11 replies to this topic

[LBGSHI]

I believe there is a misconception in the nootropics community as to how the various 'racetams operate. I constantly see people referring to aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam in terms of how many times more 'potent' they are than piracetam. This seems a little misleading, as the various 'racetams appear to operate in very different ways. One might ask: does potency imply a greater improvement to verbal fluency, multitasking capability, single-minded focus, appreciation for color, appreciation for sound, memory retention, creativity...a combination of these...or what exactly? Some of the 'racetams even inhibit the effects of the other 'racetams (in my experience, aniracetam's effect on focus virtually eliminated piracetam's effect on multitasking, for example). I can certainly say that the effects of both aniracetam and oxiracetam were more immediately noticeable than those of piracetam, but I could also say that the effects of LSD are more immediately noticeable than those of caffeine - yet no one would say one is more 'potent' than the other, because they're completely different substances, with completely different effects.

Does anyone who subscribes to this terminology have another way in which we should be interpreting these claims, or am I correct in assuming that they're merely baseless assertions made to increase sales, or gross oversimplifications made to promote a given member's favorite nootropic?

[SuperjackDid_]

great post .

i fully agreed with you .



X times more potent LOL


it fully different substance and different in effect .

[Darkat]

They definitely do seem to have different effects on cognition.

I have always thought of the potency as the amount you need to take to get an effect - eg: you can get a positive effect off 400mg of oxiracetam, but 400mg of piracetam would have zero effect in most people.

[golden1]

It's based on the dosage range commonly needed for each one I'd assume, but thats not too important.. it's not nearly as important as how you respond to each one or which ones effects suit your life best.

for example: LSD is roughly more x times more potent than psilocin. Both chemicals have different effects in a similar way that the -racetams differ, but can be compared potency wise.

Edited by golden1, 12 December 2012 - 10:10 PM.

[LBGSHI]

It's based on the dosage range commonly needed for each one I'd assume, but thats not too important.. it's not nearly as important as how you respond to each one or which ones effects suit your life best.

for example: LSD is roughly more x times more potent than psilocin. Both chemicals have different effects in a similar way that the -racetams differ, but can be compared potency wise.

Even if that were the case, it's still a gross misrepresentation, in that it implies the same effect but to a greater degree. If one saw a new drug at the local grocery store, which included the claim, "3x more potent than Tylennol!", one would conclude that this drug would be effective at decreasing pain perception (such as that experienced in headaches), decreasing fever, or both. If it turned out that this drug was in fact a laxative, no one would defend this company as having been honest and accurate in their labeling.

More to the point, this simply isn't true. While many people on various forums have specified that they perceive their respective optimal dosages of the different 'racetams to be higher in the case of piracetam than in the cases of aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam, the literature available via PubMed and others specify wildly varying 'optimal doses' of any of these, with pramiracetam being determined to be 'optimal' at 3200mg in some studies, while piracetam is sometimes found to be 'optimal' at only 800mg. In the end, it appears that the majority of opinions concerning 'optimal' doses is more concerned with cost (as in, the less expensive the product, the more people seem to think that several grams per serving is the optimal dose). This is evident in the fact that price from lowest to highest is generally: piracetam, aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam; and 'optimal dosage' is anecdotally perceived from highest to lowest as: piracetam, aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam.

Edited by LBGSHI, 12 December 2012 - 11:00 PM.

[golden1]

It's based on the dosage range commonly needed for each one I'd assume, but thats not too important.. it's not nearly as important as how you respond to each one or which ones effects suit your life best.

for example: LSD is roughly more x times more potent than psilocin. Both chemicals have different effects in a similar way that the -racetams differ, but can be compared potency wise.

Even if that were the case, it's still a gross misrepresentation, in that it implies the same effect but to a greater degree. If one saw a new drug at the local grocery store, which included the claim, "3x more potent than Tylennol!", one would conclude that this drug would be effective at decreasing pain perception (such as that experienced in headaches), decreasing fever, or both. If it turned out that this drug was in fact a laxative, no one would defend this company as having been honest and accurate in their labeling.

More to the point, this simply isn't true. While many people on various forums have specified that they perceive their respective optimal dosages of the different 'racetams to be higher in the case of piracetam than in the cases of aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam, the literature available via PubMed and others specify wildly varying 'optimal doses' of any of these, with pramiracetam being determined to be 'optimal' at 3200mg in some studies, while piracetam is sometimes found to be 'optimal' at only 800mg. In the end, it appears that the majority of opinions concerning 'optimal' doses is more concerned with cost (as in, the less expensive the product, the more people seem to think that several grams per serving is the optimal dose). This is evident in the fact that price from lowest to highest is generally: piracetam, aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam; and 'optimal dosage' is anecdotally perceived from highest to lowest as: piracetam, aniracetam, oxiracetam, and pramiracetam.

All racetams, for me, are closer in effect than comparing Tylenol to a laxative or LSD to caffeine though... You already seem aware of all the background, as you've just posted all the varying doses, so yes clearly you are correct in one way, but they are not completely baseless IMO. It's there for marketing I'd say yes, but it also can have basis in reality depending on the claim(here is an example of how one paper came to a x times more potent conclusion http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/12070754 another: http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8277504). There might be ones saying the same for piracetam compared to aniracetam etc, I don't know.

