Declaring War on Adderall

> Imagine a world where our policy-makers, cancer-researchers, and entrepreneurs are all realizing gains from cognitive enhancement.

Seems like that would dramatically exacerbate the have/have not gap that the article talks about earlier. And, corollary: imagine a world where our rogue traders, mafia bosses, used car salesmen, cult leaders, and con artists are all realizing gains from cognitive enhancement.

For fun, try a limit analysis: imagine a world where all your rivals in business are dosed up on your nootropics. You're now in the position of having to consume mind altering pharmaceuticals in order to retain your job, with some completely uncertain future cost to your health. Or you could conclude that the risk isn't worth it, and instead try to make a career in a lower paying field suitable for 'unenhanced' people, probably something dangerous and physical that robots can't quite manage yet.

It's frightening that the author thinks this is a good idea. I am clinging to the hope that this was put together by some disgruntled college kids who want the benefits but can't quite stomach the risk of buying black market Adderall.

EDIT - good: it got flagkilled. Horrible article.

> Adderall, an amphetamine initially developed to treat people diagnosed with ADHD or narcolepsy, is in a heydey. One estimate states that at some colleges and in workplaces across the nation, despite (or maybe due to) the fact that it’s a habit-forming prescription drug.

It's pretty funny that an article seeking Kickstarter funding for a cognitive enhancement drug would have a misspelling in its first sentence, and a missing clause in its nonsensical second sentence.

Lots of energy, little coherency. Pretty much the kind of writing typical of Adderall users. Also spam.

It is strange they should compare the safety of their non-prescription nootropic to Tylenol, which is a particularly hazardous over-the-counter drug.

Secondly, you can get L-Theanine readily and inexpensively in the US. This crowdfunding campaign seems to be a marketing exercise for something already sold by multiple supplement makers. L-Theanine also appears to be less hazardous than Tylenol.

> The premise of Adderall is exciting: pop a pill and plug in, and to that end, it’s been shown to be quite effective. The problem is that casual, non-prescription users are faced with a false choice: 0 or 100. There is no in between, no widely available supplement that works, that’s available over the counter, that’s not illegal and harmful.

As a user of both Vyvanse (a successor to Adderall) and non-prescription nootropics, I've found that to simply not be true.

I do in fact have ADHD. Vyvanse is a godsend 80% of the time, allowing me to function when without it I would be unable to keep cognitive focus long enough to figure out how long it's going to take me to get to work, much less sit down and write code. I take it most of the time before work, and it's very effective.

On days when I need to work late to meet a deadline, I could take a second Vyvanse. That would be against my doctor's orders, but it would work. I'd also not be able to sleep for an addition 6-8 hours, and over time could develop a number of health issues from both lack of sleep and elevated metabolism.

So.. I take racetams. I started with piracetam several years ago, and found that it allowed me to better absorb the structure of code that was difficult to understand. Piracetam only lasts about 2 hours though, and I have to take four capsules to get that much. It's bothersome, and I don't particularly want to be the guy that's always popping pills at his desk.

Aniracetam seems about as effective for me, and lasts 4-6 hours. It doesn't increase my heartrate or blood pressure like an amphetamine would, so it's perfect for when I need a few extra hours of productivity that day.

Racetams have been fairly extensively studied, and are available over the counter and as prescriptions elsewhere in the world. They're classified as supplements in the US, and are pretty much unregulated.

So, this isn't a "war on Adderall", but really about creating an alternative for those that are drug abusers. As someone who has ADHD, has a prescription for an alternative to Adderall that is not addicting, I see "war on Adderall" and read it as "war on Wheelchairs."

TL;DR: Adderall is bad, we need better legal nootropics.

Very confusing and repetitive article BTW. Maybe the author didn't find the drug for himself.

nootropics seems to be like steroids - useful medicine to treat real issues, and to produce exceptional results in useless "pure for show" activities like very quickly carrying that ball across those lines or picking out those 2 the same words in a quickly flickering sea of words. No practical improvement in any practical activities.

Note: 20+ years ago at University i first hand observed some acquaintances using nootropics to facilitate exams cramming. It worked for that purpose. While no practical improvement in their grades or knowledge beyond the day of the exam. People with comparable capabilities did the same cramming without chemicals too. With nootropics it was just easy, and sparing your mind such hard work isn't a good thing in mathematics (or anywhere else) actually.

Just curious, what are these permanent side effects that the article is talking about?

If you'd like to join us on our war against adderall, please support us at our Indiegogo campaign here: igg.me/at/sprint

We're around to answer any questions / concerns as well!