TL;DR - It took me about 14 days to increase my IQ by 13 points, in a controlled experiment that involved no learning or taking stimulants, it was a relatively pleasant process, and the change seems to be permanent, more people should be doing this.
The late psychologist (and noted self-experimenter) Seth Roberts developed a simple reaction-time test that he felt could be used to track changes in brain function. He used the test to measure the effects of various interventions. Flaxseed oil made his reaction time faster (and presumably improved his brain function). Eating soy made him slower. I tried to replicate some of his findings but didn't get the same results as him.
In a couple of weeks, I will start an experiment to see if taking creatine supplements will improve my reaction time. I think Seth's method is useful in that the test only takes a few minutes and can be done every day, perhaps several times a day. Seth's original blog is down (he died in 2014) but is accessible on the Wayback Machine: http://blog.sethroberts.net/2014/01/09/reaction-time-as-a-measure-of-health/
I'd love to find other people who are interested in collaborating on this project (i.e., using reaction time as a way to measure the effectiveness of various interventions). I can be contacted at alexc [at] aya.yale.edu .
The method that I used consisted of targeted NIR interference therapy, short UV during the morning, a lot of inversion-based exercises where I focused on contracting/relaxing neck and face muscles, a few customized breathing exercises (think wim hof), figuring out the correct levels for a bunch of cholinergic vaso[dilators/modulators] (think noopept), massage therapies to reduce tension on the spine, some proprioception-heavy movement practices, a niche tibetan metta meditation series… and about 5 other things that are even harder to compress. The main point is that “the method” doesn’t matter so much, you can just google “intervention to increase IQ”, find 50 things, dig through the evidence, select 20, combine them, and assume 5 work
---
I think the core point of "how" is really unimportant, since I didn't do something optimal... not even close, I did something "silly" that I could execute part time with pocket change.
So I don't want to bias people towards this particular method.
The reason I have a control is to answer that, my answer is 2 points (full spectrum) and 3.2 (fluid components only) -- which in both cases are ~1/4th of the total gain/
I was waiting for the part where you explained what you did and how it changed your experience in a way that would encourage more people to try to replicate your experiment 🤔
I think the core point of "how" is really unimportant, since I didn't do something optimal... not even close, I did something "silly" that I could execute part time with pocket change.
I will publish a broader protocol a bit later once I have something better.
For the moment I added a quick update with the tl;dr -- but it's nothing ground breaking really -- you can just google “intervention to increase IQ”, find 50 things, dig through the evidence, select 20, combine them, and assume 5 work
Yes, but cardiovascular exercise is very annoying. I avoided using it in my own intervention... which is not to say that it isn't good.
My personal take is that diet-related stuff is oversold and primarily placebo, while not having zero effect, but that's more trial-and-error on my end, using diets to affect other things. It may work, but I haven't used it here.
In general I think "bounded duration of time + doesn't interfere with lifestyle" is ideal for interventions.
Diet and CV training are permanent thing that requires changes in lifestyle.
<This is not to say you shouldn't eat fruits or do CV training, both of those things are good>
I feel like I am executing on less tasks (good) and have found a way to make tasks I would find unbearable because of their structures to be moderately pleasant.
For a concrete example:
Right now I am working on a NIR + EEG closed-loop biofeedback device that faces:
a) annoying "I need to order this off amazon or go to the store tomorrow" blockers
b) requires precise soldering and insulation due to working with relatively high watages
c) requires to to constantly debug hardware (frustrating, especially since I don't "do electronics" as a profession)
The project has chugged along (not quite ready but another round of components and it will be) -- and it's a simple project -- but I would have otherwise lost the motivation and/or only been able to execute it using drugs or social pressure.
Of course... the counterfactual couldn't have been, so I can't be certain, but overall I feel like I've encountered a few such tasks where previously I'd have either given up or completed the task with high amounts of frustration and discomfort.
---
I don't do puzzle style problem in my day to day so it's hard to say if I'm able to "beat something on higher difficulty", all my work is more fuzzy/real.
interesting, thanks! The project you describe, while totally unrelated to what I do day-to-day, shares similarities in that I don't think that being 15 IQ points smarter would let me be more effective at it, and mostly depends on my motivation to exhaust all pathways. I think one of the other commenters touched on this, but how clear do we feel about the lines between "IQ" and "intelligence" and this "more motivation" that you describe?
your IQ increased so much that you forgot to include THE FLIPPIN STEPS TO DO IT??
If you believe that there are specific steps, do consider reading the article again.
there are ZERO mentions of what you actually did besides "i put together a setup for 400$"
have you tried ctrl-F for "method" -- usually does it :)
unfortunately it only works when the word is there before you hit ctrl-F.
if you add that text in the article after, the causality prevents it from appearing in the original search.
