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

Photo
- - - - -

On A Mission to Pay Attention


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#31 kikai93

  • Guest
  • 244 posts
  • 90

Posted 21 February 2009 - 10:03 PM

In the very study you post, it says outright that cocaine is not neurotoxic (which begs the question of why it's illegal).

Meth is laso not the same as adderall or dexedrine, though. Meth is much stronger and causes a lot of neurotoxicity. You use a lot smaller doses therapeutically, but ultimately for therapetic uses stimulants are stimulants. There's about 1 mg of cocaine in each bag of tea, and it absorbs over a couple of hours or so. It's fairly helpful, though not as good as taking an adderall, but then nothing is.

From what I've read it's basically the transportation of dopamine to the receptor sites that kills off the receptors. Cocaine doesn't do that (which is why it's munch less helpfull than amphetamines and doesn't cause neurotoxicity). Basically, if you are feeling intense euphoria with amphetamines that's the feeling of your brain cooking itself off. If you are not getting that intense euphoria then it seems you are not getting any neurotoxicity. Smart people come to realize quick that the euphoria is not what means it's working (and really, I've never gotten any, anyway). I get a brightened mood, but not what other people seem to get out of it.

FunkyOddesy - Nicotine is extremely effective, but it has bad side effects of vasoconstriction and at higher doses, nausea, manickiness, and irritability. When I was using it for 3-4 months (along with wellbutrin and occasional adderall) it was enough to completely halt my ADD 24 hours a day.


The study you selected out of several citations states that cocaine is not neurotoxic to dopamine and serotonin neurons. This is not the same thing as saying Cocaine is not neurotoxic. Cocaine IS neurotoxic to specific cells in two other transmitter systems, acetylcholine and gamma-aminobutyric acid. Even more fun, cocaine is extremely toxic to cells in your Fasciculus retroflexus. This is one of the primary contributing centers for self-control. Cocaine has other neurotoxic effects as well. Read the monograph I selected or just google "Cocaine neurotoxicity". Cocaine wrecks your brain, end of story.

As for dextroamphetamine: Results show that a single injection of a high dose of AMPH is able to induce several neurotoxic effects. I believe the most consistent finding for therapeutic doses of D-AMPH is a change in dopaminergic nerve terminal morphology and a reduction in synaptic DAT proteins. Only in extraordinary high doses does one begin to see actual apoptosis of dopamine neurons. It also causes an increase in oxidative stress in blood and tissues, causes cardiovascular stress, hyperthermia, etc. Hypertensive crisis has been reported even at therapeutic doses, and this is because individual responses to dex vary dramatically, and any or all of these effects may come into play at "regular therapeutic dosages" in some individuals.

Hopefully we are agreed that Methamphetamine is highly neurotoxic, primarily due to its serotonergic effects and greater potency.

It never fails to amaze me how far people will go into self-delusion and/or deluding others to defend drugs of abuse in spite of reality.

#32 Jacovis

  • Guest
  • 247 posts
  • 1

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:12 AM

Ok, so before I go and get Adderall prescribed to me right away, I figured it would be smart to post on here first, so I'll know what I am about to get myself into. Part of me feels a bit confident taking a stimulant drug to combat my ADD, but a part of me is somewhat hesitant. In a way, I have had sort of a "preview" of what using an amphetamine-drug would feel like, given the fact that I had used a supplement before (E3Live) that contained PEA, which they coined "the molecule of love," and gave me incredible focus that I could not believe... but then soon faded away. But now since I've been blessed to have found & be a part of Imminst, I was able to look up and learn how PEA is a very, very short-lived version of amphetamine (anyone know how to extend it's half-life by the way? I don't). So IF I do feel the same while on Adderall, or another amphetamine-drug I may soon be taking (although I'm aiming towards Adderall right now), it may be the answer I'm looking for... but I know the drug's addicting, I know it may build tolerance, and who knows, it just may not work, which is why part of me is on the hesitant-side about taking it. But if it DOES happen to work for me, what is it's half-life usually? when does a tolerance build up? And if so, is there a way to keep a tolerance building, say by, not using it everyday? I know they aren't the best kind of drugs to be taking, but I know for a fact that I need something designed to improve my attention, given that I've worked-out and exercised my heart out during certain semesters in college, and still felt like I needed additional focus in school (at the time I wasn't one who would consider taking these type of meds, given that I didn't want to have to rely on that sort of thing at the time, but I'm beginning to wonder if my brain had indeed been begging for it).

But being one who has experimented with a lot of supplements, some to try and put my attention problems to an end, to my surprise the only two that have ever done justice for me were the E3Live (for about a day, lol) and to my surprise & accidentally (since I couldn't find any pure maca supplements at the time) a maca supplement blended with horny goat weed, or the other way around I guess (this one in particular). I actually was AMAZED how well this worked for me, though the feeling only lasted for about a month, but my memory was better, mood lifted, libido... yeah, that definitely was improved. But I know by now that it definitely was the HGW, not the maca, which induced this well-being, focused feeling, since I don't receive this sense of focus just by taking maca alone. But I am actually very, very curious now as to how HGW actually effects the brain, what it's mechanism of actions are. Hopefully I can achieve this sense of well-being and focus with a stimulant. By the way, I am doing my hardest to try and seek out the best treatment for my ADD, in Dr. Amen's book "Healing ADD," I have realized that I fall under the Inattentive & Overfocused ADD-Types, Inattentive being the type best treated with stimulants, while Overfocused is best treated with SSRI's, which I never had really much success with by the way. But Effexor (an SNRI) is one of the drugs to combat the overfocused type, has anyone heard of it being used to treat ADD? But before I get into anything like that, my heart... or I guess my brain, is saying to go with a stimulant first to see how that works out. Sorry if I made this type of post a little too lengthy, it just felt right to elaborate a little to get my situation out on paper.

I had a tendency to look for a one pill solution as well but how about another approach.
Say you are functioning at 60% of your potential normally (very subjective), why not try to sort out any other issues first aside from 'pure ADD'. There's any number of things that can mimic and contribute to ADD symptoms: see for example http://www.incredibl.../mimic-adhd.htm. Getting a sleep study done, getting the best quality (most reliable) blood testing done for various nutrients, hormones, and heavy metals, and screening for diseases (like Lyme disease) should be an essential part of everyone's approach here IMHO.
So after spending a few years (and $1000s of dollars no doubt) on getting everything checked, you might find one or two things or even more that exarcebate your symptoms. After taking care of them [say getting your levels of nutrients at optimal levels (even Iron/Ferritin levels for example need to not be too LOW or your attention span/energy levels might suffer), getting a sleep device to improve any sleep disordered breathing problem - this is common in ADD, getting your Thyroid hormones at optimal levels, etc] you may be functioning at 70% of your potential. Wouldn't it be better to be in a position where you aren't completely reliant on one pill or a combination of pills and can function fine (70% is okay right!) without them (but to slay the ADD dragon on a daily basis you would probably still need medication...).
It's important not to rely on one 'crutch' IMHO - at least some tolerance develops sooner or later to most things, and it isn't easy to keep a steady rate of a drug in your system to effectively manage your symptoms 24 hours a day. Not to mention the fact that you could be going after issues (for example mild Sleep Apnea or low hormone levels) that may be left untreated causing health problems later down the track. Indeed later on in life many people develop such health problems possibly after having them for years (they might have gone unnoticed or were 'subclinical'). Wouldn't it be a good idea to learn about the 'health position' of your own body so that later on, while your non-ADD friends are relying on busy doctors to treat their ailments, you are fully informed/experienced about your own body's situation and managing it effectively (hopefully utilising the best doctors you can afford)?

