

Drugs to build up that mental muscle - amichail
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-braindoping20dec20,0,6487141.story

======
Hexayurt
DMAE. Not a drug, an over-the-counter "food supplement."

I was introduced to it by a programmer in Florida. Apparently it increases
oxygen availability in the brain. What I found was that it was pretty much a
30 minute cure for programmer's burn out, like a cup of coffee that actually
worked by making you clearer and fresher, rather than just more restless and
agitated. I wouldn't refer to it as performance enhancing, only performance
_restoring._

Worth reading up on. I don't remember there being any contraindications, but
YMMV.

~~~
amichail
What's the scientific evidence for its effectiveness? In your case, it could
simply be the placebo effect.

~~~
downer
GIYF. "Dimethylaminoethanol is related to choline and is a biochemical
precursor to the neurotransmitter acetylcholine" (ACh).

"In the central nervous system, ACh has a variety of effects as a
neuromodulator, e.g. for plasticity and excitability. Other effects are
arousal and reward."

Do you remember Andro (androstenedione, used to be available in stores, used
by Mark McGwire)? It's a testosterone precursor. Your liver converts it to
testosterone (and also some amount converts to estrogens). So a
neurotransmitter precursor would seem to be a bit like steroids for the brain.

Not sure how external supplementation affects endogenous neurotransmitter
production, but with hormone precursors the biofeedback loop tells your
endocrine system to stop its own production. E.g. if you take testosterone,
your body shuts down its own production (when your testosterone level hits a
certain point, your body thinks "oh, that's enough for now" and hits the off-
switch on your testicles. This turns off ALL their functions, so it's actually
also a form of birth control. And since they aren't doing anything, they
atrophy).

Fun note: Your body tries to keep your testosterone:estrogen ratio at about
50:1 (for young men). So if you take androgenic steroids, your body increases
its own estrogen production. Once you hit a certain _absolute_ amount of
estrogen, you're growing breast tissue.

Then you are a man. With titties.

(Bodybuilders combat this by using certain steroids that don't aromatize into
estrogen as much, and also using anti-estrogens that either bind to the
aromatase enzyme to stop conversion into estrogen, or bind to the actual
estrogen receptor sites like Clomid. One interesting effect of Clomid -- that
makes it attractive to male porn stars -- is it causes big pop shots.)

~~~
skmurphy
Starting with "Do you remember Andro" we seemed to have switched topics.

Your brain produces acetylcholinterase which scavenges excess acetylcholine.
Arricept, Huperzine, and other chemicals inhibit acetylcholinesterase
formation (and therefore increase acetylcholine levels). If your brain
acetylcholine levels are low then certain substances may help in the formation
of additional acetylcholine (e.g in addition to DMAE there are other compounds
like choline, CDP choline, Alpha GPC, and PPC). If your equilibrating
mechanisms are working then small amounts of precursors shouldn't cause a
derangement. Athletes taking steroids are attempting to overload the
equilibrating mechanisms to build muscle. Choline precursors don't seem to
have these same "down-regulation" harmful side effects when taken in
moderation to bring brain acetylcholine levels back into "normal range." I am
not advocating steroids or supplement use, but it seems to me that they have
two different usage patterns: steroid use involves intentionally boosting
levels outside of the normal range for "performance enhancing" results, where
the DMAE use described by Hexayurt was in response to "programmer burnout"
which likely involved depleted acetylcholine levels in the brain and was in
his own words "performance restoring."

In terms of the hacker news angle, I would think all things in moderation in
the context of development plans that rely on efforts that are sustainable
over a long period of time.

A references on choline for memory formation improvement:

<http://sciencenewsmagazine.org/articles/20031122/food.asp>

~~~
downer
I don't know what effect neurotransmitter precursors have on endogenous
production, which is why that information would be useful so we can better
judge their safety. The steroid example was to point out that there could be
substantial repercussions from taking a substance which you produce naturally.
You don't even have to take excessive doses -- take in only as much as you
would normally make and your body's production may drop to zero, since it's
now being completely replaced. Steroids must be cycled down gradually, because
going off cold turkey just leaves you with a crashed endocrine system. If
neurotransmitter replacement works similarly, one can imagine a few problems
that might crop up with a crashed _brain_.

 _> Choline precursors don't seem to have these same "down-regulation" harmful
side effects when taken in moderation to bring brain acetylcholine levels back
into "normal range."_

"Don't seem"? Human studies needed. Maybe these already exist -- that would be
handy. I'm not familiar with neurotransmitter supplementation.

Taking something because you have a deficit is indeed different from trying to
massively exceed your nominal levels.

In the context of performance-enhancing mental drugs, exceeding your typical
levels is of course the point of the exercise.

 _ > "programmer burnout" which likely involved depleted acetylcholine levels
in the brain_

Possibly, but that assumption seems like it could be quite a leap.

Kind of like saying coffee works because of depleted caffeine levels in the
brain. In fact, we have no data on what caused his particular case of
"burnout". We can well imagine that an adrenaline shot, cocaine, ephedrine,
and many other drugs could well "restore performance", but that doesn't
indicate there was a deficit of those particular substances.

Provigil and Ritalin may also help but that doesn't mean there was a deficit
of those, either.

