What's your top mood enhancement supplements?

[Cthulhu]

Lastly, the benefits, if any, are agreed upon by all parties to be minimal.

Cmon, that's taking it too far. Without supplements my productivity would be nowhere near where it is, they keep me at a high, stable operating level. And they all have their own unique effects - phenibut for example is very relaxing and slightly euphoric, good after a week's hard work without the stupor caused by alcohol. Picamilon relieves my headaches without fail. Placebo is certainly at play, but there are studies as well (piracetam?!) confirming special applications of supplements. Sure, they're not really for fully healthy people... but who here is fully healthy? Maybe not dementia, but especially here on bluelight there are issues with drug after-effects and whatnot... supplements are worth a try, as you yourself have attested to.

Although I agree this guy is a creep, should be tarred and feathered and run out of Town Bluelight.

 

[aanallein]

And yet I am at a "high, stable operating level" without any of these substances at all..... hmmmm.

 

[Cthulhu]

^u are very lucky. I would like to get to that point, but in my current situation (hectic, but hoping for peace in the future) they come in handy (along with coffee ) I was not saying that supplements, barring some kind of vitamin deficiency, are necessary, cause theyre not, not for anyone. But many of them have a fairly safe and very real effect on the brain/body and I try to utilize that to my advantage. You know, sometimes you just need to get a job done, and you can't argue with the fact, for example, that coffee can raise your energy for a temporary period of time.

I understand the point of view of limiting the number of psychoactive substances one puts in his/her body to the minimum, it actually appeals to me very much. But in some cases it is counter-productive.

 

[bingalpaws]

Except many of the compounds used are known to be active by western science...?

homeopathy is *strictly* the process of taking an ingredient which may/may not have been active from the start, and diluting it beyond/close to beyond quantifiable levels, right?

Known to be active? I never said they weren't, as I know full well sugar pills are active.

However, if you're saying they're *more* active than sugar pills, please provide some references to back that up, as anything I've ever found has shown, conclusively, the opposite.

 

[bingalpaws]

<< in reference to me saying noots' effects are minimal >>

Cmon, that's taking it too far. Without supplements my productivity would be nowhere near where it is, they keep me at a high, stable operating level. And they all have their own unique effects - phenibut for example is very relaxing and slightly euphoric, good after a week's hard work without the stupor caused by alcohol. Picamilon relieves my headaches without fail. Placebo is certainly at play, but there are studies as well (piracetam?!) confirming special applications of supplements. Sure, they're not really for fully healthy people... but who here is fully healthy? Maybe not dementia, but especially here on bluelight there are issues with drug after-effects and whatnot... supplements are worth a try, as you yourself have attested to.

Although I agree this guy is a creep, should be tarred and feathered and run out of Town Bluelight.

what I bold/under/italicized is the problem - *you* think the effects are not minimal, but in normal, healthy adults, they are either absent or so close to absent, they're pointless to waste considerable amounts of cash on, and nevermind minimal safety records on the vast majority of them.

You say there's studies on piracetam - great, I would never disagree with that. But they show benefit when administered to people with alzheimer's and shit, and that's not the mental health level of these boards, with the exception of just a couple maybe, so if you've got studies on at least quasi-normal folk that show significant benefits (legit studies, studies nobody would be concerned about the validity of), I'd love to see them.

Oh, and ditto on that last part.



(You said I said supplements are worth a try - some are, some aren't, I cannot imagine having ever said something as bold and unqualified as "supplements, in general, are worth a shot". If I've actually said that, which I don't believe to be the case, that's my bad. For the record, I'd say 95% of supplements on the market, whether bodybuilding or nootropics, are a complete waste, even if they were free.)

 

[Arnold]

However, if you're saying they're *more* active than sugar pills, please provide some references to back that up, as anything I've ever found has shown, conclusively, the opposite.

Linkboy at work
http://www.trusthomeopathy.org/case/res_table2.html links to research that were positive on homeopathy. You could say they're biased as they were mainly done by homeopaths or supporters of them...

