• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Best Substance for Standardized Tests


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 16 May 2006 - 06:24 AM


What substance would allow me to perform the best on a standardized test like the GRE which I will be taking soon? If I had unlimited time, I would only take a good night's rest. Given enough time, I know I could ace the damn thing. But with the GRE and other standardized tests, they want to measure how fast you can think. I have a friend who obtained a substantial improvement in his GRE scores by taking Adderall the second time he took the test. (He does not have ADD and obtained the pills from someone who had a prescription.) He claims that the drug allowed him to focus better, think faster, and hold his attention span for a much longer period of time. But he attributed the most beneficial effect to faster mental processing ability. He insists that he does not have any of the ADD tendencies which would explain the substantial increase in his score. What substance besides amphetamines would allow me to achieve faster mental processing and perhaps deeper concentration. My concentration is fine for daily work, but it's a completely different matter to hold it for 3-4 hours under high stress. This topic is similar to the exam thread, but the GRE is different in nature quantative and qualitative, and certainly in length.

#2 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 16 May 2006 - 05:14 PM

modafinil, adrafinil?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 16 May 2006 - 08:23 PM

what will help the most is if you simply don't worry during the test.

#4 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 16 May 2006 - 10:18 PM

While I don't endorse relying on supplements/drugs for test performance, that is what you asked for. You might find this helpful:

http://www.mindandmu...00&hl=modafinil

#5 Ghostrider

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 May 2006 - 01:49 AM

While I don't endorse relying on supplements/drugs for test performance, that is what you asked for. You might find this helpful:

http://www.mindandmu...00&hl=modafinil


Looks like Modafinil should do it. What is this H.E.A.T I hear about?

#6 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 01:52 AM

http://www.1fast400....roducts_id=1685

#7 Ghostrider

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 May 2006 - 01:55 AM

http://www.1fast400....roducts_id=1685


This stuff is for weight loss. I want to think faster, not lose weight. How does hunger suppression help focus / mental processing efficiency?

#8 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:28 AM

H.E.A.T. has some effects on dopamine, mood, etc. that can affect concentration.

#9 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:35 AM

H.E.A.T. has some effects on dopamine, mood, etc. that can affect concentration.


Is this assumption based on scientific evidence?

I would still suggest modafinil or adrafinil to start looking for a noticable effect in an otherwise healthy individual:

Cognitive enhancing effects of modafinil in healthy volunteers
Psychopharmacology
Publisher: Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
ISSN: 0033-3158 (Paper) 1432-2072 (Online)
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-002-1250-8
Issue: Volume 165, Number 3
Date: January 2003
Pages: 260 - 269

Danielle C. Turner, Trevor W. Robbins, Luke Clark, Adam R. Aron, Jonathan Dowson, Barbara J. Sahakian

A1 Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK
A2 Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK

Abstract:

Rationale. Modafinil, a novel wake-promoting agent, has been shown to have a similar clinical profile to that of conventional stimulants such as methylphenidate. We were therefore interested in assessing whether modafinil, with its unique pharmacological mode of action, might offer similar potential as a cognitive enhancer, without the side effects commonly experienced with amphetamine-like drugs.

Objectives. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the cognitive enhancing potential of this novel agent using a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests.

Methods. Sixty healthy young adult male volunteers received either a single oral dose of placebo, or 100 mg or 200 mg modafinil prior to performing a variety of tasks designed to test memory and attention. A randomised double-blind, between-subjects design was used.

Results. Modafinil significantly enhanced performance on tests of digit span, visual pattern recognition memory, spatial planning and stop-signal reaction time. These performance improvements were complemented by a slowing in latency on three tests: delayed matching to sample, a decision-making task and the spatial planning task. Subjects reported feeling more alert, attentive and energetic on drug. The effects were not clearly dose dependent, except for those seen with the stop-signal paradigm. In contrast to previous findings with methylphenidate, there were no significant effects of drug on spatial memory span, spatial working memory, rapid visual information processing or attentional set-shifting. Additionally, no effects on paired associates learning were identified.

Conclusions. These data indicate that modafinil selectively improves neuropsychological task performance. This improvement may be attributable to an enhanced ability to inhibit pre-potent responses. This effect appears to reduce impulsive responding,
suggesting that modafinil may be of benefit in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.



