Amphetamine at low (and even increasingly high) doses has also been shown to be neuroprotective. Kind of a wonder drug as far as neurology goes, aside from the addictive and euphoric properties.
Amphetamine is not neuroprotective in a general sense, nor is that what the study shows. The study shows that gradually increasing the dose apparently allows rats to avoid some of the neurotoxicity effects of the amphetamine doses.
Amphetamine is well known to be toxic to rats in high doses, and the study you linked confirms as much. They just identified a dosing scheme which reduced the neurotoxicity through gradual dose increases, perhaps by giving the brains a chance to adapt.
It should not be interpreted to suggest that amphetamine is neuroprotective in general.
IMO the jury on these studies is to be determined. There is evidence of neurotoxicity but at the same time there are studies showing some neuroprotective properties. How about we wait to make claims until after more thorough research has been conducted
Keep in mind you still have the constraint of the Yerkes–Dodson law [0]. Drugs that are neuroprotective at therapeutic doses can easily become neurotoxic at extremely high supratherapeutic doses.
The only exception that comes to mind is memantine, which leads to a clearly disassociative state, but recreational use (again supratherapeutic doses) hasn't been studied thoroughly.
I don't believe amphetamine at therapeutic doses is addictive. You definitely have to ween off of it, because cold turkey means you'll sleep for a week straight. And any trace of euphoria goes away after a few months of daily therapeutic doses. Even if you quit for a week+ and get back on, the euphoria only comes back for, at most, a couple days.
I'd love to see more research about nicotine and schizophrenia. Something like 80% or schizophrenics smoke, and they do so heavily. This is 3 or 4 times the rate of the general population.
The question is: does smoking cause schizophrenia, is it self-medication, or both?
Scott Alexander has an interesting summary [1].
For what it's worth, my schizophrenic brother says smoking makes his mind feel much clearer.
I think mental hospitals should have a strategy to provide nicotine to patients (in the high dose they need) to minimise the harm of the strong cheap rubbish that schizophrenics inhale all day. Maybe e-cigs should be promoted to smoker patients.
There is theorized to be some synergistic effects between tobacco smoking and the antipsychotic medications that people such as your brother often require. IIRC it really isn't known why that is, but it seems relatively well accepted among people who routinely work with schizophrenia.
> There is theorized to be some synergistic effects between tobacco smoking and the antipsychotic medications that people such as your brother often require.
"Antipsychotics" are palliative medications that do not address the cause of the problematic symptoms. They have repeatedly been shown to cause a very poor long-term prognosis for the unfortunate patients who are put on them.
Nicotine is somewhat similar to Vitamin B3 (Niacin), which has been shown to help schizophrenics recover. Niacinamide supplementation helps my girlfriend reduce her tobacco use.
... Here, we propose a model that a subset of
schizophrenia can respond to niacin augmentation therapy
better than other subsets because these patients have
contributions in their psychotic manifestations from the
neural degeneration resulting from niacin deficiency. We
present a short description of our case report which
showed rapid improvement in schizophrenic psychotic
symptoms subsequent to administration of niacin as an
augmentation therapy. We, thus, propose that niacin
deficiency is a contributory factor in schizophrenia
development in some patients and symptom alleviation in
these patients will benefit from niacin augmentation,
especially in some particular psychotic features."
I've read your story submissions and let me first say that I admire your courage and dedication. I hope this comment is useful and not too blunt.
It sounds like you've gained two passions from your experience: (1) finding the right treatment for mental health issues, instead of long-term palliation, and (2) addressing casual abuses of power and ignorance of the law.
My advice to you is to focus on one passion at a time. You can't make progress on both fronts at once.
Regarding (1), there's a word for people who try to go around the medical establishment and run a business selling a cure-all pill. It's "quack", not "hack". Even if you're right you'll have no credibility and make zero difference to psychiatric treatment, mainstream or otherwise.
The credible approach is to write a case report plus literature review and get it published. I suggest the topic of the literature review should be "low-cost, low-risk interventions to assist in diagnosing subtypes of schizophrenia". You can't do this on your own: you'll need a friendly PhD co-author to edit it brutally and guide you through publication.
(By subtype here I mean the different etiologies, which is an emerging area of study, not the traditional grouping by symptoms)
Regarding (2), your focus should be local and specific, and honestly your best bet may be donating or raising money for existing organisations that work in this area.
Thanks for your comments - they are quite helpful.
> Regarding (1), there's a word for people who try to go around the medical establishment and run a business selling a cure-all pill. It's "quack", not "hack".
I manufactured a supplement once, then I realized it was a legal minefield. I have plans to apply for FDA approval for a claim for a device. This would provide legal protection against the status quo, while destroying their harmful business at the same time.
I gave a bottle of my supplement to a young woman who'd just been not-helped at the hospital. I called her a few days later - she said, "THAT STUFF REALLY WORKS!" I called a few months later, and her sister said she was in the state mental hospital. People need more than a supplement to become truly well.
> The credible approach is to write a case report plus literature review and get it published. I suggest the topic of the literature review should be "low-cost, low-risk interventions to assist in diagnosing subtypes of schizophrenia".
"... for the Emergency Room physician." Yeah, I like that idea. I have some ideas of people to work with.
Robert Whitaker has pointed out to the psychiatrists that their "science" is paid for by the industry whose products they use [1]. He hasn't gotten very far in the last 15 years.
I'd just like to echo what tominous said. I'll be honest, and say that your post set off what I'd call my "Crank/Crackpot Detector". By no means is that detector anything approaching perfect, but if I had to describe why it went off, tomimous' post gets right to the heart of it.
To be clear, I don't disagree with your characterization of antipsychotics as being potentially (often) devastating in the long term. When you meet people with drastic manifestations of tardive dyskinesia from their medications for example, that fact becomes exceedingly clear.
The problem is that it becomes equally clear upon careful examination, that the only worse outcome than a lifetime of antipsychotic therapy, is psychosis. Each psychotic break is correlated with increasingly grim outcomes, such as a homelessness, permanent care, and suicide.
I see your argument as very impassioned, but fundamentally in the same vein as people who tell you to avoid chemotherapy because it's bad for you. It's true, chemotherapy is poison, but oftentimes it's the best we have to work with. The problem then, is that recognizing the limitations of current therapies doesn't imply that a better "natural" alternative exists right now.
Hi, thanks for posting and sharing your reaction to what I'd said. I'm going to respond to tominous next, so check for that comment too.
> I'll be honest, and say that your post set off what I'd call my "Crank/Crackpot Detector".
I know, right? It's usually safe to assume that conventional practices are what they are because they're the best we have, at the present time.
> Each psychotic break is correlated with increasingly grim outcomes, such as a homelessness, permanent care, and suicide.
Robert Whitaker proposes that patients did much better before the psychiatrists had drugs to put them on: people had "episodes" from which they frequently recovered. Page 7 of "The Case Against Antipsychotics" [1] begins a discussion of studies of psychotic illnesses in the pre-drug era.
> It's true, chemotherapy is poison, but oftentimes it's the best we have to work with.
Sometimes science takes detours before it rediscovers that which was previously unpopular. This article demonstrates that progressive oncologists are beginning to recognize the errors of their predecessors:
Betel nut and arecoline (one of the primary constituents, similar to nicotine) are ridiculously carcinogenic. Bad idea touching that stuff.
A contract manufacturing lab in the supplement industry tried to bring it into supplements with celebrity athletes promoting it. I did my research and decided it was a BAD idea outside of hardcore /well-researched circles and went on the attack.
I had some legal threats but was in communication with toxicologists over the issue and was ready to take it all the way to court to protect my first Amendment rights. One major retailer then also got toxicologists involved. After much tension, the supplements were removed from the market.
And interestingly, the owners of the company that tried to bring it to market are now facing serious jail time for other things.
Point being?
1. Do not touch that stuff with a ten foot pole.
2. You can make a difference and protect consumers who do not know how to do the research themselves.
Sorry for the offtopic rant. I am a huge fan of stimulants but I do not believe in promoting all of them to everybody and urge you all much caution with them. Especially that Betel nut / arecoline poison.
I remember Dr. Dean Edell said more than a few times, 'nicotine/tobacco has been so vilified in the U.S., we will never know if it has any medicinal value.'
Exactly. It has a ton of valuable, useful characteristics. It's a REALLY good hack for fitness--every day, wear a nicotine patch and go to the gym (at the same time/trigger each day). You RAPIDLY get addicted to fitness.
Nicotine has similar effects to Vitamin B3. Niacinamide (a no-flush B3 supplement) has helped my girlfriend reduce her tobacco intake, when she gets it...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2440058