44 replies to this topic

[jamesw]

Hi, I was wondering if I can get an opinion on this formula?

Vinpocetine: 10mg

DMAE: 75mg

Huperzine: 100mcg

Pyritinol: 175mg

Picamilon: 50mg

Rhodiola Rosea: 75mg

CDP Choline: 10mg

I'm looking for a supplement to help focus and quicken my thinking. Any opinion will be greatly appreciated.

[LifeMirage]

It's a good formula....the 2 main nootropics in this formula are in fair doses.

I did help design it and the newer formula coming out in a few months.....fyi.

[jamesw]

Thanks very much Lifemirage! I'll wait for the newer formula!

[LifeMirage]

Thanks very much Lifemirage! I'll wait for the newer formula!

lol....ok but don't e-mail or call them asking for it...wait for it to come out.

[losty]

Seems remarkably well balanced for an all in one. The DMAE and CDP would tire quickly on their own but the HUP-A would carry their asses taking them the distance. Vinpo and Picamilon synergising for for some hefty vasodilation and working their own unique magics by themselves .Pyritinol FOCUSING on its thing and a bit of Rhodiola for its chill factor. 2 pills would work quite nicely.

Would be a good formula to recommend someone who is naive to nootropics and lacks the inclination/disicpline to take a heap of different pills.

Nice1 LM How long have you been around doing this stuff ?? An advanced lifeform from way back huh?

I read your book " Cognitive Awareness" will have nootropics as only a small part of its cover.
Am awaiting it eagerly.

[LifeMirage]

Seems remarkably well balanced for an all in one. The DMAE and CDP would tire quickly on their own but the HUP-A would carry their asses taking them the distance. Vinpo and Picamilon synergising for for some hefty vasodilation and working their own unique magics by themselves .Pyritinol FOCUSING on its thing and a bit of Rhodiola for its chill factor. 2 pills would work quite nicely.

Would be a good formula to recommend someone who is naive to nootropics and lacks the inclination/disicpline to take a heap of different pills.

Its a good formula for those who want to take a 1-4 pills and get a fair dose of a few nootropics.

Nice1 LM How long have you been around doing this stuff ?? An advanced lifeform from way back huh?

Well over a decade....consulting Source Naturals, Now Foods, Better Health Products, Smart Nutrition, Unique Nutrition, Relentless Improvement,..the list goes on......and the people I've talked to and met...Ward Dean, James South, Paul/Tom at MoreLife, Ergopharm...interesting.

I read your book " Cognitive Awareness" will have nootropics as only a small part of its cover.
Am awaiting it eagerly

.

It will be a chapter….that happens to contain the most detailed info on nootropics ever….but is not the focus of the book. Thank you for your interest.

[rbutinar]

I am 32 year-old. I work as consultant and run my own company, then cognitive alertness and mood are key factors for my private but also for my business life.
Three weeks ago I started with the simplest approach I could figure out: PIRACETAM alone (6x800mg a day for 2 days, then 3x800mg per day).

Initially I experienced a lot of nice effects, mostly linked with very improved mood and increased energy. I also started to find my girlfriend much more interesting than before (I didn't expect this effect from a nootropic, but I liked it...). From the cognitive side, I can't say If there have been effects (as improved memory or speach ability), but, overall, I felt great and I decided to go on.

But from the first time I also experienced some side effects as light headaches and some neck tension and they turned worse few days after, I experienced increased nervousism, as when you are tired and you take coffee to stay awake. So I decided then to drop to 1 pill per day to reduce side effects and try to calm down and restore energy.

I guess this may be related to shortened CHOLINE levels (??), so I am going to order and take choline together with Piractam. But so many different approaches and stacks... in this forum, I don't know what would be the best. Some of you are taking 10 or more different pills. Should I follow the path of adding slowly one by one to observe and calibrate effects or better to go to a "ready mix" as "Get Smart"?

