98 replies to this topic

[xanadu]

It seems the nay sayers can't even come up with one study to show any problems with piracetam while we have given many to show positive benefits. That's the thing with negative people, they are not reasonable and no matter how much proof you give, they will just say something negative in return. To those out there who are interested, try it. It can't hurt you and may do a lot of good. It's also inexpensive.

[mike]

The following link is to a statement from a chemist saying that she finds Piracetam helpful for meditation and lucid dreaming:

Statement about Piracetam

What is the benefit of lucid dreaming?

I have never experienced lucid dreaming and have never attempted to experience it, so can't speak about any benefits from personal experience. I agree with Shepard, though, that it sounds like fun. Here is a link to a major website on lucid dreaming, which includes discussion of some claimed benefits:

Lucid Dreaming site

[Athanasios]

To those out there who are interested, try it. It can't hurt you and may do a lot of good. It's also inexpensive.

Agreed. Although, many need to supplement with choline while taking it. A search on piracetam and choline yields a bunch of results on this board.

[doug123]

I have a lot of trouble offing this product, even when I sell it for $24.50 per kilo. Interested maybe, xanadu, cnorwood?

[brizzadizza]

Xanadu,
For all the purported benefits piracetam offers on reading and language skills you still seem to have huge difficulties understanding other peoples posts. I don't know if it is just selective reading, or maybe you only skim posts, but it seems somewhere down this thread you missed the point. Adam is NOT saying piracetam has no effect:

I do think that the racetams have some pharmacological effect....But for most individuals searching the web for drugs to enhance cognitive capacity -- Piracetam is not what they are looking for.

When measured next to drugs such as Aricept, Provigil, Ritalin, and other various prescription drugs that have demonstrated efficacy in healthy subjects, the clinical effect of the "dietary supplement" type nootropics available in the USA are not significant enough to warrant their use as effective medicines. They may do something...but just not enough. The racetams may have beneficial effects on "receptor plasticity"...(what exactly does that mean?)

What he is saying rather clearly is the alleged benefits of piracetam don't support the cost of the "drug." Which is a little ironic considering how cheap piracetam is.

What kills me is your statement:

That's the thing with negative people, they are not reasonable and no matter how much proof you give, they will just say something negative in return.

What proof did you give that wasn't addressed? You eventually break down and say it is too subjective an experience to be demonstrated scientifically:

I think one reason that the benefits of piracetam in healthy subjects are hard to quantify is due to the nature of the benefits themselves. It's a really subjective thing. How would you quantify beauty or pleasure... The benefits of piracetam are very subjective but real.

Do you understand that with this one statement you "left tear streaked reason upon the shore?" You essentially closed discussion of the topic with an appeal to pathos and denied the evidence against piracetam with the thought, it makes me feel good so it must be.

You then went on to lambast science's investigative procedure. Xanadu, what I'm about to say will rock your world: The evidence supporting ESP is very weak. In every controlled experiment ESP is demonstrated to not have predictive powers greater than would be statistically expected. That suggests the conclusion that ESP even if it were to exist is offers no demonstration of its existence. Similar to the invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage, no researcher will ever be able to see it and it will have no appreciable effect on the environment around it beyond what my psyche attributes to it. Here is a nice little essay describing Positive Results Bias in relation to ESP:

For your reading pleasure

This is relevent as we are ultimately discussing skepticism and scientific inquiry. When you have hundreds of papers offering no conclusive demonstration of your claims at some point you have to come to the conclusion that your claim is unlikely to be correct. Its not to say it is NOT correct, but that the statistical likelyhood of your claim being correct is very low.

Cnorwood, regarding the pubmed IDs you gave only 3 of them, 3305591, 3522509, and 3522510, supported your claim of piracetam being a cognitive enhancer. The rest showed various other physiological effects of piracetam but did not support your view of piracetam as a cognitive enhancer. Overall it shows piracetam to be what we all know it to be, a low level stimulant.

