Would you take smart drugs to perform better at work? | Hacker News Reader

Would you take smart drugs to perform better at work?

bbc.com

54 pointslelf85 comments

Reading this reminds me of Paul Erdös's amphetamine habit. Excerpt from "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers":

Like all of Erdös's friends, Graham was concerned about his drug-taking. In 1979, Graham bet Erdös $500 that he couldn't stop taking amphetamines for a month. Erdös accepted the challenge, and went cold turkey for thirty days. After Graham paid up--and wrote the $500 off as a business expense--Erdös said, "You've showed me I'm not an addict. But I didn't get any work done. I'd get up in the morning and stare at a blank piece of paper. I'd have no ideas, just like an ordinary person. You've set mathematics back a month." He promptly resumed taking pills, and mathematics was the better for it.

There's probably a good chance the placebo effect was holding him back during that month. He was already nervous that he might need the drugs to continue working (otherwise he wouldn't have made the bet) so it follows that he may have tricked himself into believing he needed the drugs to keep working. It's hard to say either way.

BS, that isn't "placebo" effect. Tried that experiment. Amphetamines are addictive as hell. Sure you can stop taking them but it leaves your neurochemical state in the crapper for a while, so you're down & out (Maybe a withdrawal symptom). IMHO, best not to screw with the brain. It's a fairly complex bit of machinery & you may be wishing you left it at good enough. I know someone who did the electromagnetic stimulation thing, it sounded crazy to me at the time but then actively flooding you bloodstream with crap that will "hack" you brain isn't that far off either

FYI, guy who tried the electromagnetic stimulation had a baby, when I saw him afterwards he always seemed tired. I'm assuming any benefit from the electromagnetic stimulation was negated by lack of sleep... Did not seem to get significantly smarter or anything.

You clearly didn't know him personally. Although I didn't, I know people who did, and, trust me, he probably would have made the bet either way. ;)

Quitting amphetamines after a long time of use would definitely make your brain go blank for a while.

not so sure about that. when taken in the prescribed doses, amphetamines have no side effects that persist after cessation of treatment. They're among the safest prescribed substances on the planet.

Amphetamines aren't used for creativity. They more accurately could be characterized as "reducing the activation energy for entering (and resuming) the focused state needed for a task".

quitting caffeine by contrast, will cause terrible headaches and a shitty mood for a at least half a week.

They're among the safest prescribed substances on the planet.

That seems like a very doubtful claim. To my knowledge, for example, antibiotics are pretty much 100% safe (unless you have an allergy). Are you indeed comparing amphetamines to all other prescription drugs? Or perhaps only to prescription drugs with abuse potential?

Antibiotics are not 100% safe, they can have serious life threatening consequences. They can knock your bacterial balance out of whack in your digestion system leading to colon issues.

So... more dangerous than amphetamines?

I have no position on that, I just wanted to point out that antibiotics are not totally safe.

Antibiotics can be pretty taxing on your body and metabolism.

Amphetamine is a dopamine agonist with downstream effects that inhibit the reuptake of monoamines and trace amines. Dopamine agonists and monoamine reuptake inhibitors cause tolerance and withdrawal. Cessation after chronic use at prescribed doses will cause a rebound of apathy and inability to focus.

I am sure about that, as someone who's taking prescribed doses.

If they were truly effective and there were no side effects, I would take them, and not just for work.

There is a slippery slope here: If taking moderately effective drugs with no side effects becomes commonplace, there will be pressure to take more effective drugs with slight side effects, then possibly very effective drugs with considerable side effects. Just like in sports.

In my opinion, this is not something to be afraid of, but something to be aware of, and debated.

Maybe. However, caffeine is a moderately effective smart drug with no side effects, and is fairly commonplace. I don't think this causes pressure to take Adderall (more effective, slight side effects).

