• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
LongeCity .                       Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

PRL 8 53 Experiences

prl 8 53experiences prl-8-53 prl 8 53 experiences new star nootropics newstarnootropics nikolaus hans prl 8 53 prl

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Greek86

  • Member
  • 17 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Ontario Canada

Posted 08 November 2013 - 07:27 AM


I created this topic for PRL-8-53 because I didn't find an appropriate listing in the forum and I am personally very intrigued by the results claimed by wikipedia in some studies with this substance.

"Subjects were given 12-item word lists to memorize as part of the trial. While initial word acquisition performance on PRL-8-53 was only 107.46% of baseline, subjects recalled words at 132.5-142.7% of the baseline rate 24 hours after testing, and at 145.2-146.2% after a week. Stronger effects were noted in the bottom 60% of subjects (who recalled 6 or fewer words on placebo at 24h), with 24 hour retention improved to 187.5-191% of baseline, and one week retention to 200-205%. Subjects over 30 displayed even more substantial results, with improvements to 208-222% and 236-252% of baseline performance at one day and one week respectively."

PRL-8-53 has been available on NSN for about a week now

Has anyone given this a try yet?

Please let us know about your experiences.

#2 MizTen

  • Registered User
  • 260 posts
  • 113
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 08 November 2013 - 09:54 PM

I've been taking 20 mg per day for the last 3 days. There haven't been any notable changes, positive or negative, except for one big difference.

I am easily remembering, without effort or error, numbers that I always had to reference from written notes in the past. The first time this happened I was talking on the phone with someone and needed to give them an 8 digit number that previously I have always had to look up in my notes. I was astonished when I just spoke it to her while I was still looking for it in my notes.There have been about 6 instances of this instant recall since I started.

I also take NSI-189 and it has had many profoundly positive effects on my overall brain health, including memory, but my numeric recall didn't improve a whole lot. That may be because it was so bad. I always thought that having ADD was what was causing that problem.

If I have time, I'll try to verify this with the brain training app I use.

  • like x 3

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 xks201

  • Registered User
  • 839 posts
  • 31
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 November 2013 - 02:12 AM

Same thing here except I took 10 mg two days ago and 100 mg one day ago. I am getting vivid flashbacks of memories from 10 to 15 years ago somewhat randomly. My memory has improved...its really a compound with amazing potential. Combine this with a few other compounds I can think and I dont see how you couldnt become extremely intelligent.
  • Disagree x 1

#4 Wu Hang

  • Registered User
  • 71 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 09 November 2013 - 07:53 PM

8-53's mechanism was unknown to many members here due to absense of researches after the initial research.

And one should know that in the original study they have only record a week long test which doesn't support whether the compound is useful for long term memory or short term memory. With that being said, I am waiting my compound to be arrived and will be reporting results immediately

#5 hav

  • Registered User
  • 984 posts
  • 174
  • Location:Cape Cod, MA
  • NO

Posted 09 November 2013 - 09:10 PM

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard
  • like x 1

#6 jly1986

  • Registered User
  • 166 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 09 November 2013 - 09:45 PM

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard


PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.
  • dislike x 1

#7 sparkk51

  • Registered User
  • 417 posts
  • 36
  • Location:TX, US

Posted 09 November 2013 - 10:01 PM

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard


PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.


No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.
  • like x 1

#8 jly1986

  • Registered User
  • 166 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 09 November 2013 - 10:55 PM

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard


PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.


No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.


Incorrect. Simply search for "PRL 8-147" and in the top few results, you'll easily find the site which made the original naming error. "147" doesn't exist. I don't know why some people here are insisting it does. Complete fiction.

#9 sparkk51

  • Registered User
  • 417 posts
  • 36
  • Location:TX, US

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:30 PM

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard


PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.


No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.


Incorrect. Simply search for "PRL 8-147" and in the top few results, you'll easily find the site which made the original naming error. "147" doesn't exist. I don't know why some people here are insisting it does. Complete fiction.


I am searching now but I am not sure which website your talking about. Could you please link it?

#10 jly1986

  • Registered User
  • 166 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:43 PM

[quote name='sparkk51' timestamp='1384039841' post='622419']
[quote name='jly1986' timestamp='1384037737' post='622411']
[quote name='sparkk51' timestamp='1384034483' post='622404']
[quote name='jly1986' timestamp='1384033517' post='622403']
[quote name='hav' timestamp='1384031438' post='622398']
There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard
[/quote]

PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.
[/quote]

No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.
[/quote]

Incorrect. Simply search for "PRL 8-147" and in the top few results, you'll easily find the site which made the original naming error. "147" doesn't exist. I don't know why some people here are insisting it does. Complete fiction.
[/quote]

I am searching now but I am not sure which website your talking about. Could you please link it?
[/quote]

http://www.whatareno...emory-enhancer/

Note the comments below the article.

#11 PWAIN

  • Registered User
  • 1,254 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:46 PM

Ok to straighten this question out, I have seen nothing about PRL-8-147 not existing. What happened was that the original paper quoted referred to PRL-8-147 incorrectly instead of the correct name PRL-8.53. This does not imply that PRL-8-147 doesn't exist, just that the original reference used the wrong name.

As per Turnbuckles quote below, PRL-8-147 does appear to exist however it was only ever tested in rodents and results do not appear substantial but then given the rodent model used and lack of details, we don't really know for sure. It was designed to be more effective than PRL-8-53 and for all we know could be. There is only really one way to find out. The issue is that it is extremely unknown with no known human testing.

Only questions I see are:
1. Does anyone here want to take the chance of something completely unknown that many have incredible effects or not much at all.
2. Are we able to get a structure for this molecule to get it synthesised.

So lets start with question 1. what do people here want to do?



Turnbuckles quote from page 1 of the PRL-8-147 thread:

I just happened to be browsing through this website and noticed several inquiries regarding Dr Nikolas R Hanls, early work, with PRL 8-53. You may have missed other research mentioned on this drug, in the Publication, DRUGS of the FUTURE. You can also find some of his work in chemistry journals. Dr Hanls, developed a similar compound which was hoped to be more effective than PRL 8-53, it was known as PRL 8-147. NO research is available on this compound that I know of, but was tested in rat studies at the University of Colorado, in Boulder, sometime during 1982-84. This compound may have been tested at Stanford University, but I'm not sure when this was done. The results where only considered "novel." I must tell you that the results or perhaps no results obtained, may have been due to how the rats where treated! That statement comes directly from Dr. Hanls himself!...

http://brainmeta.com...showtopic=21252

There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard


PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.


No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.