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607617061/fulltext will have to sign up for that one but appears non biased.
http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/the-lancet-benefits-and-risks-of-homoeopathy/ description what it is about.

51st State anyone?

 

[Arnold]

You say there's studies on piracetam - great, I would never disagree with that. But they show benefit when administered to people with alzheimer's and shit, and that's not the mental health level of these boards, with the exception of just a couple maybe, so if you've got studies on at least quasi-normal folk that show significant benefits (legit studies, studies nobody would be concerned about the validity of), I'd love to see them.

http://altmedicine.about.com/cs/herbsvitaminsad/a/5HTP.htm quoting the sources at the bottom of that page up to you to look them up.

 

[Cthulhu]

<< in reference to me saying noots' effects are minimal >>


what I bold/under/italicized is the problem - *you* think the effects are not minimal, but in normal, healthy adults, they are either absent or so close to absent, they're pointless to waste considerable amounts of cash on, and nevermind minimal safety records on the vast majority of them.

You say there's studies on piracetam - great, I would never disagree with that. But they show benefit when administered to people with alzheimer's and shit, and that's not the mental health level of these boards, with the exception of just a couple maybe, so if you've got studies on at least quasi-normal folk that show significant benefits (legit studies, studies nobody would be concerned about the validity of), I'd love to see them.

Oh, and ditto on that last part.



(You said I said supplements are worth a try - some are, some aren't, I cannot imagine having ever said something as bold and unqualified as "supplements, in general, are worth a shot". If I've actually said that, which I don't believe to be the case, that's my bad. For the record, I'd say 95% of supplements on the market, whether bodybuilding or nootropics, are a complete waste, even if they were free.)

I know I've seen studies on the efficacy of piracetam on normal subjects, went looking again and here's one that suggests that piracetam increases cooperation between separate parts of the brain: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T3M-3XMPNJR-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7210513c9eeefd26fb9b9fdd959219d2

Take into consideration that, since many members of bluelight have experience trying to distinguish between placebo and the real deal among many drugs, they are likely better than average judges of supplements, as well - and quite a few members use noots. I'll tell you, for most people piracetam along with other noots such as hydergine, dmae, phenibut etc., are clearly beyond placebo (judged subjectively). I wouldn't say that 95% of supplements are bunk, that's exaggerated. I can't speak for body building, but I judge my noots against the standard of caffeine and amphetamines, and they measure up decently. I don't know if noots will make you permanently smarter or extend your life, but in the short term they are very effective.

 

[bingalpaws]

arnold, you throw links up AND admit some are biased - I'm not going to do the work for you, please either post a proper study (ie peer reviewed, placebo controlled, etc) to support your position, or, I guess, agree to disagree.

What's the most popular homeopathic remedy in the world? If I'm not mistaken, it's that osciloccocinum stuff, which is what, some part of a chicken or some shit? Reduced down to like a 1/1000000000000000000000th of the original dosage?

When you come in claiming there's science behind this stuff, the burden of proof is on YOU. And throwing links at me is, well, completely pointless as I've *already* done my research on homeopathics, quite a good deal actually. If you're gonna be of the position that's contrary to common scientific knowledge, you'll need more than some links, especially when you're straight up admitting some are biased - how the hell is that gonna help anyone? Not that it's *anyone's* responsibility to prove them except yours, again.

 

[bingalpaws]

http://altmedicine.about.com/cs/herbsvitaminsad/a/5HTP.htm quoting the sources at the bottom of that page up to you to look them up.

jesus dude - if you're confident in piracetam in healthy adults, or homeopathics in general, please, for the love of god, post some study summaries and, maybe, go ahead and highlight the 'proof' you want people to see to support your stances.

