I have tried to get the actual text of the reports I found referenced. Unfortunately, I do not have subscriptions to the text that allow copy and paste. The Abstracts do not say much worth repeating.
One reference says that a study was conducted in Japan in 2000-2001 and due to negative results, the study was not completed. Another comment says that due to an article with a negative result the drug (trade name Draganon) was delisted. It may be referring to the Japan study.
Keep in mind that there are many different kinds of studies. In one abstract of a review of the published literature, it commented that there were myriads of both pro and con reports about Aniracetam and Piracetam.
It did not include a review of most of the reports because the methodology was not scientific due to open label, lack of adequate pre and post trial testing (neuropsych) or other statistical problems. A common problem was combining too many different types of dementia. In one report reviewed, the cohort was 150 patients. Upon thorough review of the patient histories, only 19 were properly qualified for the study as it was designed.
It was the Alpha GPC that was problematic to AD plaque formation, not the Aniracetam. The same was true of the CDC Choline (Citocholine). The AD brain already has an excess of acetylcholine.
As brain injury has been found to relate to a 4 to 10 fold increase in the prevalence of Alzheimer's Disease, it is easy to combine the two and see the long term risk.
There is a common problem with brain injury/dementia studies. It is all but impossible to get enough volunteers to participate in a long term double blind study because many of the patients are not willing to delay what ever other treatments may be available. A properly designed study needs to isolate the subjects from other treatments and therapies.
The studies of subjects with Alzheimer's were usually cut short unless positive results were documented early in the study.
I can not get the required written authorizations for the other information from another forum so that I can post it.
Either way, After my preliminary research, I discussed it with my wife and I was about to order some Aniracetam and CDC Choline to try but now will not take the risk.
I may have horrible memory problems and slowed thinking but my intelligence is still intact. I can not imagine losing any more mental abilities. I know what it is like to lose mental skills step by step over the last 40 years. This last step of lost skills was devastating. I cannot afford another step down in brain function.
By the way, in reviewing some past posts, it appears I never answered an important question. Why did the neurologist and neurofeedback therapist suggest neurofeedback was not recommended for my case? He could tell from the level of damage shown in my 22 lead QEEG that I have serious damage beyond the level that would be recoverable due to neuroplasticity.
He believed that my multiple concussions (13) had just finally overwhelmed my brain's ability to rewire. He based some of his prognosis on my reports of my prior successful brain retraining. He was actually shocked at my high level of functioning considering the damage shown in my QEEG waveforms. He did not know how bad my function was a year earlier. I had learned many work-arounds and accommodations to hide my dysfunctions.
This neuropsychiatrist had a full time clinic that kept busy and profitable doing neurofeedback. He used a QEEG targeted system, not a take home shotgun approach. At the time, I had the money to spend. His QEEG tech had recovered from a brain tumor and two-lobe-ectomy and used brain retraining to go on to earn a master's degree.
I had had very good recoveries from most of my concussions until a concussion in 1996. I worked hard at brain retraining and got intellectual functions and memory back to a high level but never regained tolerance for visual or auditory stimuli.
I was assaulted from behind with a blow the the head in 1999 and has even more struggle to recover. A new injury in Jan 2001 was the end to my ability to recover.
Upon starting serious research into brain injuries, I was able to define the functions I had been losing step by step after each concussion. It was like at each concussion, I took three steps back and recovered with two steps forward. Finally, it was three steps back and one step forward then no steps forward.
When I started devoting my energies to learning work-arounds and accommodations, my ability to function at a high level returned, not 100% nor 24/7 but enough that I could rest up for an event where I needed maximum function.