Commentators

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 14° London Hi 14°C / Lo 8°C

Johann Hari: They were great at first – but then the creativity dries up

Last year, I had my own brief experiment with smart drugs. I felt burned out after a series of long foreign assignments, and my brain was rustily chug-chugging along at half-speed. That's when I first read about a drug being billed as "Viagra for the brain" – not Ritalin, but Provigil, a brand name for modafinil.

It was originally designed for narcoleptics, but clinical trials stumbled across something odd: if you give it to non-narcoleptics, they become smarter. Their memory and concentration improves considerably, and so does their IQ. There were no known side-effects, except – oh, thank you! – weight loss.

I hunted it down online. A week later, the little white pills arrived in the post. Within a few hours of a 200mg dose, I found myself gliding into a state of long, deep concentration, able to read a book for six or seven hours at a time without looking up. My mood wasn't any different; I wasn't high. It was like I had opened a window in my brain and all the stuffy air had seeped out, to be replaced by a calm breeze. On Provigil, I had the most productive month of my life, writing reams of articles. I didn't notice any side-effects – until the third week.

At any given time, only a small amount of your brainpower is dedicated to the tasks immediately in front of you. The rest is working on other stuff – processing memories, your subconscious, your creative thoughts. But Provigil points all your mental guns forward. It deploys far more of your brainpower on to your direct task.

It's great at first – but it has a cost. After a while, you realise that your mental life is oddly depleted. Creative thoughts don't come to you any more. You are running on the imaginative store you built up before Provigil, and whizzing through it efficiently, but you aren't inventing anything new. That part of your brain is undernourished. You feel fast and flat.

When I stopped taking them, my brain went back to its slower, scrappier state – but my creative impulses came back. I was more spontaneous again. So I have cut a deal with myself. I keep a pack in the bathroom cabinet for the days when I am really knackered and have to be able to work fast and fluently – but I don't ever take more than one or two a month.

But if I ever had to do exams again, I would take Provigil. And here's the ethical dilemma. Is this the equivalent of athletes taking steroids? Does it create an unfair pressure for other people to take these drugs – which are still pretty expensive – to keep up with other students and co-workers? Or would we be unfairly holding the human race back by refusing to smarten up?

We can't escape these dilemmas now. Smart drugs are only going to become more subtle and powerful as money flows in. As Professor Anjan Chatterjee says: "This age of cosmetic neurology is coming, and we need to know it's coming." My little pack of Provigil is a challenge to us all.

More from Johann Hari

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Who dares?
[info]fourpie wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 05:17 am (UTC)
Good advert but... How do you dare trust the internet, when it is awash with counterfeit pills that contain chalk, flour and poisons?
Unfair advantage?
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 05:26 am (UTC)
It's a bit of unfair advantage on those who are not taking 'smart drugs' or disadvantaged kids who are on a stodgy junk food diet. I would have taken gingko biloba/ginseng if I had known about the effects of these on cognition in the old days. Damn, the world isn't fair and what we eat isn't making it any fairer. This isn't like testing for steroids since there are so many different ways to make the brain go faster or slower and there is no obvious baseline in cognition. Do we give kids sporadic & random IQ tests and then weight their exam results accordingly? Seems a sensible way of overcoming the transitory effects of supplements on exams.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/713087.stm
Re: Unfair advantage?
[info]johndoe09 wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 08:39 am (UTC)
How is purchasing smart drugs any more unfair, as the article notes, than being able to afford intensive tutoring for exams? I know several people who were 'tutored' through their 11+, even more to get the grades needed at A-level. The real issue is that once the exam is over and they have their place in the better school these people were unable to keep up with the group without the extra tutoring, and sometimes even with it, often leading to a crumbling of self-confidence and desire. The same could well happen with these concentration boosting pills, except the pressure of not keeping up could force those who used them to pass entrance exams or the BMAT, LMAT, etc, to feel the need to constantly use, especially in intense and highly competitive courses such as medicine or vet med. And however safe they seem, I've always believed that no drug is wholly good for you if taken repeatedly over the long-term, though I say this with no medical knowledge. Moreover, addiction, dependence and burn-out seem highly likely with such a performance enhancer and the pressure to use them.
Re: Unfair advantage?
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 11:27 am (UTC)
Some people self-medicate with alchohol once they've attained the high profile career they've been brain washed into seeking. These people are not too bright to begin with but often use every trick, good & bad, in their parents/mentors books to maintain the niche they've been told to aim towards. It must take a vey strong will to swim against the tide of such pressure towards the wrecking reef of their forties.
Decided against it
[info]theselflessmeme wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 12:26 pm (UTC)
Though it might not be 'mind-altering' in the way-out, hippy sense, any drug like this fundamentally affects the way your brain works. Which means, to a materialist like me, that they fundamentally change the person you are when you take them.

Thus, whilst they would have helped no end in exams or other heavy work-periods, I chose never to try Ritalin, Provigil etc. There are lots of things I'd like to change about myself, but I think I'll keep trying to change those with the mind I've already got, ably assisted by coffee.

Johann, your work is always wonderfully forceful and refreshingly clear - I think you already reach very high standards with your natural levels of aptitude and concentration, and don't need Provigil to aid them.

Plus, there's a class/financial dimension to this. If these drugs really do raise one's intellectual capabilities, is it fair that those most likely to take them will already be the most educated/successful, whilst those who struggle in those respects are likely to fall further behind by not knowing of or having access to 'clever pills'? Clearly not.
What about the people who actually need it for medical reasons?
[info]soz_this_userna wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 03:50 pm (UTC)
It is completely unfair that the issue of student abuse of provigil led to me being refused it as treatment for a sleep disorder when at Oxford University during a critical period of my degree.

Here it may have helped me overcome the effects of long-term sleep deprivation, which of course reduces cognitive function, and shortened sleep hours prevents memory acquisition as material fails to be encoded properly into the long term memory. (And that is to say nothing of the physical and emotional effects.) It took me two years to get diagnosis, recognition and a prescription for provigil, but by this time my degree was irretrievably in ruins.

And as to why I didnt buy it on the net, read the post below. Also, I had been asking my doctor for it.

Was it the miracle drug? It helps, but does not offer an absolute solution. It enables me to function better on an inadequate amount of sleep, but like I said, those hours in bed are necessary to lay down long term memory so without an ultimate cure for my sleep disorder I am not able to achieve my potential. This is also true for other functions of sleep such as emotional processing. So using provigil recreationally to cut sleep hours is literally a no-brainer.

As for its use for cognitive enhancement, if sleep deprivation lowers cognitive functioning, provigil, by addressing the sleep-deprivation, will enhance cognitive functioning. So to use it when rested for cognitive enhancement alone is possibly addressing some order of (perhaps not obvious) fatigue??

Perhaps, but as pointed out by Johann, we don't know whats happening here and it's other and long-term effects are certainly an unknown. It works on the dopamine system, so could this put you at risk of say, Parkinson's?



Columnist Comments

brian_viner

Brian Viner: Sorry, Roy, but Ireland played like superstars

It would be nice if Roy Keane could show some generosity of spirit.

christina_patterson

Christina Patterson: What we learn from the Sikh in the BNP

For ethnic harmony, you can go the route of a Tito or a Saddam Hussein.

andrew_grice

Andrew Grice: Blair beaten, but a coup for PM nonetheless

Mr Blair would have loved to become a powerful figurehead for Europe.


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion