I was made aware recently that only a neurologist can officially diagnose a brain "disorder", "disease", "syndrome" etc,. as this is the only individual officially qualified. Diagnoses by a psychologist/psyschiatrist is completely subjective.
When one indicates that there is "something" wrong with a person, ie., having a "disorder", "disease"(as depression is often called) or "syndrome", what they are saying is that there is a physical abnormality of some kind. What I find strange is that there is no bilogical proof that these disorders, syndromes, diseases exist in the body. None. No physical evidence that in fact differenciates any one particular disorder from another, yet we are told that there is a chemical imbalance when no such imbalance exists. There is no physical test to assertain the presence of any abnormality.

(scratching head)

Tim

Tim,

Because there are no 'tests' that you can take that dx ADD does not mean there are no physical, biological reasons behind the disorder. There are many diseases that have no hard and fast tests to say, definitively, yes you have this disease or no, you do not. MS is one. There are many, many more. Practising medicine would be so easy if there were tests for all the physical problems people have. To dx many physical illnesses the doctor looks at the symptoms and determines from that the illness. This is what is done with ADD too. There is a definite biological basis for ADD.

Ok, I got it, so where is the biological proof? Show me as I would love to see it. Thanks for your reply.

Best,

Tim

Tim,

Because there are no 'tests' that you can take that dx ADD does not mean there are no physical, biological reasons behind the disorder. There are many diseases that have no hard and fast tests to say, definitively, yes you have this disease or no, you do not. MS is one. There are many, many more. Practising medicine would be so easy if there were tests for all the physical problems people have. To dx many physical illnesses the doctor looks at the symptoms and determines from that the illness. This is what is done with ADD too. There is a definite biological basis for ADD.

Hi Tim. Thanks for writing. I personally do not believe in giving any unnecessary drug to a child. But I do have one who could not function without it. He is now in college. We fought medication his entire school career because of the confusing information that effected our understanding of AD/HD. You should always be skeptical before putting something in your child's mouth that may not be needed. Maybe I can give you some new information.

My neurologist at Duke Medical University explained to me that neurologists are not necessarily experts on attention deficit disorder. The technology used in viewing the brain abnormalities is new,very expensive, and for the most part unnecessary.He suggested that I have testing done locally with my family doctor and a psychologist.

There are other methods of determining the presence of AD/HD that are very reliable and less costly. Psychologists and psychiatrists evaluate clients/patients to determine whether or not they have other mental or physical illnesses or disorders because other illnesses and disorders can mimic AD/HD.

Someone can correct me if needed, but the bottom line is that AD/HD is an abnormality that responds to treatment in most cases. You can split hairs all day long over words such as disease, disorder, condition, and syndrome.

Just because the disorder (my name of choice today) can not be seen under a microscope doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist and interrupt the quality of someone’s life. I have epilepsy- ideopathic. Meaning: we just don’t know why. But I still have it and I need medicine to keep from injuring or killing myself or someone else. There is no physical test to be taken that will tell me anything. We can only go by the VISIBLE symptoms which occur.
Diagnosis is based on evaluating symptoms, ruling out other disorders, and taking note of the disruption that's taken place over the course of a person's life.

My question is to those who have chosen not to take stimulants or other drugs. Do you manage your symptoms without drugs and if so, how? Can somebody help me with this?

thanks,
Ann

Arts,

I hear what you are saying. However, if someone is diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, we are frequently told he or she has a "chemical imbalance". Be this as it may, where is the physical proof? A neurologist specializes in diagnosing brain and nerve malfunction, disease (as these disorders are commonly called) To indicate brain abnormality, one would have to prove this either by physical test or biological proof.
My biggest problem is that very few people have a complete physical examination prior to being "diagnosed" with a particular disorder.
I had a neighbor who recently was told that her little boy had ADHD and if she did not put him on Ritalin, he could not return to school. I encouraged her to have a complete physical examination done first before starting any medication. In fact I sent her to a local doctor I knew would be very thorough. After the physical which included allergy testing, toxic scan and blood work, it was found that the boy was allergic to a substance known as Red Dye # 40. This apparently made him very hyper. Changing his diet to exclude "Hot Cheetos" was what started turning things around for him. Red dye # 40 is in a lot of snacks apparently.
I have family and close friends in law enforcement so I also had the school investigated. Upon investigation, it was also found that the school nurse was behind a teacher who was simply fed up with the child and intentionally lied to the parent. This was not only a lie but completely illegal activity. I find this interesting.
Most importantly, this story ended on a positive note. The boy was not drugged. To me, he was handled in a much more caring fashion. Till this day my neighbor stays in touch and still calls me an angel for helping her with her son.
My point is, there is no physical proof, so why medicate? In actuallity we don't even know what most of these drugs do. One thing that we do know is that they are harmful and often times more addictive than street drugs.
Chemical imbalance? Where? Disease means a pathogen is present. OCD is often called a disease. Where is the test? Where is the Bio proof it is legitimate? None exists. Diagnoses is subjective.
When you say expensive equipment, you are saying that such equipment exists to diagnose or prove a disorder/disease/syndrome exists. If so, what kind of equipment? What is it called and what is it's function? These are perplexing questions.

Best,

Tim




Hi Tim. Thanks for writing. I personally do not believe in giving any unnecessary drug to a child. But I do have one who could not function without it. He is now in college. We fought medication his entire school career because of the confusing information that effected our understanding of AD/HD. You should always be skeptical before putting something in your child's mouth that may not be needed. Maybe I can give you some new information.

My neurologist at Duke Medical University explained to me that neurologists are not necessarily experts on attention deficit disorder. The technology used in viewing the brain abnormalities is new,very expensive, and for the most part unnecessary.He suggested that I have testing done locally with my family doctor and a psychologist.

There are other methods of determining the presence of AD/HD that are very reliable and less costly. Psychologists and psychiatrists evaluate clients/patients to determine whether or not they have other mental or physical illnesses or disorders because other illnesses and disorders can mimic AD/HD.

Someone can correct me if needed, but the bottom line is that AD/HD is an abnormality that responds to treatment in most cases. You can split hairs all day long over words such as disease, disorder, condition, and syndrome.

Just because the disorder (my name of choice today) can not be seen under a microscope doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist and interrupt the quality of someone’s life. I have epilepsy- ideopathic. Meaning: we just don’t know why. But I still have it and I need medicine to keep from injuring or killing myself or someone else. There is no physical test to be taken that will tell me anything. We can only go by the VISIBLE symptoms which occur.
Diagnosis is based on evaluating symptoms, ruling out other disorders, and taking note of the disruption that's taken place over the course of a person's life.

My question is to those who have chosen not to take stimulants or other drugs. Do you manage your symptoms without drugs and if so, how? Can somebody help me with this?

thanks,
Ann

[QUOTE=Drummergod35]My point is, there is no physical proof, so why medicate? In actuallity we don't even know what most of these drugs do. One thing that we do know is that they are harmful and often times more addictive than street drugs.
Chemical imbalance? Where? Disease means a pathogen is present. OCD is often called a disease. Where is the test? Where is the Bio proof it is legitimate? None exists. Diagnoses is subjective.
/QUOTE]

Tim,

Have you been dx'd with ADD? I wonder why you question the existence of ADD and you are on a forum for ADDers? Are you against medication in general or just for ADD?

I don't see the sense in arguing this issue when that is not the intent of the original poster's question. Maybe we should open this up for discussion on another thread? I am game! :)

I was made aware recently that only a neurologist can officially diagnose a brain "disorder", "disease", "syndrome" etc,. as this is the only individual officially qualified. Diagnoses by a psychologist/psyschiatrist is completely subjective.
When one indicates that there is "something" wrong with a person, ie., having a "disorder", "disease"(as depression is often called) or "syndrome", what they are saying is that there is a physical abnormality of some kind. What I find strange is that there is no bilogical proof that these disorders, syndromes, diseases exist in the body. None. No physical evidence that in fact differenciates any one particular disorder from another, yet we are told that there is a chemical imbalance when no such imbalance exists. There is no physical test to assertain the presence of any abnormality.

(scratching head)

Tim
You're correct that diagnosis is a subjective process. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as "misdiagnosis," since either no diagnosis would be given, or every physician would give the same diagnosis. I'd also like to add that Alzheimer's dementia is a common disorder diagnosed by both psychiatrists and neurologists for which there is no definitive test. The only way to confirm a diagnosis is via postmortem examination of the brain.

You're also correct that there is no physical evidence as yet linking a brain abnormality or "chemical imbalance" as a cause to any mental illness. (There is some correllational evidence, but correlation is not causation.)

Finally, you're correct that allergies and other conditions can easily mimic ADHD and should be ruled out by a physical exam before starting ADHD meds.

However, that's where it ends. A psychiatrist is perfectly capable of diagnosing ADHD, and possibly moreso than most neurologists. I would be willing to bet that most neurologists do not have any specific training in ADHD, while most psychiatrists do. (This probably does not apply to pediatric neurologists.)

Furthermore, there is solid statistical proof that medications for several mental conditions (whatever you want to call them) are effective. Ritalin is one of the most heavily studied drugs out there, and every new drug has to go through at least 4 or 5 clinical trials for efficacy to make it to the market (I forget the exact number of trials required, but it's somewhere in the range of 3-5.)