I am developing some interest in the use of low-dose, continous delivery nicotine patches for the treatment of ADD, at a dose of 3.5 - 7mg daily. There is a saying in research circles, "nicotine is a good drug with a bad delivery system". It has shown efficacy for ADHD in several studies and performed as well as ritalin in a comparison study.

FunkOdyssey,
how have you found the Anti-lyme disease medications you have been taking have helped with your ADD symptoms (if at all). I am thinking here of the Antibiotics especially you were trying - have you noticed improvements in any ADD symptoms (or any other symptoms for that matter)?

FunkyOddesy - Nicotine is extremely effective, but it has bad side effects of vasoconstriction and at higher doses, nausea, manickiness, and irritability. When I was using it for 3-4 months (along with wellbutrin and occasional adderall) it was enough to completely halt my ADD 24 hours a day.

I didn't try Nicotine for a continuous period of months like bgwithadd, but I didn't find using anything from 5-21 mg Nicotine patches 'extremely effective' for curbing my ADD symptoms. Certainly not as effective for me as Dextroamphetamine. However Nicotine patches definitely help and considering that they are available OTC and not a controlled substance (unlike the neurostimulant medications for ADD), they are well worth trying as an add-on for ADD. I wonder would Memantine help with tolerance issues to the effects of Nicotine patches (a lot of people get some tolerance to the effects of Nicotine patches when used regularly)?

sponsored ad

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

#33 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 22 February 2009 - 04:10 AM

I'll find out, because I'm ramping up to an effective dosage of memantine right now, and it will be in place when I attempt the experiment. A little too fast actually -- I decided to be a tough guy and start at 10mg rather than 5, and I am a little makeup shy of a Left 4 Dead zombie this weekend. :-D

Antibiotics have been helpful or completely resolved several of my symptoms but not so much with the ADD. However, I am not anywhere close to finished with treatment, so it is really too early to comment. And the drugs/supplements that effectively kill bacteria put me in a retarded brain fog, which doesn't help. I am interested in band-aid'ing the ADD problem in the short-term so I can get more done, because life is not waiting for me to fully recover.

#34 yoyo

  • Guest
  • 582 posts
  • 21

Posted 22 February 2009 - 04:44 AM

cocaine is much safer than the AMP drug class, its not neurotoxic even at abuse-level doses. i'd prefer it for ADD if availible.


This is a joke, right?

Cocaine is highly neurotoxic:

www.nida.nih.gov/pdf/monographs/Monograph163/Monograph163.pdf

Amphetamine compares favourably with cocaine in terms of neurotoxicity
:
www.drugabuse.gov/Nida_notes/NNVol13N1/Comparing.html

Hyperglycemia can exacerbate:
www.aemj.org/cgi/content/abstract/7/9/974?ck=nck

Additional Studies and resources on Cocaine's Neurotoxic effects:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8464338
www.ionchannels.org/showabstract.php?pmid=7603637
http://www.ingentaco...25?crawler=true
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0014299908008546

Bottom line: Cocaine is not a good choice. Just sayin'.


you misread one of those (it says cocaine isn't neurotoxic), you actually cite to the pantpissing drugwarrior!s at 'drugabuse', and the 'neurotoxic' studies are a selection of fetus studies, direct application of cocaine to reduce breathing and induce hypoxia, and some vague references about toxicty w/o any indication of dose or effect or relevance to actual use.

FAil.

cocaine doesn't wreck your brain, being a rat given huge doses by drugwarrior!s on a mission does.

Nicotine: i like the lozenges. they last for hours, so the dosing is nice and slow.

there seems to be some interaction with MAOIs though, increasing sensitization (rats are extra addicted to their camels). i need to look more into longterm withdrawal effects before i'm 100% comfortable with it.
also, see these threads: http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine

#35 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:22 AM

In the very study you post, it says outright that cocaine is not neurotoxic (which begs the question of why it's illegal).

Meth is laso not the same as adderall or dexedrine, though. Meth is much stronger and causes a lot of neurotoxicity. You use a lot smaller doses therapeutically, but ultimately for therapetic uses stimulants are stimulants. There's about 1 mg of cocaine in each bag of tea, and it absorbs over a couple of hours or so. It's fairly helpful, though not as good as taking an adderall, but then nothing is.

From what I've read it's basically the transportation of dopamine to the receptor sites that kills off the receptors. Cocaine doesn't do that (which is why it's munch less helpfull than amphetamines and doesn't cause neurotoxicity). Basically, if you are feeling intense euphoria with amphetamines that's the feeling of your brain cooking itself off. If you are not getting that intense euphoria then it seems you are not getting any neurotoxicity. Smart people come to realize quick that the euphoria is not what means it's working (and really, I've never gotten any, anyway). I get a brightened mood, but not what other people seem to get out of it.

FunkyOddesy - Nicotine is extremely effective, but it has bad side effects of vasoconstriction and at higher doses, nausea, manickiness, and irritability. When I was using it for 3-4 months (along with wellbutrin and occasional adderall) it was enough to completely halt my ADD 24 hours a day.


The study you selected out of several citations states that cocaine is not neurotoxic to dopamine and serotonin neurons. This is not the same thing as saying Cocaine is not neurotoxic. Cocaine IS neurotoxic to specific cells in two other transmitter systems, acetylcholine and gamma-aminobutyric acid. Even more fun, cocaine is extremely toxic to cells in your Fasciculus retroflexus. This is one of the primary contributing centers for self-control. Cocaine has other neurotoxic effects as well. Read the monograph I selected or just google "Cocaine neurotoxicity". Cocaine wrecks your brain, end of story.

As for dextroamphetamine: Results show that a single injection of a high dose of AMPH is able to induce several neurotoxic effects. I believe the most consistent finding for therapeutic doses of D-AMPH is a change in dopaminergic nerve terminal morphology and a reduction in synaptic DAT proteins. Only in extraordinary high doses does one begin to see actual apoptosis of dopamine neurons. It also causes an increase in oxidative stress in blood and tissues, causes cardiovascular stress, hyperthermia, etc. Hypertensive crisis has been reported even at therapeutic doses, and this is because individual responses to dex vary dramatically, and any or all of these effects may come into play at "regular therapeutic dosages" in some individuals.

Hopefully we are agreed that Methamphetamine is highly neurotoxic, primarily due to its serotonergic effects and greater potency.

It never fails to amaze me how far people will go into self-delusion and/or deluding others to defend drugs of abuse in spite of reality.

I'm not trying to defend anything and I'm not a coke user, but nothing you linked to made any real case against it. Most of it was scare tactics crap that only happens from longterm high dose use. It would take a lot of coke or amphetamines to become psychotic, though certainly lots of idiots out there will just take more and more and more. Personally, though, I say let them. It's darwin in action, and for people witht hat proclivity there is always a form of destructive behavior that they will latch onto anyway.

Cocaine is (aside from small amounts coca tea) pretty much an abuse only drug so I am curious to see what effects it would have at doses closer to therapeutic values instead of values designed to elicit maximum euphoria. 100mg is pretty normal for coke use...and you also snort it, which will worsen anything's effects. When you drink it or eat the packet (as I do) it absorbs much more slowly than snorting, or even than a normal pill. There's a lot to suggest that the concentration levels are not the only factor but that how quickly they change determines a lot of neurotoxic effect.

