cell cycle

[asecin]

You can't witness changes in neurogenesis from personal experience, unless you've been giving yourself cranial biopsies.

ebola

no i mean its only when i do drugs i actually experience the positive and negative effects in great abundance of neurotransmitters such as glutamate, GABA, dopamine, and serotonin. dunno how much they influence neurogenesis either positively or negatively, but if they do, i assume based on experience that i can only stimulate them adequately enough for such thing to occur with drugs and nothing else.

 

[ebola?]

Again, you can't infer increases in intersynaptic neurotransmitters from personal experience.

ebola

 

[asecin]

Again, you can't infer increases in intersynaptic neurotransmitters from personal experience.

ebola

yes i can notice by how i feel. i have been reading all about neurotranmission and i have been experimenting with drugs to try to notice how it alters it. i exhibited all the symptoms of high serotonin, dopamine, GABA etc. textbook record. to this point i guess, now i cant even do it anymore naturally which sucks. but i get the idea that may have caused neurogenesis of some sort and complete alteration of brain chemistry short and long term through me as subject to the experiment.

 

[ebola?]

i have been reading all about neurotranmission and i have been experimenting with drugs to try to notice how it alters it.

A lot of the generalizations about "how a neurotransmitter makes a person feel" are gross oversimplifications. In a lot of cases, drugs' mechanisms are not fully known, and are multifaceted. In all cases, how changes in one facet of neurotransmission affect subjective experience depends on other aspects of neurotransmission. The fact that you are grouping together disparate drugs (eg, "stimulants, opioids, etc.") and disparate neurotransmitters (eg, "the symptoms of high serotonin, dopamine, GABA etc.) shows that your understanding is not sufficiently rigorous.

ebola

 

[asecin]

A lot of the generalizations about "how a neurotransmitter makes a person feel" are gross oversimplifications. In a lot of cases, drugs' mechanisms are not fully known, and are multifaceted. In all cases, how changes in one facet of neurotransmission affect subjective experience depends on other aspects of neurotransmission. The fact that you are grouping together disparate drugs (eg, "stimulants, opioids, etc.") and disparate neurotransmitters (eg, "the symptoms of high serotonin, dopamine, GABA etc.) shows that your understanding is not sufficiently rigorous.

ebola

so actually you admit even thought you claim to be educated in biochemistry you dont really know a damn thing ? you are saying anything defining what is generally accepted in cases of neutrotransmitters affects on the brain is oversimplification. and there is no concrete proof or understanding of them fully. which means, so far you have wasted your time reading and studying it.
all i know it in whats generally accepted as knowledge about lets say dopamine. i will take doses of cocaine and ill experience all that is described with high dopamine in the brain, absolutely textbook. then ill feel all the lows of dopamine when withdrawing from it. it is really as simple. and trying to make it seem more complex only sounds pretentious.

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

How about you display a your knowledge of dopamine. Here are just a few basic questions that you could answer very succinctly if you know how. How and from what is dopamine synthesized by the body? From what is its precursor synthesized? How can it be further modified, and into which other neurotransmitters? What is the role of dopamine with regards to muscular control?

With exception to the last question understanding these basics is the very least a person should know to even begin thinking about the role that dopamine, and the chemicals associated with it, play within the body.

Moreover, a statement from your other thread in HL, saying that Oxytocin is like a natural form of MDMA, just shows how little of an understanding you actually have of this stuff.

 

[ebola?]

so actually you admit even thought you claim to be educated in biochemistry you dont really know a damn thing ?

This is a key example of why people don't enjoy discussion with you. Also, I have never claimed such.

you are saying anything defining what is generally accepted in cases of neutrotransmitters affects on the brain is oversimplification. and there is no concrete proof or understanding of them fully.

No. I am saying that it is problematic to take drastic simplifications of multiple experiments and then use them to infer physiological effects from personal experience.

For example, application of dopaminergic agents and dopaminergic antagonists in experimental animals suggests that dopamine plays a key role in motivation, attention, and reward (as well as locomotion). This, coupled with human experience with various exogenous ligands and diseases affecting dopaminergic neurons, suggests a certain "feel" of increases in dopaminergic transmission. However, this does not suggest that whenever someone feels motivated, driven, and euphoric one should implicate dopaminergic transmission as the relevant causal factor.

i will take doses of cocaine and ill experience all that is described with high dopamine in the brain, absolutely textbook. then ill feel all the lows of dopamine when withdrawing from it. it is really as simple.

Cocaine actually exerts drastic effects on serotonin and norepinephrine as well. Do you know which mechanisms of action (and which interactions between mechanisms of action) cause which subjective effects? Have you ever tried a highly selective dopamine reuptake inhibitor?

it is really as simple. and trying to make it seem more complex only sounds pretentious.

It is not simple at all. Trying to claim grasp of neurology (indeed, to the point that it's "simple") is the real pretense at play here.

ebola