51–60 of 64 posts
Massive, massive potential for the placebo effect. This needs to be tested in a randomised double blind trial with standardised testing of the purported cognitive enhancements. Until then it's snake oil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a thorny topic. The trouble is that when a large number of people take a drug, rare but horrific side effects may manifest. How do you factor this in to deciding an appropriate level of regulation? Is it fair that we permit easily accessible experimentation with psychoactive or nootropic substances, when someone downs a few too many, has a psychotic episode and drowns his children? Or has a fatal allergic rea…
How do we handle alcohol? You tell people that modifying yourself isn't an excuse for committing crimes. And follow up and enforce that. Making it a crime to use chemicals on your own mind is absurd. With heroin, the biggest risk is the fact it's illegal, thus preventing you from obtaining clean, known-quantity medication. If Tylenol was sold on the streets, with pills ranging from 100mg to 1000mg, we'd have a LOT mo…
2. Heroin is a highly addictive substance, that will kill you in sufficient qualities. You don't see that as a problem?? Even if it were cleanly packaged with a black label, people would still take too much and die from it. Cute example with Tylenol, but doesn't cause dependence and withdrawal. Opiates are given to people with pain, where they have a fundamentally different physiological effect.
I used a fairly popular, legal nootropic and set off a manic episode. Not hypomania (I'm cyclothymic, so I'm used to that and it's usually benign) but scary, saw-code-when-I-closed-my-eyes mania. (It was bad code but at least it wasn't Java.) Also, mania isn't usually "happy"; it's 15% euphoria but 35% anger and 50% anxiety. Based on one episode (eh, maybe two or three; before your mid-20s it is hard to tell) I give…
You could probably do a lot of good on a small scale just by naming the one you're talking about, even if that reaction is rare.
I was also self-medicating for Open Plan Syndrome (often a precursor to full-blown Panic Disorder, as it was for me, and not uncommon in tech) so the reason why I was using it (in such absurdly high doses) may be a contributor to the fucked-up-ness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember reading in one of Dan Ariely's book that spending more on placebos makes them more effective. (He typically tested people by giving them word scrambles or similar tasks). Remember kids, if you want a really good placebo experience, buy the good shit.
Other fun placebo effects: red pills work better than blue pills. All pills work better if given to you by a doctor. Better still if the doctor is wearing a white coat. Yet better is the doctor uses a large peace of medical machinery as part of the intervention. And yet a bit better on top if the machine beeps. Basically, for best results you want to receive your medicine as the Star Patient in a Very Important Looki…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I suppose it's only natural that people are resorting to these when huge swathes of the American youth are being prescribed Adderall and similar and gaining a competitive edge with them over those who don't have access to them. I don't think Adderall would really give ADHD suffers an advantage. It might bring them close to the level of others, but Adderall has its own effects, and ADHD isn't going to be completely…
It brings your dopamine production up towards normal levels, letting your neurons connect to each other properly. The effect is that it doesn't improve concentration so much as it allows concentration in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do we handle alcohol? You tell people that modifying yourself isn't an excuse for committing crimes. And follow up and enforce that. Making it a crime to use chemicals on your own mind is absurd. With heroin, the biggest risk is the fact it's illegal, thus preventing you from obtaining clean, known-quantity medication. If Tylenol was sold on the streets, with pills ranging from 100mg to 1000mg, we'd have a LOT mo…
1. Countless lives have been destroyed by alcohol. Busted up families, people killed by drunk drivers, children maimed by fetal alcohol syndrome, abused wives, husbands and children, fried brains, fried livers and across multiple generations... Why would we want to repeat that experience? If alcohol were invented today it would never be in widespread use like it is now. It's become a lifestyle thing because of thousa…
Opiates do not have a "fundamentally different" effect if you're in pain. I think people like saying that about opiates and stimulants so as to excuse people that "need" it.
And yes, personal freedom is worth people choosing to rip apart families.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Countless lives have been destroyed by alcohol. Busted up families, people killed by drunk drivers, children maimed by fetal alcohol syndrome, abused wives, husbands and children, fried brains, fried livers and across multiple generations... Why would we want to repeat that experience? If alcohol were invented today it would never be in widespread use like it is now. It's become a lifestyle thing because of thousa…
My comparison to Tylenol is apt. If you bought pills thinking they were ~100mg, but they were 10x that, you would soon find yourself with a broken liver. To be clear Tylenol will kill you in sufficient quantities, amounts you're likely to easily by from a store. Opiates do not have a "fundamentally different" effect if you're in pain. I think people like saying that about opiates and stimulants so as to excuse people…
The point is about dangerous usage patterns. You are trying to argue that hard drugs are actually not that bad if only they were available with the same safety and dosage rigor applied to approved pharmaceuticals. My point is that it isn't an apt example because nobody gets euphoric or addicted when they take Tylenol. Any drug that causes some physiological disturbance in sufficient quantities is going to be more dangerous if that drug is taken by users in ever increasing quantities.
