Drugs for neuroenhancers

[Conor Dary]

Interesting article in this week's New Yorker. Students, pro poker players, lawyers, etc. using drugs to improve performance. While there are a few negative comments: "there should be drug tests at exams", the article states that these 'neuroenhancers' shouldn't be banned because they are already used widely.

Frankly, compared to steroids they are probably far more dangerous, but it is not cheating if everyone does it. Ha, ha.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009 ... act_talbot

[kuha]

This is exactly, and precisely, the scenario I've been suggesting for years in regard to "our" anti-drugs fixation in sports. Drugs to improve intelligence or work performance will be very hard for many people to resist--and, in fact, they will likely be widely encouraged. Assuming some real resulting difference in performance, how many of us would go out of our way to choose--for ourselves, on issues that really matter--a non-performance-enhanced accountant, or surgeon, or auto mechanic, or [fill in the blank]...? I'm not pretending I'm "for" this--just that, in our absolutely drug-saturated society, this kind of thing is basically inevitable.

[gh]

very long read, but fascinating.... our old friend Modafinil enters the dialogue on the second page.

[Conor Dary]

I am curious why there is a link at the top of the page for an ad that sells human growth hormone?

It is ads by google, so I presume it is an ad related to the link on drugs.

PS. It is gone now. Pretty funny.

[Conor Dary]

Towards the end of the article is this passage:

"It makes no sense to ban the use of neuroenhancers. Too many people are already taking them, and the users tend to be educated and privileged people who proceed with just enough caution to avoid getting into trouble."

As opposed to....athletes? Who, I suppose, are too dumb and of the wrong type to be trusted?

[Pego]

This is the first time, I heard the CNS stimulants called "neuroenhancers".