![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Phenylpiracetam.
|
-- The data in the pharmacology section calling phenylpiracetam a NDRI is dubious at best. The patent claiming increases in dopamine levels based on ONE chart has massive error bars on the data points which all conveniently lack a bottom bar. The abstracted cited for NET inhibition does not state anything regarding norepinephrine unless it's discussed somewhere within the article. -June 2018
--One CNN article noted, has a dead link. Cannot be found Google searching with reference to it.
-- Agreed. The section on pharmacology makes sweeping claims about the action of phenylpiracetam without providing any citations or other evidence. The entire page reads like an advertisement for the product. I deleted links to suppliers that included PRICING information! - Oceanlab — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanlab ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
You're not going to find anything on it in English, because Westerners didn't patent it. There isn't going to be any further research on it in English, for the same reason. You're going to have a hard time finding anyone to translate it too. Teaching Russian has never been a priority. The Berlin Wall still exists if you turn to propaganda outlets like CNN for any type of information beyond it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.221.237.163 ( talk) 03:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree that more citations are needed and disagree that "You're not going to find anything on it in English, because Westerners didn't patent it". Although the sentiment is based in truth, it's over the top and I'm fairly certain that Life Science Solutions LLC owns the rights to this and several related nootropics in the US. Moving on, here are some citations that should be worked in (in general, and so you can get rid of the valid-but-unnecessary giant warning message), but I haven't time to do it myself at present:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968089613002290
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1819712423020198
https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/11319230-000000000-00000
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10787-020-00705-7 (Mice)
https://cp.neurology.org/content/11/3/e303.abstract (analysis of commercial nootropic products)
https://figshare.utas.edu.au/articles/thesis/Monitoring_the_internet_for_nootropic_substances_available_to_Australian_consumers/23238149 (another in Austria like the one above)
https://www.ijest.org/nootropics/does-phenylpiracetam-increase-dopamine/ (Note: There's multiple articles mentioning the drug from this source, but I'm actually a little wary of it... it claims to be an "academic journal" but reads like a pop press tabloid).
There's also some that discuss it in the context of being a doping agent within sports, like this: https://web.s.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=0019462X&AN=149907672&h=ckTuNC1odkeZXJe2YUO3ZotYyOstdg3cPZ7xKsQFpBSd9X6kuOc33MTkqBG%2fj3beQM5kLH6gUD6R62HMCcrfmA%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d0019462X%26AN%3d149907672
71.244.243.33 ( talk) 03:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
This text was apparently translated via babelfish from the German wikipedia. It must be re-translated by hand. Athf1234 07:05, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Wow. I was going to add the info about Olga Pyleva, but somebody beat me to it.
PrometheusX303
21:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm buzzing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.64.117.54 ( talk) 14:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It is in fact an OTC drug in Russia, used to treat narcolepsy.-- 178.219.32.24 ( talk) 19:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Profmad07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
A new age in Neurol-Psychological modulators, may be dawning. After the jobless pharmacologists, or sold-out as DNA scientists, it has smoldered.
When Valium was found to have specific sites,& Shulgin's List got out, Hoffman's Problem child, was on dole.
Prof. Dole designed the 'methadone Project'. (Does it really stand for Dept. of Lost Employment?).
(anec.)
It was redundant. It had revolutionized the art-world, as much as it had science, design & technology.
Phenypiracetam, to quote Shulgin, has many erogenous zones (q.v. Chemistry is like Pornography, when you know what groups to look for).
Structurally, it resembles & replicates an array of noo(psycho)tropics, as Methylphenidate (MP) & also GABAergic agents. compounds..
Its Pharmacological profile, is a very rapid (intranasal) onset, Tachycardia is almost instant, quickly fading. It is a mild/moderate euphoriant, with a similar potency, and effect as Ethyl / Methylphenidate It too, has a slightly longer active t1/2. It gives a greater 'crystal' clear thought, without repetitive behavior (induced by amphetamines or EP)
Phenylpiracetam is an intriguing leap since the racetams, began. (Piracetam was used, (& Centrophenoxine), twenty years ago in Turkey. Piracetam, was not recognized, here at the time.
Research Chemistry should, make for a good double-blind study, of new psychotropics (nootropics).
Pharmacology is back!
07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Profmad07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Google, Bing and ChatGPT are now much better translators of Russian. I've corrected the rather silly mis-translated quote in 'History'. You can get the original Russian now also from the Wayback archive link I added and all are welcome to verify the much more sensible translation those engines gave me.
71.244.243.33 (
talk)
03:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
According to the wikipedia article naming policy, "Most notably: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's 'official' name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." [1] The recent change to this article's title abandoned a commonly used name to use a more "official" name, which nobody uses and nobody has heard of. Check the number of google search results if you want to see the huge magnitude of this difference.
Piojo ( talk) 06:49, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm considering expanding this article. I don't have access to Russian texts or manufacturer inserts; some help would be appreciated.