Additionally, Adam is allowed an opinion without reference to his past misbehaviors. You were way out of line to suggest he is "getting edgy again" when he responded with evidence and a concise post which demonstrated his claims, had you perhaps demonstrated his edginess there would be no problem, instead you left it as is in order to fester in readers mind the legitimacy of Adam as regards his post. What you seem to be taking issue with is his reasoned opinion that piracetam doesn't work. A constructive approach would be to debate him point for point as opposed to the veiled ad hominem you threw his way, not meant to be an insult or slam.

The fact remains, no one is debating whether or not piracetam has any effect, what is being debated is if piracetam has cognitive enhancing effects and if so are those effects worth the cost and hassle of taking piracetam? Why should I take 4.5 grams of a foul tasting substance when I can get the same effect from freshly brewed french pressed coffee? I agree with Adam that piracetam is very often presented as a wonderful brain enhancer when that is not really the case. Further constant research on piracetam takes time and funding away from more legitimate cognitive enhancers and allows manufacturers to promote a product whose efficacy is in question by the scientific community.

[xanadu]

Uh, brizza, weren't you outed as an Adam clone a while back? No way to prove it but it sure seems that way. He has already admitted using other names though he claims not to do it any more. Your point of view is exactly the same as his and you use the same sort of insults. I guess the brizza name will be doing his dirty work from now on

As for piracetam, if it doesn't work for you then don't use it. It works very well for many people, myself included. Why are you so obsessed with attacking it and anyone who supports it?

[doug123]

Can someone with credibility please rephrase xanadu's statement? LOL

[brizzadizza]

Yep, exactly the kind of misdirection I've come to expect from you Xanadu. I've never been outed as an Adam clone as I am not an Adam clone. Its funny that you bring that up as your lack of skepticism regarding the LifeMirage instance demonstrates very effectively your lack of skepticism in general and casts a shadow on any of your claims. And as I've been exceptionally transparent regarding my claims to personhood, I would say in this instance oyu are being unreasonable and are clinging tenaciously to your incorrect belief that I am Adam without any proof to the contrary.

Now if you would like to be constructive may I sugest you address the specific evidences brought up in this post regarding the efficacy of piracetam.

Brandon

[doug123]

From Dukenukem's site:

Trolls - Anyone deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait' type messages is not welcome. You will be banned (possibly without warning depending on the severity of the issue) if you persist in this behavior.

[xanadu]

As I recall, brizz, you popped up during the LM debate to take Adam's side. We aren't fooled, you might fool some of the newbies but those who've been around know your style and the more you play games the more obvious it becomes. Not that brizz is the only sleeper you have waiting to take up arms when needed. I don't care, create and use an army to agree with yourself if you like. You just make yourself look foolish in the long run.

Piracetam works very well for me and for a lot of other people. Many of them have written of their experiences in these forums. You can call them anecdotes if you like or placebo effect but when something works for you, you know it. Placebo effect is very real but if that's all there is then it wears off after a time. I've never known a pure placebo that kept working for a long time. Can anyone give me an example? As a matter of fact, I'm in the middle of a break from piracetam because it's becoming a little too strong and interfering with my sleep. The cognitive benefits are great but there is a price to pay for a racing mind at bedtime. I take it early in the day now but the effects don't wear off that fast.

[Ghostrider]

Over the past few months, I have noticed some personal conflict (attacks) on this forum. Please keep in mind how this personal slander will affect other people's view of the imminst.org community and will only support the view than transhumanists are a bunch of eccentric people who are trying to overcome personal issues and fulfillment deficiencies -- which is a commonly held stereotype towards anyone who does not subscribe to mainstream ideals and values. The happiest and most fulfilled people I know never resort to personal slander. And it makes sense why this would be the case... Let us put in more effort to keep the conversation professional. Sure, I can expect that myself rather than my views will be attacked from time to time by unprofessional people. However, if I simply dismiss these attacks rather than respond with a counter-personal attack, others will see that I am more professional, more logical, and less emotional. My point is that it takes two or more people for these multi-page attacks to exist. So just drop it. People on this forum are not idiots and will realize the evidence or lack of evidence. This is not politics. Remember that you are not only speaking for yourself, you are also associated with a cause.

