Of course, work pressure, post-Christmas financial constraints and time away from family and friends can make us all feel low, however, this can happen on any date depending on our own personal circumstances. Rather than taking a ‘duvet day’ to bail out of commitments on Blue Monday, as the media is suggesting, why not take a more positive stance and engage in some activities that are tried and tested tools to help support better mood? After all, as the evidence suggests, the date or day of the week is unlikely to change these worries for the majority of us. For example, doing some exercise and eating a healthy meal with good company are both scientifically proven to support our mental wellbeing. Low-intensity exercise such as walking sustained over an extended period can help release proteins called neurotrophic factors that improve brain function and support mood, and nutrients such as B12 and Omega 3, are just two of many that have been shown to improve symptoms associated to depression. Our Nutrition Solutions offers more information on nutrition for depression if you want to know more about practical actions you can take yourself through nutrition to prevent or tackle depression.
Some work has been done on estimating the value of IQ, both as net benefits to the possessor (including all zero-sum or negative-sum aspects) and as net positive externalities to the rest of society. The estimates are substantial: in the thousands of dollars per IQ point. But since increasing IQ post-childhood is almost impossible barring disease or similar deficits, and even increasing childhood IQs is very challenging, much of these estimates are merely correlations or regressions, and the experimental childhood estimates must be weakened considerably for any adult - since so much time and so many opportunities have been lost. A wild guess: $1000 net present value per IQ point. The range for severely deficient children was 10-15 points, so any normal (somewhat deficient) adult gain must be much smaller and consistent with Fitzgerald 2012’s ceiling on possible effect sizes (small).
I’ve been taking nootropics on and off for a month, and despite my spurts of productivity, I’m still not 100 percent sure that they’re working. I could well be placebo-ing myself into thinking I'm working harder and focusing better than I typically do. But apparently enough people are feeling some effect, placebo or not, because nootropics start-ups are thriving. There’s truBrain, Nootrobrain, Nootroo, and a host of others. Nootrobox, the company that makes my pills, says that it’s selling "five figures" worth of cognitive supplements monthly to customers that include top Silicon Valley executives and Hollywood moguls.
I’ve spent over a million dollars hacking my own biology. The lion’s share has gone to making my brain produce as much energy as it can. I even wrote a book, Head Strong, about neurofeedback, oxygen deprivation, supplements, deeper sleep, meditation, cold exposure, and about a dozen other brain hacks, and how you can use them to make your brain stronger than you thought possible.
As a result of her years of research in this area, Dr. Lisa proposes a variety of foods that lead to better cognitive functioning and those which, in contrast, minimize cognitive functioning. "The best four foods one can consume to boost brain power are fish, dark leafy green veggies, berries, and water," she explains. And the worst? "Fast food, processed foods and poor quality meat." 
It’s also loaded with vitamin C — in fact, just one cup provides you with 150 percent of your recommended daily intake. Its high-fiber levels mean that you’ll feel full quickly, too. If you’ve only chowed down on overcooked, tasteless broccoli, you’ll love my Crockpot Beef and Broccoli, Creamy Broccoli Soup and Broccoli Pesto Dip — they’ll turn you into a broccoli lover fast!
Interesting however, that there’s no mention of the power of cocoa (chocolate extract) or green tea. I’ve reviewed dozens of studies from Harvard Science as well as internation publications that discuss cocoa in particular. We already know the value of antioxidants in green tea but chocolate seems to be up and coming. I’ve been taking a product called vavalert that combines cocoa and green tea and it’s been working like a miracle.
When I spoke with Sahakian she had just flown from England to Scottsdale, Arizona, to attend a conference, and she was tired. "We may be healthy and high-functioning, and think of ourselves that way," she told me, "but it's very rare that we are actually functioning at our optimal level. Take me. I'm over here and I've got jet lag and I've got to give a talk tonight and perform well in what will be the middle of the night, UK time." She mentioned businessmen who have to fly back and forth across the Atlantic: "The difference between making a deal and not is huge, and they sometimes only have one meeting to try and do it." She added: "We are a society that so wants a quick fix that many people are happy to take drugs."
…researchers have added a new layer to the smart pill conversation. Adderall, they’ve found, makes you think you’re doing better than you actually are….Those subjects who had been given Adderall were significantly more likely to report that the pill had caused them to do a better job….But the results of the new University of Pennsylvania study, funded by the U.S. Navy and not yet published but presented at the annual Society for Neuroscience conference last month, are consistent with much of the existing research. As a group, no overall statistically-significant improvement or impairment was seen as a result of taking Adderall. The research team tested 47 subjects, all in their 20s, all without a diagnosis of ADHD, on a variety of cognitive functions, from working memory-how much information they could keep in mind and manipulate-to raw intelligence, to memories for specific events and faces….The last question they asked their subjects was: How and how much did the pill influence your performance on today’s tests? Those subjects who had been given Adderall were significantly more likely to report that the pill had caused them to do a better job on the tasks they’d been given, even though their performance did not show an improvement over that of those who had taken the placebo. According to Irena Ilieva…it’s the first time since the 1960s that a study on the effects of amphetamine, a close cousin of Adderall, has asked how subjects perceive the effect of the drug on their performance.

