Can a Pill Make You Limitless? The Ethics of Cognitive Enhancement

 

 

While the new film Limitless is a familiar Hollywood treatment, it also shines a light on important and unaddressed neuroethics challenges

 

“I was blind, but now I see.”

 

 

Eddie Morra (played by Bradley Cooper) is a typical struggling writer: unemployed, behind on his book and his girlfriend just moved out. He just can’t seem to muster up enough oomph to turn things around. All this changes when Eddie’s drug-dealing brother-in-law gives him a dose of a new smart pill, “NZT-48.” The drug offers powerful abilities: perfect memory recall, flawless decision-making skills, charisma, and the ability to be 10 steps ahead of everyone else. These powers, coupled with a newfound drive for success, allow Eddie to finish his book in four days, learn several languages, and develop algorithms that predict the stock market. One scene even has Eddie fighting off a group of men with karate moves he recalls from a Bruce Lee film he watched as a child. A seductive scenario indeed, one that might have viewers in the audience asking themselves, “Could such a drug really exist?” And if so, would it be possible to unlock the full potential of the human brain, whatever that might be?

 

 

Maybe. There are many types of pharmacological cognitive enhancers already on the market, as well as substances—caffeine and nicotine being among the most common. In other words, humans have used enhancers for millennia. The drugs most similar to NZT, however, belong to two categories: ones that target executive function (amphetamine salts such as Adderall or Ritalin), and ones that target memory consolidation and recall (Modafinil). Neither class is as effective as the fictional NZT, but the drugs have gained a reputation for enhancing alertness, arousal and memory among those who don’t have a clinical need for them.

 

These effects have resonated strongly with college students, especially in the United States, who often do not use the drug for its intended medical purpose—to treat ADHD—but to gain an edge on exam prep. At present, these drugs probably won’t replace a good work ethic. But it is not unreasonable, and perhaps even expected, that drugs similar to the potential of NZT will be available in the near future.

 

 

Say we ignore, for now, that a drug like NZT isn’t out there yet. Limitless creates a world where audiences can imagine what a world with a powerful enhancer would affect a healthy person, and if that’s something we would want. The film, although hyperbolic at times, does raise important questions that demand meaningful discussion: What are the safety concerns related to using new pharmacological substances? Do cognitive enhancers change the traditional conception of what it means to be human? Is it wrong to be able to achieve success without any hard work?

 

“When it finally stopped, I couldn’t account for the last 18 hours of my life.”

 

The most paramount concern is safety. In other words, should we give people access to a highly addictive drug with potentially dangerous side effects for which they have no medically diagnosed need. “Do no harm” is often cited as a guiding principle for the medical profession, and it seems unlikely doctors would prescribe a drug that had severe negative side effects. But this would not stop drugs from being sold on the street. The film does address safety concerns, showing what can happen when experimenting with unproven drugs. NZT has severe side effects that range from short-term amnesia to possible death. It is also highly addictive, forcing Eddie to increase his dosage to get the same effect. A drug with such side effects could cause widespread harm in society, as it does in the film.

 


“I would do anything I could do to get my hands on that little clear pill that would bring back ‘enhanced’ Eddie.”

 

Another concern is what ethicists refer to as “coercion.” Once individuals start using such a drug, they might find it difficult to do anything without it. Meanwhile, those around the users who have thus far abstained may find it hard to keep up—so they feel pressured to take the drug, too. The film depicts an underground world thirsty to acquire NZT at all costs. Eddie is stalked by gangsters and businessmen alike, and barely manages to keep his stash safe. A drug as powerful as NZT could have a domino effect in society, forcing those who wish to perform on par with their “enhanced” peers to take extreme measures.

 

You have not earned those powers … you haven’t had to climb up all the greasy rungs.”