I use amphetamines for ADD, and I do worry about neurotoxicity. I guess my main belief so far is that really the damage is not severe enough at lower doses to worry too much, but I do worry somewhat and try to keep my dose low and take breaks. Eliminating dopamine producing neurons is not something I worry about too much, though. It's easy to safely raise your dopamine levels with drugs like deprenyl or wellbutrin or amantadine. As I said before, from what I gather it seems the euphoria itself is what causes the cell death anyway. So if you are not going into the doses you need for that you are probably OK. In the studies I've read, methheads seem to lose about 5% of their dopamine cells. In real terms, that's nothing - you'll lose 10% per decade after your 30s anyway.

I think that all the stimulants and in a larger sense all psychiatric drugs are going to have some negative long term effects. That definitely seems so for most depression and anxiety drugs as well. MAOIs actually seem to be the least brain damaging, really. Too bad they have other issues. Of course lithium actually seems to cause large amounts of brain growth, but again it has some signifigant drawbacks.

#36 kikai93

  • Guest
  • 244 posts
  • 90

Posted 22 February 2009 - 07:03 AM

you misread one of those (it says cocaine isn't neurotoxic),


As I explained to the other fellow, it is you who mistake. The article you read (and I'm guessing the only one of the many I posted) indicates that cocaine is not neurotoxic to dopamine or seratonin neurons. It is highly neurotoxic to cells in the GABA and acetylcholine systems though. As well as to a specific area in the brain responsible for self control. See previous post.

you actually cite to the pantpissing drugwarrior!s at 'drugabuse', and the 'neurotoxic' studies are a selection of fetus studies, direct application of cocaine to reduce breathing and induce hypoxia, and some vague references about toxicty w/o any indication of dose or effect or relevance to actual use.


Actually I cited the monograph on cocaine from drugabuse.gov due to the bibliography. Look up some of the source materials involved. The monograph itself is just a fairly accurate handy reference. Findings from animal and clinical studies have shown that chronic use of even low to moderate doses of cocaine can produce serious neuropathies (Daras et al. 1991; Fredericks et al. 1991; Klonoff et al. 1989; Lathers et al. 1988; Lichtenfeld et al. 1984; Mody et al. 1988; Pascual-Leone et al. 1991). Read the studies for yourself. Honestly, if you're this invested in cocaine use, get some blow and set to. Darwin in action, as you say.

FAil.


Oh great, I'm arguing with a 4chan connoisseur.

cocaine doesn't wreck your brain, being a rat given huge doses by drugwarrior!s on a mission does.


Wow, someone should let all those addicts in rehab know their physical and mental impairments are illusions created by the government to deny people the genuine and perfectly safe pleasures of cocaine. [/sarcasm] Seriously though, if you have some studies you want to cite that say all of the ones I've read are bollocks from credible researchers, I'm all ears. Heck, I'll even take an article from a peer-reviewed journal in the last 15 years touting the benefits of cocaine use.

Nicotine: i like the lozenges. they last for hours, so the dosing is nice and slow.


I'll take that under advisement, although Funk's idea about cutting down the patches seems more convenient.

there seems to be some interaction with MAOIs though, increasing sensitization (rats are extra addicted to their camels). i need to look more into longterm withdrawal effects before i'm 100% comfortable with it.
also, see these threads: http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine


Thank goodness I'm not a MAOI fan. :) Thanks for the info though. And incidentally, I'm not a drugwarrior! as you say. I correct in the interest of factual information being relayed. If after understanding the dangers (aforementioned neurotoxic effects, massive addiction/abuse potential blahblahblah) people want to do some coke, I won't stand in their way so long as they are adults. I just won't stand by and watch misinformation being disseminated.

#37 kikai93

  • Guest
  • 244 posts
  • 90

Posted 22 February 2009 - 07:36 AM

I'm not trying to defend anything and I'm not a coke user, but nothing you linked to made any real case against it. Most of it was scare tactics crap that only happens from longterm high dose use.


I'm now certain you didn't read those links.

It would take a lot of coke or amphetamines to become psychotic, though certainly lots of idiots out there will just take more and more and more. Personally, though, I say let them. It's darwin in action, and for people witht hat proclivity there is always a form of destructive behavior that they will latch onto anyway.


Well, that would be the problem. Cocaine addiction is sneaky too. A lot of people go from weekend to weekday to allday users without realizing it. Your last statement I disagree with. Some people seem to have a sensitivity to one drug or another that makes them more likely to become destructively addicted to it. It does not follow that if they don't do that drug, they'll pick risky sex behaviours, booze, or something else instead. People from alcoholic families often avoid the cycle by just... not... drinking. :)

Cocaine is (aside from small amounts coca tea) pretty much an abuse only drug so I am curious to see what effects it would have at doses closer to therapeutic values instead of values designed to elicit maximum euphoria. 100mg is pretty normal for coke use...and you also snort it, which will worsen anything's effects. When you drink it or eat the packet (as I do) it absorbs much more slowly than snorting, or even than a normal pill. There's a lot to suggest that the concentration levels are not the only factor but that how quickly they change determines a lot of neurotoxic effect.


Hmm... top of the post you say you aren't defending anything and don't use coca... here you talk about eating the packet. Which is it? Look, I just put many scientific studies in your hands. If after reading about how cocaine can suck, you want to drink, eat, snort, or shoot cocaine by all means, set to it. You're an adult. By the way, coca tea, coca leaves, etc that have not been decocainized are highly illegal in the US and the EU, if that matters to those who are using it. Oh and you are correct about the massive quick change having a big effect on the neurotoxicity, but then again at certain concentrations it doesn't matter how long it took to get there, and people have varying sensitivity to the drug so it's hard to know your personal threshold.

I use amphetamines for ADD, and I do worry about neurotoxicity. I guess my main belief so far is that really the damage is not severe enough at lower doses to worry too much, but I do worry somewhat and try to keep my dose low and take breaks. Eliminating dopamine producing neurons is not something I worry about too much, though. It's easy to safely raise your dopamine levels with drugs like deprenyl or wellbutrin or amantadine. As I said before, from what I gather it seems the euphoria itself is what causes the cell death anyway. So if you are not going into the doses you need for that you are probably OK. In the studies I've read, methheads seem to lose about 5% of their dopamine cells. In real terms, that's nothing - you'll lose 10% per decade after your 30s anyway.


There are some promising studies concerning preventing that decline. I'm hoping to offput long enough to see 200, maybe 250.

I think that all the stimulants and in a larger sense all psychiatric drugs are going to have some negative long term effects. That definitely seems so for most depression and anxiety drugs as well. MAOIs actually seem to be the least brain damaging, really. Too bad they have other issues. Of course lithium actually seems to cause large amounts of brain growth, but again it has some signifigant drawbacks.


Some drugs have serious issues (Lexapro, Paxil, Adderall, Seroquel, etc) that need to be weighed carefully prior to accepting administrations of them. Some have moderate and low risks as well. It's a cost/benefit analysis. You do need good info to make these choices I think. I tend toward peer-reviewed journals for my info.

Low dose lithium orotate seems promising and is something I'm investigating. If you have experiential info, I'd love to read about it.

Edited by kikai93, 22 February 2009 - 07:41 AM.