Any advice will be very welcome.

Roberto

[rfarris]

I tried the "taking 10 or more different pills" when I started a couple of months ago. My neck started hurting, which I assume you are calling "neck tension," and after a fair amount of experimentation I found out that my neck quit hurting when I cut out the A-GPC choline. I was taking a relatively small racetam load -- 1600mg Piracetam, 800mg Aniracetam, 750mg Oxyracetam; but I was also taking Hup-A, which I think helps keep your choline high (acetylcholine, actually).

I read that a common side effect of low levels of choline (for the amount of rams one takes) is caused by a headache. Too much, a painful neck; too little and a headache.

Recently, after completely cutting out choline, I've started having a very mild headache, so I think it's time to put a little bit of A-GPC back in. Someone else said that it is not all that great an idea to take Hup-A every day, so I think I'll start using Hup-A and a small amount of A-GPC weekdays, and on the weekend no Hup-A, but more A-GPC. I'll report what happens.

At any rate, I'm probably going to take a beating over this, but if you're considering an all-in-one cognitive stack, I suggest you also take a look at Ortho-Mind as well as Get Smart. You can see Ortho-Mind at www.relentlessimprovement.com. (Just a happy customer.)

[zoolander]

the "get smart" supplement is a great supplement. It is a great starting supplement for those who would like to try nootropics.

I have also tried their "Pay Attention" supplement. This was also a great supplement until they changed the formula recently. The new "Pay attention: formula contain very very low dosages of many good compounds but unfortunately they are in ridiculously small dosages. The dosages are so small that they would only act as fillers. The new "Pay attention" contains centrophenoxine which in Australia (I'm in Australia) and alot of other countries is a regulated substance. When I spoke to "Smart nutrition" and questioned them about this they were not exactly co-operative and basically gave me the cold shoulder. Understandably as Australia is a very small market.

I have started making my own for formulas and encapsulating them myself. It's a very tedious job but I have gotten used to it. Rhodiola is a bitch to encapsulate though.

All this said, even after buying in bulk powders and encapulating them myself, the price difference between the bulk powders and "Get Smart" is not that much so "Get Smart" is a really good simple and convienient way to get your nootropics

[eternaltraveler]

At any rate, I'm probably going to take a beating over this, but if you're considering an all-in-one cognitive stack, I suggest you also take a look at Ortho-Mind

I don't think you'll take a beating over it. However for me it's unfortunate as I've recently developed some kind of an allergy or other intolerance to something in ortho mind. When I take it I get a cough for the following 2 days. Which sucks because I liked the forumla.

[psychenaut]

The new LEF Mitochondial Energy Optimizer is an interesting formula. Cognitex is also reformulated, they added what they call a "Neuroprotection Complex". If you haven't checked them out lately, you owe it to yourself to do so.

The good news is there are some excellent choices based on your individual preferences.

[dopamine]

Vinpocetine: 10mg

DMAE: 75mg

Huperzine: 100mcg

Pyritinol: 175mg

Picamilon: 50mg

Rhodiola Rosea: 75mg

CDP Choline: 10mg

This isn't a very good formula, IMO. I would first of all take the DMAE out since it competitively blocks choline transport to the brain, amongst other anticholinergic effects (1,2). Second, I would replace the Pyritinol with Vinpocetine (a good antioxidant and vasodialator) as Pyritinol has been associated with the development of hepatitis and acute pacreatitis (3,4). The Huperzine A dose is a little high, I would lower it to 50 mcg. Rhodiola rosea dose is so ridiculously low that it doesn't even warrant comment, same for the CDP-Choline.


1. Leung HW, Tyl RW, Ballantyne B, Klonne DR. " Developmental toxicity study in Fischer 344 rats by whole-body exposure to N,N-dimethylethanolamine vapor." J Appl Toxicol. 1996 Nov-Dec; 16(6): 533-8.