But throwing links at people is just laughable - are you honestly expecting that I, someone who has already said I've researched the stuff and came to a conclusion, going to tear through some anonymous person's links? You have your links, if they're strong enough to support your case, simply cut/paste the study summaries for all to see. But, they *won't* support your case, so just throwing links at me, as if I'd ever do the research for you, just comes off as some cheap-ass way of forfeiting, really

 

[bingalpaws]

and here's one that suggests that piracetam increases cooperation between separate parts of the brain: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T3M-3XMPNJR-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7210513c9eeefd26fb9b9fdd959219d2

fine - if "suggests that piracetam increases cooperation between separate parts of the brain" is enough for you, cheers and good luck. I'd prefer to see something like "piracetam increases reaction time by 0.005%", or "intelligence by 0.3% in normal, healthy adults". If that study is all that's needed for your support of piracetam dosing in normal, healhty adults, that's all well and good - I just expect more proof.

Take into consideration that, since many members of bluelight have experience trying to distinguish between placebo and the real deal among many drugs, they are likely better than average judges of supplements, as well - and quite a few members use noots.

Again, subjective reports of products that purport only marginal benefits in highly subjective, ambiguous areas ('clarity', 'well being', etc), are worth almost nothing.

I'll tell you, for most people piracetam along with other noots such as hydergine, dmae, phenibut etc., are clearly beyond placebo (judged subjectively).

I think that may qualify as a, meh, I forget the term - how can you say "CLEARLY beyond placebo", then say you're judging it subjectively!? For something like shrooms, acid, yeah, subjective reports are enough to verify activity, but noots, well, nope, not for most of the mainstream ones anyways. Any activity is minimal, if present at all in healthy adults, and that's before we even begin to talk safety, long term effects (do the benefits last forever?), effects upon cessation, etc. I mean, either way, you say "MOST" people - it either works or it doesn't, you don't hear "most" people find results with stuff like acid or ecstasy

I wouldn't say that 95% of supplements are bunk, that's exaggerated.

it's not exaggerated, it's the god's honest truth. Maybe 'bunk' was a little over the top, how about "95% of supplements sold as either health or brain enhancers of extremely little, if any, tangible/quantifiable benefits". Still think that's exaggerated? Out of curiousity, why? I, myself, have worked with them for many years and taken almost any you can name, have you? Have you studied them? How else can you call me on exaggeration then?

I can't speak for body building, but I judge my noots against the standard of caffeine and amphetamines, and they measure up decently.

No, they don't. Perhaps, for you, due to your unique brain chemistry, they help you fill a missing void. However, your statement that they measure up decently to amph and caffeine is just implausible, I mean asides from even trying to make a pharmacological debate out of that, I'll just use common sense - caffeine and amph are highly sought out products used by many, repeat customers are extremely common, while the exact opposite can be said for the noot industry - how is that not extremely telling to you?

I don't know if noots will make you permanently smarter or extend your life,

Nobody does - but I'm holding my $$ til I see something convincing.

but in the short term they are very effective.

agree to disagree, I guess. Very effective at what, exactly? A single attribute that can be quantified? If so, has this been quantified? If so, please show it, if not, why do you think that is?

 

[Cthulhu]

No, they don't. Perhaps, for you, due to your unique brain chemistry, they help you fill a missing void. However, your statement that they measure up decently to amph and caffeine is just implausible, I mean asides from even trying to make a pharmacological debate out of that, I'll just use common sense - caffeine and amph are highly sought out products used by many, repeat customers are extremely common, while the exact opposite can be said for the noot industry - how is that not extremely telling to you?

If you compare the percentages - repeat customers as a percentage of total customers - I'll bet they are similar. As for the studies, I just picked one out to show you that there's not an absence of research on normal, healthy people. There are more studies, plus the ones showing the neuroprotective action of piracetam, plus the ones showing the benefit for those with cognitive pathologies = me being quite convinced that piracetam has significant (good) effects on cognition (which is the attribute you want, cognitive performance) for nearly all people, with some gaining minimal benefits (you?) and others gaining high end benefits - there is a bell curve. It isn't like acid where everyone gets unequivocally fucked up.