Finally, I did some searching (dictionary.com, webster.com and a couple online medical dictionaries) to make some sense of the statement that disease requires a pathogen to be present. None of the sources I looked at would confirm that.

It's funny, too, how you mentioned OCD as not being a disease. In fact, OCD can be caused by a strep infection of the brain. Google "strep brain ocd" for more info.

Hello Tim!
Just want to say that I was not diagnosed with a chemical imbalance, but a neurological disorder.
Depression is one example of a chemical imbalance and because of scientific studies, we know that a depletion of serotonin is to blame in most cases. One way we know this is through research and trials of medications such as SRIs. The SRIs prove to relieve the symptoms of depression just like aspirin relieves a headache. Are you saying that depression is subjective? If you are, you have never been depressed. If the medicine works.....

Stimulants take care of many of the symptoms we are attributing to AD/HD if you have the disorder. It does nothing for, or even aggravates conditions if you do not. The answer to your confusion is in the scientific process that is behind defining all illnesses
( disorders, diseases, what have you..)

Do you think you could do me a big favor and let people answer the question that I posted? Maybe you could start your own thread on the debate over whether or not adhd exists? Don't mean to be rude back at you friend. Pretty please <3

hey tim you should go to amenclinic.com

it shows images of peoples brains who have adhd. it proves that the're different from "normal" peoples brains. people with adhd have actual problems that they cant control becasue the're brains work differntly.

Those studies confirm brain atrophy and other forms of brain damage. The commonality is that these cases are also those already on a medication and most have been for a while. This cannot be said for cases not on any medication.

Also, any link sponsored by the AMA, APA, NIMH or CHADD I don't personally hold a lot of stock in. These sources have obvious reason to be bias and support labeling and medication. Over the last 50 years it would be safe to say that a cure is not in the best interest of Big Pharma or in fact the mental health industry period.

You must understand that when J Jensen of the National Institute of Mental Health and Chadd (he is a member of their advisory council) says Quote: "studies have consistently pointed towards disturbances in brain functioning, particularly in brain areas responsible for attention and memory." Jensen used the wording: "pointed toward disturbances in brain functioning" because there was no proof of brain malfunction at the time. Just as there is none today.


This is my beef.


Tim


hey tim you should go to amenclinic.com

it shows images of peoples brains who have adhd. it proves that the're different from "normal" peoples brains. people with adhd have actual problems that they cant control becasue the're brains work differntly.

Are you calling me stupid?


I certainly hope not, even though that's the inuendo here. As far as medications being effective, ok sure. They are effective in handling symptoms. What about the source of trouble? The source is'nt known, so you medicate? We medicate the common cold to handle symptoms such as a runny nose and cough with NyQuil. These drugs are a far cry from NyQuil and many are highly addictive. You'd think with all the billions of tax dollars spent on research over the last 18 years there would be a drug that handles source troubles. (even if there was a source of trouble and none have been found.)
As far as OCD being a disease, I'll say this. In medicine, strict criteria exist for calling a condition a disease: a predictable group of symptoms and the cause of the symptoms or an understanding of their physiology must be proven and established. Chills and fever are symptoms. malaria and typhoid are diseases. Diseases are proven to exist by objective evidence and physical tests. Yet, no mental "diseases" have ever been proven to medically exist.
What you mentioned regarding OCD, you said that it "can" be caused by a strep infection of the brain. This is theory at best and has no peer review to back the claim.
What I am looking for here is something I can sink my teeth into. Not theories, but when someone says "disease", show me objective proof. I'd love to see a justification for the over drugging of our nations children. Give me one.


Best,


TimYou're correct that diagnosis is a subjective process. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as "misdiagnosis," since either no diagnosis would be given, or every physician would give the same diagnosis. I'd also like to add that Alzheimer's dementia is a common disorder diagnosed by both psychiatrists and neurologists for which there is no definitive test. The only way to confirm a diagnosis is via postmortem examination of the brain.

You're also correct that there is no physical evidence as yet linking a brain abnormality or "chemical imbalance" as a cause to any mental illness. (There is some correllational evidence, but correlation is not causation.)

Finally, you're correct that allergies and other conditions can easily mimic ADHD and should be ruled out by a physical exam before starting ADHD meds.

However, that's where it ends. A psychiatrist is perfectly capable of diagnosing ADHD, and possibly moreso than most neurologists. I would be willing to bet that most neurologists do not have any specific training in ADHD, while most psychiatrists do. (This probably does not apply to pediatric neurologists.)

Furthermore, there is solid statistical proof that medications for several mental conditions (whatever you want to call them) are effective. Ritalin is one of the most heavily studied drugs out there, and every new drug has to go through at least 4 or 5 clinical trials for efficacy to make it to the market (I forget the exact number of trials required, but it's somewhere in the range of 3-5.)

Finally, I did some searching (dictionary.com, webster.com and a couple online medical dictionaries) to make some sense of the statement that disease requires a pathogen to be present. None of the sources I looked at would confirm that.

It's funny, too, how you mentioned OCD as not being a disease. In fact, OCD can be caused by a strep infection of the brain. Google "strep brain ocd" for more info.

Are you calling me stupid?

I certainly hope not, even though that's the inuendo here. As far as medications being effective, ok sure. They are effective in handling symptoms. What about the source of trouble? The source is'nt known, so you medicate? We medicate the common cold to handle symptoms such as a runny nose and cough with NyQuil. These drugs are a far cry from NyQuil and many are highly addictive. You'd think with all the billions of tax dollars spent on research over the last 18 years there would be a drug that handles source troubles. (even if there was a source of trouble and none have been found.)
As far as OCD being a disease, I'll say this. In medicine, strict criteria exist for calling a condition a disease: a predictable group of symptoms and the cause of the symptoms or an understanding of their physiology must be proven and established. Chills and fever are symptoms. malaria and typhoid are diseases. Diseases are proven to exist by objective evidence and physical tests. Yet, no mental "diseases" have ever been proven to medically exist.
What you mentioned regarding OCD, you said that it "can" be caused by a strep infection of the brain. This is theory at best and has no peer review to back the claim.
What I am looking for here is something I can sink my teeth into. Not theories, but when someone says "disease", show me objective proof. I'd love to see a justification for the over drugging of our nations children. Give me one.
No, I don't think you're stupid at all. I think your ideas are a little off base, and you might be at the wrong forum if you think these ideas are going to be uncritically accepted. For example, I don't agree with your definition of a "disease." I think most physicians would probably say something along the lines of "a disease is any abnormal condition of the body or mind that causes discomfort, dysfunction, or distress to the person affected or those in contact with the person. Sometimes the term is used broadly to include injuries, disabilities, syndromes, symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts these may be considered distinguishable categories." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease) Notice that nowhere in the definition is pathogenisis mentioned.

As for drugs not treating the underlying cause of ADD, okay, I agree. Pumping me full of stimulants isn't going to take away my ADD, but it does help manage it. A great parallel here is with asthma, which I also happen to have. If it were not for this great drug called albuterol which effectively treats the symptoms of asthma, I would be dead almost 25 years by now. (Hint, if you have asthma, don't go to a grain mill, even if your grandparents are farmers... hehe.) I could trot out probably a dozen studies confirming a link between strep infection and some cases of OCD, but, since you won't believe links sponsored by the AMA or APA, I doubt you'd believe them, since the physicians doing the studies are probably members of these organizations.

As for your last statement, asking me to justify the "over drugging of our nations [sic] children," that is like asking me if I have stopped beating my wife yet. The question itself is loaded and assumes that children are being overmedicated en masse (which may or may not be true). Of course I am not going to support overmedicating anyone, but the simple fact is that for the cluster of symptoms (i.e. the "syndrome") that make up ADD, there are many medications that are proven effective in treating them.

As with all medications, one has to always weigh the benefits vs risks, and there are always risks. I agree, too, that one should have a thorough physical to rule out conditions that produce similar symptoms, such as thyroid dysfunction and allergies. If an underlying medical condition is found, then it should be treated. In fact, the DSM criteria state that an ADHD diagnosis is warranted if and only if symptoms are not due to any other medical condition.

Hello Tim.

<When you say expensive equipment, you are saying that such equipment exists to diagnose or prove a disorder/disease/syndrome exists. If so, what kind of equipment? What is it called and what is it's function? These are perplexing questions.>quote drummergod35

****The Structural Differences include studies with MRIs, PET scans, and SPECT scans. ******They show subtle structural differences in the prefrontal cortex (smaller right anterior frontal cortex, and less white matter in the right frontal lobes which cause problems with sustained or focused attention), caudate nucleus (asymmetries which cause problems with self-control), and globus pallidus. They also show that the right hemisphere of the ADD ADHD brain is, on average, 5% smaller than the control groups.
They also show differences in blood flow in certain parts of the brain, as well as chemical abnormalities in Attention Deficit Disorder – ADD ADHD subjects.

