Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 149 posts

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#51

Post by ldehaan »

shas3 wrote: post #11

Hope someone writes a similar letter about nootropics. There's little evidence about their long term effects.

nootropics have been around for a long time and the base agents like aniracetam have been studied for decades.

also, you're "messing" with the chemicals in your brain any time you consume something... unless you're aware of studies that have shown negative affects attributed to nootropic use.

I use a stack of nootropics and it's better than coffee, but not like some magic wonder drug, it just helps with alertness and focus.

I also use a tcds machine when I really need to get things done, I have found, for myself, an arrangement that kicks my brain into full gear.

the downsides of my config are: my teeth feel like they've got batteries stuck to them for a week or so after. it's not that bad, but it's uncomfortable. I get over powered I suppose is a good enough word combo, I feel too awake and need to sit in a dark room and relax for a bit.

the upsides are: ultra focus, very able to context switch and maintain previous data whilst working on large infrastructure issues and or writing complex software applications for large infrastructure goals. much much more so than I get when it's just me and a cup of coffee. depression just goes away, hell I forgot what it was like to be depressed for a while, it was nice, it's like all the negative thoughts aren't able to make themselves known. I am currently on a 6 month break to give me a good idea of lasting effects (depression is back sadly).

I would have to say that the benefits of both tcds and nootropics are not yet fully understood, and neither are the downsides, but I can say for myself, it's been a positive experience.

my only advice on the tcds portion, if you have the skills, build it yourself, you want really good components, or buy a really nicely made Analog one, there's a difference between smoothly generated output and a cheap digital machine you buy off amazon for 100 bucks. you can feel the difference.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#52

Post by verbify »

lawless123 wrote: post #2

""Some people were administering it to their kids," he says. " WTF , fair enough if you want to risk it on yourself but not your children with still developing brains.

Yup, same with anti-vaxxers. But they (like anti-vaxxers, or even vaxxers) think they're doing the kids a favour.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#53

Post by mhurron »

DigitalJack wrote: post #15
gwbas1c wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole thing just reminds me about the radium water craze years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radithor https://67.media.tumblr.com/1899ba50f59df9c88dace35c13c2c1a7...

I watched a documentary on Netflix a while back that talked about the Radium health craze and carelessness. I think it was about the rise of investigative chemistry with regard to poisonings, etc. The radium portion was horrifying to think about.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/poisoners/

The Poisoner's Handbook

The radium portion was especially sad, but fit in quite well with the lead section in american societies willingness to poison people to improve profit.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#54

Post by toufka »

ccrush wrote: post #39
stared wrote: post #30

Forgive my votum separatum, but: > The biggest risk is that we just don't know what all the risks are. I think that's the biggest risk. I would call it "an opportunity". And as far as it is being done voluntarily, and there is a non-zero entry barrier, I am indebted to all those who (maybe) risk their health and lives for possible progress of science, medicine and technology. Compare it to extreme sports, where there…

Yes, but unless these experiments are done by pairs or groups, you are getting what is passed off as scientific results from someone who is experimenting on their own brain with a sample size of one and no control group. How do you trust the results from an experiment conducted on the experimenter's brain? What if the experimenter loses the capacity to properly conduct the experiment in the process? How would you kno…

Check out Erowid[1] and see how people dealt with those 'scary chemicals'. People were being their own chemist & pharmacy at much higher doses, for much longer periods than any doctor had ever prescribed. There are certainly uncertainties, but enough people saying similar things actually do start to hone in on very real affects (that aren't/can't actually be known from an 'ethical' experiment).

[1] https://www.erowid.org/

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#55

Post by khedoros »

Karunamon wrote: post #24
BlanketLogic wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't know the effects yet. That's what makes it 'pseudo'.

So by that definition, any new and untested-en-masse "thing" is "pseudoscience", with all the implied quackery baggage that term applies. That is not a useful definition.

The article was about people using tdcs for durations and at levels of current that haven't been tested, measured, and documented, and then claiming that it has a known, beneficial effect, while implying that there are no negative side-effects.

When scientists study these effects, they study them over groups of people. For some individuals, it hurts where it should help. For others, they get a larger-than-average boost. At the same time, research seems to suggest that some abilities are increased while others decrease, for a given protocol.

It's not pseudoscience that a lot of people are trying a new, untested thing. It's pseudoscience if they claim benefits based on subjective perception or claim that the same protocol will help everyone, without documenting objective, replicable proof.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#56

Post by ZenoArrow »

6stringmerc wrote: post #47
ZenoArrow wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "That's one of the reasons I've stayed away from 'beta blocker' medications even though they're designed to tone down stage fright to a bare minimum." Just in case you're interested, bananas are meant to act as natural beta blockers (or more specifically, the potassium in bananas). I have no idea about how effective bananas are in reducing anxiety, but they might be worth a try.

Thank you very much for sharing! I believe I have a mild allergy to them (and avocado as well) but will pursue this experiment in the name of science. A banana rich, plain yogurt smoothie sounds like a good test.

