193 replies to this topic

[joelski28]

Fortfun do you have proof. when you do you can talk. Otherwise stfu.

Edited by joelski28, 26 February 2012 - 02:33 PM.

[FortFun]

joelski28, on 26 February 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

Fortfun do you have fucking proof. then shut the fuck up. simple as that. speculate all you want mr scientifc profressional but ultamately you don't know. Do you? you don't know. you don't know. So in the end if it is published and verified you'll feel like big ol piece of dump. If not. Then your still a big ol piece of dump because people have benefitted from this thread. Fucking skeptics with everything. Your on a forum. IF you don't believe. leave.

lol.  I think you are in the wrong place joelski.  Try this search...

http://www.google.co...iw=1680&bih=985

You'll find friends there.

BTW, just so you know, your nootropics stack obviously isn't working.  Good luck in your future endeavors.

-fortfun

"If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts, he shall end in certainties."
Francis Bacon (1605) The Advancement of Learning, Book 1, v, 8

Edited by FortFun, 26 February 2012 - 02:33 PM.

[Tomas E]

Can people stay on the topic insted of all this hate, if you think its all a hoax fine by me, but there are ppl here who have gotten help and its working for them, really dont get why some are behaving really bad, either believe it or dont.

[joelski28]

Its ok Fortfront is known for attacking people all over the board. He clearly thinks he is god. Have you tried the methods at all with any success? Just curious or are you just making statement due to the way the the studies were done whether this is a standard way or not. Just took Piracetam and Calcium and it definetly working. Been taking piracetam 4-5 years. Never found anything online that says supplementing calcium would increase efficiency. Oh wait I see a spelling error. Stack must not be working.

[ScienceGuy]

Novotropic, on 26 February 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

Let's all stay cool here.

I think we all agree that at this point the claims made by Hyperspace have not been verified. The main difference between the skeptics and the believers is that believers think that "it won't hurt, it might help", that is, believers wouldn't mind so much if the claims turn out to be false, and would value an improvement in their piracetam very highly. The skeptics value truth more than anything, and think it would be very bad if a false claim would get accepted here. The latter is the more scientific stance, because in science we aim to not accept something as fact until we are very certain of it. Untill then, it's speculation.

I've PMed Hyperspace and manic_racetam (moderator), and asked for the email of a supervisor at MIT. If I can verify his claims with a scientist employed by MIT, then we can start to discuss his experiments by their scientific merit, instead of having to question if the experiments have been performed at all. At that point, we can all stop the ad-hominems because the subject is then the quality of the experiments, and the question what conclusions we can draw from them, and not the reliability of Hyperspace21 himself.

Cheers

SECONDED

Please can everyone CALM DOWN   

I wholeheartedly agree that the most sensible and obvious course of action is for a MODERATOR to verify that Hyperspace is indeed 'on the level' so to speak via communication with Hyperspace's supervisor and/or a scientist employed by MIT.

In the interim please can everyone cease with the BRAWLING and try to keep posts POSITIVE

Also, please let's put things into perspective, in that Hyperspace is essentially suggesting supplementing with 10-100mg of L-GLUTAMIC ACID and CALCIUM when taking PIRACETAM, and irrespective of the validity of his STUDY REPORT, doing so does not pose any risk whatsoever to anyone

Edited by ScienceGuy, 26 February 2012 - 05:58 PM.

[capctr]

Thanks Scienceguy, and the other posters who are calling for cooler heads.
Look Fortfun, I apologize for sounding so rude-but you have to look at this from a different perspective. I don't know why everybody takes Piracetam, but I do it because I want very much to improve my quality of life, thus I find myself willing to give the benefit of the doubt to somebody who sounds like they know what they are talking about. When you consider that his suggestions involve drinking more milk(calcium), and taking L-glutamate, how is that a problem? Its not as if he is saying something like:" If you cut your Piracetam with arsenic and cocaine, you will have a life-altering experience"(which, now that I think of it, is probably true).
Is hyperspace21 legit? I sure hope so, it would be nice to know that someplace like MIT would approve an in depth study on this subject, it is how advancements actually happen. I suppose that until we have whatever empirical evidence supporting his claims, I will just keep my fingers crossed.

