6219 replies to this topic

[ranza]

Oh well....

[hadora]

Oh well....

Fail

the molecule is going in phase II in a few months

[Xenix]

Oh well....

*opportunity

Maybe you (or whoever made that meme) should really be taking research chemicals...

[sunshinefrost]

Oh well....

Fail

the molecule is going in phase II in a few months

Lol, still it's kind of appropriate for this situation

[EngineeringGenius]

Are you guys getting quotes from companies with nothing more than the diagram of the NSI-189 molecule? Is that sufficient? Because I don't think Neuralstem has released the chemcal formula, to my knowledge NSI-189 does not yet have a CAS #, and NSI-189 does not show up in search bars on any synth company's webpages. I would greatly appreciate advice on how to go about this and any additional information as I have never attempted to get a chemical synthesized and I share an interest in this promising chemical. Thanks in advance.



P.S.
I am largely ignorant regarding patent laws and such so please excuse my ignorance, but is it illegal for these labs to sell Neuralstem's patented chemical without their permission?

Edited by EngineeringGenius, 11 May 2013 - 05:11 AM.

[Xenix]

Are you guys getting quotes from companies with nothing more than the diagram of the NSI-189 molecule? Is that sufficient? Because I don't think Neuralstem has released the chemcal formula, to my knowledge NSI-189 does not yet have a CAS #, and NSI-189 does not show up in search bars on any synth company's webpages. I would greatly appreciate advice on how to go about this and any additional information as I have never attempted to get a chemical synthesized and I share an interest in this promising chemical. Thanks in advance.



P.S.
I am largely ignorant regarding patent laws and such so please excuse my ignorance, but is it illegal for these labs to sell Neuralstem's patented chemical without their permission?

Are you willing to spend $2,000 to get 2 grams synthesized? because that's roughly how much it's going to cost.

[Xenix]

I wonder if all the people in the group buy have amazing results (and post their results here) the price of Neuralstem's share prices would rise... It really makes me think how many people/investors are out there are watching this thread...

[megatron]

I wonder if all the people in the group buy have amazing results (and post their results here) the price of Neuralstem's share prices would rise... It really makes me think how many people/investors are out there are watching this thread...

The results won't be posted here, but in a new thread. The new thread is also hopefully going to be private, so only participants and members have access to it.

[Izan]

Are you guys getting quotes from companies with nothing more than the diagram of the NSI-189 molecule? Is that sufficient? Because I don't think Neuralstem has released the chemcal formula, to my knowledge NSI-189 does not yet have a CAS #, and NSI-189 does not show up in search bars on any synth company's webpages. I would greatly appreciate advice on how to go about this and any additional information as I have never attempted to get a chemical synthesized and I share an interest in this promising chemical. Thanks in advance.



P.S.
I am largely ignorant regarding patent laws and such so please excuse my ignorance, but is it illegal for these labs to sell Neuralstem's patented chemical without their permission?

this guy is the reason why we should have a private section in this forum. do not feed this troll

[kylehere]

Making the thread private would be such a disservice to everyone that missed the group buy that would've participated otherwise.

[Reformed-Redan]

I think the results should be made private.

Just so there isn't one person who says it doesn't work for him and the rest will think the same. I'd also make a log for 1 month of dosing and at the end collaborate with other members who achieved similar results. That way prejudgments about the effects aren't made or perpetuated.

I'd also request that other members refrain from silly and outlandish statements like, "OMG, this is NZT!" or "This stuff really changed my life, I think the whole world should be on this stuff."

It would make this place look like a group of idiots throwing down their throats whatever powder they get in the mail. ehh

Edited by yadayada, 11 May 2013 - 09:41 PM.

[EngineeringGenius]

Are you guys getting quotes from companies with nothing more than the diagram of the NSI-189 molecule? Is that sufficient? Because I don't think Neuralstem has released the chemcal formula, to my knowledge NSI-189 does not yet have a CAS #, and NSI-189 does not show up in search bars on any synth company's webpages. I would greatly appreciate advice on how to go about this and any additional information as I have never attempted to get a chemical synthesized and I share an interest in this promising chemical. Thanks in advance.



P.S.
I am largely ignorant regarding patent laws and such so please excuse my ignorance, but is it illegal for these labs to sell Neuralstem's patented chemical without their permission?

Are you willing to spend $2,000 to get 2 grams synthesized? because that's roughly how much it's going to cost.

Duly noted.

Edited by EngineeringGenius, 11 May 2013 - 10:11 PM.

[sparkk51]

I'd also request that other members refrain from silly and outlandish statements like, "OMG, this is NZT!" or "This stuff really changed my life, I think the whole world should be on this stuff."

Agree with this wholeheartedly. There's nothing quantifiable with sensationalist remarks, just don't fucking make them.

