Live data from Hacker News

What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

troof.blog

151–160 of 183 posts

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#151
post #79
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's bad habits from a younger age. I remember in my 20s, I didn't need to exercise at all and yet my body felt perfect. And so was my mental health. It was after several years of sedentary lifestyle that it clicked for me that my health was declining and exercise was needed to restore it. I suspect this could be the case for many: you don't need exercise and your body remains in a tip top shape when you are young.

Remember you probably were exercising until about 18, since it’s required by most schools.

"Physical education" would be hilarious if it weren't sad. It's a pretty impressive feat that it managed to simultaneously:

- make me spend quite a lot of time on something exercise-related (since it was "opposite shift" of regular school classes)

- had me do next to zero actual exercise

- teach me literally nothing about how exercise or training works

- make me hate everything related to exercise for quite a few years

Worse than a waste of time, it was actively harmful.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#152

They work until they don’t in my anecdotal experience. Any substance it seems the first time is the best. Then, slowly, my brain chemistry adapts, and it becomes less effective. Sometimes a higher dose works for a while. But it never lasts. Then side effects start to build up, and before long it’s counterproductive. SNRIs worked, until after a few months I lost all my endurance (running) and libido. Kratom was wonder…

> They work until they don’t in my anecdotal experience. Any substance it seems the first time is the best. Then, slowly, my brain chemistry adapts, and it becomes less effective.

It’s wild to me that the nootropics community evolved into a hybrid between the recreational drug community and supplement enthusiast communities while forgetting all of the lessons people learned in those communities long ago.

So much of the nootropics discourse is about compounds that have a moderate to high recreational value: The above post is talking about Kratom (an opioid) as if it was a nootropic, which would be unfathomable under the original description of nootropics.

The linked article also includes psilocybin, tianeptine (a compound that started out with some myths about serotonin but was later discovered to be an opioid), and phenibut (an extremely addictive substance, see /r/quittingphenibut )

The latter substance is known for temporarily reducing anxiety and giving a confidence boost, which is a common theme among substances cited as helpful. Something about calling them “nootropics” seems to reset people’s expectations and they forget that all recreational drugs make people feel some combination of euphoria, motivation, confidence boost, anxiety reduction, or stimulation at first, before tolerance takes in. People find themselves not only tolerant to these substances, but in withdrawal when they don’t take them (as mentioned above)

Phenibut is one of the most obvious recreational drugs that got pulled into the “nootropics” label for years. Nootropics Depot got caught importing large numbers of drums of this substance for resale. They deleted a lot of the discussion about their lawsuit on /r/nootropics (did you know they control the subreddit?) and have put forward a very selective version of the story that makes them look like the victims. Meanwhile it was one of the most common debilitating addiction stories coming out of supplement and nootropics communities until word spread that it was highly addictive and the withdrawals were very long.

Whatever meaning the word “nootropic” originally had is long lost. It’s now a blanket term for experimenting with powerful supplements or prescription drugs under a different name. I think that alternative name has left a lot of people blind to the reality of what they’re doing. They also frequently don’t realize that self-reported feelings of drug liking effect are not indicative of the drug’s objective positive effects.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#153

The suggestion/allusion that the EU's GDP per capita is lower than the US due to Adderall and Dexedrine not being approved/available is wild. Kind of makes me not want to take seriously the rest of the article...

Adderall is a performance enhancing drug, and widly used as such. Its nigh on impossible to compete at the highest level workplaces with doped employees if you are a natural worker.

The graph implies is that aderall causes people to perform at 150% on average if 100% of the workforce is on it. I say that both implying that aderall has such a massive objective effect and implying it is so widely (ab)used are the laughable ramblings of a psychonaut at worst and unsubstantiated at best.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#154
post #62

There's one very simple "nootropic" that I've discovered many years ago and have been doing most days of the week. Buying a cup of coffee and taking a walk in nature. It makes me feel better than just coffee or just walking in nature. Another benefit is that in the days I can do this, I have something to look forward to since waking up.

Probably the slight MAO inhibiting effect of coffee.

Going to make a wild guess that coffee’s contribution is its classic stimulant effect, which is well known.

Not sure why the nootropics people are always trying to come up with alternate theories for why something works when substances like caffeine are well studied and known to provide a mood boost.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#155
post #14

It is frustratingly hard for me to trust most any nootropic discussion nowadays. Without many large random trials, there are as many questions as answers afterwards. It doesn't help that I'm on Adderall, but if left to my own devices, would absolutely skip it. I'm assuming I benefit in the able to think way from it. Largely the only reason I know I missed a dose is if I find I lose my patience quickly with others.

> It doesn't help that I'm on Adderall, but if left to my own devices, would absolutely skip it.

The difference is that you’ve taken it medicinally for years, whereas most nootropics users are early users who are experimenting with high placebo priming.

Stimulant prescriptions have a high churn rate because many people take their first few doses and feel euphoric, then think it’s going to be like that forever. Fast forward a couple years and the fun is long gone so it’s a different story.