My interest comes largely from fixation: I'm getting ADHD treatment, and part of that is a big treatment for anhedonia; amphetamine isn't working as well as phenylpiracetam for that, and I'm thinking about several long-term options including atomoxetine combined with amphetamine or phenylpiracetam. For now I haven't raised this with my provider because I don't want to put strain on him, and because I don't know if I'll eventually bring it up anyway; if I start using it under medical supervision, I'll clear it with my psychiatrist first. As a compensating mechanism, I may as well work on making this a FA.
I'm obviously biased. If I write anything questionable or inappropriate, please correct if possible, or remove if necessary. I'll be citing patents as well, which frequently have studies; some studies demonstrate things other than the patent subject matter--for example, a patent for R-phenylpiracetam to treat sleep disorders includes methodology and results of a study on rats showing increases in motivation ("Present data show that (R)-phenylpiracetam increases motivation, i.e., the work load, which animals are willing to perform to obtain more rewarding food."). I do not believe I can cite this to suggest it may treat anhedonia, because postulating that an increase in reward is a treatment for motivational anhedonia (imagine that--more motivation treats a lack of motivation) is an assertion not made outright in the citation which states that R-phenylpiracetam increases motivation.
There are a few things I've seen mentioned on forums about what the Russian prescribing data says. If someone can get me a real source, I'd appreciate being able to back up the following:
I can't insert these into the article without reliable information. They should not be considered reliable here. These are listed in a forum post citing the manufacturer information.
Toxicity information is particularly interesting. -- John Moser ( talk) 02:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Basically this entire article needs to be rewritten or organized better. There is clearly some selective bias here about nootropics being beneficial since I see ZERO mention of any downsides. The article also relies too heavily on animal experiments and I think all of those pieces should be moved to a separate section called "Testing in animals" maybe.
More human studies are needed to make any claims about benefits/drawbacks when ingested by people. My ideas: - Move all the animal testing bits to its own section - Reserve the "Uses" area for research that actually applies to humans. If there isn't many, I think a collective evaluation of primary sources would suffice. While Wikipedia generally doesn't favor primary sources taking up too much of a section, I believe it is possible to write about them in an informative way. It's a drug, after all. Anyone whos taken it is qualified to speak on its effects. - Rename "Athlete doping" to "Controversies". In this renamed section, the stance of any drug administrations towards Phenylpiracetam should be included. Also, mentions of how it can be abused and, more importantly, mentions on how it can impact health negatively.
Let me know if this sounds good and I will get around to it. I have Spring Break this week so I have the free time. Any modifications you could suggest I will take into consideration. I love Phenylpiracetam, but this article pretends as if it's 100% good for you with no drawbacks which is simply not true for anything. ~~bob~~
Sure there must be some side effects?-- Hiveir ( talk) 20:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Phenylpiracetam.
|
-- The data in the pharmacology section calling phenylpiracetam a NDRI is dubious at best. The patent claiming increases in dopamine levels based on ONE chart has massive error bars on the data points which all conveniently lack a bottom bar. The abstracted cited for NET inhibition does not state anything regarding norepinephrine unless it's discussed somewhere within the article. -June 2018
--One CNN article noted, has a dead link. Cannot be found Google searching with reference to it.
-- Agreed. The section on pharmacology makes sweeping claims about the action of phenylpiracetam without providing any citations or other evidence. The entire page reads like an advertisement for the product. I deleted links to suppliers that included PRICING information! - Oceanlab — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanlab ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
You're not going to find anything on it in English, because Westerners didn't patent it. There isn't going to be any further research on it in English, for the same reason. You're going to have a hard time finding anyone to translate it too. Teaching Russian has never been a priority. The Berlin Wall still exists if you turn to propaganda outlets like CNN for any type of information beyond it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.221.237.163 ( talk) 03:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree that more citations are needed and disagree that "You're not going to find anything on it in English, because Westerners didn't patent it". Although the sentiment is based in truth, it's over the top and I'm fairly certain that Life Science Solutions LLC owns the rights to this and several related nootropics in the US. Moving on, here are some citations that should be worked in (in general, and so you can get rid of the valid-but-unnecessary giant warning message), but I haven't time to do it myself at present:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968089613002290
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1819712423020198
https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/11319230-000000000-00000
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10787-020-00705-7 (Mice)
https://cp.neurology.org/content/11/3/e303.abstract (analysis of commercial nootropic products)
https://figshare.utas.edu.au/articles/thesis/Monitoring_the_internet_for_nootropic_substances_available_to_Australian_consumers/23238149 (another in Austria like the one above)
https://www.ijest.org/nootropics/does-phenylpiracetam-increase-dopamine/ (Note: There's multiple articles mentioning the drug from this source, but I'm actually a little wary of it... it claims to be an "academic journal" but reads like a pop press tabloid).
There's also some that discuss it in the context of being a doping agent within sports, like this: https://web.s.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=0019462X&AN=149907672&h=ckTuNC1odkeZXJe2YUO3ZotYyOstdg3cPZ7xKsQFpBSd9X6kuOc33MTkqBG%2fj3beQM5kLH6gUD6R62HMCcrfmA%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d0019462X%26AN%3d149907672
71.244.243.33 ( talk) 03:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
This text was apparently translated via babelfish from the German wikipedia. It must be re-translated by hand. Athf1234 07:05, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Wow. I was going to add the info about Olga Pyleva, but somebody beat me to it.