Incorrect. Simply search for "PRL 8-147" and in the top few results, you'll easily find the site which made the original naming error. "147" doesn't exist. I don't know why some people here are insisting it does. Complete fiction.



#12 hav

  • Registered User
  • 984 posts
  • 174
  • Location:Cape Cod, MA
  • NO

Posted 10 November 2013 - 12:06 AM

[quote name='sparkk51' timestamp='1384039841' post='622419']
[quote name='jly1986' timestamp='1384037737' post='622411']
[quote name='sparkk51' timestamp='1384034483' post='622404']
[quote name='jly1986' timestamp='1384033517' post='622403']
[quote name='hav' timestamp='1384031438' post='622398']
There's already a 47-page thread on both this and 8-147 in the nootropics/mental health section:

http://www.longecity...memory-enhancer

I only read the 1st 10 pages but it looks like they organized separate 8-53 joint buys in the US and EU.

Howard
[/quote]

PRL 8-53 is the same as the mis-named "PRL 8-147". Some website mistakenly used "147", when it meant 53. PRL 8-53 is available for sale to the public at Newstar Nootropics.
[/quote]

No, they are two somewhat similar, but different compounds. PRL 8-53 is what's currently being taken by members on this forum.
[/quote]

Incorrect. Simply search for "PRL 8-147" and in the top few results, you'll easily find the site which made the original naming error. "147" doesn't exist. I don't know why some people here are insisting it does. Complete fiction.
[/quote]

I am searching now but I am not sure which website your talking about. Could you please link it?
[/quote]

Previously discussed with links here...

Some blogger some where may have been confused, but post#12 by changshageorge in this thread was the original source and he seems to have stuck to his story though that 2nd reiteration which seems unambiguous to me. If he's confused too, its more than a typo. In any event 8-147 was never formally tested, the inventor is dead, and no one seems to know exactly what it was.

Howard

Edited by hav, 10 November 2013 - 12:13 AM.


#13 hathor

  • Registered User
  • 117 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Arizona
  • NO

Posted 10 November 2013 - 12:31 AM

Same thing here except I took 10 mg two days ago and 100 mg one day ago. I am getting vivid flashbacks of memories from 10 to 15 years ago somewhat randomly. My memory has improved...its really a compound with amazing potential. Combine this with a few other compounds I can think and I dont see how you couldnt become extremely intelligent.


Would you say that the acute affects of the subustance caused you to improve long-term memory? How do you compare those affects to the ability to recall information in an educational setting where you're under the influence while learning new information and then sober later on with improved ability to recall those events? From what I can tell from the study they had people do all these tests while on the substance, and then a week later tested them on recall of the information, presumably when they were sober and hadn't taken it again since.

I ask because I get a bit concerned about new substances getting yanked off the market or having the FDA shut them down or whatever kind of stuff, so what interests me the most is in learning while under the influence and not having to think too hard later to recall the things I learned, since it really seems like a lot of times I struggle with remembering the word I wanted to say, or it seems like my "seek time" is really low, like my brain's recall speed is more comparable to a floppy disk than a solid-state drive.

Primarily I'm taking all these courses to learn music production, like theory, production, mixing/mastering, sound design, and programming. I'm trying to absorb everything like a sponge, and what intrigues me more than acute memory improvement (which I easily get from megadosing piracetam) is the ability to improve memory retention and the speed of recall when learning new information.

#14 MizTen

  • Registered User
  • 260 posts
  • 113
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 10 November 2013 - 01:34 AM

Same thing here except I took 10 mg two days ago and 100 mg one day ago. I am getting vivid flashbacks of memories from 10 to 15 years ago somewhat randomly. My memory has improved...its really a compound with amazing potential. Combine this with a few other compounds I can think and I dont see how you couldnt become extremely intelligent.


Would you say that the acute affects of the subustance caused you to improve long-term memory? How do you compare those affects to the ability to recall information in an educational setting where you're under the influence while learning new information and then sober later on with improved ability to recall those events? From what I can tell from the study they had people do all these tests while on the substance, and then a week later tested them on recall of the information, presumably when they were sober and hadn't taken it again since.

I ask because I get a bit concerned about new substances getting yanked off the market or having the FDA shut them down or whatever kind of stuff, so what interests me the most is in learning while under the influence and not having to think too hard later to recall the things I learned, since it really seems like a lot of times I struggle with remembering the word I wanted to say, or it seems like my "seek time" is really low, like my brain's recall speed is more comparable to a floppy disk than a solid-state drive.

Primarily I'm taking all these courses to learn music production, like theory, production, mixing/mastering, sound design, and programming. I'm trying to absorb everything like a sponge, and what intrigues me more than acute memory improvement (which I easily get from megadosing piracetam) is the ability to improve memory retention and the speed of recall when learning new information.


So I'm using Tapatalk which is failing miserably, but I'll try to answer some of your questions:

“Would you say that the acute affects of the subustance caused you to improve long-term memory?”

“I don't know right now, it's too soon to tell.”

“How ,do you compare those affects to the ability to recall information in an educational setting where you're under the influence while learning new information and then sober later on with improved ability to recall those events?”

“This isn't relevant to me (personallyb right now, but the question itself is very valid.”

Pretty much, I don't think we really are sponges, but the culturalsocial imperatives are like that.


OK, so I gave up trying to answer this from a phone. Sorry if it seems scattered!





#15 chemicalambrosia

  • Registered User
  • 393 posts
  • 59
  • Location:Minnesota, USA
  • NO

Posted 11 November 2013 - 11:20 PM

Same thing here except I took 10 mg two days ago and 100 mg one day ago. I am getting vivid flashbacks of memories from 10 to 15 years ago somewhat randomly. My memory has improved...its really a compound with amazing potential. Combine this with a few other compounds I can think and I dont see how you couldnt become extremely intelligent.


Do these few other compounds already exist, and if they do what are they?

#16 YOLF

  • Member
  • 7,458 posts
  • 2,154
  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:20 AM

Well I got my PRL-8-53. It looks like so far so good based on the reports. I really wish they had done longer tests though. I wonder if 147 got snatched up by the government? Maybe that's how the politicians write things most people can't hope to read and understand as a whole! Anyone else got a report to post? Any anecdotal ideas regarding long term use of this substance?
  • like x 2
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • dislike x 1

#17 MizTen

  • Registered User
  • 260 posts
  • 113
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 13 November 2013 - 06:03 AM

This seems to have an inverted U dosage. I've taken 10 -30 mg and at 40 mg had higher scores on the brain games app I use.

Mistakenly took 80 mg today, I was fine but felt unpleasant, though not strong, stimulant effects. Much lower scores on the brain training app...

