Nootropics still exist largely in an unregulated gray area, which makes users somewhat hesitant to discuss their regimens. But I did speak to several people who told tales of increased productivity and sharpened focus. Bob Carter, a financial analyst for a start-up called LendingHome, says that nootropics have replaced his other morning stimulant. “I basically think of it as a substitute for coffee,” he says. “I think the problem with a cappuccino from Starbucks is that it gives you the feeling of being jittery. Whereas with this particular supplement, I feel more calm.”
Hericium erinaceus (Examine.com) was recommended strongly by several on the ImmInst.org forums for its long-term benefits to learning, apparently linked to Nerve growth factor. Highly speculative stuff, and it’s unclear whether the mushroom powder I bought was the right form to take (ImmInst.org discussions seem to universally assume one is taking an alcohol or hotwater extract). It tasted nice, though, and I mixed it into my sleeping pills (which contain melatonin & tryptophan). I’ll probably never know whether the $30 for 0.5lb was well-spent or not.

Professor David O Kennedy published a book in 2014 called Plants and the Human Brain. In his book he summarizes the last 15 years of research into cognitive nutrition, including the work he's done with colleagues at the Brain Performance Nutrition Research Center at Northumbria University. It's a great read and a good guide to what sorts of herbs and other plants to include in our weekly diet and it is all based on hard science rather than mere assertion or trendy but unsubstantiated beliefs.


Recent findings also suggest that taking extra vitamins could help preserve memory, especially as we age. Researchers at Australia's University of Sydney tested 117 people in a retirement home by putting them through a battery of mental tests that included remembering a string of words, listing as many words as possible that begin with a certain letter of the alphabet, and doing mental addition and subtraction. Those who regularly took vitamin C, they found, scored higher on the tests.

Past noon, I began to feel better, but since I would be driving to errands around 4 PM, I decided to not risk it and take an hour-long nap, which went well, as did the driving. The evening was normal enough that I forgot I had stayed up the previous night, and indeed, I didn’t much feel like going to bed until past midnight. I then slept well, the Zeo giving me a 108 ZQ (not an all-time record, but still unusual).
At this point, I discovered I had run out of magnesium pills and had forgotten to order the magnesium citrate powder I’d intended to. I still had a lot of Noopept pills for the concurrently running second Noopept self-experiment, but since I wanted to wrap up some other experiments with a big analysis at the end of the year, I decided to halt and resume in January 2014.
Dr. Mosconi’s book is keystone book for advancing the dialogue and practice of integrative brain health. This is the book I’ve been waiting for. As someone who is obsessed with nutrition, it’s very hard to find REAL research and sound logic. There’s a lot of people who proclaim to be health experts, but few people who can say they are trained in both scientific and holistic approaches. Dr. Mosconi’s book FINALLY gets to the bottom of what we all need to know to take care of our brains.
“Over the years, I have learned so much from the work of Dr. Mosconi, whose accomplished credentials spanning both neuroscience and nutrition are wholly unique. This book represents the first time her studies on the interaction between food and long-term cognitive function reach a general audience. Dr. Mosconi always makes the point that we would eat differently and treat our brains better if only we could see what we are doing to them. From the lab to the kitchen, this is extremely valuable and urgent advice, complete with recommendations that any one of us can take.”
Green tea is widely drunk in many cultures, especially in Asia, and is known to have potent health benefits. These benefits are attributed to its polyphenol content (particularly the flavanols and flavonols). In cell cultures and animal studies, the polyphenols have been proven to prevent neurotoxin-induced cell injury. Green tea also has anti-inflammatory properties and, according to a study performed on aged mice, may delay memory regression. It’s safe to drink several cups of green tea per day, though it may be more efficacious to take a green tea extract supplement to reach a daily dose of 400 to 500 mg of EGCG, one of the main active components of green tea.
However, despite these apparent good results, it’s recommended that you don’t run to the pharmacy just yet. The long term effects of taking Modafinil haven’t been studied conclusively or in-depth yet; to the contrary and in direct opposition to the many claims that Modafinil is completely safe, 50% of modafinil users report a number of short term side effects, such as mild to severe headaches, insomnia, nausea, anxiety, nervousness, hypertension, decreased appetite, and weight loss.

So, I thought I might as well experiment since I have it. I put the 23 remaining pills into gel capsules with brown rice as filling, made ~30 placebo capsules, and will use the one-bag blinding/randomization method. I don’t want to spend the time it would take to n-back every day, so I will simply look for an effect on my daily mood/productivity self-rating; hopefully Noopept will add a little on average above and beyond my existing practices like caffeine+piracetam (yes, Noopept may be as good as piracetam, but since I still have a ton of piracetam from my 3kg order, I am primarily interested in whether Noopept adds onto piracetam rather than replaces). 10mg doses seem to be on the low side for Noopept users, weakening the effect, but on the other hand, if I were to take 2 capsules at a time, then I’d halve the sample size; it’s not clear what is the optimal tradeoff between dose and n for statistical power.

Alex's sense of who uses stimulants for so-called "non-medical" purposes is borne out by two dozen or so scientific studies. In 2005 a team led by Sean Esteban McCabe, a professor at the University of Michigan, reported that in the previous year 4.1% of American undergraduates had taken prescription stimulants for off-label use - at one school the figure was 25%, while a 2002 study at a small college found that more than 35% of the students had used prescription stimulants non-medically in the previous year.


