Adrafinil: Legal Status, Manufacturers and What the Label Says

Adrafinil is usually written about from one angle: that in a number of countries it is not a prescription medicine. That fact is real, and this page states it precisely.

Contents

But an absence of prescription control is a statement about paperwork, not about a substance, and building a whole article on it produces a very misleading document — because the same absence that removes the prescription also removes the regulator, the assessment, the leaflet, the approved side-effect list and every other thing that would let you find out what you were dealing with.

So this page is organised around what can actually be established:

• the compound’s identity and chemistry;
• the history of the one authorisation it ever held, and why that authorisation was withdrawn;
• its legal position today, country by country;
• what is printed on the product we sell, and who supplies it;
• what a batch analysis does and does not prove;
• what to do if something goes wrong.

An earlier version of this article carried a mechanism section, timing figures, an effects-and-benefits list and a three-way comparison table scoring adrafinil against modafinil and armodafinil. All of that has been removed on purpose, and there is a section near the end that explains exactly why.

What adrafinil is

Adrafinil is a synthetic compound. It carries three designations, and between them they cover essentially every name you will encounter for the same molecule:

• Chemical name: 2-[(diphenylmethyl)sulfinyl]acetohydroxamic acid — a benzhydryl sulfinyl structure carrying a hydroxamic acid group.
• Development code: CRL-40028, the code under which it appears in the literature.
• Former brand name: Olmifon, under which it was marketed for a period in France and parts of Europe.

Where the compound came from

It was developed in France in the late 1970s by the Lafon laboratories, the research group commonly referred to as Group Lafon and founded by the chemist Louis Lafon. Modafinil, which carries the development code CRL-40476, came out of the same programme: modafinil was identified during work on adrafinil, and it was modafinil rather than adrafinil that was eventually taken forward through the regulatory process in most of the world.

Group Lafon was later acquired by Cephalon. That is the documented sequence, and it is worth knowing for one specific reason: adrafinil is the older compound and the one that fell out of the development pathway, not a newer or refined version of anything.

How adrafinil relates to modafinil, and what that relationship does not transfer

The two compounds are chemically related and came out of the same laboratory. That is the whole of what this page will say about the relationship, and the restraint is deliberate, because the relationship is precisely what adrafinil is sold on. Almost the entire trade in this compound rests on an argument about what one molecule has to do with another, and that argument is asked to carry conclusions no document supports.

This page does not describe what either substance does or becomes in a person: that is a pharmacological statement, and a shop is not the place to read one. What is worth setting out instead is what the relationship does not transfer, item by item, because each of those is a checkable regulatory fact.

• It does not transfer an authorisation. Modafinil is authorised as a substance in EU member states. Adrafinil is not, and holds no marketing authorisation of its own anywhere in the Union. Authorisations are granted to a specific product, with a specific composition, made by a named holder to an assessed specification; there is no mechanism by which one substance’s authorisation extends to a chemically related one, and no regulator has ever suggested there is.
• It does not transfer a leaflet. The patient information leaflet and the summary of product characteristics published for an authorised modafinil medicine are documents about that medicine. They do not describe adrafinil, nobody has assessed which parts of them might apply to adrafinil, and reprinting them under this compound’s name would be presenting a guess as a source. That is why the harm-reduction section further down this page is written from first principles instead of copied across from a document that belongs to something else.
• It does not transfer an assessment. Modafinil has been reviewed by European regulators, most visibly in the Europe-wide review completed in 2010 that narrowed its authorised indication. Adrafinil has had one regulatory assessment of its own — the French one described in the next section — and the outcome of it was the withdrawal of the authorisation in 2011. Those are two separate files, with two separate conclusions, and the second one is not improved by the first.

So the honest summary is short. The molecules are related; the paperwork is not. Anywhere you see the relationship used as a bridge from “these molecules are related” to “therefore this one does what that one does, and here is a table”, a chemical fact is being asked to carry a pharmacological conclusion it cannot carry — and usually a commercial conclusion behind that.

Olmifon: an authorisation that was granted and then withdrawn

Adrafinil is unusual among the unapproved compounds in this category, because it is not a substance that never made it through a regulator. It went through one, held a marketing authorisation in France, was marketed there under the brand name Olmifon from the 1980s, and then lost that authorisation.

