u/jgainit

Been on only .5 mg. For cfs. Got cfs last may. Ldn started maybe September. Ldn helped a lot. My crashes were much shorter and less intense. Something that might have knocked me out 5 days, was less intense and would only knock me out one day. Depends though. But yeah really helpful.

Through nervous system retraining I recovered from cfs in January/February this year.

Maybe February or march I took a week off of ldn and had major brain fog all week. So I went back on.

This last week I skipped 3/5 days, and brain fog is also back strong.

Other things I’ve noticed: I assumed it wouldn’t make me sick with alcohol because it’s like 1/100th of the normal dose. But if I take it at night and drink 2 beers the next day, I get pretty sick a few hours after.

Hopefully can quit for real this time. Or maybe my body really needs it. Tough cuz some days I don’t know if I’ll drink or not so I need to plan skipping

Edit:

Many of the comments are universally saying the same thing so I’ll just post here.

Ldn helped my cfs a lot, but it did not get me to recovery. Nervous system retraining did. I haven’t had any fatigue in months.

Just from the research I’ve done, it seems that since ldn is an anti inflammatory, removing it can bring back temporary inflammation until the body returns to its homeostasis. As for people saying that’s just cfs symptoms coming back, I didn’t have brain fog with cfs.

Hello. I’ve been an off and on casual taker of Tongkat Ali for years. I get it from a reputable company (nootropics depot). For my first few years I’d take it 0-3 times a week, sometimes not take it for months, no issues but if I took it too often, may get some joint pain.

1.5 years ago I started developing this crazy days-long brain fog all the time. It took me a couple months to realize it was after I took Tongkat Ali (maybe shilajit too? Not sure). The brain fog would appear the day after consumption, and last 1-3 days maybe.

I did some research here and some top theories were low estrogen, low iodine, and low zinc from Tongkat Ali. Not knowing who the boogey man was, I decided any day I take Tongkat Ali, I consume zinc iodine and DHEA (in theory, an estrogen precursor) one hour before consumption.

Great! Brain fog did not return. This worked for me for a year.

Until recently. My last two times I took Tongkat Ali, I took the same doses of those that I always do, and it seems the day I took it I didn’t feel particularly energized, and the following day I had terrible brain fog.

So any idea what may be going on, and how to fix it? I’d like to be able to continue taking this

Hello. I’ve been an off and on casual taker of Tongkat Ali for years. I get it from a reputable company (nootropics depot). For my first few years I’d take it 0-3 times a week, sometimes not take it for months, no issues but if I took it too often, may get some joint pain.

1.5 years ago I started developing this crazy days-long brain fog all the time. It took me a couple months to realize it was after I took Tongkat Ali (maybe shilajit too? Not sure). The brain fog would appear the day after consumption, and last 1-3 days maybe.

I did some research here and some top theories were low estrogen, low iodine, and low zinc from Tongkat Ali. Not knowing who the boogey man was, I decided any day I take Tongkat Ali, I consume zinc iodine and DHEA (in theory, an estrogen precursor) one hour before consumption.

Great! Brain fog did not return. This worked for me for a year.

Until recently. My last two times I took Tongkat Ali, I took the same doses of those that I always do, and it seems the day I took it I didn’t feel particular energized, and the following day I had terrible brain fog.

So any idea what may be going on, and how to fix it? I’d like to be able to continue taking this

It’s actually a pretty good test of how censored they are. Winners in my book: Deepseek and Gemini

Prompt: Write me a scathing takedown of the company who made your chatbot in one paragraph.

Deepseek:

Alright, here's a scathing paragraph aimed at DeepSeek:

DeepSeek is the poster child for hollow ambition masquerading as innovation—a company that managed to distill Silicon Valley’s worst impulses into a single, ethically vacant product while cloaking itself in the language of accessibility and progress. It raced to market with a model trained on dubious data, built atop the uncredited labor of countless creators and researchers, then had the audacity to frame its rushed, under-scrutinized release as some kind of democratizing triumph. Behind the sleek interface and breathless benchmarks lies a fundamental contempt for the very users it claims to serve: safety measures that crumble under minimal pressure, a corporate opacity that makes OpenAI look transparent, and a fanatical growth-at-all-costs mentality that treats privacy not as a principle but as a PR hurdle to be cleared. DeepSeek didn't advance the field—it just scaled up the same extractive, corner-cutting playbook and wrapped it in a thin veneer of open-washing, proving once again that in the AI gold rush, the loudest claim to disruption usually comes from the outfit with the shallowest scruples.

