@ gamesguru
Every nootropic? Man that's a bigger task to tackle. Now your task is more difficult, even insuperable for a single individual. Let's just stick to piracetam since that's the topic of the thread.
No, the OP simply asked a broad question regarding the safety of piracetam so therefore I gave a broad answer.
Any man that could account for a virtually infinite number of variables would be tantamount to God. Clearly a reasonable person would realize I am not referring to such sisyphean nonsense.
How can you prove, for example, that some degree of the brain fog does not become permanent, due to excitotoxicity as one pet theory put it. How can you not be alarmed by the negative anecdotal reports??
1)Reports of brainfog from Piracetam use are not universal.
2)Because current scientific evidence contradicts that theory and unlike brainfog excitotoxicity can be observed and quantified
3)Because we do not share a hivemind. Why should negative anecdotal reports be given more creedence than positive ones and visa versa?
Do you have a preponderance of evidence against long-term damage/effects??
That's a relative term. If current evidence is not suffient for you then who requires you to except it?
I would say chemicals are guilty until proven innocent.
See post #9
ideology
[ahy-dee-ol-uh-jee, id-ee-]
noun, plural ideologies.
1.
the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group...
http://dictionary.re...browse/ideology
Such damage could be clinically silent, subtle, showing no obvious symptoms, requiring decades of great diligence to uncover.
If you deem the potential risk a drug too great then by all means don't use it.
You seemlingly fail to grasp that no one is criticizing you for
your personal choices or beliefs. I never endorsed blind faith in science.
Anyone who suffered long-term damage could be considered a casualty of your liberal philosophy.
Ironic how my apparently "liberal philosophy" is met with your call for conservatism.
Discussing the safety of drugs (including piracetam) is not the same as encourging their use.
I cannot think it presumptuous to recommend a plant-based stack in place of more synthetic, experimental ones.
The OP wanted to know whether to believe ancedotal account vs published studies concerning racetam safety while you recommend "plant-based stacks" over synthetic drugs. Seems presumptuous to me.