Use of drugs to enhance academic performance

[rhody]

Freshman year tends to be tough for MIT students, because that's the time people whose math skills are "merely good" meet people that are totally scary crazy math geniuses. It's usually a shock for someone that was the top math student in their state go somewhere that the find that they are in the bottom 20%, but you get use to it.

Dear twofish-quant,

I found this thread interesting especially since I have a daughter in college, and have friend's whose kids are in the same situation.

During a discussion with one of them about achievement, grades, stress, time management, cramming, all nighters, etc... I asked him what his kids do to help them focus. I got a surprising answer, his kids, son and daughter both use strattera, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomoxetine" ). It works/builds up in their system over time. They start with a smaller dose, gradually increasing to obtain full effect, usually over a month period or so. Then, after the school year is over, they wean themselves off it as recommended to avoid unwanted side-effects. He confided that both his son and daughter use it to help them focus and obtain better grades, but only during challenging semesters (as needed) at college. I know times have changed since you were in college, because in those days drugs with this level of sophistication did not exist.

So, question is: How rampant at competitive colleges like MIT is this and other prescription drugs used to help focus/study/prepare for tests ?

Thanks...

Rhody

 

[davesface]

Dear twofish-quant,
So, question is: How rampant at competitive colleges like MIT is this and other prescription drugs used to help focus/study/prepare for tests ?

The bigger question is: how can I get some?

 

[twofish-quant]

Then, after the school year is over, they wean themselves off it as recommended to avoid unwanted side-effects. He confided that both his son and daughter use it to help them focus and obtain better grades, but only during challenging semesters (as needed) at college. I know times have changed since you were in college, because in those days drugs with this level of sophistication did not exist.

I don't know what the situation is like today. In my day circa late-1980's, people didn't use anything stronger than lots of coffee and Jolt Cola, but even those didn't work very well for very long. When you need to sleep, you need to sleep.

Also, one very good thing about Harvard and MIT, is that you had some pretty strong pressure from professors and upperclassmen *NOT* to study. The problem with students at MIT, is that sometimes you need someone in a position of authority to tell you that you've been working too hard, you need to get some sleep, and that everything will be fine in the end.

So, question is: How rampant at competitive colleges like MIT is this and other prescription drugs used to help focus/study/prepare for tests ?

It didn't happen when I was at MIT in the late-1980's although I can't say anything about today. One of the things that I liked about MIT, was that it wasn't that internally competitive. Everyone made it clear that if did a reasonable amount of work, you'd pass the class, and one thing that did was it meant that people tended to help each other a lot.

I do think that there is something seriously dysfunctional about the way that higher education has been structured.

 

[twofish-quant]

The bigger question is: how can I get some?

The even bigger question is how have we gotten ourselves in a situation were people think they need it. Once you start tinkering with neurochemistry, it's tinkering with dynamite.

And it doesn't help. If you get to the point where everyone feels compelled to use prescription drugs to get an "extra edge" then you'll end up in an arms race in which no one ended up ahead, and it's not going to stop until something really, really had happens.

 

[rasmhop]

And it doesn't help. If you get to the point where everyone feels compelled to use prescription drugs to get an "extra edge" then you'll end up in an arms race in which no one ended up ahead, and it's not going to stop until something really, really had happens.

That is not really true unless everyone's ultimate goal is a good relative rank, not knowledge, accomplishments or fun. If we really had a 100% safe drug without side-effects, available to everyone that would allow us to focus better then it would be beneficial for all, as society as a whole could accomplish more without any sacrifice (or get more free time if that was what we wanted).

I know that I use caffeine (through soft drinks) to help my studying and if I could find an as inexpensive, legal and safe alternative I would use it and I don't see a problem with everyone else doing as well. I have heard second-hand accounts of ADD medicine like adderall and ritalin being used at other colleges, but at least at my (non-competitive) college it doesn't seem to be a major issue (or perhaps people just don't discuss it openly).

 

[rhody]

If you get to the point where everyone feels compelled to use prescription drugs to get an "extra edge" then you'll end up in an arms race in which no one ended up ahead, and it's not going to stop until something really, really had happens.

To clarify, I have known this guy and his family (now college age) for over 30 years, even before his kids were born, I assure you they are as "normal" a family as you will ever find. Normal problems like everyone else has, sure... My friend was making a comment that in his opinion that taking straterra made a difference in their grades by something like the difference between a B and a B+.