[ScienceGuy]

capctr, on 26 February 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

Its not as if he is saying something like: "If you cut your Piracetam with arsenic and cocaine...

Am I the only person who does that then?

[joelski28]

I apologize for being a dick I went overboard and just have issues with people that would rather pick apart others rather than just using the information.

I have a question relating to the talking to hyperspace or anyone. I've been dosing low dose (50-100mg) glutamate  and it seems to give me a little anxiety

Is this typical. I know in phenibut withdrawal there is supposedly excessive glutamate and dopamine so I'm wondering if its the same thing as dosing too much glutamic acid.

I"ve been sticking just to calcium lately and its been working great. I must of been seriously defiecent because it has improved. I was very skeptical how effective this was going to work so I know that this is not a placebo. Thanks. BTW i'm a 29 year old college student. Do I need to put my GPA and acceptance letter in my profile now? Ok i'm done. Sometimes its all just in good fun on the interenet, I'd like to request that the Mods delete all of my Outbursts and other in order to keep this thread clean. If that could be done. Then If Hyper never proves himself well just have to say that it was a test that was tried and these seemed to be the results but are not scientifically proven, even though this just seems to be a premilminarly study. Maybe this will open up for more studies if it becomes known in any researching facilites. Then we will have absolute proof. Hyper seems too integrous to be lying but I could be wrong. Oh well. Sorry again for my jekyl and hyde performance.

[vlipm0de]

Yep! am definitly unfollowing this thread
I can understand that putting something unverified on the board could raise alarmbells...but my scam detector havent really picked up Hyperspaces comments as BS...
So maybe you guys should give him the benefit of the doubt. I agree that Hyperspace would be best of to bust the myth and just give some sort of MIT validation...

But again... I believe that people are so Jade nowadays because they dont really understand how somebody in his right mind could "possibly" help someone out without asking for returns.
Advice should be taken as just that ...Advice , It just happens to be the case that Hyperspace is trying to Validate its arguments with unverified proof.. and i think that that is really worrying people

[FortFun]

The supplements industry is a fairly unregulated business and on the fringes (e.g. Nootropics) it tends to attract the unscrupulous looking to make a buck.  The problem is it is fairly easy for vendors to game the system through forums like this one with a circle jerk of fake accounts and claims.  Someone says they are from MIT doing a piracetam study and that now calcium supplements are crucial for piracetam to work.  A couple new accounts chime in and suddenly through the forum echo chamber, the tried & true stack of choline/piracetam now needs calcium.  The MIT account becomes the expert for all things Nootropic (plus he is now suggesting the benefits of creatine) and what do you know, some vendor posts the best deal on calcium, creatine, etc.

If you don't think this happens then you have not been on any supplement forums for very long or you are extremely naive.

Obviously, this type of behavior is impossible to entirely eliminate.  Forums work when people exchange ideas and treat claims skeptically.  The more outrageous the claim, the more skeptical we should be, especially with substances we ingest into our bodies.  The placebo effect is not science fiction, it is significant especially with respect to brain science.  You do no one any favors when you jump in and claim that you tried calcium or any other addition to your stack this morning with great results.  If you want some credibility tell us exactly what your stack has been for how long.  If you change it, then stick with the change and reports results over time.  This is common sense, so please don't take offense when you are called out for lacking it.

Sure Calcium/Glutamate is 'probably' not dangerous to add to your stack.  But you entirely miss the point if that is your focus, and I would strongly suggest that you are setting yourself up for dangerous results if you are managing your stack going forward based on claims like this one.

Hyperspace21 has made a pretty incredulous claim.  That he is working for MIT on a $5 million Piracetam study.  After basically 1 month, he has such important results that he wants to post here outside of the study structure.  Calcium/Glutamate or whatever.

This defies logic.  If I am wrong, then great!  But if we don't want vendors playing their little games here with our health and our pocketbooks then we all need to show a little more skepticism with incredulous claims like hyperspace21's.

-fortfun

[capctr]

I have seen this with bodybuilding supps, so I could not argue with you even if I wanted to.