AFAIK caffeine is a diuretic, interferes with sleep, and gives me the shakes at a high enough dosage. I'd consider those things to be side effects. Pushing up against an unacceptable level of side effects is what probably forces most of us to moderate our dosage.

Caffeine is only a mild diuretic, and only for those who haven't built a tolerance to it. You're right though, Caffeine sure does have side-effects, especially withdrawal effects.

Those side effects are trivial. Everything has side effects or lets just call them effects, since drugs don't do what you want them to do.

You may be a slow caffeine metabolizer, its common.

These drugs do exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racetam You can get them from India, and I know a number of coders who've taken them to very great effect.

However, there is a very real downside: lack of sleep. I know one guy who went off the fucking deep end with paranoia and deceit after taking this stuff for around a year, non stop. He slept, but not much. From what I can tell of my friends who take these drugs, they're great for the occasional week of crunch, or 48-hour coding binge, but as a daily thing, be very careful to stop and rest your body from the stuff after a week or month.

Caffeine is addictive and has physical/mental side-effects.

Caffeine reduces appetite

I'm gonna slide down that slippery slope :).

The way I see it, jobs that can be done better while doped will have pressure on their executors to continue to supplement or lose the position.

That's not to say it's hopeless, just that highly competitive jobs might be out of reach for those of us who decide that they don't want to be drugged.

I look at it like professional sports. So many athletes use performance enhancing drugs, that to compete with the pros, you need to take them as well.

On the other hand, sports performance is easier to measure than professional, white-collar job performance. If they ever start measuring every stat about your daily job performance, then what you say would be true. Otherwise, I don't see how they will even determine who is performing worse, let alone weed them out.

I can't view this from the UK?! On the British Broadcasting Cooperation's website crazy.

"BBC Future (international version) We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee. It is run commercially by BBC Worldwide, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BBC, the profits made from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes. You can find out more about BBC Worldwide and its digital activities at www.bbcworldwide.com.

If you are looking for health, technology, science and environment news in the UK, please visit: Health, Technology, Science and Environment."

You would think that if they are smart enough to figure out you are in the UK and they cannot "profit from you", they would just not show you the Ads.

https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=We%27re+sorry+...

Deleted comment

Edit - replying to deleted comment saying to use a commercial VPN

Alternative for the particularly nerdy brit, who happens to have a cloud instance in the US, and likes to roll their own. Instructions are from a Linux machine, but you can do this with putty too.

1. In Firefox, go Preferences->Advanced->Network->Connection:Settings

2. Manual proxy configuration, set SOCKS host to localhost, socks port to 10000 (ten thousand)

3. Connect to your proxy with ssh and an extra parameter -D localhost:10000

i.e. ssh -D localhost:10000 user@mycloudinstance.com

Your firefox traffic is now tunneled via your cloud instance.

I drink coffee already, so I guess it's more a matter of degrees than would.

Like most things, it depends on the trade-offs. Who wouldn't want to be a better version of themselves if it can be done safely?

I already take several: creatine monohydrate (5g/day), Vitamin D (4,000 IU/day), fish oil (~1000mg EPA/600mg DHA), caffeine, and probably more that I'm forgetting.

could you briefly describe the benefits of each?

There's a nice list of claimed nootropic supplements (legal and illegal, depending on what country you live in) and what benefits (if any) they provide: http://examine.com/supplements/Nootropic/

Would I? Or do I?

Cognitive enhancing drugs (nootropics) have been in use in the workplace for quite a while now.

Reddit has a pretty robust community as well: http://www.reddit.com/r/Nootropics/

On the stipulation that:

1) They have been 'proven' empirically to have the advertised efficacy in the general population. Different tasks require different kinds of attention and thinking.

2) There are absolutely no mental or physical potentials for addiction

3) There are absolutely no deleterious mental, physical or general health effects.

Caffeine gets 0/3, so I don't drink it.

