More Nootropics: Racetams and Glycinergics

http://examine.com/blog/more-nootropics-racetams-and-glycinergics/

by aaxe • 13 years ago

32 37 13 years ago

examine.com

najhr9992• 13 years ago

Anyone use nootropics and want to share their usage/experience?

sycamore3• 13 years ago

I take noopept 20mg daily sublingually or orally, and occasionally modafinil.

Modafinil works really well for me (300/400mg keeping me awake and FOCUSED but not buzzing/twitchy) but worked poorly for my brother (no noticeable effect at similar dosage).

Since taking noopept I have noticed more of a willingness and now desire to learn, something which was an issue in my past. It also seems to help me work for prolonged periods of time without getting burnt out. (anecdotal, could well be placebo effect but it works for me!) Feel free to ask me anything.

xanmas• 13 years ago

Do you have any recommended places to pick up noopept?

najhr9992• 13 years ago

How do you obtain Modafinil?

lowmagnet• 13 years ago

I used to take piracetam 800 mg daily, apparently a low dose. I now take noopept, 20 mg daily.

I notice the texture of things more, and I constantly have a need to look at everything in my vicinity. It's not distracting however, and really helps with technical tasks.

drone3• 13 years ago

I take Nootropil, 3200mg daily to help combat hypoxia damage from a bad habit I picked up about 20 years ago (smoking =). I can't say there are any noticeable effects of doing so that I wouldn't call placebo effects.

I used to take a much larger, and more structured regimen, and found it very difficult to keep everything balanced, some things increased the consumption of ACH so much that I had to start taking choline supplements, but if I screwed up my timing/doses, I'd hit nasty lows from too much choline intake. I gave up on it, as the only noticeable difference I had from the regimen was a more difficult job of timing, having to have a lot of pills around, etc.

I stick with nootropil due to its well-established safety, and minimal impact on overall chemical balance.

pallandt2• 13 years ago

3.2g/day of piracetam is quite a large dose.

If you are diagnosed by a doctor with a hypoxia-related condition, I would presume you are self-treating with piracetam, because I don't think it would have a great positive impact, unless your condition would be quite severe.

I suggest looking into pentoxifylline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentoxifylline) and then re-evaluating your situation with a doctor and whether it would be ok for you to try it. I think you'd see more results with it rather than racetams, maybe except for levetiracetam, which would also require a prescription.

Also, pentoxifylline should probably be almost as cheap as generic piracetam; levetiracetam, even generic, is not however.

Do not take any of these Rx meds on your own, without consulting with a professional.

I know people generally hate going to the doctor, but in some cases they do help :) Think about all the advantages taking only 1 pill for your condition could have, instead of a whole stack, not to mention the financial savings.

ngcazz2• 13 years ago

I took around 2g piracetam daily for a few weeks back in '09. I remember a general improvement in my mental visualization ability, dream recall and that's about it. There is no change in consciousness nor alertness (a theme I was curious about when I dabbled in the substance).

I stopped taking that because obtaining it OTC where I live is kind of hit and miss. The drug requires a prescription (generally to treat degenerative conditions common in the elderly) and some pharmacists are more hardline in that respect.

In hindsight, given it's a relatively recent compound and there's so little research on it, I guess it's for the best. I wonder if my "experiments" can have a negative impact in my health, especially my mental health; I hope the estimates regarding the safety of piracetam turn out to be correct.

drone3• 13 years ago

In hindsight, given it's a relatively recent compound and there's so little research on it,

Piracetam is actually well-researched [1], it's been out since the early seventies. It's the most researched of all of the nootropics, AFAIK. I'm unaware of any studies that resulted in health damage from piracetam, but would, of course, love to read any if there are.

[1] Take, for one example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=piracetam[Title]

yawgmoth• 13 years ago

I take, daily, 100mg Caffeine, 200mg of L-Theanine (as Suntheanine), and 500mg of Rhodiola Rosea (3.6% rosavin 18mg, 0.9% salidrosides 4.5mg).