[semi-retarded-individual]

FortFun, on 27 February 2012 - 03:27 AM, said:

The supplements industry is a fairly unregulated business and on the fringes (e.g. Nootropics) it tends to attract the unscrupulous looking to make a buck.  The problem is it is fairly easy for vendors to game the system through forums like this one with a circle jerk of fake accounts and claims.  Someone says they are from MIT doing a piracetam study and that now calcium supplements are crucial for piracetam to work.  A couple new accounts chime in and suddenly through the forum echo chamber, the tried & true stack of choline/piracetam now needs calcium.  The MIT account becomes the expert for all things Nootropic (plus he is now suggesting the benefits of creatine) and what do you know, some vendor posts the best deal on calcium, creatine, etc.

If you don't think this happens then you have not been on any supplement forums for very long or you are extremely naive.

Obviously, this type of behavior is impossible to entirely eliminate.  Forums work when people exchange ideas and treat claims skeptically.  The more outrageous the claim, the more skeptical we should be, especially with substances we ingest into our bodies.  The placebo effect is not science fiction, it is significant especially with respect to brain science.  You do no one any favors when you jump in and claim that you tried calcium or any other addition to your stack this morning with great results.  If you want some credibility tell us exactly what your stack has been for how long.  If you change it, then stick with the change and reports results over time.  This is common sense, so please don't take offense when you are called out for lacking it.

Sure Calcium/Glutamate is 'probably' not dangerous to add to your stack.  But you entirely miss the point if that is your focus, and I would strongly suggest that you are setting yourself up for dangerous results if you are managing your stack going forward based on claims like this one.

Hyperspace21 has made a pretty incredulous claim.  That he is working for MIT on a $5 million Piracetam study.  After basically 1 month, he has such important results that he wants to post here outside of the study structure.  Calcium/Glutamate or whatever.

This defies logic.  If I am wrong, then great!  But if we don't want vendors playing their little games here with our health and our pocketbooks then we all need to show a little more skepticism with incredulous claims like hyperspace21's.

-fortfun

I like that we have people like hyperspace adding new ideas to old discussions but what I like even more is that we have members like this who aren't afraid to challenge others to think critically.

Hyperspace may be everything he says he is, but fortfun is right, a new member joins making some pretty bold statements and within only a couple of weeks he has amassed a group of implicit followers.

It's easy to have discussions like these get carried away and I like knowing there are members here who aren't afraid to be the dissenting voice.

[ScienceGuy]

FortFun, on 27 February 2012 - 03:27 AM, said:

The supplements industry is a fairly unregulated business and on the fringes (e.g. Nootropics) it tends to attract the unscrupulous looking to make a buck.  The problem is it is fairly easy for vendors to game the system through forums like this one with a circle jerk of fake accounts and claims.  Someone says they are from MIT doing a piracetam study and that now calcium supplements are crucial for piracetam to work.  A couple new accounts chime in and suddenly through the forum echo chamber, the tried & true stack of choline/piracetam now needs calcium.  The MIT account becomes the expert for all things Nootropic (plus he is now suggesting the benefits of creatine) and what do you know, some vendor posts the best deal on calcium, creatine, etc.

If you don't think this happens then you have not been on any supplement forums for very long or you are extremely naive.

Obviously, this type of behavior is impossible to entirely eliminate.  Forums work when people exchange ideas and treat claims skeptically.  The more outrageous the claim, the more skeptical we should be, especially with substances we ingest into our bodies.  The placebo effect is not science fiction, it is significant especially with respect to brain science.  You do no one any favors when you jump in and claim that you tried calcium or any other addition to your stack this morning with great results.  If you want some credibility tell us exactly what your stack has been for how long.  If you change it, then stick with the change and reports results over time.  This is common sense, so please don't take offense when you are called out for lacking it.

Sure Calcium/Glutamate is 'probably' not dangerous to add to your stack.  But you entirely miss the point if that is your focus, and I would strongly suggest that you are setting yourself up for dangerous results if you are managing your stack going forward based on claims like this one.

Hyperspace21 has made a pretty incredulous claim.  That he is working for MIT on a $5 million Piracetam study.  After basically 1 month, he has such important results that he wants to post here outside of the study structure.  Calcium/Glutamate or whatever.

This defies logic.  If I am wrong, then great!  But if we don't want vendors playing their little games here with our health and our pocketbooks then we all need to show a little more skepticism with incredulous claims like hyperspace21's.

