The brain may be about to have its Ozempic moment
economist.com
economist.com
I had been looking into orexin agonists (along with other things like H3 autoreceptor antagonists) back when they were just a concept. It’s good to see them finally reaching commercialization. Although they’re not approved by our own (Canadian) regulatory body quite yet.
Now that they’re approved in the US, though, I’m looking very much forward to seeing how these drugs perform in off-label-ish treatment of the various other sleep disorders that I’m sure clinicians will now begin throwing them at.
https://www.jellinek.nl/en/alcohol-drugs-behavior/ghb/
> GHB is difficult to dose. The difference between a dose with pleasant effects and the dose at which someone becomes overwhelmed by sleep and becomes unconscious is very small. People quickly take too much GHB. The combination with alcohol enhances the effects of GHB. This means that people can become unconscious even with a small dose of GHB.
The reason GHB has a narrow tolerance window (which, note, is not exactly the same thing as a therapeutic index, as the upper bound here isn't where the drug becomes toxic; it's just where the drug stops being recreationally "fun" and becomes a potent sleep drug instead) is because you actually require a decently high amount of the drug to get the recreational effect; and then only a little more of it will put you to sleep. But a "microdose" would imply that you're not going anywhere near the dose that gives you the recreational effect in the first place.
The term "microdose" is usually employed in conversations like this to specifically mean "a dose of a normally-conceptualized-as-recreational drug, too small to experience recreational effects" — although it can technically also mean "a dose of a prescription medicine too small to see the regular clinical effect."
People talk about microdoses of e.g. LSD, MDMA, or ketamine, as potential treatments for various mood disorders. In none of these cases is there an expectation that you'd "feel" the drug. It's a microdose, not a dose.
(And a fun tangent, back on the clinical end of things: sometimes microdoses of drugs can have paradoxical or unique effects, due to the particular ligand having higher binding affinity for a postsynaptic autoreceptor than for regular presynaptic receptors, such that microdoses of the ligand will only agonize the autoreceptors, with no accompanying agonism of the regular receptors. Activating the autoreceptor without activating the regular receptors can potentially do all sorts of wacky things — you're essentially giving the receptor's coupled ion channel a "negative stimulus", which for most gated ion channels isn't something they're they know what to do with; it's an "undefined behavior" kind of state. But some of these "undefined behavior" states are very useful! Low-dose naltrexone [LDN] therapy, for example: it has none of the subjective anti-euphoric effects of regular naltrexone therapy; but nor does it have pro-euphoric effects. Instead, it has anti-inflammatory effects, specifically on the tissues of the brain itself [astrocytes + microglia] that express opioid autoreceptors. LDN therapy is thus being investigated as a treatment for ME/CFS.)
---
† Presuming that what you have is actually pure GHB. Microdosing GHB's cousin GBL would be a different story, since it is extremely potent, with its active dose (and tolerance window) being measured in micrograms. Don't try to microdose GBL, kids. Not even if you know what solvents dissolve GBL and what serial dilution is.
I added the “pretending to be an adult” part because I knew someone was going to be a pedant about it.
I don’t see what’s the problem with someone taking any drug legally prescribed to them by their doctor. Lots of prescription drugs are potentially addictive, but that’s a risk to be weighed against the potential benefits.
But "microdosing" per se isn't the issue.
I once stumbled upon a psychiatry case report about a man with a psychotic illness, who found out by experimentation that taking significantly less of his antipsychotics than prescribed, along with up-titration when he began to notice the prodromal signs of relapse, helped him avoid relapse while also avoiding most of the unpleasant side effects. He did this on his own, only later confided in his psychiatrist he was doing it. Some psychiatrists would have reacted rather negatively, but his (being somewhat influenced by R. D. Laing & friends) actually thought it was smart, and wrote it up.
BHB is quite similar to GHB, but is a naturally produced ketone.
(I did try google)
2. Unhealthy desire to get rich (or work on interesting projects, which would be the better option).
Is it from these Valley Bros I read about experimenting with designer semaglutide on themselves? Or is there another stigma?
> IMO the much more likely explanation is that the brain uses contrastive learning somewhere. [...] Instead of using calculus and outer products to calculate derivatives, you feed real data and false data forward through the network and each neuron tracks and trains on the difference.
- when learning on the real examples, just propagate forward
- when learning on the fake examples, first generate them by propagating white noise backward
1) don’t need to sleep, be able to sleep: the coolest thing in the universe.
2) don’t need to sleep, be unable to sleep: you would likely cope. Also, be an irreplaceable shift worker.
3) need to sleep, be able to sleep: this is where most of us are now, nothing to write home about.
4) need to sleep, be unable to sleep: the rest of your life is short and full of exponentially growing suffering.
By „don’t need to sleep” I mean that the body refreshes itself by different means and you still reap the benefits.
I can’t really imagine how it would feel, much like I can’t imagine being immortal. Most fiction describing those phenomena as „nightmare” usually is about a character who gains the ability but none of the protective mechanisms.
The only way through will be anecdata. Science of one.
I await basic safety reports.
Here’s the thing: what a lot of these drugs are doing are basically acting as equivalents to the store-bought neurotransmitters you’d find in things like SSRIs or -phetamines/stimulants. To people lacking in these substances, they’re game changers.
The problem right now is a mismatch between regulation, availability, and testing regimes. Regulations are meant to prevent dystopian shit like employers mandating (or encouraging) a drug regimen for employment through threat of punitive fines or prosecution, while the private insurance markets promote unaffordability domestically (as North America is where over half of pharma revenues come from) and testing regimes fail to identify who is best suited for a given drug. All three of these prongs will shake out in time, but cause new problems as a result.
Where we’re at right now is less of a click-baity headline from The Economist, and more at the start of a new frontier in medicine that capitalizes on decades of research. We’ve maximized the benefits of “low-hanging” chemical-based drugs, and have moved into more complex, nuanced, or targeted drugs developed through modern compute rather than traditional drug trials alone. Things will change very quickly, and then stagnate again when we’ve picked clean the easy fruits from these new branches.
Everyone involved in a stock market agrees it's quite useful to have a separation between days, although you could have a 23.5/7 stock market with only half hour day-ends. That's when things like index rebalancing, addition, removal, stock splits occur. You say whoever holds stock X at end of a certain day holds stock Y+Z at the start of the next day (due to a company splitting up) and there's no need to argue about which millisecond a trade occurred. (It's your own damn fault if you were trying to buy the stock in the milliseconds before closing, but some exchanges run a special closing auction with a different algorithm to prevent races). It's also the time you can deploy software, which you can't do during the day. Maybe half an hour is too short for all this stuff. Or maybe it should be a 12 hour window once a week instead.
And of course, overnight trading is available on some stock exchanges now. (I’m not sure whether this is a new thing or has existed for a while, but I’ve only noticed it on TradingView for some papers about a year ago I think.)
We have our NeuroLinkBrain Implant plugin to AI agent , so that you can vibe code 24/7 . To maximize shareholder value.
It also helps with non-work stuff that's just not fun to do, such as chores or filing your taxes. It even helps you stick with hobbies you actually enjoy but your brain gets bored of.
The meds (both stimulant and non stimulant) help people with ADHD choose where to hyperfocus, but hyperfocus is an internal trait of the ADHD neurotype, so it isn’t just attributable to the drugs or something.
I.e. normal people use stimulants to go fast, while ND people with ADHD use them to go slow or have their brain actually be able to slow down.
Probs already there…
Nothing like losing 100 pounds to show you how profoundly lookist society is. It's been great.