This is a fairly effective regimen, for me, for combating fatigue and maintaining focus. I simply keep a bottle of Suntheanine and another of Rhodiola Rosea at my desk and eat them with my morning water or tea. I haven't done any rigorous testing to prove to myself that these things are helping, but I am certainly convinced that they do.

azurelogic• 13 years ago

I take 1.5g of piracetam in the morning with a choline supplement. When I remember to, I take another 750mg around lunch to keep blood levels up. The half life of piracetam is reported to be around 4 hrs. It is one of those things that you don't realize is there until you notice that you've been focused and on task for hours without drifting off. It has also helped me expand my ability to hold larger object models in my head while coding. Also, it staves off that thing where you lose track of a word or thing you've been trying to remember. Great stuff.

For particularly taxing times, I have a bottle of oxiracetam that I use in conjunction with the piracetam. It reminds me of the heightened focus I used to get when I had prescriptions for Ritalin/Adderall growing up, yet without all of the nasty side effects. It was great a couple of hours before an exam during my masters program, or in the mornings right after my daughter was born.

I tried pramiracetam once. I got nothing but a bad headache from that.

I have a few samples of noopept around somewhere, but I don't think I've been brave enough to try them yet after the pramiracetam disaster.

Oh, and I've recently added 200mg of huperzine A to my morning regimen. Not sure how much it helps. Seems to be a decent replacement on the weekends when I don't want to take the full cocktail.

nabnob• 13 years ago

I take L-theanine in combination with caffeine. The difference is noticeable - caffeine normally makes me feel kind of shaky and jittery and L-theanine takes the "edge" off of it.

seletskiy• 13 years ago

I took glycine, semaks (Met-Glu-His-Phe-Pro-Gly-Pro), piracetam for about several months, and, finally phenylpiracetam (it's called phenotropil in Russia) some time ago.

I've notice entirely no effect from any of this drugs with except of phenylpiracetam.

While I've used phenylpiracetam, I've noticed some effects: 1) I've got more physical endurance (I'm engaging in sports a lot) just from one doze of it; 2) My overall alertness arises; 3) My visual perception became more clear and vivid; 4) I was able to maintain focus for extended periods of time; 5) It was easy to wakeup and harder to sleep down earlier (my brain was like "so much ideas, need to think it all").

When I stop taking phenylpiracetam all of these effects gone away.

easy_rider2• 13 years ago

There is one really awesome supplement that is often overlooked. (Neuroscience is one of my main side-interests and apparently I've been living under a rock in regards to L-Theanine. Well studied, It has a very good safety profile, with no apparent side-effects even in high dosage. It's the reason why I've switched from coffee to green tea.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21040626

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18641209

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18296328

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22214254

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16930802

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23395732

com2kid• 13 years ago

L-Theanine is amazing stuff, it basically cuts a lot of the side effects away from caffeine and increases the positive effects of caffeine to boot.

To get useful amounts of it I just take it separately whenever I consume a caffeinated beverage. 250mg-500mg suffices (technically you can dose it in relationship to how much caffeine you are dosing, but since there are no side effects to taking too much l-theanine, I just take 2 and call it good)

easy_rider2• 13 years ago

Yeah diminishes the effect of any stimulants for that matter, so people on adderall and ritalin should be interested in this to battle inevitable events of insomnia. I usually dose about 200mg starting the day now, then basically based on the amount of Tea I consume throughout the day (and thus caffeine) dose about 200-400mg more right after diner along with a brew. But i'm quite lightweight, and for depression/anxiety higher doses are needed. It improves your REM sleep, promotes alpha-wave activity and stimulates dopamine production. Caenorhabditis elegans lived longer on it, and it even helps cQuring cancer..list goes on. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2774573/

desireco42• 13 years ago

Modafinil works great, racetams while they do something, I didn't observe some effect that would be specifically desirable. It's not that they don't have effect, just that they seem overhyped.

