Cart
0
The word "nootropic" gets thrown around a lot these days, applied to everything from prescription pharmaceuticals to mushroom coffees and TikTok-friendly supplement stacks. But the term has a precise origin and a specific meaning that most of the marketing conveniently ignores. Nootropics are, at their core, a heterogeneous collection of compounds that improve learning, memory, and brain health [6]. The concept was formalized in 1972 by Romanian neuroscientist Corneliu E. Giurgea, who needed a name for a new kind of substance he had stumbled upon: one that sharpened cognition without producing the sedation, stimulation, or toxicity associated with conventional psychotropic drugs [1]. More than fifty years later, the category has ballooned into a global consumer market projected to surpass $6 billion [2], yet the central tension has never been resolved. We have strong evidence that many of these compounds help people with cognitive impairment. What we still lack is convincing proof that they do much for healthy brains over the long term [3].
This guide unpacks the science: where the concept came from, how researchers classify the major nootropic families, what biological mechanisms are actually at work, and why the safety picture for healthy users remains so incomplete.
A Romanian neuroscientist, a failed sleep aid, and the birth of a concept
The story starts in the early 1960s at UCB, a Belgian pharmaceutical company. Giurgea was trying to develop a sleep aid from GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid), the brain's main inhibitory neurotransmitter. The problem was that GABA itself cannot cross the blood-brain barrier, so Giurgea synthesized a cyclic derivative called piracetam (2-oxo-1-pyrrolidine acetamide), hoping it would slip through and produce sedation [4][5]. It did slip through. But instead of making animals sleepy, it made them better at learning and remembering, without any apparent stimulation or sedation. It was, pharmacologically speaking, something genuinely new.
Giurgea spent the next decade studying the compound, and by 1972 he had published a formal framework for the drug class it represented. He coined the name from the Greek nöos (mind) and tropein (to turn or guide), and he set out five criteria that he believed any true nootropic must satisfy [1][6]. The substance should enhance learning and memory. It should protect learned behaviours from disruption by conditions such as hypoxia or electroconvulsive shock. It should defend the brain against physical or chemical injury. It should improve the efficiency of cortical and subcortical control mechanisms, including communication between the two hemispheres. And, perhaps most importantly, it should lack the typical side-effect profile of other psychotropic drugs: no sedation, no motor stimulation, and very low toxicity [1].
Those criteria were deliberately strict because Giurgea wanted to draw a hard line between nootropics and everything else in the psychopharmacology cabinet. The racetam family that grew out of piracetam expanded steadily through the 1970s and 1980s, adding aniracetam in 1979, then oxiracetam, pramiracetam, and several others [7]. Soviet researchers pursued a parallel track, developing their own cognitive enhancers alongside adaptogens like Rhodiola rosea [6]. But the real transformation came in the 2000s. Biohacking culture in Silicon Valley, off-label use of prescription stimulants and modafinil among students and professionals, and an explosion of herbal supplement marketing all conspired to stretch the word "nootropic" far beyond anything Giurgea had in mind [6]. Today, the label covers everything from rigorously studied pharmaceuticals to unregulated online products with questionable ingredient lists.
Four families of nootropics and what makes each distinct
A useful way to make sense of this sprawling landscape comes from a 2022 review by Malík and Tlustoš, published in Nutrients, which organizes nootropics into four sub-groups according to their primary mechanisms and origins [6]. These categories are not watertight (many compounds straddle more than one), but they offer a helpful map for understanding how different substances approach the shared goal of cognitive enhancement through quite different biological routes.
Classical nootropic compounds
The racetams and their close relatives form the original heart of the field. Alongside piracetam, this group takes in compounds like deanol (DMAE), meclofenoxate, nicergoline, and pyritinol [6]. What they share is a tendency to work through modulation of ion channels (calcium and potassium channels in particular), enhancement of acetylcholine signalling, and improvements to how easily red blood cells can deform and pass through narrow capillaries, which has a direct effect on brain perfusion [6][7].
Piracetam's mechanism is worth dwelling on because it illustrates how subtle nootropic pharmacology can be. Rather than activating glutamate receptors outright, piracetam acts as a positive allosteric modulator of AMPA receptors, binding to a secondary site on the receptor that makes it respond more vigorously when glutamate arrives [8]. The downstream effect is a strengthening of long-term potentiation (LTP), the cellular process that encodes new memories [6][8]. One practical consequence of this gentle mechanism is that classical nootropics tend to require several weeks of consistent dosing before users notice anything, and underdosing is one of the most common reasons people conclude they "don't work" [6].