 

Is it wrong to gain overnight what takes many people years to achieve? Is it cheating? The film’s depiction of Eddie is a sympathetic one. He is able to ultimately remain on top without having to bother with old-fashioned sweat equity. Although a drug like NZT might cause one to question the value of hard work, society is full of examples of people effortlessly achieving success.  That the film doesn’t exactly discourage an easy shortcut is one good example of how it raises a provocative point worth serious discussion.

 

“I’m still the same person.”

 

Pharmacological cognitive enhancers have the ability to permanently change the brain. The film’s conclusion forces audiences to question whether Eddie is the same person on and off the drug, and whether this irreversible state has created a super-human of sorts. A society where cognitive enhancement is widespread would certainly raise questions about whether we are extending the limits of traditional human ability. That said, many strategies we currently accept and promote—education, mind-training and even nutrition—cause permanent “enhancements” to the brain. Humans are constantly redefining the limits of their abilities. Could pharmacological enhancers be the caffeine of tomorrow?

 

“How many of us ever know what it is like to become the perfect version of ourselves?”

 

Although the film largely ignores many ethical questions regarding enhancement, its depiction of a world with legitimate cognitive enhancers is rich with thought-provoking examples. Many may find the movie’s ultimate endorsement of enhancements troubling, or even radical. But the notion is nothing new for philosophers and academics, some of whom have argued that non-therapeutic neuroenhancement can be done responsibly.

 

Solid arguments have been made in support of the use of cognitive enhancers among the healthy. What remains to be seen is how the public at large thinks about it. Studies show that people often fear what is not the status quo, until it becomes the status quo. Maybe enhancers will one day become as status quo as vitamins, maybe not. Regardless, bioethics should embrace—not dismiss—movies like Limitless as opportunities to discuss questions that would benefit from more public discussion.

 

Other recent films, including the Oscar-nominated The Kids Are All Right, Never Let Me Go, and the upcoming HBO-Harpo Productions adaptation of the bestseller The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks all bring core bioethical issues to the big screen as well. Stay tuned.

 

 

~ Ishan Dasgupta, B.A., is a research program coordinator at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. He is interested in the enhancement of human traits and the implications this has for society

 

 

 

 

51 people like this post.

Share

Contributors
Ishan Dasgupta

29 Responses to “Op-Ed: Can a Pill Make You Limitless?”

  1. A.M. says:

    Great issue to bring to people’s attention. I’d like to know more about the memory loss associated with taking Adderall and Ritalin. You hear from students taking Ritalin to study all night, and the next morning completely blanking on the exam. Any thoughts or experiences on this?

    Also, I’m curious whether college students have seen much abuse among drugs like Modafinil that are prescribed for narcolepsy (among other disorders)? If Modafinil targets memory consolidation and recall, are students less likely to have the “blanking” effect associated with post-Adderall/Ritalin intake?

  2. PHP says:

    Did Einstein take NZT to become Limitless? Interesting blog. http://ow.ly/4lQib

  3. Ishan says:

    PHP: I enjoyed your blog entry, but had a few comments. (1) Many of the factors you identified were circumstantial. Not everyone will have a dramatic event happen in their life, or have constant doubters who egg them on. (2) People like Einstein were blessed with not only tremendous intelligence, but also with unparalleled motivation and drive. Not everyone is “given” those abilities in life, many have to develop or train them through schooling, discipline, and hard-work. For a lot of people no amount of the aforementioned will get them even close to the level of Einstein. So, while Einstein did not need a drug to achieve what he did, I find it a bit misleading to say everyone could accomplish similar feats through traditional methods. The promise of cognitive enhancement is that it may level the playing field. Especially for those who are struggling to get to the field at all.

  4. Ishan says:

    A.M: As far as I know adderall/ritalin is not associated with signficant memory loss. Students who study on adderall and then blank the morning after are probably suffering from extreme fatigue, which definitely effects memory recall. If you take adderall all night to study, and then the drug wears off in the morning you will be left very tired and unable to function. Similarly, even if students continue to take the drug during their exams, you have to take into consideration that your brain is still fatigued, its probably not the drug as much as sleep deprivation. There has been some connection between chronically elevated cortisol levels (which amphetamines cause) and damage of the hippocampus and memory impairment.