I can't substantiate that because it is a single isolated case. A scientific study would have to be done to prove or disprove it. His son is now a graduate, has a job and doing fine. His daughter has less than two years to go. His kids were always active in sports and got good grades when they applied themselves. They were not the kind of kids who needed to be #1 in their class to be happy with themselves. I hope I have clarified this instance at least. I can't speak for anyone else...

Rhody

 

[DarrenM]

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/04/20-of-scientist/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12/brain-enhancing/

Somewhat disturbing trend, part of me says. The other part says I'm a hypocrite, because I drink coffee with breakfast and wine with dinner.

 

[davesface]

The even bigger question is how have we gotten ourselves in a situation were people think they need it. Once you start tinkering with neurochemistry, it's tinkering with dynamite.

It's a good thing college kids aren't known for their use of mind-altering substances already (excluding alcohol, marijuana, ecstasy, Vicodin, Xanax, Valium, and the various other amphetimanes and barbituates floating around). Plus, who are you to tell me, or anyone over whom you don't have legal custody, whether/how we are allowed to alter our neurochemistry?

If you get to the point where everyone feels compelled to use prescription drugs to get an "extra edge" then you'll end up in an arms race in which no one ended up ahead, and it's not going to stop until something really, really had happens.

Just because you call something an "arms race" doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. By that reasoning (if I may set up a straw man for comedy's sake), nobody should study for tests because if some people study then others will feel compelled to study to get an "extra edge". Returning to seriousness, though, your post reeks of luddism.

And as for the "something really, really bad", I'll assume you mean that some people are going to overdose and possibly die. Frankly, why should I care? The vast majority of college students are legally adults who should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want to take that risk. I don't like the idea of dying from alcohol poisoning, so I don't binge drink (or, indeed, drink at all).

The only reason there is even a discussion about it is because it is something new and therefore it must be scary and bad.

 

[rasmhop]

The only reason there is even a discussion about it is because it is something new and therefore it must be scary and bad.

I think that is a large part of it, but once you get beyond the initial paranoia there are still two scary things:
a) These are prescription drugs. Thus, at least legally, they are not on the level of alcohol, but rather the same as cocaine. You can get jail time in many countries for simple possession of them.
b) Some of these substance can have serious adverse effects and therefore check-ups at doctors should be encouraged or at least information on how to detect adverse efffects, but as long as they remain illegal to obtain people won't get checked for adverse reactions. Some reactions such as liver issues may not be detected until the damage is very serious.

Both issues would almost disappear if we legalized it, but some of these substances can still be dangerous (however if this was reason enough to make them illegal I guess alcohol should be made illegal too). Personally I'm all for legalizing them when proven safe, some of this stuff is really effective. Keeping them illegal pose the same threats that making alcohol illegal does, except cognitive enhancement is much better for society.

 

[jasonRF]

During a discussion with one of them about achievement, grades, stress, time management, cramming, all nighters, etc... I asked him what his kids do to help them focus. I got a surprising answer, his kids, son and daughter both use strattera, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomoxetine" ). It works/builds up in their system over time. They start with a smaller dose, gradually increasing to obtain full effect, usually over a month period or so. Then, after the school year is over, they wean themselves off it as recommended to avoid unwanted side-effects. He confided that both his son and daughter use it to help them focus and obtain better grades, but only during challenging semesters (as needed) at college. I know times have changed since you were in college, because in those days drugs with this level of sophistication did not exist.

For people who have ADHD these kinds of drugs can clearly make life much better. But I think that advising kids to use this stuff when they don't medically need it is basically a vote of no-confidence.

I personally think that many college aged folks these days could improve their concentration by eliminating their so-called "multi-tasking." You know, watching TV, texting, face-booking, reading physicforums , and somehow studying at the same time. I heard an interesting NPR show where a couple of professors were discussing a study that showed such "multi-taskers" were actually worse-off than folks that didn't. It was very intersting, as their reason for performing the study was that they were impressed at how these students seemed to do so many things at once. What they found, is that they merely did a bunch of things poorly.

Don't get me wrong, texting, email, etc. are all great and technology is the future, but to do deep thinking we need uninterrupted blocks of time. Our brains really only do one thing at a time, so when something requires a multi-step, complex thought process, constant interruptions will make it virtually impossible to get to the conclusion. When I really need to figure out something complex for work I close my email client and do not answer my phone. If I cannot get the block of time I need I will hide in the Library at work and not tell folks where I am. My efficiency is certainly the highest during such times.

jason

 

[twofish-quant]

It's a good thing college kids aren't known for their use of mind-altering substances already (excluding alcohol, marijuana, ecstasy, Vicodin, Xanax, Valium, and the various other amphetimanes and barbituates floating around).