#38 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:25 AM

To me, drug users/abusers are the problem, not drugs (not to say they can help it, it's just how they are). We have millions of alcoholics and it can trash your brain, but that doesn't mean we should make alcohol illegal or that no one should use it. Some people have a problem and it's much more deep than simply an evil substance completely overwhelmed them in one go. I will give you that some things are more appealing to some people than others, though. I've tried heroin and really didn't see why people liked it, but stimulants very difficult to resist. Not from the standpoint I am at risk of shooting up, but the chance I will ever quit caffeine or adderall permanently without a serious reason is basically zero.

It's pretty ridiculous to call me a coke user when I have coca tea, which has tiny amounts of cocaine and releases over 2-3 hours instead of 20 seconds time. My total lifetime dose is maybe 30-40mg. Many coke users can barely even feel that level. It also makes no sense I'd defend it over adderall since I use (prescribed) adderall every day in much larger doses (though still relatively low).

No, I didn't read everything you sent but the mention of neurotoxicit is pretty far in that report and I stopped reading because the quality of most of what I was seeing was maybe a half step above anti drug propaganda. I don't see either meth or coke as the boogieman. Ritalin is extremely similar to coke, and meth is prescribed for recalcitrant ADD and narcolepsy treatment and it works very well for that. It has far fewer side effects than any of the other stimulants because it goes almost straight to the CNS and has very literal peripheral effect. Lucky for me I don't get anxiety or stomach pain or racing heart or irritability or insomnia or twitching etc. etc. etc. that adderall can cause, but most of the people using stims are not so lucky and some of them can't find anything else that actually works without lots of side effects. I'm pretty sure the serotonergic properties of meth are basically due to the high levels being used. Amphetamine starts enabling serotonin increase at high doses, but that doesn't mean at therapeutic doses (which for meth is 1-5mg per day) you will have any issues in that regard. I wouldn't even be surprised if it's a better ADD drug than adderal, though I'd be more cautious about taking it and wouldn't switch just for the hell of it.

Likewise with coke, every study I see is from an abuse perspective and is pretty much worthless when comparing it to, say, taking some coca tea once in a while. This is the same falacy all the detractors of amphetamines fall into - there's plenty of studies that show it can cause damage in higher doses over the long term but there's not much to say what effect it has at low levels taken orally as compared to high levels snorted or injected. On the contrary, I've read any number of studies saying how amazingly good for you coca tea is and its many benefits. Even mercury is harmless until it builds to a certain level in your blood. I won' rule out that any dose at all could be bad enough that you should avoid it at all costs because that is the case with lead and a very few other substances like plutonium and some nerve toxins, but it's not the norm and I won't believe that just because people who snort 100 times the amount in a cup of tea experience neurotoxic effects.

#39 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:27 AM

To me, drug users/abusers are the problem, not drugs (not to say they can help it, it's just how they are). We have millions of alcoholics and it can trash your brain, but that doesn't mean we should make alcohol illegal or that no one should use it. Some people have a problem and it's much more deep than simply an evil substance completely overwhelmed them in one go. I will give you that some things are more appealing to some people than others, though. I've tried heroin and really didn't see why people liked it, but stimulants very difficult to resist. Not from the standpoint I am at risk of shooting up, but the chance I will ever quit caffeine or adderall permanently without a serious reason is basically zero.

It's pretty ridiculous to call me a coke user when I have coca tea, which has tiny amounts of cocaine and releases over 2-3 hours instead of 20 seconds time. My total lifetime dose is maybe 30-40mg. Many coke users can barely even feel that level. It also makes no sense I'd defend it over adderall since I use (prescribed) adderall every day in much larger doses (though still relatively low).

No, I didn't read everything you sent but the mention of neurotoxicit is pretty far in that report and I stopped reading because the quality of most of what I was seeing was maybe a half step above anti drug propaganda. I don't see either meth or coke as the boogieman. Ritalin is extremely similar to coke, and meth is prescribed for recalcitrant ADD and narcolepsy treatment and it works very well for that. It has far fewer side effects than any of the other stimulants because it goes almost straight to the CNS and has very literal peripheral effect. Lucky for me I don't get anxiety or stomach pain or racing heart or irritability or insomnia or twitching etc. etc. etc. that adderall can cause, but most of the people using stims are not so lucky and some of them can't find anything else that actually works without lots of side effects. I'm pretty sure the serotonergic properties of meth are basically due to the high levels being used. Amphetamine starts enabling serotonin increase at high doses, but that doesn't mean at therapeutic doses (which for meth is 1-5mg per day) you will have any issues in that regard. I wouldn't even be surprised if it's a better ADD drug than adderal, though I'd be more cautious about taking it and wouldn't switch just for the hell of it.

Likewise with coke, every study I see is from an abuse perspective and is pretty much worthless when comparing it to, say, taking some coca tea once in a while. This is the same falacy all the detractors of amphetamines fall into - there's plenty of studies that show it can cause damage in higher doses over the long term but there's not much to say what effect it has at low levels taken orally as compared to high levels snorted or injected. On the contrary, I've read any number of studies saying how amazingly good for you coca tea is and its many benefits. Even mercury is harmless until it builds to a certain level in your blood. I won' rule out that any dose at all could be bad enough that you should avoid it at all costs because that is the case with lead and a very few other substances like plutonium and some nerve toxins, but it's not the norm and I won't believe that just because people who snort 100 times the amount in a cup of tea experience neurotoxic effects.

Lithium orotate is a good one, I think. I'm not really prone to placebo. From most of the standard supplements I don't get a strong effect, but lithium seems to make my mood much better. Almost seems to make me more resilient. Not sure if that makes sense, but I can't think of a better way to describe it. I use 20-30mg of elemental lithium per day.

#40 kikai93

  • Guest
  • 244 posts
  • 90

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:29 PM

To me, drug users/abusers are the problem, not drugs (not to say they can help it, it's just how they are). We have millions of alcoholics and it can trash your brain, but that doesn't mean we should make alcohol illegal or that no one should use it. Some people have a problem and it's much more deep than simply an evil substance completely overwhelmed them in one go. I will give you that some things are more appealing to some people than others, though. I've tried heroin and really didn't see why people liked it, but stimulants very difficult to resist. Not from the standpoint I am at risk of shooting up, but the chance I will ever quit caffeine or adderall permanently without a serious reason is basically zero.

It's pretty ridiculous to call me a coke user when I have coca tea, which has tiny amounts of cocaine and releases over 2-3 hours instead of 20 seconds time. My total lifetime dose is maybe 30-40mg. Many coke users can barely even feel that level. It also makes no sense I'd defend it over adderall since I use (prescribed) adderall every day in much larger doses (though still relatively low).

No, I didn't read everything you sent but the mention of neurotoxicit is pretty far in that report and I stopped reading because the quality of most of what I was seeing was maybe a half step above anti drug propaganda. I don't see either meth or coke as the boogieman. Ritalin is extremely similar to coke, and meth is prescribed for recalcitrant ADD and narcolepsy treatment and it works very well for that. It has far fewer side effects than any of the other stimulants because it goes almost straight to the CNS and has very literal peripheral effect. Lucky for me I don't get anxiety or stomach pain or racing heart or irritability or insomnia or twitching etc. etc. etc. that adderall can cause, but most of the people using stims are not so lucky and some of them can't find anything else that actually works without lots of side effects. I'm pretty sure the serotonergic properties of meth are basically due to the high levels being used. Amphetamine starts enabling serotonin increase at high doses, but that doesn't mean at therapeutic doses (which for meth is 1-5mg per day) you will have any issues in that regard. I wouldn't even be surprised if it's a better ADD drug than adderal, though I'd be more cautious about taking it and wouldn't switch just for the hell of it.