[LBGSHI]

All racetams, for me, are closer in effect than comparing Tylenol to a laxative or LSD to caffeine though... You already seem aware of all the background, as you've just posted all the varying doses, so yes clearly you are correct in one way, but they are not completely baseless IMO. It's there for marketing I'd say yes, but it also can have basis in reality depending on the claim(here is an example of how one paper came to a x times more potent conclusion http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/12070754 another: http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8277504). There might be ones saying the same for piracetam compared to aniracetam etc, I don't know.

OK, I can use a more related analogy.

Anecdotally, piracetam's effect on multitasking is nullified by aniracetam's effect on single-minded focus. Oxiracetam is purported to give a feeling of energy and motivation (which I agree with), while pramiracetam is purported to cause clear-headed thought with occasional drowsiness (not all people experience this drowsiness, apparently). These are only a few examples of qualities which are primarily antagonistic and mutually exclusive.

If I were to market Sleep Aid (diphenhydramine HCL) as being "3x More Potent Than" No-Doze (Caffeine Anhydrous), this would be considered misleading, because these two substances cause roughly opposite effects. Caffeine blocks adenosine receptors, thus inhibiting the inhibition (nope, not a typo) of various neurotransmitters (including acetylcholine), which causes increased alertness and neural activity; while diphenhydramine HCL blocks histamine and acetylcholine receptors, causing decreased alertness and neural activity. However, it should be added that these substances also cause many of the same effects as one another (flushing of the face, irregular urination, twitching, increased heart rate, pupil dilation, cardiac arrest, etc, etc).

Just because two substances happen to cause some of the same effects as one another, does not mean one should specify that Supplement A was "X times more potent than Supplement B", unless the primary effect of one substance is greater than that same primary effect of the other. Conversely, one could say, "Supplement B is 4x more potent than Supplement A when used as an anxiolytic"; this would be a completely acceptable statement. Even though the primary effect of Supplement B may not be greater than the same primary effect of Supplement A, it has been specifically stated that the effect we're concerned with here is anxiolysis.

Your two references strengthen my point: both of them specifically state in which effect a given supplement is "more potent" than another.

If any specific racetam is "x times more potent" than another, I should like to know in what respect it is more potent...certainly, this must be describable, otherwise the assertion is useless and unwarranted. However, I have never, to my recollection, seen anyone specify this. On the contrary, I have always seen simply "Xracetam is __times more potent than Yracetam".

[golden1]

ok? I said you're mostly right. Not here to argue, you asked a question.

[LBGSHI]

ok? I said you're mostly right. Not here to argue, you asked a question.

I understand; I wasn't offended or angry. I was merely responding, and explaining why I don't agree with that explanation.

The purpose of this thread was two-fold:

1. If one exists, elucidate the legitimate reason for saying that any given racetam is "x times more potent".

2. If there is no good reason to say that one racetam is "x times more potent" than another, establish that this is a misleading statement, and hopefully raise awareness of this.

As it stands, a person with a lot of spare cash might skip straight to pramiracetam, because "it's more potent", and never even try the other racetams, one or more of which may have actually been better for his or her particular needs.

Edited by LBGSHI, 13 December 2012 - 07:09 PM.

[golden1]

Sorry I suppose I just didn't get what you were getting at(at the time).

It's for advertising or just written by uninformed people spreading it as fact as it's a completely vague statement, it is probably taken out of context from a realworld test by whoever is saying it. but I don't think that is anything nearly out of line in the advertising world(think of all the other claims they make for nootropics.. and things in general) and I don't really see it around too much when buying them.

here is another thread discussing it http://www.longecity...piracetam-mean/

So yeah, it's misleading in it's vagueness. if you hear it on a message board or review site I feel like you'd also stumble across how theyre different(hopefully you'd look up other -racetams before buying one too, idk I guess it's bad for someone who buys stuff without looking up what its all about first or takes things as fact without backing information.. but then those same people(like the person you used in the example) aren't going to see any sort of warning we/you try to put out as they won't be looking for it).

Edited by golden1, 13 December 2012 - 08:43 PM.

[LBGSHI]

Ah; that thread contains a condensation of this one, essentially

[Shamanist]

Thanks, LBGSHI ! It was a fun thread to read. I think you made your point that it's pointless to say that one racetam is X times more potent than another because they all have different effects

 

For me, Aniracetam increases motivation, concentration, and my sense of aesthetics. However, oxi and prami do very little. Since we all have different biochemistry, what works for me might not work for others - and vice versa. Regardless, I agree with your that comparisons that claim X times potency are misguided.

 

For me, the best experience from a racetam is 750 mg of Ani every 3 to 4 hours with Alpha GPC and a fat source - Fish Oil, an avocado, or something similar. I've heard that many people don't need the Alpha GPC or the fat source, but I've found it helps from trial and error.

 

Great links too. Cheers!