5 ms·

Medical journals usually use the term "nootropics". "smart drugs" is more of a catch-all, and makes me think of Mondo 2000 (cyberpunk! fractals! subvert the dom

Medical journals usually use the term "nootropics". "smart drugs" is more of a catch-all, and makes me think of Mondo 2000 (cyberpunk! fractals! subvert the dominant paradigm!) rather than medical research. And: Don't underestimate the short-term effects of caffeine withdrawl (and daily rituals). They're probably waking up mentally at -2 cups of coffee. Caffeine use seems to be more beneficial when used in small quantities over the day (a thermos of green tea* , slightly-caffeinated candy every hour or two, etc.) rather than spiking levels first thing in the morning. * And there's an amino acid in green tea, l-theanine, that seems to cancel out some of the jitteriness.

dejb 16y ago
>>> Yet another article about "smart drugs" that's actually about stimulants! > "smart drugs" is more of a catch-all So which is it? It seems to me (and you apparently) that the term "smart drugs" is rightly a catch-all for anything that can enhance mental performance, including stimulants. So the original article used the term correctly and this part of your earlier criticism doesn't make sense.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  I'm using the term "smart drugs" to match the original post, but left it in quotes - I'd be more inclined to say "nootropics", which (intentionally) narrows the scope a bit. Every couple months a post comes up on HN about nootropics, and within a few hours it typically gets derailed by comments about how taking speed is totally awesome. I try to remind people that 1) amphetamines are not "smart drugs", they have pretty nasty side effects and are generally unsustainable, 2) if taking nootropics (or any other drugs) it's a good idea to do research first, and HN doesn't count, 3) some are much less risky than others, and 4) they'll probably get more benefits from getting enough sleep and exercise, if they aren't already.
  - dejb 16y ago
    Oh I see. You're using the term "smart drugs" in 2 different ways. One to mean 'intelligence enhancing' and the other 'a smart idea to take'. Kind of like a pun or some really corny anti-drugs commercial.
  - roel_v 16y ago
    It's disingenuous to throw 'ritalin' in the same basket as 'speed', even if they're in the same pharmaceutical family. 'Speed' as sold on the street is ingested orally or nasally in an attempt to concentrate its effects in a short time period, Ritalin (and similar) is prescribed in much smaller amounts (20-80 mg a day, for speed it's not uncommon to consume 250 mg at once); plus slow-release versions of Ritalin (Ritalin MR, Concerta etc.) make this effect even stronger. Some experimentation with Ritalin is necessary to find out a person's correct dosage, when you really get a 'hit' like you do with speed, it's not used properly. Plus, people who actually have ADHD react differently to Ritalin that people who don't. Please don't just throw out blanket statements about how 'Ritalin is bad' - for some people it makes the difference between being able to function normally and not being able to plan their daily lives.
    - silentbicycle 16y ago
      I never mentioned Ritalin. I meant Adderall and particularly amphetamines. I know Ritalin is helpful for some people.

dejb 16y ago

>>> Yet another article about "smart drugs" that's actually about stimulants! > "smart drugs" is more of a catch-all So which is it? It seems to me (and you apparently) that the term "smart drugs" is rightly a catch-all for anything that can enhance mental performance, including stimulants. So the original article used the term correctly and this part of your earlier criticism doesn't make sense.

silentbicycle 16y ago
I'm using the term "smart drugs" to match the original post, but left it in quotes - I'd be more inclined to say "nootropics", which (intentionally) narrows the scope a bit. Every couple months a post comes up on HN about nootropics, and within a few hours it typically gets derailed by comments about how taking speed is totally awesome. I try to remind people that 1) amphetamines are not "smart drugs", they have pretty nasty side effects and are generally unsustainable, 2) if taking nootropics (or any other drugs) it's a good idea to do research first, and HN doesn't count, 3) some are much less risky than others, and 4) they'll probably get more benefits from getting enough sleep and exercise, if they aren't already.
- dejb 16y ago
  Oh I see. You're using the term "smart drugs" in 2 different ways. One to mean 'intelligence enhancing' and the other 'a smart idea to take'. Kind of like a pun or some really corny anti-drugs commercial.
- roel_v 16y ago
  It's disingenuous to throw 'ritalin' in the same basket as 'speed', even if they're in the same pharmaceutical family. 'Speed' as sold on the street is ingested orally or nasally in an attempt to concentrate its effects in a short time period, Ritalin (and similar) is prescribed in much smaller amounts (20-80 mg a day, for speed it's not uncommon to consume 250 mg at once); plus slow-release versions of Ritalin (Ritalin MR, Concerta etc.) make this effect even stronger. Some experimentation with Ritalin is necessary to find out a person's correct dosage, when you really get a 'hit' like you do with speed, it's not used properly. Plus, people who actually have ADHD react differently to Ritalin that people who don't. Please don't just throw out blanket statements about how 'Ritalin is bad' - for some people it makes the difference between being able to function normally and not being able to plan their daily lives.
  - silentbicycle 16y ago
    I never mentioned Ritalin. I meant Adderall and particularly amphetamines. I know Ritalin is helpful for some people.