A lot of which have caused very, very serious problems. I think that part of the problem is that most people go to college at far too young an age.

Plus, who are you to tell me, or anyone over whom you don't have legal custody, whether/how we are allowed to alter our neurochemistry?

If you want to get drunk or high, and you are doing it to have fun, that's pretty much your business, and I really don't care that much what you do. If you are taking medication because you feel that you have to do it in order to get a B+ rather than a B-, then that's something very different. There's something seriously wrong with the college environment if people feel that the are compelled to take medication for non-recreational reasons.

Just because you call something an "arms race" doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. By that reasoning (if I may set up a straw man for comedy's sake), nobody should study for tests because if some people study then others will feel compelled to study to get an "extra edge".

If education stops becoming fun, and people are too focused on the test and not learning anything, yes, that's a really big problem. Personally, I think that universities have too many tests.

Also in the case of MIT, the environment of the place tries to keep you from studying too hard.

And as for the "something really, really bad", I'll assume you mean that some people are going to overdose and possibly die. Frankly, why should I care?

If you don't want to, then don't. Just don't get in the way of those of us that do. Presumably, someone pays a college money to get an education. If they end up leaving the campus in a body bag, then something really bad did happen. Also, if you are a college administrator you should care, because you will be hit with a wrongful death lawsuit have have to pay out several tens of millions of dollars in legal settlements which happened to MIT.

The only reason there is even a discussion about it is because it is something new and therefore it must be scary and bad.

It's new therefore we really don't know what the risks are, and so it's a bad idea to create an environment which forces people to take these sorts of risks. Again, if you want to take new drugs for the fun of it, that's your business. If you feel that you need to take drugs because somehow the college is sending the message that you will get in trouble if you don't, then it really is the business of the college, if for no other reason than they'll get hit with a lawsuit if something bad happens to you.

 

[twofish-quant]

One other thing is that college is a difficult time, and pretty much everyone that goes to MIT will at some point in their undergraduate years "flip out" in some way or another.

 

[twofish-quant]

I personally think that many college aged folks these days could improve their concentration by eliminating their so-called "multi-tasking."

I think a lot of older than college aged folks could improve their concentration by eliminating multi-tasking, and I try to avoid it whenever possible.

One thing that I think is a pretty bad thing is that I get the sense that most college students are seriously overworked. Getting on the treadmill is fine if you want to be on it, but there needs to be this big red button that stops the treadmill and allows students to get off.

One problem is that curriculum tend to be the battleground for departmental turf-wars and so there is political pressure to stuff the curriculum with required courses from your department.

 

[atyy]

I don't know what the situation is like today. In my day circa late-1980's, people didn't use anything stronger than lots of coffee and Jolt Cola, but even those didn't work very well for very long. When you need to sleep, you need to sleep.

The situation seemed the same in the late 1990s. But I think people stayed up to play Doom, not homework!

 

[davesface]

If you're talking about the Richard Guy case, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here. He was doing Nitrous Oxide repeatedly in dorms and had already gone to the health center for help before he died. Of course that's a wrongful death suit; they knew he was doing it and that he was doing it in the dorms. Second, I never said anything about tests. It would be silly (in my opinion) to do Adderall just to help cram for a single test, but I would love to take it regularly for the added alertness and increased memory to help with overall learning.

I guess I see your point about the college implicitly encouraging its use, but I think personal responsibility has to come into play at some point. I can also agree with you saying that something is wrong with the whole environment if people feel pressured into trying these types of things to go from a B- to a B+, since at that point learning is secondary to getting the "prize" of a good grade by any means necessary.

Realistically, college administrators would have to be stupid to think that us kids aren't going to try something that gives even the slightest of advantages with a few mildly annoying side effects. I just don't buy into everything you say about the environment making people feel like they have to do things. Clearly it's rewarded, but it's by no means mandatory (at least from my perspective).

And I should add that I'm not as callous as I probably came off, but I was just making the point that someone else overdosing would not dissuade me from trying it cautiously. Furthermore, everything you said about the school risking a lawsuit wouldn't dissuade me personally from using it either. I'm just trying to give my perspective on it as a current student in the age group that tends to use these drugs most pervasively.

 

[twofish-quant]

I guess I see your point about the college implicitly encouraging its use, but I think personal responsibility has to come into play at some point.

