• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | thegreenhand

  • Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

I found some interesting article...

B

blase deviant

Bluelighter
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
2,897
...awhile back on pubmed about how amphetamine increased PEA levels by like 1600x! However, despite trying millions of searches/search terms on Pubmed/google, I found nothing.
 
If you cant find an article about it, its probally becaues its not true or not important. Who knows?
 
I dunno, it's not real important, it's just that I read an article on the chemical basis for love. Everyone thinks it's dopamine, and to a certain extent it is, but dopamine is mostly the 'novelty' factor (like when you're first getting involved, and infatuated and stuff), and sex and stuff. Dopamine, is of course increased, and they thought it was responsible because it multiplied a bit, and the quantity increase was great as well.

However I was reading Psych Today a few months back, and IIRC, they said PEA was responsible for the 'cuddly' and 'puppy love' parts, and long-term attachment, i.e. 'true love', if you believe such a thing exists (well, I should rephrase that, the PEA isn't 'responsible' for it, an increase is just one of the effects of it). Since PEA is present in lower amounts than dopamine, scientists ignored it, but the increase ratio/percentage-wise was larger than dopamine, and like I said, it was raised more during the 'true-love' (quotes emphasized there) part of a relationship.

So I wanted to use this reference in an argument with a friend about how amphetamines are a replacement for love, despite the fact that if PEA is raised by 1600x, you're probably going to get some paradoxical effects as compared to 'lovey-dovey/cuddly/supportive'. But it'd still remove the need for love.

Hell, talk to any frequent speed/meth user. I was reading a post the other day on here about how when you make it a habit it begins to replace your needs for everything (he mentioned sleep, eating, hobbies, friendships, and yes... love).
 
Also, please take my above post with a grain of salt. It's my memory of articles/etc that could've been wrong in the first place, so you're getting a once-removed account of articles that probably didn't even provide sources/reliable sources in the first place.

In summary, that post came out of my anus, and I hope someone can clarify/correct it.
 
Any article that states that kind of neurochemical phrenology, e.g. "high levels of this chemical causes this effect" is always going to be wrong IMO.. the brain isn't just a soup like that.
 
Well, the article didn't actually say that, that was my fault.

What they said was that they found the PEA was increased, didn't say it caused the feelings. I just hypothesized/assumed that.
 
Ohhh, so its sounds like it was more along the lines of this paper, which showed alterations in serotonin transporter when people were in "love"... alterations similar to people suffering OCD.

...Of course, that paper was rubbish though.
 
True, that paper was a little weak in control and methodology (e.g. what is the definition of 'in love,' a highly subjective state). However, a large body of circumstantial evidence suggests that 5-HT reuptake inhibitors can help people "fall out of love." Interestingly--at least for a large body of my colleagues and friends--SSRIs were the "antidote" for love, or more properly, love gone awry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top