57 replies to this topic

[aaron43]

My interpretation of your post was it was intentionally vague and tediously long. Your post had nothing of substance. Saying the information is "out there". That anyone using these things with no results are themselves to blame and lack "brains". Claming that the effects of "creative connected genuine thoughts formed by connections from previous learnings" are "real". Is that opposed to ficticious thoughts formed by lack of conections to things never experienced and forgotten? The benifits you describe are so subtle as to be arguably non-existant. But you just keep on criticizing the graduate student op as if you're oh so much more intelligent than them.

My interpretation of your response is the same of my interpretation of you going through forums and claiming you know information. You breifly skim it, then you believe you know it, and if there is any critical thinking, you just dismiss it. Good job, and that post wasnt even long so if you cant read for that long, you must be on the right track. Im being vague because all the details are already in longecity. you can find them your a big boy.
"Ficticious thoughts formed by lack of connections to things never expereinced or forgotten" is called a lie/fake. And that applies exactly to your situation. Fictitious thoughts that nootropics dont work because you didn't experience the connection that you breifly read in a forum. You might be the smartest graduate student in your class but you came on here with a bold claim, with an education of nootropics equivelent to a fourth grader.

You literally said nothing in your post, you stated the opposite of what I said and then claimed that my post had no substance.
It not lack of "brains" its lack of intelligence to understand that nootropics aren't like drugs, and their effects are not like drugs, and their benefits are not like drugs. You won't feel it, its more in retrospect when you realize the nootropics are working when comparing a nootropic response to a normal response in a situation. But again there is no use in telling you this, because its all over these forums, and your still stuck in a egotistical mindset where if it doesn't make sense to you then its wrong.

quote: "2+2=4 right. 2+2=2 wrong, a typical linear think would say thats wrong. Nootropics provide the metaphorical square root over 2+2 that would make it equal 2. It provides outside-the-box facilitation to make a problem feasible..Thus seeming to increase intelligence, and actually increasing intelligence due to the new formation of the learned creative thoughts which can be used later down the line."  





This is thoroughly retarded. Why do you expect people to understand things that are illogical? Things that make no sense? 2+2=4 is correct, 2+2=2 is false, [(2+2)^(1/2)]=2 is correct. So what? Fundamentally changing a problem into a different problem to make it "feasible" is how you do math?

again

"2+2=2 wrong, a typical linear think would say thats wrong."

In fact it's just wrong and that's that. Not to mention this metaphor of yours has nothing to do with anything.

How is that illogical? Its illogical that you take that for the surface math equation and not what it symbolizes. If you were given just a 2+2=2 problem, and you were told to prove that it is true; a linear thinker(as yourself) would say "there no way omg!". What im trying to say is, nootropics facilitate the ability to make creative connections and ideas. It would take a creative idea for the first hypothetical person to discover how that problem would be possible. So its not a change in the problem, because that is assuming that you already have knowledge of square roots.
I can talk in metaphors all day because there is no way in words to describe it, except that "it makes you smarter". But no one will believe based just on the claim that "it makes you smarter", and yet you attack my metaphor for its surface appearance, as if it was a problem that can be easily fixed if you had no knowledge of the subject, instead of the conceptual value behind it.
You proved nothing in your post just like Newb, but in fact just played off of what I said, and have yet to come up with a thorough understandable genuine post of your own. That is called being uncreative, which is also called a linear thinker.
And if you claim, "OMG there is no detail in your post you must not know what your talking about!" Again...either look up my posts or look up the other millions of posts throughout longecity, weave through the bull****, and then find out what real and whats not. Don't claim the ineffectiveness of nootropics without putting an effort.

Edited by aaron43, 29 May 2011 - 09:29 PM.

[Esoparagon]

My friend and I were taking up to 11g of piracetam. Don't knock it until you go up to 10g.

There is a huge difference with piracetam and after a while you need less for it to work. It is not a placebo effect, it just doesn't work on everyone.