-fortfun

I agree with your philosophy, though it is interesting to note that Hyperspace has recommended DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK to obtain the claimed necessary CALCIUM as opposed to buying a CALCIUM SUPPLEMENT from 'HIS SHOP'; and as such this would tend to punch a rather large hole in your theory regards his intentions of attaining financial gain?

Personally, I like to employ the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY" (ever heard of that? ); as opposed to encouraging a mob of people to grab pitchforks and fire torches with the intention of burning down his house (please excuse the cheesy analogy)

Whilst I most certainly do wholeheartedly agree that it is of paramount importance to verify the validity of Hyperspace's STUDY REPORT, please kindly note that in the interim it is NOT in fact going to do anyone any harm whatsoever if they DRINK A GLASS OF MILK with their PIRACETAM is it? As such, there is no need to PANIC, so please can we kindly go about obtaining the necessary verification NICELY as opposed to with a SLEDGE HAMMER?    i.e. In the spirit of the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY", please kindly withhold usage of the SLEDGE HAMMER until AFTER if it is PROVEN that Hyperspace is telling porkies

[FortFun]

ScienceGuy, on 27 February 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

I agree with your philosophy, though it is interesting to note that Hyperspace has recommended DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK to obtain the claimed necessary CALCIUM as opposed to buying a CALCIUM SUPPLEMENT from 'HIS SHOP'; and as such this would tend to punch a rather large hole in your theory regards his intentions of attaining financial gain?

Personally, I like to employ the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY" (ever heard of that? ); as opposed to encouraging a mob of people to grab pitchforks and fire torches with the intention of burning down his house (please excuse the cheesy analogy)

Whilst I most certainly do wholeheartedly agree that it is of paramount importance to verify the validity of Hyperspace's STUDY REPORT, please kindly note that in the interim it is NOT in fact going to do anyone any harm whatsoever if they DRINK A GLASS OF MILK with their PIRACETAM is it? As such, there is no need to PANIC, so please can we kindly go about obtaining the necessary verification NICELY as opposed to with a SLEDGE HAMMER?    i.e. In the spirit of the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY", please kindly withhold usage of the SLEDGE HAMMER until AFTER if it is PROVEN that Hyperspace is telling porkies

BrainScience,

You can not say you agree with my philosophy and then spend 2 paragraphs shouting at us that hyperspace should be "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"!!!

It is also totally disingenuous of you to state that all we have been discussing is "DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK" when both you and Hyperspace have repeatedly advocated taking L-GLUTAMIC ACID supplements.  This is a fact.

As I stated, this whole thread extremely suspicious and you have done nothing but contribute to the circle jerk.  Give it a rest.

-fortfun

[ScienceGuy]

FortFun, on 27 February 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

ScienceGuy, on 27 February 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

I agree with your philosophy, though it is interesting to note that Hyperspace has recommended DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK to obtain the claimed necessary CALCIUM as opposed to buying a CALCIUM SUPPLEMENT from 'HIS SHOP'; and as such this would tend to punch a rather large hole in your theory regards his intentions of attaining financial gain?

Personally, I like to employ the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY" (ever heard of that? ); as opposed to encouraging a mob of people to grab pitchforks and fire torches with the intention of burning down his house (please excuse the cheesy analogy)

Whilst I most certainly do wholeheartedly agree that it is of paramount importance to verify the validity of Hyperspace's STUDY REPORT, please kindly note that in the interim it is NOT in fact going to do anyone any harm whatsoever if they DRINK A GLASS OF MILK with their PIRACETAM is it? As such, there is no need to PANIC, so please can we kindly go about obtaining the necessary verification NICELY as opposed to with a SLEDGE HAMMER?    i.e. In the spirit of the philosophy "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY", please kindly withhold usage of the SLEDGE HAMMER until AFTER if it is PROVEN that Hyperspace is telling porkies

BrainScience,

You can not say you agree with my philosophy and then spend 2 paragraphs shouting at us that hyperspace should be "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"!!!

Hey FortFun,

I am not going to get into an argument with you.

Please kindly note that when I said "I agree with your philosophy" I was specifically referring to the philosophy of verifying the validity of Hyperspace's REPORT / CLAIMS. Upon re-reading my posting back it seems that I did not make this very clear, so for that I apologise.