The difference in standard deviations is not, from a theoretical perspective, all that strange a phenomenon: at the very beginning of this page, I covered some basic principles of nootropics and mentioned how many stimulants or supplements follow a inverted U-curve where too much or too little lead to poorer performance (ironically, one of the examples in Kruschke 2012 was a smart drug which did not affect means but increased standard deviations).
Gibson and Green (2002), talking about a possible link between glucose and cognition, wrote that research in the area …is based on the assumption that, since glucose is the major source of fuel for the brain, alterations in plasma levels of glucose will result in alterations in brain levels of glucose, and thus neuronal function. However, the strength of this notion lies in its common-sense plausibility, not in scientific evidence… (p. 185).
Apkarian and colleagues imaged the brains of 68 participants and gave them personality tests. The researchers then randomly assigned the participants to groups that either received no treatment, sugar pills or a pain-killing drug. Those given pills were not told if they received a placebo or an active drug. Participants took the treatment for two weeks, stopped for one week and then repeated this cycle.

But what does this all have to do with food? Our gut helps keep our body’s immune responses and inflammation under control. Additionally, gut hormones that enter the brain or are produced in the brain influence cognitive ability, like understanding and processing new information, staying focused on the task at hand and recognizing when we’re full. (3)
As discussed in my iodine essay (FDA adverse events), iodine is a powerful health intervention as it eliminates cretinism and improves average IQ by a shocking magnitude. If this effect were possible for non-fetuses in general, it would be the best nootropic ever discovered, and so I looked at it very closely. Unfortunately, after going through ~20 experiments looking for ones which intervened with iodine post-birth and took measures of cognitive function, my meta-analysis concludes that: the effect is small and driven mostly by one outlier study. Once you are born, it’s too late. But the results could be wrong, and iodine might be cheap enough to take anyway, or take for non-IQ reasons. (This possibility was further weakened for me by an August 2013 blood test of TSH which put me at 3.71 uIU/ml, comfortably within the reference range of 0.27-4.20.)
Eventually one morning you wake up and realize it has been years since you felt like yourself.  It takes so much more effort than it did before to string thoughts together.  Your clarity is gone, you can never focus for more than two seconds at a time, and penetrating insights have been replaced by a swamp of distraction, confusion, and forgetfulness.  Your thoughts feel frayed, worn—like ragged fabric flapping in the breeze.
[…] The 7 Best Brain Boosting Supplements | Live in the Now … – … much research has indicated that certain supplements can help sustain and promote excellent brain function as we age. The supplements recommended by the Alzheimer’s Prevention and … Take adequate supplements for brain and help your kids to perform well in their tests by enhancing … […]
Microdosing involves ingesting small amounts of psychedelics to induce a very subtle physical and mental effect accompanied by a very noticeable, overall positive, health effect. When you take a microdose of a psychedelic, it is typically referred to as a sub-perceptual dose. A sub-perceptual dose will not have a major impact on your ability to function normally, but the effect will definitely be present in your mood and behavior. The microdose of a particular psychedelic is correlated to the lowest dose that will produce a noticeable effect, which is also known as the threshold dose. Since the goal is not to get a hallucinogenic effect, a microdose can be well below the psychedelics threshold dose. By integrating the correct doses of psychedelics into your weekly routine, you can achieve higher creativity levels, more energy, improved mood, increased focus, and better relational skills. There is a growing body of research that shows microdosing to improve depression, anxiety, PTSD, and emotional imbalance, help with alcohol and tobacco addiction, and decrease ADD and ADHD behaviors.
I was contacted by the Longecity user lostfalco, and read through some of his writings on the topic. I had never heard of LLLT before, but the mitochondria mechanism didn’t sound impossible (although I wondered whether it made sense at a quantity level14151617), and there was at least some research backing it; more importantly, lostfalco had discovered that devices for LLLT could be obtained as cheap as $15. (Clearly no one will be getting rich off LLLT or affiliate revenue any time soon.) Nor could I think of any way the LLLT could be easily harmful: there were no drugs involved, physical contact was unnecessary, power output was too low to directly damage through heating, and if it had no LLLT-style effect but some sort of circadian effect through hitting photoreceptors, using it in the morning wouldn’t seem to interfere with sleep.
Farah told me: "These drugs will definitely help some technically normal people - that is, people who don't meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD or any kind of cognitive impairment." But, she emphasised, "They will help people in the lower end of the ability range more than in the higher end." One explanation for this phenomenon might be that the more adept you are at a given task, the less room you have to improve. Farah has a hunch that there may be another reason that existing drugs - so far, at least - don't offer as much help to people with greater intellectual abilities. Drugs like Ritalin and Adderall work in part by elevating the amount of dopamine in the brain. Dopamine is something you want just enough of: too little, and you may not be as alert and motivated as you need to be; too much, and you may feel overstimulated. Neuroscientists have discovered that some people have a gene that leads the brain to break down dopamine faster, leaving less of it available; such people are generally a little worse at certain cognitive tasks. People with more available dopamine are generally somewhat better at the same tasks. It makes sense, then, that people with naturally low dopamine would benefit more from an artificial boost.
The use of cognition-enhancing drugs by healthy individuals in the absence of a medical indication spans numerous controversial issues, including the ethics and fairness of their use, concerns over adverse effects, and the diversion of prescription drugs for nonmedical uses, among others.[1][2] Nonetheless, the international sales of cognition-enhancing supplements exceeded US$1 billion in 2015 when global demand for these compounds grew.[3]
×