[manic_racetam]

This is one of the threads that makes you wonder if the OP is controlling multiple accounts and having conversations with him/herself to invoke an emotional response to sell something. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a link pop up soon for some sort of seminar on skepticism or a paid consumer protection website

Honestly though, the placebo effect works both ways. If you're convinced you'll have no effect from something then that can definitely change your subjective experience with it. So basing a statement like, "Nootropics are useless, don't waste your money on them" on a subjective personal experience, and supporting that conclusion with, "it's just placebo" seems like a null argument. Also an anti-nootropic post on this forum is a bit too obvious of an appeal to emotion. I call bullshit

[cathological]

Quote: "Im being vague because all the details are already in longecity."

And nowhere else.


Quote: "You might be the smartest graduate student in your class but you came on here with a bold claim, with an education of nootropics equivelent to a fourth grader."

I'm not a graduate student.


Quote: "So its not a change in the problem"


Yes, in fact it is. You might as well change it to 1+1=2 or 2+2=4. let me put it to you this way; is 2+2=[(2+2)^(1/2)] a true statment? I wont try to leave that up to your creative imagination because I tried that last time and it didn't work. The answer is no. You changed something into something else that isn't equivalent. Brilliant. Here lemme try that without even taking any 'noots'.... hmmmmm... how could I make -4 = 4? I know I'll just erase that negative symbol and presto 4 = 4!


Quote: "You literally said nothing in your post, you stated the opposite of what I said and then claimed that my post had no substance."

Think about that....




Piracetam has no cerebroprotective effect.

Edited by cathological, 30 May 2011 - 07:08 PM.

[cathological]

Newb1980 is correct. Nootropics are a lie created by this forum to sell sugar pills to dumb students. Of course, the same goes for amphetamine, except only "big pharma" sells it. Same goes for methamphetamine, doesn't do shit, but people sell it to dumb rednecks saying it will make them happy to get money. Works rather well actually, nobody even realizes in the years of research and experimentation with all of these compounds that they do not actually do anything, except me and newb1980 of course, right?

LOL. Why do I get the feeling this was voted down because one of you nootropics idiots didn't realize he was being sarcastic?

[newb1980]

My friend and I were taking up to 11g of piracetam. Don't knock it until you go up to 10g.

There is a huge difference with piracetam and after a while you need less for it to work. It is not a placebo effect, it just doesn't work on everyone.

Good gawd! I'd be a little afraid of that much powder in my system. Fair enough, I haven't tried that much. Maybe I will, but that much scares me. Did you feel strange with that much powder in your belly?

[newb1980]

This is one of the threads that makes you wonder if the OP is controlling multiple accounts and having conversations with him/herself to invoke an emotional response to sell something. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a link pop up soon for some sort of seminar on skepticism or a paid consumer protection website

Honestly though, the placebo effect works both ways. If you're convinced you'll have no effect from something then that can definitely change your subjective experience with it. So basing a statement like, "Nootropics are useless, don't waste your money on them" on a subjective personal experience, and supporting that conclusion with, "it's just placebo" seems like a null argument. Also an anti-nootropic post on this forum is a bit too obvious of an appeal to emotion. I call bullshit

LOL! In fact, thanks for introducing me pitch. I would love to show you my new website, "Get Fit in Ten Daze," where you get the ultimate anti-noot cleansing program. Piracetam got you headachy? Have the adrafinil jitters? Go to www.antinootssuperhealth.com today!

BTW, TO BE CLEAR: I am NOT saying that noots don't work for everybody, all I am saying, from my limited experience, that it hasn't worked for me. I don't think I have done anything that unreasonable. It suggests to me that, AT THE VERY LEAST, the range of possible responses to noots includes a big fat nothing. Take what you will from that.

If it works for you, I'm not going to knock it (though I know I seem quite strident), but, please, permit me to be a little more skeptical, particularly since we are dealing in the realm of self-experimentation. Maybe it works for you, but I doubt it's real.

[nezxon]

Maybe it works for you, but I doubt it's real.

I posted a long list of ways that nootropics are 'real'. Proliferation of NMDA receptors isn't an imaginary result. It may not be the result you want, but you don't think the chemicals in your body are real? Are you just filled with magic dust inside?