However, I stand by what I have said about employing the philosophy of "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"; do you disagree with this philosophy? Please confirm.

FortFun, on 27 February 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

It is also totally disingenuous of you to state that all we have been discussing is "DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK" when both you and Hyperspace have repeatedly advocated taking L-GLUTAMIC ACID supplements. This is a fact.

Please kindly note that I was specifically referring to the CALCIUM / DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK in response to your implication that Hyperspace is peddling CALCIUM SUPPLEMENTS and created this thread as a MARKETING TOOL to persuade people to purchase them for the purposes of financial gain.

Your accusation that I have stated "all we have been discussing is "DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK" " is wholly factually incorrect. Please kindly see this recent post of mine, which is self-explanatory:

ScienceGuy, on 26 February 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

...please let's put things into perspective, in that Hyperspace is essentially suggesting supplementing with 10-100mg of L-GLUTAMIC ACID and CALCIUM when taking PIRACETAM, and irrespective of the validity of his STUDY REPORT, doing so does not pose any risk whatsoever to anyone

And finally with regards to the following:

ScienceGuy, on 26 February 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

As I stated, this whole thread extremely suspicious and you have done nothing but contribute to the circle jerk. Give it a rest.

-fortfun

I again ask you to please put things into perspective, in that Hyperspace, irrespective of the validity of his STUDY / CLAIMS, has said nothing that poses any health risk to anyone. So, please CALM DOWN, stop with all the AGGRESSION and calling people names, and follow YOUR OWN philosophy , namely:

FortFun, on 26 February 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

...cooler heads prevail!

-fortfun

Edited by ScienceGuy, 27 February 2012 - 12:59 PM.

[scouser]

Such a pity

This thread started off as a valuable resource with dicussions from the regular guys here, those who are happy to help; helpful to those of us who are new to the world of nootropics and even when we have what may seem the most basic of questions people here are happy to guide us towards making an informed choice.

Now, I know that we all have our own oppinions but as a result of the 'slagging off' by some forum users here, this thread has become heavy and the thought of now trawling throught to seperate the wheat from the chaff is daunting.

But hey, if its worth having :-)

But once again I tip a nod to those guys here who are always willing to help in the most constructive of ways

Thanks

[Hyperspace21]

FortFun, on 27 February 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

It is also totally disingenuous of you to state that all we have been discussing is "DRINKING A GLASS OF MILK" when both you and Hyperspace have repeatedly advocated taking L-GLUTAMIC ACID supplements.  This is a fact.

As I stated, this whole thread extremely suspicious and you have done nothing but contribute to the circle jerk.  Give it a rest.

-fortfun

Facts:

• I have never asked anyone to supplement anything unless they were sensitive/allergic to some of the food items this includes milk (source of calcium), meat (source of glutamic acid), whey protein (source of glutamic acid), nuts (source of calcium), green leafy vegetables (source of calcium). I even recommended obtaining calcium and glutamic acid/glutamate through natural foods, over supplementation.
  
• The reports obviously cannot be used for scientific purposes since they have been retyped and shortened. So they obviously will not look scientific. The original reports are about 20 pages long and contain information that can cause legal issues if revealed.
  
• I always said that people are smart enough to know what's best for them so it's their decision to take the advices or to ignore them.
  
• Since the advice has worked for many people (who have decided to follow it); there is no doubt that the research is fake since this kind of experiment has not been conducted before. So it would be impossible to formulate the advice, without proper research.
  
• The aim of the research is not towards nootropics. It's aim is towards a cure for cellular level diseases.

Reasons:

• The reason why I decided to post this thread is because, nootropics work on brain cells (neurons) which is related to our research,but, we soon found out that many people were also not being able to use these compounds properly which led us to think that there are some factors affecting piracetam's functions. The results of the research could help many people if they decided to follow the given advice. Skeptics were kept out of mind since the decision to follow the advice was absolutely free, so there was no reason to prove anything.
  
• This thread would not affect our research in anyway, so we didn't care how popular or how suspicious it would get. All we knew was that, if we were doing some research that could benefit other people then why not share the information.

Your Reasons:

• I don't see any reason why you or anyone would be angry or disappointed regarding the research.
  
