Comment · Thu, July 10, 2014 · Ceretropic
Nootropics mostly suck
Original post in this thread
AoE-Priest · 7 points
I'm by no means an expert in the area, but most of the research I've seen so far is done on old, demented stroked out grannies or done on rats. There is not much that is done on young, healthy people. The studies done on the young don't have the most robust methodologies either. And the studies tend to be inconsistent and show very modest effect sizes. Which if you've spent any time doing science you know it means most like the effect is BS and likely due to publication biases. The only things with convincing evidence seem to be caffeine, modafinil, and long-term use of bacopa. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, I will concede that.
Then there's the fact that nootropics, by their very nature, have a very robust placebo effect. So we can pretty much disregard all anecdotal reports that we see here. That leaves us with practically nothing to go on. Just venting, not trolling.
What they were answering
norepinephrinex · 4 points
PP is great, but the point he was making was the presence of well-designed studied on healthy subjects - the more the merrier. I recognize the language barrier exists, but if someone can provide some decent translations for studies regarding PP, I'd be grateful.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
They do not exist. There is no reason for people to fund studies of nootropics in healthy humans, given the current system. The real money is in treating diseases, which drives the scientific space.
One thing we are going to be doing in the not too distant future is running some of our own nootropic studies. We are going to be working with a couple companies and universities to do real testing from a nootropic standpoint. It's going to start with rat studies, but will eventually move to human ones as well. It's the one thing that is sorely lacking in our space.