All trademarks, registered trademarks and service-marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners. © 2018. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer: The information provided on this site is intended for your general knowledge only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice or treatment for specific medical conditions. You should not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting with a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult your healthcare provider with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your condition. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to this websites published terms of use and all site policies.


And in his followup work, An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance (discussion). Kurzban seems to have successfully refuted the blood-glucose theory, with few dissenters from commenting researchers. The more recent opinion seems to be that the sugar interventions serve more as a reward-signal indicating more effort is a good idea, not refueling the engine of the brain (which would seem to fit well with research on procrastination).↩

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).
Finding a usable product on Amazon caused me some difficulties. I wanted a 500mg magnesium-citrate-only product at <$20 for 120 doses, but I discovered most of the selection for magnesium citrate had sub-500mg doses, involved calcium citrate or other substances like zinc (not necessarily a bad thing, but would confound an experiment), were mostly magnesium oxide rather than citrate, or some still other problem. Ultimately I settled on Solgar’s $13 120x400mg magnesium citrate as acceptable. (To compare with the bulkiness of the LEF vitamin D+l-threonate powder, the Office of Dietary Supplements says magnesium citrate is 16% magnesium, so to get 400mg of magnesium as claimed, would take 2.5g of material, rather than 7g for 200mg; even if l-threonate is absorbed 100% and citrate 50%, the citrate is ahead. The pills turn out to be wider and longer than my 00 pills; if I want to get them into my gel capsules, I have to crush them into fine powder. The powder from one pill turns out to take up 2 00 pills.)
It makes no sense to ban the use of neuroenhancers. Too many people are already taking them, and the users tend to be educated and privileged people who proceed with just enough caution to avoid getting into trouble. Besides, Anjan Chatterjee is right that there is an apt analogy with plastic surgery. In a consumer society like ours, if people are properly informed about the risks and benefits of neuroenhancers, they can make their own choices about how to alter their minds, just as they can make their own decisions about shaping their bodies.

Here’s a thing or two you should know about your brain, so you can have a better understanding of natural brain supplements. This is the most important organ in our body that controls every single action we take. On the other hand, this importance comes at the huge price for our body’s energy levels. Our brain usually requires up to 20% of the body’s energy to function properly. The energy consumption can easily rise above 60%, if your brain engages in a series of intense mental activities.
Articles and information on this website may only be copied, reprinted, or redistributed with written permission (but please ask, we like to give written permission!) The purpose of this Blog is to encourage the free exchange of ideas. The entire contents of this website is based upon the opinions of Dave Asprey, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective authors, who may retain copyright as marked. The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the personal research and experience of Dave Asprey and the community. We will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this site; however, it is impossible to review all messages immediately. All messages expressed on The Bulletproof Forum or the Blog, including comments posted to Blog entries, represent the views of the author exclusively and we are not responsible for the content of any message.
A randomized non-blind self-experiment of LLLT 2014-2015 yields a causal effect which is several times smaller than a correlative analysis and non-statistically-significant/very weak Bayesian evidence for a positive effect. This suggests that the earlier result had been driven primarily by reverse causation, and that my LLLT usage has little or no benefits.
SOURCES: Ray Sahelian, MD. Psychopharmacology, September 2000. Human Psychopharmacology, July 2001; January 2002. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, Summer 2002. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2002. Archives of Neurology, November 1998. Zhongguo Yao Li Xue Bao, July 1999. Pharmacological Research, September 1999. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, March 2003. FDA web site.
Similarly, we could try applying Nick Bostrom’s reversal test and ask ourselves, how would we react to a virus which had no effect but to eliminate sleep from alternating nights and double sleep in the intervening nights? We would probably grouch about it for a while and then adapt to our new hedonistic lifestyle of partying or working hard. On the other hand, imagine the virus had the effect of eliminating normal sleep but instead, every 2 minutes, a person would fall asleep for a minute. This would be disastrous! Besides the most immediate problems like safely driving vehicles, how would anything get done? You would hold a meeting and at any point, a third of the participants would be asleep. If the virus made it instead 2 hours on, one hour off, that would be better but still problematic: there would be constant interruptions. And so on, until we reach our present state of 16 hours on, 8 hours off. Given that we rejected all the earlier buffer sizes, one wonders if 16:8 can be defended as uniquely suited to circumstances. Is that optimal? It may be, given the synchronization with the night-day cycle, but I wonder; rush hour alone stands as an argument against synchronized sleep - wouldn’t our infrastructure would be much cheaper if it only had to handle the average daily load rather than cope with the projected peak loads? Might not a longer cycle be better? The longer the day, the less we are interrupted by sleep; it’s a hoary cliche about programmers that they prefer to work in long sustained marathons during long nights rather than sprint occasionally during a distraction-filled day, to the point where some famously adopt a 28 hour day (which evenly divides a week into 6 days). Are there other occupations which would benefit from a 20 hour waking period? Or 24 hour waking period? We might not know because without chemical assistance, circadian rhythms would overpower anyone attempting such schedules. It certainly would be nice if one had long time chunks in which could read a challenging book in one sitting, without heroic arrangements.↩
The beauty of this stack is that nature has already given us a perfectly packaged combination of caffeine and theanine in the form of green tea, whether a cup of green tea, a bowl of matcha tea, or even a green tea extract supplement as a substitute for a cup of coffee. This is an especially convenient stack to use during a time when you don’t want the excess stimulation of coffee or caffeine in isolation, such as during an evening dinner at a restaurant or in the latter stages of a workday when a cup of coffee might keep you awake too late into the night.

