Why does sudafed help me focus

Effect of chronic drug treatment on acute c-Fos response. The data quantification of bands from western blots is expressed as percentage of c-Fos value of control animals injected with saline. The following experiments were designed to test whether chronic treatment with pseudoephedrine also affected the acute response to other psychostimulants.

Rats were chronically injected with either saline, amphetamine or psuedoephedrine for 8 days as described, and on day 9 they received a final injection of either pseudoephedrine or amphetamine respectively i. Cross tolerance between amphetamine and pseudoephedrine. A: acute response to amphetamine in rats chronically treated with saline, amphetamine and pseudoephedrine 8 day treatment of drug twice a day with an increasing dose schedule; rats were killed 1.

There was no significant difference in the acute response to amphetamine between rats chronically treated with amphetamine or pseudoephedrine. B: acute response to pseudoephedrine in rats chronically treated with saline, pseudoephedrine and amphetamine 8 day treatment of drug twice a day with an increasing dose schedule, rats were killed 1.

There was no significant difference in the acute response to pseudoephedrine between rats treated with amphetamine or pseudoephedrine. The data are expressed as percentage of c-Fos value of control animals injected with saline. In order to investigate the mechanism of action of pseudoephedrine and to compare it to that of amphetamine, the effect of pseudoephedrine and amphetamine on [ 3 H]dopamine uptake was assayed in synaptosomal preparations from rat brain areas.

Both amphetamine and pseudoephedrine inhibited the uptake of [ 3 H]dopamine into nucleus accumbens and striatal synaptosomes, with amphetamine being more potent than pseudoephedrine Fig. The amphetamine and pseudoephedrine curves were parallel to each other with the curve for pseudoephedrine inhibition of [ 3 H]dopamine uptake shifted to the right.

The IC 50 values for amphetamine and pseudoephedrine inhibition reported here see legend Fig. IC 50 is defined as the concentration of drug producing a 50 percent inhibition in 1 nM [ 3 H]dopamine uptake. Values represent uptake as percentage of control. The IC 50 values of amphetamine in inhibiting [ 3 H]dopamine uptake in striatum and nucleus accumbens are 4. Chronic injection of pseudoephedrine resulted in desensitisation of the acute pseudoephedrine induced c-Fos induction in the striatum and nucleus accumbens.

It has previously been shown that chronic treatment with cocaine and amphetamine reduces the immediate-early-gene expression response to these drugs in specific brain areas [ 19 — 21 ]. Pseudoephedrine effects on c- Fos expression is thus similar to that of other psychostimulants both at the acute and chronic level.

The c-Fos response to psychomotor stimulant drugs appears to be a direct response to the drug rather than to a general drug-related altered state. For example other studies have shown that there are no significant changes in c-Fos expression following withdrawal from chronic treatment of psychostimulants To further test the hypothesis that amphetamine and pseudoephedrine work through similar mechanisms, cross tolerance tests were carried out.

This result is consistent with our previous findings that pseudoephedrine has similar effects and mechanisms of action as amphetamine in terms of c-Fos expression [ 13 ] and internal behavioral cues [ 12 ]. In this work we have also analysed another reported effect of psychostimulants namely inhibition of [ 3 H]dopamine uptake and report that both amphetamine and pseudoephedrine inhibit [ 3 H]dopamine uptake. The role of dopamine in pseudoephedrine induced c-Fos response is further corroborated by the effect of the D1 receptor antagonist SCH which as previously described [ 13 ] inhibited acute response to pseudoephedrine results not shown.

Our studies thus indicate that pseudoephedrine, notwithstanding the higher doses required, acts in manner indistinguishable from amphetamine. This may have sociological and medical implications as pseudoephedrine is a legal over-the-counter drug. However, it is unknown whether the efficacy of the pseudoephedrine in humans is different from rats.

An additional potential risk of pseudoephedrine is reinstatement of drug seeking behaviour in individuals that have overcome previous addiction to psychostimulants. It would be useful to determine whether pseudoephedrine could induce a reinstatement of drug seeking behaviour in rats that had first been chronically treated with amphetamine and that had then been allowed to extinguish their amphetamine seeking behaviour.

Particular attention would need to be paid to the genetic background of the animals as it has been shown to affect relapse behaviour [ 23 ]. The data here reported and the additional approach described above would inform further studies in human subjects aimed at determining the potency of pseudoephedrine in humans to identify what doses may constitute a health, addiction or relapse risk. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. Hyman SE: Addiction to cocaine and amphetamine.

