New study suggests smart drugs like Ritalin may lead to lower productivity

The idea and appeal behind “smart drugs” is very simple. Taking pills activates the brain.from Medical Students Using Adderall cram for a competitive exam competent altruist Consumer demand for improved cognitive function is increasing as people take the anti-narcolepsy drug modafinil to sleep less and work more. Revitalize the Nootropics Industry It eclipses financial deals of lunchtime martinis and cocaine dust as a combination of work and drugs.

of Global survey with tens of thousands of participants, non-medical smart drug use among all U.S. respondents increased from 20 percent in 2015 to 30 percent in 2017. Over the same period, usage jumped from 3% to 16% in France and from 5% in the UK. up to 23 percent.

Anecdotal evidence for a range of smart drugs suggests several benefits, including sharper focus, stronger motivation, and a source of effort to keep going. culture of hard work.But non-medical uses far outnumber research, and what research exists? Discover the combined benefits.

now, new research in a diary scientific progress Researchers at the University of Melbourne and Cambridge (Elizabeth Bowman, David Coghill, Carsten Murowski and Peter Bossaerts) found that far from making users smarter, smart drugs actually appear to impair their cognitive abilities. I discovered something.

The authors tested methylphenidate (better known by its trade name Ritalin), modafinil, and dextroamphetamine (commercial tested the effects of three drugs such as dexedrine. – A world problem over past stimulant research.

Instead of simply concluding that smart drugs offer little benefit, the researchers found that they actually seemed to make the situation worse for users. Although study subjects worked more while taking the drug compared to placebo, the “quality of effort” or productivity actually decreased. As a result, smart drugs caused users to put more effort into their work while being less productive, which is precisely an indication of improved cognitive function. not.

“My advice is, ‘Stay away from them,'” said co-author Bossaerts, an economist at the University of Cambridge. “In the end, the performance that can be achieved is no better, or even worse, than without drugs.”

knapsack trial

A randomized, double-blind study observed 40 participants (17 females, 23 males) aged 18-35 years. Each he repeated four sessions, one week apart, and participants received a single dose of each drug. They were then asked to complete a particularly difficult cognitive task. knapsack problem.

Here’s how it works: Imagine you have a knapsack with a weight limit (say 50 lbs). In front of you is a pile of different items, each assigned a specific weight and value. The challenge is to find a combination of items that maximizes the value of what is stored in the knapsack without exceeding the weight limit. In this study, the problem was run via a computer, so participants were able to click items in and out of the bag while viewing the total weight and amount readout of the bag on the screen.

“It’s easy to underestimate how difficult the challenges humans face in modern life,” the authors say in their study. “At an abstract level, many everyday tasks belong to a mathematical class of problems considered ‘difficult’, a level of difficulty not captured by the cognitive tasks used in past stimulant research. In contrast, the knapsack problem aims to capture the same degree of difficulty that many real-world situations exhibit.

The study authors had reason to hope that smart drugs would make task completion easier. Methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, and modafinil all increase dopamine and noradrenaline, neurotransmitters involved in the brain. motivation control and Awakening, Each. Increased dopamine and norepinephrine appear to lead to increased effort and better performance.

The result was not. Of all the drugs, none actually increased my chances of finding the right solution. When participants were on either drug, they tended to expend more effort compared to sober attempts, but only came up with worse combinations than when they were off the drug. was.

“Effort” was measured in two ways. One is the amount of time spent searching for an answer before submitting a solution, and the other is the number of “moves” of items in and out of the knapsack in each instance. The authors found that when participants took drugs, they spent more time submitting their responses and tried more hands before making a final choice. These findings may suggest that the drug succeeded in increasing ‘motivation’, essentially the desire to keep working on the problem. However, the increased motivation and additional work done by the drug ultimately reduced the quality of the results.

In this case, “lower quality” means lower productivity. This is measured by the average increase in value per move while trying to fill the knapsack. As a result, participants’ efforts became less systematic and more random, resulting in more wasteful efforts and lower productivity.

Of course, no single study can point the gavel at a complex problem. With a sample size of just 40, no matter how clever the design of the experiment, like the knapsack problem, it’s hard to generalize the results to make blanket statements about productivity, let alone whether people get ‘smarter’. Needless to say. But Bossaerts described the research project in an email, describing it as the first “very difficult in a mathematical sense.” It is believed that the knapsack problem cannot be solved even by a computer. The more difficult the experiment, the more we may be able to learn about how smart drugs actually affect outcomes in a real, chaotic world.

Productivity is not always smart

According to the study framework, what the authors call “truly smart drugs” are drugs that “not only increase effort, but also improve the quality of effort” — drugs that work harder. and Be more productive. But we shouldn’t immediately equate making ourselves smarter with being more productive or thinking systematically.

Is it really existentially wise to take the “I love my job but hate people” drug? Sebastian Serrano reported on Vice of modafinil? “I feel more energetic, more motivated, and more focused, but that perception masks the fact that I’m more unstable,” says Bossaerts. The increasingly volatile answers are precisely what hurts research productivity, raising the question of what else could go wrong under smart drugs.

Laboratory conditions inevitably isolate parts of human life from the rest. In fact, it is important to filter out the noise and focus on specific hypotheses. No matter how productivity, quality and cleverness are ultimately defined, there is always the further question of what impact they have beyond the scope of research. In his self-experiment, Serrano realized that “normally I love walking, but the drugs suddenly made it seem like a complete waste of time.” Optimizing just for productivity leaves a sort of mental void. send out very clever people to find what’s missing.

Smart drugs, therefore, may reflect our cultural moment more than we would like to admit.of meritocracy pressure middle Growing instabilitythe harsh educational demands that begin with. competitive kindergarten, the threat of job insecurity due to new fears of automation, etc. all make the desire to find an edge perfectly understandable. Who has the time to optimize their lives around walking and spirituality?

Bossaerts has sometimes said that smart drugs are close to harmless. However, they can be mildly addictive, so “more frequent intake can lead to a vicious cycle.” There are no significant studies, and little is understood about how side effects interact with other substances ingested. In the long run, this is gambling at your own risk.

But people whose daily lives depend on drugs are already feeling the effects. As medicines get swallowed up by the smart drug hype, the increased demand is pulling medicines away from those who rely on them to sustain their daily lives.both already do Adderall and Ozempic (Diabetes drugs used for weight loss) today.

If all these precautions are in place, if we can develop a drug that increases both motivation and productivity without side effects, contraindications, or ruining others who depend on it. Why can’t we develop? Increase in smart drug usersif knapsack issues are any indication, we don’t have them yet.