If there is one quality a person needs to achieve great things in life, it’s intelligence. Success comes easier to those who are smart- just ask the many college students who take study drugs they don’t really need to absorb more, work faster, longer and better, and get the good grades they would literally kill for- even if it means they are slowly killing themselves.

REPUTATION: We were blown away by the top-notch reputation that Thrive Naturals has in the industry. From the consumers we interviewed, we found that this company has a legion of loyal brand advocates. Their customers frequently told us that they found Thrive Naturals easy to communicate with, and quick to process and deliver their orders. The company has an amazing track record of customer service and prides itself on its Risk Free No Questions Asked 1-Year Money Back Guarantee. As an online advocate for consumer rights, we were happy to see that they have no hidden fees nor ongoing monthly billing programs that many others try to trap consumers into.
The principal metric would be mood, however defined. Zeo’s web interface & data export includes a field for Day Feel, which is a rating 1-5 of general mood & quality of day. I can record a similar metric at the end of each day. 1-5 might be a little crude even with a year of data, so a more sophisticated measure might be in order. The first mood study is paywalled so I’m not sure what they used, but Shiotsuki 2008 used State-Trait of Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and Profiles of Mood States Test (POMS). The full POMS sounds too long to use daily, but the Brief POMS might work. In the original 1987 paper A brief POMS measure of distress for cancer patients, patients answering this questionnaire had a mean total mean of 10.43 (standard deviation 8.87). Is this the best way to measure mood? I’ve asked Seth Roberts; he suggested using a 0-100 scale, but personally, there’s no way I can assess my mood on 0-100. My mood is sufficiently stable (to me) that 0-5 is asking a bit much, even.
But Baldino may have been overly modest. In 2002, researchers at Cambridge University gave 60 healthy young male volunteers a battery of standard cognitive tests. One group received modafinil, the other a placebo. The modafinil group performed better on several tasks, such as the "digit span" test, in which subjects are asked to repeat increasingly longer strings of numbers forwards, then backwards. They also did better in recognising repeated visual patterns and at a spatial-planning challenge known as the Tower of London task. (It's not nearly as fun as it sounds.) Writing in the journal Psychopharmacology, the study's authors said the results suggested that "modafinil offers significant potential as a cognitive enhancer".
Chatterjee told me that many people who come to his clinic are cognitively preoccupied versions of what doctors call the "worried well". He had just seen a middle-aged woman, a successful Philadelphia lawyer, who mentioned having to struggle a bit to come up with certain names. "Here's an example of someone who by most measures is doing perfectly fine," Chatterjee said. "She's not having any trouble at work. But she notices she's having some problems, and it's very hard to know how much of that is just getting older." Of course, people in her position could strive to get regular exercise and plenty of intellectual stimulation, both of which have been shown to help maintain cognitive function. But maybe they're already doing so and want a bigger mental rev-up, or maybe they want something easier than sweaty workouts and Russian novels: they want a pill.
In addition to this, privilege also plays an important role in this epidemic. "Not everyone has access to eat healthily", she mentions. In fact, she recalls an anecdote in which a supermarket owner noticed how people living off food stamps rarely use them to buy fruits and vegetables. Curious about this trend, the owner approached someone with food stamps, to which she admitted she didn't buy them because she didn't know the price prior to weighing them and felt ashamed of asking. His solution? Pre-cutting and packaging fruits in order to make them more accessible to those with lower incomes. 
"Instead of messing it up, we should be appreciating something that nature has taken years to optimize," Dr. Lisa mentions. But, we aren't messing it up voluntarily or, at the very least, on any conscious or malicious level. She attributes our disregard for neuro-nutrition to a series of factors, which include the portion size of meals, how parents don't have the time to cook or teach children how to eat healthily, the big influence of cafeteria food, and our "always on the go" culture. According to her, this leads us to unconsciously choose meals which are poor quality and high in sugars, a deathly combination for our brains.