The authorisation was withdrawn in 2011, following a re-assessment of the balance of benefit and risk. Among the concerns recorded in that re-assessment were reported adverse reactions affecting the liver. That is the documented history and it is stated here as fact, because it is exactly the kind of fact that gets quietly dropped from pages selling the compound. Olmifon is no longer an approved, marketed product anywhere.

Two things follow, and they must be kept apart

First, the withdrawal of a marketing authorisation is not the same thing as making a compound illegal to possess: those are different legal acts under different parts of the law, and one does not imply the other.

Second — and this is the part usually left out — a withdrawn authorisation is a worse starting position than never having had one. A compound that was never assessed is unknown. A compound that was assessed, marketed, and then had its authorisation withdrawn on a benefit-risk basis has been looked at by a regulator, and the regulator’s conclusion was that it should stop being sold. Nothing has replaced that conclusion, and no regulator anywhere has since reached a different one.

The regulatory position today

Adrafinil is not an authorised medicine in the European Union. There is no marketing authorisation in force for it in any member state, it has not been assessed centrally by the European Medicines Agency, and the French authorisation it once held has been gone since 2011.

What that absence removes, item by item

• No summary of product characteristics. For an authorised medicine this is the reference document agreed with the regulator, setting out composition, the authorised indication, contraindications, warnings, interactions, use in pregnancy and breastfeeding, and the full tabulated list of undesirable effects with their frequencies. No such document is in force for adrafinil.
• No patient information leaflet. Adrafinil products are not supplied with a regulator-approved leaflet, because none exists to supply. The leaflet is not a formality — it is the one document written for the person taking the medicine rather than for the prescriber, and it is the thing missing from this box.
• No approved side-effect list and no frequency data. Nobody is obliged to compile which effects occur or how often, so nobody has.
• No official contraindication list. No regulator currently states which conditions or co-medications make this compound inappropriate.
• No pharmacovigilance. There is no marketing authorisation holder collecting suspected adverse reactions and no periodic safety reporting, which means there is no mechanism by which a problem one person experiences becomes information available to the next.
• No assessed specification. There is no authorised standard for the finished product against which a batch either passes or fails.

Which documents exist for what

Set against an authorised medicine in the EU, the documents line up like this:

Why the absence is a reason for caution rather than a reassurance

The most common mistake with unapproved compounds is to read a blank file as a clean one. It is not. A substance with no published side-effect list is not a substance shown to have none; it is a substance nobody has been required to examine. An authorised medicine’s leaflet is long and often unsettling precisely because somebody was obliged to write it down. Take that document away and the risks it would have described do not go anywhere — you simply lose the ability to read about them beforehand.

Applied to adrafinil, the point sharpens further: this is a compound where a regulator did look, did reach a conclusion, and the conclusion was withdrawal. Reading the resulting silence as an all-clear inverts the actual history.

The state of the evidence

There is no current body of published controlled human trials supporting adrafinil for any purpose. What exists is a mixed and dated set of material: work from the Lafon era, French clinical documentation from the period when Olmifon was on the market, and a much larger volume of contemporary user reports. None of the first two is a current regulatory assessment — they belong to an authorisation that has been withdrawn, and a withdrawn authorisation’s supporting file is not a live endorsement of anything.

What “unscheduled” does not mean

In several countries adrafinil is not a scheduled or controlled substance, and it is not classified as a prescription-only medicine. That is a true statement about its legal classification, and it is the reason the compound is discussed as often as it is. It is also, on its own, one of the least informative facts you can know about a substance.

Scheduling is a legal instrument aimed at a specific problem — usually diversion, dependence and trafficking. A compound ends up unscheduled either because it was assessed and found not to warrant control, or, far more commonly for compounds in this category, because nobody has got round to assessing it at all.

“Not on a list” is not a verdict. It is frequently the absence of one. It says nothing about quality, nothing about safety, nothing about interactions and nothing about what is in any particular container. Unscheduled, unassessed and unapproved are three different words, and adrafinil is all three at once.

Why forum reports are not evidence

The largest body of writing about adrafinil is user reports. These deserve a fair hearing rather than a dismissal, but they cannot do the job people ask of them, and the reasons are structural rather than a matter of anyone being dishonest.

