3 ms·

Brain-Doping at the Lab Bench

20 points by kkleiner 18y ago

k0n2ad 18y ago
I see a possibility of companies marketing drugs such as Ritalin and Provigil as "cognitive enhancers." I mean, caffeine is powerful CNS stimulant as it is and it's completely unregulated. So what's to stop a drug company from making an analogue to Ritalin, or a lighter dose of Ritalin and marketing it as a brain booster? Selling it OTC? Given that the FDA is already having enough trouble regulating areas such as the energy drink/supplement market - all the different concoctions of caffeine, ginseng, ginkgo (and tons of other herbal supplements) are readily available to 12 year olds. I'm curious and a bit concerned at the prospects.
- chris11 18y ago
  While I wouldn't say that drug makers are marketing stimulants to the healthy, I would say that they are not differentiating enough between medical use and use for cognitive enhancement. It seems like the drugs are being marketed as a way to improve life, not just a way to treat a pathological illness. The difference may be subtle, but it is there. Advertisements usually show a kid's life changed for the better, whether it is making more friends, or getting better grades. These are probably all accurate. But everyone has had these problems to some extent. And these ads don't really differentiate between symptoms of an illness, and symptoms caused by some other problem, and viewers can't really tell the difference themselves. So these drugs are somewhat being marketed as a brain booster.
  - asciilifeform 18y ago
    http://yarchive.net/med/lifestyle_drugs.html http://yarchive.net/med/lifestyle_drugs.html
rms 18y ago
This post is kind of confusing because it starts off with someone else's April Fool's joke. This article from Nature discusses some of the ethical issues here rather well: http://www.scribd.com/doc/13134612/Naturrecom456702a http://www.scribd.com/doc/13134612/Naturrecom456702a
anigbrowl 18y ago
It's a perennial issue, but not a very important one. Fears that 'I'll be left behind if I don't take xxxxx because everyone else is' are overblown, and balanced by fears of 'I'm only productive because I take cocaine, maybe I actually suck' or whatever. I've always liked recreational drugs, and a little boost at a critical moment can enhance work; but since one's body quickly develops a tolerance it's not compatible with any long-term work consumption (as many have found to their cost). Many (most?) articles about drugs posit some kind of linear relationship between the input and output, whereas the reality is nonlinear dynamic system with a complex feedback loop. Thus, I love a big mug of coffee every morning, but it's not so much that it makes me super-productive as I get a bit slow and crabby on the days when I skip my coffee. It doesn't give me any edge over a non-coffee drinker. On the other hand I don't get a caffeine hangover or crash, which would be a risk with a more potent drug if I took it regularly. Anyway...the article assumes there's only one kind of enhancement. A good scientist or engineer is just as likely to have a brekthrough idea while decompressing on the weekend with a beer or a fattie, as when sitting at their work station. Same reason many people get their best ideas while walking, soaking in the tub, or whatever.

20 points by kkleiner 18y ago

I see a possibility of companies marketing drugs such as Ritalin and Provigil as "cognitive enhancers." I mean, caffeine is powerful CNS stimulant as it is and it's completely unregulated. So what's to stop a drug company from making an analogue to Ritalin, or a lighter dose of Ritalin and marketing it as a brain booster? Selling it OTC? Given that the FDA is already having enough trouble regulating areas such as the energy drink/supplement market - all the different concoctions of caffeine, ginseng, ginkgo (and tons of other herbal supplements) are readily available to 12 year olds. I'm curious and a bit concerned at the prospects.

chris11 18y ago
While I wouldn't say that drug makers are marketing stimulants to the healthy, I would say that they are not differentiating enough between medical use and use for cognitive enhancement. It seems like the drugs are being marketed as a way to improve life, not just a way to treat a pathological illness. The difference may be subtle, but it is there. Advertisements usually show a kid's life changed for the better, whether it is making more friends, or getting better grades. These are probably all accurate. But everyone has had these problems to some extent. And these ads don't really differentiate between symptoms of an illness, and symptoms caused by some other problem, and viewers can't really tell the difference themselves. So these drugs are somewhat being marketed as a brain booster.
- asciilifeform 18y ago
  http://yarchive.net/med/lifestyle_drugs.html http://yarchive.net/med/lifestyle_drugs.html

rms 18y ago

This post is kind of confusing because it starts off with someone else's April Fool's joke. This article from Nature discusses some of the ethical issues here rather well: http://www.scribd.com/doc/13134612/Naturrecom456702a http://www.scribd.com/doc/13134612/Naturrecom456702a

anigbrowl 18y ago

It's a perennial issue, but not a very important one. Fears that 'I'll be left behind if I don't take xxxxx because everyone else is' are overblown, and balanced by fears of 'I'm only productive because I take cocaine, maybe I actually suck' or whatever. I've always liked recreational drugs, and a little boost at a critical moment can enhance work; but since one's body quickly develops a tolerance it's not compatible with any long-term work consumption (as many have found to their cost). Many (most?) articles about drugs posit some kind of linear relationship between the input and output, whereas the reality is nonlinear dynamic system with a complex feedback loop. Thus, I love a big mug of coffee every morning, but it's not so much that it makes me super-productive as I get a bit slow and crabby on the days when I skip my coffee. It doesn't give me any edge over a non-coffee drinker. On the other hand I don't get a caffeine hangover or crash, which would be a risk with a more potent drug if I took it regularly. Anyway...the article assumes there's only one kind of enhancement. A good scientist or engineer is just as likely to have a brekthrough idea while decompressing on the weekend with a beer or a fattie, as when sitting at their work station. Same reason many people get their best ideas while walking, soaking in the tub, or whatever.