> Opiates do not have a "fundamentally different" effect if you're in pain. I think people like saying that about opiates and stimulants so as to excuse people that "need" it.
It is different. Say a patient has severe pain from metastatic breast cancer. I can give them a dose of morphine that would stop you from breathing permanently, and they will be fine. Are you saying she didn't really need it, she just likes the rush? I don't understand your point, maybe you can clarify. The rates of opioid addiction in people receiving it for pain are much lower than you would otherwise think from the way people buy oxycodone on the black market.
Personal freedom? What about the personal freedom of the kid who gets bashed by their drunk parent? Or the personal freedom of the cyclist that gets run over by a drink driver? Or the personal freedom of the emergency department nurse that gets her ear bitten off by someone with amphetamine induced violent psychosis?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My comparison to Tylenol is apt. If you bought pills thinking they were ~100mg, but they were 10x that, you would soon find yourself with a broken liver. To be clear Tylenol will kill you in sufficient quantities, amounts you're likely to easily by from a store. Opiates do not have a "fundamentally different" effect if you're in pain. I think people like saying that about opiates and stimulants so as to excuse people…
Just to clarify, I'm not advocating criminalisation of nootropics, and I completely agree that the war on drugs is pretty stupid. The point is about dangerous usage patterns. You are trying to argue that hard drugs are actually not that bad if only they were available with the same safety and dosage rigor applied to approved pharmaceuticals. My point is that it isn't an apt example because nobody gets euphoric or add…
But let me understand you: Are you saying that if someone is in pain, their respiratory system just ignores opiates and they can take large doses even if they're opiate naive? Does this work retroactively, like if you don't have Narcan handy can you just snap someone's leg to save them? (And then, with a broken bone, they'd certainly get medicated - double win!)
Sarcasm aside, do you have a citation for this claim? That opiate tolerance doesn't matter in face of pain? That there's a "fundamental difference" in the effect? I'm truly interested in hearing about that (feel free to contact me via my profile if this thread is too long).
Everything I've read and experienced says otherwise. I've talked with some users that were taking opiates for cancer pain management, or for otherwise long-term pain, and they just as happy to take them as unlicensed users (though perhaps a bit more cautious in admitting so). In personal experience from acute trauma leading to a hospital team applying morphine, I went from screaming in pain to absolute noddy-head bliss. I'm pretty sure that's the exact effect people are seeking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bet he didn't even read the marketing literature or the industry funded studies.
Are you debating whether say Adderall has any noticeable effects?
Seriously, I don't think people doubt mind enhancing drugs exist. We're skeptical of manufacturers and people who believe they've "researched" nootropics because they've read a lot of stuff on the internet written up by marketing guys, PR men, and researchers willing to do shoddy research for money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to clarify, I'm not advocating criminalisation of nootropics, and I completely agree that the war on drugs is pretty stupid. The point is about dangerous usage patterns. You are trying to argue that hard drugs are actually not that bad if only they were available with the same safety and dosage rigor applied to approved pharmaceuticals. My point is that it isn't an apt example because nobody gets euphoric or add…
No, my point is that "hard drugs" like heroin are vastly more dangerous because users cannot use properly whilst the drug remains illegal. It's a manufacturing and usage problem. Opiates are rather tame as far as side effects go, and avoiding overdoses isn't terrifically hard if you have the right stuff . Users don't want to waste precious medicine, nor die. With precision markings, there'd be vastly less problems re…
Yes, that's right, if someone is in pain, the respiratory depression is less. This is evident to anyone that prescribes opioids regularly or looks after people with chronic and acute pain (as I do). It is also evident that the ever escalating doses and withdrawal symptoms demonstrated by recreational users of heroin for example, are not manifested in people with pain. So that's why I use the word 'fundamental difference', because the coupling between dosage, physiological response and behavior is completely different.
Lots of people don't enjoy taking opioids, they get nausea, nightmares, constipation etc, or it just doesn't work for their pain. I know this because that is what is reported in controlled trials, and because people complain to me about these side effects all the time.
Reference: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8867254
More general overview: http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/6/747.full
(Glad you are truly interested, but in the time it took to write your sarcastic comment, you could have just googled it, and we'd both be better off right now.)