    I do not know of wide spread use of Modafinil among college students. There is no literature to indicate that it is being used as much as amphetamines, and my personal recollection having recently finish undergrad, is that it is not widely used off-label. This could be because it doesnt actually offer that much to the healthy population in terms of memory.

  5. Jerry says:

    I want to take aderal. My friend has taken many drugs and said this one has helped him concentrate. I feel this day and age I have become as well as many other apathetic and complacent. I dont like the status quo but yet do nothing to change it except sit and occasionally as u said I get bursts of energy to do what I want. But my mind and society and so many things I believe inhibit me. I have only tried marijuana a few times and it mellowed me out. Its good I guess if I was overstressed but I want to do things remember? I could just take a hot bath or do what I always do and mellow out any other time. I drink but that gets me talkitive and I can’t walk sometimes after. I barely do either of these. I also never smoke since I hate cancer sticks. I do have somewhat eating habits but not as bad as others. I live in Chicago so I guess the environment is ok. Not as bad as NY or LA i heard (like smoking a pack of cigarettes or something like that)I was wondering if you recommend me taking some drug. U or n e 1 else on this forum? I read I believe ur a college student and already have ur Ba. I don’t want to rely on it forever. I do have a somewhat addictive personality but not as much. I just want to get shit done. I feel drugs can help me do that. I don’t see it as any different as athletes taking supplements (not steroids or ped’s) But like protein shakes.

  6. Tyler G says:

    Mr. Dasgupta,
    I thoroughly enjoyed your article reviewing the ethical and societal implications of the movie Limitless. Your article has sparked an interest in the practical application of pharmacological cognitive enhancers, for the purpose of achieving high levels of motivation and accomplishing goals. I was wondering if you had any suggestions for any literature or articles, by you or any others where I could find more information on the subject of cognitive enhancers. I look forward to hearing from you and I thank you in advance for your time!

    – Garrett

  7. 7TFpXdx says:

    I want to post quick hello and want to say appriciate for this good article. c6K3nTs1FORj7H

  8. check it bro, my boy wrote this:

    singularityhub.com/2011/04/18/limitless-movie-thrills-but-whats-the-future-of-smart-pills/

  9. Ishan says:

    Jerry,

    Thanks for your response. I am glad the article inspired some thought, and I have to agree with you in concluding that there is an ethical way to use neuroenhancing drugs to improve one’s life. That being said, an important part of the process is the role of the physician. While it seems you may have an idea of what type of medication would best work for you, a psychiatrist will be able to offer more accurate and responsible information on the matter. Most importantly he or she will be able to prescribe you something that is safe, and will monitor your progress.

    Ishan

  10. Ishan says:

    Tyler G,

    Thanks so much for your comment! I do in fact have several articles and names you should look into future. I would start off with the work of Anjan Chatterjee, MD out of the University of Pennsylvania. In particular these two articles I found early on shaped the conversation around cognitive enhancing drugs. http://ccn.upenn.edu/~chatterjee/anjan_pdfs/CosmeticNeurology.pdf
    http://ccn.upenn.edu/~chatterjee/anjan_pdfs/CosmeticNeuro.pdf

    Another person I think does a very good job describing the issues and is Erik Parens. This piece by him is excellent (http://www.thehastingscenter.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/HCR/Articles/2005_May-June/Parens%20Article.pdf).

    If you are interested in human enhancement more generally I would look to Julian Savulescu and Tom Douglas out of the University of Oxford. Both have very interesting work in the field of enhanement. Hope this provides a good starting point…let me know if you need further suggestions. Thanks!

  11. Ishan says:

    Abbas,

    Great article. We should combine our posts into a super article, ha.