[manic_racetam]

This is one of the threads that makes you wonder if the OP is controlling multiple accounts and having conversations with him/herself to invoke an emotional response to sell something. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a link pop up soon for some sort of seminar on skepticism or a paid consumer protection website

Honestly though, the placebo effect works both ways. If you're convinced you'll have no effect from something then that can definitely change your subjective experience with it. So basing a statement like, "Nootropics are useless, don't waste your money on them" on a subjective personal experience, and supporting that conclusion with, "it's just placebo" seems like a null argument. Also an anti-nootropic post on this forum is a bit too obvious of an appeal to emotion. I call bullshit

LOL! In fact, thanks for introducing me pitch. I would love to show you my new website, "Get Fit in Ten Daze," where you get the ultimate anti-noot cleansing program. Piracetam got you headachy? Have the adrafinil jitters? Go to www.antinootssuperhealth.com today!

BTW, TO BE CLEAR: I am NOT saying that noots don't work for everybody, all I am saying, from my limited experience, that it hasn't worked for me. I don't think I have done anything that unreasonable. It suggests to me that, AT THE VERY LEAST, the range of possible responses to noots includes a big fat nothing. Take what you will from that.

If it works for you, I'm not going to knock it (though I know I seem quite strident), but, please, permit me to be a little more skeptical, particularly since we are dealing in the realm of self-experimentation. Maybe it works for you, but I doubt it's real.

I went to your website... not very impressed

There's been enough laboratory testing on animals showing the action of nootropics in the brain that I'm not even going to entertain your argument that the effects are "fake" (not real).

As far as placebo effect though, I think you're taking the wrong viewpoint altogether. The placebo effect is "real". Do a quick search on placebo knee surgery if you're curious. Be as skeptical as you want but take into consideration that your skepticism has likely turned into a prejudice that is playing a large part in shaping your subjective experience.

I just wonder why you seem so upset about this. Are you mad that you didn't get the awesome placebo effect and so now you feel like trying to spoil it for everyone? Or maybe the aniracetam is causing some aggression or confusion, a rare but potentially serious side effect. LOL

[iago]

I'm not wading through this. I just wanted to say that while I can understand the perceived effects from most of these can be negligible, adrafinil should not be one of them. It's kind of a pain to take because it needs to be taken on an empty stomach and you should not consume food for about an hour after ingestion. To add to that, I find that I can't take it first thing in the morning - perhaps my stomach is too empty! Anyway, the ideal time to take it is two hours after the last meal.

[cathological]

I'm not wading through this. I just wanted to say that while I can understand the perceived effects from most of these can be negligible, adrafinil should not be one of them. It's kind of a pain to take because it needs to be taken on an empty stomach and you should not consume food for about an hour after ingestion. To add to that, I find that I can't take it first thing in the morning - perhaps my stomach is too empty! Anyway, the ideal time to take it is two hours after the last meal.

I just searched adrafinil on pubmed and it turns up only 31 research articles. Virtually all of them are on animals such as dogs and rats.


http://www.ncbi.nlm....?term=adrafinil

You have to ask yourself why anyone should take any 'nootropics' if this rickety ass research is the basis upon which adrafinil is considered one of the most promising of the bunch.

[iago]

I did not say that Adrafinil is "the most promising of the bunch." Adrafinil is the prodrug of modafinil, a prescription drug that most certainly has an effect on wakefulness. Theoretically, adrafinil, once metabolized, has the same mode of action as modafinil. My point is that Adrafinil "works," it has an effect when administered correctly.

[cathological]

Or you know, you could just sleep a bit more and not take drugs that cause liver damage.

[manic_racetam]

Or you know, you could just sleep a bit more and not take drugs that cause liver damage.

You're obviously the OP and are getting boring. Let's all just stop bumping your thread that doesn't seem to be helping anyone. If nootropics are causing people harm and you don't like that, then at least realize that your proselytizing isn't going to stop anyone from taking them.