2. Fisher MC, Zeisel SH, Mar MH, Sadler TW. "Perturbations in choline metabolism cause neural tube defects in mouse embryos in vitro." FASEB J. 2002 Apr;16(6):619-21.

3. Maria V, Albuquerque A, Loureiro A, Sousa A, Victorino R. "Severe cholestatic hepatitis induced by pyritinol." BMJ. 2004 Mar 6;328(7439):572-4.

4. Straumann A, Bauer M, Pichler WJ, Pirovino M. "Acute pancreatitis due to pyritinol: an immune-mediated phenomenon." Gastroenterology. 1998 Aug;115(2):452-4.

[LifeMirage]

This isn't a very good formula, IMO. I would first of all take the DMAE out since it competitively blocks choline transport to the brain, amongst other anticholinergic effects (1,2). Second, I would replace the Pyritinol with Vinpocetine (a good antioxidant and vasodialator) as Pyritinol has been associated with the development of hepatitis and acute pacreatitis (3,4). The Huperzine A dose is a little high, I would lower it to 50 mcg. Rhodiola rosea dose is so ridiculously low that it doesn't even warrant comment, same for the CDP-Choline.


1. Leung HW, Tyl RW, Ballantyne B, Klonne DR. " Developmental toxicity study in Fischer 344 rats by whole-body exposure to N,N-dimethylethanolamine vapor." J Appl Toxicol. 1996 Nov-Dec; 16(6): 533-8.

2. Fisher MC, Zeisel SH, Mar MH, Sadler TW. "Perturbations in choline metabolism cause neural tube defects in mouse embryos in vitro." FASEB J. 2002 Apr;16(6):619-21.

3. Maria V, Albuquerque A, Loureiro A, Sousa A, Victorino R. "Severe cholestatic hepatitis induced by pyritinol." BMJ. 2004 Mar 6;328(7439):572-4.

4. Straumann A, Bauer M, Pichler WJ, Pirovino M. "Acute pancreatitis due to pyritinol: an immune-mediated phenomenon." Gastroenterology. 1998 Aug;115(2):452-4.

Pyritinol is one of the best nootropics & a potent antioxidant to take....a few case reports really means nothing compared to its 40 years in the worldwide market....Huperzine A is remarkably safe and I've given it to older women in their 40's at 200 mcg daily for years with no problems.

Compare this formula to most of the brain formulas on the market I consider it one of the best ones.....next to AOR's OrthoMind. They update this product every few years...with a new formula coming out in a few months.

[exigentsky]

I think I'll give the new "Get Smart" formula a try due to your recommendations.

However, I hate the name. It implies that I'm not already smart and that I need to formula to "get smart". WTF!? Perhaps they could change the name with the new formula too.

Also, what has changed in the new formula?

[rfarris]

Huperzine A is remarkably safe and I've given it to older women in their 40's at 200 mcg daily for years with no problems.

Ahem. "40's" isn't all that old, Life. How old are you, exactly?

--Rick

[LifeMirage]

I think I'll give the new "Get Smart" formula a try due to your recommendations.

However, I hate the name. It implies that I'm not already smart and that I need to formula to "get smart". WTF!? Perhaps they could change the name with the new formula too.

Also, what has changed in the new formula?

Its a good formula one of many on the market....I believe they think the name is catchy and doubt they will change it.

I really can't comment on the changes and neither will they...but it will be an upgrade.

Ahem. "40's" isn't all that old, Life. How old are you, exactly?

--Rick

Did not mean to categorize 40's as old or older but perhaps middle aged is a better term. I'm in my 30's btw.

Yours In Health

[dopamine]

Pyritinol is one of the best nootropics & a potent antioxidant to take....a few case reports really means nothing compared to its 40 years in the worldwide market

Vinpocetine has about twice as much research as Pyritinol, and has no known case reports of it causing liver problems. Just because Pyritinol has "been around" for a while doesn't mean it is superior to newer substances. Pyritinol isn't even in the PDR as a supplement or drug.