• Nobody is blinded. Everyone writing knows what they took and what it is supposed to do. Expectation is one of the largest influences on self-reported experience, which is precisely why controlled trials go to the trouble of concealing who received what.
• There is no control condition. A report describes one day and cannot describe the same day without the substance, so it cannot separate the compound from sleep, workload, caffeine, stress or ordinary day-to-day variation.
• Reporting is self-selected. People who noticed something write about it; people who noticed nothing mostly do not, and people who had a bad experience often leave rather than post. What accumulates is a sample of the experiences that motivated someone to type, not a sample of experiences.
• The material is unattributable. With an unapproved compound there is no batch-level accountability across the market, so nobody knows what any given poster actually took: which supplier, which batch, which content. Two reports about “adrafinil” may not describe the same material.
• Some of it is commercial. Vendor-adjacent posting is routine in this category and is not always disclosed.

Where a page cites user reports as the basis for a performance claim, it is citing the absence of evidence in a format engineered to sound like its presence.

Legal status: different in every country, and subject to change

There is no single EU-wide answer, and anyone who gives you one is guessing. Because adrafinil holds no marketing authorisation, its treatment is not set by medicines-approval law but by whichever other instruments a given country applies, and those differ considerably.

These positions change. National medicines agencies reclassify substances, novel psychoactive substance frameworks are amended, and a status that held last year may not hold now. Treat every line above as a pointer to a source rather than as the source itself, and check the current position with your own national medicines agency before ordering.

Personal import and customs

Import is a separate question from possession and the two are routinely confused. Whether a consignment may lawfully enter a country is decided by that country’s medicines and customs rules, not by a shop’s willingness to dispatch it. Customs authorities may inspect, detain, refuse entry to or destroy a consignment, and may write to the addressee about it. A seller shipping to an address has made a commercial decision. That is not a legal opinion about your circumstances and should never be read as one.

NeuroPeak is a shop and not a legal adviser. What this page can usefully do is tell you where to look: your national medicines agency, your customs authority, and a pharmacist or local legal source if the position is not clear from those. Do that before ordering, because rules differ between neighbouring countries and are amended from time to time.

Competitive sport

Anyone subject to anti-doping rules should treat adrafinil as prohibited. It is named on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Prohibited List among stimulants, as are modafinil and armodafinil. Being unscheduled under a country’s drug laws has no bearing on this whatsoever: anti-doping lists are separate instruments with their own criteria, and the fact that a substance can be bought without a prescription in a given country does not make it permitted in competition. Check with your own anti-doping authority.

What we stock, who supplies it, and what is on the label

One product. Adrafinil 300 mg is supplied by NeuroPeak Labs in capsules, each declaring 300 mg of adrafinil on the label. The capsule shell is vegetarian HPMC. The container is shipped sealed as it was packed, with the batch number and the expiry date printed on the label; capsules are not counted out into bags, not transferred into our own containers and not relabelled between our warehouse and your address. The declared shelf life is 24 months from manufacture, with the expiry date printed on the container.

The particulars you can read for yourself and check against what arrives are these:

• Compound: adrafinil (2-[(diphenylmethyl)sulfinyl]acetohydroxamic acid)
• Strength declared: 300 mg per capsule
• Capsule shell: vegetarian HPMC
• Supplied by: NeuroPeak Labs
• Shelf life: 24 months from manufacture; expiry date printed on the container
• Batch number: printed on the label and matched to the Certificate of Analysis
• Storage: cool, dry place, away from direct sunlight

What is deliberately not printed on the container

Note what is absent from that list. There is no pharmacopoeial standard printed on this container, because adrafinil is not an authorised medicine and there is no monograph for a finished adrafinil product to be manufactured to. The modafinil and armodafinil tablets listed elsewhere in this shop carry “IP” after the substance name on the carton, denoting the Indian Pharmacopoeia standard the tablet is made to. Adrafinil carries no such mark, and we will not imply one.

Nor do we place a regulator’s name next to this product in any form: no medicines authority has approved it, and an administrative registration held by a facility is not an approval of anything sold from it.

Pack sizes and price per capsule

The current listing is:

Paying in Bitcoin takes 20% off the whole order automatically at checkout, with no coupon code to enter. The table on the product page is generated from the catalogue as the page loads rather than typed into the text, so where this article and that page ever disagree, the product page is the one being charged.

The per-capsule figure falls as pack size rises. It is a price and nothing more: it is not a measure of value, quality or anything about the contents, and we do not publish a price per milligram, because that arithmetic would quietly imply that different strengths stand in for one another — a statement about quantity, which is not ours to make.