The studies on Essential Fatty Acid levels in Attention Deficit Disorder – ADD ADHD subjects vs. non-ADD ADHD subjects are interesting. The ADD ADHD groups had significantly lower concentrations of key essential fatty acids than did the control groups, and about 40% of the ADD ADHD group showed signs of EFA deficiency (increased thirst, frequent urination, dry skin, and dry hair). Low levels of Omega 6 EFAs contributed to higher incidents of illness (colds, flu, etc.), and deficits in Omega 3 EFAs contributed to problems with learning, behavior, sleep, and temper. These studies support the case for EFA supplementation as a part of the overall treatment approach to Attention Deficit Disorder – ADD ADHD.

Obtaining an EEG from a neurologist is rarely helpful.

EEGs will show differences from non-ADD children. Typically there is excessive slow brainwave activity, particularly in the Theta band (4-7 Hz.). However, ninety-five percent of all Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder - ADD ADHD - kids have "normal" EEGs. What we mean by "normal" is they don't have big epileptic spikes, or things like that, that a neurologist would say are "abnormal." But when you compare them side by side with a non-ADD kid, they are much different.

An EEG may be helpful if the child is going to be treated with EEG biofeedback, but in terms of being helpful for a diagnostic work-up, it is rarely helpful. However, if the parent interview revealed that the child had some potential neurological problem, as seen in sleep walking, or a history of seizures, and so on, then an EEG would be a good idea.

<AN ADDED NOTE FROM ME: MY EEG AND MRI WERE NORMAL THE 1st TIME AROUND - BUT I COTINUED TO HAVE SEVERE EPILEPTIC SIEZURES IT WAS 20 YEARS LATER THAT THE TESTS WERE CONCLUSIVE- THE TESTING WAS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE - they made no difference in my treatment.Something to think about>

newsideas.net (ADD/ADHD newsletter)

ADD is being shown as a different kind of brain. Areas that control impulse (ie... what keeps us from being culturally appropriate) Have less cells than certain parts of the temporal lobe... There is no "net deficiancy" in brain cell number but a difference.

Does not sound like "disease" to me. It think the difference involves both chemical AND physical changes... especially during the development in the brain.

This supports the hypothesis of "internal reference"... We are just missing the parts that help us connect into the "cultural feed"... instead of using our brain power to navigate culture, we are free to use it in other ways. Contextual retrieval of memory is most likely the standard model for animals and young children... we just continue in that vein with tons more computing power.

With heirarchical memory, there is a "dumming down" of the memory in order to have faster access to semantics and shared world view stuff that defines culture. For 95 percent the big brain is for culture... we ADDers get to use it for our own purposes :)

Contextual memory is creative and constantly growing. We archive information in contexts...it takes lots of grey matter to this, I am guessing :)

so... 95 percent of the population has the ability to deal with culture (or not deal with it) and we are 5 percent left out of the loop so we can create (ie drive the very culture that we cannot fit into...can't have the driver sitting at the back of the bus now, can we?)

The big problem is that we are letting the other 95 percent define us. We are different and at 5 percent there is obvious functionality to that difference...it is genetic as well.

It is only a disorder if we treat it as such... yeah, we have limitations but so do they...just different ones.

If I were a man with no legs who could paint amazing pictures, should I become a marathon runner instead? No! Am I productive? Yes! Am I disordered? No!

We just keep on trying to fit our square heads in round holes . We are then told we are disordered because they don't fit... think about it :)

Tim,

What do you think should be done with suicidal people? Should professionals just say hey why don't you just go kill yourself until we find physical proof that you are severely depressed?

Tara,

No, I did'nt say that. I think that after all this time and money spent on research, literally billions upon billions each year in the promise of a cure with no source found quite honestly has scam written all over it. I think the drug companies are getting fat and the lobbyists hired by them help to push certain bills up the line and drugs past the right people so that can become publicly consumable. I think we are over drugging.
What to do? Well, we could start by giving a severly depressed person a complete physical exam. A close friend and MD in Los Angeles mentioned a commonality in depression cases in that a high percentage have poor diet, don't exercise, and take vitamins and essential minerals. After my divorce I was severely depressed. This is totally normal. Did I go see an Psychiatrist and get some prozac? No. I went to see my MD and she gave me a full physical. She told me I was very low on B vitamins and also informed me that drinking almost comletely robbed my body of any vitamins I was getting through food, and I ate pretty healthy stuff. This was data I NEVER would have gotten if I went to see a Psychiatrist. 97% of the time they will not recommend a physical exam. Anyway, my doctor had me take a regiment of vitamins, minerals and extra B-1. I was told to take 200mg 2X a day. By day two I was much, much better. She also recommended I get some exercise and get extroverted by getting into action on some projects etc,. This is what got me thorough the depression.
Should we let someone kill them selves? Come on. There are alternatives though. We don't have to take a pill and neither do our children.

Best,

Tim

Okay,here we go again.

I don't know who told you that...... but it's NOT true. Licensed pyschologist's can and do diagnose ADHD, depression, Tourette's, OCD and schizophrenia, etc. I've been doing it for 21 + years here in Minnesota. There are absolutely no restrictions on the diagnoses within the DSM -IV-TR, other than the professional be licensed and competent. All states require licensed psychologist's to post their professional competencies in their office. When I added diagnosing & treating ADHD to mine, I had to demonstrate to the state licensing board that I had received the proper course work, training (CEU"s) and/or books read (more CEU's) to be able to justify adding that.That meant sending in the certificates from the workshops or showing documentation that you actually read those books, etc.

In order to practice psychology , you have to do more than just pass a national licensing exam and a state ethics exam + 2000hrs (that's right..... 2,000 hours) of supervised practice. You also have to be admitted to each managed care companies panel as an authorized provider.If you don't then you cant bill for those services to that company.That requires a separate set of documentation for each and every one of them.Included in that is a background check as well. As if that weren't enough, your malpractice insurer requires the same thing.

I am admitted to every managed care panel in Minnesota as an approved ADHD examiner.One of my best referral sources is the pediatric neurologist from the larger town 1 hr away.

***AN ADDED NOTE FROM ME(artsmartbabe): MY EEG AND MRI WERE NORMAL THE 1st TIME AROUND - BUT I COTINUED TO HAVE SEVERE EPILEPTIC SIEZURES IT WAS 20 YEARS LATER THAT THE TESTS WERE CONCLUSIVE- THE TESTING WAS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE - they made no difference in my treatment.Something to think about***

Excuse me the above note was from me, artsmartbabe.Sorry it is not clear.
I am trying to share one experience in which I have first-hand knowledge.

I am trying to tell drummergod that if doctors had based my treatment on the results of technical test results as proof of my seizure disorder, where would I be??
The only "proof" neurologists had to go by were history and the possible "subjective" reports by my family and friends.

I am trying to make my point by comparing the testing of the neurological disorder epilepsy, to that of adhd since in doing so, the same types of equipment would be used.

*Both epilepsy and adhd are neurological disorders

*Normal test results from equipment such as mri, eeg,etc. in both disorders are common. Many times we cannot pinpoint the origin of the problem.

*Testing is often inconclusive and is always extremely expensive.

*Both disorders have symptoms that can often only be reported by the patients themselves and friends and family...

*Both disorders respond well to medicines that have been scientifically tested and approved.
*Both may cause significant impairment to an individual's quality of life, and may benefit from treatment.

I did take a pill for my depression
After getting a full exam by my MD
I went on Lexapro
What that did was create a barrier to all the intense emotions I was feeling.
It gave me the break I needed from depression.
To get myself back.
And that was the goal.
I'm no longer taking anything for depression and I am not depressed.
Taking an antidepressant was the thing I needed to do at that time to help myself.
This post is not me saying hey everyone run out and get drugs.
I'm showing another side to how a person can help themselves.
Lexapro was my only experience with that type of drug.
I've never taken AD/HD meds and that was my only time with an antidepressant.
We all have to be allowed to do whats right for ourselves.
No one can tell me what drug to take or not take.
Especially when they haven't walked in my shoes.

PS If anyone is getting themselves all fired up by my post.
You should know I'm not interesting in debating and going round and round on a subject. I just wanted to express my personal feelings here.
Everyone is free to agree or disagree with me. Thank You for understanding.

Good grief Tim;
"disorder", "disease", "syndrome" "abnormality" "disturbances in brain functioning"
Even in my darkest hours I have NEVER EVER thought of myself using any of those terms. I hope for your sake that you are just trying to stir things up and not being challenged by someone to validate your "illness" (Been there done that) We are here to help.

There's a Huge difference between situational depression and a Major Depressive Disorder. Most people going thru some type of grief will be sad; which is "normal" under those circumstances. At the very least, it's called an Adjustment Disorder ( most people going thru the same thing would feel the same way). The main differences are the lenght of time the person has been depressed and the impact of the symptoms (transient vs longer lasting ).

Among it's numerous defintions, ADHD is a proven brain based disorder.The risk factors for untreated ADHD are profound. If you don't believe me, then please check out Sandra Rief's 2003 book.....The ADHD Book of Lists; page 20. It provides an evidenced based (research validated) list. The impact to the Executive Functions alone (listed on pages 5,6 & 7) shows how potentially devastating the disorder is. You can't trivialize a major neurobiological disorder as something that doesn't require the consideration at least of medication as part of an overall treatment plan. An adult is obviously in a better position to decide for themselves whether or not to treat their ADHD (or any other disorder ) than say a child.