• Are you some anti-nootropic campaign leader or did the advice simply not work for you?
  
• Why would you need to verify research that has been proven real (logically)? All that matters is that the advice is working for many people, and cannot cause health hazards. ( Consuming calcium and/or glutamate/glutamic acid within the RDA is not going to harm you in any way).
  
• If you wanted to repost the research or use it as part of your homework/project; then I'm sorry,but you simply are not allowed to do that.
  
• Let the research stay unproven real until it's published.That way, people have a free decision to make and can either suspect its authenticity or follow the advice. None of us will be affected.

Revealing your identity on the internet is pretty dangerous and can be fatal in some cases. Most of my professors/ research supervisors have denied to give me their email ids except for one, whose email id (.edu) I shall soon send to the moderator manic_racetam along with her mit website.

My colleagues and I have not applied for our .edu ids since we don't require them. (They are mainly used to get discounts on certain purchases and access MIT's private websites/databases). We don't need them since all that we require is provided in the form of research funding.

Hope you feel better soon and overcome your disappointment.

Feel free to ask any questions .

[Ben]

Jipers cripers fools.

Any idiot can figure out what to do here.

1. Follow this advice (it's free and harmless).

2. Didn't work? Ignore it.

3. If the thread starter posts spam, report it (e.g. a merch link.)

These are very simple steps any moron can figure out. My own advice for you, therefore, is for everyone spamming this thread with long winded accusations (specifically fortfun and brain-something) to increase their nootropic doses hugely. Also, do us a favour you non contributing buffoons: leave the imminst.

[ScienceGuy]

Ben, on 27 February 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Jipers cripers fools.

Any idiot can figure out what to do here.

1. Follow this advice (it's free and harmless).

2. Didn't work? Ignore it.

3. If the thread starter posts spam, report it (e.g. a merch link.)

These are very simple steps any moron can figure out. My own advice for you, therefore, is for everyone spamming this thread with long winded accusations (specifically fortfun and brain-something) to increase their nootropic doses hugely. Also, do us a favour you non contributing buffoons: leave the imminst.

Nice one Ben! THANK YOU for bringing some SANITY to this thread!

I believe you have totally hit the nail on the head; and I'd like to say that I wholehearted agree on ALL points

[nezxon]

I have ignored most comments about the information coming from a research project.  I don't think the available details allow the project to be verified.  I think the least we would need is the project title, the department involved, and the name of the director.  Project directors don't often withhold their name, they're usually more than willing to get any attention they can for their project because attention means grant money.  Pojects don't secure grants by making sure there's no way anybody can find out about or validate their existence.  I don't think an mit.edu email address would be sufficient to verify the project, I think there must be something more substantial that can be verified.

Edited by nezxon, 27 February 2012 - 03:34 PM.

[Hyperspace21]

nezxon, on 27 February 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

I have ignored most comments about the information coming from a research project.  I don't think the available details allow the project to be verified.  I think the least we would need is the project title, the department involved, and the name of the director.  Project directors don't often withhold their name, they're usually more than willing to get any attention they can for their project because attention means grant money.  Pojects don't secure grants by making sure there's no way anybody can find out about or validate their existence.  I don't think an mit.edu email address would be sufficient to verify the project, I think there must be something more substantial that can be verified.

And you want this verification because.......

[ScienceGuy]

nezxon, on 27 February 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

I have ignored most comments about the information coming from a research project.  I don't think the available details allow the project to be verified.  I think the least we would need is the project title, the department involved, and the name of the director.  Project directors don't often withhold their name, they're usually more than willing to get any attention they can for their project because attention means grant money.  Pojects don't secure grants by making sure there's no way anybody can find out about or validate their existence.  I don't think an mit.edu email address would be sufficient to verify the project, I think there must be something more substantial that can be verified.

Please kindly note that it is my understanding that the plan is for a MODERATOR of this FORUM (such as Manic_Racetam) to actually communicate with the respective SUPERVISOR at MIT via the mit-edu email address provided by Hyperspace and confirm whether or not they have indeed being carrying out some recent studies on PIRACETAM, without causing problems with respect to breaching NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS etc. by requesting any more detail than that; further to this the MODERATOR would of course also verify that the person with whom they are communicating is indeed an employee of MIT and not just some friend of Hyperspace's. IMO this would be more than sufficent to confirm the validity of Hyperspace's REPORTS / CLAIMS.