Likewise with coke, every study I see is from an abuse perspective and is pretty much worthless when comparing it to, say, taking some coca tea once in a while. This is the same falacy all the detractors of amphetamines fall into - there's plenty of studies that show it can cause damage in higher doses over the long term but there's not much to say what effect it has at low levels taken orally as compared to high levels snorted or injected. On the contrary, I've read any number of studies saying how amazingly good for you coca tea is and its many benefits. Even mercury is harmless until it builds to a certain level in your blood. I won' rule out that any dose at all could be bad enough that you should avoid it at all costs because that is the case with lead and a very few other substances like plutonium and some nerve toxins, but it's not the norm and I won't believe that just because people who snort 100 times the amount in a cup of tea experience neurotoxic effects.

Lithium orotate is a good one, I think. I'm not really prone to placebo. From most of the standard supplements I don't get a strong effect, but lithium seems to make my mood much better. Almost seems to make me more resilient. Not sure if that makes sense, but I can't think of a better way to describe it. I use 20-30mg of elemental lithium per day.


I hear what you're saying, and to a degree I agree. I looked up the average dose of cocaine in coca tea... 1.2-2.5mg. That being the case, drink up and drink hearty I suppose, though I don't imagine its in any way superior to coffee (does it taste good?)

Likewise, some people can use coke, meth, dex, or even heroin with little ill effect. I notice that most of those people aren't habitual users. On the other hand, I've seen all of those drugs destroy lives both at therapeutic and abusives doses. They are all powerful drugs and they all have serious liabilities which must be considered prior to use. As an example at therapeutic doses cocaine or amphetamine can kill a person with a previously undetected heart defect. Caution would seem to be in order. Also, look at this statement from the insert that comes with Adderall: "The effectiveness of ADDERALL® for long-term use has not been systematically evaluated in controlled trials. Therefore, the physician who elects to use ADDERALL® for extended periods should periodically re-evaluate the long-term usefulness of the drug for the individual patient." This is a troublesome statement for me. It may not be for you.

Oddly enough, I'm actually for legalizing, regulating (for quality), and taxing the drugs we presently hold illegal. I would then use the taxes garnered from that on education (90% scholastic, 10% drug awareness). The key is that people need to be aware of what they're ingesting before making the choice to ingest. I haven't been saying "no one should ever use this" but let's not put lipstick on a pig. All of the stimulant meds have serious liabilities to consider. I will say for me, I'm seeking alternatives. Adderall makes me feel wonky, which is why I discontinued it some years ago after only 3 months. Another danger I see with stimulant meds is it's considered a magic bullet by some docs and most laymen. They find one that helps, and hey who needs any other type of therapy? Diet and exercise? Pssshhhhaw. EMDR? Why bother, when I have D-AMP? etc. I am not a fan of "magic faery dust pill" thinking.

YMMV.

#41 yoyo

  • Guest
  • 582 posts
  • 21

Posted 23 February 2009 - 07:21 AM

you misread one of those (it says cocaine isn't neurotoxic),


As I explained to the other fellow, it is you who mistake. The article you read (and I'm guessing the only one of the many I posted) indicates that cocaine is not neurotoxic to dopamine or seratonin neurons. It is highly neurotoxic to cells in the GABA and acetylcholine systems though. As well as to a specific area in the brain responsible for self control. See previous post.

you actually cite to the pantpissing drugwarrior!s at 'drugabuse', and the 'neurotoxic' studies are a selection of fetus studies, direct application of cocaine to reduce breathing and induce hypoxia, and some vague references about toxicty w/o any indication of dose or effect or relevance to actual use.


Actually I cited the monograph on cocaine from drugabuse.gov due to the bibliography. Look up some of the source materials involved. The monograph itself is just a fairly accurate handy reference. Findings from animal and clinical studies have shown that chronic use of even low to moderate doses of cocaine can produce serious neuropathies (Daras et al. 1991; Fredericks et al. 1991; Klonoff et al. 1989; Lathers et al. 1988; Lichtenfeld et al. 1984; Mody et al. 1988; Pascual-Leone et al. 1991). Read the studies for yourself. Honestly, if you're this invested in cocaine use, get some blow and set to. Darwin in action, as you say.

FAil.


Oh great, I'm arguing with a 4chan connoisseur.

cocaine doesn't wreck your brain, being a rat given huge doses by drugwarrior!s on a mission does.


Wow, someone should let all those addicts in rehab know their physical and mental impairments are illusions created by the government to deny people the genuine and perfectly safe pleasures of cocaine. [/sarcasm] Seriously though, if you have some studies you want to cite that say all of the ones I've read are bollocks from credible researchers, I'm all ears. Heck, I'll even take an article from a peer-reviewed journal in the last 15 years touting the benefits of cocaine use.

Nicotine: i like the lozenges. they last for hours, so the dosing is nice and slow.


I'll take that under advisement, although Funk's idea about cutting down the patches seems more convenient.

there seems to be some interaction with MAOIs though, increasing sensitization (rats are extra addicted to their camels). i need to look more into longterm withdrawal effects before i'm 100% comfortable with it.
also, see these threads: http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine http://www.mindandmu...amp;hl=nicotine


Thank goodness I'm not a MAOI fan. :) Thanks for the info though. And incidentally, I'm not a drugwarrior! as you say. I correct in the interest of factual information being relayed. If after understanding the dangers (aforementioned neurotoxic effects, massive addiction/abuse potential blahblahblah) people want to do some coke, I won't stand in their way so long as they are adults. I just won't stand by and watch misinformation being disseminated.


i still haven't seen evidence on adults (no fetuses or infants) that non-recreational/abuse doses is dangerous.

#42 brain

  • Guest
  • 148 posts
  • 5

Posted 01 March 2009 - 03:06 AM

about the horny goat weed's effects: it increases NO production. NO levels have been found to be lower in ADHD:

There are various evidences of the role of nitric oxide (NO) in several neuropsychiatric disorders. However, there is no clinical study which investigated the role of NO in disruptive behavioral disorders (DBD). The aim of this study is to investigate the relation between NO levels and DBD. NO levels were measured in serum from 45 patients diagnosed as having DBD (30 patients with a diagnosis of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder [ADHD] and 15 with ADHD + oppositional defiant disorder [ODD]) and 51 healthy control subjects. It is statistically significant that the pure ADHD group's blood NO levels are lower than those of both the ADHD + ODD and control groups. There was no significant difference between the ADHD + ODD group and the controls. The difference of the NO levels in DBD may indicate the effect of NO in the etiology of this disorder spectrum.


i've been trying to find ways to increase NO safely after reading this study (i too have adhd, btw) but there seem to be very little supplements that do this, other than NO boosters for body builders. anyhow, pycnogenol is another supplement shown to increase nitric oxide. i can't at the moment find the abstract, but this info is on the pycnogenol website under "research library". its also shown to be a helpful treatment for adhd regardless of the fact that it seems to decrease dopamine levels.

