• 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

Rubidium: A novel and underutilized nootropic candidate

rubidium nootropic rubidium chloride

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 PeopleProgrammer

  • Guest
  • 25 posts
  • 13
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Posted 12 July 2016 - 08:37 PM


http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC1436619/

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...d00297-0039.pdf

 

http://link.springer...646-6_32#page-1

 

http://www.google.co...2370684A1?cl=en

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/1153625

 

https://books.google...IRTAJ#v=onepage

 

https://en.wikipedia...bidium_chloride

 

TL;DR: Rubidium chloride has been shown to increase the duration of manic episodes in bipolar disorder as well as ameliorate the symptoms of depression with greater efficacy than impramine. Rubidium decreased basal cAMP levels but makes andenylyl cyclase more sensitive to external stimuli, resulting in an effect cAMP that is directly opposite to lithium. It may reduce the magnitude of mood swings with efficacy equal to lithium but without the loss of dopamine, and consequent mood depression associated with lithium treatment. another example of its efficacy in depression is in 5 people who did not respond to lithium, ECT, phenothiazine neuroleptics, or tricyclics (all the usual heavy-duty measures). Rubidium appears exceptionally safe with the toxic dose being 30 percent of potassium serum concentration (which you will never come close to without some really drastic measures)

I'd argue that controlled mania can be an extremely powerful method/mechanism of cognitive enhancement. It appears that rubidium may be as nootropic as lithium is neuroleptic. Na+ is primarily excitatory and is partially displaced by Li+ while K+ is primarily inhibitory and is partially displaced by Rb+. It would logically follow that their effects are equal in magnitude but opposite in effect, and this is the consensus based on available data.

Any interest or experiences? comments or concerns?


Edited by PeopleProgrammer, 12 July 2016 - 08:41 PM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • Informative x 2
  • like x 2
  • unsure x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Cheerful x 1
  • Agree x 1

#2 normalizing

  • Guest
  • 2,692 posts
  • -104
  • Location:Warm Greetings
  • NO

Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:04 PM

this makes it unattractive to me kind of;

 

Every 18 mg of RbCl is approximately equivalent to 1 Banana equivalent dose due to the large fraction (27.8%) of naturally occurring isotope Rubidium-87

 

Rubidium, like sodium and potassium, almost always has +1 oxidation state when dissolved in water, even in biological contexts. The human body tends to treat Rb+ ions as if they were potassium ions, and therefore concentrates rubidium in the body's intracellular fluid

 

Although a partial substitution of potassium by rubidium is possible, when more than 50% of the potassium in the muscle tissue of rats was replaced with rubidium, the rats died


Edited by normalizing, 14 July 2016 - 01:06 PM.


sponsored ad

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

#3 Mind_Paralysis

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Scandinavia
  • NO

Posted 14 July 2016 - 06:54 PM

Hmm... rubidium, huh?

 

I'm... sceptical about this one - mainly because so far, Rubidium has NOT been found to be a part of the mechanisms of any living organism (in comparison to say, Lithium) - that, the potassium-replacement property, coupled with the low level of radioactivity, makes me rather uneasy.

 

What exactly happens, when you use this long-term? I mean, if you take this drug for let's say, 3 years, what will be the result? Does the body have the ability to cleave the clorine-atom away from this molecule? I can see the toxicity rising in time then - maybe it won't be a problem for one year, maybe not two, but what happens in the third or fourth year?

 

And then there's the mania - controlled mania could probably be a useful property, but I can actually see this compound becoming a big problem when it comes to addiction - and if you take too much, then you won't be in controlled mania, now will you? Or maybe I have misunderstood the action of this compound.

 

I could see this being a useful compound in NARCOLEPSY though - they are the least likely to go truly manic, and they are already in a very serious position, so a compound like this may well be worth it to them.

 

 

What do you think about the narcolepsy-option, PeopleProgrammer? Would this have any greater effect than good ol' Amphetamine on them? Or would it not really provide any added benefits?



#4 treonsverdery

  • Guest
  • 1,312 posts
  • 161
  • Location:where I am at

Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:24 PM

This online reference has a new age sounding url yet the data is nifty;  https://www.essense-...ealth Topic.htm rubidium is as effective as tricyclics; it effects normetanepherine a metabolite of norepinephine from COMT

 

there are online descriptions of how rubidium, effects K (potassium) channels, effecting a variety of cytosystems.  some similar things, like strontium rather than calcium are actually physiologically beneficial.  thinking along the periodic table cesium has also been researched as a happifying drug (image)Attached File  cesium neurology.png   270.05KB   2 downloads

 

 

technology thought:  do you think a halogenated gas like a halothane, or just CF2Cl linked to rubidium would 1) remain a gas 2) be nootropic ?

that would be a nootropic anesthetic!