#10 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:38 AM

No, pure witchcraft.

Although, while I haven't tried modafinil...I agree that it looks to be a good way to go.

#11 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:28 AM

I was just wondering if perhaps this stuff might work. These days on the Internet people go take stuff based purely on an anecdote. I've done it myself. I'm trying to stop that bad habit. ;) Peace. :)

#12 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:39 AM

Here is a pretty fun read on H.E.A.T.

http://www.mindandmu...=235&issueID=18

#13 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:05 AM

I couldn't find any scientific references at that webpage. I didn't look too hard and they might have been hyperlinked. Instead of linking off site, can you post the relevant abstracts here? Anyone want any PS DHA?
Peace.

#14 Ghostrider

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:41 AM

Modafinil is an essential ingredient in any stack of this nature, IMO.

Also, adaptogens like Ginseng, Ashwagandha, Rhodiola rosea, etc, are important for brief periods of high stress. During finals weeks and intense graduate studies testing, I usually use the following for about two weeks:

Morning (before meal)

- Modafinil: 200 mg
- DL-Phenylalanine: 750 mg
- Glucophase XR: 1 cap
- H.E.A.T: 1 cap
- Chocamine: 500 mg

(w/ meal)

- Alpha GPC: 600 mg
- Phospatidylserine: 100 mg
- Aniracetam: 500 mg
- Ginkgo biloba: 120 mg
- Panax Ginseng: 500 mg
- Rainbow One Men's Multivitamin

Afternoon/Evening (w/meal)

- Rhodiola rosea: 500 mg
- Ashwagandha: 450 mg
- Inositol: 6 g
- Milk Thistle: 300 mg
- Tumeric (Curcuma longa): 700 mg

Low dose paroxetine & methylphenidate is also a good addition. Clonazepam at night to help get to sleep during periods of stress can be a miracle worker.

Taking too many stimulants before a test, however, can be bad. If your shaking and jittering from ECA so much that you can't hold a pencil straight, it means you've taken too much.


The poster Dopamine posted this on a different forum (follow the link above to see his origional post). I IMed him, but I think he stopped visiting this forum...he's a very busy fellow.

Most of Dopamine's stuff above does not look like it will help out that much. I used to have a Monster Energy before exams back in college and I found that it worked wonders for my mental processing speed. The only downside is that I would definitely need to use the bathroom if I drank the entire 16 oz before my test. And to be completely honest, I am looking for something stronger. Generally, I don't favor the approach of relying on drugs for performance. I certainly would not rely on something like Modafin for chronic use as my most important objective is longevity ahead of performance. However, these three hours can have huge effects on whether I go back to college, the college I get accepted to, funding, etc. And it's not a knowledge based test, I know all the knowledge I need (vocabulary and math), I have been studying for almost a year now. My scores are good, but I keep going over time on the verbal section by about 3-5 minutes. I need to improve my reading comprehension and reading efficiency. If I am in the US, how can I obtain a small amount of Modafinil? I only need maybe enough for 3-5 days supply. 3 days as a trial and then 1 for the actual test day.

#15 alexoverhere

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 1

Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:42 AM

i just crammed for it and drank a lot of coffee. i didnt know about modafinil then, but even now, i wouldnt experiment on test day with something i've never taken. if you're going to take something, i would test your performance on practice exams with and without it several times. it's really, really probably better to spend your times studying a little bit, especially on the math section, which you'll get a 700+ score if you just memorize some basic princeton review stuff and practice a little.

#16 alexoverhere

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 1

Posted 17 May 2006 - 06:00 AM

i would take it for longer than 3 days as a trial. the first day i took modafinil i experienced extreme euphoria. it went away within a few days. some people i know have felt depression and/or anxiety after taking it. none of these states is ideal for taking the GRE.

i assume you know how the test works and stuff. you need to adjust your strategy based on your target score. even if you're aiming for a top grad program, in most fields, you do not need to max out on either the verbal or the math. unless your goal is to get 800s, you should concentrate
on getting the earlier questions correct (the test is adaptive) -- guessing on the last few questions wont hurt you that much. ive never even heard of GREs for college.. what country are you in?