other supplements to consider:

gingko
alpha-gpc (this only works in conjunction with caffiene, for me, and apparently there is a inhibitory function here that explains it)
cdp-choline (because of the effects on DA, general neuronal excitability, memory function, and ability to regenerate brain structure. i have some unanswered questions about this supplement, such as whether an increase in DA receptors would be helpful in adhd, as some evidence suggests there is already an increase in receptors, but that could be compensation.)
vitamin B6, as a co-factor in adrenal conversion of tyrosine to l-dopa, production of dopamine. would be helpful to take along with the tyrosine. vitamin C would also be an excellent adjunction to tyrosine treatment) speaking of, the l-tyrosine form is supposed to be more bioavailable, but as the n-acetyl form is more potent, i can't say which may be better. i've heard subjective reports that the n-acetly form has better results, i've yet to try it.
acetly-l-carnitine has had some promising research in adhd, other studies have been negative. dosage and methodology on the negative study were not listed in the abstract. i personally have had good results with it.
alpha-lipoic-acid, to go along with alcar, also as a genreal brain/mitochondrial antioxidant.
magnesium, before sleep. it could help aid with sleep while on a regimen of stimulating substances, there is also evidence of this mineral being deficient in adhd patients.
green tea, as a natural DOPA decarboxylase inhibitor. this helps me focus quite a bit, and it increase alpha-wave production in the brain. brew a big pot and drink throughout the day. in my experience, anything that comes in bags is going to suck, vitamin shoppe actually has an excellent brand of loose leaf organic japanese sencha, its called rishi tea. its very good quality, i've also tried green tea from tea shops that is similar.

all i can think off the top of my head. in my experience with adhd, increasing dopamine hasn't helped much, whereas piracetam + alpha-gpc have produced the best results out of anything i've tried (prescription or non-prescription), however, the effects seem to subside after a few weeks. i believe it has some sort of cumulative effect that isn't documented, or that perhaps it increases certain receptor densities, while not other, thus failing to give a consistent effect. i notice the effects again once i stop taking it, however the euphoria and mental energy/creativity seem to have gone away. i don't know whats going on, i'm still trying to figure it out. i'm thinking i could also be building a tolerance to the choline source.

you may also want to consider modafinil as a safer alternative to adderall.

hope this helps.

#43 3VeRL0ng

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 66 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 01 March 2009 - 05:05 AM

It's funny how you had mentioned Pycnogenol brain, it was the next one to try on my list & took a 100mg dose of it before even reading your comment. But I definitely appreciate the info., perhaps it's a crucial piece of the puzzle for taking care of & band-aiding (or hopefully healing) my problem. But aside from raising N. O. levels, I understand that Horny Goat Weed plays a role in modulating hormone levels, effecting the Thyroid as well, so perhaps this is another piece to the pandora's box, in this case my brain. I must say though, after experiencing what I had felt from taking the HGW, it almost seemed as if feeling/becoming hypomanic, with the exuberant confidence, etc. But by god, one thing I couldn't believe, and noticed for sure, was the amount of CLARITY I felt. Sentences I spoke were much more clearer, more coherent, more logical. Eye contact was made (a problem I usually tend to lack). It honestly felt as if it had fixed EVERYTHING that had needed to be fixed for me, mentally (I did experience some pretty gnarly gastrol disturbances). ADD had disappeared, depression & anxiety diminished... it was doing something right. Though it did seem quite peculiar as to why it had been working so damn well for me, I had become extremely curious as to why it had worked the way it did. But I'm pretty anxious to feel what Pynco's willing to do for me (I'm doubting to achieve the same feeling as I did with HGW). I probably should mention how I had been testing L-Tyrosine out (for about a week now), and I definitely could feel the increase in dopamine levels, which by the way helped out with energy levels & focus, and even learning, but it felt as if it was too much (if I was ever startled by something, my heart went off like a jack-hammer). So I'm planning to give DLPA a try, in hopes to achieve a similar effect as Tyrosine, but without so much craziness. BTW, I can't believe the amt. of hits this has received by now, almost 1,200? holy freakin' schnikes, I know it may not seem a lot to some, but I have yet to post a topic that has received so many views. I hope that some of you are enjoying the post, and finding it helpful. This mission may be far from complete, but there's no turning back now! :)

BTW, I know I posted this in a different thread, but I just realized Horny Goat Weed was listed on this. And I'm mostly just throwing it up on here again, in case anyone's interested in checking it out. Natural Supplement Research

#44 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 01 March 2009 - 05:24 AM

Tyrosine produces more NE than DA, but NE is what you want.

Horny goat weed is PDE5 inhibitor, like viagra. It works by vasodilation, but might have some effect on cAMP. It seems odd you'd get a lot of focus from it, and that being the case I'd be interested to see how you did with guanfacine. It could also be some other thing unique to that formulation, though. I took some horny goat weed for a while and it did pretty well with correcting some of the vasoconstriction problems I had before.

Strangely, I have been superfocused on my work today, but I am not sure why. I did take a bunch of ALCAR-arginate and taurine this morning, though. It seemed after that it was almost like I was on high dose adderall so maybe it is as good as some people have claimed. The protein mix I've been taking lately has a ton of amino acids like glutamine, though, too.

Pycnogenol doesn't so much release NO as it has some modulating effect or something like that. Its vasodilation is only a small part of what it does, though. I'm convinced it's the most important supplement anyone can take.

#45 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:30 AM

I tend to agree with others that coca leaf as it traditionally used in a tea or chewed is not significantly toxic and is possibly beneficial in some respects. I have not seen any evidence to suggest traditional use is associated with either toxicity or dependence, and the three studies I could find in pubmed that mention traditional use of coca support this position. The body of evidence that has amassed against cocaine is generally specific to purified cocaine in a context of human drug abuse or simulated drug abuse (high dose) in animals -- as the saying goes, the dose makes the poison. There is also a clear agenda and bias with which the topic is approached by researchers and by those funding research.

Methylphenidate has a stronger affinity for the dopamine transporter than cocaine and rhesus monkeys cannot discriminate between equal doses of cocaine and ritalin. Methylphenidate is more potent on a mg-for-mg basis and this is a well-regarded drug given to millions of children. If we think of cocaine as essentially ritalin with a shorter half-life, then we could begin to imagine the potential therapeutic value of low, controlled doses. I don't like to see knee-jerk rejection of ideas as a result of stigma.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 02 March 2009 - 02:32 AM.


#46 Duke

  • Guest
  • 51 posts
  • 0

Posted 02 March 2009 - 05:26 AM

I've only had the best relationship with lithium orotate. Most of the stigma appears to stem from previous bipolar-treatment use that in fact did not use orotate but rather the carbonate derivative. Beyond overtly stupid doses I have yet to find anything that would discourage me from using lithium.

Though if someone finds something worthy of attention, do post it.

#47 Guacamolium

  • Guest
  • 747 posts
  • 30
  • Location:Tahoe

Posted 02 March 2009 - 07:21 AM

Methylphenidate has a stronger affinity for the dopamine transporter than cocaine and rhesus monkeys cannot discriminate between equal doses of cocaine and ritalin. Methylphenidate is more potent on a mg-for-mg basis and this is a well-regarded drug given to millions of children. If we think of cocaine as essentially ritalin with a shorter half-life, then we could begin to imagine the potential therapeutic value of low, controlled doses. I don't like to see knee-jerk rejection of ideas as a result of stigma.


The questions that come to mind is how the low, controlled doses get administered, and how they wouldn't get abused by people who'd seek abuse. Cocaine abuse and methylphenidate abuse are on completely different levels of concern.