[doug123]

In most cases, snyp40a1, I agree that personal attacks should be ignored; however, in xanadu's case, I think it would be best if s/he was just officially banned. S/he constantly posts "flame bait" far too much to just look over in exchange for content; which degrades the content of this forum. I removed the last post for respect for your stance and to give xanadu another chance to act like an adult rather than a troll for hire.

[xanadu]

Adam, your "last post" itself is nothing but a personal attack against me. All I've ever done is defend myself against your unprovoked attacks.

Join me in stopping this sort of behavior. I'll try to ignore you and your hand puppets until you simmer down. When you think about it, you have more to lose than I do. You are trying to peddle products here, not I. By engaging in this sort of action you are likely to lose customers. Doing it by proxy doesn't work either. I'll leave you alone if you will do the same. Deal?

[doug123]

I think you should stop projecting your BS at me and go make a new screen name somewhere where other posters actually respect to what you have to say.
[thumb]

[brizzadizza]

The nootropics forum in particular needs strongly skeptical people. We've been duped once and duped very extensively. Xanadu needs to realize that a reasoned rebuttal to a claim S/he makes is not an attack. Its a chance to strengthen his argument, its a chance to realize his error, its a chance to hone his debating skills.

The zeitgeist of the boards seems to be about expansion lately. The board members are considering redesigning the front page, they're considering possible fund raising strategies and they're considering expanding membership. In light of the hypothetical increased traffic and also the fact that the nootropics board is often times the first introduction visitors have to the ImmInst site, it behooves us to make sure that the research we are presenting is of the highest caliber possible. It will serve us better in the long run if we question and ultimately challenge claims that may be poorly based. LifeMirage taught us that there is no authority when it comes to the internet, Xanadu constantly reminds us that there is no certainty when it comes to identity on a forum, in light of those facts it is even more important that we are judged not on our claims but on the research that supports those claims.

When the research is lacking ANY individual has a right to challenge it if they know better. If a stronger argument can be presented then the one previously posited it is of great benefit that the stronger argument be presented. The title of this thread is "Piracetam research and benefits." Why are two members getting worked into a snit over the negative view being posted? If it is a matter of the data presented you challenge the data. Don't break down into feelings and ad hominems, defend your position with grounded research, and when the new position is challenged, defend it as well. Thats how reasoned discourse works. We don't need to love one another, if someone is wrong let them know. If it turns out in the course of the discussion you are wrong, or many reasonable counter-arguments have exhausted your supply of arguments, accept it gracefully.

To bring this topic back on track, do you Xanadu have any counter to the body of evidence that suggests piracetam is ineffective as a cognitive enhancer versus the body of evidence that suggests it is effective as a cognitive enhancer? A reasoned rebuttal could consist of an underlying reason why piracetam is so maligned in the medical literature (its not maligned per se, its just not often supported) or an as yet unpresented stack of evidence that supports the cognitive benefits of piracetam, not just its physiological effects, but the kind of double-blind placebo controlled study that pits dyslexic kid against dyslxic kid in a battle royale of reading comprehension. If you do not, then what is your justification to the people visiting this board to try piracetam? There are many other methods to increase cognitive capacity (an idea that is NOT at all clearly defined) that are more readily available and generally produce similar results. This board in particular gives short shrift to the nootropic effects of exercise, brain stimulation, logic puzzles and what have you in support of various chemicals that require time and effort to attain and in some cases cause serious side effects (yea, I know the racetams are non-toxic, but read some of the stack threads and see how many people are just sticking to racetams.) So in a reasoned and articulate manner please tell me why the nil result research on piracetam should be ignored and a first time nootropic user should spend their money/time on piracetam.