> - modafinil >- piracetam >- amphetamines >- beta blockers > - ritalin

None of these pass any of the three requirements. Two of them have the fun potential for inducing psychosis in the general population, I have a friend who had a psychotic break after being prescribed amphetamines for ADD.

If you mix beta-blockers with stimulants, you can cause paradoxical hypertension and die. Beta-blockers also build up a tolerance and you will have rebound hypertension. Also people say they cause hair loss, but I attribute that men are typically prescribed them at an age where hair loss is natural.

Modafinil is thought to work by inhibiting GABA release through a similar mechanism as opioids, but in different parts of the brain and not to such an extreme extent. From what I've read, a pattern of abuse and withdrawal can develop with this substance.

Piracetam has a withdrawal, and needs supplementing with other nutrients to be effective.

If any of the above work for you, kudos. I don't want to live in a world where I am pressured into taking drugs on the off chance I might provide more value to my employer at the expense of my health, just because other people are willing to risk it for a job.

Piracetam is unsafe and has withdrawal? That must be joke!

Some people are taking 20g/day for entire life, including pregnancy.

And, no, you don't need 'other supplements'. You can for instance eat eggs for choline.

Actually, your numbered list is nonsensical:

1. Nothing is ever proven 3. Substance such as that 'absolutely no deleterious mental, pyshical or general healt effects' doesn't exist. The toxin is in the dose. Every input is trade between good and bad.

Depends on the risk. Assuming that the risk is proportionate to dosage, and in the absence of a regulatory mechanism, widespread use of performance enhancing drugs will lead to a level of use just shy of being lethal over the duration of employment, say three years.

I'm not so sure I believe that. Is there some kind of game theory argument that shows this? I find it hard to believe that taking "just shy of ... lethal" dosages is a Nash equilibrium here, once you factor in risk of death in the payoff matrix.

I had to look up Nash equilibrium, and your critique is valid given that I certainly haven't tried to compute anything. A number of observations lead me to suspect that there is some sort of optimum:

1. Working conditions generally being more dangerous in the absence of regulatory mechanisms such as OSHA.

2. I live in a state with a sizable dairy industry, and I've read that three years is the typical productive lifespan of a milk cow before it can no longer support its own weight and collapses, when its production is managed with RBGH and antibiotics.

3. Doping of elite athletes is regulated by practical limits of detection.

Lethality might not be the ultimate limit. Public outrage or a decline of performance above a certain dosage might also set upper limits.

I took anaracetam for about 6 months earlier in the year. Same as piracetam but non-prescription and only 3-4hrs vs 8+ duration.

The effects were definitely there. More code, easier comprehension of code but also enhanced use of my vocabulary, clarity of speech.

I stopped taking it because I was worried it was affecting my short term memory. I felt like I was becoming more forgetful especially on weekends when I would take a break.

I'm not sure if this was just a readjustment of my baseline making me feel dumb when I wasn't taking any or if there has actually been damage done.

I'm now of the mind that it's probably better not to risk it until a drug is well established as safe.

+1 for experiencing negative effects on memory after a while. I had that too.

Piracetam was first synthesized in 1964 and has been studied ever since. Don't worry, it's safe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracetam#History

I don't need that to perform better. I would do it the natural way: maintaining a healthy lifestyle. This means proper sleep, daily exercise and a balanced and varied food.

It's not like 'performing better' is binary. I'm sure that you would perform even better if you took nootropics.

Not necessarily. Good chunk of the "enhancers" might not bode well with strenuous exercise. I don't know of anyone who's mentioned an amplification in their abilities by mixing both diet+exercise with neuro enhancers.

Well that settles it. Killah911 doesn't know anyone who would do both, ergo there isn't anyone.

If you do, please share. It's not the kind of discussion that comes about as a normal part of my conversation with most people. Hoping to hear some interesting viewpoints on HN, especially if they happen to be from people who were able to amplify or have an additive effect by doing both.