Look, when I take a stack of piracetam, dmae, and coffee in the morning, the effect is profound. It is more than any single one of those elements, more than their sum. It is actually intense, and is comparable to amphetamines, in some aspects better than (greater creativity and flexibility). It is not placebo, cannot be confused with placebo, it is as real as any other subjective experience I have. And it is backed by research. So, what more do you want? I find something backed by science, corroborated by people I trust on bluelight, and validated by my personal experience. This is good enough for me. I understand cynicism coming from someone for whom such substances did not work, but don't deny the experiences of others.

 

[Arnold]

arnold, you throw links up AND admit some are biased

My exact wording was "could be seen as being biased", that is NOT admitting they're biased

- if you're confident in piracetam in healthy adults, or homeopathics in general, please, for the love of god, post some study summaries and, maybe, go ahead and highlight the 'proof' you want people to see to support your stances.

I'm not on about piracetam, Cthultu is your man.

Department of Epidemiology and Health Care Research, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE--To establish whether there is evidence of the efficacy of homoeopathy from controlled trials in humans. DESIGN--Criteria based meta-analysis. Assessment of the methodological quality of 107 controlled trials in 96 published reports found after an extensive search. Trials were scored using a list of predefined criteria of good methodology, and the outcome of the trials was interpreted in relation to their quality. SETTING--Controlled trials published world wide. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Results of the trials with the best methodological quality. Trials of classical homoeopathy and several modern varieties were considered separately. RESULTS--In 14 trials some form of classical homoeopathy was tested and in 58 trials the same single homoeopathic treatment was given to patients with comparable conventional diagnosis. Combinations of several homoeopathic treatments were tested in 26 trials; isopathy was tested in nine trials. Most trials seemed to be of very low quality, but there were many exceptions. The results showed a positive trend regardless of the quality of the trial or the variety of homeopathy used. Overall, of the 105 trials with interpretable results, 81 trials indicated positive results whereas in 24 trials no positive effects of homoeopathy were found. The results of the review may be complicated by publication bias, especially in such a controversial subject as homoeopathy. CONCLUSIONS--At the moment the evidence of clinical trials is positive but not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions because most trials are of low methodological quality and because of the unknown role of publication bias. This indicates that there is a legitimate case for further evaluation of homoeopathy, but only by means of well performed trials.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1825800?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

Now remind me where I said that there was science behind it?
End of the day mood supplements (this was the initial topic) can help if you need them.

West Palm Beach Veterans Affairs Medical Center, FL 33410-6400, USA.

Dietary supplement use has increased during the past decade. Epidemiologic studies suggest that patients turn to dietary supplements because of a reluctance to take prescription medications or a lack of satisfaction with the results. They often perceive dietary supplements to be a safer or more natural alternative. Patients with mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders, are among those who use dietary supplements. St. John's Wort is used to treat depression. Clinical studies comparing dietary supplements with low-dose antidepressants (maprotiline, amitriptyline, or imipramine at 75 mg/day) or high-dose antidepressants (imipramine at 150 mg/day) find no significant difference between treatments. Kava kava is used to treat anxiety. Clinical trials demonstrate it to be superior to placebo, and roughly equivalent to oxazepam 15 mg/day or bromazepam 9 mg/day. Agents discussed for use in sleep disorders include melatonin, valerian, 5-hydroxytryptamine, catnip, chamomile, gotu kola, hops, L-tryptophan, lavender, passionflower, skullcap, and valerian. Familiarity with the evidence for use and the possible resulting risks can help health professionals to guide patient decisions regarding use of dietary supplements.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10711131?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=2&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

Department of Health Care Sciences, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.

Alternative therapies are widely used by consumers. A number of herbs and dietary supplements have demonstrable effects on mood, memory, and insomnia. There is a significant amount of evidence supporting the use of Hypericum perforatum (St. John's wort) for depression and Ginkgo biloba for dementia. Results of randomized, controlled trials also support the use of kava for anxiety and valerian for insomnia. Although evidence for the use of vitamins and amino acids as sole agents for psychiatric symptoms is not strong, there is intriguing preliminary evidence for the use of folate, tryptophan, and phenylalanine as adjuncts to enhance the effectiveness of conventional antidepressants. S-adenosylmethionine seems to have antidepressant effects, and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, particularly docosahexaenoic acid, may have mood-stabilizing effects. More research should be conducted on these and other natural products for the prevention and treatment of various psychiatric disorders.