Medication is always a personal choice in any treatment plan. However, ADHD is absloutely NOT something that vitamins, diet or excercise will serve as clinical treatments for. Yes, everyone needs all of those; whether they have ADHD or not. For a child with ADHD, they need the best of both approaches in order to have a "fighting chance" at succeeding in life.

stori great post!!!!!!! well said!!!!!!!!!

Thank You johna :)

Mc Tavish,

Brain based disorder? How so? Where is the proof "in" the brain that it exists? Is there a physical abnormality present? If so, where? Most of what I see out there are theories. Theories are fine. But when I see no peer review that is conclusive in backing claims such as "chemical imbalance" I get a little annoyed because there is no chemical out of balance. This is the lie. Seratonin imbalance maybe? Ok, then my instict is to say: Where is the physical evidence to back this up that has peer review with definitive conclusions that take away doubt and reservation that these are legitimate abnormalities.
The best we have out there in explanation are theories. It's also interesting that there are not many psychiatrists who ahve joint agreement on these theories. Again, theories are great. There is a group I heard about not long ago that believes that all cancer is linked to a major loss in someones life, such as the death of a child, spouse, etc,. This is a theory. Theories help us look at different areas like for instance how the planets were formed. I think theories are helpful, but they are still only just that.
I do see what you are saying and I understand the viewpoint.

Tim

Stori,

That's great. I am glad to hear that you made it through the depression and the incident unscathed. A lot of people don't make it don't get off the meds they take. It is a fact that drugs such as Ritalin cause brain atrophy with prolonged usage. This is an irreversable effect as Ritalin is basically methamphetamine. I met someone over the weekend that was diagnosed by 3 different Psychiatrists with over 8 different disorders. Talk about being confused. This guy was. He actually told me straight out that he had lost his identity. He mentioned that he tried to stop taking the drugs as this made him feel more normal but that when he did, he felt suicidal. Each psychiatrist he saw "rediagnosed" the guy and prescribed more drugs. Things like this upset me. My personal view is that after 300 years as a profession, you'd think someone would know what causes these disorders, syndromes, diseases as they are commonly called. I mean what gives here? You were one of the lucky ones. I'm glad. Yours is a great story. I just don't trust the system as it's statistics are horrible.
July 03 a close friend of mine was prescribed a fairly low dosage of Paxil. 3 weeks after he started taking it he dove off a 7 story balcony on his head. The family was devistated. A family member recommended a Psychiatrist who gave him the prescription. I knew him for 13 years. He never had suicidal thoughts and was never severely depressed. In fact he was handling his divorce rather well and stated " i just need someone to talk to who will really listen". Unfortunately I was on a project out of town and was working a lot and could not spend much time with him. 3 weeks later he was dead. I lost a really close friend. What do I think of all of this? Well, the psychiatrist should be held somewhat accountable for his death. He took it as prescribed and he killed himself. I knew him well. He would never take his own life. I am upset that he was given a drug and later found out that he spent only an hour with this psychiatrist before he was given the prescription. I sometimes blame myself. I wonder that if he went to see my MD friend in LA if he would have lived. I know she would have exhausted every option before even considering an antidepressant. I have heard many stories very similar to mine. This is what upsets me most. I think the industry is loose and careless. Remember I said "the industry".
I'm glad your ok. Not everyone makes it. I personally strive to find solutions. I steer away from medication as I know there are countless other ways to handle people. I'll keep doing what I do in the mean time to help others without drugs. I don't think meds are a good solution. Do they save lives? Yes. Do they kill?. Definitely.

Best,

Tim

... I think that after all this time and money spent on research, literally billions upon billions each year in the promise of a cure with no source found quite honestly has scam written all over it. I think the drug companies are getting fat and the lobbyists hired by them help to push certain bills up the line and drugs past the right people so that can become publicly consumable. I think we are over drugging.

I have to disagree with you here since there are many fields where huge amounts of money are spent on research and drug development...cancer, MS, cystic fibrosis, AIDS, even the common cold. It doesn't make it a scam just because there are no answers yet. If we stop looking we will never make any more progress.

As consumers and members of society I do believe that we have the obligation to be informed and active politically, so that when the kind of manipulation you speak of occurs (I agree, it does), it can be held in check. I know, too, that this is easier said than done, but simply labelling it a "scam" doesn't help the end users.

Organization, clear , concise, substantiated data, contacts for voicing concerns, etc. is what I would be looking for, so that I felt I could maybe make a difference.

What to do? Well, we could start by giving a severly depressed person a complete physical exam. A close friend and MD in Los Angeles mentioned a commonality in depression cases in that a high percentage have poor diet, don't exercise, and take vitamins and essential minerals.

I agree 100% that a complete physical examination is the first step for any concerns and that a "softer" approach is always the best place to start when possible. However, the case of depression is complicated...how to get the depressed person involved in those things you mention (diet, exercise) when they aren't capable of doing more than sleeping and coping.

I speak from first hand experience. I fought for over 10 years through sheer willpower to overcome my depression. Exercise and diet was a part of that, but I still lost the battle. In the end, the stresses in my life from dealing with 2 ADD kids (one extreme ODD, too) was more than my physical body could handle.

I had a complete neurological, physical, ob/gyn, and psychological workup. The end diagnosis was "exhaustion"...my body just couldn't do it anymore. I started anti-depressants (something I swore I would never do) and am finally winning back my life. I don't intend to take them forever, and my doctors agree, but until things change in my environment (kids do grow up :D) I need the extra help.

Should we let someone kill them selves? Come on. There are alternatives though. We don't have to take a pill and neither do our children.
I don't believe you were trying to imply what Tara suggested here. I think maybe only one word was missing... "there are OFTEN alternatives though..." and "We don't ALWAYS have to....". Just as you feel strongly about not medicating, others feel strongly about the opposite and this leaves room to discuss it. IMHO

Kim

Tim,

Every diagnosis in the DSM is researched based/validated .Every one. The current DSM-IV has TR (Text Revision ) attached to it. That refers to the on going (scientific) scrutiny of each & every diagnosis.If the research doesnt continue to support the diagnoses via longitudinal validity & reliability then it gets tossed. Most recently, the dx of Passive -Aggressive Personality Disoder was deleted due to the data not continuing to support the diagnostic criteria. That's really too bad because they obviously didnt interview some of the people I used to work with. The point is that ADHD HAS BEEN IN THE DSM AS A VALID DIAGNOSIS SINCE DSM I.


Keeping up with the research is exspensive and time consuming. When I went to the Medical College of Wisconsin's 17th Annual Door County Summer Institute in Aug of 2003 to train with Russ Barkely, the mental health center where I work had a freeze on all training monies.They'd give me permission (training hours) to go anywhere I wanted as long as I paid for everything. We drove 9hrs one way and spent over $1k out of pocket just for me to train with Dr Barkley.We dont itemize either, so thre was no tax write off.
I didnt do that for something that isn't "scientifically based." I did it because I have a passion for learning about ADHD and then applying it to my practice, as well as sharing what I can with the ADHD community via the Forum.

If you suddenly have access to data that refutes the existence of ADHD as a brain based /scientifically documented disorder, then I urge you to contact the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics and tell them they're all FOS. This isn't some game.We've spent years studying and learning about this disorder. Your remarks blatantly attack the ethical principles which drive our respective profession(s). If theres no scientific proof then the whole thing is a "scam" and we're all liars. Thats not going to cut it because its BS.


In terms of your standards for "proof," every reference I posted supports that. The brain based data is directly supported by the fact that dopamine & noerpinephrine are neurotransmitters. The different areas of the brain that I qouted from Russell Barkley's presentation speak for themselves. If you don't believe it then you go read those articles.You obviously havent.

Not only do I have ADHD (when I was dx'd in 1972 it was called Minimal Brain Dysfunction or Damage. How's that for a name)? I also am a licensed(clinical/child) pyshcologist in Minnesota, so it's also whatI do for a living. ADHD is my primary area of expertise. I've spent the last 17 years making it so. I take this very seriously as you can tell.

While I'm not a Daniel Amen devotee, you can take virtually any of his books and open them up to see your "proof,"i.e,.pictures of the brain with ADHD and the impact of medication on ADHD (after the fact).

Seriously, what the hell do you think we do for a living? If it isn't based on science then you're saying it isnt "real".
Go to Sandra Rief's book The ADHD Boook of lIsts and turn to pages 3 and 4. There will be the various definitions of ADHD and the references that support them.

What you're saying in effect is that, without reading any of these, you can "prove" it isn't scientifically based. Well go for it. I ALWAYS back up what I say with specific references, page numbers, etc. This is my profession and theres no way I'll let anyone trivialize it (or ADHD).

The International Consensus 2002 journal article is THE definitive research article on the "proof" of ADHD as a "real" disorder , including it's scientific basis.

I've posted just a few of the references that more than make the point, which btw was settled 15 years ago. Go pick up Amen's 1993 book Window Into the ADHD Mind and look at some pictures of the "proof."