[IA87]

Making the thread private would almost certainly amplify positive claims and squelch negative ones. Since everyone in the thread will have paid to obtain the RC, they will be averse to the idea that they have invested in an ineffective, or only mildly effective, compound; exaggerated, positive claims will result. This is a documented phenomenon (it is a form of confirmation bias). Having the nonparticipating members view and comment on the thread will likely result in a more healthily balanced discussion, and more accurate judgments on the compound's effectiveness. Finally, there is the long-term financial motivation for opening the thread to the public: A successful trial would evidence to the nonparticipating members the potential research chemicals have as cognitive enhancers. This will increase the likelihood that they will participate in a future group buy.

I realize that, as a nonparticipant, I benefit by making the above claims. Judge for yourselves the truth behind my claims. I believe you will conclude that they are accurate and sensible.

[OpaqueMind]

I agree wholeheartedly with IA87. On top of that, I don't see the point in a private thread between participants... if it works for you it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. Telling each other about it circlejerk style serves little purpose. The very ethos of this forum is the free-flow of information. To make this thread private would be a disservice to those who could potentially benefit greatly from this.

[Hebbeh]

I certainly hope everybody realizes Neuralstem is certainly watching this thread and the implications of that.

[spookytooth]

They are running their own trials. I highly doubt this thread is of significance to them.

[DamnedOwl]

I'm sure they'd be horrified to learn about our efforts to test their drug without them at least being able to control the tests.

Any serious health related issues that even only one of us would encounter whilst taking this drug would not be remotely helpful to them at all. Indeed, if word were to 'get out', then the bad publicity could easily jeopardize their chances of bringing this to market.

If they are monitoring this thread then I wonder how hard it would be for them to work out whatever they need to in order to try to prevent the synthesis from being completed?

[Xenix]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

[DamnedOwl]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

[Xenix]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

OK. I wonder if NSI-189 will have any benefit on brain functions other than memory - like executive functioning, abstract thinking, creativity, etc? It's exciting to think about what neurogenesis has to offer, if its mechanism of action really works in humans like it has on rats. It's all in the neurons, right?

[megatron]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

OK. I wonder if NSI-189 will have any benefit on brain functions other than memory - like executive functioning, abstract thinking, creativity, etc? It's exciting to think about what neurogenesis has to offer, if its mechanism of action really works in humans like it has on rats. It's all in the neurons, right?

I would say memory is the key essential part in intelligence. I can almost conclude that if this drug improves both working memory and long term memory, those aren't the only effects you'll see. A high working memory is absolutely crucial in having a high IQ. Also, reasoning, formulating complex arguments, solving math problems and high level thinking are all very dependent on working memory. Indeed, the coming weeks will be the most interesting in my till date.

Edited by Megatrone, 12 May 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[Xenix]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

OK. I wonder if NSI-189 will have any benefit on brain functions other than memory - like executive functioning, abstract thinking, creativity, etc? It's exciting to think about what neurogenesis has to offer, if its mechanism of action really works in humans like it has on rats. It's all in the neurons, right?

I would say memory is the key essential part in intelligence. I can almost conclude that if this drug improves both working memory and long term memory, those aren't the only effects you'll see. A high working memory is absolutely crucial in having a high IQ. Also, reasoning, formulating complex arguments, solving math problems and high level thinking are all very dependent on working memory. Indeed, the coming weeks will be the most interesting in my till date.

Yeah, I definitey agree with everything you've written.

Final question from me today - any idea how long the effects will take to be noticeable? SSRIs generally take around a month before they 'kick in' (this is generally believed to be because it has something to do with acting on neurogenesis) - is NSI-189 going to be similar in this regard (even though it isn't an antidepressant)?

[megatron]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

OK. I wonder if NSI-189 will have any benefit on brain functions other than memory - like executive functioning, abstract thinking, creativity, etc? It's exciting to think about what neurogenesis has to offer, if its mechanism of action really works in humans like it has on rats. It's all in the neurons, right?

I would say memory is the key essential part in intelligence. I can almost conclude that if this drug improves both working memory and long term memory, those aren't the only effects you'll see. A high working memory is absolutely crucial in having a high IQ. Also, reasoning, formulating complex arguments, solving math problems and high level thinking are all very dependent on working memory. Indeed, the coming weeks will be the most interesting in my till date.

Yeah, I definitey agree with everything you've written.

Final question from me today - any idea how long the effects will take to be noticeable? SSRIs generally take around a month before they 'kick in' (this is generally believed to be because it has something to do with acting on neurogenesis) - is NSI-189 going to be similar in this regard (even though it isn't an antidepressant)?

My advice: You should really read the previous pages, as you'll find some clarifying information regarding your question. It's also a good idea to read the study posted earlier (or maybe it was the patent).

[sparkk51]

So do drugs like these actually have to be shown to be effective to pass FDA standards, or do they just have to be safe in clinical trials? I mean, if NSI-189 didn't show some promise it wouldn't have been pushed this far along, right?

And not just effective for but also better than whatever currently exists for (in this case) MDD.

OK. I wonder if NSI-189 will have any benefit on brain functions other than memory - like executive functioning, abstract thinking, creativity, etc? It's exciting to think about what neurogenesis has to offer, if its mechanism of action really works in humans like it has on rats. It's all in the neurons, right?