#48 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:24 PM

You'll never be able to stop people who are determined to abuse substances from abusing them. I do wonder why you feel cocaine abuse and methylphenidate abuse are on "different levels of concern", since we have established they are pharmacologically very similar, and abuse of methylphenidate is widespread and rampant. I would argue that coca leaf is more difficult to abuse than prescription methylphenidate, which is commonly crushed into a powder and snorted like street cocaine. You can't snort ground up coca leaf any more easily than you could snort green tea. It is used traditionally as a tea or the whole leaves are chewed, and these routes of administration have not been shown to produce toxicity or dependence.

Coca tea is sold in grocery stores in Bolivia and Peru and enjoyed by the majority of the population, served as an alternative to coffee in restaurants, and provided to visitors of our own U.S. embassy to combat altitude sickness.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 02 March 2009 - 02:31 PM.


#49 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:45 PM

I use amphetamines for ADD, and I do worry about neurotoxicity. I guess my main belief so far is that really the damage is not severe enough at lower doses to worry too much, but I do worry somewhat and try to keep my dose low and take breaks. Eliminating dopamine producing neurons is not something I worry about too much, though. It's easy to safely raise your dopamine levels with drugs like deprenyl or wellbutrin or amantadine. As I said before, from what I gather it seems the euphoria itself is what causes the cell death anyway. So if you are not going into the doses you need for that you are probably OK. In the studies I've read, methheads seem to lose about 5% of their dopamine cells. In real terms, that's nothing - you'll lose 10% per decade after your 30s anyway.


To the extent that the neurotoxicity of stimulant drugs is caused by increased glutamatergic transmission and NMDA-receptor mediated excitotoxicity, memantine can protect you from this phenomenon based on the studies I've seen. This is in addition to reducing or preventing the development of tolerance which is mediated by the same pathway and seems to be a protective response to prevent excitotoxicity. At this point I would not recommend anyone take a stimulant medication without it.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 02 March 2009 - 04:56 PM.


#50 Cuil

  • Guest
  • 56 posts
  • 1

Posted 02 March 2009 - 03:06 PM

I have enjoyed coca tea as well and just chewing on the leaves with a little bit of baking soda put into the bag. Not bad. I played the drums on cocoa tea and it was great. I have never taken ritalin before, but I can say that cocoa tea has perpheral effects that I would not desire in high doses. I remember feeling a rapid hearbeat. I may respond differently to this chemical now, who knows? I know that the tea is better for physical illness while quiding it is better for the mental effects.

#51 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 March 2009 - 05:13 PM

Memantine should also guard against addiction or addictive behavior during the use of psychostimulant medication:

Neuron. 2008 Aug 14;59(3):486-96.

Role of NMDA receptors in dopamine neurons for plasticity and addictive behaviors.
Zweifel LS, Argilli E, Bonci A, Palmiter RD.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. larryz@u.washington.edu

A single exposure to drugs of abuse produces an NMDA receptor (NMDAR)-dependent long-term potentiation (LTP) of AMPA receptor (AMPAR) currents in DA neurons; however, the importance of LTP for various aspects of drug addiction is unclear. To test the role of NMDAR-dependent plasticity in addictive behavior, we genetically inactivated functional NMDAR signaling exclusively in DA neurons (KO mice). Inactivation of NMDARs results in increased AMPAR-mediated transmission that is indistinguishable from the increases associated with a single cocaine exposure, yet locomotor responses to multiple drugs of abuse were unaltered in the KO mice. The initial phase of locomotor sensitization to cocaine is intact; however, the delayed sensitization that occurs with prolonged cocaine withdrawal did not occur. Conditioned behavioral responses for cocaine-testing environment were also absent in the KO mice. These findings provide evidence for a role of NMDAR signaling in DA neurons for specific behavioral modifications associated with drug seeking behaviors.

PMID: 18701073


Neuron. 2008 Aug 14;59(3):497-508.Click here to read Links

Glutamate receptors on dopamine neurons control the persistence of cocaine seeking.
Engblom D, Bilbao A, Sanchis-Segura C, Dahan L, Perreau-Lenz S, Balland B, Parkitna JR, Luján R, Halbout B, Mameli M, Parlato R, Sprengel R, Lüscher C, Schütz G, Spanagel R.

Division of Molecular Biology of the Cell I, German Cancer Research Center, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

Cocaine strengthens excitatory synapses onto midbrain dopamine neurons through the synaptic delivery of GluR1-containing AMPA receptors. This cocaine-evoked plasticity depends on NMDA receptor activation, but its behavioral significance in the context of addiction remains elusive. Here, we generated mice lacking the GluR1, GluR2, or NR1 receptor subunits selectively in dopamine neurons. We report that in midbrain slices of cocaine-treated mice, synaptic transmission was no longer strengthened when GluR1 or NR1 was abolished, while in the respective mice the drug still induced normal conditioned place preference and locomotor sensitization. In contrast, extinction of drug-seeking behavior was absent in mice lacking GluR1, while in the NR1 mutant mice reinstatement was abolished. In conclusion, cocaine-evoked synaptic plasticity does not mediate concurrent short-term behavioral effects of the drug but may initiate adaptive changes eventually leading to the persistence of drug-seeking behavior.

PMID: 18701074


Yonsei Med J. 2008 Apr 30;49(2):175-88.
The role of NMDA receptor antagonists in nicotine tolerance, sensitization, and physical dependence: a preclinical review.
Jain R, Mukherjee K, Balhara YP.

National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre and Department of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, Pin 110029, India. rakajain2001@yahoo.com

Nicotine, the primary psychoactive component of tobacco products, produces diverse neurophysiological, motivational, and behavioral effects through several brain regions and neurochemical pathways. Various neurotransmitter systems have been explored to understand the mechanisms behind nicotine tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal. Recent evidence suggests that glutamate neurotransmission has an important role in this phenomenon. The aim of the present review is to discuss preclinical findings concerning the role of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor neurotransmission in mediating the behavioral effects of nicotine, tolerance, sensitization, dependence, and withdrawal. Based on preclinical findings, it is hypothesized that NMDA receptors mediate the common adaptive processes that are involved in the development, maintenance, and expression of nicotine addiction. Modulation of glutamatergic neurotransmission with NMDA receptor antagonists may prove to be useful in alleviating the symptoms of nicotine abstinence and facilitate tobacco-smoking cessation.

PMID: 18452252


It might be more effective for methylphenidate / cocaine than for amphetamines:

Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008 Oct;33(11):2701-14.
Genetic NMDA receptor deficiency disrupts acute and chronic effects of cocaine but not amphetamine.
Ramsey AJ, Laakso A, Cyr M, Sotnikova TD, Salahpour A, Medvedev IO, Dykstra LA, Gainetdinov RR, Caron MG.

Department of Cell Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

NMDA receptor-mediated glutamate transmission is required for several forms of neuronal plasticity. Its role in the neuronal responses to addictive drugs is an ongoing subject of investigation. We report here that the acute locomotor-stimulating effect of cocaine is absent in NMDA receptor-deficient mice (NR1-KD). In contrast, their acute responses to amphetamine and to direct dopamine receptor agonists are not significantly altered. The striking attenuation of cocaine's acute effects is not likely explained by alterations in the dopaminergic system of NR1-KD mice, since most parameters of pre- and postsynaptic dopamine function are unchanged. Consistent with the behavioral findings, cocaine induces less c-Fos expression in the striatum of these mice, while amphetamine-induced c-Fos expression is intact. Furthermore, chronic cocaine-induced sensitization and conditioned place preference are attenuated and develop more slowly in mutant animals, but amphetamine's effects are not altered significantly. Our results highlight the importance of NMDA receptor-mediated glutamatergic transmission specifically in cocaine actions, and support a hypothesis that cocaine and amphetamine elicit their effects through differential actions on signaling pathways.