But it's hard to argue for personal responsibility if the students don't have any real control over the testing and the classroom environment. Also, if you are going to mess up your life in a way that is going to cause a college to face major lawsuits and bad publicity, I don't think it's unreasonable for them to ask you to do it elsewhere.

Realistically, college administrators would have to be stupid to think that us kids aren't going to try something that gives even the slightest of advantages with a few mildly annoying side effects.

Why is getting a "slight advantage" so important? One thing that college is *supposed* to do is to teach people to question their environment. How did we end up with a world in which the difference between a B+ and a B- is so important, and do we really want to live in that kind or world?

One thing that you have to realize is that one of the motivations behind college is so that the military/corporate/industrial complex can turn you into a cog to allow the power elite to make huge profits and when you are used up, you get thrown away. Grades are one way that power structure controls you, and makes you do what they want them to.

Furthermore, everything you said about the school risking a lawsuit wouldn't dissuade me personally from using it either.

Of course it wouldn't. You aren't the person that's getting sued.

I'm just trying to give my perspective on it as a current student in the age group that tends to use these drugs most pervasively.

And if you are having fun doing it, then it's outside the bounds of this discussion.

 

[atyy]

What if vitamin C were found to make the difference between a B and B+, would you be opposed too?

 

[atyy]

My personal view: intelligence is over-rated, and stupidity is a priceless asset, but not everyone can afford to be idealistic and a B and a B+ sometimes makes a practical difference.

However, everything we do is messing with neurochemistry, including eating our fruits and vegetables, so messing with neurochemistry per se is nothing new, except some means are better tested than others.

 

[davesface]

But it's hard to argue for personal responsibility if the students don't have any real control over the testing and the classroom environment. Also, if you are going to mess up your life in a way that is going to cause a college to face major lawsuits and bad publicity, I don't think it's unreasonable for them to ask you to do it elsewhere.

We're not talking about whether or not a college encourages students to use these drugs, obviously they have to come out publicly against it until it becomes acceptable and they don't risk lawsuits anymore. We're talking about whether or not individuals should use them.

Why is getting a "slight advantage" so important? One thing that college is *supposed* to do is to teach people to question their environment. How did we end up with a world in which the difference between a B+ and a B- is so important, and do we really want to live in that kind or world?

One thing that you have to realize is that one of the motivations behind college is so that the military/corporate/industrial complex can turn you into a cog to allow the power elite to make huge profits and when you are used up, you get thrown away. Grades are one way that power structure controls you, and makes you do what they want them to.

I agree with you about mindlessly chasing grades rather than trying to actually learn the material. As I said before, it would be silly to use these drugs just to get through a test for which you hadn't truly learned the material on your own. Using them regularly to make really learning the material easier, on the other hand, seems totally acceptable.

More power to you for that second paragraph, and I agree wholeheartedly. I'm not one to chase grades at the expense of learning the material for my own satisfaction, but I still insist that I would use Adderall/etc. regularly if it would help me learn and remember course material better.

You aren't the person that's getting sued.

Again, my point in saying what I originally said was to talk about it from a student's perspective since the school's position pretty much has to be whatever will avoid the most lawsuits.

 

[twofish-quant]

What if vitamin C were found to make the difference between a B and B+, would you be opposed too?

I'm not sure what I'm for or against here.

If it turned out that drinking mineral water or wearing tall hats could boost one's grades, then we'd have a problem, because in a situation where someone feels that they are under pressure to perform, they'll drink increasingly large amounts of mineral water and wearing taller and taller hats until something bad happens.

In the case of drinking mineral water or drinking coffee, you will run into the situation that you'll get sick before you end up in the hospital. If you drink eight cups of coffee to stay awake for a test, chances are that you will get into a totally bad mental state, and then learn never to do it again. If it works for you, then chances are that you'll try drinking sixteen. Eventually you'll hit the wall. If wearing tall hats gets you better grades, then people will wear taller and taller hats until people end up with back and neck problems.

(And something like this *does* happen with carpal tunnel syndrome.)

The problem with prescription drugs is that when you hit the wall, it's usually something more serious than feeling miserable for a day or two.

 

[twofish-quant]

We're not talking about whether or not a college encourages students to use these drugs, obviously they have to come out publicly against it until it becomes acceptable and they don't risk lawsuits anymore. We're talking about whether or not individuals should use them.