Edited by treonsverdery, 14 July 2016 - 11:04 PM.


#5 PeopleProgrammer

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 25 posts
  • 13
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Posted 14 July 2016 - 11:38 PM

Ok, in response to the influx of comments let me first say; there is a great deal of misconception/misinformation floating around. While I do mean to try my best to correct this, I mean absolutely no offense to you in my comments below.

 

It’s important to understand that a banana equivalent dose (BED) of radiation is absolutely tiny. ( 0.1 micro Sv to be precise) Every day you are exposed to more than 100x this amount, simply by existing on earth’s surface.  It would take MILLIONS of BED in a single day, to cause any radiation related symptoms. You *will not* get radiation sickness from rubidium unless you start eating large ampoules of the stuff (really, a quantity which likely wouldn’t even be legal to possess). A standard dose of rubidium should have a negligible to non-existent effect on your cancer risk. If it really worries you that much (which IMHO, it really shouldn’t), try stacking with decitabine or SAHA, or another anti-cancer drug that could protect against oncogene activation and mitosis checkpoint inactivation (which seems to be the mechanism by which radiation causes cancer).

 

Your body does not need to “cleave” or remove the chloride ion. This is an ionic compound. There are no covalent or peptide bonds in rubidium chloride. The chloride (1-) ion disassociates from the rubidium (1+) ion readily in aqueous solution. The hydrogen bonding capacity of water is adequate to separate the two ions, as is the case with all soluble ionic compounds. The MOA of rubidium is believed to be its displacement of potassium ions. None of the alkali metals build up in the body. They are all removed by the kidneys (in the loop of Henley) and you should not see toxicity from that displacement behavior unless you displace more than 30% of your entire body’s potassium. Heavy metal accumulation is really something that only occurs with the polyvalent metals of the d-block of the periodic table.  I’d be far more uneasy about lithium as it really seems to break everything. Rubidium seems to have opposite effects.

 

Rubidium does not significantly interact with sodium or displace it from ion channels on account of the large difference in atomic radius. It does however displace potassium, with toxicity becoming apparent at 30% displacement. Lithium is to sodium what magnesium is to calcium, except much more powerful and with extrapyramidal effects. Strontium’s benefit is highly contested and its effect on calcium may not be as you believe. I do not believe that strontium has any nootropic utility (but I might be wrong on this). The only displacement of calcium I see is in bones, where it makes them stronger yet somewhat brittle. There is also strontium ranelate which is linked to similar strontium related complications. Magnesium though, does seem to displace calcium from its ion channels and in some ways for some people may have nootropic potential. If you have any further information on strontium, namely why I might be wrong, please enlighten me?

 

Lastly I’m sure this has utility in narcolepsy, in some manner. It would be very different than amphetamine, and possibly synergistic. It would be neither better nor worse, merely a new therapeutic mechanism. However I’m far more interested in the ability to trigger and channel pseudo-mania in healthy people. I don’t see responsible use leading to taking a dose so high, so quickly, that the person is totally unprepared for it and loses all control. As long as you titrate up, you’ll acclimate to whatever changes occur and you (as well as your body) won’t be shocked into losing control. Thus even though it may be possible, most people won’t have issues. I sincerely hope that anyone reading this is responsible and aware enough to know to take it slow and proceed delicately. Common sense should be adequate protection to this.

 

Cesium is pretty cool and may be more potent than rubidium however there is even less data/research on it. I wouldn't feel comfortable proposing it as the successor to rubidium (which It may very well become) until we first get some reports and trials on rubidium in the nootropic community.

 

I think that rubidium will almost always form an ionic bond (and really stay ionized 90% of the time since it has a very weak hold on its outermost electron). Unless you ionize the gas, rubidium will not bond to it. the connection you seem to be implicating in your idea is a covalent bond which Unfortunatley I doubt will happen. that being said, I think anything that can supply rubidium would be nootropic (with the exception of things like anesthetics which are notorious for impairing memory etc). Something I'd personally like to see done, technology-wise with rubidium, is to make a brain-selective salt such as one with orotic acid. Lithium orotate, for instance largely does not dissociate until crossing the Blood-brain barrier. However orotic acid is not a viable candidate as it is likely mutagenic.

 


Edited by PeopleProgrammer, 14 July 2016 - 11:57 PM.