[nezxon]

You're obviously the OP and are getting boring. Let's all just stop bumping your thread that doesn't seem to be helping anyone. If nootropics are causing people harm and you don't like that, then at least realize that your proselytizing isn't going to stop anyone from taking them.

I think you're right about that. I suspect he's a scientologist. He has an agenda and he keeps switching up user names and playing baiting games to try to build up to some pitch. I think this thread is a farce, I don't think he's taken any nootropics. I get the sense that his current ethics wouldn't allow him to ingest a foreign agent.

Here's my thinking: I would have thought salesman, but he's too defensive of his position for a salesman. He works too hard to spread panic and false information, it's like a religious zeal. A salesman doesn't argue back and forth with people about whether or not it's okay to take supplements. He could be a common troll, but it's a terribly niche community to seek out for your average troll. Just the right mix of delusion and self-righteousness for a scientologist though. That group does have a fundamental problem with using drugs to treat the brain, so that makes sense. Now that I can see the pattern at least I can avoid being engaged by him again.

[newb1980]

HEY EVERYONE. I'M THE OP. I AM NOT CATHOLOGICAL, I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT PERSON IS.

Just as I assume that everyone who disagrees with is a distinct, biological entity, why can't you assume that more than one person finds nootropics less than workable (i.e. that I am difference than someone named "cathological"? Is it THAT inconceivable that more than one person was disappointed or critical of the (non) effects of noots?

I don't know cathological's position, but my OWN experience stems from ineffectual noots. Rather than spin conspiracy theories about my supposed existence, why not discuss the CONTENT of my complaints and criticisms?

Someone else asked why I go to lonegecity and complain about noots, then suggesting I'm an elaborate troll. This is why I am here: It's because: 1) I read these threads, 2) learned about noots from these threads (what to get, where to get it); 3) spent hundreds of dollars on said noots, 4) tried them for three weeks, 5) found no experiential effect, even on something like adrafinil, which has been said to elicit subjective changes (see erowid).

[nezxon]

HEY EVERYONE. I'M THE OP. I AM NOT CATHOLOGICAL, I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT PERSON IS.

Just as I assume that everyone who disagrees with is a distinct, biological entity, why can't you assume that more than one person finds nootropics less than workable (i.e. that I am difference than someone named "cathological"? Is it THAT inconceivable that more than one person was disappointed or critical of the (non) effects of noots?

You don't answer questions because that doesn't register as a high priority to you. You're not here to answer questions, you're here to preach. All the technical details about physical changes, chemistry, pharmokinetics, response curves... all that has no significance to you because you're just here to make a statement disguised as a question. Basically, get bent.

[cathological]

Only 31 research articles... and not one of you have anything to say.

[newb1980]

HEY EVERYONE. I'M THE OP. I AM NOT CATHOLOGICAL, I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT PERSON IS.

Just as I assume that everyone who disagrees with is a distinct, biological entity, why can't you assume that more than one person finds nootropics less than workable (i.e. that I am difference than someone named "cathological"? Is it THAT inconceivable that more than one person was disappointed or critical of the (non) effects of noots?

You don't answer questions because that doesn't register as a high priority to you. You're not here to answer questions, you're here to preach. All the technical details about physical changes, chemistry, pharmokinetics, response curves... all that has no significance to you because you're just here to make a statement disguised as a question. Basically, get bent.

Those hypothesized mechanisms DO have significance to me. Hence, I spend 100s of dollars on nootropics. However, my experience with said noots have not been perceptible. I have continued to take them (until my supply runs out) and they STILL do nothing. Based on my experience, I call into question the efficacy of said noots. For example, it is possible that these noots may work in people with brain damage (e.g. alcoholics may benefit from piracetam) or in certain demographic subpopulations (e.g. the purported efficacy of adrafinil among the elderly has been demonstrated). On the other hand, much of the hypothesized mechansism that may operate may simple be at too low a level. OR the publication bias in science may result in numerous type I errors (false positives). OR perhaps there are "saturation" levels at which mega-loads of noots do not work (similar to something like vitamin C).