You're welcome 6stringmerc. A banana rich, plain yogurt smoothie sounds like a good way to try it out. You may want to give dark chocolate a go too, it's also meant to be good at reducing anxiety (as long as you only eat small amounts):

http://www.livestrong.com/article/450142-how-does-chocolate-...

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#57

Post by srtjstjsj »

kbenson wrote: post #44
spdustin wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quote from the reporter's blog [0]: "When the nice neuroscientists put the electrodes on me, the thing that made the earth drop out from under my feet was that for the first time in my life, everything in my head finally shut the fuck up." I'll be honest, that is a pretty compelling testimonial for many folks. [0]: http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2012/02/09/better-living-th...

From that blog post: And then, finally, the main question: what role does doubt and fear play in our lives if its eradication actually causes so many improvements? Do we make more ethical decisions when we listen to our inner voices of self-doubt or when we’re freed from them? If we all wore these caps, would the world be a better place? That's a really interesting thought. Not so much "would the world be better", as…

It's a leap to say that suppressing doubt and fear makes people more rational. It could just as well make people more impulsive.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#58

Post by AnkhMorporkian »

graeme wrote: post #46
AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beta blockers aren't great for sudden panic attacks. I took them for years, and while they're great for toning down the anxiety baseline, they don't even remotely approach benzos when it comes to mitigating severe panic. Sadly the only medications you can reasonably get out there that will address an incipient or in progress panic attack are benzos. There are other supplements/medications that are helpful (phenibut i…

Ah, interesting. I checked with my friend, and it turns out they had gotten mixed up. They were prescribed benzos, not beta blockers. What made you stop taking them? My friend has been making good progress without them, but still gets some rough days. And what supplements/medicines do you use, apart from phenibut? (To be clear, they've already spoken with a doctor, psychologist, consulted drugs.com listing of side ef…

I stopped taking them for two reasons.

1. I have an absurdly high tolerance to them (and almost all GABAergics, for that matter.) I always have, and also have an absurd alcohol tolerance. So, while clonazepam worked for me, I was taking roughly the maximum dosage designated for severe seizure disorders (I was taking 18mg/day, which if anyone is familiar with clonazepam, they'll know how absurd that is.)

2. I was starting to feel dumb. I'm not 100% sure if that was the clonazepam or the quetiapine or the topamax, but one or all of them was making me forget my friends' and family's names. So, I dropped them like they were hot.

I'll give a small rundown of my stack below. I certainly won't say my stack is bulletproof, and for people with addictive personalities it could certainly be actively harmful. I won't discuss dosages either, because frankly my phenibut dosage is irresponsible, but once again that goes directly towards my GABAergic tolerance.

-----

Tianeptine - for depression. It's a fast acting novel TCA that works via unknown mechanisms. In higher dosages it exhibits opioid activity, and if someone suffers from addictive tendencies it should absolutely be avoided.

Phenibut - for anxiety. It's converted directly into GABA in the brain. It's relatively fast acting. Some people, but definitely not all, can suffer from horrible withdrawals if they take it for a long time and then stop taking it. I've never had problems with it if I've run out though, and I take it daily.

Adrafinil - for fatigue and sleepiness. I suffer from an autoimmune disorder and am chronically fatigued. Adrafinil is a pro-drug for modafinil, and gets rid of your tiredness without being otherwise stimulating.

Caffeine - tiredness. I get mine powdered, but it doesn't really matter.

Vitamin D - this one helped with my depression enormously. I decided to give it a try one day after my dad was diagnosed with SAD, and did a loading dose. Within 3 days the dark circles had disappeared from under my eyes and my depression lifted significantly.

Those are everything I take on a day to day basis. I also have conditional nootropics for days when I'm in the mood for them/need to be extra productive. Noopept, aniracetam, oxiracetam, N-Acetyl Selank Amidate for days I'm feeling extra anxious, N-Acetyl Semax Amidate for a mental boost, and a few others I rarely use.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#59

Post by etrautmann »

Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups. It's absolutely not clear what the appropriate protocols are, and behavioral outcomes could be incredibly sensitive to factors such as 1) electrode placement, 2) stimulation frequency, 3) amplitude, 4) direct or alternating current, etc.

On top of that, benefits may come at the cost of other unobserved effects (i.e. faster learning and plasticity, accompanied by faster forgetting, to oversimplify).

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#60

Post by steve19 »

louprado wrote: post #21

RadioLab's 9-Volt Nirvana episode discussed how DARPA uses tCDS to enhance sharp-shooting ability. At the end of the episode, the reporter conveyed a sense of loss when the tCDS system was no longer available to her. She sounded like a drug addict that pines for that feeling of their first high and then risks spending their life in vain trying to recover that feeling. If your life literally depends on a skill and sup…

They improved her ability to play a shooting video game.

Quite honestly, those games ("simulations") are like Counter Strike on adderal. They are nothing like the real deal. They certainly do not teach precision sharp shooting.

What they do teach is reaction times and hand eye coordination (see bad guy, point gun, pull trigger, repeat).

Let's hope the CSGO community never find out about this and start trying to juice themselves with 9v batteries.

Post reply on HN