I don't think that we are talking about whether or not individuals should or shouldn't use them, since I think that's a pointless discussion. If I tell you that I've come to the conclusion that you shouldn't use these drugs, I don't think you are going to listen to me. If I tell you that I will give you $1 million to change your behavior somehow, then there is a good chance that you will do it.

I'm more interested in why people do or don't to certain things, rather than whether people should or shouldn't do them, because the later turns out to be more interesting and useful. I'm also not that much of a fan of the lecture as a form of education. If someone gives a speech saying that you shouldn't take formula X, that's not going to be useful. If you take formula X, and the next day you either totally zone out or you turn into Einstein, that's going to be a more effective lesson.

Using them regularly to make really learning the material easier, on the other hand, seems totally acceptable.

If it works... I lot of this has to do with my relationship with coffee. What I find is that coffee really does help to keep me awake, but if I use it for long periods of time, it causes increasingly large problems. It's actually better for me to cut down on the coffee and try to relax.

Bur what worries me is that if it turns out that SSRI's will let people absorb twice as much material, then what is going to eventually happen is that people will hand out SSRI's and they'll assign twice as much material so you are going to end up with the same stress level until something breaks.

Also, there are broader educational issues here. If SSRI's make it easier to learn the material, then people might be a bit too focused on learning the material rather than questioning if the material should be taught. That may not be such a good thing.

 

[tmyer2107]

At my school adderall is everywhere. I think I know more people that either take it before every test or have at least tried it a few times than people that haven't tried it at all. Most of these falling into the first category.

Why is getting a "slight advantage" so important? One thing that college is *supposed* to do is to teach people to question their environment. How did we end up with a world in which the difference between a B+ and a B- is so important, and do we really want to live in that kind or world?

In some cases, the diffrence between a B+ and a B- is huge. A few of my friends just lost their scholarships because they dropped to a 2.9 cum. I know this is a rare occurance but there is a lot of pressure felt by many of the first and second year engineering students here to get As abd B+ to make sure they don't lose their scholarships. And they will take any advantage they can get. There is also a lot of pressure on the students to do well because of the co-op program at my school. Some jobs you can't even send your resume to if you don't have at least a 3.3 or 3.5. So those few classes with a half letter grade difference can mean a lot.

If it turned out that drinking mineral water or wearing tall hats could boost one's grades, then we'd have a problem, because in a situation where someone feels that they are under pressure to perform, they'll drink increasingly large amounts of mineral water and wearing taller and taller hats until something bad happens.

I agree here. I don't know of any really bad things happening due to people I know taking too much adderall but that doesn't mean it won't happen. I have seen someones legs give out on them while walking back from a final because they were so exhausted from not sleeping for 2 days, they took adderall to stay awake.

I'm more interested in why people do or don't to certain things, rather than whether people should or shouldn't do them, because the later turns out to be more interesting and useful.

Students take adderall because there is such a massive amount of pressure on them to perform, at least at my school. How tough it will be is drilled into us since orientation. They say, "55% of you will drop out of the program by the end of freshmen year". The professors scare most of the students into thinking they won't make it and don't focus enough on what they need to do in order to make it. These students then try to do everything they can to make sure they have an edge and won't fall into that 55%.

 

[Codester09]

I have ADHD. I take Adderall IR twice a day. My roommate and a couple other friends knew and told a few other kids on our floor and eventually the word spread. I can't go anywhere without someone saying "Hey, you have Adderall right?". I think that the misuse of Adderall & other amphetamines is an emerging epidemic in academics. Adderall goes for $5-7 a pill around here. I refuse to sell mine, but I could easily make over $400 with a month's supply.

 

[tmyer2107]

Adderall goes for $5-7 a pill around here. I refuse to sell mine, but I could easily make over $400 with a month's supply.

Its about the same here depending on whether or not it is an XR and how many mg it is. A friend of mine that has ADD rarely takes it himself, he just sells it. He usually saves it until finals week because the price per pill goes way up then.

 

[Choppy]

I don't think this is anything new. I'm pretty sure students have been experimenting with drugs all the way back to the time of Socrates. There will always be students who are willing to try something to give them that edge - even if the pressure to perform isn't all that great. People naturally want to do well at the tasks they chose to take on. So even if we somehow change the university environment to reduce the pressure, I doubt the drug issue will go away. People will still take risks just for the heck of it.

There will also always be people who don't approve of such risks. To quote an earlier post:

Plus, who are you to tell me, or anyone over whom you don't have legal custody, whether/how we are allowed to alter our neurochemistry?