DMAE for example (if I got letters right), if you take it before sleep, it gives you vivid dreams, since it was suppose to help with generation of neural links, then, this would explain effect.

I am still looking and trying to find things that would be helpful without detrimental effects. I should note that anything like adderal I didn't try and don't intend to.

samwilliams3• 13 years ago

The glycerinergics are those molecules that can bind to what is known as the 'glycine binding site' of a particular subset of stimulatory receptors (NMDA), and it seems that by stimulating this binding site the overall signalling is increased.

'Glycerinergics' has only one result on Google - this article. Even if we assume that they mean it in the same way as we talk about GABAergic or dopaminergic drugs the definition they have stated is fundamentally incorrect. Glycerinergic drugs would be those that bind to any of the same sites that the endogenous molecule glycine binds to - not necessarily just NMDAr sites, this is an over simplification. Further more, to say that NMDA receptors are inherently 'stimulatory' is frankly ridiculous. Ligands can be either agonists or antagonists at a given binding site - examples of non-excitatory NMDAr binding drugs would be the arylcyclohexamine family (PCP, Ketamine, PCE etc) and Dizocilpine (MK-801). Finally, 'overall signalling is increased' is almost laughable. 'Signalling' through which neurotransmitters? In what manner? How is 'overall' measured?

While I may not have an absolutely perfect understanding of psychopharmacology, I do know enough not to trust this article - particularly when it is taking about drugs with very little history of human use.

If you are considering using the drugs in this article, it might be advisable to question why. Just because a compound is new, does not mean it is going to be better or the effects more desirable than it's predecessor(s). Of course it is possible that it could be, but it seems likely that in reality you are simply exposing yourself to unnecessary health risks for minimal reward. Would it really be so bad to use Piracetam for a couple of years while the phenyl derivative's action in humans is not well documented? Consider your health and the potential gains carefully and make a rational decision.

resu_nimda• 13 years ago

It looks like "glycerinergic" was a typo for "glycinergic," which has ~100k results on Google (they also mention "glycincergics" - the poor copy editing would support your distrust).

But yeah, I'm not sure what's going on here. I guess it's just an announcement that they have added some info about these drugs to their database. To be fair, the article itself isn't really promoting their usage, and the subheading does describe them as "A large amount of somewhat poorly researched compounds." Perhaps there is better information on the actual pages for each substance.

samwilliams3• 13 years ago

The spelling mistake would make sense, but I agree that it doesn't inspire confidence.

The impression I got from the article was the same as yours - they are not explicitly advocating the use of these drugs, but I don't think they were doing very much to inform the reader of the potential dangers that using any very new psychoactive compounds would entail. Perhaps the real fault here is in the manner that this has been submitted to HN, rather than the article itself? Personally, I think it would be more appropriate and safer to call the submission 'Racetams and Glycinergics of the future' or something similar. As the title currently stands the impression given is that these chemicals are appropriate for use now, by everyone.

aaxe2• 13 years ago

The article links to the actual listing pages, which go into full details.

aaxe2• 13 years ago

You do realize its talking about the neuron, not the synapse? They are quite different.

samwilliams3• 13 years ago

I mentioned neither the neuron or the synapse explicitly. I am fully aware of the differences between the two.

If you have a problem with my comments please expand and clearly state your issue. Also, I think it is pretty well accepted around here that you shouldn't reply to the same comment twice. Editing your previous comment to reflect your new thoughts would certainly have sufficed in this case.

tokenadult• 13 years ago

In every discussion I have seen of "smart drugs" (nootropics), what is conspicuously lacking is discussion of the actual smart deeds performed by the smart drug users. Self-reported n=1 anecdotes have not established a convincing case that any kind of nootropic actually does anyone any good in the real world.

