Comment · Thu, March 14, 2013 · Ceretropic
What's the deal with piracetam?
Original post in this thread
[deleted] · 17 points
I started taking piracetam after reading (here) that the compound is well studied, with plenty of papers backing up its psychoactive effects, both from a theoretical and clinical basis.
Recently, posts involving piracetam seem to receive walls of comments claiming the chemical is only a placebo. Now I'm confused. I obviously don't want to spend money on a useless powder, but I understand I cannot evaluate the compound's effect on myself. For a drug whose primary supposed benefit concerns only the mind, the placebo effect is indistinguishable by definition.
So I'm not asking if piracetam works or not, and I'm not asking for more anecdotes. I just want to know what we know. What clinical trials support or oppose piracetam's effect as a nootropic? Do we even know for sure that the compound is psychoactive? To what extent are the FAQ recommendations based on clinical studies, and to what extent do they stem from (placebo-laden) personal accounts?
What they were answering
andytronic · 2 points
Another red-flag regarding overly-positive anecdotal posts about racetams, is if they report that they experienced the benefits immediately after the first dose. Most (maybe all?) of the racetams, like most nootropics, don't have much of an immediate effect; they take a day or two at least to actually see any improvement.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
You are countering one anecdote with another. Racetams have proven acute effects in animal models. Some take time to build up, and others build up tolerance. We shouldn't simplify it to mean that all acute effects are placebo.