#18 izan82

  • Registered User
  • 224 posts
  • 32
  • Location:netherlands

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:30 PM

This seems to have an inverted U dosage. I've taken 10 -30 mg and at 40 mg had higher scores on the brain games app I use.

Mistakenly took 80 mg today, I was fine but felt unpleasant, though not strong, stimulant effects. Much lower scores on the brain training app...

is this the best substance you've ever taken regarding your search for a better memory ?

#19 GetOutOfBox

  • Registered User
  • 159 posts
  • 46
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:47 PM

Just a copy-paste post I made today in my own thread regarding PRL-8-53, at roughly 10 mg sublingual dose:

Ok, so just did the first round of testing today using www.cambridgebrainsciences.com .

Digit span was not as amazing as the study, 8 digits was the stopping point. However 8 digits is still fairly impressive for me, as I usually have trouble with phone numbers. So I'd say there's perhaps a slight, though noticable improvement in working memory. Spatial span tests (memorizing the pattern in which squares flash on a static matrix, the size of the pattern increases) were actually not impressive at all strangely, possibly worse than my ordinary self. I had trouble memorizing patterns more than 5, which is very low (the test starts at 4, which I assume was found to be an average starting point). What I felt was impeding my ability to memorize the pattern was I was having trouble focusing and actually paying attention to the pattern. Perhaps this compound exacerbates the attentional-deficit aspect of ADHD-Pi. The paired associates memory test (in which objects are paired with each of a layout of boxes on a static matrix, you have to remember which is paired with which) was a little better, at a score of 7 easily, but couldn't easily get past that. Again, I feel like my attention was the limiting factor, I felt like other stimuli and thoughts were sort of "seeping into" my working memory, overwriting the data I was supposed to hold in my mind. Very much sounds like a prefrontal deficit (the PFC failing to regulate working memory and filtering extraneous stimuli).

I suspect that perhaps my likely defective Prefrontal Cortex is the limiting factor with any memory enhancement, as the deficit interferes with proper memory prioritization. I will be extremely interested to see how nootropics combine with Intuniv therapy.

Anyways, I am going to drink a can of pop, as I regularly drink a small amount of some caffeine source. I could be experiencing minor withdrawal which could be the limiting factor. I will re-test within another hour. I will note that today I did not consume my regular nootropic stack, aside from 10 mg afobazole (as I am going out to socialize later, it seems to help), which is not supposed to effect memory. However, I will try testing again tomorrow without anything to see if perhaps the afobazole is causing or exacerbating memory issues.

I also should note I noticed non-cognitive sensory effects which may or may not be placebo. Definitely getting strong visual effects (strong as in they are likely real and not placebo, not psychadelic strong xD), red objects appear "redder", or perhaps they leap out at me more. All colours seem to have an almost surreal, dreamy, sort of look to them. It's hard to describe, the best comparison I can give is to the "bloom" shading effect in some video games(though not that strong, but very similar). It's actually very beautiful, I find myself enjoying visual observations of the area around my house more than usual. These visual effects lead me to strongly suspect serotonergic mechanisms, I seem to recall similar reports from Tianeptine users. I'm not certain if there's an antidepressant effect, I will report it if I observe it.

Finally, I will say that it's not unusual that I didn't get a lot of cognitive benefit from this substance the first time; the optimal dosing range is fairly wide (ranging from 0.05 mg/kg to 1.2 mg/kg). I'll try doubling the dose tomorrow (normally this would be irresponsible, however several of the studies on this compound tested megadoses and found no negative effects beyond reduction of motor activity at VERY high doses). Also, one study claimed immediate effects, while another claimed benefits only affected long-term memory, with only a tiny improvement in working memory. The study that claimed immediate effects reported digit span results going from 7 to 21 digits, which I am highly skeptical of (there must have been confounding factors, I'd expect to only see such gains using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation or Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation), so I'm leaning towards the other study which reported the chemical enhanced long-term memory uptake, which is much more reasonable to me.

#20 MizTen

  • Registered User
  • 260 posts
  • 113
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 13 November 2013 - 08:19 PM

This seems to have an inverted U dosage. I've taken 10 -30 mg and at 40 mg had higher scores on the brain games app I use.

Mistakenly took 80 mg today, I was fine but felt unpleasant, though not strong, stimulant effects. Much lower scores on the brain training app...

is this the best substance you've ever taken regarding your search for a better memory ?


I can't really tell right now, I'm taking a few other things that are probably skewing my results. Yes, since first taking PRL-8-53 I am pulling a lot of numeric data out of my head that is normally hard or even impossible to remember, but then, I've been focusing on memory improvement for a few months. It's hard to say...


...
I also should note I noticed non-cognitive sensory effects which may or may not be placebo. Definitely getting strong visual effects (strong as in they are likely real and not placebo, not psychadelic strong xD), red objects appear "redder", or perhaps they leap out at me more. All colours seem to have an almost surreal, dreamy, sort of look to them. It's hard to describe, the best comparison I can give is to the "bloom" shading effect in some video games(though not that strong, but very similar). It's actually very beautiful, I find myself enjoying visual observations of the area around my house more than usual. ...


I guess the 80 mg I mistakenly took yesterday stayed with me because I noticed the same thing this morning when I looked out the window, but it's very different from the "gratitude and awe" perceptions that NSI-189 sometimes triggered on nice days. Colors are much more saturated, rather film like and ethereal. I can also feel some of the rather weird stimulant and head effects, though milder than yesterday.

PRL-8-53 seems to have some lasting effects. I think that a high dosage, such as the 80 mg I took, is a waste and maybe even unsafe. It reminds me of sunifiram without the hypomania or ensuing irritability.

Edited by MizTen, 13 November 2013 - 08:35 PM.


#21 kevinseven11

  • Registered User
  • 385 posts
  • 43
  • Location:Texas

Posted 15 November 2013 - 07:43 PM

Has this compound been studied with marijuana? My guess is that it would decrease memory since this compound increases dopamine.

#22 GetOutOfBox

  • Registered User
  • 159 posts
  • 46
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 15 November 2013 - 11:01 PM

Has this compound been studied with marijuana? My guess is that it would decrease memory since this compound increases dopamine.


It's unlikely there are any combination studies due to this both being a very obscure compound with little research in general, and the fact that it is illegal in all western countries, and a lot of European countries to study cannabis with human subjects, as it is both illegal and considered potentially harmful (wrongfully in my opinion, or at least over-enthusiastically considering alcohol is studied) and hence unethical to purposefully administer.