Brandon

[xanadu]

OK, if that's the way you want to play.

"do you Xanadu have any counter to the body of evidence that suggests piracetam is ineffective as a cognitive enhancer versus the body of evidence that suggests it is effective as a cognitive enhancer?"

That is a claim and a statement, not a fact. That is your opinion on the subject. Much research has been presented to show that piracetam does have many benefits. I've given links, other people have given links. If someone wants to claim it has no benefits, they need to show some evidence to back up that claim. The pro piracetam side has shown plenty, where is you guys' evidence to the contrary?

[emerson]

If it is a matter of the data presented you challenge the data. Don't break down into feelings and ad hominems, defend your position with grounded research, and when the new position is challenged, defend it as well. Thats how reasoned discourse works. We don't need to love one another, if someone is wrong let them know. If it turns out in the course of the discussion you are wrong, or many reasonable counter-arguments have exhausted your supply of arguments, accept it gracefully.

Well said. It's somewhat unfortunate that a non threaded style of display is used on these forums. It doesn't lend itself well to the kind of categorized examination of multiple studies that's really needed here. It's a little too easy to flow ones way down the list and only see the studies which support ones own feelings, and then come out at the end with conclusions that their own view has been vindicated.

As much as my last post in this forum bordered somewhat on a defence of "science light", that's more an acceptance of what is rather than what I might wish we could strive for. Science is time consuming, and really getting to the bottom of a subject that spans quite a few languages, obscure journals, huge bias and bad methodology, is a daunting task. It's a hard one to do if approached as an occasional jaunt rather than a regular after-hours, unpaid, job. And rational, calm, examination of data within a social settings is something I've seen even a significant percentage of professionals to have trouble with. Much of the reason it's taken so long to get to the technological point we're at now is the simple point that adherence to the scientific process is in many ways an uphill battle against the fuzzy, imprecise, way our minds were meant to function as when selected for tracking down food and shelter.

But even if the perfect realization of the goal isn't likley, it should be something we strive toward. And of course I say that while also not contributing any actual examination of the data myself.

[Athanasios]

I posted studies that showed the below effects, which can not be achieved with just a cup of coffee. I also take piracetam in pills, so I do not know the taste. I take 800mg, which has a very beneficial and noticable effect on me.

Again, the microcirculation, intrabrain communication, improvements in patients with dyslexia, neuroprotective properties, and the regulation to normality of multiple brain functions make piracetam worth taking, for me that is. I still have not found the reason why NOT to take it. Maybe stress on the adrenals? That may be a stretch though.

As for me being out of line, I only think this is true out of respect of others in the forum, not in the context of the thread. I have explained my reasons within this thread as well. To me, this thread shows how unprofessional and out of line the nootropics section of this institute is with its mission and character. I have not had a discussion reach this kind of discourse, yet, in any other forum

[patch]

It’s hard to give evidence that piracetam does not work when nobody is studying it. However, the fact that nobody is studying it is extremely powerful evidence.
As I said before, if you believe a story until someone disproves it, then you are a sitting duck for charlatans and con artists like Life Mirage.

Xanadu, I have not seen anyone attack you personally. Brizzadizza’s first post in this thread was a well thought-out criticism of your arguments. Your response was to accuse him of being a clone created by Adam. THAT is a personal attack. You did not address any of his points, you just made a nonsensical ad hominem attack.
I searched the message history for the LM affair, and Brizzadizza was never “outted”as a clone--he was never even accused. That is a (very effective) rhetorical technique that is used a lot in politics, e.g. instead of saying “those claims are false” they say “those claims have been discredited”. If you had said “you are an Adam clone” people would have compared their writing styles and looked at their posting histories and concluded that your claim is absurd. Saying he was “outted” makes it seem like a proven fact.