  12. psyyche says:

    I had similar effects using (just a bit of) mdma (pure quality) for 20days everyday a couple of years ago. morning and afternoon… flawless decision making skills and charisma no-end… really, it was amazing – i finished a job (video) in 12 days that usually need at least 20 days of work and _every_ time I was speaking with a girl I fancied…done! problem: the down effects after 20 days at this level was dreadful. almost on the psychosis side…just don’t do it.

    anyway, what people need to understand about drugs&mind is: drugs boost your _actual_ abilities. probably clear your mind somehow but if you suck in something itdoesn’t mean that your going to excel in this thing because of the drug itself. that’s something different, which goes behind a simple neuro-activator. it could help opening some doors, but you are the one who move the wire and drive the car. good physical exercise, a good diet and a good sex life…that’s THE prescription
    cheers

  13. Bling says:

    There was a substance that has since been banned in the USA that was VERY similar to the affects of the drug in limitless. It was called GHB and the side effects of overuse and withdrawal were similar as well (short of death that is). I often wonder if the author used that as his basis. It would even make the eyes bluer in a blue eyed person.

  14. Ishan says:

    Bling,

    I think GHB is a good parallel, although current amphetamines are perhaps a better example. GHB, which is used to treat narcolepsy, does provide euphoria and was apparently used illicitly in the “club scene.” But I think the effects and uses of current amphetamine salts (adderall, ritalin) mimic the effects of NZT to a greater degree. I think the author definitely had these cognitive enhancing drugs, and the prevalence of their use in society in mind when writing the novel. Thanks for your comment!

  15. Jmcneff says:

    i would like to start by saying i’m bipolar. i found your article while i was searching about NZT. i’m on lithium and like in the movie it clarifies my thoughts helps me to recall memories much faster so in the same token it has done the same as NZT to a point. so how is it different or a bioethical issue or lack there of for someone to take lithium.

  16. Qwuke says:

    Ive been Wow’ed by this article, and have been looking into human enhancement for a little while longer than “Limitless”, but the movie definatly stirred up some of my old curiousity about it. I take low(20MG) of adderall twice a day for an anti-depressent supplement/ADD medication, and I had hoped for a while that it would increase my general fluid intelligence, but I have never really felt that my intelligence was heightened by it. Rather than doing what NZT does in “Limitless” it just increases the amount of focus I have slightly. I have played with N-Back and have felt that i learned faster doing it for 30 minutes a day, but its effects got slower and slower, so i do it much less regulary now. My true question here is asking if anyone knows of a medication that actually increases your ability to process thought. Not how well you can recall memory or how focused you can be, but how well you can absorb knowledge and/or the speed of your thoughts. With N-Back Ive felt that doing it greatly enhanced the rate of which i can learn, but it ate up a lot of time and was rather slow the longer I did it. As with adderall, all I really felt was me getting less distracted. Is there a true smart drug like NZT, or are they all just enhancers of focus/memory recollection?
    P.S. sorry for the mile long response, just had a lot of details to add…

  17. Ishan says:

    Jmcneff,

    Great question! You bring up a very important part of the debate. In my view, there is very little difference between you taking Lithium for treatment of bipolar disorder and Eddie using NZT to enhance his mind except that you have a diagnosed mental disorder, and Eddie as far as the movie portrayed was a “healthy” human being (although he suffered from extreme laziness and lack of motivation). People with a more conservative view however, would say that the distinction between treating a sick patient on one hand is far different than enhancing an otherwise normal individual. A large part of this argument rests on the safety issues involved with any sort of pharmacological intervention. Since, there are always risks in giving medication to people many will argue that one can only justify their use if someone has a deficit in cognitive ability that they must overcome. In fact, part of mantra of modern medicine is that interventions are only to be given when there is a medical need. This, I think, is changing drastically though–especially as physicians think through the deeper ethical issues involved and decide which side they fall on.

