DMAE. Not a drug, an over-the-counter "food supplement."
I was introduced to it by a programmer in Florida. Apparently it increases oxygen availability in the brain. What I found was that it was pretty much a 30 minute cure for programmer's burn out, like a cup of coffee that actually worked by making you clearer and fresher, rather than just more restless and agitated. I wouldn't refer to it as performance enhancing, only performance restoring.
Worth reading up on. I don't remember there being any contraindications, but YMMV.
GIYF. "Dimethylaminoethanol is related to choline and is a biochemical precursor to the neurotransmitter acetylcholine" (ACh).
"In the central nervous system, ACh has a variety of effects as a neuromodulator, e.g. for plasticity and excitability. Other effects are arousal and reward."
Do you remember Andro (androstenedione, used to be available in stores, used by Mark McGwire)? It's a testosterone precursor. Your liver converts it to testosterone (and also some amount converts to estrogens). So a neurotransmitter precursor would seem to be a bit like steroids for the brain.
Not sure how external supplementation affects endogenous neurotransmitter production, but with hormone precursors the biofeedback loop tells your endocrine system to stop its own production. E.g. if you take testosterone, your body shuts down its own production (when your testosterone level hits a certain point, your body thinks "oh, that's enough for now" and hits the off-switch on your testicles. This turns off ALL their functions, so it's actually also a form of birth control. And since they aren't doing anything, they atrophy).
Fun note: Your body tries to keep your testosterone:estrogen ratio at about 50:1 (for young men). So if you take androgenic steroids, your body increases its own estrogen production. Once you hit a certain absolute amount of estrogen, you're growing breast tissue.
Then you are a man. With titties.
(Bodybuilders combat this by using certain steroids that don't aromatize into estrogen as much, and also using anti-estrogens that either bind to the aromatase enzyme to stop conversion into estrogen, or bind to the actual estrogen receptor sites like Clomid. One interesting effect of Clomid -- that makes it attractive to male porn stars -- is it causes big pop shots.)
Starting with "Do you remember Andro" we seemed to have switched topics.
Your brain produces acetylcholinterase which scavenges excess acetylcholine. Arricept, Huperzine, and other chemicals inhibit acetylcholinesterase formation (and therefore increase acetylcholine levels). If your brain acetylcholine levels are low then certain substances may help in the formation of additional acetylcholine (e.g in addition to DMAE there are other compounds like choline, CDP choline, Alpha GPC, and PPC). If your equilibrating mechanisms are working then small amounts of precursors shouldn't cause a derangement. Athletes taking steroids are attempting to overload the equilibrating mechanisms to build muscle. Choline precursors don't seem to have these same "down-regulation" harmful side effects when taken in moderation to bring brain acetylcholine levels back into "normal range." I am not advocating steroids or supplement use, but it seems to me that they have two different usage patterns: steroid use involves intentionally boosting levels outside of the normal range for "performance enhancing" results, where the DMAE use described by Hexayurt was in response to "programmer burnout" which likely involved depleted acetylcholine levels in the brain and was in his own words "performance restoring."
In terms of the hacker news angle, I would think all things in moderation in the context of development plans that rely on efforts that are sustainable over a long period of time.
A references on choline for memory formation improvement:
I don't know what effect neurotransmitter precursors have on endogenous production, which is why that information would be useful so we can better judge their safety. The steroid example was to point out that there could be substantial repercussions from taking a substance which you produce naturally. You don't even have to take excessive doses -- take in only as much as you would normally make and your body's production may drop to zero, since it's now being completely replaced. Steroids must be cycled down gradually, because going off cold turkey just leaves you with a crashed endocrine system. If neurotransmitter replacement works similarly, one can imagine a few problems that might crop up with a crashed brain.
> Choline precursors don't seem to have these same "down-regulation" harmful side effects when taken in moderation to bring brain acetylcholine levels back into "normal range."
"Don't seem"? Human studies needed. Maybe these already exist -- that would be handy. I'm not familiar with neurotransmitter supplementation.
Taking something because you have a deficit is indeed different from trying to massively exceed your nominal levels.
In the context of performance-enhancing mental drugs, exceeding your typical levels is of course the point of the exercise.
> "programmer burnout" which likely involved depleted acetylcholine levels in the brain
Possibly, but that assumption seems like it could be quite a leap.
Kind of like saying coffee works because of depleted caffeine levels in the brain. In fact, we have no data on what caused his particular case of "burnout". We can well imagine that an adrenaline shot, cocaine, ephedrine, and many other drugs could well "restore performance", but that doesn't indicate there was a deficit of those particular substances.
Provigil and Ritalin may also help but that doesn't mean there was a deficit of those, either.
An ACh deficit is only one of a bazillion possible reasons for "burnout".