An ACh deficit is only one of a _bazillion_ possible reasons for "burnout".

~~~
skmurphy
There have been a number of studies done with choline supplements in a variety
forms. Here is a list of citations

[http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=e049880...](http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=e0498803-7f62-4563-8d47-5fe33da65dd4&chunkiid=21658)

None of these listed have found the rebound side effects. I am not saying that
you couldn't cause yourself problems at a high enough dosage, but in the
dosages used in the studies it's not mentioned as a side effect.

This is not true for acetylcholinterase inhibitors (things like huperzine,
arricept, galantamine,...) which can cause a significant excess of
acetylcholine because they inhibit the down regulation process.

You are correct that I was speculating what might cause "programmer burnout."
I agree with you that there are people who believe in "mental performance
enhancing drugs" but I am not one of them. I do think that folks with ADD may
be able to take substances that limit their ADD and I think that you can take
things as you age to limit the effect of age related cognitive decline, but I
don't think you can "supercharge" someone in their teens or twenties.

One of the great discoveries of the last decade has been that we continue to
add new brain cells (at a much lower rate than in early childhood) all of our
lives and that lifelong learning and stimulation does in fact encourage the
formation of new connections and delay the onset of diseases like Alzheimers.

Our brains are plastic and respond to how they are used. In that sense my
answer to the original question of "how to build mental muscles" is: I don't
know of any drugs but I do believe that mental exercise helps.

------
skmurphy
A good book on supplements for improving memory and focus

"Mind Boosters" Ray Sahelian M.D
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312195842>

It's based on published research (as of 2000) but focuses primarily on
reducing "age related cognitive decline." It's less for folks in their teens
and twenties and more for folks in their 30's and beyond. Dr. Sahelian also
stresses the need for regular exercise, sleep, and human contact and
connection to keep our brains healthy.

Probably the best advice that Sahelian offers is to try one thing at a time,
start with the lowest effective dosage and understand what co-factors are
needed. In general pre-cursors are safer than re-uptake inhibitors because you
are making more of the raw materials available for processing rather than
modifying the internal regulation. In particular, if you are trying to boost
acetylcholine then CDP, PPC, and GPC have many fewer side effects than the re-
uptake inhibitors like Huperzine.

I agree with the comment on "restoring" vs. "enhancing" and would also suggest
that everyone has limits (e.g. in their need for sleep) that they would do
well to recognize. I personally have found meditation to be something that
"builds mental muscle" when it comes to stress management and getting through
a crunch time with reduced sleep (note: not no sleep) and believe that it's
complementary to other methods.

------
staunch
For the poker player I suppose it _might_ be worth the risk of taking these
pills for a week if millions of dollars are on the line. For programmers
though it's a marathon. I think it'd rarely, if ever, be worth the risk.

------
buss
Since I have a really terrible memory, I would jump on a memory drug in an
instant. As it stands, I'm thinking of getting a prescription for modafinil
(this article mentions Provigil, which is just a brand name for modafinil).

There are already regulations in place to prevent abuse of these drugs, but
they hardly work. I think that if humans want to use something, then we should
be able to use it. Of course, there should be things like surgeon general's
warnings on the various substances, and they should be sold with the safety
sheet and proper precautions to take.

I'm surprised that more people on HN don't agree with this sentiment. I would
presume that the majority of the people here are libertarians, and
deregulation of drugs goes hand in hand with that political ideology. My guess
is that most people here are worried that any promotion or tacit approval of
drugs will lessen their chances of getting selected for funding.

~~~
tarkin2
For me, it's not so much regulation vs. deregulation or political ideology.
I'm more pragmatic than idealistic. In fact I only briefly thought about that.
It's more short term vs. long term and, basically, effectiveness.

For example, weed relaxes you and if you take it enough you can sustain a
relaxed lifestyle. But then you become, to a certain extent, dependent on weed
for this relaxed state and I'd rather work on something bereft of such an
external dependency, like meditation as previously mentioned.

[edit] I am, of course, still assuming that this supposed drug takes over from
your internal mechanisms that induce concentration, as opposed to
strengthening them, meaning once you stop taking the drug you lose your
enhanced concentration. If the drug does strengthen these mechanisms on a long
term basis then I'm all for it.

------
tarkin2
I'm generally a prude when it comes to drugs, but I wonder how much this would
increase cognitive _muscles_. I say this because I would expect the brain
would, after a while, become used to this externally induced effect and
therefore disregard internal mechanisms to do so. This is pure conjecture,
though.

It would, however, be interesting to _momentarily_ feel what it's like to
obtain that kind of concentration in order to try to mimic it without the
drug.

~~~
optimal
Good point. It seems there's no "free lunch"--the body will maintain
equilibrium (for example, see caffeine or alcohol consumption).

~~~
skmurphy
The "no free lunch" model is a good one. I have found that cutting out other
activities like watching television and limiting the amount of on-line game
playing gave me more time, focus, and energy for work. Thinking about what you
can give up or defer to get what you want should be part of any calculation
around stimulants to reduce your need for sleep. I still drink a lot of very
strong tea (because, for me, the side effects were fewer and less burdensome
than coffee) but I don't try and get less than six hours of sleep and know
that if I cut it to less than four a price will be paid, if not the next day
within two to three days.