Which is a bit different then "95% dont' work", couldn't have summed it better then they have.

 

[ebola?]

To the OP:

regular aerobic exercise has done very good things for me.
my cycling probably approximates interval training, and encompasses ~7 hr/week.

ebola

 

[bingalpaws]

If you compare the percentages - repeat customers as a percentage of total customers - I'll bet they are similar. As for the studies, I just picked one out to show you that there's not an absence of research on normal, healthy people. There are more studies, plus the ones showing the neuroprotective action of piracetam, plus the ones showing the benefit for those with cognitive pathologies = me being quite convinced that piracetam has significant (good) effects on cognition (which is the attribute you want, cognitive performance) for nearly all people, with some gaining minimal benefits (you?) and others gaining high end benefits - there is a bell curve. It isn't like acid where everyone gets unequivocally fucked up.

Look, when I take a stack of piracetam, dmae, and coffee in the morning, the effect is profound. It is more than any single one of those elements, more than their sum. It is actually intense, and is comparable to amphetamines, in some aspects better than (greater creativity and flexibility). It is not placebo, cannot be confused with placebo, it is as real as any other subjective experience I have. And it is backed by research. So, what more do you want? I find something backed by science, corroborated by people I trust on bluelight, and validated by my personal experience. This is good enough for me. I understand cynicism coming from someone for whom such substances did not work, but don't deny the experiences of others.

Good luck with them then

(and by "what more do I want?", well, if you give me a handful of study summaries done on normal, healthy people, and I mean legit studies, just post the study results and a link for like 3 or 4 studies on normal, healthy people showing *actual*, quantifiable results - NOT studies that figured it "may" do "something". Short of that, you have no proof, and I'm not gonna try to figure it out with you right here in this thread - post something up that backs your claims or don't, but just stop the rationalization of why it 'has' to work, because obviously we can go back and forth for pages on that. Surely you've seen some positive studies, right?)

 

[bingalpaws]

My exact wording was "could be seen as being biased", that is NOT admitting they're biased

cool - either way you get that a <potentially> biased link is crap though, I'm sure. Even if there's likely to be bias, there'd be no reason for me to click and waste my time figuring it out y'know?

I'm not on about piracetam, Cthultu is your man.

ya - thought you and I were on about "95% of supplements", and homeopathics, no? Well, on to them then!!


of your study on homeopathy, it, well, doesn't sway me in any way:

CONCLUSIONS--At the moment the evidence of clinical trials is positive but not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions because most trials are of low methodological quality and because of the unknown role of publication bias. This indicates that there is a legitimate case for further evaluation of homoeopathy, but only by means of well performed trials.

So it shows, yeah, sometimes there can be benefit. However, we already know that simple sugar placebos can provide benefit. What we need, and *you* need to show, is that homeopathic remedies beat out sugar pill placebos in a respectable/controlled study, hell at least a couple of them. Not an analysis of some studies that doesn't even come to the conclusion they're better than sugar pills (the conclusion states the evidence is positive - that is *expected* even with sugar pills, show me how they out-perform sugar placebos and we're in business then).

Now remind me where I said that there was science behind it?
End of the day mood supplements (this was the initial topic) can help if you need them.

(initial topic was meant as a sales tactic, imo of course, for nootropics on a daily regimen, *not* herbal end of day mood supplements, although they're fair game enough)

Your study shows kava kava works - I never said anything to the contrary. I'd also never talk shit about valerian, yohimbine, ephedrine, etc. What I'm arguing against is both homeopathy in general, and nootropics' benefits in normal, healthy adults. I know herbs are good and use some myself, that's *not* what the disagreement is about, I'm sorry about the confusion because you went and found studies showing boosts from herbs, but I never called that class as a whole out - while some herbs can be noots, not all are, and kava kava certainly is not.

Which is a bit different then "95% dont' work", couldn't have summed it better then they have.