What the Certificate of Analysis does and does not say

Every batch is sampled on arrival at our EU warehouse and sent to an independent laboratory before it is listed for sale, and the Certificate of Analysis for that batch is available to download. The batch number on the container matches the certificate, so the analysis for the exact container in your hand can be requested and checked rather than taken on trust.

What the certificate establishes is identity and declared content: that the compound in the capsule is the compound named, and that the amount matches the figure on the label. That is worth having, and for an unapproved compound it is close to the only objective check available.

It is also the limit of what it establishes. A Certificate of Analysis is a document about the contents of a container. It is not an approval, not a safety assessment, not a substitute for a regulatory dossier, and it says nothing whatever about what those contents will do in any person. We do not present it as though it did, and it is worth being sceptical of sellers who blur the two.

What cannot be verified

The more important list is the one of things nobody can check for you:

• Whether the compound is appropriate for you. No suitability criteria exist for an unassessed substance, so no shop can apply any. We apply none.
• What quantity means what. There is no assessed quantity in force for this compound and therefore nothing for us or anyone else to state.
• How it interacts with your other medicines. There is no current interaction assessment. This cannot be ruled out, worked around or reassured away.
• What continued use does. There is no current long-term human data, and the last regulator to consider the matter withdrew the authorisation.
• What other suppliers are selling. Content, purity and contamination vary across this market, and self-declared purity figures are frequently just typed onto a label. A certificate covers the batch it was issued for and nothing else.

Harm reduction where there is no leaflet

For an authorised medicine, this section would relay the manufacturer’s leaflet and stop there. For adrafinil there is no leaflet to relay. What follows is the set of things that can be said responsibly without one, and it is deliberately not a translation of modafinil’s leaflet: adrafinil is a different compound, no regulator currently states what applies to it, and borrowing another substance’s document would be presenting a guess as a source.

Speak to a doctor or pharmacist first

Anyone considering this product should discuss it with a doctor or pharmacist before use and mention every other medicine, every supplement and every health condition in that conversation. That is not a disclaimer bolted to the bottom of a page. It is the entire replacement for the assessment a medicines regulator would otherwise have carried out, and it matters more for a product with no leaflet than for one that arrives with a full one, not less.

The liver

The liver-related adverse reactions recorded in the Olmifon documentation, and among the concerns in the 2011 benefit-risk re-assessment that ended that authorisation, are a matter of record and are set out plainly in the history section above. That history belongs in front of a doctor.

What follows from it — including whether any form of testing or review is appropriate for a particular person, and whether use is appropriate at all — is a clinical judgement, and this page issues no monitoring instruction, no testing schedule and no guidance on duration of use of any kind. A shop is not in a position to set the terms on which someone manages a risk a regulator concluded was not worth carrying.

Anyone with a liver condition, or a history of one, or who is taking any medicine that affects the liver, must take medical advice before use.

Alcohol and other medicines

Do not combine this product with alcohol without medical advice, and do not combine or alternate it with other medicines without professional advice. Interactions have not been assessed for this compound and cannot be ruled out. Take medical advice before use if you are taking any other medicine at all, and specifically if you take any of the following:

• medicines for the heart or blood pressure;
• antidepressants or other medicines acting on the central nervous system;
• a monoamine oxidase inhibitor.

Conditions requiring advice before use

Take medical advice before use if you have any of the following:

• a heart condition;
• high blood pressure;
• impaired liver or kidney function;
• a history of psychiatric illness.

This is not a contraindication list, because no regulator publishes one for this compound; it is the set of circumstances in which a professional conversation is clearly needed, and the absence of an official list is a reason to have that conversation rather than to skip it.

Hormonal contraception

It is documented that modafinil reduces the effectiveness of hormonal contraception, and that this covers every hormonal form:

• combined pills;
• progestogen-only pills;
• patches;
• implants;
• vaginal rings;
• hormonal intrauterine coils.

Whether the same applies to adrafinil has not been established either way: no regulator has issued a statement covering this question for adrafinil in its own right, and the absence of a study is not a finding of no interaction.

Anyone relying on hormonal contraception should therefore raise this specifically with a doctor or pharmacist before use, agree what additional or alternative contraception is appropriate, and raise it with them again when stopping. This is the interaction most often left out of writing about this class of compound, and its consequences are the kind that cannot be undone.

