 Alright, so our next speaker is a long-time security malcontent, early adopter of the Not for Human Consumption Defense, and extensive research into the areas of cognition enhancing drugs and lifestyle regimens will be the focus of this talk today. Presenting on neurogenic peptides, smart drugs four minute mile, here is Gingerbread. Thank you sir. Everybody hear me? Is that going to work? A little too close? Alright, neurogenic peptides. So the reason I subtitled this smart drugs four minute mile is that much like the four minute mile, I think the pharmacological action behind this class of new tropic drugs will go from being the impossible feat that we set as something in the future that will never be reached to the standard for exemplary performance. Neurogenesis, the idea that you can grow more neurons, repair damaged neurons, actually increase the density of your brain has long been considered impossible. The majority of new tropic drugs that we have now are more about augmenting the processes of the brain much like tuning up a race car. Neurogenic peptides offer a novel approach, and what's really fun about the neurogenic peptides is after a period of experimentation, even if you completely cease any exposure to these drugs, the benefits persist. So let's go there. So first things first. Haven't you seen me here before? Last year we gave a talk on new tropics here. We covered some more of the usual stuff. I'm an infosec researcher and part-time pen tester out of Denver. I do a lot of independent security research. We do some pharmacological research, mostly looking at trends within the industry. It's important to remember though that I am not a doctor and I'm certainly not your doctor. So it's very important for you to do your own research. Understand the mechanisms behind how these drugs work and decide whether or not you're willing to take the risk. Because the one thing that is clear is this is not thoroughly researched. The mechanisms of these drugs are well understood but their use in humans and especially their long-term use in healthy humans has not. So throughout all of this it seems that the same question keeps coming up over and over and over and it is, does it make me like you? And if I offer at least a little assurance that it won't, the conversation will move forward. So in order to give a credit where it's due, we have to talk about Rita Levi Montelsini. Please, please look into this woman's history. It's a fascinating story. She was the first Nobel laureate to reach 100 and she was the oldest still productive Nobel laureate to date. At 102, she was still releasing papers that are every bit as lucid and relevant as papers from her 20s. In fact, there's a famous interview I like to reference where she's doing an interview with Italian television and they say, you know, Montelsini, do you feel that you've slowed down? Do you feel that these new scientists can out thank you? And she just got a little sparkle in her eye and smiled to him. She's like, oh, no, no, no. I'm just as lucid as I was in my 20s. The only difference is I have an entire lifetime of experience and training to draw upon. She's like, I do take more naps though. So she absolutely should be honored for these discoveries. She should be referenced in a lot of this stuff because if it weren't for her observations and her deduction of the mechanism behind her observations, we wouldn't have this area of research. So working with Stanley Cohen in the 50s, they were able to isolate NGF from tumor cells. She had noticed that oftentimes with certain forms of tumors you will have great bundles of nerve tissue. You'll have innervated masses that just swarm and wrap the tumors. And from looking very carefully, she was able to determine that while the neurons had invaded most tissues, the veins, the muscles that had invaded most tissues, it did not invade the arteries. And so she deduced that perhaps this action was coming from something the tumors were releasing. And from that deduction, she was able to isolate NGF, Neurogenic Growth Factor. Now this is a peptide, a string of amino acids that is responsible for a lot of neuron-based processes within the body. Certainly in learning and in early childhood development, NGF is now being researched and is a large part behind the attempted head transplant that is going on now. If it weren't for NGF and the ability for the stimulation of neuron growth, none of that would be possible. But it took 30 years for the discovery to be recognized. It wasn't until 1986 that they were awarded the Nobel Prize. But what was great and as kind of telling is the individuals on the research team knew what they had and more than one began immediately administering the drug to themselves. In fact, Montelsini famously constructed eye drops and would administer NGF to the eye daily and sometimes multiple times daily for the rest of her life shortly following the discovery. That's why I give her credit as a gonzo scientist here because, you know, long before she would ever get any kind of approval, she's like, mm-mm, this is for me. Now if you were to hire a peptide lab to produce human neurogenic growth factor, inequality that was sufficient to put in your eye safely, you're looking at roughly $10,000 a month per person. So unless you're a biochemist, it's a little bit prohibitive. So