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 · 1 points
I totally agree. Yesterday (I think) there as a post here where 5 or 6 people where so fast to scream "placebo" that it seemed like a concerted effort.
But I've also seen many posts where (like chrico03 demonstrated) people claim almost impossible (and probably too-rapid) benefits from their noots.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
Yep, there needs to be a balance of verifiable claims to known mechanisms. Those won't always be able to be scientifically proven, but there needs to be some logic behind the claims. I'm one for giving more of a benefit of the doubt than immediately calling placebo.