Everyone needs to remember that an attack against an argument is not an attack against the poster. And an attack against a poster is a stupid and weak substitute for attacking an argument.

IMO, the only time it is OK to question the poster and not the posting is if they claim to be experts, either directly by saying they are a expert, or indirectly by quoting a jargon-filled EEG study and interpreting it as proof of something (which only an expert could justifiably do). If someone failed out of school in grade 9 and is a convicted felon and proven liar, then we should question their assertions. But once their premises and assumptions are proven, then we can evaluate the argument ourselves, so the credibility of the poster has no impact whatsoever on the validity of the argument.

[brizzadizza]

Emerson,
I absolutely agree. I don't pretend to know all the data one way or another, and I certainly wouldn't say that piracetam will never be shown to have cognitive enhancing abilities, but I feel that there is a way to discuss relevent studies without this kind of infighting. I don't know what the solution is, if you can't tackle a tiny issue like the benefits of piracetam without resorting to personal attacks what are the chances larger issues can be rationally discussed?

Patch,
To be honest I was accused of being an Adam clone, it was by LifeMirage. I still have his PMs. I linked to my myspace profile in order to demonstrate the truth of who I am but it seems LifeMirage was able to convice Xanadu that I am Adam. However so far as I know, no one in leadership thinks I'm Adam, and as I've PMed Adam on several occasions I'm fairly certain he knows I'm not he.

Cnorwood,
Not to drag this out further but your responses to Adam were attacks from the start. If this thread has become unprofessional it is because of contributions like:

You seem to be getting a little edgy again, not ment to be an insult or slam.

or:

Anyone that is looking into using piracetam should not be discouraged by nootropikamil's comments. He likes to insight by over-claiming or other tactics.

or finally:

I cant't believe that you are even allowed to post still. Very tolerant moderators/admins here.

If you hadn't made those statements and instead offered rebuttals to Adam and Patch's evidence/observations this entire thread would have been point-counterpoint and I can't think of a more "professional" atmosphere to discuss the benefits and costs of piracetam.

Xanadu,
You prove my point. I honestly think you don't read posts. Counter arguments were presented on the first page of this thread which offered more current research then your term paper cited. Additionally the authority of the first three citations in that term paper were called into question. The existence of a body of evidence that does not show cognitive benefits from the use of piracetam is evident. That is not an opinion, that is evidenced by the earlier posted journal citations. And the links to journals you've presented have been countered. Do you have anything to offer by way of a rebuttal to the journals that Adam presented? If not is there a reason why those journals are not worthy of a rebuttal? If you simply have no counter-point to the research presented you then why should an interested party be swayed to buy piracetam when there are other better supported methods to increase "cognitive capacity?" Those are the questions that need to be addressed to make this a legitimately useful thread and discussion. Otherwise, I just wish I could figure out the smiley that keeps slamming its head into the wall. It seems evident to me this conversation is headed nowhere. I'm done with this thread.

Brandon

[Ghostrider]

If you simply have no counter-point to the research presented you then why should an interested party be swayed to buy piracetam when there are other better supported methods to increase "cognitive capacity?"

Is this regarding healthy individuals?

[Shepard]

Jesus, someone actually moderate and quit this shit.

[xanadu]

I've been accused of personal attacks for stating my opinion that brizza is Adam. In what way is that a personal attack? Is being Adam a bad thing that one must not accuse anyone of? He has admitted using other names in the past, the only question remaining is is he still doing it or not? I leave the answer to that to other people. We see "patch" a new name with few posts but all his posts seem to agree with Adam and attack me. No, I haven't made any personal attacks. However, brizza/adam has attacked me. For evidence of that, here are statements under the brizza name:

"For all the purported benefits piracetam offers on reading and language skills you (xanadu) still seem to have huge difficulties understanding other peoples posts"

"exactly the kind of misdirection I've come to expect from you Xanadu"

Those are personal attacks. Now lets look at Adams statements against me:

"in xanadu's case, I think it would be best if s/he was just officially banned. S/he constantly posts "flame bait" far too much to just look over in exchange for content; which degrades the content of this forum"

" I think you should stop projecting your BS at me and go make a new screen name somewhere where other posters actually respect to what you have to say."