The easiest way to use 2mg was to use half a gum; I tried not chewing it but just holding it in my cheek. The first night I tried, this seemed to work well for motivation; I knocked off a few long-standing to-do items. Subsequently, I began using it for writing, where it has been similarly useful. One difficult night, I wound up using the other half (for a total of 4mg over ~5 hours), and it worked but gave me a fairly mild headache and a faint sensation of nausea; these may have been due to forgetting to eat dinner, but this still indicates 3mg should probably be my personal ceiling until and unless tolerance to lower doses sets in.


The placebos can be the usual pills filled with olive oil. The Nature’s Answer fish oil is lemon-flavored; it may be worth mixing in some lemon juice. In Kiecolt-Glaser et al 2011, anxiety was measured via the Beck Anxiety scale; the placebo mean was 1.2 on a standard deviation of 0.075, and the experimental mean was 0.93 on a standard deviation of 0.076. (These are all log-transformed covariates or something; I don’t know what that means, but if I naively plug those numbers into Cohen’s d, I get a very large effect: \frac{1.2 - 0.93}{0.076}=3.55.)
According to the official website, Cognizin is based on Citicoline, which is a highly beneficial nutrient that’s useful for assisting certain brain functions that are related to mental focus and cognitive processing. What’s more, it’s shown to improve your brain’s metabolism regarding the use of acetylcholine, which is an important neurotransmitter involved in the storage and processing of memory.
Brain consumption can result in contracting fatal transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as Variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and other prion diseases in humans and mad cow disease in cattle.[10] Another prion disease called kuru has been traced to a funerary ritual among the Fore people of Papua New Guinea in which those close to the dead would eat the brain of the deceased to create a sense of immortality.[11]

[…] The verdict is out on brain health and aging. Scientists now know that memory loss and cognitive decline are not an inevitable part of growing older. In fact, the research proves quite the contrary. You can keep your mind sharp well into old age with a strategy that combines a healthy, active lifestyle with a brain-protecting diet and brain-boosting supplements. […]


Took pill #6 at 12:35 PM. Hard to be sure. I ultimately decided that it was Adderall because I didn’t have as much trouble as I normally would in focusing on reading and then finishing my novel (Surface Detail) despite my family watching a movie, though I didn’t notice any lack of appetite. Call this one 60-70% Adderall. I check the next evening and it was Adderall.
Sun: This is a day I devote to spiritual disciplines and deep personal exploration, along with a hefty dose of neurogenesis, and for a day such as this, I’ll use a more potent neuron sprouting and ego-dissolving mix – most notably a blend of psilocybin microdose with Lion’s Mane extract and niacin (if the skin flush and increased blood flow from niacin tends to be too much for you, you can also use “nicotinamide riboside”, a form of vitamin B3 that has similar effects without the flushing).

Modafinil is a stimulant specifically designed to reduce fatigue and sleepiness. It was approved for treatment of narcolepsy in 1998, and although the exact mechanism behind its effects is not fully understood, most research indicates that modafinil also works by inhibiting reuptake of dopamine, which produces effects similar to those of methylphenidate. It’s also believed that by inhibiting dopamine uptake, more acetylcholine (another neurotransmitter) is released by the hippocampus, which leads to improved cognitive performance, specifically memory.
Using neuroenhancers, Seltzer said, "is like customising yourself - customising your brain". For some people, he added, it was important to enhance their mood, so they took antidepressants; but for people like him it was more important "to increase mental horsepower". He said: "It's fundamentally a choice you're making about how you want to experience consciousness." Whereas the 1990s had been about "the personalisation of technology", this decade was about the personalisation of the brain - what some enthusiasts have begun to call "mind hacking".
Board-certified neuropsychologist Brian Lebowitz, PhD and associate clinical professor of neurology at Stony Brook University, explains to MensHealth.com that the term "encompasses so many things," including prescription medications. Brain enhancers fall into two different categories: naturally occurring substances like Ginkgo biloba, creatine and phenibut; and manmade prescription drugs, like Adderall, and over-the-counter supplements such as Noopept.
Jump up ^ Greely, Henry; Sahakian, Barbara; Harris, John; Kessler, Ronald C.; Gazzaniga, Michael; Campbell, Philip; Farah, Martha J. (December 10, 2008). "Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy". Nature. Nature Publishing Group. 456 (7223): 702–705. Bibcode:2008Natur.456..702G. doi:10.1038/456702a. ISSN 1476-4687. OCLC 01586310. PMID 19060880. Retrieved March 25, 2014. (Subscription required (help)).
×