They're the ones whose taxes pay for your hospital bed when things don't work out.

 

[Shackleford]

There's nothing wrong with adequate nutritional supplements, especially given the crappy foods we all eat on-the-go, typically, and so forth. The abuse by some shouldn't dissuade others from taking highly beneficial nutrients.

I take glucosamine, multivitamin, vitamin A, C, E, B-complex, Zinc, calcium, and MSM every day. I've cut my daily fat intake in half. I lift weights moderately. I feel great. Everything in moderation.

 

[twofish-quant]

In some cases, the diffrence between a B+ and a B- is huge. A few of my friends just lost their scholarships because they dropped to a 2.9 cum.

I think that the basic problem that academia and society both took a really, really bad turn somewhere. There was this idea that society should be divided between the saved and the damned, and if you were saved then you'd end up being master of the universe whereas if you were damned, you ended up with nothing. The problem is that for this system to work, you have to basically promise everyone that they are "saved" but if you wait a few years, you find out that you are really "damned."

Some jobs you can't even send your resume to if you don't have at least a 3.3 or 3.5. So those few classes with a half letter grade difference can mean a lot.

The thing that you have to ask yourself is what happens after you get that job. Well if it's anything like my experience, you'll find that you are still playing monkey tricks to get ahead. At some point, you'll realize that you are chasing a mirage, and the sooner you realize that the better.

Students take adderall because there is such a massive amount of pressure on them to perform, at least at my school. How tough it will be is drilled into us since orientation. They say, "55% of you will drop out of the program by the end of freshmen year". The professors scare most of the students into thinking they won't make it and don't focus enough on what they need to do in order to make it. These students then try to do everything they can to make sure they have an edge and won't fall into that 55%.

This sort of things really disgusts me. I mean it really, really makes me angry because there really is absolutely no excuse for it. It's immoral.

1) It's not as if there aren't enough teachers. If you don't have enough teachers than hire more.

2) OK. Maybe the students aren't prepared enough. Well if that's the case, then why don't you just give a two or three day pre-test, and if you don't have the preparation for the class, then you just tell the student what they need to study, and tell them to come back next semester after they are in better shape.

Let me tell you the *real* reason that universities don't do that. If you fail out of class, the university keeps your money, so it's in their financial interest to fail you out and take your money. In fact, it's really in their financial interest not to teach you. Hey, if they fail everyone, they get to keep your tuition. It's really a nice scam.

Well, I should point out that this is the big reason that I don't think these sorts of drugs are a good idea. You may think they help you to think, and they may very well help you to pass tests. But they really end up keeping you from thinking about what is really going on, and how badly you really are being abused.

 

[rhody]

My personal view: intelligence is over-rated, and stupidity is a priceless asset, but not everyone can afford to be idealistic and a B and a B+ sometimes makes a practical difference.

I take glucosamine, multivitamin, vitamin A, C, E, B-complex, Zinc, calcium, and MSM every day. I've cut my daily fat intake in half. I lift weights moderately. I feel great. Everything in moderation.

My friend's kids have been on these meds since they were in grammar school and to their credit only use them during the school year. Coming from a middle class background, they use the meds in part I believe to tune out the distractions which helps them do better in college. I will ask them the next time I see them.​

In some cases, the difference between a B+ and a B- is huge. A few of my friends just lost their scholarships because they dropped to a 2.9 cum. I know this is a rare occurence but there is a lot of pressure felt by many of the first and second year engineering students here to get As and B+ to make sure they don't lose their scholarships. And they will take any advantage they can get. There is also a lot of pressure on the students to do well because of the co-op program at my school. Some jobs you can't even send your resume to if you don't have at least a 3.3 or 3.5. So those few classes with a half letter grade difference can mean a lot.

I empathize with you, tmyer2107. That being said, I live life with an open mind, and don't judge others unless I have lived and walked in their shoes.

Rhody...​

 

[Troponin]

I would never take an ADHD medication in order to "cheat" on an exam. I want to earn the score that I've earned, not what some pill has earned me.
I've always been against performance enhancing drugs. I drink coffee on occasion, but NEVER before studying or before an exam. Because I avoid caffeine, I'm pretty much limited to juice and water.
Unfortunately, I realized that the juice was probably giving me a sugar buzz that would be an unfair advantage and I didn't want to go out seeking sugar to get an edge. Because of that I changed to sugar free drinks for a while...until I realized that the artificial sweetener in most of them is Aspartame!
The first thing that happens in the digestion of Aspartame is the cleaving of Phenylalanine from its molecular structure.
Of course, phenylalanine gets converted to l-tyrosine...which undergoes tyrosine hydroxylase to form L-DOPA which undergoes a decarboxylase to form Dopamine!
Yes...the dopamine that is often touted as a potential cognitive enhancer.