Personally, I think Vinpocetine is far superior to Pyritinol as a cerebral vasodialator and antioxidant.

[scottl]

Dopamine,

LifeMirage is a....clinican with experience using pyritinol (and many other nootropics) in many patients over a long period of time. Pyritinol has....properties (see numerous prior threads) which vinpo does not (ones very helpful for anyone with ADD for example).

Perhaps you also are a clinician, I do not know. But if there is one weakness to boards e.g. here and avant is that sitting at a computer and researching supps e.g. with pubmed ain't the same as practicing in a field and seeing how patients actually respond. Stuff works and is discovered "in the field" that ain't in the books, and not all patients read the book.

Dopamine I have respect for your and your knowledge, but there is info you are not aware of, and this discussion has...happened enough that as I said the last time, pyritinol should be a FAQ.

[LifeMirage]

Vinpocetine has about twice as much research as Pyritinol, and has no known case reports of it causing liver problems.

Pyritinol has been in use since 1960's there is a massive amount of research & clinical experience (which I consider an important factor) on it but most of it is not in english or not pubmed where is I assume you made the comment vinpocetine has more research.

Just because Pyritinol has "been around" for a while doesn't mean it is superior to newer substances. Pyritinol isn't even in the PDR as a supplement or drug.

The PDR is for US drugs and supplements it is a poor reference to use for nootropics.....which most are created or used outside the US. Pyritinol and Vinpocetine both have unique effects and are superior to each other in different areas.

Personally, I think Vinpocetine is far superior to Pyritinol as a cerebral vasodialator and antioxidant.

Pyritinol has little effect on cerebral blood flow so your comment seems uninformed. Picamilon is superior to vinpocetine in terms of CBF. Pyritinol unlike vinpocetine is well studied and used in children in a syrup form in many countries without any notewise side effects. Pyritinol is one of the best treatments I’ve used for those with ADD and ADHD…..it one of the best stimulants of the locus Coeruleus neurons and has a potent effect in most people for multi-tasking information. As far as its antioxidant effects they both work on different types of free radicals….so one does not replace the other.

[dopamine]

LifeMirage is a....clinican with experience using pyritinol (and many other nootropics) in many patients over a long period of time. Pyritinol has....properties (see numerous prior threads) which vinpo does not (ones very helpful for anyone with ADD for example).

One of the great things about these types of boards, Scott, is that deference to authority is not necessary. We are all on "equal ground" as far as I am concerned with respect to debates relating to nootropics and various related substances. For someone to say, "it doesn't matter what the evidence says or doesn't say, I'm a clinician, so I have the final word on what is or is not correct." This is a clergymen approach, which I think reasonable people like ourselves can reject on solid logical ground.

Perhaps you also are a clinician, I do not know. But if there is one weakness to boards e.g. here and avant is that sitting at a computer and researching supps e.g. with pubmed ain't the same as practicing in a field and seeing how patients actually respond. Stuff works and is discovered "in the field" that ain't in the books, and not all patients read the book.

I am not a clinician. But clinicians should know the power of various kinds of evidence. Individual positive responses to various types of substances (a.k.a "anecotal reports") are the lowest form of evidence in medical science, this is elementary.

Again, whenever someone says "I don't need verifiable evidence to prove the truth of my statements", it is an attempt to establish a type of authority which is objectively unsubstanstiated. Of course we can always say "he is a clinician, so he has unique experiences which most of us lack." Myself and many others respect the work that physicians do every day in improving the lives of their patients. However, I don't think that admiration should translate into an unquestioning heroification.

We are certainly fourtunate to have clinicians within this discussion board who can help guide us through medical decisions, but that shouldn't impede a little discussion between the merits of two different substances in a company's nootropic formula.