Nootropics forums are dominated by posts from people saying “Just took my first dose of $substance and I feel amazing!” which is the least useful measure of how well it will treat someone long term.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#156
post #129
post #14

It is frustratingly hard for me to trust most any nootropic discussion nowadays. Without many large random trials, there are as many questions as answers afterwards. It doesn't help that I'm on Adderall, but if left to my own devices, would absolutely skip it. I'm assuming I benefit in the able to think way from it. Largely the only reason I know I missed a dose is if I find I lose my patience quickly with others.

> Without many large random trials That, historically, does not work well for neurochemistry. Large random trials are good for an average biological response of profitable chemicals, but it seems there are significant differences in neurochemistry, between people, that these don't capture. If you've ever had a prescription for most anything mental related, like ADHD, depression, etc, there's never just one drug, ther…

> Unsurprisingly, it seems to be the same with many of these nootropics.

Controlled trials are actually very revealing of the placebo effect, which is a rampant confounded in nootropics communities. When people spend months reading about new nootropics, then a week waiting for it in the mail, then they take their first dose with excitement and anticipation they generally report feeling something.

The nice thing about trials is that they can start separating out this placebo effect.

Several people have done self-trials with different compounds with surprising results. Gwern is perhaps the most famous. Whenever people post about magnesium being a life altering substance or producing profound effects I also point them to his measured magnesium trials where the net effect over time was beginning to trend negative.

One of the myths in nootropics communities is that everything is a matter of neurochemistry and everyone is substantially different. In reality, RCTs are actually great at capturing enough people to see subgroups responding if you have enough people.

One thing most nootropics people don’t acknowledge enough is how often placebo effect appears in RCTs. Perform an RCT for depression and the placebo group will get better. It happens in every study. Give college students Adderall before an exam and they will report performing better, despite no statistical improvement in their grades. Now consider these facts in light of all of the scattered nootropics forum reports from people claiming different substances cured their depression or made them smarter. Not surprisingly, if you check their post history more recent comments will show them off on a new tangent trying a new substance, the old one long forgotten as a short trial that didn’t work out.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#157

The tl;dr is: 1. Apart from ADHD medications, which are very powerful, most drugs and weird obscure supplements have little effect (there are some intriguing but noisy results about peptides). 2. Exercise— especially weightlifting and HIIT— is also very powerful. There's evidence of a dose-response curve where light exercise is good but intense is better. Arguably this is pretty unsurprising, from an evolutionary per…

So regular exercise (lifting, HIIT, and light cardio outdoors) is literally that one weird trick. It's hard to identify any downsides but the upsides are tremendous. It's amazing that people will go out ingesting all sorts of questionable substances just to avoid getting in shape.

> It's hard to identify any downsides but the upsides are tremendous.

I wish! If you're lucky (or not particularly unlucky) that might be true.

I don't feel any mental benefits, nor do I sleep better. Fun kinds of exercise (badminton, football, BJJ) always seem to injure me me over longer time periods (and it takes months, or even years, to heal when you're in your forties). And they are not very forgiving, schedule-wise.

Lifting weights or rowing on a machine is painfully boring, but it does make me feel better physically. It's a great upside, but the downsides are real too.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not difficult to make your own bread as well, so easily avoided eating non-processed bread.

> so easily avoided eating non-processed bread. How do you make bread without flour? Flour is a processed food.

While yes, flour is ground and therefore processed - I think we all mean bleached, stabilized and enriched flour.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#159

I've tried everything, and the only things that make any noticeable difference in my experience: Modafinil, Racetams, Noopept, Phenibut Noopept seems to be curiously missing from this list?

Phenibut will FUCK you up. Ever take a big dose? Its like being piss drunk. Very fun substance also nasty as fuck and undoubtably bad for your brain. (I got weird neurological "withdrawal" symptoms after like 3 days of taking it)

It causes next-day depression for me. Could only be purely recreational.

Re: What I learned gathering nootropic ratings (2022)

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are evolutionarily adapted to running. Yes, going from a modern sedentary lifestyle to running will feel rough for a few months as you acclimate (and most people don't start off at the slow 11 min. / mile [7 min. / km] pace they should). But there's a reason marathons are so popular, running and exercise starts to feel really good.

> Yes, going from a modern sedentary lifestyle to running will feel rough for a few months as you acclimate Right. Which is why people don't exercise. That's a lot to ask of people with other things on their plate. To be clear, I know I should exercise. I just find it very difficult to do so, and it's very easy to convince yourself you should do something else with that energy. I think team sports are probably the be…

The problem with exercise is that we have evolved to be energy efficient and this includes being lazy when we have food/shelter so the resistance to it is high.

However once we start exercising for any period of time and observe the positive outcomes then the difficulty drops and it becomes enjoyable.

The problem is peoples expectations and approach.

> Yes, going from a modern sedentary lifestyle to running will feel rough for a few months as you acclimate

This is a terrible idea and for someone who has been sedentary they will likely just injure themselves and/or feel miserable. People don't have realistic expectations. It's better to do something like "couch to 5K" running on a grass or a dirt track. In a couple of weeks they will feel good after a run (if they are not too distracted and outward looking) then from there the runners high reinforces the behavior and they will look forward to exercising.

Post reply on HN