That's my favourite part of the entire article as well -- the author clearly knows what he's talking about.
It's actually surprising how many people do the opposite to this advice. Often it starts with nootropics and then continues into more dangerous territory.
It seems to me that people within companies that encourage competitiveness between employees are more prone to that. I.e. if your company only gives bonus to the top 10% of employees when ranked by productivity ("productivity" being defined in any way), that's a bad sign.
Nootropics—it's part of the meaning of the name—are supposed to be used when you're already perfectly healthy, to optimize further. If you're using them to compensate for a problem, you're using them as medicine, and that's outside their "tested configuration." You should see a doctor if you need medicine.
Technically I agree with you, but at some point you get so used to being optimized that going back is just as bad as getting sick. The most successful nootropics like caffeine and modafinil easily become long-term medicine for the problem of being less awesome than you otherwise would be, even if you're medically in the same health in either case.
It's actually surprising how many people do the opposite to this advice. Often it starts with nootropics and then continues into more dangerous territory.
It seems to me that people within companies that encourage competitiveness between employees are more prone to that. I.e. if your company only gives bonus to the top 10% of employees when ranked by productivity ("productivity" being defined in any way), that's a bad sign.