My own experience with PRL-8-53 (using digit span and spatial memory tests) is that it had only a small improvement in working memory, roughly ~10% improvement. A few of the studies seem to indicate benefits targeting long-term memory encoding rather than short-term memory, so it may not be relevant to combining with cannabis.

It should be noted that I did notice signs of serotonergic activity, mostly visual side-effects (enhanced colour perception, subtle strange "glow" to colours, visual noise, etc), so it may have some interesting effects when combined with cannabis. I suspect the combination would not be harmful, though if it is dopaminergic (which none of the studies I've seen have mentioned), there is a potential to cause anxiety and/or mania when combined with cannabis. I seem to recall one study saying it did not potentiate amphetamine effects, so I'm guessing it has little if any dopaminergic effects.

I may test the combination sometime in the future. I have tested PRL-8-53 combined with my largish stack of nootropics (Sunifiram, Noopept, Oxiracetam, Sarcosine, ALCAR), and had no negative effects, so I suspect this compound is not working through strong neurotransmitter actions (as that stack is both highly glutaminergic and highly cholinergic, and that study I mentioned ruled out dopaminergic activity). It may be working upon norepinephrine, in which case it's still probably safe to combine (stacking could cause acute anxiety or hyperactivity, but that's about it), as the norepinephrine circuits do not carry a risk of psychosis or excitotoxicity.

Edited by GetOutOfBox, 15 November 2013 - 11:07 PM.


#23 YOLF

  • Member
  • 7,458 posts
  • 2,154
  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 16 November 2013 - 03:50 AM

Did someone mention that PRL853 is tasteless or was that another substance?

I tried 5mg and tasted horrid... No positive effects on memory that I can tell.

#24 GetOutOfBox

  • Registered User
  • 159 posts
  • 46
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:59 AM

Did someone mention that PRL853 is tasteless or was that another substance?

I tried 5mg and tasted horrid... No positive effects on memory that I can tell.


Mine from New Star Nootropics had a bitter taste, very much like Noopept. Strangely enough though, it doesn't taste horrible to me, nor does Noopept. Some members describe it as if it's unbearable to take sublingually, but I find both compounds to be about as bitter as black coffee.

#25 cylack

  • Registered User
  • 69 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Orlando, FL

Posted 01 January 2014 - 06:18 PM

I'm thinking of taking PRL-8-53. Very intrigued by this and am wondering why studies on this were seemingly abruptly stopped in the late 70's? Here is an article I found on it:

Phi Delta Kappan - December 1979 - Vol 61 - pages 264-265

Learning and Memory Improvement Through Chemistry: Dream or Reality in the Offing?
by Nikolaus R. Hansl and Adele B. Hansl
The 'smart pill' may, at last, be only a testing period away. It is PRL-8-53.

The news story read: "A team of Creighton University health science researchs is working with an experimental drug that could be just what the `absent-minded professor' has been needing for years."

The story was based on a news release by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. Good credentials for sure, but what are the facts supporting such statements? How is it possible for a drug, a single chemical conpound, to have a positive effect on the function of the brain, which is such an an enormously complex system? What has been the clinical experience so far, and what can we learn from laboratory findings?

The last clinical report, a paper by Nikolaus Hansl, Adele B. Hansl, and Beverley T. Mead given in Portland at the meeting of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, reported that retention of verbal information (nonsense syllables) improved by 80% for subjects who had taken PRL-8-53 when compared to the same subjects' learning when on a placebo. This confirmed an earlier report on the sme drug, published in Experientia, reporting increased acquisition and retention in another group of volunteers.

Intellectual function comprises many factors, and as we are learning now, individual distinctive functional characteristics such as perception, short-term memory, long-term memory, correlation, retrieval, to name but a few, appear to be chemically controlled by their specific agonist-receptor systems within the neuronal latticework. In other words, it seems to be possible to augment or suppress one or more of these specific capabilities by chemical means, i.e., by amplifying or inhibiting chemical signals in control of the respective neuronal pathways.

We do have evidence regarding the identity of some chemical correlates. Recall from "long-term memory," retrieval of information that has been accumulated over a period of time, seems mediated by acetylcholine and the cholinergic system. Inhibition of this system in the experimental animal by drugs such as atropine or scopolamine greatly impairs recall capacity or performance dependent on it. By the same token, a boost of the cholinergic system by a drug such as physostigmine improve recall-dependent performance.

Actually, this latter drug has been used with some success in humans in Alzheimer Disease, which involves severe pre-senile memory loss. The problems with physostigmine are toxicity and practicality. Aside from the fact that the positive effects with this drug were observed within a very narrow dose range (less having no effect at all and a slightly higher dose causing considerable side effects), physostigmine, in order to achieve the desired effect, had to be given by an intravenous drip infusion.

In contrast, the drug reported by us, PRL-8-53, has been shown to enhance the respose to acetylcholine, the response being quantititatively similar over a considerable dose range, excluding the likelihood of accidental overdosing. The compound may be taken orally, and it is active over a period of several hours. The drug is not a stimulant, andin the experimental animal toxicity appears only after it is given a dose more than one thousand times as large as the projected human dose. In summary, we now have a potentially useful drug that will boost a specific chemical system in the brain, the cholinergic system, and thereby improve our ability to recall, to retrieve information from a pre-existing information pool. Other important chemical effects have been attributed to this drug, but space does not permit us to cover the more detailed information here.

Long-term memory, the type of information referred to above, is laid down in the brain in the form of a chemical code. In order to effect a synthesis of the informational molecules, we now believe it to be necessary to effect a transition from an earlier code, whic referred to as short-term memory. This transition, which is a chemical process, appears to depend on the mediation of another chemical system using noradrenaline as the chemical messenger. PRL-8-53 has been shown to augment responses to noradrenaline in the animal model both peripherally and centrally. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that a similar function may be present in humans. Translated into behavioral effects, it implies that this drug is also capable of facilitating the conversion of short-term to long-term memory, causing an increased storage of informational code. We now have a data base supporting the notion that we can modulate chemical systems in the brain, systems that are involved in or are mediating intellectual function. It further appears that we are able to affect these systems in such a way as to improve performance.



In one series of tests the subjects were asked to memorize simple words by listening to a tape recording. In another test slides with lists of words were projected for a given time, and again subjects were asked to memorize these lists. These two different tests enabled us to see whether learning was improved regardless of which one of the two most commonly used patheways of information input was used. We found that acquisition and subsequent retention improved following drug intake to a similar extent in both experiments.