Pregnancy and breastfeeding

Do not use this product if you are pregnant, may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, without medical advice. There is no current safety data in pregnancy for this compound, and the standard applied to an unassessed substance in pregnancy is caution rather than optimism.

Storage

Keep the capsules in their original container, in a cool, dry place away from direct sunlight, and out of the sight and reach of children. Do not use the product after the expiry date printed on the container.

When to stop and seek urgent help

Stop and seek medical help immediately if any of the following occur:

• a skin rash, blistering, or ulceration of the mouth or eyes;
• swelling of the face or throat;
• difficulty breathing;
• fever;
• chest pain;
• an irregular heartbeat;
• yellowing of the skin or the whites of the eyes, dark urine or pain in the upper right abdomen;
• hallucinations, agitation, confusion, depression or thoughts of self-harm.

A rash can be the first sign of a serious reaction and is a reason to stop and get medical attention rather than to wait and see. If any other reaction occurs, stop and take medical advice. Because no pharmacovigilance system covers this compound, nobody is collecting these reports — your doctor is the only route by which what happens to you becomes information anyone acts on.

Why this page publishes no comparison of effect

An earlier version of this article carried a three-column table setting adrafinil against modafinil and armodafinil, with rows for onset, duration, how long each was said to last, how each was said to feel, and which was described as the smoothest of the three. It also carried a passage advising which of them to pick. Those tables and that passage have been removed on purpose, and they are not coming back.

Why the table was not true in the way a reader would take it

A product meeting the same specification as another does not begin sooner, run longer or land harder than it: two products containing the same substance at the same declared strength are not two different things, and a bioequivalent generic is not a distinct medicine with its own character. Where the substances genuinely differ, establishing a difference in effect takes controlled human trials — and for adrafinil in its current status there is no live body of such trials to draw on.

A table that awards adrafinil a slower start and armodafinil a smoother finish is therefore not reporting a comparison. It is constructing one from user reports, patent language and vendor copy, and in this market the arrow reliably points at whichever row carries the better margin.

What this site compares instead

So this site publishes no comparison of effect between brands, between presentations or between substances, and no ranking by onset, strength or smoothness, anywhere in the catalogue. We compare exactly two things, because they are printed and real: who makes or supplies a product, and what it costs per unit.

Naming the comparisons we refuse to make is unavoidable in a passage like this one, and that is fine — it is more useful to a reader to know which claims a shop has decided it cannot back than to be handed a grid that looks authoritative and is not.

Frequently asked questions

Is adrafinil an authorised medicine anywhere?

No. There is no marketing authorisation in force for adrafinil in any EU member state. It held one in France, under the brand name Olmifon, and that authorisation was withdrawn in 2011. No regulator has since authorised it, so there is no approved patient information leaflet, no summary of product characteristics, no official side-effect list and no official contraindication list.

Why was Olmifon withdrawn?

The authorisation was withdrawn in 2011 following a re-assessment of the balance of benefit and risk, in which reported adverse reactions affecting the liver were among the concerns recorded. Withdrawal of an authorisation is not the same legal act as prohibiting possession of a compound, but it does mean a regulator looked at the file and concluded the product should stop being marketed. Nothing has replaced that conclusion.

Adrafinil is related to modafinil. What does that actually tell me?

That the two molecules are chemically related and came out of the same French research programme, and nothing beyond it. The relationship transfers no paperwork: adrafinil does not share modafinil’s marketing authorisation, since it holds none of its own anywhere in the EU; it does not share modafinil’s patient leaflet or summary of product characteristics, which are documents about a different medicine; and it does not share any regulator’s assessment.

Adrafinil’s own regulatory file consists of one French authorisation, granted for Olmifon and withdrawn in 2011. We publish no statement about what either substance does in a person, or about any equivalence between them.

Adrafinil is unscheduled in some countries. Does that mean it has been cleared?

No. Scheduling is a legal instrument aimed at diversion and dependence, and a compound is usually unscheduled either because it was assessed and found not to warrant control or, far more often in this category, because nobody has assessed it. Unscheduled, unassessed and unapproved are three different things, and adrafinil is all three. Not being on a list is frequently the absence of a verdict rather than a favourable one.

Is it legal where I live?

We cannot answer that and no shop can. There is no EU-wide position: it was authorised and then withdrawn in France, is reported to be treated as a prescription medicinal product in Germany, is not a controlled drug in the United Kingdom although supply for human consumption is likely unlawful there under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016, and is neither controlled nor approved in the United States and Canada. Check with your national medicines agency and customs authority before ordering.

