How can you argue against harm reduction? I don't understand this lol. There have been 0 proper human studies, does that not mean that everything is speculation/anecdotal?
That's kinda my point - it is all speculation for that exact reason. Talking of harm reduction when the object in question is a compound with literally no human studies is bordering on insane. The only harm reduction possible in such a scenario is to not touch it - hence the statement that there have been no human studies being sufficient information on the wikipedia page for anyone with half a brain.
If any of you taking this have the impression that you are anything more than a guinea pig, you have bigger issues than anything which Sunifiram might do to you. If you can accept that fact then you will have more than likely already educated yourself on strategies to minimise the risk of excitotoxicity and the like and will not be dosing 20mg/day like a moron. Whoever was doing 5mg/every other day has the right idea. Whoever is taking anti-oxidants and GABA releasing substances just might have a clue.
And, ofcourse, now we're going to go through a period of Tulip Mania where everyone and their dog is going to report persistent headaches from Sunifiram all of a sudden. Great.
Honestly, people, only Vishnu simultaneously facepalming with all of his hands would do my reaction to all of this justice.
Alright man, if your really going to call promoting harm reduction "bordering on insane" than I don't really think I need to argue my point any further because you clearly don't get it.
Seriously, what is your interest in Sunifiram? Why is it so important to keep a positive light? You must have vested interests or something it doesn't make sense why your hellbent on it's success.
I don't know if you were implying that I personally took "20mg/day like a moron" by I assure you that is not the case. I was dosing between 1-5 mgs every other day, sometimes 3 days in between. I was consuming plenty of AO's and was also most likely at the same time I was taking GABA drugs, though this much I am not sure.
I realize that I was acting as nothing more than a guinea pig, but on paper, with the rat studies, it seemed like a pomising compound. But is it really? Because in my mind it didn't pan out that way and it is foolish for more people to trial. I'm not against free will though as people are free to live their lives as they please. However I do not believe against persuading people into potentially dangerous situations.
My point is this: What benifit is there from sunifiram? Seriously? Can you show me any effects which cannot be achieved through other, safer means? Stimulation: Caffine etc. even adderall is probably a safer alternative given its history and research. Saturated colors: Smoke some weed. Seriously though, why push sunifram so hard?
What we do have is at least a handful of people who have side-effects (most likely) caused by Sunifiram, and could possibly be very long lasting. This is certainly not the case with other nootropics, at least as far as I know (save maybe nefiracetam).
Harm reduction, in my mind at least, is letting people know that these things COULD VERY WELL HAPPEN, not deny them and any reasearch which taints your beloved sunifiram.
IS THIS AMPAKINE WORTH IT? I certainly do not believe so.