Substances that increase brain metabolism
Where the classical compounds tweak signalling at the synaptic level, this second group takes a more infrastructural approach: making sure the brain has enough blood, oxygen, and glucose to run at full capacity [6][9]. The best-known member is vinpocetine, a semi-synthetic derivative of vincamine extracted from the lesser periwinkle plant (Vinca minor). Also in this category are naftidrofuryl and dihydroergotoxine (sold under the trade name Hydergine), one of the oldest nootropic drugs still prescribed, originally developed by Albert Hofmann in the 1940s [6].
Vinpocetine works through a combination of phosphodiesterase type I inhibition (which relaxes cerebral blood vessels), voltage-gated sodium channel blockade, and a metabolic shift that nudges glucose processing toward more energy-efficient aerobic pathways [9][10]. The net result is more blood reaching the brain, carrying more oxygen, and being used more efficiently once it arrives. Dihydroergotoxine takes a different route: it reduces monoamine oxidase activity, which tends to rise with age and gradually depletes the brain's stores of dopamine and norepinephrine, while at the same time increasing the density of cholinergic receptors [6].
Cholinergic agents
Acetylcholine occupies a central role in memory, attention, and learning, so it is no surprise that an entire sub-group of nootropics is devoted to keeping the brain well supplied with it [6]. The main players here are phosphatidylcholine (lecithin), acetyl-L-carnitine, alpha-GPC, and citicoline, all of which serve as precursors or cofactors that the brain uses to manufacture acetylcholine [6].
Alpha-GPC is roughly 40% choline by weight and has around 90% bioavailability, meaning it crosses the blood-brain barrier efficiently and gets converted into acetylcholine with relatively little waste [6]. Citicoline is interesting because it pulls double duty: once absorbed, it breaks down into choline (which feeds acetylcholine production) and cytidine (which the body converts into uridine, a nucleotide that supports dopamine signalling and the synthesis of phospholipids in neuronal membranes) [6]. Whether cholinergic agents count as "true" nootropics in Giurgea's sense is debatable, since they work primarily by topping up neurotransmitter supply rather than by modulating integrative brain mechanisms, but in practice their cognitive effects overlap heavily with those of the other groups [6].
Plant-derived extracts (phytonootropics)
This is where the oldest remedies in the nootropic toolkit live, and it is also the fastest-growing segment of the market [6].
Bacopa monnieri, known as Brahmi in Ayurvedic tradition, has been used for cognitive purposes for centuries. Modern research has identified its active compounds, bacosides A and B, and shown that they inhibit acetylcholinesterase (the enzyme that breaks down acetylcholine), boost the activity of antioxidant enzymes, and enhance protein kinase signalling in the hippocampus, the brain region most closely associated with memory formation [6][11].
Ginkgo biloba is probably the most extensively researched botanical nootropic in the world. Its flavonoid and terpenoid fractions (particularly the ginkgolides) improve cerebral blood flow, reduce platelet clumping, and provide strong antioxidant protection to neuronal tissue [6][12].
Lion's Mane mushroom (Hericium erinaceus) has attracted particular attention because its bioactive compounds, hericenones and erinacines, are able to cross the blood-brain barrier and stimulate the production of nerve growth factor (NGF) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), two proteins essential for neuronal growth, repair, and survival [13][14].
The Malík and Tlustoš review also discusses Panax ginseng and its ginsenosides, Rhodiola rosea, ashwagandha (whose active withanolides have anxiolytic and neuroprotective properties), gotu kola, maca, and guarana [6]. As a class, plant-derived nootropics tend to offer broader and more synergistic effects than single-target synthetic compounds, generally with lower toxicity, though standardization and quality control remain persistent challenges because the concentration of active ingredients can vary enormously between batches and brands [6].
Three biological pathways that explain how nootropics affect the brain
Despite the diversity of their origins and chemical structures, nootropics across all four sub-groups tend to exert their effects through three interconnected biological pathways: brain energy optimization, neurotransmitter modulation, and neuroprotection [6]. Most compounds touch more than one of these pathways at once, which is part of what makes them interesting but also part of what makes them difficult to study in isolation.
Brain energy optimization
The human brain accounts for only about 2% of total body mass, yet it consumes roughly 20% of the body's energy budget [6]. That enormous metabolic demand means that even small improvements in how efficiently energy is produced or delivered can translate into noticeable cognitive effects.