[dopamine]

Pyritinol has been in use since 1960's there is a massive amount of research & clinical experience (which I consider an important factor) on it but most of it is not in english or not pubmed where is I assume you made the comment vinpocetine has more research.

Could you point me to some of the sources for this research?

Pyritinol has little effect on cerebral blood flow so your comment seems uninformed

Pyritinol does increase cerebral blood flow -

MMW Munch Med Wochenschr. 1978 Sep 29;120(39):1263-8.

[The effect of pyritinol on the human cerebrovascular circulation (author's transl)]

[Article in German]

Herrschaft H.

The change in global and regional cerebral circulation after intravenous administration of pyritinol was investigated in 14 patients with acute or subchronic cerebral ischemia. The measurement of the cerebral circulation was performed by intraarterial isotope clearance with 133xenon using a multidetector apparatus. With a single administration of pyritinol (400 mg) there was a statistically significant increase in the cerebral circulation in the gray matter by 6.7 ml/100 g/min corresponding to 9.7% (p less than 0.01) 10 minutes after the end of the drug injection. In the areas of all portions of the brain with defective circulation there was a significant increase in blood flow by 8.9, 0.8 and 3.2 ml/100 g/min (gray matter, white matter, total substance), corresponding to 12.3%, 4.4% and 8.1%. In areas with a normal initial status, the increase in blood flow attained statistical significance in the gray matter only (p less than 0.05).

But the evidence is conflicting, some saying that it has no effect at all. I suppose the underlying issue here is whether increasing cerebral blood flow is necessary for "Get[ting] Smart."

Pyritinol unlike vinpocetine is well studied and used in children in a syrup form in many countries without any notewise side effects.

Well again, from Medline, the term "Pyritinol" results in 267 abstracts, many of which are unavailible after about the 40th study. The term "Vinpocetine" results in 405 abstracts. This doesn't mean that Vinpocetine is "better" than Pyritinol, but indicates that the medical research community may know more about the mechansims underlying the effect(s) of the drug in treating a given pathology.

If there is a body of accredited peer-reviewed research that Medline does not show about Pyritinol, I would appreciate it being illuminated to me.

it one of the best stimulants of the locus Coeruleus neurons

What evidence is this based on? Is there published research showing this specific effect? If there isn't, why believe it?

[scottl]

I hate this board. It just ate a large reply.

Ya YA I should use word.

[scottl]

One of the great things about these types of boards, Scott, is that deference to authority is not necessary. We are all on "equal ground" as far as I am concerned with respect to debates relating to nootropics and various related substances. For someone to say, "it doesn't matter what the evidence says or doesn't say, I'm a clinician, so I have the final word on what is or is not correct." This is a clergymen approach, which I think reasonable people like ourselves can reject on solid logical ground.



I am not a clinician. But clinicians should know the power of various kinds of evidence. Individual positive responses to various types of substances (a.k.a "anecotal reports") are the lowest form of evidence in medical science, this is elementary.

Again, whenever someone says "I don't need verifiable evidence to prove the truth of my statements", it is an attempt to establish a type of authority which is objectively unsubstanstiated. Of course we can always say "he is a clinician, so he has unique experiences which most of us lack." Myself and many others respect the work that physicians do every day in improving the lives of their patients. However, I don't think that admiration should translate into an unquestioning heroification.

We are certainly fourtunate to have clinicians within this discussion board who can help guide us through medical decisions, but that shouldn't impede a little discussion between the merits of two different substances in a company's nootropic formula.

For someone to say, "it doesn't matter what the evidence says or doesn't say, I'm a clinician, so I have the final word on what is or is not correct."

Sorry but if pubmed shows 400 abstracts saying how wonderful something is and you try it on 5 patients and none respond guess which matters?



"We are all on "equal ground" as far as I am concerned with respect to debates relating to nootropics and various related substances."

No, with all do respect we are not.