I normally refrain from posting my personal feelings on matters but I have to say I am not at all happy with the way some individuals have treated Hyperspace (you will note that I have diplomatically avoided naming names). The poor guy is essentially being put on trial, when in fact he has not suggested ANYTHING that poses ANY potential health risk to ANYONE; as such, the absolutely worst case scenario that Hyperspace would be guilty of IF it were to transpire that he's made everything up is akin to a HARMLESS PRACTICAL JOKE. After all DRINKING MILK (=CALCIUM) and EATING PROTEIN (=GLUTAMATE/GLUTAMIC ACID) is not going to harm anyone is it?

I should add that it is OBVIOUS to anyone and everyone reading this thread properly that Hyperspace's posts REPORTS / CLAIMS are not yet conclusively substantiated since the studies are not published. It is therefore up to individuals to make up their own minds accordingly with regards to how much they wish to accept the REPORTS / CLAIMS. However, there is no reason whatsoever for indivduals not to try out the proposed CALCIUM and/or 10-100mg GLUTAMIC ACID supplementation and see if it works for them, since doing so is 100% SAFE.

Edited by ScienceGuy, 27 February 2012 - 04:10 PM.

[capctr]

Hyperspace21- while I am trying to be respectful to the skeptics and their right to give voice to their doubts, I do wish they would extend to you this same courtesy, and I hope that their aggressive behavior does not turn you off from continuing to share whatever insights you gain in the course of your study on this board.
I think the reason you have gained a following, is because the FREE info you have shared has helped those non-responders who were willing to try something new, yet so simple. I wish I could say I am baffled by the hostility I have seen(and shown)here, but the sad truth is that it is human nature react negatively to things that come from outside ones comfort zone; however, consider this: How many discoveries/scientific advances have ever been made by hostile people wielding pitchforks and torches?

[capctr]

Oh yeah, none.

[scouser]

There is a great song by William Shatner ( Capt James T Kirk) called 'Has Been'

It seems to fit in well with some of the negative types here :-)

[Tomas E]

People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.

[joelski28]

How about we just ignore the people that want verification and we do our thing.(No wonder this country has so many rules and regulations. Are we uptight or what) Is there anyone out there that has received negative effects from these suggestions or no effects at all. Like it was a waste. Just taking the advice forget about it being a study or not. Would like to see some more subjective reports of people and what there dosing regimen is regarding glutamate and calcium. I'm still tweaking mine. I would like to take a 2 week break and start over and see what happens because that does lower my tolerance a little bit where the lower doses are more noticeable

Edited by joelski28, 27 February 2012 - 07:17 PM.

[nezxon]

Hyperspace21, on 27 February 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

nezxon, on 27 February 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

I have ignored most comments about the information coming from a research project.  I don't think the available details allow the project to be verified.  I think the least we would need is the project title, the department involved, and the name of the director.  Project directors don't often withhold their name, they're usually more than willing to get any attention they can for their project because attention means grant money.  Pojects don't secure grants by making sure there's no way anybody can find out about or validate their existence.  I don't think an mit.edu email address would be sufficient to verify the project, I think there must be something more substantial that can be verified.

And you want this verification because.......

...you claimed to be involved in a research project. Although strictly speaking I don't want verification of any kind, I choose to believe people based on what they say not who they represent, I was talking about what would be necessary to verify your claim of this information being research material, not that I care either way.  If you want to give advice, just lay it out there.  You don't need to preface with "By the way, all this stuff I'm saying is official from research."  Either people take your advice or they don't.  I was only interested in the research project for the prospect of getting my hands on new data.

[manic_racetam]

For the sake of thread cogency lets stop everything not related to the topic.  The topic is in relation to the effects of calcium and glutamate on piracetam efficacy... basically anyway.

All sides of the argument regarding the OP's credentials have been stated many times over, so lets stop beating that dying horse... for now at least.

Hyperspace21 gave me an email address of a professor.  I'm going to check up on it when I get a chance, hopefully in a day or two, and will report back my findings.  Until then lets stay on topic.