PrometheusX303
21:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm buzzing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.64.117.54 ( talk) 14:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It is in fact an OTC drug in Russia, used to treat narcolepsy.-- 178.219.32.24 ( talk) 19:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Profmad07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
A new age in Neurol-Psychological modulators, may be dawning. After the jobless pharmacologists, or sold-out as DNA scientists, it has smoldered.
When Valium was found to have specific sites,& Shulgin's List got out, Hoffman's Problem child, was on dole.
Prof. Dole designed the 'methadone Project'. (Does it really stand for Dept. of Lost Employment?).
(anec.)
It was redundant. It had revolutionized the art-world, as much as it had science, design & technology.
Phenypiracetam, to quote Shulgin, has many erogenous zones (q.v. Chemistry is like Pornography, when you know what groups to look for).
Structurally, it resembles & replicates an array of noo(psycho)tropics, as Methylphenidate (MP) & also GABAergic agents. compounds..
Its Pharmacological profile, is a very rapid (intranasal) onset, Tachycardia is almost instant, quickly fading. It is a mild/moderate euphoriant, with a similar potency, and effect as Ethyl / Methylphenidate It too, has a slightly longer active t1/2. It gives a greater 'crystal' clear thought, without repetitive behavior (induced by amphetamines or EP)
Phenylpiracetam is an intriguing leap since the racetams, began. (Piracetam was used, (& Centrophenoxine), twenty years ago in Turkey. Piracetam, was not recognized, here at the time.
Research Chemistry should, make for a good double-blind study, of new psychotropics (nootropics).
Pharmacology is back!
07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Profmad07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Google, Bing and ChatGPT are now much better translators of Russian. I've corrected the rather silly mis-translated quote in 'History'. You can get the original Russian now also from the Wayback archive link I added and all are welcome to verify the much more sensible translation those engines gave me.
71.244.243.33 (
talk)
03:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
According to the wikipedia article naming policy, "Most notably: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's 'official' name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." [1] The recent change to this article's title abandoned a commonly used name to use a more "official" name, which nobody uses and nobody has heard of. Check the number of google search results if you want to see the huge magnitude of this difference.
Piojo ( talk) 06:49, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm considering expanding this article. I don't have access to Russian texts or manufacturer inserts; some help would be appreciated.
My interest comes largely from fixation: I'm getting ADHD treatment, and part of that is a big treatment for anhedonia; amphetamine isn't working as well as phenylpiracetam for that, and I'm thinking about several long-term options including atomoxetine combined with amphetamine or phenylpiracetam. For now I haven't raised this with my provider because I don't want to put strain on him, and because I don't know if I'll eventually bring it up anyway; if I start using it under medical supervision, I'll clear it with my psychiatrist first. As a compensating mechanism, I may as well work on making this a FA.
I'm obviously biased. If I write anything questionable or inappropriate, please correct if possible, or remove if necessary. I'll be citing patents as well, which frequently have studies; some studies demonstrate things other than the patent subject matter--for example, a patent for R-phenylpiracetam to treat sleep disorders includes methodology and results of a study on rats showing increases in motivation ("Present data show that (R)-phenylpiracetam increases motivation, i.e., the work load, which animals are willing to perform to obtain more rewarding food."). I do not believe I can cite this to suggest it may treat anhedonia, because postulating that an increase in reward is a treatment for motivational anhedonia (imagine that--more motivation treats a lack of motivation) is an assertion not made outright in the citation which states that R-phenylpiracetam increases motivation.
There are a few things I've seen mentioned on forums about what the Russian prescribing data says. If someone can get me a real source, I'd appreciate being able to back up the following:
I can't insert these into the article without reliable information. They should not be considered reliable here. These are listed in a forum post citing the manufacturer information.
Toxicity information is particularly interesting. -- John Moser ( talk) 02:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Basically this entire article needs to be rewritten or organized better. There is clearly some selective bias here about nootropics being beneficial since I see ZERO mention of any downsides. The article also relies too heavily on animal experiments and I think all of those pieces should be moved to a separate section called "Testing in animals" maybe.
More human studies are needed to make any claims about benefits/drawbacks when ingested by people. My ideas: - Move all the animal testing bits to its own section - Reserve the "Uses" area for research that actually applies to humans. If there isn't many, I think a collective evaluation of primary sources would suffice. While Wikipedia generally doesn't favor primary sources taking up too much of a section, I believe it is possible to write about them in an informative way. It's a drug, after all. Anyone whos taken it is qualified to speak on its effects. - Rename "Athlete doping" to "Controversies". In this renamed section, the stance of any drug administrations towards Phenylpiracetam should be included. Also, mentions of how it can be abused and, more importantly, mentions on how it can impact health negatively.
Let me know if this sounds good and I will get around to it. I have Spring Break this week so I have the free time. Any modifications you could suggest I will take into consideration. I love Phenylpiracetam, but this article pretends as if it's 100% good for you with no drawbacks which is simply not true for anything. ~~bob~~
Sure there must be some side effects?-- Hiveir ( talk) 20:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)