What is printed on the product you sell?

Adrafinil supplied by NeuroPeak Labs in capsules declaring 300 mg each, in a vegetarian HPMC shell, with the batch number and expiry date on the label and a declared shelf life of 24 months from manufacture. There is no pharmacopoeial standard printed on the container, because there is no monograph for a finished adrafinil product — unlike the modafinil and armodafinil tablets in this shop, whose cartons print “IP” for the Indian Pharmacopoeia.

Does the Certificate of Analysis mean it has been approved?

No, and the two are entirely different. A Certificate of Analysis is an independent laboratory’s statement about what is in one specific batch — identity and declared content. Approval is a medicines authority’s assessment of quality, safety and efficacy for a defined use. This product has the first; nothing in this category has the second.

Why does this page not tell me how much to take, or for how long?

Because no assessed quantity exists for this compound, so there is nothing for anyone to state, and because we are a shop rather than a pharmacy: we hold nobody’s medical history, we assess nobody and we issue no prescriptions. We also publish no guidance on duration of use and no monitoring or testing instructions — those are clinical judgements, and they belong to a doctor with the Olmifon history in front of them.

Where did the comparison table go?

It was removed on purpose. It ranked adrafinil, modafinil and armodafinil against one another on onset, duration and how each was said to feel, on the basis of user reports and vendor material rather than trials. This site now publishes no comparison of effect between any products or substances — only the supplier and the price per unit.

Is it prohibited in competitive sport?

Yes. Adrafinil is named on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Prohibited List among stimulants, alongside modafinil and armodafinil. That is entirely independent of whether it is scheduled under a given country’s drug laws, and being able to buy something without a prescription has no bearing on whether it is permitted in competition.

How is it shipped, and what if it does not arrive?

Orders leave our EU warehouse within 24 to 48 hours of payment confirmation, travel tracked end to end and typically take 3 to 7 business days within the EU, in a plain unmarked box with a neutral sender reference. Shipping is €4.95 to the Netherlands, €6.95 to Belgium and Germany and €9.95 to the rest of the EU and to the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland, and is free over €150.

If a tracked shipment has not arrived within the estimated window plus a five-business-day grace period, we reship it at no cost or refund it in full, at your choice, after checking the carrier record.

The bottom line

Adrafinil is a compound with an unusually well-documented history and an unusually thin present. It came out of the same French research programme as modafinil, held a French marketing authorisation under the name Olmifon, and lost it in 2011 after a benefit-risk re-assessment in which liver-related adverse reactions were among the concerns recorded.

Today it holds no authorisation anywhere in the EU, arrives with no leaflet, has no approved side-effect list and no official contraindication list, and is unscheduled in several countries — which is a fact about paperwork and not a finding about the substance.

What we can offer against that background is a product whose particulars are printed and checkable, an independent batch analysis you can match to the container in your hand, a clear statement of the legal position and where to verify it for your own country, and a refusal to fill the regulatory gap with prose.

If you want the parts of this category that do come with a regulator’s file behind them, modafinil and armodafinil are authorised as substances in EU member states, unlike adrafinil, and the product information agreed for the authorised medicines is published in the national medicines registers for anyone to read.

The tablets in our modafinil and armodafinil categories are not those authorised medicines: they are Indian-Pharmacopoeia generics holding no EU marketing authorisation of their own, carrying the pharmacopoeial mark on the carton and the manufacturer’s own leaflet inside it rather than a regulator-approved one. Flmodafinil: What It Is, What Is Known and What Is Not covers the other unapproved compound in the catalogue on the same terms as this page.

Questions this page has not answered are covered on our FAQ page, or you can contact us directly. The questions we will not answer are how much to take, for how long, and whether it suits you — not out of caution for its own sake, but because nobody has established the answers and we are not going to invent them.

NeuroPeak is a shop, not a pharmacy, and this article is not medical advice. Adrafinil is not an authorised medicine in the European Union: the French authorisation held under the name Olmifon was withdrawn in 2011, no regulator has authorised it since, and there is no approved patient information leaflet, no official side-effect list and no official contraindication list. Nothing here is intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any condition. Consult a qualified healthcare professional before use, and confirm the legal position in your own country before ordering.