next »

[treehugger1]

Fess' up one and all ... do you "dope?"

Personally, I stick to the non-prescription stuff. But if you don't, it seems you're not alone. Take a look at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/weekinreview/09carey.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Also, note the quote from "one person who posted anonymously on the Chronicle of Higher Education Web site ..." We're famous! Yipee! Oh, wait ... the article's about ethically questionable behavior.
 

[treehugger1]

Ooops. Just noticed magistra's post in "In the Classroom."

Sorry, magistra.

[magistra]

'S'Okay.  I didn't know where to put it myself.  It seems like a topic ripe for discussion, but I found what I really wanted to discuss was the bad journalism...

[treehugger1]

'S'Okay.  I didn't know where to put it myself.  It seems like a topic ripe for discussion, but I found what I really wanted to discuss was the bad journalism...

Oh well, in that case I've done gone and hijacked your thread. Apologies (bis)!

[magistra]

No, no.  That was my intent when originally posting it.  But then I realized that one reason I didn't have too much to say was simply that the article didn't have much in the way of specifics -- I had plenty of questions, though.  It just seems like the NYTimes is making a big deal out of something that's not a problem (yet), based on very little real information.  I think a lot of us believe that a lack of critical thinking and supporting details in writing is a bigger problem we contend with than our colleagues' use of Adderall.

[treehugger1]

I think a lot of us believe that a lack of critical thinking and supporting details in writing is a bigger problem we contend with than our colleagues' use of Adderall.

Or maybe this sloppiness can be linked to the same kind of time-pressures that push others to self-medicate. I'd provide more supporting evidence for this, but unfortunately my diss (and/or the drug-like Free Association thread) awaits.

[pandora]

Ok, I know this is probably taking us on a bit of a tangent, but if we fussed about all of the historically available forms of "brain enhancement" (if we take that to mean substances that alter one's brain chemistry so as to enhance performance, drive, creativity, whatnot), then wouldn't we be obliged to invalidate, oh. . . approximately 72.6% of canonical literature?  Perhaps entire eras of literary production?   

[treehugger1]

Ok, I know this is probably taking us on a bit of a tangent, but if we fussed about all of the historically available forms of "brain enhancement" (if we take that to mean substances that alter one's brain chemistry so as to enhance performance, drive, creativity, whatnot), then wouldn't we be obliged to apply those stigmatizing little asterisks to, oh. . . approximately 72.6% of canonical literature?  Perhaps entire eras of literary production?  

There you go.

[the_honey_badger]

I don't get the idea expressed in some discussions that this is "cheating"
By extension, the non-caffeine inbibbing set could say this about those who chug down the Starbucks with expresso shots. Or my colleague who alternates between Mountain Dew and Red Bull all day everyday.
  I'm missing something in that conclusion that there is cheating going on by users of adderall (sp?). Many questions could be raised about professions that require so much productivity or such long hours that it drives people to use stimulants to keep up but "cheating?"

[treehugger1]

yankeedan,

I agree. In fact, I argued on magistra's thread (see In the Classroom) that one can't really draw a neat moral line between the use the medication for depression triggered by overwork and the use of stimulents to "get ahead" in the academic rat race.

[magistra]

I think that one argument is that prescription drugs, when used by the non-prescribee (well, you know what I mean) or used off-label is illegal and potentially dangerous.  Coffee is perfectly legal, and apparently works differently, as mentioned on the other thread.

There were questions about the different types of medications on the other thread, and they were partially answered, but I agree that the original article didn't even attempt to sort them out.  I'd love to see a lengthy explanation of the different drugs, coffee, Red Bull, No Doz, what have you, with descriptions of how they work, what the effects are, what the side effects are, long-term dangers, etc.  That, to me, is at the heart of it -- in order to keep up, am I someday going to have to take something that damages my body, and be told it's my fault because it was a "choice"?  And if these things aren't dangerous, why are they prescription-only? 

Frankly, I suspect that a lot of my questions don't have good answers.  They're still studying the effects of caffeine.  Remember that study recently that confirmed caffeine is really, really bad for fetuses?  Another study came out about the same time that was inconclusive.  That one didn't get reported.

[hegemony]

I don't know from Adderall, but I'm here to say that I tried Provigil.  I'd read that it makes you feel awake, calm (unjittery, unlike caffeine), alert, all kinds of good things.  I travel across the Atlantic a lot and I often need to hit the ground running, so I thought, "Boyohboy, that drug's for me!"  It's recommended for jet lag and workers changing shift, just this kind of thing.  So I mentioned it to my doctor and he gave me a free 7-day sample.  I was so looking forward to not being stupefied and feeling like I was going to keel over for those first few days after landing in Britain.  Now, I should add that drugs often don't seem to have much of an effect on me.  I was given morphine after an operation and it didn't do a thing; I couldn't even feel it.  (No pain relief, needless to say -- ouuuuch!)  Much the same thing with Provigil.  It felt like having a caffeine drink.  My doctor warned me to start with half a pill, as some people had trouble sleeping the next night if they'd taken a whole pill in the morning.  I started with half a pill and it had no noticeable effect.  The next day I took a whole pill.  I fell asleep halfway through the afternoon -- while sitting on someone's couch.

Later I read that the effects have been overhyped, and that really the drug does have about the same effect as caffeine.  It certainly didn't do much for me.  I yearn to be one of those people who has wild bursts of stamina, creativity, and zeal on great new prescription drugs.  As for me, back to the Diet Pepsi.  I'd be interested to hear others' experiences.

[larryc]

I bought some pills for enhancement but apparently they are for men only.

[treehugger1]

So it's true! Men think with their *****!?

[danny_boy]

Is running to release all those endorphins before work ethical?