  18. Ishan says:

    Qwuke,

    Thank you for your comments and question! Let me start off by saying that there are currently no drugs on the market that enhance cognitive abilities to the degree portrayed in the film. The closest ones are probably things like Adderall that target executive function and alertness. Now executive function in some way is how you process thoughts, or at least how you decide which thoughts you will give more importance to. It will not however, significantly contribute to what you call “fluid intelligence.” Although this term is a little vague I think I understand what you are trying to say. The problem with trying to enhance intelligence as a whole is that we currently do not understand very well what individual components make up what we collectively call intelligence. Alertness, executive function, and memory however, are undoubtedly involved in what we understand to be intelligence.

    Additionally, Modafinil has shown similar effects to that of amphetamines in healthy users, as well as improve memory during certain tasks. This being said, there is an entire industry focused on creating the next wave of smart drugs–so NZT is not as far fetched as it may seem.

    I wanted to talk a little about N-Back. Many people do not realize that enhancements DO NOT have to be pharmacological. As we understand more about brain mechanisms I think it is just as likely that we will be able to develop non pharmacological interventions like N-Back that help people improve their cognition. In fact, meditation has already been shown to improve many cognitive abilities. The more we find out about the neural mechanisms, the better scientists will be able to design new programs that will enhance the human mind.

  19. Jmcneff says:

    first i would like to state that my body doesn’t produce a good level of tryptophan and serotonin. i am not a sick person. I’m 29 been to iraq twice and i took a online test for bipolar disorder because i was bored. ended up going to the doc i asked him about bipolar disorder and more test ensued.

  20. Ishan says:

    Jmcneff,

    I did not intend to imply you were “sick.” I think this actually points to one of the difficulties physicians have with the issue of enhancement. Doctors are traditionally used to treating the sick. In your case, you said you have lower levels of typtophan and serotonin compared to a level that has been established as normal. Now this may or may not be problematic for you in terms of your day-to-day wishes. Unlike for afflictions of the body, say having the flu, mental differences are not so objective and vary greatly from person to person.

    Consider the following example: Lets say there are two people in the world with the exact same levels of tryptophan and serotonin. Those levels are said to be 30% lower than the average level for humans across all populations. Person A is an abstract artist and specializes in sculpting. Person B is an investment banker who works for Goldman Sachs. Person A is extremely happy and content with their life and just opened up a new exhibit. Person B has recently been struggling to keep up with the stresses of his job and is worried because he feels he suffers from extreme mood swings. Person B goes to his doctor, who runs some tests and diagnoses him with Bipolar Disorder and prescribes him the anticonvulsant Lamictal. Person A goes on living his life without medication and lives an otherwise normal life. Now if we knew nothing Person A or Person B except that one was on medication and one was not, many would claim that Person B is “sick” and had to go to the doctor to get treated, and person A was “healthy” and did not need any treatment. Yet, both had the same levels of tryptophan and serotonin. You can see that when it comes to mental health how difficult is it to make a distinction between sick and healthy. We might even be wrong to say Person B is sick at all in the traditional sense since they could continue living a basically normal life with a few problems. It is not like they would end up dying because they did not get treatment, as in with a disease such as cancer.

    For this reason, I tend to define mental illness in a very broad way–any condition or state that significantly prevents you from doing what you want to achieve in life within reasonable bounds and/or a condition or state that harms or impedes other people in society from doing what they want to achieve in life. I say reasonable because not everyone can be the next Albert Einstein even if they really want to be, and saying that they have a mental illness is wrong in that case because all of our brains simply aren’t made same way. But by taking a very broad approach I think we can get rid of the problem of saying some people are sick and some people are healthy and that only some deserve/need treatment whereas giving it to others would be enhancement. The mind is a subjective and personal thing–its probably time we started treating it like one.

  21. JerroldSud10 says:

    Exactly where did you get the information from?