Piracetam contributes here by increasing the fluidity of mitochondrial membranes (which is a key determinant of how well mitochondria perform) and by boosting the synthesis of cytochrome b5 in the electron transport chain, both of which improve ATP output [6][5]. PET imaging studies have confirmed these effects in practice, showing enhanced glucose metabolism in the brains of Alzheimer's patients given piracetam [5]. Coenzyme Q10 participates in a different part of the same energy pipeline: it acts as an electron carrier in the mitochondrial respiratory chain, and because it is lipid-soluble, it also doubles as a potent antioxidant that protects the very membranes it works within [15]. Creatine offers yet another angle on brain energy, providing a rapid ATP regeneration pathway through the phosphocreatine buffering system. A randomized controlled crossover trial that combined creatine with CoQ10 and lipoic acid found measurable reductions in markers of oxidative stress, suggesting that these energy-related compounds may work better in concert than alone [15][16].
Vinpocetine's contribution to energy optimization is more about delivery than production. By inhibiting PDE1 and blocking voltage-gated sodium channels, it dilates cerebral blood vessels and increases the volume of blood (and therefore oxygen and glucose) reaching the brain, while simultaneously shifting glucose metabolism toward more efficient aerobic pathways [9][10].
Neurotransmitter modulation
If energy optimization is about fuelling the hardware, neurotransmitter modulation is about tuning the software. Of all the neurotransmitter systems involved, the cholinergic system (built around acetylcholine) gets the most research attention, largely because of its well-established role in memory encoding and retrieval [6].
Huperzine A illustrates how powerful targeted modulation can be. Derived from the Chinese club moss Huperzia serrata, it is an exceptionally selective acetylcholinesterase inhibitor that can increase brain acetylcholine levels by up to 40% within a single hour of administration. The effect is not uniform across the brain: the frontal cortex sees elevations of around 125% and the parietal cortex around 105%, which aligns with those regions' roles in working memory and spatial processing [17][18]. Racetams work the cholinergic system from a different angle, increasing the rate at which neurons take up choline (the raw material for acetylcholine) and raising the density of muscarinic receptors, effects that are particularly pronounced in aged brains where receptor populations have naturally thinned [6][7].
Modafinil, often lumped in with nootropics despite being a prescription wakefulness-promoting agent, affects a much wider spread of neurotransmitter systems. It inhibits the dopamine transporter (keeping dopamine active in the synapse for longer) but without triggering the burst-firing pattern of spontaneous dopamine release that characterizes classical stimulants like amphetamines, and it simultaneously increases extracellular concentrations of serotonin, glutamate, histamine, and orexin [19][20]. L-theanine, found naturally in tea leaves, does something quite elegant: as a structural analogue of glutamic acid, it binds to AMPA, kainate, and NMDA glutamate receptors and dampens excitatory signalling, while at the same time enhancing inhibitory GABAergic neurotransmission. The result is a state of alert calm rather than sedation, which is why L-theanine and caffeine are so often combined in nootropic formulations [21][22].
At the synaptic level, the racetams tie these threads together. Their positive allosteric modulation of AMPA receptors stabilizes the receptors in their open, glutamate-bound conformation, which directly facilitates the long-term potentiation process through which the brain converts short-term experiences into lasting memories [8].
Neuroprotection
Where the first two pathways improve immediate performance, neuroprotection is about the long game: defending neurons against the accumulated oxidative damage, chronic inflammation, and growth-factor deficits that progressively degrade cognitive function with age or disease.
Bacopa monnieri is one of the most thoroughly documented neuroprotective nootropics. Its bacosides reduce protein carbonyl levels (a marker of oxidative protein damage) across multiple brain regions, inhibit lipid peroxidation in the prefrontal cortex, striatum, and hippocampus, and increase the activity of the brain's own antioxidant defence system, including superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase [11][23]. Bacopa also addresses neuroinflammation directly: extracts have been shown to significantly reduce microglial release of the pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF-α and IL-6, which are implicated in the progression of neurodegenerative disease [11]. Vinpocetine contributes anti-inflammatory effects through a different mechanism, inhibiting the NF-κB signalling cascade via an IKK-dependent pathway [9].