#17 Ghostrider

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 May 2006 - 07:44 AM

i would take it for longer than 3 days as a trial. the first day i took modafinil i experienced extreme euphoria. it went away within a few days. some people i know have felt depression and/or anxiety after taking it. none of these states is ideal for taking the GRE.

i assume you know how the test works and stuff. you need to adjust your strategy based on your target score. even if you're aiming for a top grad program, in most fields, you do not need to max out on either the verbal or the math. unless your goal is to get 800s, you should concentrate
on getting the earlier questions correct (the test is adaptive) -- guessing on the last few questions wont hurt you that much. ive never even heard of GREs for college.. what country are you in?


Hi Alex, I am in the USA. And yes, I was planning to take Moda* once and then take one or few practice tests and see how I can do for time and accuracy. My verbal scores are consistent, I just want to complete faster which means improve my reading comprehension which means faster mental processing ability. That's what I need. I would probably wait a few days, take another shot of modafin and repeat...then give a few more days until test day, take it and mash the mental accelerator to the floor and see what time I can get on the academic quarter mile. It's an intellectual tractor pull actually, kinda.

I know I don't need dual 800's, but I want to do very well. Hoping for 800 math and 650+ verbal. I am at those now (according to old ETS GRE Big Book Exams), but I need 33 minutes for the verbal section and I still make a few stupid mistakes. I have no doubt that I could nearly kill the damn thing if I had a shot of adderall -- according to my friends experience. It's very tempting but if Moda* can get me half way there without the mental damage, then that's the ticket.

#18 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 12:06 PM

I'll just post a couple related to tyramine:

Neurovascular dissociation with paradoxical forearm vasodilation during systemic tyramine administration.

Jacob G, Costa F, Vincent S, Robertson D, Biaggioni I.

Jacob Recanati Autonomic Dysfunction Center, Department of Internal Medicine C, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of tyramine as a pharmacological tool to assess the effects of norepinephrine release from sympathetic nerve terminals, its vascular effects are not adequately characterized. In particular, previous results indicate that intravenous tyramine produces little if any systemic vasoconstriction, suggesting that tyramine does not cause significant norepinephrine release from sympathetic nerves innervating peripheral vascular beds. To test this hypothesis, we determined the effects of intravenous tyramine on local forearm norepinephrine spillover and vascular resistance. METHODS AND RESULTS: Seven healthy subjects were studied with systemic and local forearm norepinephrine spillover and forearm blood flow at baseline, during systemic tyramine infusion, and after sympathetic stimulation induced by the cold pressor test. Tyramine infusion caused a significant increase in systemic and forearm norepinephrine spillover. The amount of norepinephrine released into the forearm by tyramine was similar to that caused by cold pressor stimulation, 0.15+/-0.05 versus 0.18+/-0.05 ng x dL(-1) x min(-1). As expected, forearm vascular resistance increased during the cold pressor test, but tyramine produced forearm vasodilation (4.5+/-1 versus -5+/-1 mm Hg x dL(-1) x min(-1), P<0.03) despite the increase in local norepinephrine spillover. In 6 additional subjects, plasma dopamine increased significantly during tyramine administration, from 11+/-3 to 662+/-105 pg/mL. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, systemic tyramine infusion evokes a significant increase in peripheral norepinephrine spillover, and this, paradoxically, is associated with local vasodilatation rather than vasoconstriction.

http://circ.ahajourn.../full/109/3/e17

However, I'm sure you'll see the problem once you read them.

You kind of have to understand the way the guys over at Avant work. They don't take obvious things and market them, it is a very roundabout process of interpreting many various studies and using knowledge of physiology to come to the final conclusion. More often than not, the products end up working and their hypotheses seem to be correct. If you're looking for direct human studies on these particular ingredients...good luck. I know that you used to be on Avant, so you might know all of this.

#19 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:33 PM

If it is not based on scientific evidence, it's just another anecdote -- at best. At worst, it's just more LEF type hype intended for unscientific folks who will believe anything they read -- and are unable to think critically.

Sure, we all could get real "smart" and make "assumptions" and share anecdotal experience until kingdom come -- however, we'd all be fools to go waste our hard earned money on what has never been proven effective in practice.

The bottom line is we have few tools to "increase" cognitive performance at this point in time. We need to fund more research to investigate what compounds actually *work* in healthy humans. I'd like to form a non profit to investigate the efficacy of some of the older nootropics -- or perhaps a mixture of some of them -- in healthy subjects.