Well said McTavish!!!
Drummerguy, I don't get it; how can you deny the logic that how a brain is wired will somehow affect one's output and abilities?
If enough people share the same characteristics their "group" gets a label. We get ADD or ADHD.
Off topic: Is there such a thing as adhdophobia?

No, I did'nt say that. I think that after all this time and money spent on research, literally billions upon billions each year in the promise of a cure with no source found quite honestly has scam written all over it. I think the drug companies are getting fat and the lobbyists hired by them help to push certain bills up the line and drugs past the right people so that can become publicly consumable. I think we are over drugging.

Well, where is your proof? Every prescription med that goes on the market has to pass trials for safety and effectiveness. In fact, each med must pass several favorable trials for effectiveness before it's allowed on the market. (Again, my memory fails, but I think it's 4 or 5 favorable trials.)

I don't think I've seen a solid study showing that anyone is being overmedicated en masse for psychiatric disorders.


Brain based disorder? How so? Where is the proof "in" the brain that it exists? Is there a physical abnormality present? If so, where?

I think we covered this before. Sure, a lot of the brain scan studies are flawed in that the patients participating are already on or have been on medication before, so there's no way to factor that out. Yes, it's correlational, showing that the brain differences are there when ADHD is there, but doesn't show causation. The differences could be caused by medication, but we don't have evidence of that, either.

Lots and lots of diseases are diagnosed by signs and symptoms alone. Before CT imaging was invented, most neurological disorders were diagnosed this way. Alzheimer's is one, like I mentioned before. There's no evidence of pathogenisis in Alzheimer's dementia at all, either. No test a doctor can order today will tell you if you have Alzheimer's. I think it's pretty safe to assume that it's real, though.


Most of what I see out there are theories. Theories are fine. But when I see no peer review that is conclusive in backing claims such as "chemical imbalance" I get a little annoyed because there is no chemical out of balance. This is the lie. Seratonin imbalance maybe? Ok, then my instict is to say: Where is the physical evidence to back this up that has peer review with definitive conclusions that take away doubt and reservation that these are legitimate abnormalities.

Again, you're right, but restating it over and over doesn't make you any more right, and neither does putting it in nice, bold letters. However, none of what you say comes close to refuting the effectiveness of psychiatric drugs. The studies are all behind the medications.


I don't think meds are a good solution. Do they save lives? Yes. Do they kill?. Definitely.


This statement is vacuous and trivially true without a proper risk-benefit analysis, which can only be done by statistical analysis.

Drummergod,


I am so very sorry that your friend commited suicide. This is tragic. Anytime someone feels so desperate to end their life it is a tragedy. People commit suicide on medication and off of medication. Because your friend was on medication does not prove that was the cause. There is no way to know what he was thinking and you just can't second guess the 'should of's and could of's' of what you would like to do if you had another chance. I am certain that families who have lost a loved one to suicide who were NOT on medication would wish they could turn back the clock and get them on medication. There is no way to win in this kind of situation.

I do have to say though that by making blanket statements as far as blaming a medication without 'proof' is not appropriate. To do this may disuade a person in need of help a viable option for them.

I was dx'd with PTSD and depression prior to my ADD diagnosis. After I reached a point in therapy in which I was not able to make progress and in fact slipped deeper into a serious depression I began taking antidepressants. As a child I was given drugs as part of the child abuse I suffered. The drugs were used in place of seeking help and served to 'shut me up' or actually turn me into a zombie so that I would not speak out against my abuser. So if anyone was resistant to taking drugs I was. I only began to take them because I truly don't think I would of survived without them because the depression was so serious. The medication was a life saver. I was able to shed the depression and make some real, lasting progress in my therapy. What could of been a major tragedy to my husband and children became a time were we were able to support and affirm each other. I in no way regret taking the medication. I would recommend the same to anyone in my position. Like another poster said happened to her, my body was exhausted from the extended stress I was under. As a way to cope prior to the medication I worked myself into the ground with manual labor so my body was physically and emotionally spent and on a downward spiral.

I again extend my sympathies at your lose of your friend. This is truly tragic and I can see now where the pain that comes thru in your posts is coming from. I admire your passion on your mission to be anti drug. I am very anti drug too for good reason but I don't want to eliminate a treatment option when it is warranted.

I am also saddened by your loss. In January, my first cousin committed suicide. He was an accomplished professional and a world class athlete. I always admired him, even though he obviously thought otherwise of himself.

I think that people should definelty have phsysicals to rule out others conditions which could mimic or even contribute to psychological conditions. I also agree that proper nutrition is vital to helping people with conditions such as AD/HD. Many experts in AD/HD also believe this.

Pharm companies are making a lot of money off of people with mental illnesses and conditions. But, they are also making money off of people with allergies, colds, and erectile dysfunction. Did they also created Allergies? I'm sure that they are making a lot more money off of allergergies than they were 10 or 20 years ago just like AD/HD.

It's great that when you were depressed that you could actually get yourself up and out of the house to go see a doctor. Many people who are debilitated by depression or anxiety can't even do that. Many of these people have tried eating better and adding vitamin B and Omega-3 to their diets. If these people could get out an exercise they would.


You really didn't answer my questions about what do with a severly suicidal person instead of giving him or her medication? From what you talked about doing it sounds like the person would have killed himself or herself by the time he or she waited to get an appointment for a physical exam or gone to the healthfood store for some vitamins.



Tara,

No, I did'nt say that. I think that after all this time and money spent on research, literally billions upon billions each year in the promise of a cure with no source found quite honestly has scam written all over it. I think the drug companies are getting fat and the lobbyists hired by them help to push certain bills up the line and drugs past the right people so that can become publicly consumable. I think we are over drugging.
What to do? Well, we could start by giving a severly depressed person a complete physical exam. A close friend and MD in Los Angeles mentioned a commonality in depression cases in that a high percentage have poor diet, don't exercise, and take vitamins and essential minerals. After my divorce I was severely depressed. This is totally normal. Did I go see an Psychiatrist and get some prozac? No. I went to see my MD and she gave me a full physical. She told me I was very low on B vitamins and also informed me that drinking almost comletely robbed my body of any vitamins I was getting through food, and I ate pretty healthy stuff. This was data I NEVER would have gotten if I went to see a Psychiatrist. 97% of the time they will not recommend a physical exam. Anyway, my doctor had me take a regiment of vitamins, minerals and extra B-1. I was told to take 200mg 2X a day. By day two I was much, much better. She also recommended I get some exercise and get extroverted by getting into action on some projects etc,. This is what got me thorough the depression.
Should we let someone kill them selves? Come on. There are alternatives though. We don't have to take a pill and neither do our children.

Best,

Tim

Tara & Tim both raised some interesting points.

One of the things that has been reported in the literature over the years is that when a severely depressed person starts an anti -depressant medication regimen, they often become "energized" (literally) in terms of the impact of the medication on the vegetative symptoms (eating, sleeping, energy level,etc.) As a result, that can sometimes lead to a person who previously lacked the energy to act on their suicidal ideation, intent or plans, to actually follow thru to completion. The end result sometimes leads to a successful suicide. What percentage of suicides invlove that scenario I don't know. Nor have I seen any data on it.

In terms of who is getting "rich", there's no question that pharmaceutical companies make tons of $$$ and are a powerful force in Washington.The one group though that usually escapes scrutiny all together by the general public are the insurance companies. In particular, the managed care companies.

Minnesota invented the HMO (Health Maintenance Organization). Personally & professionally, that's not something I would be proud of. I belong to the Minnesota Psychological Association.Over the years we have had numerous speakers at our annual convention. One of the most popular has been our state Attorney General. He is an excellent speaker with a good sense of humor.More importantly though, he really has something to say. He is one of the few main speakers we've invited back.Here's why: he isn't afraid to take on the HMO's, even though they're chartered as "non profit" and can't be sued. I wonder how many of you knew that? I certainly didn't the first time I heard him.

The last time he spoke he singled out one of the HMO's in particular . What he did since he can't sue them was to do an investigative report (like Dateline or 60minutes) on salaries, spending, etc.,of the main executives. Here's the best part ; he then put it all on the front page of the Minneapolis paper.What he found out was that these top execs threw lavish parties,took expensive trips AND belonged to multiple country clubs.That's right; multiple. Not only did he find out that the top execs belonged to 6 country clubs apiece, they also used solid gold golfball markers. And we thought Enron was a rip off.

Things have gotten a lot better with most of them since then. He did successfully sue BC/BS and won. They now are 100% better and easier to work with.In fact, all but one have really come around. I believe (but have no proof) that his actions made a big difference.

So the next time you're pondering who's getting wealthy, remember those poor execs who have to pay greens fees at all those clubs.What a sacrifice.

The brainscan studies I referred to weren't "flawed." Now Dr Amen's work has come under attack for some reasons that I think are valid. As I said, I'm not an Amen devotee'. I included his name because he has some great "pics" if you will. If someone wants to see actual brain tissue as somehow representing a higher level of "proof," then I would refer them there.

The MTA study , Cook et.al. and Zametkins arent called "landmark" for no reason.

The brainscan studies I referred to weren't "flawed."
I was under the impression that a number of early studies included only people who were taking or had taken medication. I went and looked up the abstract of Zametkin's 1990 study in the New England Journal of Medicine, and found out I was wrong. :P In fact, all the adults he scanned had never taken meds for ADD at all.