Lion's Mane approaches neuroprotection from the growth-factor side. An 8-week double-blind randomized controlled trial found that supplementation with Hericium erinaceus had measurable effects on circulating BDNF levels [13], and research into erinacine A-enriched mycelium has traced the neurotrophic mechanism through the BDNF/PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β signalling cascade, a pathway closely linked to neuronal survival and synaptic plasticity [14]. Huperzine A rounds out the neuroprotection picture by operating across multiple targets at once: beyond its primary role as a cholinesterase inhibitor, it also acts as an NMDA receptor antagonist (providing protection against glutamate excitotoxicity), shields mitochondria from damage, and modulates the expression of proteins involved in programmed cell death [17][24][25].
These overlapping protective mechanisms go a long way toward explaining a pattern that appears repeatedly in the literature: nootropics tend to produce their most striking results in brains that are already under stress from ageing, disease, or injury, precisely because there is active damage for these mechanisms to counteract [6].
Why the safety picture remains incomplete for healthy users
All of the mechanisms described above have genuine scientific support behind them. The problem is that almost all of that support comes from studies conducted on people (or animal models) with some form of cognitive impairment. For the healthy individuals who make up the bulk of the nootropic consumer market, the evidence base is thin, and what exists is not especially reassuring [3].
The missing clinical trials
The core issue is straightforward: there are almost no large-scale, long-term randomized controlled trials examining the effects of nootropics in healthy populations [3]. A 2022 review by Schifano and colleagues in the journal Drugs laid this out plainly, noting that while users generally perceive cognitive enhancers as effective (and enthusiastic testimonials circulate freely online), measured efficacy in healthy subjects remains uncertain, and whatever improvements do appear tend to be temporary [3].
Nearly all of the rigorous clinical data we have comes from trials involving elderly patients with dementia or Alzheimer's, people recovering from stroke, or individuals being treated for ADHD [3][26]. Applying those findings to a healthy 25-year-old is scientifically questionable, because a brain that is already functioning near its optimum responds to pharmacological intervention very differently than one that is depleted or damaged. Neuroscience researchers frame this in terms of the inverted U-shaped dose-response curve: there is a sweet spot of neurotransmitter activity where cognition peaks, and for someone already near that peak, pushing levels higher can actually degrade performance rather than enhance it [26]. The American Medical Association acknowledged this concern in 2016, when it adopted a policy discouraging nootropic prescriptions for healthy individuals on the grounds that effects are highly variable, dose-dependent, and limited at best [6].
Regulatory fragmentation
The regulatory environment around nootropics is a patchwork that varies wildly by jurisdiction, and the gaps create real risks for consumers. In the United States, the 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act means that supplements can reach the market without any pre-market FDA review for safety or efficacy; the FDA can only intervene after a product has already been sold and shown to cause harm [27].
Piracetam is a telling example of how this plays out in practice. In Europe, it is a prescription pharmaceutical with standardized dosing and quality controls. In the US, it is neither approved as a drug nor technically legal to sell as a dietary supplement, leaving it in a regulatory no-man's-land [27][28]. EFSA has approved only three health claims with any connection to nootropic effects (for DHA, caffeine, and Ginkgo biloba under traditional-use provisions) [2]. The practical upshot is that the same compound can be a controlled prescription medicine in one country, a banned supplement ingredient in another, and a freely purchasable online product in a third [2][27].
Quality control failures
Against this regulatory backdrop, quality control in the supplement market has proven unreliable in ways that have direct consequences for consumer safety. When Cohen and colleagues analysed piracetam supplements sold in the US for a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine, they found enormous variation in actual ingredient content. Following the label instructions on some products could expose a consumer to up to 11,283 mg of piracetam per day, more than double the standard European prescription dose, while at least one product contained none of the compound at all despite claiming 700 mg on its label [28].
The same research group later examined cognitive enhancement supplements more broadly and found five unapproved pharmaceutical drugs hiding in products marketed as dietary supplements. Three-quarters of the declared drug quantities on labels were inaccurate, and some products contained as many as four unapproved drugs in a single capsule [29]. A 2022 surveillance effort coordinated across European and Australian regulatory laboratories turned up 159 illicit nootropic samples containing 34 distinct unauthorized molecules, with close to half of those samples being sold to consumers as dietary supplements [30].
Clinical use vs. enhancement use
These quality and regulatory problems crystallize around a distinction that is easy to state but has profound practical implications: using a nootropic under medical supervision for a diagnosed condition is a fundamentally different proposition from buying a supplement stack online to try to boost your performance at work or university [3][26].