Having establised that acquisition and retention of verbal information could be positively affected by the drug, we considered it important to look at nonverbal areas. We used the Benton test, exposing geometric patterns for brief periods to the subjects, then asking them to draw the figures as they remembered them. Again we found statistically significant improvement when subjects were on the drug.

To explore still another area, we deisgned a test to determine how number manipulation might be affected. Our subjects rand through a somewhat complex countdown maneuver. Subjects had to subtract seven from a given starting number, then add one, subtract seven and add tow, subtract seven and add three then subtract seven then add one, and so on until they reached the goal number. This was a timed test and again we found improvement, i.e., shorter test times when subjects had taken the drug. In a final test we asked our subjects to complete words from dot-letter-dot-letter combinations (e.g., U.R.). Words could be extended on either side. The only requirements: The words must be in English (even slang), and the spelling for the letters replacing the dots must be correct (e.g., cUrRent). Here we tried to see how long the drug would affect recall from an existing information pool. The information retrieved in this test is also subject to a certain amount of intellectual manipulation. In effect, the test might be considered a verbal fluency test. Again we found statistically significant improvement when the subjects had taken the drug prior to testing.

Having established the spectrum of effectiveness in students, or at least a part of it, we wanted to learn how an older population subgroup would respond. A number of colleagues volunteered and took the verbal learning and retention test. This group as age 30 or older. As might be expected, rote memory did not come as easily to this group as it did to the younger students. The average retention after 24 hours when on placebo was just under three words out of a possible 12. The average retention after one week was two words. However, the same subjects, when learning subsequent to drug administration, retained an average of 5.85 words after 24 hours and 5.25 words after one week. Again the increases were statistically significant. The improvement expressed in percent of placebo performance was 108% for the 24 hour test and 152% for the one-week recal.

The above tests all concerned the effects of PRL-8-53 on acquisition and memory. At this time we have only limited experience with drug effects on higher integrating functions of the brain, such as association and correlation. Moreover, our experience in this area is limted to animal responses. We designed experiments specifically aimed at measuring correlation, or what we conceive as possibly a rudimentary capacity of conceptual understanding. There was significantly improved performance after administration of the drug, but we do not know whether we shall find similar positive responses from humans. Even conservative extrapolations from experimental animals to humans are risky.

ANother area that has not been discussed is one of much concern: learning disabilities. With so many different causes underlying disabilities, no generalizations can be made. Where there is anatomical damage, the prognosis for benefits from PRL-8-53 would not be good. In the case of chemical aberrations as the only cause of a learning disability, any possible drug effect would depend on the nature of the aberration. Drug effects must be investigated for each type of disability; only experimentation will bring answers.

In summary, it appears that a number of important parameters of intellectual function are amenable to drug action. Improvement does ot seem limited to the young; the older group actually experienced a greater relative improvement in the test. However, just as the extent of improvement varied from one group to another, so did the response from one individual to the next. This is to be expected. The drug seems to augment some weak link in the chain of events related to intellectual function. This link is weaker for some than for others. The individual net effect is not predictable and will vary. We certainly are not dealing with a compound that would act as a great equalizer. Although some people with quite different base levels of performance might end up in close proximity, others will still be apart in performance. The important thing is that, regardless of initial performane level, improvment can still be achieved.

Finally, let us emphasize that we are dealing with an experimental compound; much investigation will be neccessary and many questions must be answered. So, while there is hope for the "absent minded professor" as well as for the student, both must wait until all regulatory requirements are met -- and we hope -- this or a related compound becomes available for use in the improvement of learning.

NIKOLAUS R. HANSL is a neuropharmacologist at Creighton University, Omaha, Nebr. He holds the Ph.D. from the University of Vienna. ADELE B. HANSL is his wife and research associate. The research reported here is based on a clinical report made by the Hansls and Beverley T. Mead at the August 1979 meeting of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.


#26 GetOutOfBox

  • Registered User
  • 159 posts
  • 46
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 01 January 2014 - 08:04 PM

I'm thinking of taking PRL-8-53. Very intrigued by this and am wondering why studies on this were seemingly abruptly stopped in the late 70's? Here is an article I found on it:


I suspect studies were aborted for good reason; it was likely found to be less effective than the first studies indicated. There is no other reason why it would be abandoned, if it was truly as effective as the preliminary studies indicated, pharma companies would have leapt on it. As it is no one even bothered patenting it as far as I can tell (perhaps the original researcher owns the patent, but I don't believe any pharmaceutical companies own it).
  • dislike x 1

#27 Ekscentra

  • Registered User
  • 36 posts
  • 10
  • Location:Bluffton, SC
  • NO

Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:12 PM

I'm thinking of taking PRL-8-53. Very intrigued by this and am wondering why studies on this were seemingly abruptly stopped in the late 70's? Here is an article I found on it:


I suspect studies were aborted for good reason; it was likely found to be less effective than the first studies indicated. There is no other reason why it would be abandoned, if it was truly as effective as the preliminary studies indicated, pharma companies would have leapt on it. As it is no one even bothered patenting it as far as I can tell (perhaps the original researcher owns the patent, but I don't believe any pharmaceutical companies own it).

 

 
With all due respect Box, I cant necessarily agree, as Id hardly call it ineffective by any means. PRL is a pretty novel substance, and the idea of bringing nootropics to market is still nothing more than a vague dream at the time, let alone back when those studies were taking place. A general lack of interest is certainly a possibility here. Interested as you and I may be, I hardly think the average scientist back then would care so much for the idea of chemically improving his or her intelligence. It sounds a bit naïve, and there certainly were individuals involved in this field at the time with a great interest in nootropics, but it simply wasnt all that important in the grand scheme of things. Only now are we starting to realize the importance of cognitive enhancers, and the profound ways in which they can affect the mind, yet even today, weve only scratched the surface of whats possible out there. From the looks of it, the termination of the studies seemed to have more to do with PR issues between the patent holder and the university (There was a lawsuit case between the two, which Dr. Hansl, the patent-holder, lost the case. Not to even get into the financial problems pertaining to these studies, this fact alone would certainly hinder any further progress. I for one would consider these issues more relevant in the studies' termination than a lack of effectiveness. However, to contradict myself and support your point somewhat, PRLs biggest drawback is without a doubt the incredibly fast-building tolerance. This could have almost certainly been grounds for keeping it off the market, effective as it may be. As far as my personal experiences go, it's not the end-all, be-all of the nootropics realm (and lets be honest, nothing will be), but I do find PRL quite effective in fulfilling the (somewhat) limited role it plays in my stack. PRL keeps me awake better than amphetamines (and even better with the combination of the two), significantly improves digit retention, working memory, muscle memory, and long-term memory. Moderate increases in short-term memory are observed, hand-eye coordination is god-like (probably the most pronounced effect for me overall), and my focus and concentration are improved, as with all other dopamine agonists. It combines wonderfully at a dose of 10mg with 30mg Coluracetam, 20mg Dextroamphetamine, 250mcg Clonazepam, 900mg Krill Oil, 60mcg Methylene Blue, 2g Piracetam, and 4mg Intuniv (yes, all at once :D ).