I don’t have the energy to re-create the original post but briefly:

1. No invocation of deity was made.
2. I don’t believe docs are anything special.
3. If you have experience giving clients/patients supps/drugs then you know things that people who only read about it don’t. I’m sorry but this is true and perhaps you cannot appreciate it until you have been in the position.
4. Some supps that work on paper, don’t do much in real life e.g. inositol hexaniacinate (I did finally find an abstract to confirm it’s lack of efficacy).
5. I have taken high dose vitamin C many many times for acute illnesses and have given it to numerous people. It works and works very well. It is blatently obvious and I have no idea what the literature says about it. Similar for high dose proteolytic enzymes for inflammation which according to conventional wisedom “can’t work”
6. My comments are of a general nature, but as for pyritinol you can search the board and find many people’s experience’s including Lynxs.

Edited by scottl, 25 September 2005 - 02:18 PM.

[dopamine]

If you have experience giving clients/patients supps/drugs then you know things that people who only read about it don’t. I’m sorry but this is true and perhaps you cannot appreciate it until you have been in the position.
4. Some supps that work on paper, don’t do much in real life e.g. inositol hexaniacinate (I did finally find an abstract to confirm it’s lack of efficacy).

The problem is that these antecdotes are non-verifiable and therefore non-scientific. Again, this is what is being said: "I don't need verifiable evidence, because I know something you don't know, and that knowledge is special only to me." We can't reject this as insufficient, Scott, on logical ground?

[LifeMirage]

But clinicians should know the power of various kinds of evidence. Individual positive responses to various types of substances (a.k.a "anecotal reports") are the lowest form of evidence in medical science, this is elementary.

If you believe more than 10 years of giving nootropics and reviewing their effects on blood tests, IQ tests, and MRI’s and other means of measuring cognitive abilities is worth nothing then that is sad.....is this clinical experience with drugs with 1,000's of people.

QUOTE
Pyritinol has been in use since 1960's there is a massive amount of research & clinical experience (which I consider an important factor) on it but most of it is not in english or not pubmed where is I assume you made the comment vinpocetine has more research.


Could you point me to some of the sources for this research?

Sure go to Europe....not everything is available free online.

QUOTE
Pyritinol has little effect on cerebral blood flow so your comment seems uninformed


Pyritinol does increase cerebral blood flow –

I never said it didn’t but its effects don’t compare to compounds that are used for that purpose.

QUOTE
MMW Munch Med Wochenschr. 1978 Sep 29;120(39):1263-8.[The effect of pyritinol on the human cerebrovascular circulation (author's transl)][Article in German]Herrschaft H.The change in global and regional cerebral circulation after intravenous administration of pyritinol was investigated in 14 patients with acute or subchronic cerebral ischemia. The measurement of the cerebral circulation was performed by intraarterial isotope clearance with 133xenon using a multidetector apparatus. With a single administration of pyritinol (400 mg) there was a statistically significant increase in the cerebral circulation in the gray matter by 6.7 ml/100 g/min corresponding to 9.7% (p less than 0.01) 10 minutes after the end of the drug injection. In the areas of all portions of the brain with defective circulation there was a significant increase in blood flow by 8.9, 0.8 and 3.2 ml/100 g/min (gray matter, white matter, total substance), corresponding to 12.3%, 4.4% and 8.1%. In areas with a normal initial status, the increase in blood flow attained statistical significance in the gray matter only (p less than 0.05).


But the evidence is conflicting, some saying that it has no effect at all. I suppose the underlying issue here is whether increasing cerebral blood flow is necessary for "Get[ting] Smart."

Its not necessary but may be helpful.

QUOTE
Pyritinol unlike vinpocetine is well studied and used in children in a syrup form in many countries without any notewise side effects.


Well again, from Medline, the term "Pyritinol" results in 267 abstracts, many of which are unavailible after about the 40th study. The term "Vinpocetine" results in 405 abstracts. This doesn't mean that Vinpocetine is "better" than Pyritinol, but indicates that the medical research community may know more about the mechansims underlying the effect(s) of the drug in treating a given pathology.

