Scientists take drugs to boost brain power: study

chemicalwasteland

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Messages
741
Location
somewhere over the rainbow
by Marlowe HoodWed Apr 9, 2:46 PM ET

Twenty percent of scientists admit to using performance-enhancing prescription drugs for non-medical reasons, according to a survey released Wednesday by Nature, Britain's top science journal.

The overwhelming majority of these med-taking brainiacs said they indulged in order to "improve concentration," and 60 percent said they did so on a daily or weekly basis.

The 1,427 respondents -- most of them in the United States -- completed an informal, online survey posted on the "Nature Network" Web forum, a discussion site for scientists operated by the Nature Publishing Group.

More than a third said that they would feel pressure to give their children such drugs if they knew other kids at school were also taking them.

"These are academics working in scientific institutions," Ruth Francis, who handles press relations for the group, told AFP.

The survey focused on three drugs widely available by prescription or via the Internet.

Ritalin, a trade name for methylphenidate, is a stimulant normally used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, especially in children. Modafinil -- marketed at Provigil -- is prescribed to treat sleep disorders, but is also effective against general fatigue and jet lag.

Both medications are common currency on college campuses, used as "study aids" to sharpen performance and wakefulness.

"It doesn't seem to be causing too much trouble since most [students] use the drugs not to get high but to function better," Brian Doyle, a clinical pyschiatrist at Georgetown University Medical Centre, told a US newspaper last month. "When exams are over, they go back to normal and stop abusing the drugs."

Other experts expressed more concern about what the survey revealed.

"It alerted us to the fact that scientists, like others, are looking for short cuts," Wilson Compton, director of epidemiology and prevention research at the US National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), told AFP.

Ritalin, he noted, can become addictive, even if it has proven safe and effective when taken as prescribed.

The third class of drugs included in the survey was beta blockers, prescribed for cardiac arrhythmia and popular among performers due to its anti-anxiety effect.

Of the 288 scientists who said that had taken one or more of these drugs outside of a medical context, three-fifths had used Ritalin, and nearly half Provigil. Only 15 percent were fans of beta blockers.

More than a third procured their meds via the Internet, with the rest buying them in pharmacy.

Other reasons cited for popping pills were focusing on a specific task, and counteracting jet lag.

Almost 70 percent of 1,258 respondents who answered the question said they would be willing to risk mild side effects in order to "boost your brain power" by taking cognitive-enhancing drugs.

Half of the drug-takers reported such effects, including headaches, jitteriness, anxiety and sleeplessness.

Wilson of the NIDA expressed surprise at the rate of substance abuse shown, but cautioned that the survey did not meet rigorous scientific standards.

"This is a volunteer poll of people responding to an Internet survey. There might be an over-representation," he said.

But previous research has shown that, as the boundary between treating illness and enhancing wellbeing continues to blur, taking performance-boosting products continues to gain in cultural acceptance.

"Like the rise in cosmetic surgery, use of cognitive enhancers is likely to increase as bioethical and psychological concerns are overcome," opined Nature in a commentary.

In the survey, 80 percent of all the scientists -- even those who did not use these drugs -- defended the right of "healthy humans" to take them as work boosters, and more than half said their use should not be restricted, even for university entrance exams.

More than 57 percent of the respondents were 35 years old or younger.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080409/ts_afp/healthscienceresearchersdrugs
 
chemicalwasteland said:
taking performance-boosting products continues to gain in cultural acceptance.

damn straight, as soon as it becomes cost effective we'll all be running around on pills pushed on us by government and economic interests.
 
You know, the funny thing is that I also take a performance-enhancing drug every day. I do so specifically to boost my concentration and effectiveness both at work and while undertaking academic projects. Worse yet, it is quite clear that I am addicted - if I were to stop suddenly, I'd face a nasty series of headaches plus restlessness, irritability, and poor short-term memory. Pretty much the same thing happens if I take too much. There's some concerns over the long-term impact this drug has on cardiovascular health, but for me the trade-off is worth it.

I could live without it, of course, but I choose to use it as part of the lifestyle I lead. The good news is that I'm not going to get arrested, and I don't even have to buy the drug over the internet. I just drive down the street to the local dealer, who can be found every morning, bright and early, in a handy little kiosk with my drug of choice ready and waiting. . .

The drug is caffeine.

Let's face it, the laughable distinction between "recreational" drug use, "performance enhancing" drug use, and "legitimate" drug use is a sham. They all blend into each other, and the definitions are more vague than they are useful. Making good decisions about what drugs we use - or don't use - in our own bodies isn't as simple as choosing the "good" ones over the "bad" ones.

Unfortunately, once we admit this obvious reality, then we are left with no logical cover whatsoever for fascistic control over some kinds of drugs while others are freely available (or available with a scrip, easy to obtain for the well-connected, middle class, white American consumer if not for other minority groups).

In short, if I am entitled to use caffeine every day to boost my mental performance (and I do feel entitled to do so), it's simply impossible for me to see how someone else is a criminal for using some other drug to help them relax (a drug other than alcohol of, which of course is legal. . . now that makes heaps of sense). I'm not even going to get into cigarettes and nicotine, which unquestionably impose massive healthcare costs on society and is virulently, biologically addictive - and yet is legal.

Twenty years from now, folks will look back on this time in history and shake their heads. "How could they have been so utterly scatterbrained, hypocritical, and erratic in how they viewed chemical tuning of the biological body?" It would, indeed, be funny if there weren't so many genuine victims - not of drugs, but of the shambling Frankenstein of policy apparatus that has formed crenelated phantasmagoria around one of the most basic human (and, indeed, mammalian) desires: to ingest stuff that makes us happy, calm, powerful, smart, fast, or healthy.

Peace,

Fausty
 
Back in college, my roommate, a physics genius, was taking a cocktail of "smart drugs"; vinpocetine, that sort of thing. Lots of them. He used to tell me he was basically hallucinating his physics homework.

And, of course, everyone in grad school had Adderall and benzo prescriptions. Everyone except the poor kids.
 
It's more then abit of a double standard thats for sure. If a person in university takes ritalin or dexedrine to help them study they are taking performance enhancing drugs which isn't looked at in such a bad light. Because they are taking these drugs to help them be good little citizens. But if the same person was to go out on the town and take ecstasy, LSD, cocaine, weed or magic mushrooms then they are suddenly taking recreational drugs which of course as we all know according to the media is a bad thing.

It seems that if you take drugs in order to help you get through your studying, job or whatever then that is more or less ok. But if you take drugs just to have a good time then that is a bad thing because we don't want people having fun on drugs now do we. Unless it's alcohol of course which is perfectly acceptable because it's legal.
 
I'm surprised they didn't mention any of the racetams or other nootropics, wonder what their bias is? I suppose the pharm companies have such a stranglehold/monopoly on the ritalins/adderalls/provigils (I had a scripit once and it was like 300 a month without insurance) the media wouldn't publicize such easily accessible alternatives like hydergine, deprenyl, vincopetine, huperzine, or any of the other neuroprotectants.
 
Oh well, if speed becomes more accepted among these circles, perhaps legal even, I should have my supply set.
 
Top