and synthetic nootropics. Some natural nootropics include Ginkgo biloba and ginseng. One benefit to using natural nootropics is they boost brain function and support brain health. They do this by increasing blood flow and oxygen delivery to the arteries and veins in the brain.
For example, a study published in the journal Psychopharmacology in 2000 found that ginkgo improved attention. A 2001 study in the journal Human Psychopharmacology suggested that it improves memory. Nevertheless, in a review of studies on ginkgo in healthy people, researchers found no good evidence that it improved mental abilities, according to a 2002 report in Psychopharmacology Bulletin.
The Lynches said that Provigil was a classic example of a related phenomenon: mission creep. In 1998, Cephalon, the pharmaceutical company that manufactures it, received US government approval to market the drug but only for "excessive daytime sleepiness" due to narcolepsy; by 2004, Cephalon had obtained permission to expand the labelling so that it included sleep apnoea and "shift-work sleep disorder". Net sales of Provigil climbed from $196m in 2002 to $988m in 2008.
We’d want 53 pairs, but Fitzgerald 2012’s experimental design called for 32 weeks of supplementation for a single pair of before-after tests - so that’d be 1664 weeks or ~54 months or ~4.5 years! We can try to adjust it downwards with shorter blocks allowing more frequent testing; but problematically, iodine is stored in the thyroid and can apparently linger elsewhere - many of the cited studies used intramuscular injections of iodized oil (as opposed to iodized salt or kelp supplements) because this ensured an adequate supply for months or years with no further compliance by the subjects. If the effects are that long-lasting, it may be worthless to try shorter blocks than ~32 weeks.
Even party drugs are going to work: Biohackers are taking recreational drugs like LSD, psilocybin mushrooms, and mescaline in microdoses—about a tenth of what constitutes a typical dose—with the goal of becoming more focused and creative. Many who’ve tried it report positive results, but real research on the practice—and its safety—is a long way off. “Whether microdosing with LSD improves creativity and cognition remains to be determined in an objective experiment using double-blind, placebo-controlled methodology,” Sahakian says.
Nootropics may seem attractive to anyone who wants to try to improve their cognitive function and is willing to purchase powders, pills and other forms of these natural and synthetic supplements. Nootropic users have their own terminology, referring to measured combinations of nootropics and vitamins and minerals as “stacks.” For instance, Danger and Play, a site for active people, features a stack for beginners.[5] The recipe includes 1600 mg of the piracetam along with recommended dosages of supplements such as ALCAR, rhodiola and magnesium. There are recipes for morning, afternoon and night, thus providing daylong guidance on how to most effectively stack for more energy, greater concentration, and improved information retention. The stack tip specifically states that the ingredients are not addictive, especially if taken in strict accordance with the recipe.
Christopher, love your heart for Pete’s security in who he is to The Lord. So cool. Brother, God does judge. Jesus is even referred to as “the righteous judge” (2 Timothy 4:8). In the first 5 verses of Romans 2, the judgment of God is even mentioned 3 times. Matthew 25:46 speaks of what will happen when God judges – that some “will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” Those who believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior who died for their sins and rose again will be and are “by grace… saved through faith” (Ephesians 2:8-9) in Jesus as such, having their sins forgiven and the righteousness of Jesus credited to them. (Romans 4:22-25) Thank you, Lord!
My answer is that this is not a lot of research or very good research (not nearly as good as the research on nicotine, eg.), and assuming it’s true, I don’t value long-term memory that much because LTM is something that is easily assisted or replaced (personal archives, and spaced repetition). For me, my problems tend to be more about akrasia and energy and not getting things done, so even if a stimulant comes with a little cost to long-term memory, it’s still useful for me. I’m going continue to use the caffeine. It’s not so bad in conjunction with tea, is very cheap, and I’m already addicted, so why not? Caffeine is extremely cheap, addictive, has minimal effects on health (and may be beneficial, from the various epidemiological associations with tea/coffee/chocolate & longevity), and costs extra to remove from drinks popular regardless of their caffeine content (coffee and tea again). What would be the point of carefully investigating it? Suppose there was conclusive evidence on the topic, the value of this evidence to me would be roughly $0 or since ignorance is bliss, negative money - because unless the negative effects were drastic (which current studies rule out, although tea has other issues like fluoride or metal contents), I would not change anything about my life. Why? I enjoy my tea too much. My usual tea seller doesn’t even have decaffeinated oolong in general, much less various varieties I might want to drink, apparently because de-caffeinating is so expensive it’s not worthwhile. What am I supposed to do, give up my tea and caffeine just to save on the cost of caffeine? Buy de-caffeinating machines (which I couldn’t even find any prices for, googling)? This also holds true for people who drink coffee or caffeinated soda. (As opposed to a drug like modafinil which is expensive, and so the value of a definitive answer is substantial and would justify some more extensive calculating of cost-benefit.)

One should note the serious caveats here: it is a small in vitro study of a single category of human cells with an effect size that is not clear on a protein which feeds into who-knows-what pathways. It is not a result in a whole organism on any clinically meaningful endpoint, even if we take it at face-value (many results never replicate). A look at followup work citing Rapuri et al 2007 is not encouraging: Google Scholar lists no human studies of any kind, much less high-quality studies like RCTs; just some rat followups on the calcium effect. This is not to say Rapuri et al 2007 is a bad study, just that it doesn’t bear the weight people are putting on it: if you enjoy caffeine, this is close to zero evidence that you should reduce or drop caffeine consumption; if you’re taking too much caffeine, you already have plenty of reasons to reduce; if you’re drinking lots of coffee, you already have plenty of reasons to switch to tea; etc.


Panax ginseng – A review by the Cochrane Collaboration concluded that "there is a lack of convincing evidence to show a cognitive enhancing effect of Panax ginseng in healthy participants and no high quality evidence about its efficacy in patients with dementia."[36] According to the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, "[a]lthough Asian ginseng has been widely studied for a variety of uses, research results to date do not conclusively support health claims associated with the herb."[37]
×