A bit of a stupid question I suppose, but I'll ask it anyways since, presumably, it shouldn't be too difficult to answer. In fact, if I'm honest, I've probably answered this myself already. If anything though, I hope someone can confirm my understanding here.

So, I understand that PRL 8-53 is a dopamine agonist, along with its Histamine 3 inverse agonism and a host of other unknown MoAs. Now, it was mentioned that it potentiates the dopaminergic effects of other substances. However, it was also mentioned that PRL 8-53 *does not* potentiate the effects of amphetamines, but it only mentioned that in relation to its actions on serotonin and norepinephrine, ignoring dopamine altogether. Now, you can certainly tell where this is going, and why I labeled it as a "stupid" question. So, being that dopamine was not mentioned with regards to potentiation, I extrapolated that the dopaminergic effects of amphetamines are in fact potentiated by this substance, but without having seen this confirmed in the paper, I cant say definitively if this is true. Now, this may have been mentioned in the full study, but I only have access to the abstract and what I recall of the many PRL-related discussions on the web, here on Longecity as well as over on Reddit and a host of other sources, so that's what I'm basing my understanding on at the moment. Now, it's a bit embarrassing that I'd even be asking this, but I'm certainly far from a pharmacologist, just an individual with a strong curiosity for a plethora of topics, pharmacology/neurology-related or otherwise. Blame the Aspergers, haha. Now, I assume I'm right on this point, but there's certainly a chance I could be wrong. So, just for the sake of confirmation: correct or incorrect?

It feels a bit incomplete at times being a part of this community without a decent pharmacological knowledge base. I certainly should be spending a good portion of my time studying this topic, as I feel quite inexperienced. Still, I suppose my anecdotal contributions could be of use to many in this community. I digress

One major problem with PRL 8-53 Ive always had is tolerance. Ive been incredibly paranoid of building up tolerance, so Ive restricted my use to a maximum of 3 times a week spaced out, usually only 1 or 2 doses maximum. Is this a good rationale, or would I be fine in dosing more frequently without risk of tolerance? I adore this substance, and its done quite a lot for me, so I couldnt imagine what might happen if it stopped working as well for me as it does now. Has anyone figured out a way to reduce, slow, or better yet prevent tolerance? Im already using MXE at holing doses once a week to help reset tolerance. So far, having used PRL 8-53 since October of last year, Ive never run into any issues with tolerance. Any tips on avoiding this?

Also, a bit of a crazy thought: PRL 8-53 is always incredibly numbing to the tongue. Does it work as a topical anesthetic like cocaine, by any chance? Has anyone tried rubbing the powder on their skin to test this? Maybe Im just insane for suggesting something like that, but I genuinely do think its a possibility. Of course, I dont have much of a supply to waste, but for those that do, a simple test like this would take about 15 seconds, maybe a bit longer. Not too bad, huh? And no, I dont have any evidence, just a hunch.

On another mildly off-topic note, I'm still very interested in testing PRL 8-53s younger brother, PRL 8-147, assuming we can ever manage to obtain the chemical formula and succeed in convincing a company to synthesize the compound and another, hopefully NSN, to make it available for purchase by the general public (multiple big-ass warning labels would be warranted, in this case). Now, it's very important to mention that the only testing ever to take place with this compound was on rats, as most of you already know, so it's definitely not something for the faint of heart, and testers should take great pains in ensuring testing is gone about in as safe a manner as possible, if at all, and I certainly wouldnt blame anyone for not wanting to ingest a substance thats never once been tested in humans. That no further tests took place is probably, once again, a byproduct of all the events taking place with Dr. Hansl and the lawsuit situation. A shame, as this was certainly one promising substance, for what little information surrounded it, and even in its seeming demise, its still near the top of my must-try list of substances. Going back to PRL 8-147 itself, caution is of the utmost importance if is to be tested by any of us, not only for our own sakes, but also for the sake of potential future testers, who would almost certainly be gravely disappointed to see this compound receive negative attention due to negligence on part of the testers, which could easily lead to the scheduling of said substance. Equally important are the observers, especially those in a position to see this substance banned, whether that decision is reached through direct or indirect influence on part of that observer. To avoid this from happening, inform yourself, apply yourself and the information at hand to maximize safety and minimize harmful and dangerous effects, and take full responsibility with yourself, only pushing forward if you are comfortable and capable of doing so. If it isn't possible to practice safety in the most ideal manner, then testing should not take place. This compound, and furthermore any compound with unknown effects and/or a potentially sketchy safety profile, should be treated as if it were a psychedelic trip taking place in a first-time user. Restrict movement and action only until you can be sure what type of activity can be considered safe, dedicate yourself to focused activities relevant to the effects of the substance itself in order to take full advantage of the experience of ingesting a novel substance, and most importantly, make sure a responsible, adequately educated and informed, and most of all trustworthy sober sitter is on hand at all times, in case anything goes wrong. Avoid any sharp objects, anything that could be used as a weapon, and anything that you could fall on if dizzy or imbalanced, should any unpredictable effects pop up. Prepare everything beforehand, any food and the like, activities you'll be doing throughout the duration of effects, if any, and any possible missteps that could take place during the experience, Foreshadowing and being prepared for the worst does not make one a pessimist. Theres always that possibility worse could come to worst, likely or not, and to prepare for the unlikely is every bit as important as preparing for the guaranteed. Keep usage of other substances to a minimum if possible, to ensure no dangerous interactions take place. The more substances added, the more unpredictable the experience becomes. Overboard as it may seem, its always better to be safe than sorry. If minimizing use of other substances is not a possibility, once again, save the testing for another time. Your health is more important than your pride or ego, or your excitement and anxiousness to try a new substance for the first time. Don't let eagerness get in the way of safety. That's what causes individuals to harm themselves, permanently damage themselves, or even kill themselves - keep this in mind. Do not fear, but tread carefully and keep a clear mind. Always assess your judgment thoroughly, and if you're not in a state to have this experience, don't. As the nootropics scene continues to progress, so too does the risk factor with each of the substances we test. It can very realistically happen that C16 become a scheduled substance as many of us are aware, and there's no reason not to exercise similar if not greater caution in the case of PRL 8-147 in avoiding this scenario of even more excessive prohibition. With each passing day, yet another nootropic substance emerges from the thick, and so too does the information surrounding it, oftentimes almost deliberately vague, yet the potency of each new compound find itself even greater than the last. Higher potencies almost definitively can be extrapolated to result in an increased risk factor, so safety absolutely comes first here, above even scientific progress. There's no sense in testing a compound if your lack of preparedness, an improper mental state or some other hypothetical scenario will likely result in overwhelming consequences. The long-term halting of progress is never worth any short-term progression, however revolutionary that may be. Save the tests for an ideal time and place, for that is where the risk-reward factor is most favourable for us all, as well as where the most progress can be made and the most useful information obtained. More potent related compounds cannot be said to guarantee increased danger (especially if an additional MoA results in improved safety; hypothetically, an amphetamine that acts to increase BDNF expression, to block NMDA, and to agonize AMPA would, despite potential neurotoxicity from the combined dopamine and AMPA agonism, not be neurotoxic at all due to the addition of NMDA antagonism and increased BDNF expression. Of course, this would depend on the extent said substance acted on those receptors, but thats beside the point. The point is, such a substance could be possible, at least in theory. In reality, though, I know of no single substance that uses one mechanism of action to protect from damage of the other. If anyone can show me otherwise, Id love to see an example.), but it doesn't hurt to be careful and to inform oneself as thoroughly as possible. I can't say it enough - don't be an idiot, and *never* go into this with your eyes closed, and, more importantly, your mind.