  22. Ishan says:

    Well JerroldSud10,

    I spent a fair amount of time both researching and thinking about the topic of cognitive enhancement in my undergraduate years. So, as much as I wish I could share all the sources that I drew my information from it is simply impossible to do here. But two good papers that provide a lot of good information on this topic are the following:

    1. http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=neuroethics_pubs

    2. http://www.npp.wisc.edu/newsarchive/PDF/TowardsResponsibleUseOFCognitive-EnhancingDrugsByTheHealthy.pdf

    I hope this at least somewhat answers your question

  23. Dimitri says:

    ” “Do no harm” is often cited as a guiding principle for the medical profession, and it seems unlikely doctors would prescribe a drug that had severe negative side effects. But this would not stop drugs from being sold on the street.”

    Really? It seems unlikely that doctors would prescribe a drug with severe, harmful side effects? Have you ever actually listened to ANY commercial advertising a prescription medication? The vast majority of them spend 90% of the commercial promoting the hell out of the positive effects, then in the last few seconds you hear a faint voice speaking hyper fast telling you that taking this drug can cause faintness, insomnia, restlessness, heart palpitations, stroke, bleeding ulcers, and possibly death.

    Most doctors are prescribing these drugs like they’re going out of style because the drug companies spend a ton of time and money “motivating” them to do so. Doctors today seem either completely oblivious to the fact that these drugs do more harm than good or more likely have complete disregard for the hippocratic oath they swore to practice by.

    That was one of the most naive statements I’ve read in some time.

  24. Qwuke says:

    Thank you for the response, it was very appreciated. This article was quite helpful and I am going to try out racetams, as people say they aren’t actually “Productivity Enhancers” like adderall and other drugs of the such. Also, thank you for posting the links to all the articles. They were all a great help.

    And a common knowledge response to Dimitri, The FDA approves these drugs because they have minimal side effects. Its not like everyone will get strokes and ulcers for using these drugs on the long term.

  25. Qwuke says:

    “For this reason, I tend to define mental illness in a very broad way–any condition or state that significantly prevents you from doing what you want to achieve in life within reasonable bounds and/or a condition or state that harms or impedes other people in society from doing what they want to achieve in life.”

    Great saying by the way.

  26. Ishan says:

    Dimitri,

    I apologize for the late response and thank you for your comment. I think you are sort of missing the point of what I was trying to convey (perhaps I was a bit unclear). I think it is understood in the medical field that most if not all drugs will have side effects, many of which could be considered potentially life threatening. The key here is that physicians are always trying to weigh the negative side effects of a drug with the positive therapeutic benefit they might offer to the patient. Chemotherapy drugs are a good example. These drugs often have severe side effects that heavily influence a patient’s day-to-day well being. They are given, however, because of the potential that they might cure a patient’s cancer, which if untreated could take the individual’s life. The point I was trying to make in my article is that physicians would be unlikely to prescribe a drug that had severe negative side effects when there was NO promise of therapeutic benefit (in the case of cognitive enhancers). With enhancers there is no benefit per say in the cost/benefit analysis, because the individual is not sick or in need or treatment. So doctors would be unlikely to put a person through unnecessary risk just to enhance their already “normal” state.

    Now what you mention in your comment is a legitimate concern. Drug companies do have tremendous influence over doctors, and this is an unfortunate by-product of the American medical system. And while I admit some doctors may be unethically swayed by Pharma’s presence I believe most of them prescribe medicine with a genuine aim to help their patients. Many drugs with the potential for substance abuse are also monitored by the DEA and physicians’s prescription records are monitored closely. Finally, as Qwuke mentions all FDA approved drugs are tested for severe adverse side effects, and while it is always possible that someone will have a bad reaction to a drug, their tests focus on making sure it is generally safe for the population.