the drugs we're working on here are sort of a shortcut. They allow your body to release more NGF or BDNF or GCNF or, I know, or GCNF or BDNF and some of these act as pro-drugs for these same compounds. But considering their proteins, the vast majority of these compounds are very fragile and so even pro-drug formation is not an option. So brain-derived neutrophic factor is probably the most active of this group. You see a line of neutropic drugs that are being released such as lion's mane extract. The heranesians and erinesians within the extract is shown to release this type of drug within the body. Now nerve growth factor, of course, was the topic of Montelsini's original research and CNTF is interesting in that it promotes the survival of neurons much more than any kind of expansion. CNTF is responsible or sorry is capable of promoting the survival of dopamine neurons even in situations where they normally would be destroyed. And so they've been able to show it have a prophylactic effect against head injury. They've been using it for ischemic victims recently and there's a lot of research that shows that we have just to scratch the surface of the use of these compounds. Particularly in the United States, our understanding of and our utilization of peptide-based pharmacology is in its infancy. We've absolutely been outshined by the rest of the world and in particular the former Soviet Union. So it sounds easy right? More brain, more better. Everyone would like to just be able to have a dome head and fit as much brain in there as you can afford. It's not a big deal. But the structure of the brain is what provides its magic, not the substance. And having undifferentiated brain tissue exploding with growth inside of your head is not necessarily a constructive thing. So if you have a predisposition or a family history for any type of organic brain disease it would be best to just sort of write off this line of experimentation. Having half of your brain soaked up with some some useless tissue is not going to be good. So there have been some drugs developed in this space, particularly in the Soviet Union as we said. So the first were products of the state. And so what does the state do? They look to agricultural byproducts for their needs. And so one of the first readily available sources of these peptides was in pig brain concentrate. And exactly as it sounds, the brains from recently deceased pigs were harvested, purified, and sold as a drug called cerebrolysin. You can actually still purchase cerebrolysin. It's totally unregulated in the United States. It's kind of fallen out of favor as some of these more advanced drugs have become available. But it absolutely is effective. And unlike some of the others there are anecdotal reports of people with 20 years of daily administration. And so that can be a real low hanging fruit if you want to get started. This absolutely one with the most safety profile. Now after looking to these concentrates and proving their efficacy, they're able through clinical trial to determine which portions of this protein amalgam was actually providing the neurological action. And so after the brain concentrates we start to get into these structured peptide drugs. And so this is the the group that most people are going to be familiar with. Newpept, this particular drug, very very cheap, extremely potent in just dozens of milligrams per dosage. But Newpept is fairly unique within the family in that it can be stored at room temperature and can be administered orally. The vast majority of these drugs are too fragile to be administered orally. They have to be injected. And that was a reason why up until recently and with recent advancements their popularity had been limited. There's quite a stigma with needle-based recreational drug administration here in the U.S. So Salonk has been marketed in Europe and in the former Soviet Union for almost 20 years now. It's over the counter. It's used as an anxiolytic. So these protein-based drugs, despite their seemingly fragile pharmacology, have every bit the efficacy of alkaloids and and other more traditional pharmacological agents. Salonk has an anxiolytic potential on par with low-dose benzodiazepines. Absolutely a very very powerful sedative without having the ceiling with sedation. You can dose yourself with a hundred times the recommended dose of Salonk and you're not going to have an adverse health event. Now Cmax is probably the most popular drug. This was developed again in the former Soviet Union and their their government had for whatever reason an emphasis on cognitive decline research. Some have speculated that it's because of alcoholism or nutritional deficiencies or what have you. But they absolutely have invested more time, more research, and more money than the United States has in maintaining the cognition of its populace. So Cmax is a potent new tropic drug. Very potent. The the action is within just moments after administration. Very similar to some of the rassetam drugs in a clearing of vision, slight stimulation, verbal fluidity, memory, and these effects will last five six hours. Again because of the the sort of ephemeral nature of these protein drugs you could administer a hundred times the active dose and not necessarily have an adverse event. And the most adverse events are discomfort. You know