Now that that's over with, I suppose I should finally get to the point I was intending to get down to in the first place: a member on Reddit managed to get into contact with one of Dr. Hansl's relatives 7 months back, but we haven't heard from him since. This could mean nothing came of his efforts, though as far as I'm aware, his reasoning for getting in contact with this relative was for discussing PRL 8-53 and raising awareness of the returning interest in this compound, not to obtain any information on PRL 8-147. This could mean the individual on Reddit was simply busy and either could not update us on his assumed progress or forgot about this topic and decided to move on to other things, which is completely understandable. Either way, I want to be sure at the very least whether or not we can achieve anything here, and I'm optimistic and intuitively hopeful we will. If anyone's still interested in the testing or at least in receiving more information about this compound, and I may just do this myself when I have the time and if I have the means - it would be of great help to this community to get into contact with this relative, should anyone find out how to seek her out, and I ask that anyone who is willing takes the time to get in contact with this woman. She may know the chemical formula for this substance, and if this is the case, she is able to give it to us as well. Whether or not she's willing to do this tremendous favour, seemingly simple as it may be to fulfill, is entirely a different story, and I wouldn't blame her being that we're hardly more than random strangers scouring the internet looking for random tidbits of information so as not to bore ourselves to death in her eyes, though that's a very cynical way of looking at things, and possibly just a bit inaccurate (Just a bit ;) ). From what little impressions I get from this individual and of her character, based entirely on her conversing with this Redditor and his few comments of her, she does seem to be a very kind, sincere lady, and I have no reason to believe she wouldn't be more than willing to help out here, so long as we dont come off as demanding or rude. If no one else expresses interest, I'll take it upon myself to contact this individual, as soon as I have the time and as soon as I obtain the means of finding her contact information. Going through Dr. Hansl's obituary and finding this relative through Ancestry, if such a thing can realistically be done, would probably be the best way to get in contact with this woman. I've not used Ancestry more than once myself, and I'm unsure if searching for specific information on relatives is at all possible or allowed in the case of non-relatives or any individual at all for that matter, but in my limited understanding, any individual can research information on any person in the world, relative or not, so long as they have a paid account. I know what some of you are going to say, but hey, it's not stalking if we have a good reason to be doing this and aren't going around harassing anyone, especially the potential benefactor. I say we go for this, being that it's quite possibly our only chance to eventually get ahold of and begin testing on PRL 8-147. I will attempt to go about this process in as professional a manner as possible, and I'll do my best to ensure no one is harmed in this testing process by properly informing those who wish to join me in this cause to the best of my abilities, as well as empowering said individuals to inform themselves through whatever means available to them, and I shall of course do the same myself. Of course, this is all assuming I succeed in obtaining the information I seek and in putting it to use, but once again, I'm quite optimistic this "operation," so to speak, will be more than successful, but it will take time, and likely quite a bit of it. I ask that those ready and willing dedicate themselves to make as much effort as necessary to get this done. We could use an effective communicator on these boards to present a nice, honest (maybe not such a good idea) argument as to why it would be in the best interests of both parties to give this information away. If such a person cannot be found, I will once again take on this responsibility myself. Thanks to all of you for taking the time to read this long, drawn-out post, and I sincerely hope something good comes out of this, and that, through this hopefully positive outcome, we may continue to progress in the nootropics realm without drawing unwanted attention to ourselves through reckless, irresponsible behaviour and actions. As always, stay safe, maintain personal responsibility in realizing your ownership of your own actions, especially if you intend to do the same as myself and test these novel substances in the future. I know I said it earlier in some sense, but Ill say it again for the sake of beating it into your thick skulls, be constantly aware at all times and inform yourself as best you can - no, better, and most of all, don't do anything reckless or stupid. We dont need any deaths on our hands in the process of testing novel substances. Hell, we dont need a broken ankle. Cautiously, slowly, and with plenty of forethought, yet maintaining a constant, passive vigilance thats the only way to go about exploring the unexplored without getting yourself harmed.