Also, newer studies confirm that the brain atrophy seen on brain scans of ADHD patients is not due to medication.

Nevertheless, the point was moot anyway, since I believe ADHD is due to some difference in brain structure, anyway.

Thanks. I really appreciate it. Sometimes I feel like I'm in an uphill battle and I'm going nowhere. :)

I try my best to post accurate data and use only the most well known (and some of the most important) studies. I believe that it's critical for people to know factual information in order to reduce fictional assumptions.

As an FYI, the pediatric neurologist I referred to as one of my referral sources, has used Ritalin to help heal Traumatic Brain Injuries in children.


Once again, thanks. I have great respect for your opinion and read your posts with interest.


P.S.

Also thanks for taking the time and effort to go and read some of these studies.My hope would be for more Forum members to do exactly that.The end result would be a better informed ADHD community;which has always been the driving force behind my being here.:)

Your post brings to mind another important point regarding research in general. No mainstream professional journal is going to accept for publication a research study that is so blatantly flawed from the beginning; as it would detract from it's credibility and diminish it's stature. It would also defeat the purpose of doing the research in the first place to design a study that was problematic from the beginning.

The New England Journal of Medicine is by far the premier medical journal in the world today. If there were serious, glaring flaws in a study's methodology, there's no way it would be accepted for publication. Shoddy science doesn't lead to anything in the way of making a meaningful contribution to the field of study.

The other point is that no self-respecting researcher would risk damage to their professional reputation by putting forth such a flawed study with so some many possible confounding variables. Many, if not most, depend on the quality of their work to continue to get the grants to conduct their research. Thats why it's so important for people to realize that the top researchers have devoted their entire careers to the study of ADHD. The journal articles and books I have posted are among the very best available.This is serious science. So when someone tries to infer that there's no scientific basis for substantiating ADHD, I'm going to jump all over it.

Many of the top researchers are professors at major universities and/ or medical schools. As such, they can also be on the staff of teaching hospitals; or both. As I've mentioned in another post,Dr Barkley is at the Medical College of South Carolina.

Mc,

Everything in the DSM is research based? This is simply not true. According to an international poll of mental health experts conducted in England in 2001, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-IV (fourth edition) was voted one of the 10 worst psychiatric papers of the millennium.even key DSM contributors admit that there is no scientific/medical validity to the “disorders,” the DSM nonetheless serves as a diagnostic tool, not only for individual treatment, but also for child custody disputes, discrimination cases, court testimony, education and more. I would think you would know this. As the diagnoses completely lack scientific criteria, anyone can be labeled mentally ill, and subjected to dangerous and life threatening “treatments” based solely on opinion.
I read not long ago that Dr. Thomas Dorman, an internist and member of the Royal College of Physicians of the United Kingdom and Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada, wrote, “In short, the whole business of creating psychiatric categories of ‘disease,’ formalizing them with consensus, and subsequently ascribing diagnostic codes to them, which in turn leads to their use for insurance billing, is nothing but an extended racket furnishing psychiatry a pseudo-scientific aura. The perpetrators are, of course, feeding at the public trough.”
Professors Herb Kutchins and Stuart A. Kirk, authors of Making Us Crazy, conclude: “The public at large may gain false comfort from a diagnostic psychiatric manual that encourages belief in the illusion that the harshness, brutality and pain in their lives and in their communities can be explained by a psychiatric label and eradicated by a pill. Certainly, there are plenty of problems that we all have and a myriad of peculiar ways that we struggle...to cope with them. But could life be any different? Far too often, the psychiatric bible has been making us crazy—when we are just human.”
In my eyes, while psychiatrists have managed for years to make it look, feel, and sound convincingly scientific, their diagnoses are being seen for the dangerous frauds that they really are. Far more than just “marketing tools” or harmless “billing codes” for treatment, in the hands of psychiatrists these manuals can literally be used to decide the fate of any individual. Now that's scary.


A inderect personal friend and Psychologist attended an APA meeting once, where she said that Diagnoses were developed by majority vote on the level that one would use to choose a restraunt. Then it's typed into the computer. She also said she was shocked at the low level of intelectual effort of the attendees. She said later: "It may reflect on our Naivete', but it was our belief that there would be an attempt to look at the things scientifically. Her name is Paula Caplan Phd. from New York.

Best,

Tim
Tim,

Every diagnosis in the DSM is researched based/validated .Every one. The current DSM-IV has TR (Text Revision ) attached to it. That refers to the on going (scientific) scrutiny of each & every diagnosis.If the research doesnt continue to support the diagnoses via longitudinal validity & reliability then it gets tossed. Most recently, the dx of Passive -Aggressive Personality Disoder was deleted due to the data not continuing to support the diagnostic criteria. That's really too bad because they obviously didnt interview some of the people I used to work with. The point is that ADHD HAS BEEN IN THE DSM AS A VALID DIAGNOSIS SINCE DSM I.


Keeping up with the research is exspensive and time consuming. When I went to the Medical College of Wisconsin's 17th Annual Door County Summer Institute in Aug of 2003 to train with Russ Barkely, the mental health center where I work had a freeze on all training monies.They'd give me permission (training hours) to go anywhere I wanted as long as I paid for everything. We drove 9hrs one way and spent over $1k out of pocket just for me to train with Dr Barkley.We dont itemize either, so thre was no tax write off.
I didnt do that for something that isn't "scientifically based." I did it because I have a passion for learning about ADHD and then applying it to my practice, as well as sharing what I can with the ADHD community via the Forum.

If you suddenly have access to data that refutes the existence of ADHD as a brain based /scientifically documented disorder, then I urge you to contact the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics and tell them they're all FOS. This isn't some game.We've spent years studying and learning about this disorder. Your remarks blatantly attack the ethical principles which drive our respective profession(s). If theres no scientific proof then the whole thing is a "scam" and we're all liars. Thats not going to cut it because its BS.


In terms of your standards for "proof," every reference I posted supports that. The brain based data is directly supported by the fact that dopamine & noerpinephrine are neurotransmitters. The different areas of the brain that I qouted from Russell Barkley's presentation speak for themselves. If you don't believe it then you go read those articles.You obviously havent.

Not only do I have ADHD (when I was dx'd in 1972 it was called Minimal Brain Dysfunction or Damage. How's that for a name)? I also am a licensed(clinical/child) pyshcologist in Minnesota, so it's also whatI do for a living. ADHD is my primary area of expertise. I've spent the last 17 years making it so. I take this very seriously as you can tell.

While I'm not a Daniel Amen devotee, you can take virtually any of his books and open them up to see your "proof,"i.e,.pictures of the brain with ADHD and the impact of medication on ADHD (after the fact).

Seriously, what the hell do you think we do for a living? If it isn't based on science then you're saying it isnt "real".
Go to Sandra Rief's book The ADHD Boook of lIsts and turn to pages 3 and 4. There will be the various definitions of ADHD and the references that support them.

What you're saying in effect is that, without reading any of these, you can "prove" it isn't scientifically based. Well go for it. I ALWAYS back up what I say with specific references, page numbers, etc. This is my profession and theres no way I'll let anyone trivialize it (or ADHD).

The International Consensus 2002 journal article is THE definitive research article on the "proof" of ADHD as a "real" disorder , including it's scientific basis.

I've posted just a few of the references that more than make the point, which btw was settled 15 years ago. Go pick up Amen's 1993 book Window Into the ADHD Mind and look at some pictures of the "proof."

Mc,
A inderect personal friend and Psychologist attended an APA meeting once, where she said that Diagnoses were developed by majority vote on the level that one would use to choose a restraunt. Then it's typed into the computer. She also said she was shocked at the low level of intelectual effort of the attendees. She said later: "It may reflect on our Naivete', but it was our belief that there would be an attempt to look at the things scientifically. Her name is Paula Caplan Phd. from New York.
Tim, are you sure Paula Caplan made all of these statements?

I am a licensed (clinical/child) psychologist with 28 years of experience , an adult ADHD and a specialist in ADHD.

The National Board of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapists in Ft Wayne Ind gave me one of their highest honors in July of 1999 by awarding me certification as a Diplomate in Psychotherapy without my having to take the national written exam or go before the Peer Review Board. Cognitive -behavioral therapy is the most widely practiced therapy in the US and in the world. Diplomate status is reserved for the top 10% of therapist's practicing CBT in the US.

In July of 2001, the Who's Who Historical Society of Boston, Mass named me to the International WHo's WHo of Professionals. That distinction is reserved for the top 1/2 of 1% of all professional (from all walks of life ) from 150 nations. It's the equivalent of an international gold medal. I am the only Minn psychologist listed.

Neither one of these organizations knew I was an adult ADHD.

I was nominated for both by someone or some people who know me and my work well enough to say some very nice things (and before you start salivating, you can't nominate yourself and I have no clue who did). I will tell you though that my latest revised resume has a state district court judge and a federal judge as my 2 newest references. We became friends over the course of my now 21+years here. During that time I have testified in court as an expert witness many times. Most of the time I testified in the capacity of the therapist for a child or children, so they wouldnt have to take the stand. That way, one of the attorneys could come after me instead of the kid, which is fine. Ive also testifed on psychometrics (testing) and on professional ethics. There's no real training for that role other than the school of hard knocks. You either learn by your mistakes or you don't. I'm a quick study.