Perhaps as a for-profit venture, I'd like to twist more racetams and see if we can find one that has a real (measurable) clinical effect.

As far as increasing one's so called "intelligence" -- we already have enough data from studies on healthy and demented subjects to determine what is most likely to "actually" work -- in a statisically significant manner.

At this juncture, the largest benefits in cognitive performance can be obtained from pharmaceutical drugs like modafinil, strattera, the amphetamine class (such as dextroamphetamine and Adderall), and cholinesterase inhibitors. Everything past that is simply speculation, an anecdote, or based on hype. The main issue folks have to address is how much cash they want to blow on unsubstantiated pseudoscience.

If you are interested in a great webcast about the current status of cognitive enhancers, see this (credit to Opales for this discovery) -- real player required:

Nick Boström on cognitive enhancement, webcast presentation at the Oxford conf.
http://streaming.oii...6/16032006-1.rm

Edited by nootropikamil, 17 May 2006 - 03:53 PM.


#20 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:16 PM

At this juncture, the largest benefits in cognitive performance can be obtained from pharmaceutical drugs like modafinil, strattera, the amphetamine class (such as dextroamphetamine and Adderall), and cholinesterase inhibitors.  Everything past that is simply speculation, an anecdote, or based on hype.  The main issue folks have to address is how much cash they want to blow on unsubstantiated pseudoscience.


Is this based on your own experiences? You certainly used to take compounds that didn't fit that criteria. Scouring PubMed for studies and only accepting what is proven in healthy young men is perfectly fine, but I'm willing to atleast try certain products from companies that I consider respectable to see what effect it has, especially when there are many people already taking a product and can vouch for its efficacy.

#21 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:25 PM

what will help the most is if you simply don't worry during the test.


I think that this is the best recommendation so far. Why is this being overlooked?

#22 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:29 PM

what will help the most is if you simply don't worry during the test.


I think that this is the best recommendation so far. Why is this being overlooked?


People prefer pills to basically any other method no matter the goal.

#23 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 17 May 2006 - 04:35 PM

I once had too much caffeine before an exam. When the invigilator came up behind me to check my student ID, I jumped a mile.

Alot of students in biochemistry exams are on something

Edited by zoolander, 17 May 2006 - 07:20 PM.


#24 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 07:15 PM

At this juncture, the largest benefits in cognitive performance can be obtained from pharmaceutical drugs like modafinil, strattera, the amphetamine class (such as dextroamphetamine and Adderall), and cholinesterase inhibitors.  Everything past that is simply speculation, an anecdote, or based on hype.  The main issue folks have to address is how much cash they want to blow on unsubstantiated pseudoscience.


Is this based on your own experiences? You certainly used to take compounds that didn't fit that criteria. Scouring PubMed for studies and only accepting what is proven in healthy young men is perfectly fine, but I'm willing to atleast try certain products from companies that I consider respectable to see what effect it has, especially when there are many people already taking a product and can vouch for its efficacy.


Is what based on my experiences? The scientific data can be interpreted in different ways -- however, I try to remain as objective as possible regarding what may -- and what may not -- be effective at improving cogntive function.

There is little -- if any -- scientific evidence that would suggest that nootropics (the Piracetam family and other misc. cholinergic agonists) in their current state of development would make a significant difference in memory performance of otherwise healthy subjects. If there is data suggesting otherwise, I have not encountered it yet in my research. I'd be pleased to see your presentation to support such an unconventional argument.

One cannot take different compounds in an indiscriminant fashion and expect to consider the results of such experiences as having any statistical worth. First, (n=1) and...well, you seem to be unfamilar of the *power* of the placebo effect.

Patients suffering pain after wisdom-tooth extraction got just as much relief from a fake application of ultrasound as from a real one, so long as both patient and therapist thought the machine was on.[/u] Fifty-two percent of the colitis patients treated with placebo in 11 different trials reported feeling better -- and 50 percent of the inflamed intestines actually looked better when assessed with a sigmoidoscope ("The Placebo Prescription" by Margaret Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January 9, 2000).*


As I believe I may have mentioned previously, nootropics in their current state of development are *barely* even effective in elderly folks affected with senile dementia or otherwise similar cognitive decline. That's why the FDA did not approve the use of a single one of these compounds for such "clinically relevant" applications. Hydergine, (and several cholinesterase inhibitors) on the other hand -- recieved FDA approval (Hydergine at a low dose of 3mg/day) even though a recent proper Cochrane review of its efficacy did not seem to find Hydergine of any practical clinical use when compared with cholinesterase inhibitors such as donezepil.

