This article sucks, and is basically marketing for the new wave of nootropic companies. I think nootropic use is an issue that will enter the societal conversation relatively soon, but it's important to note that for the most part, the younger generation has already gone half-in on nootropic use-- while many were non-consensually plied with nootropics by their parents/teachers to increase their productivity, nearly all have experimented with nootropics to some degree on their own, even if it's just with coffee. I am of the opinion that a good place for us to land would be the removal of any and all limits on what a person is allowed to consume in the name of self-modification, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone other than the user. In practice, most nootropics are whitemarket or greymarket, with a number of notable entries being prescription-only.

Nootropics are for everyone, and always have been due to the fact that having greater cognitive ability is a large factor in success at most tasks.

Coffee (caffeine) is the most consumed nootropic in the history of the planet, and is probably the safest. There are probably a number of other equally useful yet harmless compounds out there that are ripe for discovery, but I wouldn't exactly put my money on the options that this article suggests.

I've experimented with nootropics extensively, and here are some of my findings:

1. Piracetam makes me very spacey and distant

2. Modafinil is good for staying awake without jitters, but otherwise useless

3. Adderall is too stimulative and leads to jittery, coked-out thoughts

4. Caffeine is a winner

5. Weed improves creativity but makes tracing the logical steps of your thoughts more difficult

6. Fish oil helps reduce skin dryness but nothing else that is detectable