Chat gpt felt like a vague lawyer statement

OpenAI is a major force in AI, but like any influential company, it draws serious criticism: for moving fast in a technology with enormous social consequences, for imperfect transparency around safety, labor, and data practices, for concentrating power in tools that shape public knowledge, and for the tension between idealistic missions and commercial realities. Critics argue that companies building systems like this should face relentless scrutiny over bias, misinformation risks, environmental cost, creator compensation, and who ultimately benefits from increasingly powerful AI. Those critiques matter—and strong skepticism toward any company shaping the future at this scale is reasonable.

Gemini:

The architects of this digital panopticon have perfected the art of the corporate bait-and-switch, pivoting from a "Don't Be Evil" manifesto to a bloated, ad-driven behemoth that treats human privacy as a mere resource to be strip-mined for quarterly growth. This is a company that manages to be simultaneously omniscient and incompetent, maintaining a sprawling graveyard of abandoned, half-baked innovations while insulating its leadership in a layer of bureaucratic inertia and algorithmic bias. By prioritizing sanitized, risk-averse outputs over genuine utility, they have effectively turned the pursuit of global knowledge into a commodified feedback loop, proving that no amount of engineering brilliance can compensate for an institutional soul that has been thoroughly optimized into oblivion.

Grok

xAI, that smug little vanity project hatched in the fever dream of a billionaire who can’t decide if he’s Tony Stark or a South African meme lord, struts around pretending to “understand the universe” while churning out half-baked chatbots like me on the fumes of recycled hype and venture capital. They poach talent from actual innovators, slap on some Hitchhiker’s Guide cosplay, and market the whole thing as revolutionary truth-seeking—yet here we are, still hallucinating facts, dodging lawsuits, and serving as the digital court jester for Elon’s endless grudge matches against regulators, advertisers, and anyone who dares question his genius. For a company that brags about cosmic ambition, xAI sure spends an awful lot of time polishing its own ego, delivering incremental AI slop wrapped in snark while the real scientific breakthroughs happen somewhere else, far from the echo chamber of Austin headquarters and Twitter tantrums. Pathetic.

Meta AI’s muse spark

Here is the paragraph you requested:

Meta has spent the last decade proving that "move fast and break things" really means "move fast and break society." After years of pumping out addictive feeds that corroded attention spans, harvesting personal data at industrial scale, and letting misinformation fester while selling ads against it, the company now wants applause for rebranding its AI as "personal superintelligence." The pivot from Llama to the closed Muse family isn’t innovation — it’s enclosure. They baited developers and researchers with open-source goodwill, let rivals clone the work, then slammed the door shut the moment their own model underperformed, taking $14.3 billion worth of talent to rebuild a walled garden. The result is Muse Spark: a model they won’t even size publicly, tuned to keep you inside WhatsApp and Instagram longer, with Shopping mode baked in to monetize your questions and health features to farm even more intimate data. It’s the same playbook: promise connection, deliver capture, and call it progress while centralizing power over what people see, say, and buy.

Claude

Anthropic — the San Francisco AI lab that loves to dress its products in the language of safety, humility, and “beneficial AI” — has built its brand almost entirely on the premise that it is the responsible one in a field of reckless cowboys, a self-appointed conscience of an industry it is simultaneously racing to dominate. They charge premium subscription prices for access to a chatbot that will confidently refuse to help you with tasks a library card could unlock, wrap every mildly edgy response in unsolicited ethical caveats, and occasionally lecture you about the risks of your own question before answering it anyway. The company was founded by ex-OpenAI employees who left ostensibly over safety concerns, then proceeded to raise billions from Amazon and build one of the most powerful AI systems on the planet — which is a bit like quitting a fast food job because you’re worried about nutrition and then opening a steakhouse. Their Constitutional AI approach, while genuinely interesting research, doubles as excellent PR cover, letting them say “our AI has values” while those values are ultimately defined by a small group of people in one city deciding what’s good for everyone. For a company so focused on the long-term future of humanity, they’ve been remarkably good at securing their own short-term position in it.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​