If that's not enough, another simple decarboxylase away is Norepinephrine...the same performance enhancing neurotransmitter that many ADHD medications base their action around!

My only recourse was to completely avoid all food and water for a full 4 days before any major examination, and ingest no nutrients at all during finals week.

I felt comfortable with this, knowing that I was earning my grades on my own merit and not cheating my way through a test with performance enhancing drugs.

Imagine my sadness upon reading that severely calorie restricted diets increase life expectance in test animals by 20% or more!
I'm doing all I can to keep from cheating and in that quest I've committed the ULTIMATE CHEAT! It's bad enough to cheat on a single exam by using something to help you study, but I'm potentially extending my lifespan by decades!

That's 20 years that I can spend learning and gaining knowledge that my peers do not have. I've not only done something to give me an edge on a simple quiz, I've given myself hundreds of potential tests that my peers will never have the opportunity to take!

The only logical course of action I can find at this point is to take every performance enhancing drug I can get my hands on (including steroids and growth hormone). I'm begrudgingly giving myself an unfair advantage now, but feel safe in knowing that my shortened lifespan will ensure that I've cheated none of my peer group out of top grades for their entire life.

 

[davesface]

Am I talking (or typing, as the case may be) to myself here? Nobody is suggesting that it is a good idea to take these drugs for the sole purpose of achieving a certain grade. There is a clear consensus that doing that is ridiculous, so stop responding as though that is what is under consideration here.

The debate is concerned with the question: should the taking of these drugs on a regular basis in order to increase one's overall ability to learn and remember information be simply permissible, actively encouraged, or actively discouraged? twofish seems to be the only other person addressing this underlying issue, but I suspect a number of people have equally interesting opinions.

 

[twofish-quant]

The debate is concerned with the question: should the taking of these drugs on a regular basis in order to increase one's overall ability to learn and remember information be simply permissible, actively encouraged, or actively discouraged?

I think it's more complicated than that. If you are going to take these drugs anyway, and the administration becomes hostile to it, then you have the worst situation in which everything is happening under the table without any monitoring. All drugs have side-effects, and I've found that you absolutely need someone that is closely watching you when you are taking them, and that you can have frank, open, and confidental conversations about. However, a school that was interested and compassionate enough to provide those sort of services to students, would also probably not have idiot professors that threaten to fail most students. If the professors are obviously incompetent, then I wouldn't count much on the medical staff.

Also, increased focus may not be such a good thing. People who get prescribed SSRI's or similar medications often find that it increases focus but makes them less creative. It's also common that people that are good at physics and math get something like "runners high" from solving hard math problems, and medicines that make it easier to absorb information get in the way of that. Drugs are also a poor substitute for natural rhythms.

The thing that increases my focus is the right amount of sleep. Using coffee and benedryl to get the right amount of sleep doesn't cause the same benefits, and using drugs to force the right amount of sleep quickly leads to problems.

The reason that I'm worried about all this, is that my experience has been that people that are really good at physics and math are often "half crazy." They are just crazy enough to come up with weird and strange ideas, but not so crazy that they have to be locked up. People that are high performers in this area are skating on the edge of insanity anyway, and so doing something that changes neurochemistry has to be watched very closely.

It's not that I'm philosophically opposed to people taking medication to do well on tests, but I am very worried that there isn't a red emergency panic button that people can press if things go very bad.

 

[atyy]

I would never take an ADHD medication in order to "cheat" on an exam. I want to earn the score that I've earned, not what some pill has earned me.
I've always been against performance enhancing drugs. I drink coffee on occasion, but NEVER before studying or before an exam. Because I avoid caffeine, I'm pretty much limited to juice and water.
Unfortunately, I realized that the juice was probably giving me a sugar buzz that would be an unfair advantage and I didn't want to go out seeking sugar to get an edge. Because of that I changed to sugar free drinks for a while...until I realized that the artificial sweetener in most of them is Aspartame!
The first thing that happens in the digestion of Aspartame is the cleaving of Phenylalanine from its molecular structure.
Of course, phenylalanine gets converted to l-tyrosine...which undergoes tyrosine hydroxylase to form L-DOPA which undergoes a decarboxylase to form Dopamine!
Yes...the dopamine that is often touted as a potential cognitive enhancer.