    While I will concede that there is corruption at every level of this process that does contribute to unethical behavior, I think your blanket generalized statement: “Doctors today seem either completely oblivious to the fact that these drugs do more harm than good or more likely have complete disregard for the hippocratic oath they swore to practice by” is a bit naive.

  27. Ishan says:

    Glad to be of help, Qwuke.

  28. M says:

    This is in response to the first post.

    Q) “Also, I’m curious whether college students have seen much abuse among drugs like Modafinil”.
    A) There is some but most kids don’t have the money or ability to get the drugs, they are fairly hard to get or maintain a “steady” supply of.

    -“I’d like to know more about the memory loss associated with taking Adderall and Ritalin. You hear from students taking Ritalin to study all night, and the next morning completely blanking on the exam.”

    My name is Mark, I am in college, and I am a fairly smart kid “off” the drug, and everything I am about to say is true as is the best of my knowledge, due to not wanting legal problems for anyone who looks at this page I will leave it at that. I got some adderall at one point from someone, I wont discuss how because I think we all know. Anyway Originally I only took that first 20 mg dose to “help” study for a up coming test that I was stressing about and wasn’t sure if I was going to be able to pass. I memorized everything I needed to know that night with ease, Stuff that would normally take me a week to understand much less memorize. The problem is the very next day when I went to go look at my notes, I didn’t understand very much of what I had wrote the night before, I wrote it in a way that was to “advanced” for my “un-enhanced self”. At this point I decided to get some more to “help” me study. I decided I would keep a small journal of what I am like, when “enhanced”, and write in “dumb” termanology so anyone could understand. In a few short days I understood things that would take weeks to explain to some people. I couldn’t eat anything though, I was never hungry or thirsty. And I couldn’t sleep, I always felt like I had just woken up and had a cup of coffee, even if I had been up for 2 days straight. This ultimately started to become a problem because I was so sleep deprived my body would fall asleep for short spurts, and wake right back up regardless of where I was or what I was doing. Then the hallucinations started because I was so sleep deprived, at this point I immediately stopped usage and drank a bunch of water and ate a lot of food to help my body fight the drug so I could fall asleep. I understood at this point that listening to the craving inside me to take more to maintain my “enchancement” was a VERY bad idea, so I began to limit my self and found a blend of “on” and “off’s” that seemed to work quite well. The formula is this 1 day on 1 day off, 20 mg at the start and a 10 mg booster about 7 or 8 hrs later. Under this formula it worked for me personally, and I had managed to do things I probably couldn’t of done normally with out much greater struggle. For instance in 4 days I had managed to teach myself to be able to read and write Russian (This is not a over exaggeration!!!), still to this day I can’t speak Russian, mainly because I don’t know enough people that can speak it to learn how words are said. I have since then discontinued use due to several factors. 1) being the “coercion” factor mentioned in the article above, I legitimately felt because of all the things I had accomplished while “on”, I couldn’t do anything or accomplish anything of difficulty with out the drug, destroying my self esteem almost over night to thoughts of worthlessness. 2) When “on” I remember thinking to myself, what happens if like most drugs over long term exposure I “fry out” the part of my brain that the drug targets? In this case I would loss my ability to think and understand advanced concepts. So ever since then I have discontinued use and have lost a lot of the knowledge I had learned when “on” the drug, I also I feel like normal me has A.D.D. now, It’s not that I do because I don’t, but instead It’s the lack of the “focus” that I had when I was on the drug, I believe this is some form of physiological addiction that will in time go away. My final thoughts on the subject are this, when I took the exam several days after I had stopped usage, I passed with a 95%. However the side effects of what the drug does to a person even over short term usage is very real, scary, and dangerous, so if you are heaven sent and hell bent on taking the drug make sure you understand what the consequences are first.

  29. Kava powder says:

    Saved me some time and money……

    […]wow, sweet!!!, I am putting your website link on my website about kava powder in a few days… http://BuyKava.info Thanks!!!…

Leave a Reply