'Smart drugs' don't make people better at a problem-solving test | Hacker News Reader

'Smart drugs' don't make people better at a problem-solving test

newscientist.com

16 pointsRafelMri18 comments

Nice article, but looking at the primary source, what the authors completely forgot to measure or even so much as discuss [0], is the effect of participants physical well-being on performance when under the influence of these drugs.

They solely focus on the patients cardiac profile, I'm assuming for safety as these drugs can raise blood pressure quite a bit. Also, the sample size is strikingly small for a 4 cohort study on the effects of a drug on behavior (n = 30, 17 males, 23 females, but subdivided into 4 groups).

Performance enhancing drugs can have a myriad of effects on physical well being. The amount dispensed to participants was at least for Ritalin strikingly high. 30mg is a dose you get after at least 1-2 months of raising the dosage from 10mg, and that' the _retarded_ pill. If these were unretarded tablets, no doubt the participants must have felt completely wired up. The results look to me as if you drugged a bunch of people, told them to do something and they performed worse, but not much worse, probably because they were complaining of side effects. I know that's a polemic interpretation of the results, but I feel like I'm entitled to it, given the authors one sided discussion.

[0] https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/sciadv.add4165

Practicing cognitive games does, I'm sure of that. Mental math, crosswords, etc.

In terms of papers, I did a quick search:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190516082349.h...

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/have-you-done-your-cross....

The only debate is how much do they help. This is likely linked to the number of different cognitive games practiced, and how frequently.

I have no idea why people call them smart drugs. In fact, Ritalin and Concerta did not make me any smart at all, but it rather make me slow down in thinking, thus making me dumber than I look!

Spoiler alert: I have legal prescription of those drugs, and my subconscious hated it so much!

As an ADHD person, my experience of Ritalin was that all my thought processes slowed down and from my own inside perception it was significant, but it wasn’t bad because I stopped feeling like I was in a rush to do every possible thing all at once. I was, for once in my life, content to sit still and I was able to listen to others without interrupting them with thoughts I had which I felt compelled to share quickly before moving onto the next thought. However, it significantly worsened my hyperfocused to my disadvantaged, and I would spend literal days just glued to my computer, gaming the whole time. I don’t think it made me “smarter” but it slowed me down enough to actually take time to read things properly, and write coherently which at the time in mt life that I was taking Ritalin, saw a massive improvement in my grades, going from C’s to A’s within about a month of being on it.

First time I took methylphenidate I played piano for 8 hours straight

Maybe your test is just a stupid assessment and doesn't reflect what it means to be 'in the zone'

There is definitely a potential that the study design offered a measurement that wasn’t useful in determining how well these drugs do or do not work.

But, in your example, you measured the length of time you put into playing the piano, something the study did address and note that people on the drugs did do—by increasing their time on task. The important part though was that while taking longer, the participants did not perform any better when on the actual drugs and worse than those on the placebos.

So, following this logic in your own claims, it’s possible that while you played for 8 hours, it wasn’t your best work.

But if I wasn't on the drug, I wouldn't have done that at all, despite playing piano on and off for years prior to $EVENT

So 8 hours of something is still more (magic internal neural network synaptic connection strengthening) than the null hyp which is "yeah, without stimuli, you're not playing piano for 8 hours"

You played piano for 8 hours straight, but were you 1) playing well, 2) repeating the same things over and over again, 3) doing something creative, or 4) any or all of the above?

I've seen more than a few people on various drugs do some obsessive things, continually for long periods without a break. That didn't make them smart or skilled.

Then again being able to focus on dull work seems more helpful than being smarter or more skilled while having to do that same work.

My day to day life is full of things I just don’t want to do, not things I’m too dumb to do.

:heavy_plus_sign:

I knew someone who took something and played minesweeper for 8 hours straight. I'd say both are equally productive.

Imagine equating piano playing and a session of minesweeper

#NGMI

This sounds like what Ritalin does to hyperfocus. I personally think Ritalin makes hyperfocus much worse than when not on Ritalin - from my own experience of the drug for the treatment of ADHD

I'm just on Vyvanse these days, more like a nice pot of tea vs methylphenidate pop. Less piano, more ~~stretch your face~~ work/focus excitement stuff

Archive.today Mirror https://archive.ph/SMaf1#selection-667.0-667.64

Discussed here yesterday, 61 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36335730

Obligatory comic (surprisingly not xkcd): https://old.reddit.com/r/comics/comments/d1sm26/behold_the_u...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com