other than the sort of atypical anaphylaxis that you may see these drugs are incredibly or sorry have an incredibly wide therapeutic window. So Cmax has been marketed in the United States but because of its ejection only administration it really never caught on. And so there were various attempts to try and make Cmax more bioavailable. And some of those those adjustments were the second wave. No, none of that thank you. So nice try that was good. So we we get into these these structure drugs that the the structures have been modified specifically to provide the action they want. Now anacetyl Cmax was created as sort of a protection against the degradation of this peptide. Instead of having to be stored entirely under refrigeration it administered with subcutaneous injection. Anacetyl Cmax can be administered intranasally. And so all of a sudden a whole group of people that would never just inject things under their skin for fun had access to it. Now anacetyl Cmax also can be stored at room temperature for periods of you know 40 hours or so and still be safe. So that allows a whole window of clinical administration without the the refrigerators and various things like that that are needed. Now anacetyl Cmax amidate is different. Anacetyl Cmax amidate was created with the same goal in mind to make it more bioavailable more stable. But instead of being created by a pharmaceutical company these were created by people in the Neutropic space. This was created by individuals really with not the necessary training. There haven't been any clinical studies done but there are tons of anecdotal reports and both the acetylation and the amidate make the drugs much more potent. As you would expect if it was more bioavailable the same dosage is going to provide more action. But also because they're more stable you see longer durations of action for these drugs. Anacetyl Cmax is very stimulatory. You can be completely worn out ready to go to bed and have a dosage and be awake as if you had used a more traditional stimulant. Again the dosage window is incredibly broad. You're not going to have these sort of overstimulation adverse effects and you don't really develop a tolerance. There are individuals who have been using this drug for about five years now since it was invented or at least distributed to the public. And again they say no development of tolerance even with somewhat less than responsible use. So that brings us to where we kind of are at today. We're getting to the point where individuals who are operating in this space with no oversight are being provided with the resources to push this research forward but without the the institutions of traditional pharmaceutical research. So what we're having are people reading mice studies. We have people that are looking at animal based reports and they're extrapolating that research and producing a drug. Getting it out to the world to the lowest bidder and then distributing it wholesale to the the greedy public. And so we have drugs not only like the Anacetyl Cmax Amidate but P21. This isn't just a more bioavailable alteration to an already tested drug. This is a peptide sequence shown to have efficacy in animal studies and then 20 years go by some individual with a peptide based neutropics company in the U.S. sees it has it developed and starts distributing it to people with a not-for-human consumption caveat. So there seems to be quite a almost institutional naivete that has pervaded the neutropic scene. These aren't necessarily your traditional drug people that that are used to not trusting their suppliers. And so there's a there's a lot of room for problems and so I think that before this is all said and done perhaps not with the peptide drugs but the neutropics industry is certainly going to have a wake-up call as there's just people are becoming more and more bold and more and more products which have never been tested in humans let I mean in primates let alone humans are just being released and people are taking them each and every day. Something that I think is important to remember even with this class of drugs art there is no biochemical free lunch. There's nothing you're going to be able to do each and every day that is not going to have a lasting effect on your body or isn't going to down regulate in some way. Now I know that's kind of contrary to the you aren't going to develop a tolerance but that's based more on broad experience than this particular class of drugs. So Delta sleep inducing peptide is an interesting one that's only recently become available in outside of research markets and it's been shown in rodent studies to induce spindle forms on EEGs with almost as soon as it's induced and so they're looking at this using it for a deep restorative sleep or for people to use it to consolidate memories. Again anecdotal only this has never been tested in humans and you certainly couldn't stretch it to say things are safe. Now a pitalon is really unique here and I'd like to mention it because unlike the others this one has an actual action on telomeres. Telomeres at the end of your genetic material that helps sort of soup up the damage that that has happened here DNA over time shortened and shortened and there's some some pretty strong correlation between telomere length and the overall age of an animal or at least how well it's