Good luck, Longecity. I'm ever so eager to see and realize the incredible things we'll be achieving in the future. C60, Methylene Blue, IDRA-21, Coluracetam, PRL 8-53...even now, we have so many substances within our reach that are infinitely interesting, and day-by-day we continue to improve, coming up with yet more effective substances. I can't imagine where we'll be 10 years from now and, to contradict a bit of what I've just said, I simply cannot wait. As much as I try to exercise patience, I can't help but get incredibly giddy for what awaits just around the corner. My impatience is killing me, but I always think forward and look at what were doing, and I just couldnt bear to experience that so quickly, so I started thinking again and decided Im just going to take it slow, wait for these amazing substances to show what theyre capable of. Sometimes, I feel as if theres too much to look forward to, and no time to cherish that anticipation. We live in a wonderful generation to be able to bear witness to achievements so great as these. Are you ready to take on the next challenge, my friends? Let us hope so, and I wish you all a wonderful day. Maintain good vibes in this community, for it is unimaginably important that we remain both positive and perpetually aware of our surroundings in our journey through the depths of cognition, of human consciousness, of immortality. And together we journey across the stars, aimless but with our intentions clear as day and our mind always open to discovering the new possibilities that patiently await us at that final destination, wherever that is. We sit hand-in-hand, dedicated to the causes that drive us forward - the elimination of aging and more broadly, all disease, the maximization of enjoyment and fulfillment in life, the realization and practice of humility and generosity, the achieving of an egoless, efficient way of thinking, the realization of the ultimate in nootropical (new word, write it down folks!) vision, the elimination of war, corruption, greed, and the release of our incessant need to control everything but ourselves, even our own situations allowed to be as they are, untouched by a single human soul. And thus, life is that much closer to perfection. That is where we are headed. Of great importance to understand is that everything in life is a great paradox. Forcing one's way along seems the best path to progress, the best method in fulfilling this goal, but this is not the case at all. In understanding the great paradox of life, we become free of these animalistic tendencies, of these counterproductive, secretly illusive needs that bind us in unbreakable chains. All is not lost in the pushing aside of the ego for a greater cause. In fact, through the application of this tremendously positive change in mindset, it becomes possible to realize all progress conceivable. Indeed, the answers lie within our own minds. They are directly in front of us, as they have always been, but through our constant negative thought patterns, it becomes invisible. For all of us, set aside these notions you cling so tightly to and think in a new light. If every person that reads this takes it to heart and mind, we may just reverse the self-destructive patterns that have plagued our existence since our very conception. The elimination of negativity is quite realistic so long as we collectively work towards that goal. So I ask every last one of, again - take all of my words to heart and mind and use them to actively change your condition, your personal situation. Nothing lasts, but all is not lost in the process. Free yourself of counterproductive habits. Think in a way that betters *you.* Frame your situation to create an advantageous outcome for you and for all. You can live as you dream to live. Nothing comes free, so for the sake of the betterment of humanity, start working today. :)

Edited by Ekscentra, 23 June 2014 - 09:12 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • dislike x 1

#28 redan

  • Registered User YadaYada Redan Owes money for failed group buys
  • 2,056 posts
  • -10
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 24 June 2014 - 04:04 AM

I'm going to get downvoted; but why stop at -53? Heh

 

Anyway, I watched and helped orchestrate the first group buy for what I'll just call "PRL." The group buy didn't work; but, NSN decided to stock up on it. Anyway, the interest, or should I say hype(?), in the compound stemmed from an anecdotal report about the compound increasing working memory of digit span to somewhere 23. Oh, and I forgot to add that idiotic youtube video. In reality, those claims haven't been matched by even the best responders. So, I, personally put the  compound in the same bag as IDRA-21, which means, nothing really special. But, hey if it works for you, great. My point is just that the compound doesn't live up in any manner to the hype about it. But, at least we got that compound off my list of compounds to try in my life, heh. 


Edited by yadayada, 24 June 2014 - 04:06 AM.

  • like x 2

#29 Ekscentra

  • Registered User
  • 36 posts
  • 10
  • Location:Bluffton, SC
  • NO

Posted 24 June 2014 - 08:26 AM

I'm going to get downvoted; but why stop at -53? Heh

 

Anyway, I watched and helped orchestrate the first group buy for what I'll just call "PRL." The group buy didn't work; but, NSN decided to stock up on it. Anyway, the interest, or should I say hype(?), in the compound stemmed from an anecdotal report about the compound increasing working memory of digit span to somewhere 23. Oh, and I forgot to add that idiotic youtube video. In reality, those claims haven't been matched by even the best responders. So, I, personally put the  compound in the same bag as IDRA-21, which means, nothing really special. But, hey if it works for you, great. My point is just that the compound doesn't live up in any manner to the hype about it. But, at least we got that compound off my list of compounds to try in my life, heh. 

 

Oh, don't misunderstand me now. PRL 8-53 doesn't come anywhere near living up to the hype, in my opinion. Hardly any substances do, for that matter. It's not a jack of all trades - in fact, it's not even the master of its own trade. I find PRL useful, enough so to continue using it. For months, I thought it was the most useless compound I'd ever tried. Now, I use it strictly to increase memory retention and to prevent me from falling asleep. Aside from that, and that latter use doesn't seem to apply to any other compound I'm aware of, it's about average in the world of nootropics. I'd be more inclined to go for Semax once I have the funds. PRL is fairly limited in its uses. Those benefits I mentioned each took a long period of time, often months, to become apparent, with the exception of preventing sleep. I feel the same about IDRA: limited uses, not for everyone, doesn't live up to some of the more powerful nootropics, but useful nonetheless for what it does do. So yes, I'll have to agree with you there, though perhaps for entirely different reasons than yours.


  • like x 2

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#30 Ekscentra

  • Registered User
  • 36 posts
  • 10
  • Location:Bluffton, SC
  • NO

Posted 25 June 2014 - 07:36 PM


So, I understand that PRL 8-53 is a dopamine agonist, along with its Histamine 3 inverse agonism and a host of other unknown MoAs. Now, it was mentioned that it potentiates the dopaminergic effects of other substances. However, it was also mentioned that PRL 8-53 *does not* potentiate the effects of amphetamines, but it only mentioned that in relation to its actions on serotonin and norepinephrine, ignoring dopamine altogether. Now, you can certainly tell where this is going, and why I labeled it as a "stupid" question. So, being that dopamine was not mentioned with regards to potentiation, I extrapolated that the dopaminergic effects of amphetamines are in fact potentiated by this substance, but without having seen this confirmed in the paper, I cant say definitively if this is true. Now, this may have been mentioned in the full study, but I only have access to the abstract and what I recall of the many PRL-related discussions on the web, here on Longecity as well as over on Reddit and a host of other sources, so that's what I'm basing my understanding on at the moment. Now, it's a bit embarrassing that I'd even be asking this, but I'm certainly far from a pharmacologist, just an individual with a strong curiosity for a plethora of topics, pharmacology/neurology-related or otherwise. Blame the Aspergers, haha. Now, I assume I'm right on this point, but there's certainly a chance I could be wrong. So, just for the sake of confirmation: correct or incorrect?

 

To update, after doing some more research on this topic, I've determined that my initial thoughts were correct. 3AlarmLampScooter mentioned that amphetamines and PRL-8-53 synergize well, which I've found to be the case as well. Indeed, the dopaminergic effects do seem to be potentiated with this combination. It's not definitive proof, and it is somewhat subjective, but it's good enough for me.


Edited by Ekscentra, 25 June 2014 - 07:37 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: prl 8 53experiences, prl-8-53, prl 8 53 experiences, new star nootropics, newstarnootropics, nikolaus hans, prl 8 53, prl

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users