I think we can all agree those are personal attacks. How about if we stop this sort of thing? I will stop giving my opinion that Adam is using other names to attack me and agree with himself if he will stop the attacks. Since he has shown no willingness to do that, I will unilaterally ignore him and his sock puppets. That is the only way to deal with Adam, to ignore him and his clones. I will however give my opinion and post information I find interesting and usefull whether a certain person agrees with it or not. Does that sound reasonable to the rest of you?

Is there any chance of getting back to the subject of piracetam without it turning into a flame war?

emerson wrote:

"It's a little too easy to flow ones way down the list and only see the studies which support ones own feelings, and then come out at the end with conclusions that their own view has been vindicated."

Very well said and on the mark. That's the trouble with almost anything you could name in the nootropic field. There is always controversy and those who believe one way or the other can find some study or some evidence to support their position. They can then ignore the evidence to the contrary. That's why I say personal experience is the final test. If it works for you then it works period. The only real question you don't want to answer with that method is whether it's safe or not. I think the decades of research have established that piracetam is safe. No one has disputed that up to now. People in this forum have tried it and gotten very real benefits.

[Athanasios]

All studies posted should be the starting point for someone inquiring, not the end all. The person reading has an obligation to really look into things, and not just be fed what others say. There is no way for the poster to assure that the reader will do so.

It is important, ethically, not to pick out studies that have lots of equivalent studies showing the opposite effect, because that is definitely misleading. This is definitely a responsibility of the poster.

Also, when showing efficacy or non-efficacy, it is important to stay within the range of the drug. Showing that my electric toothbrush does not prevent skin cancer does not make it a product without efficacy. This too is the responsibility of the poster. The poster must make himself aware of this range, as best he can, before posting information that could mislead others.

I think that there is good evidence for piracetam within this range:

microcirculation, intrabrain communication, improvements in patients with dyslexia, neuroprotective properties, and the regulation to normality of multiple brain functions

I normally wouldnt add dyslexia, as i want to focus on healthy individuals, but dyslexia is very common. I also think everyone has it to an extent.

[doug123]

Jesus, someone actually moderate and quit this shit.

I'm a slave to the data.

The thread is well moderated...there are those making personal attacks and using anecdotes or unofficial authority to establish an argument...and those of us forming scientific arguments and sticking to the data.

Peace.

[emerson]

It is important, ethically, not to pick out studies that have lots of equivalent studies showing the opposite effect, because that is definitely misleading.

Totally disagree on that one. One can't just pick and choose the validity of a study based on the end findings. You have to consider them all, 100% of all available data, and then proceed to narrow them down by examining their methodology. Any other way leaves you too open to the very bias that the scientific method is meant to compensate for. There's a huge, huge, percentage of badly designed studies out there. The last major review I did was on caffeine, and if I still had my notes I'd be able to easily throw down twenty absolutely horribly designed studies and a single well designed one which when compared with these criteria would show the well designed study to be in error due to showing such a different end result from the bad studies.

The poster must make himself aware of this range, as best he can, before posting information that could mislead others.

Questionable. Just how much duty do I have for making assumptions about how well someone is going to be able to take the relevant parts of a study out of a seemingly unrelated one? Just posting an abstract on some particular subject could be taken as being misleading if the general perception of the group was of a collection of individuals incapable of examining the data at all. In fact, I'd even argue that the purposeful over-compensation to a target audience, rather than the data itself, is in the long run harmful.

microcirculation, intrabrain communication, improvements in patients with dyslexia, neuroprotective properties, and the regulation to normality of multiple brain functions

