It would be a large understatement to say that the term 'nootropics' is loosely defined, and so it certainly cannot be said that anything anyone considers a 'nootropic' should be avoided if you have an 'addictive personality' (another pseudo-clinical term with a very loose definition). I would be okay with the term 'nootropic' being thrown out, along with 'addictive personality', as they are both terms that are sourced from bro-science in my opinion.
The term nootropic, as you state, is a scientifically undefined term without basis which may mean diffrent things to diffrent people. Addictive personaly on the other hand, while it is an undefined medical term, has its root in genetic D2A1 molymorphism which results in increased addiction susceptibility and mental desire. This is often refered to as an "addictive personality" although it is not actually a personality trait. This is anything but bro-science.
The general consensus, after reading quite alot on these forums, seems to be that a nootropic is something that increases mental clearity, cognition and memory retention to a certain unquantifiable degree. As people respond diffrently to diffrent kinds of substances which may, in their opinion, fall under the category of being a nootropic, it is not possible to define what a nootropic is and is not as it is not medically defined. Now, since my statement was completely relative, this may be disregarded.What is a nootropic? An AMPA modulator? Something that improves LTP? Something that corrects an imbalance, temporary or permanent? Something that acts as a prophylactic against a large amount of predictable future neurophysical or emotional stress? A stimulant? Something that causes neurogenisis? Something that subjectively just makes you think better, or remember better without a clear explanation as to how it is accomplished? Something that specifically counteracts an addiction that was creating a loss in cognitive ability?
Substances that do work for a certain individual, who has a fear of falling into an addictive pattern due to past experiences, should stay away from anything mind-altering that may increase well being.
A nootropic will be something different for everyone, especially those with a specific pathology, like many/most on this board have, addiction included. Many substances here, that subectively/objectively act as nootropics for an individual, do so specifically by lessening addiction to, sub-optimal self medication with, or damage caused by other substances.
It's not fair to lump "everyone" in to your admonishment in regard to a comment made by one person. Many people here are exceptionally reasonable, educated, and careful, even more so than most MDs (careful). I don't know of too many MDs, and I know more than a few personally, who take the time to read the full research regarding everything that they prescribe, especially in the context of other regulated or non-regulated options out there. Of course, there are exceptions and a select few fringe individuals on this board tend toward the reckless, choose to chase a nootropic buzz, or choose the shotgun approach without being aware of the science or the consequences. After all, the board itself is not password protected and is free to all to read who can use google. However, especially when the recklessness of modern commonly prescribed medications is taken into account, an example being long term adderall use amongst many others, then the approach by most here, who are attempting to find more sustainable and less long-term damaging solutions through a largely careful and responsible methodology, should escape your finger pointing.
The term "people" is plural refering to a group of people, in this case the community of longecity.org. As it is unlikely and illogical of me to adress every single person for a statement directed at a majority, there are no logical flaws. Yes there are plenty of smart people here, yes there are many who learn and actually put effort to state the correct facts, but the vast majority are one time casual people who come here and spread hearsay they heard on the streets or somewhere else without actually caring to confirm it.
Shit contains a fair amount of healthy chemicals, yet it is refered as unhealthy. Get my point?
Addressed above, but also patently untrue (especially with the lazy accusation of "zero research being behind them"): the term 'random shit' being wholly non-specific. Again, "people" on these forums covers a lot of "people", most of whom don't deserve your rush to judgment or other wise blind categorization based on relative unfamiliarity with specific personalities here and your skimming the forum.
Persoanlly, I'd be a heck of a lot more sick/damaged/less functional than I am if it weren't for this forum. I'm able to live my life becasue of it.
Are you stating that the majority of the consumed substances discussed on these forums have sufficient research to confirm their efficiecy for their health claims?
While results from animal and in vitro studies are transferable to real life results to a certain degree, its far from sufficient data to confirm health benefits. This applies to a large spectrum of substances, not to mention those who only have a nomenclature based name.
And to my defense, random shit is the only appropriate term when you consume something you believe is a nootropic supplied by a shady chinese company. Since you dont know for certain what it is you are consuming, it may be anything. Thus "random".
You seem to react mostly to my generalization, sorry to break it to you buddy but even if you were robert oppenheimer, in a crowd you are a nobody. Just like taking a piss in the pacific ocean wont dilute it.