If Medline is your only sole of data I’m not surprised.

QUOTE
it one of the best stimulants of the locus Coeruleus neurons


What evidence is this based on? Is there published research showing this specific effect? If there isn't, why believe it?

I’m not going to quote every study for you……you obviously have no respect for me. Yes their research go research it. Are you suggesting I’m lying Dopamine?

[scottl]

If you have experience giving clients/patients supps/drugs then you know things that people who only read about it don’t. I’m sorry but this is true and perhaps you cannot appreciate it until you have been in the position.
4. Some supps that work on paper, don’t do much in real life e.g. inositol hexaniacinate (I did finally find an abstract to confirm it’s lack of efficacy).

The problem is that these antecdotes are non-verifiable and therefore non-scientific. Again, this is what is being said: "I don't need verifiable evidence, because I know something you don't know, and that knowledge is special only to me." We can't reject this as insufficient, Scott, on logical ground?

You can reject anything you wish on logical grounds. Don't make it true. It has nothing to do with "me". People's body's don't always read the textbook or latest new england journal article.

[wannafulfill]

I�m not going to quote every study for you��you obviously have no respect for me. Yes their research go research it. Are you suggesting I�m lying Dopamine?

I think he just can't find it and was looking for a little guidance. Maybe that's too much to ask, fair enough. It would be great to be able to debate these issues without anyone taking it personally. It's hard to do when some of us don't have the resources for an extended discussion:

H. R. Olpe, M. W. Steinmann, and R. S. Jones
Locus coeruleus as a target for psychogeriatric agents
Ann NY Acad Sci 1985 444: 394-405.

[rfarris]

I think he just can't find it and was looking for a little guidance.

Personally, I think that he is a very young man who has been taught (in academia) that for something to be completely proven it must meet certain standards. What they didn't tell him is that nothing ever meets all those standards. One way or another, it is always possible to show most anything else can't be proven.

It all boils down to do you trust someone?

Do you know the difference between theory and practice? In theory, there is no difference.

-- Rick

[dopamine]

If you believe more than 10 years of giving nootropics and reviewing their effects on blood tests, IQ tests, and MRI’s and other means of measuring cognitive abilities is worth nothing then that is sad.....is this clinical experience with drugs with 1,000's of people.

Here is my presumption: that the search for effective nootropics is a scientific pursuit.

The problem is that the evidence you are giving isn't reviewable or verifiable, which is essential in any science. If we are going to take something as true, it has to be subject to review so people can repeat the experiment. It is not about calling someone a liar, it is simply elementary scientific theory.

Sure go to Europe....not everything is available free online.

Can you be more specific?, where in Europe would I go for this information?

I’m not going to quote every study for you……you obviously have no respect for me. Yes their research go research it. Are you suggesting I’m lying Dopamine?

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying. I do not disrespect you. I am simply asking you: how do you know it has that specific effect? I searched medline for "pyritinol AND locus coeruleus" and didn't turn up anything. Maybe I missed something, that's entirely possible. I was simply hoping you might be able to point me to a study that shows that effect. Why take offense to that? Asking someone for evidence to back up their claims is not an insult.

You can reject anything you wish on logical grounds. Don't make it true. It has nothing to do with "me". People's body's don't always read the textbook or latest new england journal article.

If we agree that looking for effective nootropics is a scientific pursuit, then we have to yield to the standard of science: verifiability. Unless a claim is not supported by at least one controlled experiment then there isn't a scientific reason to believe it is true. Again, I think we can agree on this.

[rfarris]

Unless a claim is not supported by at least one controlled experiment then there isn't a scientific reason to believe it is true. Again, I think we can agree on this.

Likewise, neither is there isn't a reason to believe that it is false. Again, I think we can agree on that.

-- Rick