The late psychologist (and noted self-experimenter) Seth Roberts developed a simple reaction-time test that he felt could be used to track changes in brain function. He used the test to measure the effects of various interventions. Flaxseed oil made his reaction time faster (and presumably improved his brain function). Eating soy made him slower. I tried to replicate some of his findings but didn't get the same results as him.
In a couple of weeks, I will start an experiment to see if taking creatine supplements will improve my reaction time. I think Seth's method is useful in that the test only takes a few minutes and can be done every day, perhaps several times a day. Seth's original blog is down (he died in 2014) but is accessible on the Wayback Machine: http://blog.sethroberts.net/2014/01/09/reaction-time-as-a-measure-of-health/
I'd love to find other people who are interested in collaborating on this project (i.e., using reaction time as a way to measure the effectiveness of various interventions). I can be contacted at alexc [at] aya.yale.edu .
But... how did you do it?
See my update:
The method that I used consisted of targeted NIR interference therapy, short UV during the morning, a lot of inversion-based exercises where I focused on contracting/relaxing neck and face muscles, a few customized breathing exercises (think wim hof), figuring out the correct levels for a bunch of cholinergic vaso[dilators/modulators] (think noopept), massage therapies to reduce tension on the spine, some proprioception-heavy movement practices, a niche tibetan metta meditation series… and about 5 other things that are even harder to compress. The main point is that “the method” doesn’t matter so much, you can just google “intervention to increase IQ”, find 50 things, dig through the evidence, select 20, combine them, and assume 5 work
---
I think the core point of "how" is really unimportant, since I didn't do something optimal... not even close, I did something "silly" that I could execute part time with pocket change.
So I don't want to bias people towards this particular method.
Thank you! How much of the effect is gaming the IQ metric VS actually improving cognitive performance?
Roughly 25%
The reason I have a control is to answer that, my answer is 2 points (full spectrum) and 3.2 (fluid components only) -- which in both cases are ~1/4th of the total gain/
I was waiting for the part where you explained what you did and how it changed your experience in a way that would encourage more people to try to replicate your experiment 🤔
I think the core point of "how" is really unimportant, since I didn't do something optimal... not even close, I did something "silly" that I could execute part time with pocket change.
I will publish a broader protocol a bit later once I have something better.
For the moment I added a quick update with the tl;dr -- but it's nothing ground breaking really -- you can just google “intervention to increase IQ”, find 50 things, dig through the evidence, select 20, combine them, and assume 5 work
What did you actually do?
See update
Typo: fatest -> fattest
This is one of the most laughable experiments I've ever seen. It is completely pointless.
Cardiovascular exercise seems to work best. Healthy diet with fruits and vegetables like carrots and beets is another good way to improve cognition.
Yes, but cardiovascular exercise is very annoying. I avoided using it in my own intervention... which is not to say that it isn't good.
My personal take is that diet-related stuff is oversold and primarily placebo, while not having zero effect, but that's more trial-and-error on my end, using diets to affect other things. It may work, but I haven't used it here.
In general I think "bounded duration of time + doesn't interfere with lifestyle" is ideal for interventions.
Diet and CV training are permanent thing that requires changes in lifestyle.
<This is not to say you shouldn't eat fruits or do CV training, both of those things are good>
Do you feel like you can execute day to day or work tasks better/faster? Or come up productive new ideas that have meaningful benefits?
I feel like I am executing on less tasks (good) and have found a way to make tasks I would find unbearable because of their structures to be moderately pleasant.
For a concrete example:
Right now I am working on a NIR + EEG closed-loop biofeedback device that faces:
a) annoying "I need to order this off amazon or go to the store tomorrow" blockers
b) requires precise soldering and insulation due to working with relatively high watages
c) requires to to constantly debug hardware (frustrating, especially since I don't "do electronics" as a profession)
The project has chugged along (not quite ready but another round of components and it will be) -- and it's a simple project -- but I would have otherwise lost the motivation and/or only been able to execute it using drugs or social pressure.
Of course... the counterfactual couldn't have been, so I can't be certain, but overall I feel like I've encountered a few such tasks where previously I'd have either given up or completed the task with high amounts of frustration and discomfort.
---
I don't do puzzle style problem in my day to day so it's hard to say if I'm able to "beat something on higher difficulty", all my work is more fuzzy/real.
interesting, thanks! The project you describe, while totally unrelated to what I do day-to-day, shares similarities in that I don't think that being 15 IQ points smarter would let me be more effective at it, and mostly depends on my motivation to exhaust all pathways. I think one of the other commenters touched on this, but how clear do we feel about the lines between "IQ" and "intelligence" and this "more motivation" that you describe?