Why does this remind me so much of the multi-level marketing companies that are so prevalent in Utah, making bold unproven claims about their tropical fruit juices?
Because it's very similar. A magic recipe of existing products marketed with some difficult-to-prove claim. It could be woo, it could be legit, but you'd lean heavily towards the former.
More probably because most of these things exist in the same wild west of loosely tested fda unapproved ingestibles. As such they're subject to a similar environment that attracts shady characters and enables weakly substantiated claims.
Yes. You outed me. That's exactly the point I'm making. I'm claiming Adderall has no noticeable effects. I'm also claiming caffeine does help people stay awake and that pot doesn't give people the munchies. While we're at it, morphine doesn't help with pain. I am taking the hard-line position that all well tested drugs have no efficacy.
Seriously, I don't think people doubt mind enhancing drugs exist. We're skeptical of manufacturers and people who believe they've "researched" nootropics because they've read a lot of stuff on the internet written up by marketing guys, PR men, and researchers willing to do shoddy research for money.
First off, nothing personal against you here. Onto the post:
Read his comment again.
This article is painting a picture of silicon valley kids coming up with exciting new nootropic drugs that will help us perform better mentally.
OP is saying this new "nootropic industry" smells and sounds like the bullshit that's peddled in Utah. He's not wrong. I can smell the jizz from the pants of the PR guy who coordinated this article with Observer. Unless these new drugs are rigorously studies and their efficacy is independently verified, we're going to be bombarded by all sorts of pseudo-drugs and supplements that are unregulated, untested and potentially dangerous. You're going to see marketing guys, PR men, and all sorts of phoneys trampling over themselves to get a piece of the nootropic action. They'll form associations and lobby for nootropic friendly legislation that defangs the FDA so these marketing psychopaths can experiment on us with their secret blends of brain food.
That's a legit concern because we've seen this sort of nonsense repeated throughout history for hundreds of years. Some of the stuff might be good, most of it will be garbage, and the overwhelming majority of people won't have enough skill or training to be able to discern the bullshit from the real deal. Most pharmaceutical "autodidacts" who "research their shit" online will have no fucking idea what they're talking about, but they'll be more than happy to confidently share their ignorance with others. They won't be able to discern real independent research from industry sponsored research because modern PR groups and associations are really good at lying. The pharmaceutical companies know how to manipulate doctors. Do we really think these marketing and PR assholes can't dupe some autodidactic dipshits who extract only the most vague understanding of the "research" they just happen to come across.
That's what he was getting at, not that there aren't brain enhancing drugs, but that he smells the bullshit coming down the road.
It all starts with a bullshit name that sounds smart (Oohh nootropics!), but is legally vague enough to skirt any meaningful regulation or discernment between bona fide brain enhancers and grass clippings put into pills. You add a story about how nootropics are the future and then you divide the market up into "reputable" brands vs. unreputable brands. People don't have the mental tools to be able to discern what's good or bad, so they'll naturally follow the "wisdom of the crowd" and tell themselves they researched it.
It's the same fucking story. Science and understanding is substituted with brand reputation once again.
Fuck nootropics. Not brain enhancers, but the word nootropic.