When a neurologist prescribes piracetam for post-stroke cognitive rehabilitation at a known dose from a pharmaceutical-grade source, the risk-benefit calculation rests on solid ground. When a healthy student orders an unregulated product containing unknown quantities of multiple compounds, that calculation cannot meaningfully be made. Schifano's review highlights several specific risks in this latter scenario: paradoxical cognitive decline (both short- and long-term), reduced capacity for neuroplastic learning, and the development of addictive patterns of use [3]. Even modafinil, which many users consider relatively benign, has been shown to activate brain regions associated with reward and addiction [19][20]. Prescription stimulants like amphetamines carry Schedule II controlled substance classifications precisely because of their high dependence liability [3]. And even plant-derived nootropics are not without risk in uncontrolled settings: Ginkgo biloba has significant blood-thinning effects and is contraindicated with anticoagulant medications [12], while stacking multiple poorly-characterized compounds in a single supplement introduces pharmacological interactions that no one has studied [29][30].
In a nutshell
Nootropics sit at a genuinely interesting crossroads of neuroscience, pharmacology, and traditional herbal medicine. The four sub-groups described here (classical racetam-type compounds, brain metabolism enhancers, cholinergic agents, and phytonootropics) attack cognitive enhancement through complementary biological pathways that converge on energy optimization, neurotransmitter tuning, and long-term neuronal protection. Many of these mechanisms are well-characterized at the molecular level, backed by decades of research into compounds like piracetam, huperzine A, and Bacopa monnieri.
What is much less well-established is whether those mechanisms translate into meaningful cognitive gains for people whose brains are already working normally. The current evidence suggests that nootropics are far more effective as treatments for impairment than as tools for enhancement in healthy individuals [3][26]. The inverted U-curve of neurotransmitter function implies that healthy brains have less headroom for improvement and more exposure to overshoot [26]. For anyone exploring this space, the sensible approach is to favour pharmaceutical-grade products with established quality controls, stick to compounds supported by human clinical trials rather than animal or in-vitro data alone, and treat enhancement claims with the same healthy scepticism you would apply to any unproven medical intervention. The research continues to advance, but the marketing has been running well ahead of it for some time now.
References
[1] Giurgea, C.E. (1982) 'The nootropic concept and its prospective implications', Drug Development Research, 2(5), pp. 441–446.
[2] Lexology (2023) 'Nootropics revolution: patentability in the UK and EU'. Available at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fa4b97bc-5f2d-4faf-8225-4392567f7b5b (Accessed: 24 March 2026).
[3] Napoletano, F., Schifano, F., Ferranti, R. et al. (2022) 'Benefits and harms of "smart drugs" (nootropics) in healthy individuals', Drugs, 82(6), pp. 633–647. doi: 10.1007/s40265-022-01701-7.
[4] Giurgea, C.E. and Salama, M. (1977) 'Nootropic drugs', Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology, 1(3–4), pp. 235–247.
[5] Winblad, B. (2005) 'Piracetam: a review of pharmacological properties and clinical uses', CNS Drug Reviews, 11(2), pp. 169–182.
[6] Malík, M. and Tlustoš, P. (2022) 'Nootropics as cognitive enhancers: types, dosage and side effects of smart drugs', Nutrients, 14(16), 3367. doi: 10.3390/nu14163367.
[7] Gualtieri, F., Manetti, D., Romanelli, M.N. and Ghelardini, C. (2002) 'Design and study of piracetam-like nootropics, controversial members of the problematic class of cognition-enhancing drugs', Current Pharmaceutical Design, 8(2), pp. 125–138.
[8] Ahmed, A.H. and Bhatt, D.K. (2010) 'Piracetam defines a new binding site for allosteric modulators of α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionic acid (AMPA) receptors', Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 53(5), pp. 2197–2203. doi: 10.1021/jm901905j.
[9] Bönöczk, P., Gulyás, B. et al. (2000) 'Role of vinpocetine in cerebrovascular diseases', Pharmacological Reports, 52(4), pp. 263–277.
[10] Szilágyi, G., Nagy, Z., Balkay, L. et al. (2005) 'Effects of vinpocetine on the redistribution of cerebral blood flow and glucose metabolism in chronic ischemic stroke patients', Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 229–230, pp. 275–284.
[11] Aguiar, S. and Borowski, T. (2013) 'Neuropharmacological review of the nootropic herb Bacopa monnieri', Rejuvenation Research, 16(4), pp. 313–326. doi: 10.1089/rej.2013.1431.