I would say memory is the key essential part in intelligence. I can almost conclude that if this drug improves both working memory and long term memory, those aren't the only effects you'll see. A high working memory is absolutely crucial in having a high IQ. Also, reasoning, formulating complex arguments, solving math problems and high level thinking are all very dependent on working memory. Indeed, the coming weeks will be the most interesting in my till date.

Yeah, I definitey agree with everything you've written.

Final question from me today - any idea how long the effects will take to be noticeable? SSRIs generally take around a month before they 'kick in' (this is generally believed to be because it has something to do with acting on neurogenesis) - is NSI-189 going to be similar in this regard (even though it isn't an antidepressant)?

I've taken Effexor for a little over a year now and, personally, I think the wait for them to kick in is complete bullshit. At least in the case of seriously depressed patients. I understand that everyone's different but I felt the effect almost immediately. There is no doubt in my mind that the intended effects of SSRIs stem more from an increase in serotonin than neurogenesis.

Concerning neurogenesis, if no negative interactions are met when combining PRL 8-53 and NSI 189, do any of you believe that NSI-189 could help establish the neuronal infrastructure surrounding PRL 8-53's cognitive effects?

Edited by sparkk51, 12 May 2013 - 05:03 PM.

[Reformed-Redan]

I agree wholeheartedly with IA87. On top of that, I don't see the point in a private thread between participants... if it works for you it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. Telling each other about it circlejerk style serves little purpose. The very ethos of this forum is the free-flow of information. To make this thread private would be a disservice to those who could potentially benefit greatly from this.

Yeah, so are peer reviewed papers.

I hope next group buys are with a lower amount of people.

I don't know who's getting this compound or what they're going to do with it. Give it to their grandma?

[golden1]

so the plan is posting the results in a private thread? wow.
well, I'm going to hope some people in the group buy see the significance of sharing the experience and effects and do so publicly.

anyway, you're welcome for all the public feedback on coluracetam and sunifiram...

[IA87]

I agree wholeheartedly with IA87. On top of that, I don't see the point in a private thread between participants... if it works for you it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. Telling each other about it circlejerk style serves little purpose. The very ethos of this forum is the free-flow of information. To make this thread private would be a disservice to those who could potentially benefit greatly from this.

Yeah, so are peer reviewed papers.

I hope next group buys are with a lower amount of people.

I don't know who's getting this compound or what they're going to do with it. Give it to their grandma?

I am confused by your comment on peer reviewed papers. Are you saying they are like a "circle jerk?" If so, this is false. In most fields, peer review means that people of similar competence to you, but from *different groups*, review your work. This does not breed the same behavior as we should see in a private thread of individuals that are all of the same mindset, more or less. In the former, the different groups provide the much required Popperian falsification aspect to the review of a hypothesis. To survive a peer review, a scientist's work must be bulletproof; other scientists often have competing hypotheses that they wish to publish, and are thus motivated to falsify your paper. This is often a good thing: what we get are small hypotheses that are very well-formed and have a high likelihood of being error free. In contrast, a private thread would be analogous to one research group reviewing each other's work. They are all of the same opinion already, so there is a strong tendency to search for positive evidence for the hypothesis. This is a common phenomenon in this forum, in fact. We rarely see people here ask, "Anyone have any negative experience with <drug>?" Rather, we see, "Anyone have any positive experience with <drug>?" Ideally, we want the former. Publicizing the results of your trial engenders this ideal.

[Reformed-Redan]

I agree wholeheartedly with IA87. On top of that, I don't see the point in a private thread between participants... if it works for you it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. Telling each other about it circlejerk style serves little purpose. The very ethos of this forum is the free-flow of information. To make this thread private would be a disservice to those who could potentially benefit greatly from this.

Yeah, so are peer reviewed papers.

I hope next group buys are with a lower amount of people.

I don't know who's getting this compound or what they're going to do with it. Give it to their grandma?

I am confused by your comment on peer reviewed papers. Are you saying they are like a "circle jerk?" If so, this is false. In most fields, peer review means that people of similar competence to you, but from *different groups*, review your work. This does not breed the same behavior as we should see in a private thread of individuals that are all of the same mindset, more or less. In the former, the different groups provide the much required Popperian falsification aspect to the review of a hypothesis. To survive a peer review, a scientist's work must be bulletproof; other scientists often have competing hypotheses that they wish to publish, and are thus motivated to falsify your paper. This is often a good thing: what we get are small hypotheses that are very well-formed and have a high likelihood of being error free. In contrast, a private thread would be analogous to one research group reviewing each other's work. They are all of the same opinion already

That's a non-sequitur. I'm not saying we can't publish our results after they have been carefully logged and reviewed. Rather than, *OMG, this is my first day and I feel super!"

[IA87]

Well, I didn't realize that is what you meant. It is fine to review your results and publish them only when you feel they are ready. What I thought you were saying was that there would be no publication at all. This is what I felt was a bad idea. If I have misunderstood, I apologize.