I am NOT saying that my personal null experience disproves efficacy in all cases. HOWEVER, absent more clincial trials in humans, I can at least attest to the likelihood that the RANGE OF POSSIBLE OUTCOMES INCLUDES A FAT NULL. I am only broadening the discussion to include this point: THE RANGE OF POSSIBLE OUTCOMES INCLUDES A FAT, EXPENSIVE NULL. Now, it MAY work for you. You may be above the null in your confidence interval. BUT, YOU MAY END UP WITH SIMILAR EXPERIENCES TO MINE.

That said, since I paid 100s of dollars for this stuff, I will use it until my supply runs out. IF IT WORKS, then I will certainly report on this. BUT, FOUR WEEKS IN, STILL NOTHING AT ALL.

[aaron43]

On the other hand, much of the hypothesized mechansism that may operate may simple be at too low a level.

OR the publication bias in science may result in numerous type I errors (false positives).

OR perhaps there are "saturation" levels at which mega-loads of noots do not work (similar to something like vitamin C).

For example, it is possible that these noots may work in people with brain damage (e.g. alcoholics may benefit from piracetam) or in certain demographic subpopulations (e.g. the purported efficacy of adrafinil among the elderly has been demonstrated).

- Piracetam has made you feel tired? It proves that the little substance you take can have physiological effect varying on what level they work on.
- Doctorate Degrees and the majority of experiences on longecity are that at least one nootropic works. Disproving your argument.
- Recommended Dosage, Optimal Dosage, User Experience Optimal Dosage, Toxicity limit, pro-oxidation limit.
- Elderly people/injured usually are below optimal working threshold. Their effects are more noticeable due to new threshold baseline level. There are have no profound studies on healthy young people, they are not the target of most studies. They are close to or at or above optimal working threshold. The effects of supplementation may not be noticed, but through scientific theory and personal experiences there is a feel for what works and doesn't work. Demographic population can subjectively be argued that there are nutrient deficiencies throughout varying populations, economies, and demographic region. There would be no way to prove that theory wrong so you will never get a right answer to that portion of the question. And there it is boyo take it or leave it.

Stop talkin to him
AND Im way higher than you right now.
your goofy

since I paid 100s of dollars for this stuff, I will use it until my supply runs out. IF IT WORKS, then I will certainly report on this. BUT, FOUR WEEKS IN, STILL NOTHING AT ALL.

o
- If you payed hundreds of dollars on piracetam, adrafinil, aniracetam*, and choline then you shant be running out anytime soon.

Edited by aaron43, 06 June 2011 - 08:23 PM.

[aaron43]

just searched adrafinil on pubmed and it turns up only 31 research articles. Virtually all of them are on animals such as dogs and rats.


http://www.ncbi.nlm....?term=adrafinil

You have to ask yourself why anyone should take any 'nootropics' if this rickety ass research is the basis upon which adrafinil is considered one of the most promising of the bunch.

- O you say? http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC1227691/

Let's all just stop bumping your thread that doesn't seem to be helping anyone.

Sorry ol boy

Edited by aaron43, 06 June 2011 - 08:41 PM.

[krsna]

entertaining thread to read. people can become so cultish about their drugs, anyone challenging the efficacy of these supplements is trashed and gangbanged verbally. as a neutral unbiased spectator reading this, a couple of years removed, my own perception is that peoples reaction to the OP only seem to help support his/her argument. i can't really fathom why someone spending money on something and getting a positive effect out of it, would become so horribly defensive and angrily eager to defend it's worth. it's as if i drank alcohol and said 'man this stuff makes me feel great', and someone comes on my forum and says 'i tried alcohol and got nothing out of it', I'd just feel sorry for them, not gang up and attack them with crazy speculations (paranoid in some cases) about them having a sales agenda or posting under multiple accounts. anyways, from my own perspective, for the money people pay on a lot of these things, i only hope they have a lot of spare money, because i would think directing some of that revenue towards healthy food/recreation would be a far greater positive addition to ones 'stack' than a lot of these 'miracle powders'. people on this site also tend to have some higher literary skill and a tendency to extreme hyperbole, something anyone should take into account when reading 'experience' threads - ie. keep your expectations realistic, don't buy the hype.