[12] Singh, S.K., Srivastav, S., Castellani, R.J. et al. (2019) 'Neuroprotective and antioxidant effect of Ginkgo biloba extract against AD and other neurological disorders', Neurotherapeutics, 16(3), pp. 666–674.
[13] Docherty, S., Doughty, F.L. and Smith, E.F. (2023) 'The acute and chronic effects of Lion's Mane mushroom supplementation on cognitive function, stress and mood in young adults: a double-blind, parallel groups, pilot study', Nutrients, 15(22), 4842. doi: 10.3390/nu15224842.
[14] Li, I.C., Lee, L.Y., Tzeng, T.T. et al. (2024) 'Effect of erinacine A-enriched Hericium erinaceus supplementation on cognition: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study', Journal of Functional Foods, 114, 106054.
[15] Yang, L., Calingasan, N.Y., Wille, E.J. et al. (2009) 'Combination therapy with coenzyme Q10 and creatine produces additive neuroprotective effects in models of Parkinson's and Huntington's diseases', Journal of Neurochemistry, 109(5), pp. 1427–1439. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2009.06074.x.
[16] Rodriguez, M.C., MacDonald, J.R., Mahoney, D.J. et al. (2007) 'Beneficial effects of creatine, CoQ10, and lipoic acid in mitochondrial disorders', Muscle & Nerve, 35(2), pp. 235–242.
[17] Tang, X.C., De Sarno, P., Bhatt, D.K. et al. (1989) 'Effect of huperzine A, a new cholinesterase inhibitor, on the central cholinergic system of the rat', Journal of Neuroscience Research, 24(2), pp. 276–285.
[18] Zangara, A. (2003) 'The psychopharmacology of huperzine A: an alkaloid with cognitive enhancing and neuroprotective properties of interest in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease', Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 75(3), pp. 675–686.
[19] Minzenberg, M.J. and Carter, C.S. (2008) 'Modafinil: a review of neurochemical actions and effects on cognition', Neuropsychopharmacology, 33(7), pp. 1477–1502. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1301534.
[20] Esposito, R., Cilli, F., Pieramico, V. et al. (2017) 'Modafinil-induced changes in functional connectivity in the cortex and cerebellum of healthy elderly subjects', Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 9, 85. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00085.
[21] Nathan, P.J., Lu, K., Gray, M. and Oliver, C. (2006) 'The neuropharmacology of L-theanine (N-ethyl-L-glutamine): a possible neuroprotective and cognitive enhancing agent', Journal of Herbal Pharmacotherapy, 6(2), pp. 21–30.
[22] Unno, K., Muguruma, Y. et al. (2025) 'Theanine modulation of monoamine metabolism visualized by derivatized imaging mass spectrometry', Scientific Reports, 15, 3894. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-08190-0.
[23] Simpson, T., Pase, M. and Stough, C. (2015) 'Bacopa monnieri as an antioxidant therapy to reduce oxidative stress in the aging brain', Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2015, 615384.
[24] Zhang, H.Y. and Tang, X.C. (2006) 'Neuroprotective effects of huperzine A: a natural cholinesterase inhibitor for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease', Neuroscience Bulletin, 22(4), pp. 236–244.
[25] Wang, R. and Tang, X.C. (2007) 'Non-cholinergic effects of huperzine A: beyond inhibition of acetylcholinesterase', Acta Pharmacologica Sinica, 28(9), pp. 1405–1412. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7254.2007.00600.x.
[26] d'Angelo, L.C., Savulich, G. and Sahakian, B.J. (2021) 'The downsides of cognitive enhancement', The Neuroscientist, 27(4), pp. 322–330. doi: 10.1177/1073858420945971.
[27] U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2022) Dietary supplements. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/food/dietary-supplements (Accessed: 24 March 2026).
[28] Cohen, P.A., Avula, B., Wang, Y.H. et al. (2019) 'Presence of piracetam in cognitive enhancement dietary supplements', JAMA Internal Medicine, 180(3), pp. 458–459. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.5507.
[29] Cohen, P.A., Avula, B., Wang, Y.H. et al. (2021) 'Five unapproved drugs found in cognitive enhancement supplements', Neurology Clinical Practice, 11(3), pp. e303–e307.
[30] Deconinck, E., Aouadi, C., Bothy, J.L. et al. (2023) 'The occurrence of illicit smart drugs or nootropics in Europe and Australia and their associated dangers', Pharmaceuticals, 15(3), 88. doi: 10.3390/ph15030088.