I'm not telling you this to brag or boast.I'm an overachiever thats for sure, but then again I have always had something to prove because of my ADHD. I'm trying to get through to you that I know what the hell Im talking about.


For the very last time, EVERYTHING I POSTED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE.

If the DSM wasnt based on research, do you honestly think that insurance companies would dare pay for bull**** disorders? You are trying to relegate my profession to some kind of joke and thats above and beyond beyond irrational.

Russ Barkley was on the DSM committee that drew up the ADHD diagnostic criteria. It is research based. If the best you can do is give a second hand quote of a friend of a friend then I guess that's more than what I've posted.

I will tell you though that the cut off age of 7 years that was originally listed has been done away with for lack of substantiation. You realize that means someone must have checked the literature?


Tim, this is the last post I'm going to make on this. The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics ALL RECOGNIZE ADHD AS A DISORDER /MEDICAL CONDITION, AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER DIAGNOSES IN THE DSM. Once again, I urge you to let them know they are all a joke.

I don't give a damn if your friends friends uncle is Dr Phil and or his/her aunt Joyce Brothers, what you posted is pure BS. What amazes me is that I'm having to actually have this conversation within the Forum.

Meanwhile, you really need to try reading some of these articles. If you or someone you love has ADHD, then you'll need facts and not fantasy.

On that note I do wish you well. I don't know you and have nothing against you personally. I wil give you props for being stubborn and hanging in there.:) This is the last Im going to post in response to you directly on this specific subject.Good luck man and take care.

Hmmm.., shrunk brains, death, suicide, mayhem, and finally Dr's out of contol...hmmm..? When I see these ideas red flags pop up. When you read personal stories of drugged children who are normal, I know I am dealing with a Dr. Breggin follower or a member of Scientology.

Scientology's horn of choice is the "Citizens Commission of Human Rights International", while Breggin has created his own horn called the "International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology". They are all part of the Anti-psych movement which was founded by Scientology and is still entwined with that flawed religion.

Drummergod's sources....they all link with one of the two institutions listed above.

Paula Caplan
http://www.heall.com/calendar/psychosocial_solutions.html
She presents with Breggin and wrote, "So they say your crazy".

Dr. Thomas Dorman
http://www.dormanpub.com/index.htm
He has reviewed Breggin's books. He wrote the book entitled, "Dante's Cure: A Journey Out of Madness".

Herb Kutchins and Stuart A. Kirk
Breggin reviews their book at the annual ICSPP meeting. They have written two books together titled, "Who have wrote Making Us Crazy and The Selling of DSM".

Mc,

I'm glad you are trying to help. Maybe you have a great way of doing so. You certainly have the credentials to indicate that you are dedicated and that you care for children. There are a lot of individuals out there making a difference and doing what is needed to help protect our children. However, the problem I have is with the industry, not you in particular. Don't get me wrong. I have no desire to attack or discredit you. I do have a desire for truth though and by God I will have it. In fact, I insist on it.

The answer to the question about Dr. Caplan, she did say those things. In fact you may find it in her book on page 90. As far as your proof however, I have to be the one to say that in 1998 a friend, (not second hand by the way but a friend and Board Certified Child Neurologist (Dr. Fred Baughman) addressed NIMH and CHADD directly. In fact, you can read his entire testimony.

Here is the link:

http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/106th/oi/ritalin92900/baughman.htm

also, another helpful link is: http://www.adhdfraud.com/frameit.asp?src=commentary.htm


When you are finished with this, let me know and we can discuss your views to the contrary. I'm really interested in what you have to say. Keep in mind though that when the NIMH in 1998 itself says: "… we have not yet met the burden of demonstrating the specific pathophysiology that we believe underlies this condition." Forgive me if I have a hard time trusting what you are saying, credentials or not.

Best,

Tim "I am a licensed (clinical/child) psychologist with 28 years of experience , an adult ADHD and a specialist in ADHD.

The National Board of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapists in Ft Wayne Ind gave me one of their highest honors in July of 1999 by awarding me certification as a Diplomate in Psychotherapy without my having to take the national written exam or go before the Peer Review Board. Cognitive -behavioral therapy is the most widely practiced therapy in the US and in the world. Diplomate status is reserved for the top 10% of therapist's practicing CBT in the US.

In July of 2001, the Who's Who Historical Society of Boston, Mass named me to the International WHo's WHo of Professionals. That distinction is reserved for the top 1/2 of 1% of all professional (from all walks of life ) from 150 nations. It's the equivalent of an international gold medal. I am the only Minn psychologist listed.

Neither one of these organizations knew I was an adult ADHD.

I was nominated for both by someone or some people who know me and my work well enough to say some very nice things (and before you start salivating, you can't nominate yourself and I have no clue who did). I will tell you though that my latest revised resume has a state district court judge and a federal judge as my 2 newest references. We became friends over the course of my now 21+years here. During that time I have testified in court as an expert witness many times. Most of the time I testified in the capacity of the therapist for a child or children, so they wouldnt have to take the stand. That way, one of the attorneys could come after me instead of the kid, which is fine. Ive also testifed on psychometrics (testing) and on professional ethics. There's no real training for that role other than the school of hard knocks. You either learn by your mistakes or you don't. I'm a quick study.


I'm not telling you this to brag or boast.I'm an overachiever thats for sure, but then again I have always had something to prove because of my ADHD. I'm trying to get through to you that I know what the hell Im talking about.


For the very last time, EVERYTHING I POSTED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE.

If the DSM wasnt based on research, do you honestly think that insurance companies would dare pay for bull**** disorders? You are trying to relegate my profession to some kind of joke and thats above and beyond beyond irrational.

Russ Barkley was on the DSM committee that drew up the ADHD diagnostic criteria. It is research based. If the best you can do is give a second hand quote of a friend of a friend then I guess that's more than what I've posted.

I will tell you though that the cut off age of 7 years that was originally listed has been done away with for lack of substantiation. You realize that means someone must have checked the literature?


Tim, this is the last post I'm going to make on this. The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics ALL RECOGNIZE ADHD AS A DISORDER /MEDICAL CONDITION, AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER DIAGNOSES IN THE DSM. Once again, I urge you to let them know they are all a joke.

I don't give a damn if your friends friends uncle is Dr Phil and or his/her aunt Joyce Brothers, what you posted is pure BS. What amazes me is that I'm having to actually have this conversation within the Forum.

Meanwhile, you really need to try reading some of these articles. If you or someone you love has ADHD, then you'll need facts and not fantasy.

On that note I do wish you well. I don't know you and have nothing against you personally. I wil give you props for being stubborn and hanging in there.:) This is the last Im going to post in response to you directly on this specific subject.Good luck man and take care.

Mc,

Also, why do you think The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics ALL RECOGNIZE ADHD AS A DISORDER /MEDICAL CONDITION, AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER DIAGNOSES IN THE DSM? Might it have anything to do with
Profit? Could that be a motive? Who else benefits?

Tim

Also, It has recently come to the attention of the DEA, the Ciba-Geigy (the manufacturer of the methylphenidate product marketed under the brand name Ritalin) contributed $748,000 to CHADD from 1991 to 1994. The DEA has concerns that the depth of the financial relationship with the manufacturer was not well-known by the public, including CHADD members that have relied upon CHADD for guidance as it pertains to the diagnosis and treatment or their children. A recent communication from the United Nations International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), expressed concern about non-governmental organizations and parental associations in the United States that are actively lobbying for the medical use of methylphenidate for children with ADHD. The INCB further stated that “financial transfer from a pharmaceutical company with the purpose to promote sales of an internationally controlled substance would be identified as hidden advertisement and in contradiction with the provisions of the 1971 Convention.

If nothing else, this is certainly food for thought.

Exeter,


Where is that study you speak of. I'd like the source on it.


Thanks,


Tim

I was under the impression that a number of early studies included only people who were taking or had taken medication. I went and looked up the abstract of Zametkin's 1990 study in the New England Journal of Medicine, and found out I was wrong. :P In fact, all the adults he scanned had never taken meds for ADD at all.

Also, newer studies confirm that the brain atrophy seen on brain scans of ADHD patients is not due to medication.

Nevertheless, the point was moot anyway, since I believe ADHD is due to some difference in brain structure, anyway.

I read through this thread and the argument does not make sense really... Not that anyone is making a bad argument but it just seems that there is a lot of miscommunication.

So is it that ADD is: disorder vs. difference vs. no difference ? just curious if that is what it boils down to in this thread.

My feeling is that disorder is a bad term because it carries stigma with it that is not conducive to healing and makes it seem like meds are needed in all cases. If you look at it, the majority of the population is disordered in some way or another.

So, I am ADD and I function fine at work, does that make me disordered? I have close friendships and am a good father. My ADD is a tool that I use at work to get me ahead. I am not perfect and I do not do great in cultural situations, but to tell you the truth... I really don't need to in order to feel fulfilled. If I had a disorder, now I am not disordered... I think that in just the simple fact that ADDers some amazing tools at hand that other "disorders" do not seem to...