PMID: 18185498


5HT signaling plays a part as well, and memantine is also an uncompetitive 5HT(3) antagonist of similar potency as its NMDA antagonism. Its like memantine was tailor-made for this purpose, because it seems weirdly coincidental:

J Pharmacol Sci. 2008 Jan;106(1):15-21. Epub 2008 Jan 16.Click here to read Links
Neuropsychotoxicity of abused drugs: effects of serotonin receptor ligands on methamphetamine- and cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization in mice.
Ago Y, Nakamura S, Baba A, Matsuda T.

Laboratory of Medicinal Pharmacology, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, Japan.

Repeated administration of psychostimulants elicits a progressive enhancement of locomotor activity known as behavioral sensitization. Central dopamine (DA) neurons play key roles as the neural substrates mediating behavioral sensitization, but the role of the serotonin (5-HT) system in the sensitization is not fully elucidated. We have recently demonstrated that osemozotan, a specific 5-HT(1A)-receptor agonist, and ritanserin, a 5-HT(2)-receptor antagonist, inhibited the expression and development of both methamphetamine- and cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization in mice and that these drugs attenuated the maintenance of behavioral sensitization of methamphetamine, but not that of cocaine. We also found that azasetron, a 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonist, inhibited the expression and development of the sensitization induced by methamphetamine and cocaine, respectively. Neurochemical studies using a microdialysis technique showed that repeated methamphetamine enhanced the methamphetamine-induced increase in 5-HT release in the prefrontal cortex. The sensitization of 5-HT release in methamphetamine-treated mice was attenuated by osemozotan and ritanserin. These findings suggest that the 5-HT system plays an important role in methamphetamine- and cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization in mice and imply that 5-HT(1A)-receptor agonists and 5-HT(2)-receptor antagonists may have a potential therapeutic value for the treatment of methamphetamine abuse or psychosis.

PMID: 18198473


Edited by FunkOdyssey, 02 March 2009 - 05:48 PM.


#52 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 02 March 2009 - 08:27 PM

I've only had the best relationship with lithium orotate. Most of the stigma appears to stem from previous bipolar-treatment use that in fact did not use orotate but rather the carbonate derivative. Beyond overtly stupid doses I have yet to find anything that would discourage me from using lithium.

Though if someone finds something worthy of attention, do post it.


The orotate or carbonate part doesn't really matter. All forms of lithium absorb the same. In the doses typically prescribed there are lots of side effects and some chance of organ damage. Even a small difference in the lithium levels in the water supply has a signifigant effect on mental illness and crime rates, though.

#53 Duke

  • Guest
  • 51 posts
  • 0

Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:02 PM

I read the orotate derivative was synthesized (or at least preferred) because older forms of lithium were not absorbed well without undesirably high doses , but perhaps I am recalling incorrectly.

To the extent that the neurotoxicity of stimulant drugs is caused by increased glutamatergic transmission and NMDA-receptor mediated excitotoxicity, memantine can protect you from this phenomenon based on the studies I've seen. This is in addition to reducing or preventing the development of tolerance which is mediated by the same pathway and seems to be a protective response to prevent excitotoxicity. At this point I would not recommend anyone take a stimulant medication without it.


Any insight as to how efficacious it is in this respect?

"To the extent that the neurotoxicity of stimulant drugs is caused by ..."


Your post almost sounded like a magical panacea until I read it more closely. :(

Edited by Duke, 02 March 2009 - 10:40 PM.


#54 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:40 PM

It is available from many online pharmacies without prescription -- I pay $21 for a month's supply (generic Admenta by Sun Pharma). I imagine it might be difficult to obtain through traditional channels.

Any insight as to how efficacious it is in this respect?

"To the extent that the neurotoxicity of stimulant drugs is caused by ..."


Amphetamines for example produce oxidative stress that may contribute to neurotoxicity independently of the glutamate-NMDA pathway that memantine addresses. NMDA receptor mediated excitotoxicity is definitely a major problem common to all of these drugs, but you have to consider each drug carefully to determine if other mechanisms might still cause toxicity.

Unfortunately, I can't say that using memantine with psychostimulant medication will render it completely safe.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 02 March 2009 - 10:51 PM.


#55 Duke

  • Guest
  • 51 posts
  • 0

Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:50 PM

It is available from many online pharmacies without prescription -- I pay $21 for a month's supply (generic Admenta by Sun Pharma). I imagine it might be difficult to obtain through traditional channels.


Yeah, I edited that part since soon after I searched for generic equivalents.

I stated that memantine was awfully expensive and getting a script for it would be difficult for anyone who is confused.

Edited by Duke, 02 March 2009 - 10:52 PM.


#56 bgwithadd

  • Guest
  • 820 posts
  • 16

Posted 02 March 2009 - 11:54 PM

Where do you get yours?

@duke - the studies done show theya re all absorbed the same.

#57 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 03 March 2009 - 12:16 AM

Where do you get yours?

alldaychemist.com

#58 Guacamolium

  • Guest
  • 747 posts
  • 30
  • Location:Tahoe

Posted 03 March 2009 - 06:44 AM

You'll never be able to stop people who are determined to abuse substances from abusing them. I do wonder why you feel cocaine abuse and methylphenidate abuse are on "different levels of concern", since we have established they are pharmacologically very similar, and abuse of methylphenidate is widespread and rampant. I would argue that coca leaf is more difficult to abuse than prescription methylphenidate, which is commonly crushed into a powder and snorted like street cocaine. You can't snort ground up coca leaf any more easily than you could snort green tea. It is used traditionally as a tea or the whole leaves are chewed, and these routes of administration have not been shown to produce toxicity or dependence.

Coca tea is sold in grocery stores in Bolivia and Peru and enjoyed by the majority of the population, served as an alternative to coffee in restaurants, and provided to visitors of our own U.S. embassy to combat altitude sickness.


Oh I know - I actually would like illicit drugs to be lessened in their penalties for the most part. To answer the next part; maybe they are similar on that pharmacological level, but I've seen statistics showing some pretty horrific actions taken because of cocaine withdrawal. The third part - I'm comparing cocaine and methylphenidate, not coca tea and methylphenyidate. I know that Coca tea was mentioned, but that was not what I was inferring - sorry for not clarifying. I agree with you on coca tea, too low of levels to cause the NAC overload that exacerbates itself with unwanted behaviors.

#59 spaceistheplace

  • Guest
  • 397 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:38 PM

hey Funk, any update on how the nicotine patches are working for you?

sponsored ad

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

#60 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 03 March 2009 - 04:20 PM

I'm starting very cautiously with a tiny dose of 1/16th of a 21mg patch (approximately 1.3mg), in order to build some tolerance to the vasoconstriction effects before going higher. Definitely improves concentration and mental energy even at this tiny dose, however I may be extra sensitive due to pre-treatment with memantine which is an nAChR antagonist. No significant effects on blood pressure or heart rate were noted.

I remove the patch 1-2 hours before bedtime and this seems to effectively "pull the plug" on mental stimulation and facilitates quick onset of sleep. I think transdermal delivery of a stimulant with a short-half life is superior to oral tablets of long-acting stimulants, providing superior control over plasma levels and preventing insomnia.

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 03 March 2009 - 04:24 PM.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users