Koob GF: Drug addiction: the yin and yang of hedonichomeostasis. Poor man's Ritalin Even a low 30mg does it. It lasts a long time too. The extended release doesn't work as well. Provides a nice kick in the pants along with a cup of coffee in the morning. Cheap alternative! I found in a pinch financially that Sudafed, or the generic equivalent helped immensely concentration, on task, following group conversations and would get me moving in a Good Orderly Direction for a couple hours when that's all that is needed.

I've taken sudafed just prior to a family Xmas. Read contraindications, jitteriness, high blood pressure.. I didn't see any appreciable effect on these for myself. I did get a little tired after it wore off, so I may not recommend it continuously I am different First, it probably helps to know that Pseudoephedrine is a synthetic version of Ephedrine, from the Ephedra plant.

Ma Huang is the chinese variety of Ephedra. Ma Huang is being accused of causing health problems but not Pseudoephedrine. My theory is that there are financial motivation to accuse the natural version of doing things but not the synthetic version.

I take four times the recommended dose of Pseudoephedrine once or twice a day. I am not aware of any negative side affects, but it sure does have postivive results for me. Yes, it is a stimulant, but not anymore than caffeine. The positive affect I get will be different from most people; my system seems less affected than most for many things. Also, I probably have had a sinus infection for most of my life, and Pseudoephedrine opens the blood vesels or something like that.

So I need Pseudoephedrine to be normal; it probably does not make me abnormal, I am abnormal without it. I don't concentrate as well without it. I always use a generic version; the name brand is far too expensive. Do you like speed?

I've never taken Sudafed for allergies- only when I had a cold. I don't like it because it has Pseudoephedrine in it. This works as a stimulant! Maybe it's due to my mitral valve prolapse but everytime I took it- I would get a racing heart and the shakes. I never could sleep well with it, either. I don't recommend this medication to anyone- unless you're into amphetamines. Generic works just as well as name brand. I've heard a lot of references to "meno-fog. I have to take Ambien for sleep a few times a month and notice that I don't remember certain things that happen after I've taken the Ambien.

Is this normal? Back to Brain Health and Memory. The Sutter Health Network of Care. Expertise to fit your needs. Primary Care. Check-ups, screenings and sick visits for adults and children. Specialty Care. Expertise and advanced technologies in all areas of medicine. For the primary analysis, standardised mean difference effect sizes ES were calculated for heart rate HR , time trial TT performance, rating of perceived exertion, blood glucose, and blood lactate.

However, subgroup analyses revealed important trends. We conclude, however, that the performance benefit of pseudoephedrine is marginal and likely to be less than that obtained from permitted stimulants such as caffeine. Pseudoephedrine use exerts an effect on heart rate, but there is no effect on time trial performance, perceived effort, or biochemical markers blood glucose and blood lactate.

Effects could be more apparent in just those athletes of most concern to anti-doping agencies: younger and well-trained athletes. Any performance benefit of pseudoephedrine is marginal and certainly less than that obtained through permitted stimulants such as caffeine. Pseudoephedrine PSE is a sympathomimetic amine derived from the plant genus Ephedra , most commonly used at therapeutic levels 60 mg to relieve nasal congestion.

This causes vasoconstriction at the level of the nasal mucosa, therefore reducing the blood flow to the nasal cavity and decreasing inflammation [ 1 ]. Despite being the optimal drug for this condition in many countries, access to PSE is restricted as it is a precursor material for the illegal manufacture of amphetamine. Instead, the less effective phenylephrine is favoured [ 2 ]. Due to its similarity in structure with ephedrine and other central nervous system stimulants, there has been speculation that PSE may also exert ergogenic effects.

Previously reviewed by Trinh et al. Increased glycogenolysis could lead to increased glucose supply when it is limiting in exercise, whereas the proposed inotropic and chronotropic effects on the heart could raise cardiac output, promoting blood flow to working muscle and potentially improving performance [ 4 , 5 ]. Regardless of the theoretical advantages of PSE, the results of studies to document its efficacy as an ergogenic agent are equivocal. Many studies have found little, or no, ergogenic effect [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ], although some researchers reported larger-than-therapeutic doses to be effective in enhancing performance [ 13 , 14 , 15 ].