Is an example of what I was writing about above. "intrabrain communication" is definitely understandable to everyone in a broad sense. However, I'm totally lost as to what it's supposed to actually mean. Are we talking about direct modulation of specific neurotransmitters, effects on specific neuron types, increasing growth or specific aspects of one or more types of neuron, changes in action potential, or modifications to neuronal plasticity? I could take that term to mean any or all of these as well as quite a bit more. Most of that list in fact gives the same effect. I understand in general what the message of each word is, and that's great if there's no need to actually come to further conclusions about the topic or compare it to other data. And a casual reader, for the most part, wouldn't need to do so. But should the focus be to lowering the data to the perceived level of understanding within a group. Or should it be to present the data and let any part of the group which finds itself uncertain of a component ask for clarification and as a result in prove their own understanding for later discussions?

For the most part I totally agree about the care which has to be put into which studies are worth referencing. But I disagree on the methods which should be used, and in how that presentation should come into effect.

[Athanasios]

I am not an expert on EEGs, but I do know enough to interpret the results that they reported. Intrabrain communication, in this case, means synchronization of electrical signals, activity, of the brain. When they report dimensional "complexity", minimal/low complexity means high correlation/synchronization, increased communication. Or, as they stated it, "The decreased EEG complexity is interpreted as increased cooperativity of brain functional processes." Lower dimensional complexity has been shown, for example, to be best for divergent thinking. This may account for people reporting increased creativity while on piracetam. One more thing on the EEG studies, when piracetam is administered they see decrease of slow frequencies, augmentation and acceleration of alpha-activity and increase of beta-activity. This gives the "awake" feeling people say they get when taking piracetam. Alpha and beta frequencies are known for being an alert, focused, concentrative state of mind, even a racing mind. The slower frequencies are known for drowsiness and deep sleep.

I listed the research I had done to conclude it was worth taking, but no, I didnt want to break down each study for people when we were acting the way we were. I feel as if people were saying that there was no basis for taking it, just so I would do their homework for them. When in the investing community, I just say, you place your bet and I'll place mine, but here people could be misled. I should have just used a PM to Xanadu instead of saying anything in the forum. I dont think I will post much in the nootropics forum anymore after this, as it is a different beast.

Edit: Oh Yeah, I agree on your first point. To clarify what I mean, it is important not to pick out studies that support your point without consideration of other studies that are on the other side of the fence...on the range comment, I meant that there is no reason to throw out possible efficacy of a toothbrush because it doesnt prevent skin cancer.

Edited by cnorwood19, 03 July 2006 - 05:03 AM.

[Shepard]

I'm a slave to the data.

The thread is well moderated...there are those making personal attacks and using anecdotes or unofficial authority to establish an argument...and those of us forming scientific arguments and sticking to the data. 

Peace.

I'm not even concerned with the data regarding this thread.

We all know the controversy regarding nootropics. What concerns me are a few intelligent people that take part in the nootropics forum acting like children. This forum is bad enough, there is no reason to clutter it with more junk. Why can't everyone state their argument once, post whatever data they wish, and let it be? If someone contradicts you, have enough faith that the readers aren't idiots.

This is assuming that they don't actually post harmful data/recommendations. Heated debate is entirely appropriate in some instances, but do you think piracetam is going to physically hurt someone?

Edited by shepard, 03 July 2006 - 06:18 AM.

[doug123]

Your lack of concern for the data in this thread might be a problem. Go ahead and glance over the personal attacks if you please; I'm not forcing you to read them.

If someone contradicts your argument (do you understand there is a difference between attacking a person and a position, shepard?), you back it up. You don't proceed to act in a childish manner and make personal attacks just because your feelings are hurt or you don't know how to form a scientific argument.

[Shepard]

I've read all the pro and con arguments regarding piracetam. That's pretty much why I stay out of the nootropics threads these days.

I'm not denying that there have been personal attacks. That is what prompted my comment in the first place. I would like to think someone would be mature enough to handle it instead of dragging it all out in the forums.