aging and so this is one of the very few drugs that has been shown to interact with telomeres without just inducing tumor growth immediately because as you know keeping cells alive after they don't want to be alive anymore is not necessarily a constructive thing to do. So again they've uh within the new tropics industry they have made acetylated and amidate versions and these drugs are pretty cheap thing all things considered. There are suppliers that are domestic within the US that are being they're producing the proteins within the US and so there's a certain degree of safety that people think is assumed because of the broad dosage windows and what have you but these drugs are absolutely untested and it's important to keep that in mind throughout. So I want to give us a little some time for questions here so if anyone wants to get ahold of me here's the information and I just want you all to remember only users or sorry only losers use drugs all right go use the mic man unless you want to shout thank you. What do you take of all these things if any? What do I think or what do I take? I'm not taking any at this time but I think if you were going to choose just one if you had to pick just one to experiment with it would be CMAX. CMAX has had you know hundreds of millions of individual doses administered to individual people and it has a very broad window of action so I personally enjoy it I think it's a better stimulant than caffeine it's much easier on your system and should you administer some and then need to go to sleep it's absolutely possible and so CMAX you're looking at about 60 to 70 dollars per person per month so it's not necessarily a cheap choice and it has to be stored under refrigeration unless you buy some of the the newer modified versions. There they go. What do you think about the administration and the nasal because like CMAX and some of them go nasal and there's the injection as well? Oh I absolutely think that the pharmacology is distinct. Intranasal administration produces different results than subcutaneous administration and so there are some researchers and certainly new tropics enthusiasts that prefer intranasal administration but for me and this was the horrible caveat that kept me from actually using CMAX long-term is it produced anosmia like very strong anosmia I had no sense of smell for probably four months after I had stopped entirely and I could smell coffee I could smell food but like real subtle biological odors like I couldn't smell my wife I couldn't tell if my my kids were in the room it was it was disturbing enough to not warrant any further experimentation so I've spoken with other researchers who haven't had that problem but it was enough to scare me off. Just a question. Speaking of the erinaceums and the anosiums have you done any research into the other supposed fungal families that have been shown to regrow neuron? Oh yeah. Should I tell you? And so please do. Okay. In fact certain strains of reishi particularly the red reishi have been shown to be even more potent releasers of NGF and BDNF and so some of the issues that you have with high-dose BDNF and NGF supplementation or at least you know excretolog supplementation is that you'll begin to get formacation with high doses you'll have ant crawling sensation or tingles over your head and on your skin and that can be that can be a sign that you're overdoing it but again there's still even further neutropic action once you've you know become accustomed to that. The NGF or the erinaceans know the the lion's main mushroom extract specifically the erinaceans and erinaceans are again shown to provide long-lasting effects even after you stop. If you take it for a year and this is how you feel that's pretty much how you're going to stay which is highly distinct from the racitams which constantly are reaching into different plateaus of action and then stepping back down without any real changes. So yeah I would yeah the formacation thing is a bit of an issue and we've spoken with individuals who have said that with high dose supplementation of NGF and BDNF substances they've overwritten their childhood memories that they've they've studied for six years in some medical field or some research field and at the end of it they did well they feel intelligent but as they start to reflect back everything from 16 or before is gone and so yeah and there's some research that shows there may be an NGF based mechanism that may be why you can't remember your really early childhood not because it's locked behind some psychological block but because you've used that space up and re-re-configured it to store later memories. So with Nupept in particular I just want to mention this one Nupept the reason I never experimented with Nupept past sort of an initial getting to know you phase was after about six weeks of supplementation I was looking in the mirror at one point it didn't recognize my reflection I knew who I was but when I tried to stop and think like what do I look like my my residual self-image had been overwritten or at least interfered with in some way and so again that was enough to go like no not it's not worth it. So Nupept again is really cheap a year supply is going to run you five dollars so this experimentation is is very accessible even to those with very little resources so thank you guys.