In , after a monitoring program that suggested increased use by athletes following the lifting of the ban, it was banned again. However, pseudoephedrine is not banned in professional sports that do not follow the WADA prohibited list, one example being ice hockey, in which it is used extensively. Even one pill a day used as a decongestant can trigger a positive drug test, and this can lead to unfortunate consequences such as the banning of Swedish National Hockey League player Nicklas Backstrom from the gold medal game of the Sochi Winter Olympics.

A recent systematic review by Trinh et al. The authors argued the limited studies available were too heterogeneous to perform a quantitative meta-analysis to supplement their findings. We performed a new review, finding seven additional articles not included by Trinh et al.

Our analysis provides quantitative support for the qualitative assertion by Trinh et al. However, we also question their view that supratherapeutic doses of PSE induce an ergogenic effect. An extensive literature search was carried out prior to statistical analyses using a random-effects model. Figure 1 outlines the search process. A search of the PubMed database took place in October and November After the identification of 13 eligible studies, a citation track was conducted and three more articles were found.

This was further supplemented by Google Scholar searches in November and August As of February , no new relevant references were found using citation searches of the final 16 articles selected.

These terms were searched for in the title and the abstract of studies. Only articles investigating the effect of PSE on exercise performance were selected. Authors must have provided enough information to derive means and standard deviations for performance tests.

Studies must have used PSE as the only substance in the intervention, and they were excluded if the substance was not specifically being investigated for its ergogenic effect [ 17 ]. Also excluded were studies investigating the effects of PSE on strength and neuromuscular coordination because data were incomparable with included articles [ 10 , 18 ]. Studies that investigated other substances were included if participants were not administered both substances simultaneously [ 7 , 12 , 19 ]. All studies were randomised placebo-controlled trials and were conducted in a double blind crossover fashion.

Each protocol of the 16 studies included in this meta-analysis required the participants to abstain from use of stimulants before the trials and some studies had a pre-planned meal.

Table 1 shows the characteristics of the 16 studies included in the meta-analysis. Where data were presented only in figures [ 7 , 24 ], authors were directly contacted for the raw data. If these were not available, the figures were enlarged and values were calculated using a ruler [ 26 ].

The meta-analysis was carried out using the RevMan [ 27 ] software. The inverse-variance random-effects model for meta-analyses was used as it proportionately weights studies based on the magnitude of their standard errors [ 28 ] and accounts for heterogeneity across trials [ 29 ]. To account for the crossover design of the included studies, data for experimental and placebo conditions were analysed in the manner of a parallel group trial [ 28 ].

Study heterogeneity is represented by the I 2 statistic which is the variation of effects that could be attributed to differences across studies rather than to chance.

The 16 analysed studies included participants. One 6. Mean ages ranged from 18 to 38 years, with only one study [ 22 ] allowing participants up to 60 years.

Participants were either competitive athletes or volunteers with an interest in sport. Effects were generally positively or negatively trivial across parameters with the exception of HR which showed a small positive effect in favour of PSE ingestion.

Subgroups, chosen by a median split, revealed important trends Table 3. In terms of the other parameters studied, there were trivial improvements in time trial performance, a trivial reduction in RPE and trivial decreases in GLU and LAC levels during exercise. It could be argued that these equivocal findings suggest a meta-analysis would better wait until a larger number of studies have been performed, thus leading to a more robust conclusion. However, the intriguing subgroup analyses argue against this.

Effect sizes tended to be larger in just those athletes of most concern to anti-doping agencies younger and well-trained athletes. They also suggest an optimal time and activity to take the drug, indicating PSE is most effectively administered less than 90 min before a short bout of exercise of less than 25 min. However, this was accompanied by a larger effect on increasing HR. A recent study looking at neuromuscular performance effects using these more effective higher PSE doses mg noted adverse side effects such as tachycardia and heart palpitations 24 h after exercise [ 18 ].

This suggests it will be increasingly difficult to get ethical approval to test the most effective doses of PSE, making it important to carry out the most complete analysis of the studies that have already been performed. The initial search for our systematic review was carried out at approximately the same time as that of the recent systematic review by Trinh et al.

However, the studies deemed appropriate for detailed analysis were different. Whilst our search confirmed and agreed with the many of the studies chosen by Trinh et al. As our enhanced sample enabled the meta-analysis that Trinh et al.