#6 normalizing

  • Guest
  • 2,692 posts
  • -104
  • Location:Warm Greetings
  • NO

Posted 15 July 2016 - 01:13 AM

peopleprogrammer, i couldnt even find this anywhere. it says used in europe for depression, WHERE!? i havent seen its use for depression anywhere IN THE WORLD, nevermind europe.

 

i am actually interested but this one has to be the most obscure antidepressant of them all. im starting to wonder, if it was ever used in europe for any period of time which i have no information on, why is it not used now days? europe has its own distinct manner of using antidepressants versus US so they always have their own meds and ways i would think if rubidium ever worked and there were no serious side effects, it would continue to be used?


  • Good Point x 1

#7 normalizing

  • Guest
  • 2,692 posts
  • -104
  • Location:Warm Greetings
  • NO

Posted 21 July 2016 - 04:39 PM

so peopleprogrammer could you find me more information on this, how to find a source and use? kind of sad this thread went into oblivion as it peaked my curiosity


  • Agree x 1

#8 Mind_Paralysis

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Scandinavia
  • NO

Posted 21 July 2016 - 08:16 PM

I think the reason why it's so obscure is probably because it's rarer and more expensive than many atoms used in medications - Rubidium is far rarer than chlorine, carbon, hydrogen, Lithium or Magnesium.

If you check Livescience you can compare the atomic masses, and since Rubidium is atomic number 37, while the others are all below 20, then you can see why this is a different metal. If you check this site for instance, you will find that the price of Rubidium is actually TWICE that of Lithium.

 

http://www.elementsa.../pl_element.htm

 

 

I think the reason why none of us can find any info on it, is because I'm guessing the European scientists that experimented with it, were probably a part of an EASTERN European country - somewhere behind the Iron Curtain back in the day.
Strangely enough, we used to think that Rubidium was actually really, really rare - but it turns out it's the 16th most common element on Earth! But the potential East-European chemists that discovered its therapeutic effects did not know this - there was no proof of that.

 

References:

 

http://www.livescien...9-rubidium.html

 

http://www.livescien...79-lithium.html

 

http://www.livescien...8-chlorine.html

 

http://www.livescien...-magnesium.html

 

 

 

Funny side-note: because of it's low radioactive properties, greater atomic weight than iron, and somewhat unstable (but not too unstable) nature, Rubidium could propably be very useful in explosive ammunition! Turns out someone else got the same idea as well, when I started googling:
http://www.thehighro.../1t-222608.html

(pscan12 is the guy with the same idea as me - I'm against explosive bullets though - just to be clear! I consider it a breach of the rules of engagement.)


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Informative x 1

#9 normalizing

  • Guest
  • 2,692 posts
  • -104
  • Location:Warm Greetings
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2016 - 12:02 AM

so, of all possible sources, should i use this http://www.elementsa.../pl_element.htm and then pour in a dish and consume :P


Edited by normalizing, 22 July 2016 - 12:03 AM.


#10 NinefingerJoe

  • Guest
  • 65 posts
  • 3
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 July 2016 - 02:18 AM

So you're telling me bananas are equally effective as TCAs? I'm very sceptical…
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#11 sativa

  • Guest
  • 536 posts
  • 46
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2016 - 01:06 PM

So you're telling me bananas are equally effective as TCAs? I'm very sceptical…


I don't think this is what was implied...

A Banana Equivalent Dose (BED) is an informal expression of ionizing radiation exposure, intended as a general educational example to indicate the potential dose due to naturally occurring radioactive isotopes by eating one average-sized banana. One BED is often taken as 0.1 µSv, however, in practice this dose is not cumulative, as the principal radioactive component is excreted to maintain metabolic equilibrium. The BED is only an indicative concept meant to show the existence of very low levels of natural radioactivity within a natural food and is not a formally adopted dose quantity.



#12 sativa

  • Guest
  • 536 posts
  • 46
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2016 - 01:09 PM

Double.post

Edited by sativa, 22 July 2016 - 01:17 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#13 Painkillerrr

  • Guest
  • 116 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 28 June 2018 - 03:50 PM

anyone manged to try it?



#14 gintrux

  • Registrant
  • 91 posts
  • 10
  • Location:Netherlands
  • NO

Posted 15 September 2020 - 04:14 PM

Anyone tried?



#15 JohnEisistin

  • Guest
  • 5 posts
  • 4
  • Location:KIEV, UA

Posted 27 February 2021 - 07:21 PM

Yes :3

sponsored ad

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

#16 gintrux

  • Registrant
  • 91 posts
  • 10
  • Location:Netherlands
  • NO

Posted 27 February 2021 - 07:49 PM

Haha I was first





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: rubidium, nootropic, rubidium chloride

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users