I don't know, it is just a word. A word that makes it more difficult for me in society... I guess that is the purpose in calling it a disorder.

I think I will call it a "Type". Yes, I have ADT... Wait a second. I have incredible contextual thought. I will call it ICCT.

I am ICCT and proud!

Are there brain differences? Yep. Can they be problematic? Yup... Can people survive without medication if they learn how to care for themselves and work in jobs that work well with ICCT... yes. So what is a disorder then?

I am going with the difference side of things. A minority difference that due to the fact it is scattered throughout all cultures, genders and races has to deal with a pile of issues that many people do not. (if we were any of those things, we could form solidarity and be proud...what the hell, I am proud anyway :) )

Tim, if your sole purpose here is to spit out the garbage that "Dr. Braughman" feeds you, I say take it elsewhere.

You believe in his theories, fine. Go with him, share these theories on his forum. Oh wait, does he have one?

I refused to dignify this with a response intially, but upon reading it again, I had to respond to these ridculous accusations. You made fine points, brought up interesting ideas, but as far as I am concerned, you are wrong.

Conspiracy theories such as your only hurt ppl. A handful of ppl, doing a little "reading" come to the conslusion that it does not exist, that it is made up by the pharm. industry for the sole purpose of bilking ppl of their hard earned money and drugging children, is dangerous and irresponsible to say the least.

As far as I can tell, you are the only one of the almost 6,000 ppl here on this forum that subscribes to your theories.

Go do some more research. I dont think you have been effectively reading thus far.

Why are you here? (honest question) Are you here to irritate us with your theories, or are you really trying to find answers. Cause if you are looking for answers, you have been given plenty. I just dont think they are the answers you wanted to hear.

As you can clearly see, I am not as patient, level headed, and forgiving as most on this board. My views do not necessarily represent the views of the others on this board. So make sure you direct your response to me, and me alone.

And one more thing, the use of the word "god" in your username is most offensive to me!!! IMO, it is just another testiment to your irresponsiblity in the way you communicate.

I just realized that this is the same Dr. Braughman that I fired off a pointed e-mail too last month! That dude is whack! ;-). Hey, the pharm industry does take advantage of and helps create hype...but that does not mean that ADD is not real... he wrote back an insulting e-mail.

Did you see his picture? I think this is how he thinks he can get chicks... sorry bad humor, that guy seriuosly riled me!

Chain,

I enjoyed your post. But, are there differences in brains that have ADD to the ones that don't? Only if the ones with ADD have been taking meds. It is has been proven that drugs like Ritalin (as they are about as close to methamphetamine as you can get) cause brain atrophy. That's one thing we do know for sure. So, when these scans are done on healthy people (those who have never taken a med) nothing shows. The ones that have taken meds, the doctors say ahahhh!! There is the proof, brain atrophy! See what I mean?
Where I am at odds with this industry is that they have spoon fed the public for so long that ADD is a medical condition that people totally believe it now.
If the National Institute Of Mental Health says: "...we do not have an independent, valid test for ADHD, and there are no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction." I dunno, I guess they were not interested in challenging someone who could verify their claims. When you have a Board Certified Neurologist sitting there asking questions and not getting answers, I'd say this is at the very least "fishy".

What do you think?

Best,

Tim

Crazymama,


This is not a personal debate. You seem upset. This is a search for truths. On one side you have data and on the other side you have data. You compare data and you arrive at what is either true for you or what is exact truth by physical evidence or something completely solid. I am looking at information. I am looking at motives. I look at a lot of things to decide what I do.
What I am curious about though with you is why you have such a hard time believing actual testimony from a Board Certified Neurologist, testimony from The National Institute of Mental Health and various other testimony provided for you to read. Here it is again.

http://www.resultsproject.net/baughman.html

My sole purpose is'nt to spit out garbage, it's to spit out facts and figures to get some answers. We are talking about actual testimony from the Commitee on Education And The Workforce 106th United States House of Repesentatives. This is'nt a conversation in the parking lot of Sears with a neigbor. This is the real thing. These are valid questions. I also gave some valid answers.
Can we agree to put our emotions aside and deal with the real questions and issues I have posed? If not, I understand. It's not my intention to agitate, only to get answers.

Tim

Tim, if your sole purpose here is to spit out the garbage that "Dr. Braughman" feeds you, I say take it elsewhere.

You believe in his theories, fine. Go with him, share these theories on his forum. Oh wait, does he have one?

I refused to dignify this with a response intially, but upon reading it again, I had to respond to these ridculous accusations. You made fine points, brought up interesting ideas, but as far as I am concerned, you are wrong.

Conspiracy theories such as your only hurt ppl. A handful of ppl, doing a little "reading" come to the conslusion that it does not exist, that it is made up by the pharm. industry for the sole purpose of bilking ppl of their hard earned money and drugging children, is dangerous and irresponsible to say the least.

As far as I can tell, you are the only one of the almost 6,000 ppl here on this forum that subscribes to your theories.

Go do some more research. I dont think you have been effectively reading thus far.

Why are you here? (honest question) Are you here to irritate us with your theories, or are you really trying to find answers. Cause if you are looking for answers, you have been given plenty. I just dont think they are the answers you wanted to hear.

As you can clearly see, I am not as patient, level headed, and forgiving as most on this board. My views do not necessarily represent the views of the others on this board. So make sure you direct your response to me, and me alone.

And one more thing, the use of the word "god" in your username is most offensive to me!!! IMO, it is just another testiment to your irresponsiblity in the way you communicate.

Everything in the DSM is research based? This is simply not true.

on what do you base this opinion? i googled the phrase ""international poll of mental health experts conducted in England in 2001" and found links to anti-psychiatry websites -- hardly unbiased resources!

I read not long ago that Dr. Thomas Dorman ...

the same Dr. Thomas Dorman who wrote, "The United Nations indeed has a very mixed reputation in its support for humanity. This writer believes it has an agenda for a New World Fascist regime."

the same man who writes, "vaccination is at best a mixed blessing and at worst a harmful interference with the biology of our species..."

this man hardly seems like a worthy source of information about psychiatry. his expertise appears to be in the field of Basic Immunology/Virology. although he has interesting (yet unconventional) views on diabetes as well.... that's as far into his site as i waded....

interestingly enough, as scuro has pointed out about several of the other sources drummer has linked to, Dr. Thomas Dorman also has direct links to the "Citizens Commission of Human Rights International." that's where i found the quote that you included in one of your posts.

if you have any information to post that has been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, i'd be interested in continuing the conversation along *that* line.

Wheezie

I never considered myself sheltered before; but anti-psychiatry websites? Where do people find the time, or passion for this stuff?

This is not a personal debate. You seem upset. This is a search for truths.I dont think what you are saying is truth. When you sit there and try to "explore" the validity of ADD/ADHD, and refuse to listen but continue to attack, I take it personal. I have ADD, therefore, you are attacking a part of me by claiming it is all a falacy.

On one side you have data and on the other side you have data. You compare data and you arrive at what is either true for you or what is exact truth by physical evidence or something completely solid. I am looking at information. I am looking at motives. I look at a lot of things to decide what I do.What are you trying to decide? As far as motives go, I hardly doubt that mainstream america, or any of those here, think there is a world wide conspiracy by the pharm. industry to drug us all and take our money. That is almost sociopathic.

What I am curious about though with you is why you have such a hard time believing actual testimony from a Board Certified Neurologist, testimony from The National Institute of Mental Health and various other testimony provided for you to read. Here it is again.

http://www.resultsproject.net/baughman.html

My sole purpose is'nt to spit out garbage, it's to spit out facts and figures to get some answers. We are talking about actual testimony from the Commitee on Education And The Workforce 106th United States House of Repesentatives.I checked out the link. Where do you think the term "spew garbage" came from. Anti-psychiatry websites....I mean come on dude.

This is'nt a conversation in the parking lot of Sears with a neigbor.Wow, this wasn't personal? Can you say passive-agressive?

It's not my intention to agitate, only to get answers.I think it is exactly your intention to agitate. IMO

You have been given many answers. Many links, many scientifically backed studies, published in all the world's leading medical journals. Are you trying to tell me that all that is nothing but a smoke screen, a bunch of *&%%#@!^?

I was recently diagnosed with ADD. I have not started any meds yet. I am trying to decide whether or not I even want to take any.

I dont need someone like you coming here and telling me that this whole website is a giant conspiracy theory. It is all bunk. Nothing more nothing less. That is why I am taking it so personally. I am looking for information, support, answers, and so on. You offer none of these. Only disdain, speculation, and unfounded acusations.

Look, maybe I am taking this a little to personal. And maybe that lack of other meds recently purged from my system are making me a little wonky.

But I just dont get how Mctavish and Coral, with their extensive medical backrounds, and Chain with all his research, and many others can post link after link to accepted scientific research validating their statements, but all you have is the brauhgman link. That alone should tell you something.

They answered your questions repeatedly, and still you protest.

blah, blah, blah......

Due to contents of this thread being directly connect to Scientology, a religious organization, this thread is being moved to the Spirituality Forum.

Kim