If that's not enough, another simple decarboxylase away is Norepinephrine...the same performance enhancing neurotransmitter that many ADHD medications base their action around!

My only recourse was to completely avoid all food and water for a full 4 days before any major examination, and ingest no nutrients at all during finals week.

I felt comfortable with this, knowing that I was earning my grades on my own merit and not cheating my way through a test with performance enhancing drugs.

Imagine my sadness upon reading that severely calorie restricted diets increase life expectance in test animals by 20% or more!
I'm doing all I can to keep from cheating and in that quest I've committed the ULTIMATE CHEAT! It's bad enough to cheat on a single exam by using something to help you study, but I'm potentially extending my lifespan by decades!

That's 20 years that I can spend learning and gaining knowledge that my peers do not have. I've not only done something to give me an edge on a simple quiz, I've given myself hundreds of potential tests that my peers will never have the opportunity to take!

The only logical course of action I can find at this point is to take every performance enhancing drug I can get my hands on (including steroids and growth hormone). I'm begrudgingly giving myself an unfair advantage now, but feel safe in knowing that my shortened lifespan will ensure that I've cheated none of my peer group out of top grades for their entire life.

:rofl: I think you can lay off the steroids - according to http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2007.09.009 , aspartame is enough!

 

[twofish-quant]

I would never take an ADHD medication in order to "cheat" on an exam. I want to earn the score that I've earned, not what some pill has earned me.
I've always been against performance enhancing drugs.

Then I'd imagine that you would be shocked to live in a world in which you basically had to in order to graduate. I worry that we are gradually moving toward that situation. If you take medication to do well on tests that's your business, but if this results on people who don't doing less well and getting punished, then we have a real big problem.

If you end up having to take medication to get through college, then you probably aren't going to object in 30 years when your kids and your students do it too. And if you do object, then you might flunk out and what you think won't matter in 30 years.

One thing that I find interesting is how the morality of drugs is influenced by one's environment. In the Middle Ages, people drank lots of beer and wine and spent the day mostly intoxicated. That makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Beer has lots of calories, no nasty bacteria, and you really don't need to be that sober to be a peasant. The problem with beer is that bad things happen if you end up drunk near large machinery, which is why coffee and tea became popular around the time of the industrial revolution.

Also, one thing that did happen in MIT when I was there was that people drank large amounts of alcohol during the weekends to deal with the large amount of stress.

I don't morally object to people using medications to do well on tests. I worry about the body count that will happen while all that is going on, and whether drugs are going to cause more problems in the long run. If nothing else, you'll end up with drug makers making huge amounts of money and having more power than maybe they should.

 

[atyy]

If nothing else, you'll end up with drug makers making huge amounts of money and having more power than maybe they should.

Drinking coffee is natural!

 

[DukeofDuke]

Dear twofish-quant,
So, question is: How rampant at competitive colleges like MIT is this and other prescription drugs used to help focus/study/prepare for tests ?

Thanks...

Rhody

I think the people best equipped to answer this question are current undergraduates like me
First, starting generally, adderall has become the punchline to many jokes. Have you ever been to the site textsfromlastnight? You should go, you might find it interesting. There is a subset of college students who actually do the kind of stuff tfln talk about...anyways, adderall jokes are pretty prevalent there.
There are definitely a lot of people who use them to focus here at Duke.

The math and science guys, we don't use them as much. I've only seen one kid using it, and I know of a second. When he left the room to use it, the rest of us laughed at him (because he was the worst academic performer amongst us by far, a leech in the lab, and he "needed" a drug to do what the rest of us were finding easy).

So you can see that there's a natural pressure not to take it if you're good enough. Taking those drugs implies you can't get their on your own. For ridiculously smart, relatively arrogant kids, this can be a turn-off. However, there's another type of kid out there. We call him the "pre-med" and/or anyone who works as hard as the premed. For them its results, and yes its well known they take adderall or other focusing drugs. A lot of times kids use it to focus while writing papers.

Its definitely an issue today. As a student, I'm acutely aware of it, I've seen it, I've joked about it, I've laughed at jokes about it...so yeah its a reality.

Also, one thing that did happen in MIT when I was there was that people drank large amounts of alcohol during the weekends to deal with the large amount of stress.

heh. Come on. Its a university. You drink because you're IN COLLEGE, not because "you're stressed", at least I hope that's the case.