http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&story_id=11412603 The article begins by discussing coffee as a "smart" drug. Then begins to escalate by discussing ritalin and other cognitive drugs. But the main issue is probably the social stigma of pharmaceuticals and their use when not needed. Look at it this way, I am a big fan of cybernetics (or robotics) where you replace biological functions with machines, hydraulics and signalprocessors. I wouldn't mind installing a computer in my brain, or maybe a new knee-joint when I need one? But machines to aid humans, as tools or enhancers, isn't a social stigma. Of course some backwards people and some conservatives would frown upon people having a large and bulky metal arm instead of a meaty one. If we could begin to construct drugs that would inhibit the age deterioration process. I think that maybe we as a species would be better off with people being in their mental prime maybe ten more years? Maybe being fast and furious even up to 90? Of course pharmaceuticals bring with them unintended sideeffects, but what doesn't? But why not smart drugs? Is it doping? Is it wrong? Discuss. P.s. I hope people won't get offended or fired up on this one. That is not my intention, I found this article and thought of it as prime discussion material in my new favourite forum. I hope you will find this angle like food for thought, as I did.