[KoolK3n]

entertaining thread to read. people can become so cultish about their drugs, anyone challenging the efficacy of these supplements is trashed and gangbanged verbally. as a neutral unbiased spectator reading this, a couple of years removed, my own perception is that peoples reaction to the OP only seem to help support his/her argument. i can't really fathom why someone spending money on something and getting a positive effect out of it, would become so horribly defensive and angrily eager to defend it's worth. it's as if i drank alcohol and said 'man this stuff makes me feel great', and someone comes on my forum and says 'i tried alcohol and got nothing out of it', I'd just feel sorry for them, not gang up and attack them with crazy speculations (paranoid in some cases) about them having a sales agenda or posting under multiple accounts. anyways, from my own perspective, for the money people pay on a lot of these things, i only hope they have a lot of spare money, because i would think directing some of that revenue towards healthy food/recreation would be a far greater positive addition to ones 'stack' than a lot of these 'miracle powders'. people on this site also tend to have some higher literary skill and a tendency to extreme hyperbole, something anyone should take into account when reading 'experience' threads - ie. keep your expectations realistic, don't buy the hype.

You got to give them some credit though. The perseverance to finally discover the "ultimate" nootropic has eluded everyone for well over a decade since nootropic discussions began. The thread of hope for that revitalized PRL-8-53 substance. I applaud their courage for pioneering into the unknown at the risk of severe adverse effects. People including myself believe that someday the effects from the movie Limitless can be replicated in reality or at least damn close.

Yes, some people vouch for racetams, but that can't be the end goal. If racetams are the closest thing to NZT, than I'll be pretty disappointed cause after a decade of discussion, the best we can come up with are racetams? I just feel like we're focusing so much attention on the racetams that we forgot our end goal objective. If PRL-8-53 doesn't work universally, it's on with the next research chemical with caution of course.

I'm pleased that a majority of the community realize this and are trying to break the norm of conventional nootropics. Even the discussions with noopept were a step up because people realized that more can be done in terms of neuroenhancement. Lastly, ask yourself this, do you really want this forum site to be arguing about the effectiveness of racetams 5, 10, 15 years from now? Supplement companies are easily making money off of this approach and it slows down possibilities of solidarity for newer research.

Edited by KoolK3n, 08 April 2013 - 08:45 PM.

[krsna]

I'm not very interested in having the effects of the nzt limitless thing, my holy grail mythological quest would be more along the lines of buddhist enlightenment -- perhaps just as illusory and impossible of achievement as nzt limitless brainpower, but to me that seems more interesting, even from the mythological standpoint alone, the descriptions of nirvana, samadhi, etc, all sound far more interesting than nzt/limitless. to me it's the difference between, do you want to be so smart and energetic that you can achieve all the material/consumerist/ego ends the world has to offer? fame, fortune, sex, possessions? or.. would you rather become so emancipated from those desires that you could be completely destitute, hungry, alone, yet in complete bliss and harmony with your surroundings and yourself? to me the answer is clear and the route to achievement seems more sustainable and a question of personal will-power and perseverance as opposed to gambling my health on powders.

for what it's worth, i doubt there will ever be any powder or other chemical means of vastly enhancing ones intelligence. for that i could see something more along the lines of surgical implants, which im sure many on this forum would happily embrace and sign up for.

Edited by bowleaf, 08 April 2013 - 09:12 PM.

[KoolK3n]

me it's the difference between, do you want to be so smart and energetic that you can achieve all the material/consumerist/ego ends the world has to offer? fame, fortune, sex, possessions? or.. would you rather become so emancipated from those desires that you could be completely destitute, hungry, alone, yet in complete bliss and harmony with your surroundings and yourself?

Personally, I would take the cognitive enhancer. Btw can't you just take DMT for what you're seeking? I can't think of anything more powerful.

[krsna]

me it's the difference between, do you want to be so smart and energetic that you can achieve all the material/consumerist/ego ends the world has to offer? fame, fortune, sex, possessions? or.. would you rather become so emancipated from those desires that you could be completely destitute, hungry, alone, yet in complete bliss and harmony with your surroundings and yourself?

Personally, I would take the cognitive enhancer. Btw can't you just take DMT for what you're seeking? I can't think of anything more powerful.

I don't think you can shortcut your way to spiritual enlightenment (or whatever term you prefer to substitute in there). If you could, all these teenagers who take copious amounts of hallucinogens would be the most spiritual interesting people.. instead of, you know. I don't think drug-induced hallucinations are without value, but they don't compare with spending a life fine-tuning your mind and body to be directed in one way. The problem with chemicals is, you can have a profound experience while on the drug, but afterwards you are not significantly changed, or if you are you are in danger of being changed in a negative way as you haven't developed the discipline or fundamentals for being able to understand what you've seen or incorporate it into a proper vision of the world -- proper being in this case very relative but nonetheless one I define as being in sync with some of the worlds major belief systems and with human life in general.

For so-called cognitive enhancers, at the end of the day all you're doing is throwing in higher grade octane, the engine stays the same. If you have a powerful engine then you are genetically blessed, if you have an old junker engine, you are unfortunate, no drug will change this and you can argue neuroplasticity until the cows come in, you will never fundamentally change the basic structure and form of your genetic inheritance, no matter how much chemical intervention you pursue.

[KoolK3n]

I don't think you can shortcut your way to spiritual enlightenment (or whatever term you prefer to substitute in there). If you could, all these teenagers who take copious amounts of hallucinogens would be the most spiritual interesting people.. instead of, you know. I don't think drug-induced hallucinations are without value, but they don't compare with spending a life fine-tuning your mind and body to be directed in one way. The problem with chemicals is, you can have a profound experience while on the drug, but afterwards you are not significantly changed, or if you are you are in danger of being changed in a negative way as you haven't developed the discipline or fundamentals for being able to understand what you've seen or incorporate it into a proper vision of the world -- proper being in this case very relative but nonetheless one I define as being in sync with some of the worlds major belief systems and with human life in general.

Several months ago, I took an extremely high dose of LSD. 500ug to be exact which is around 10 blotters. In addition, I potentiated it two-fold with high dose Piracetam. I totally agree with you, but the effects not being permanent is actually a good thing (at least for me). It wasn't a bad trip, I had brief moments of heavenly peace and utter hell but the majority of the time I was neutral (limbo). The trip lasted over 14 hours and I wanted to sleep so I took a benzo to end it. The next morning, I was extremely glad that nothing horrible happened and that I rejoined the collective human hive mind (normal perception of reality). The aftereffects lingered for a few weeks as I slowly drifted back to "normal" thinking.

The shortcut to experiencing an entire shift in consciousness can be a great tool for learning other perspectives temporarily but comes at an expense such as autism, adhd, psychotic like symptoms, etc if the individual of the user is like you said unguided or undisciplined. I think this is where the term "psychonaut" comes from because it's so easy to become lost and isolated. This is especially true for teenagers who take hallucinogens. For the vast majority of humans though, I doubt psychedelics can be tamed even with meditation The raw power in total immersion is overwhelming to the brink of insanity. If psychedelics can radically alter cognitive functioning, imagine tweaking that formula a bit for an effect similar to NZT. I don't see why it can't happen.

For so-called cognitive enhancers, at the end of the day all you're doing is throwing in higher grade octane, the engine stays the same. If you have a powerful engine then you are genetically blessed, if you have an old junker engine, you are unfortunate, no drug will change this and you can argue neuroplasticity until the cows come in, you will never fundamentally change the basic structure and form of your genetic inheritance, no matter how much chemical intervention you pursue.

Yeah except epigenetics. Genetic engineering is still several decades out.

Edited by KoolK3n, 09 April 2013 - 06:52 PM.

[Racetams]

I think people simply needed to be in a state of mind where they can completely feel the effects, it is as simple as that, all you need to do is look at the research and see the double blind placebo controlled studies proving efficacy. Those looking to "feel" a boost in memory will not notice anything, as if it were a coffee.