Reddit: IAmA grad student who has tried nearly every "study"/"smart" drug

I'd say the status quo is bad but not the worst. It would be better if cognitive-enhancing drugs were available for anyone who wanted them. It would be worse if using drugs for cognitive enhancement was illegal.

I don't think the sports analogy maps. Sports are artificial competitions and usually zero-sum. Commerce is cooperative. Intelligent individuals often benefit the less lucky. They invent new technologies that end up helping everyone.

If you allow some enhancement, why not others forms?

My sentiments exactly.

What about artificial limbs for athletes?

I guess that would be the Paralympics, but I don't have a problem with it. Cyborg kickboxing sounds more interesting than any modern day event.

Where does enhancement stop?

Hmm... matrioshka brains I guess. Although I'm willing to compromise and limit people to Jupiter brains.

What about everyone then feeling pressured to enhance themselves to still be able to compete, if they want to or not?

The same can be said for getting a college degree or some other kind of certification. Yes, people feel bad when they have low status, but the benefits of enhancement technologies outweigh the costs. I'd rather live in a world where Einsteins were 1 in 10. That world would have a better chance of solving humanity's problems.

Why talk about artificial limbs for athletes? There is a long list of banned substances, and there is no limit to the number of arguments you can find for and against the use of PEDs (Performance Enhancing Drugs) in sports.

"What about artificial limbs for athletes? Where does enhancement stop?"

Sports is all about artificial restrictions. Not just banning drugs, but banning certain moves and behavior. That's what makes it a sport, and not real life. The idea is to see what people do under controlled conditions.

Now, exactly what those restrictions should be is a useful question. But the existence of restrictions in sports is a given, by definition.

"What about everyone then feeling pressured to enhance themselves to still be able to compete, if they want to or not?"

That's how it's always been. Modern drugs are new, but the idea of self-modification to improve one's lot in life is not. Dressing better, having a better build, being more handsome or beautiful, being (or seeming) smarter; all quite historic pursuits.

The world's a better place for it, overall.

The job of a doctor is to treat people who are ill because the job of a doctor is to treat people who are ill?

Welcome to tautology club.

"the bible says that you cannot take anything that alters your behavior or your body"

I think most people wouldn't take such an interpretation of the Bible, but even if you did, your explanation doesn't line up with current societal mores.

There are many mind and body altering substances that are not only tolerated, but celebrated. Almost all of modern Western medicine is based on introducing substances or therapies to the body that alter the mind or body. Everything from cold medicine to antibiotics alters the body. There are also numerous mind-altering substances used, such as narcotics, anesthetics, anti-psychotics, and anti-depressants. All of these are fully embraced by the vast majority of people, as well as the medical establishment.

But even if we stay away from medicine, there are plenty of examples of accepted mind-altering recreational substances. Nicotine, caffeine, and alcohol are the most obvious, but there are many other less severe substances (look at the ingredients on some energy drinks). By and large, the use of all of these substances is accepted.

If it were simply the case that cultural history prevented society from accepting mind-altering substances, none of the above would be accepted. The explanation must be more complicated.

For there is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so. Hamlet

I live by that verse.

It's also not at all clear whether their long-term effect will be positive for any particular person, or how to predict it. A large portion are basically milder versions of amphetamines, without nearly as many of the really bad side effects. But they fundamentally do the same thing, upping short-term energy and concentration. One common issue is that people fall into on/off work patterns: you're taking the enhancer and working like mad, or, when you're not, you're totally checked out. There are a lot of kinds of intellectual work for which oscillating between 110% and 0% effort isn't really optimal, though.

I think it's somewhat telling that the best success seems to be at high-pressure environments with fairly prescribed tasks, like law school.

Modafinil has fewer side effects and is less habit forming than drugs such as caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol. In fact, modafinil is safer than caffeine:

Basti and Jouvet (1988) describe a suicide attempt using 4500 mg of modafinil; the suicidee survived with no long-term effects but temporary nervousness, nausea, and insomnia.

That's 45 doses of modafinil and she was fine afterwards. 45 times the typical dose of caffeine would be lethal. Sure, you can argue from ignorance about potential long-term effects, but that argument works for anything that wasn't invented before you were born. Based on the evidence we have now, modafinil appears quite safe.

Edit: You are the first reply that didn't start with "because." You broke the pattern! >:(

Not that it makes you one, but just so you know: all drug addicts can't imagine how they got by, or would want to get by, without their drug of choice.

That's actually the best argument for the continued illegality of any enhancing drugs. Drugs _have_ side effects, and creating a situation in which people are compelled to take them ensures that at least some will suffer the consequences.

I forget where I first heard about it, but the idea of something better and safer than caffeine intrigued me. I take modafinil in the following circumstances:

1. If I feel particularly tired in the morning.

2. If I need to get a lot of stuff done in a short amount of time.

3. If I need to study or perform my best for others. (Mostly job interviews or important meetings.)

On average, I end up taking it about twice a week. For me it's basically caffeine++. It helps me think faster and stay focused.

You have to take it with a choline source. I noticed next to nothing taking it alone, but when I took it with some choline bitartrate, that's when I noticed an effect and my dual n-back scores rose a little.

Exercise worked for me too. It makes a GREAT difference on me, even an hour day of exercise counts.

I don't know how to make my diet better.

Big lie as far as I can tell. I'd like to see exercise tested against a placebo.

I don't agree with this.

People without ADD experience significant benefits from using Adderall because it's an amphetamine--not because they have undiagnosed ADD.

Any amphetamine helps you think clearly through being more alert and ability to concentrate for longer periods of time.