None of these listed have found the rebound side effects. I am not saying that you couldn't cause yourself problems at a high enough dosage, but in the dosages used in the studies it's not mentioned as a side effect.
This is not true for acetylcholinterase inhibitors (things like huperzine, arricept, galantamine,...) which can cause a significant excess of acetylcholine because they inhibit the down regulation process.
You are correct that I was speculating what might cause "programmer burnout." I agree with you that there are people who believe in "mental performance enhancing drugs" but I am not one of them. I do think that folks with ADD may be able to take substances that limit their ADD and I think that you can take things as you age to limit the effect of age related cognitive decline, but I don't think you can "supercharge" someone in their teens or twenties.
One of the great discoveries of the last decade has been that we continue to add new brain cells (at a much lower rate than in early childhood) all of our lives and that lifelong learning and stimulation does in fact encourage the formation of new connections and delay the onset of diseases like Alzheimers.
Our brains are plastic and respond to how they are used. In that sense my answer to the original question of "how to build mental muscles" is: I don't know of any drugs but I do believe that mental exercise helps.
It's based on published research (as of 2000) but focuses primarily on reducing "age related cognitive decline." It's less for folks in their teens and twenties and more for folks in their 30's and beyond. Dr. Sahelian also stresses the need for regular exercise, sleep, and human contact and connection to keep our brains healthy.
Probably the best advice that Sahelian offers is to try one thing at a time, start with the lowest effective dosage and understand what co-factors are needed. In general pre-cursors are safer than re-uptake inhibitors because you are making more of the raw materials available for processing rather than modifying the internal regulation. In particular, if you are trying to boost acetylcholine then CDP, PPC, and GPC have many fewer side effects than the re-uptake inhibitors like Huperzine.
I agree with the comment on "restoring" vs. "enhancing" and would also suggest that everyone has limits (e.g. in their need for sleep) that they would do well to recognize. I personally have found meditation to be something that "builds mental muscle" when it comes to stress management and getting through a crunch time with reduced sleep (note: not no sleep) and believe that it's complementary to other methods.
For the poker player I suppose it might be worth the risk of taking these pills for a week if millions of dollars are on the line. For programmers though it's a marathon. I think it'd rarely, if ever, be worth the risk.
Since I have a really terrible memory, I would jump on a memory drug in an instant. As it stands, I'm thinking of getting a prescription for modafinil (this article mentions Provigil, which is just a brand name for modafinil).
There are already regulations in place to prevent abuse of these drugs, but they hardly work. I think that if humans want to use something, then we should be able to use it. Of course, there should be things like surgeon general's warnings on the various substances, and they should be sold with the safety sheet and proper precautions to take.
I'm surprised that more people on HN don't agree with this sentiment. I would presume that the majority of the people here are libertarians, and deregulation of drugs goes hand in hand with that political ideology. My guess is that most people here are worried that any promotion or tacit approval of drugs will lessen their chances of getting selected for funding.
For me, it's not so much regulation vs. deregulation or political ideology. I'm more pragmatic than idealistic. In fact I only briefly thought about that. It's more short term vs. long term and, basically, effectiveness.
For example, weed relaxes you and if you take it enough you can sustain a relaxed lifestyle. But then you become, to a certain extent, dependent on weed for this relaxed state and I'd rather work on something bereft of such an external dependency, like meditation as previously mentioned.
[edit] I am, of course, still assuming that this supposed drug takes over from your internal mechanisms that induce concentration, as opposed to strengthening them, meaning once you stop taking the drug you lose your enhanced concentration. If the drug does strengthen these mechanisms on a long term basis then I'm all for it.
I'm generally a prude when it comes to drugs, but I wonder how much this would increase cognitive muscles. I say this because I would expect the brain would, after a while, become used to this externally induced effect and therefore disregard internal mechanisms to do so. This is pure conjecture, though.
It would, however, be interesting to momentarily feel what it's like to obtain that kind of concentration in order to try to mimic it without the drug.
The "no free lunch" model is a good one. I have found that cutting out other activities like watching television and limiting the amount of on-line game playing gave me more time, focus, and energy for work. Thinking about what you can give up or defer to get what you want should be part of any calculation around stimulants to reduce your need for sleep. I still drink a lot of very strong tea (because, for me, the side effects were fewer and less burdensome than coffee) but I don't try and get less than six hours of sleep and know that if I cut it to less than four a price will be paid, if not the next day within two to three days.
I was introduced to it by a programmer in Florida. Apparently it increases oxygen availability in the brain. What I found was that it was pretty much a 30 minute cure for programmer's burn out, like a cup of coffee that actually worked by making you clearer and fresher, rather than just more restless and agitated. I wouldn't refer to it as performance enhancing, only performance restoring.
Worth reading up on. I don't remember there being any contraindications, but YMMV.