[FortFun]

Listen folks, this supposed 'aggression' is at best on both sides but I am the only one who has been called a baffoon, a 'has been', told to STFU, leave the imminst, etc.  Really???

But let's forget all that and assume good intentions as you all wish.  

I have some simple questions about the first study for hyperspace if that is okay here?. I hope they can contribute to the knowledgebase for further racetam studies.  I'm the last person who would be considered 'scared' of 'new' facts!

Hyperspace21...

1) You distinguish between Piracetam's 'enhanced vision' effects and normal Piracetam effects such as 'enhanced speech,cognitive function and music'.  How did you solicit, baseline, and quantify the 'enhanced vision' effects from the trial participants?

2) Can you please quantify how many people experienced 'enhanced vision' effects but did also not experience normal Piracetam effects such as 'enhanced speech,cognitive function and music'?


I know you said you had to dumb down/purge PII from trial results for the forum but in doing so you left out a couple things that make it difficult to interpret your results.  I am going to summarize what I think you are saying so please just correct me if I make an assumption based on your description of the findings in your 1st trial (non msg).

3) 1st set of 25 people - ALL 25 experienced normal Piracetam effects (enhanced speech,cognitive function and music) regardless of glutamate or calcium levels and without glutmate or calcium supplementation. Correct?

4) 1st set of 25 people - How many of the 11 that experienced 'enhanced vision'/regular glutamate levels had low calcium ion levels?

5) 1st set of 25 people - How many of the 14 that experienced normal Piracetam effects (enhanced speech,cognitive function and music)/low glutamate levels had low calcium ion levels

6) 2nd set of 25 people - You secretly dosed participants in 10mg increments of L-Glutamate (up to 10 times - don't worry I won't ask how ) until they exhibited signs of hyper-sensitivity measured through signs of being restless, dehydration, and decreased blood pressure? Or was a significant decrease blood pressure the only cutoff you used?

7) 2nd set of 25 people - The purpose of the 10 mg incremental dosing of this test group was to hopefully get them all at or just above normal glutamate levels before testing with Piracetam based on their hyper-sensitivity reactions to L-Glutamate, correct?

8) 2nd set of 25 people - Contrary to the results from the first group, 4 participants had no normal paricetam effects (enhanced speech,cognitive function and music) nor 'enhanced vision' effects even with normal to slightly elevated  glutamate levels. Correct? (Don't worry, you don't have to explain statistical analysis and such, this is not a trick question, just yes or no)

9) 3rd set of 25 people - In this group you megadosed L-Glutamate at 5x to 50x the maximum hyper-sensitivty levels displayed in your previous group based on signs of being restless, dehydration, and a decrease in blood pressure, correct? (Again, don't worry, this is not a gottcha question nor am I implying that MIT would ever do anything unsafe with trial participants, just simple yes, no)

10) 3rd set of 25 people - 14 participants experienced normal Piracetam effects (enhanced speech,cognitive function and music) with high to too high glutamate levels and low calcium ion levels, correct?

11) What process did you use to come up with glutamate/calcium levels of participants from CSF, Lumbar puncture?

12) What was the goal of your MSG study when you already had your glutamate/calcium study lined up?  Was there some research that you can point to that would imply that MSG supplementation is processed differently than L-Glutamate with respect to glutamate levels in the brain? This seems redundant if not offcourse?  Can you explain or am I dingdong? (I might be!)

14) You made a point of testing 75 regular piracetam users and 75 non piracetam users in your first trial of 150 participants.  I am guessing they were distributed as equally as possible in your 4 groups (12/13 per group?).  You did not report any correlations in your results.  There were none of interest?


I appreciate your response, I know its a bunch of questions but they are pretty simple to answer.  I have a couple follow-up questions but they seem too dumb to ask without knowing the specifics mentioned above.

The folks here that are not interested in these details, sorry.  But the gist of BrainScience/Hyperspace21's advice in this thread is to eat a balanced diet as a first resort and if you are still lacking calcium or glutamate then there are supplements than can fix that.

I'm still skeptical but that's me

Looking forward to your response Hyperspace21.

Thanks!!!
-fortfun

Edited by manic_racetam, 01 March 2012 - 05:19 AM.