That study in no way, shape, or form disputed my "95% or more are garbage/don't work" claim.

First off, the majority of what they discussed weren't even true supplements anyways - they were amino acids and fatty acids, which are part of your normal intake (although if you were deficient, and corrected it through a supplementation, that would help you - but surely that's not your stance here, correcting a previous deficiency for gain..).

But either way that spoke *nothing* of percentages of supplements in total, and even the wording of it seemed quite 'unsure', I mean I'm seeing "Although evidence for the use of vitamins and amino acids as sole agents for psychiatric symptoms is not strong", "may have mood-stabilizing effects", "More research should be conducted on these", etc - that doesn't really refute my claim in the least (that most suck and are worthless), it basically just says there may be hope, at least for some of them.

In the future, if you guys are gonna throw a study to support a claim, plz highlight which part supported you so I don't gotta read a whole abstract of something that wasn't even that relevant..

 

[Cthulhu]

(and by "what more do I want?", well, if you give me a handful of study summaries done on normal, healthy people, and I mean legit studies, just post the study results and a link for like 3 or 4 studies on normal, healthy people showing *actual*, quantifiable results - NOT studies that figured it "may" do "something". Short of that, you have no proof

and when is this assignment due, professor?

 

[Arnold]

(although if you were deficient, and corrected it through a supplementation, that would help you - but surely that's not your stance here, correcting a previous deficiency for gain..).

It actually is why else would you take a mood supplement? Because your mood is low *enter reason X* (not starting on what can cause it)
There's 2 he posted in his initial post, sam-e kinda just falls out of it, l-dopa in supplement form I understand as mucuna pruriens (herb)

 

[bingalpaws]

and when is this assignment due, professor?

hahaha NEVER!!!!!

lol I opened this thread and was really, really hoping there wouldn't be a multitude of questionable (the only kind I personally believe you'd have been able to find, imo of course) studies I'd have to go through

We can agree to disagree - I studied them, created multiple different stacks, bought them in powders and pills, and used them for a while. I never was able to get anything I could not ascribe to a placebo, so I dug further for research. After that, I concluded the costs, unknown / potential long term effects and/or down-grading of effects, and potential effects upon cessation were not worth the time and money I spent developing/buying/taking stacks of noots. So yeah, agree to disagree I guess, I really didn't even want in on any noot / homeopathic debate, but the OP of this thread is, well many believe, posting with ulterior motives, so a couple people are entering into threads started by him that they otherwise wouldn't, and then I end up arguing noots .

 

[bingalpaws]

It actually is why else would you take a mood supplement? Because your mood is low *enter reason X* (not starting on what can cause it)
There's 2 he posted in his initial post, sam-e kinda just falls out of it, l-dopa in supplement form I understand as mucuna pruriens (herb)

that's not necessarily the same as correcting a deficiency. When I say that DHA, folate, etc can help you psychologically, it's going to be mostly (always?) when you are at least partially deficient.

You cannot be deficient in an herb.

Also, I guess the big divide I was trying to illustrate is the difference between a supplement that corrects a previous, legit imbalance (DHA supplementation because you don't get enough of that omega3 in your diet) to bring you back to *baseline*, and herbs/noots that can take you above it. I have little doubt we here are all baseline, any studies for noots that I've ever seen as positive were done on people with dementia, alzheimer's, etc.

But, if you're bringing in herbs, I'm not gonna disagree, of course there's ridiculous potential in herbs (pot comes to mind ). It's noots and homeopathics my beef is with, not herbs. Noots, homeopathics, and unnecessary supplementation of stuff you've already got completely sufficient levels of (like individual amino acids for the most part, omega9's, stuff like that).

And on the note of 95% of supplements suck / don't work, you may want to take a glance at a thread I put up called "does anyone have questions on bodybuilding supplements?" in the steroid subforum, you'll see more products covered and the responses to many of them. When I say 95%, I'm talking about walking into a GNC, 95% of the bottles of pills/powders in there will have almost, or completely, zero effect on the average person. Good supplements are hard to come by, in part because many of the good ones get banned!