I've experienced negative ones so far with Beta Blockers and stimulants + exercise. Haven't been bold enough to try other combos, I'm good with excercise for now

I don't. But that still does not really give any indication about the effects of the combination.

Anecdote: I know someone that was using Ritalin in conjunction with heavy workouts. They loved it and reported far better performance. But I convinced them they really needed to consider the possible health issues of straining your body while on stimulants.

A friend of mine had a heart attack from lifting weights while abusing methamphetamine (intravenous, and a lot of it).

The effects of exercise is HUGE! Right foods, in the longer term do have significant effect, but there's nothing quite like getting your heartrate up for a while to work wonders for your brain

Why not do all that and also take smart drugs?

That's like people that say "I don't need alcohol/drugs/sex/whatever to have a good time. Why can't we listen to music and play Parcheesi?"

Why not both?

Everybody, lets LOL on that.

No drug is 100% safe or free of side effects, and these effects might only surface after long-term use. Some of these side effects are not currently known, since large numbers of people haven't taken some of these drugs on a daily basis for a long time.

For example, some psychotropic drugs, such as antipsychotics, can have severe side effects which are sometimes permanent, such as tardive dyskinesia (involuntary, repetitive body movements)[1]. Others, like SSRIs, can have very unpleasant withdrawal symptoms. Maybe I'd risk neurological side effects if I had a mental illness that prevented me from living my life. But would I do it just to become more effective at work? No way.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tardive_dyskinesia

Amphetamines and opiates have a rather small side effect profile if you're otherwise in good health. If you're not prone to psychosis or heart issues and not "abusing" amphetamines, there shouldn't be much problem. Same for opiates: apart from constipation, they're a near-complete win. People perform better at intellectual tasks when using opiates due to feeling better overall.

It's not fair to compare antipsychotics and other drugs to "fix" mental instability - those have terrible side effects. The newer ones are better overall, although with major but rare side effects like you mentioned, as well as SJS (~skin falls off). Basics, such as amphetamines, are not nearly as risky or screwed up as the psych drugs.

"If you're not prone to psychosis or heart issues"

If you've never tried taking these drugs before, how would you know that you're prone to these issues before they hit you and it's too late?

The following excerpt from Wikipedia[1] describes side-effects of amphetamines (e.g., Adderall) and similar stimulants when used to treat ADHD:

Increased rates of psychosis and/or mania are associated with many stimulants used to treat ADHD, including Concerta, Ritalin LA, d-MPH, Atomoxetine, Adderall XR, Modafinil, MTS, and Metadate. A 2009 FDA review of 49 clinical trials found that one to two percent of children taking stimulants for ADHD experienced hallucinations or other psychotic episodes. Nearly half of these were under the age of eleven, and approximately 90% had no history of similar psychiatric events. Hallucinations involving snakes, worms or insects were the most commonly reported. This incidence of psychosis is higher than the 0.1% reported by previous short-term clinical trials. Even this new incidence rate may be low, however, since the clinical trials often excluded children with previous, adverse reactions to ADHD medication.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_deficit_hyperactivit...

The only people who understand why I'm still 100% healthy after being a heroin addict for 7 years, is my doctor at my Suboxone clinic. Provided you actually follow proper harm minimisation opiates are very safe. The problems arise with addiction, the illegality of the drug, and how society handles it. My parents still blame any cold I get on my past addiction.

(Throwaway account, through proxy server, etc.)

Yes.

I've worked at a startup where 60% of the engineers were using drugs illegally, every single day. Most used Adderall that was supplied by one of the programmers, but when that ran short, some started using very small doses (~5mg) of methamphetamine (myself included).

This was the only way any of us could keep up. There was a clear divide in compensation between the engineers that were using and the ones that were not. We, the users, simply got more done. As far as I know, management was not aware of the drug use.

This company eventually had a sizeable exit, and the top-rated engineers (read: the drug users) all got hefty "rentention bonuses" from the acquirer. As far as I know, there isn't one of us in the "using group" that is not a millionaire right now.

