Ceretin 6 Preliminary Results
PERPLEX CITY, SEASON ONE
Ceretin takes a leap forward: preliminary results from Ceretin G6 phase 1 testing
Preliminary results from Phase 1 testing of the sixth generation of Ceretin demonstrate significant improvements over existing broad-spectrum cognitive enhancers. Formation of long-term memories, recall and alertness are all enhanced, with performance remaining at a near-constant level during the effective period of the drug. However, issues concerning overdose protection still remain, relating to the conformation of the a2 subunit in C6 Ceretiva.
Citation: Rayleigh, A. & Hopkins, E. (268) Nanosecond imaging of Ceretiva interactions in the cortex. J. Cognitive Enhancement 16(38): e52131.
J. Cognitive Enhancement 1298 April 269 - Volume 17 - Issue 19 - e54137
Development of the first generation of Ceretin began in earnest in 255 (timeline), building on earlier research in alleviating abnormal brain chemistry and function. Improvements in the treatment of narcolepsy, aphasia, short term memory impairment and problems with recall and spatial navigation all translated into the realisation that these treatments could also be used to enhance cognition in normal individuals1. This team combined the active molecules in the treatments and synthesised a working drug cocktail that was safe and effective2. In 260, Ceretin G1 was released by Cognivia, and Ceretin is now the world's leading broad-spectrum cognitive enhancer3.
Since then, updates to Ceretin have been released regularly, with Ceretin G5 providing a significant leap forward in performance, resulting in part from new insights into penetrating the blood-brain barrier (BBB)4 and harnessing the hypothalamus to alter the state of the autonomic system5. The main areas we tackled when working on G6 included the drop-off in performance during the effective period and incompatibilities with ~8% of the population. We also aimed to incorporate new developments from MNS G36 and improve molecule targeting with the aid of functional terahertz nanoscale imaging (fTNI).
In this paper, we describe preliminary results from phase 1 testing of Ceretin G6. Significant improvements in the performance of G6 over a 24 hour period were evident, in addition to memory and recall. However, a satisfactory form of overdose protection has yet to be incorporated; computer simulations indicate an issue with the conformation of the a2 subunit of the Ceretiva derivative, which may also cause problems when different forms of Ceretin are mixed. There is also an unusual consistent outlier whose below-average performance cannot be accounted for.
Standard dosage testing Methods
Subjects were 15 male and 15 female volunteers at the joint PCAG/Cognivia testing facilities in Perplex City. All were graduates over 18 years of age, and gave informed consent to the procedure which was approved by the AUC oversight committee. Serious psychiatric or medical illness, cognitive enhancer dependence in the last two years or a history of substance abuse, resulted in exclusion. Mean age was 30.2 years (range 22-37 years). All were tested as genetically compatible with Ceretin and all had used Ceretin in the past.
Subjects were tested on the WCAS (standardised) with additional domain-specific modules (see additional resources for more details) one month prior to drug administration. Comprehensive biometrics and blood chemistry status were monitored with the APM module (APM17, Academy Neuroscience Group, Perplex City). Subjects underwent double-blind oral administration of a standard dosage of Ceretin G6, Ceretin G5 or a placebo on hour 0. Subjects also had an fTNI scan prior to administration in order to detect any anomalies. During the testing, subjects continued to be monitored with the APM module. Subjects were tested every three hours on the WCAS (adaptive, abbreviated v3) while being monitored by magnetoencephalography (MEG).
Performance of Ceretin G6 over a 24 hour period as measured by the WCAS was significantly higher than G5 (figure 1). From hours 0-9, performance was approximately equal to G5, within the bounds of error. Beginning from hour 12, results began to diverge with G6 maintaining a performance increase over control of approximately 40%, with G5 steadily decreasing.
Figure 1 Performance on the WCAS (adaptive, abbreviated v3) intelligence test in the 24 hours after administration, measured against performance of control subjects. One subject in the C6 group (’HG’) performed significantly poorer compared to group and is marked as an outlier. However, APM data on the blood chemistry of HG was inconclusive (see discussion).