Yes, I may take several of these questionable (with respect to efficacy) compounds -- however, they cost me very little (as I sell them) -- and I am sure of their quality. I take most nootropics to prevent cognitive decline and to possibly show a marginal difference -- maybe, at best -- a 2-3% improvement from my baseline mental performance. I am a UC student, so even a 2% difference might make a difference in more intellectually challenging courses.

The real issue -- that I find most individuals are concerned with -- is what is the best value available for their money...so what I would advise one to purchase would be partially contingent on several factors: is the patient taking any other medications? What benefits is he or she expecting? What kinds of "cognitive function dependent" operations is he or she performing and what are the current results? And, perhaps most importantly -- what is their budget?

Peace out, homey. I've got to do my homework.

#25 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 07:25 PM

I was asking about your experiences since it seems that your view towards them has changed dramatically. As in: Did your experience turn you away from them or did you decide to let the science speak for itself?

I'm not defending piracetam or most nootropics. I tend to agree with you that many are not very effective at improving cognitive function (of course, we could break this down into different areas). However, many people would disagree with that statement. I am fully aware of the placebo effect, and don't really have any issue with it. If you spend $XX a month on piracetam and like it (whether it is placebo, or not), I don't really see a problem with it.

Actually, all I was saying is that there may be something to H.E.A.T., even though scientific studies of the ingredients in humans might not be abundant.

#26 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 17 May 2006 - 07:26 PM

Did someone mention statistics?

Did you know that 38.2% of all statistics are made up on the spot

#27 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 17 May 2006 - 07:50 PM

My "view" towards most nootropics changed as soon as I discovered I want to be taken seriously. ;) ImmInst is a scientific community -- so it is generally frowned upon here to use an anecdote to draw a conclusion.

As an advocate for the development of effective nootropics, it isn't wise to consider what appears to be snake oil "particularly effective" if I desire to develop any future therapies of any clinical relevance.

I believe the research on most nootropics thus far shows us where to look next -- and that's about it.

We do have some tools to improve cognitive performance for otherwise healthy individuals -- I'm not saying we don't -- I'm just sticking to what I know works when folks ask for direction on a limited budget. Most folks cannot spend $300 a month on purported "cognitive enhancers" when the benefits appear to be marginal -- at best. Most folks can hardly part with $50-100 a month.

Taking a "stack" of several compounds that have shown little (if any) efficacy in humans (elderly or healthy!) is not the way to go when one has little money and wants to get the most for their money. There are some drugs that really are effective at improving cognitive function -- and I'll stick to recommending these -- if I am remotely concerned with my credibility as a nootropics enthusiast. :)

I've really got to do my homework.

#28 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 17 May 2006 - 09:33 PM

I've really got to do my homework.


Dude, how are you still in class? Either you guys start the summer way before any university I know, or go quite a bit later.

#29 alexoverhere

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 1

Posted 18 May 2006 - 12:54 AM

zoolander: i don't think most people who have prepared freak out during the test (at least not to a degree that it impacts performance). the test is long though, so you really start to get fatigued by second verbal / math section. (at least one of these is an unscored experimental part, which ETS claims is not necessarily at the end of the exam).

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#30 alexoverhere

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 1

Posted 18 May 2006 - 12:59 AM

snyp: for the verbal, my initial plan was to memorize word definitions in the barron's list.. i ended up not getting past the d's or e's before exam time, so i switched to a short, hit parade type of list. even though i was guessing for many of the verbal questions, i scored well (98th). i would highly recommend memorizing word definitions and then quickly going with your gut for the vocab-related questions (pacing is important). the reading comprehension can be a time vortex, and you need to be able to skim once, read the questions, and then find the relevant sections of the passage to read more closely. i do think that something like modafinil could help in this aspect. if you decide to try it, please let us know how your performance compares to baseline (and record everything!). lastly, there are some programs out there with databanks of gre vocab words, if you think that'll help you study.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users