I've been doing an interesting experiment related to this. For the past month, I took either 200 mg Modafinil (Generic) or 150 mg Armodafinil (Nuvigil). I noticed no increase or decrease in my productivity. However, my mood was noticeably improved with both. I became more sociable than normal, which surprised some of my co-workers (usually I'm quite reserved / absorbed with coding during my day to day). I also was able to see certain novel patterns I wouldn't have before. It's hard to describe this: it's almost like my brain was bringing to the surface memories that were relevant to helping me solve a particular problem.

+1 to feeling more sociable while on these drugs. Whether that is a good thing depends on your personal preferences. I don't generally like being talkative and I don't really like talkative people, so in retrospect, I don't appreciate that side-effect.

Yes, I would. In fact, I need to get around to figuring out what the Silk Road Alternative Of The Week is and look into getting some Modafinil or whatever.

As of now, I pretty much limit myself to caffeine and 5HTP.

Wouldn't mind trying some acid as well, but I'm not sure you can really call that a "smart drug". :-)

No, I've found that performance at work is generally inversely correlated with being smart. That said inducing mental states that makes one more likeable generally works wonders for performance at work.

I've taken Modafinil in the past for this reason, for about six months. It made me temporarily more productive, alert, and able to focus (for the first two months, I'd say), but then I started to become habituated and the effect wasn't the same. When I was on it, I slept and ate much less. I am not sure I could have slept or ate more if I wanted to. At first, it made me feel so anxious that I could hardly exist around other people. I remember my first conversation with my roommate while I was on it. My heart nearly exploded and my brain froze. I had a terrifying experience driving around that first day too. (Lesson learned: do not try new drugs and drive!) But that went away after a day or so, and then I behaved more recklessly. I felt more aggressive and on edge. I think I felt more confident, temporarily. I became highly talkative (for me, at least). I drank a lot, at least for the first three or so months. One possible theory is that it induced a higher heart rate, which made me feel anxious, which made me want to drink more. I also smoked a lot more (cigarettes). I found that my memory was not as good after several months of taking this -- this could be due in part to its interference with my sleep, and in part due to the drinking, although I can't say for sure if I drank markedly more during that time than other times in my life. I don't really think so though. I actually got the worst grades that I have ever received in my life the semester I was on it (math and science courses). I stopped taking it soon after. Granted, I was dealing with a number of other issues then, so this was hardly a controlled experiment, and the effects I experienced could have been due to a number of other lifestyle factors. In addition, there could have been a drug quality issue. We'll never know. But my sense for these kinds of drugs after that experience is that it is not healthy for me and I would not do it again. I wouldn't even take it as a once-in-a-while all-nighter work-cramming thing, unless I was, say, in a multi-day gun battle, which is a very unlikely scenario. For me, I find that maintaining good mental health, working consistently, eating well, getting eight hours of sleep, and exercising makes me a much more productive, happy, and mentally sharp human being. I think it is difficult to use drugs to improve yourself unless you have serious issues to begin with and/or you really know what you're doing. If you're going to try it, make sure you plan ahead and have ample discipline, data, and possibly, expert supervision.

Interestingly, before experimenting with Modafinil, my friends and I used to sometimes take Adderall and similar drugs recreationally, because we found their effect to be quite similar to cocaine.

EDIT: Feel free to ask me more about this experience if you're curious.

"Smart drugs" mentioned:

- modafinil

- piracetam

- amphetamines

- beta blockers

- ritalin

Modafinil is overrated. There are modest gains, but meh...

No idea what paracetem does...

Amphetamines are great until you get a heartattack or go batshit crazy. Not worth the risk. Ok for weightloss but way too dangerous in my opinion. Quit it and you'll be down for what seems forever. I put phentermine in the same class

Beta blockers, now that's a first... Always thought they're boring blood pressure drugs or something...