(Maybe I'll edit this comment some more below during its editing time window. Or perhaps this point is so evident that it needs no elaboration.)

simpsond• 13 years ago

We can't accurately meter our performance, intelligence, and behavior. We also can't control our environment (not realistically anyways). So, it's anecdotal. I'm excited for sensor networking to get in the body, so we can actually measure the effects of our consumption. Then again... that doesn't measure behavior, or intelligence. It's a hard problem.

enraged_camel• 13 years ago

What we need is double-blind studies with proper control groups and behavior or problem-solving tests.

droopyEyelids• 13 years ago

Thank You.

I look at this smart drug crap as a weird cultural thing to study.

If smart drugs made people have better performance, you'd notice your coworkers outperforming you while grimacing down their powdered piracetam. The army would be using them. Doctors would be making statements.

aneth4• 13 years ago

Not really. Performance is far too subtle, subjective, and complex to judge on a linear scale. Poor performers often do well because they are lucky or good actors.

Having used racets at times, I can say they are definitely more than a weird cultural thing.

drewblaisdell• 13 years ago

There are, however, studies that show that racetams are not harmful. If you don't believe they work, give them a try for yourself. They work for some and not for others.

Did you consult a double-blind study of caffeine before drinking your first cup of coffee? At what point does the plural anecdote at least refute the idea that racetams are just a placebo?

pallandt2• 13 years ago

I see a lot of people here experimenting with racetams.

I caution you to do extensive research on pubmed.gov and at least flip through a few pharmacology and neuroscience books, if you plan on long term use of said racetams. Wikipedia as a last resort or to refresh your knowledge.

They all have different properties and on rare occasions, could have completely opposite effects, depending on the person taking them and their genetic markup. A lot of them act on the glutamatergic pathways, and/or have more obscure/newly discovered methods of action.

For evidence, I offer 'Levetiracetam as monotherapy or add-on to valproate in the treatment of acute mania-a randomized open-label study.' at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18369598 and conversly, 'Acute psychosis associated with levetiracetam.' http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12875956 or 'Levetiracetam: An Unusual Cause of Delirium.', at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23782757

Levetiracetam was initially approved for seizure control. I hope you can see from the above mentioned papers that while it can also help someone 'calm down', it can bring another unfortunate person into a manic psychotic state.

////

The best way to try a nootropic or a new medication for that matter, is to wean yourself off any other supplements and only try one at a time. You'll also need to have a good understanding of the Cytochrome P450, to be able to avoid enzyme induction or inhibition, if you plan to later on add other supplements to your regimen.

Especially if you will also be taking Rx medication.

You do not want to unknowingly overdose yourself with something or sabotage your 'treatment' by accidentally taking a product that happens to induce the enzyme complex metabolizing one of your other supplements or meds. A supplement or medication that also acts as an enzyme inducer will reduce the time spent in your system of the product's who's metabolism is controlled by said enzyme(s).

///

To sum up, before putting stuff in your body, do your due diligence and be wary of relying on anecdotal reports of success with said supplements. Results WILL vary, because every body is unique.

andymkdavis92• 13 years ago

Accelerator program start engine (powered by Accenture) is backing UCLA Neuroscientists on the nourishment piece to brain fitness. Full disclosure, I’m on the team for the summer. Have a look at what we are doing at trubrain and I’ll bring on Dr. Andrew Hill to answer any Neurofeedback or nootropic question.

ramgorur• 13 years ago

I have done some experiments with nootropics (namely adderal) as well, but failed to notice anything. I am a chain smoker, that could be the reason, I am not sure.

I failed to understand the basics behind this "cognitive enhancer" hype, lets say these stuff "really" works, then why we don't see those multi-billion pharmaceutical companies investing on them? If they would really worked, then I should already find all those pharmacy shops around me teeming with nootropics (assuming they have negligible side effects), right?

BTW, I am actually from south-east asia, here you can buy almost anything (except LSD etc.) without prescription, and we have dozens of pharmaceutical companies outsourcing drugs to the other side of the world. Moreover, if these companies could really come up with something real, then it could be an "instant hit" here.

More Nootropics: Racetams and Glycinergics

Related Stories