Ritalin is OK, but you can get habituated, not entirely sure there aren't any negative side effects (certainly not as creative on Ritalin).

IMHO Best cognitive enhancer with few side effects: Exercise! Read "Spark", tried the 80% of max heartrate for 30 mins a day and boom! It works! Good ol BDNF. Better concentration, creativity & less depression. Also helps create new brain cells... I hate exercising, but now I pop in a audible & take the much needed 45min refresher every day. Haven't tried with any combination of enhancers, though beta blockers are probably not a good fit right off the bat & I wonder if Amphetamines wouldn't make you heart just want to explode...

Beta blockers are used by musicians to control performance anxiety. I used to take them for auditions. For a stage performance it can leave you a bit emotionally flat, but when you have ten minutes in which you have to be perfect, it can really help stave off the shakes.

I suppose beta blockers are prescription only in most countries? Been reading up on them, sounds like they would come in handy during a job interview or something.

I got a prescription for them from my doctor at the time (for PA, not high blood pressure), so it should be doable. Definitely would be helpful for job interviews too (I'm sure 20-40% of the people you see appearing before news cameras take them also) but be aware that they can cause your mouth to be dry. Also, try them out before the big day -- I've known people to pass out during big performances because, you know, they can lower your blood pressure.

Ritalin seems to be second best to amphetamines. It feels heavier on the body, and doesn't provide any euphoria to overcome the rush of thinking so fast. Ritalin seems to wear you out quicker than amphetamines.

Modafinil seems to vary significantly by person. I don't get any effect from it, but other people seem to prefer it as there's no powerful effects like Ritalin/amphetamines. It's quite understandable people might prefer something lower-key than amphetamines.

Ones that aren't mentioned are opiates. While not smart drugs in the sense of directly improving cognition, the reduction in pain and stress can end up providing a huge positive effect on tasks.

My suboxone treatment is an amazing booster for my work. Prior to that, I was a heroin addict, which also helped quite a lot. Shame about the whole "I'm and IV drug user and addict" bit though...

What is the book Spark you are talking about? Could you share the link?

It's a compelling read:

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/721609.Spark

I already take a rather dumb drug for that: coffee. And lots of it. I'd gladly replace it with a more efficient and safer drug, preferably one that doesn't cause a physical addiction.

@greenfieldprod: You seem to have made multiple high-quality replies in this thread, but nobody is seeing them (and nobody can reply to them) because your account seems to be 'hellbanned'. Some people (like me) will see your posts, because they surf HN with 'showdead' turned on in the prefs, but most people won't even be knowing that you exist right now.

Normally this is only applied to spammers and trolls etc, but I thought it might be nice to let you know since you seem to be legitimately attempting to participate here.

I'm not sure how to appeal this, aside from contacting pg or making a new account.

No need to reply to this, not trying to derail the thread. Cheers.

I wonder what kind of relationship the answer to this question has with non-stimulated intelligence.

Do smarter people want more to be even smarter? Or do dumb people want more to be smart?

I'd take it if it would increase the success of my startup by a non-trivial percentage.

Performing well at work is no guarantee of earning more money, hence I wouldn't.

Agreed. I should have made that point in my own answer. Yes, I'd use, in the course of building my startup. But I wouldn't do it for some generic salaried job.

Would you let your child get on a bus driven by someone who wasn't taking their prozac?

Depending on the side effect, yes.

I'd rather take mushrooms.

Psychedelics seem indicated for perhaps gaining a different viewpoint on technical designs. I believe one of the senior engineers at Cisco promoted LSD for coming up with networking equipment ideas. I'm far from convinced that psychedelics are good for actually working. Even the Beatles said they never actually recorded while on LSD.

Isn't that already considered a smart drug by many societies? Experiences with psychedelics are elementary in perspective.

Yes, then we will end up with a singularity sooner.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com