I want to start a discussion to improve my own understanding of what ADHD is and if and how it should be treated. I often feel we are talking about undefined mind states that mean different things to each of us. I listed my definitions below. Please, whether you agree or not, tell me how you perceive ADHD. People have traits that fall within a range common to the population at large. But what if a characteristic, such as ability to sustain concentration, is so low that 99% of the population perform better. Should we say then it is so weak that it is pathological? My more detailed discussion follows.

Definitions:

ADD (drawn from my experience): A pathological, pervasive and life-long inability to sustain focus/concentration on tasks commensurate with intellectual potential (IQ) other than things new, novel or exceptionally stimulating.

Pathological: A damaging state or condition.

Damaging: Disruption of one of more major life activity with serious painful consequences. I’d certainly put divorce, inability to hold a job or unsatisfactory performance in an expected role as damaging. The damage must have as its root cause the inability to sustain concentration.

Normal range: Normal range for any system is derived from design specs and experience. Since God isn’t telling, we have to go with experience or what science has learned. Unfortunately brain science is in its infancy so we have to put the cart before the horse and define normal range by comparison to a significantly large population segment of intellectually similar people and then draw conclusions. Focus and concentration are also dependant on training. Therefore lack of training has to be ruled out. What criteria can we use? We are dependant upon subjective reports from people that find it difficult to live up to their potential (IQ), complain about an inability to concentrate, all other causatives have been ruled out, and every effort has been made at concentration training. Fortunately science has developed objective tests (IQ) to measure intellectual potential and tests to document subjective reports of inability to concentrate and its degree (TOVA).

Incidentally, without definitions nothing can be known - literally. For example, a human can be defined as a creature that walks on two legs and has a characteristic body and other attributes. Within that definition though, there is an enormous range in attributes - sex, height, weight, color, etc. on and on. But blue skin color is pathological because it falls outside of normal range. Likewise, each subsystem within a human body, heart, liver, kidneys, etc. have a range of values. Values outside the range need medical attention. Why? Because we have learned that without remediation premature death or much more serious debilitation lies in the future. Without definitions we cannot distinguish between human and cat, heart and lung, or what is ok and what is leading to disaster. Sure can't write a computer program.

The degree of variation from the ability to concentrate range for a statistically similar population group will be our not normal definition.

An interesting fact about IQ score is the narrow range band most of the population falls into. 80% of people have an IQ somewhere between 80 and 120. Let’s go to the extremes. 1% have IQ’s of 65 and 1% have IQ’s of 135. Folks with IQ’s above 135 or below 65 are rare critters – the greater the deviation the rarer they become.

An exceptionally high IQ does no damage – most of the time. But where do we draw the line on the low end. Where does pathology begin? Psychiatry says 70. Below 70 is considered mentally challenged. That is, those unfortunate souls with lower than a 70 IQ score, find it difficult to lead productive, meaningful lives in our society.

Is there such a benchmark for ability to maintain focus/concentration?

Yes. The TOVA test uses a similar scale to measure ability to sustain concentration. If we extrapolate from IQ scores and translate to percentile, if your ability to sustain concentration is in the lowest 1% of the population segment against which you are being compared, your ability to lead a productive, meaningful life is greatly impaired. If your IQ is above average, you will never perform well in jobs or relationships consistent with your IQ. You must accept less, a lot less, from life. Or seek treatment.

Bob

Yes Bob it is.

THE definitive article on the Proof of ADHD as a disorder is the journal article......International Consensus 2002.

It's available at www.chadd.org or at Russell Barkley's site.

The article contains the most widely used, #1 operational definition of what constitutes a "disorder," by Rutger's ethics researcher James Wakelfield.

The article is signed off on by over 80 of the world's leading scientists and has 19 pages of references supporting it as a "disorder."

The definition specifies that a disorder represents a condition that "creates major impairments in daily life activities" that cause "harmful dysfunction."

The definition applies to ALL disorders the world over and is not exclusively for ADHD.

What it establishes is, and I'm paraphrasing this as opposed to a direct qoute, that..."ADHD is considered to be a medical condition/disorder by the American Medical Association,American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association."

"Impairments in major life actitivites" for children include grades, making friends and later on, driving.

For adults, it's academics, relationships, occupational problems and driving.


The easiest"cut to the chase" presentation of the 15 or so operational definitions of ADHD (that help compliment Wakefield's definition) can be found in Sandra Rief's 2003 book....The ADHD Book of Lists."

She also lists the research substantiated RIsk Factors; which are examples of "impairments in major life activities."

She didnt write a new book.WHat she did was take the research of the last 10-15 years and put it into list form, according to heading and with the references.


Some time within the last year or so, I posted a response to someone challenging the existence of ADHD, entitled .."Here's the Proof."

It seems to have taken on a life of its own since then. At any rate, it convers in more detail what I'm trying to say here.

Thank you for the insightful post and welcome to the Forum.


mctavish23 (Robert)


p.s.

The TOVA (or any other CPT) alone is completely inappropriate for diagnosing ADHD due to its high rate of "false negatives (you have ADHD and it misses you)."

My reference here is Russ Barkley at the 2003 Medical College of Wisconsin's Door County Summer Institute, 8/4/03- 8/8/03, Egg Harbor, WIsc.


Also, using subtest scatter from IQ tests or the results of neuropsych tests are equally inapproriate for diagnosing ADHD.

Here the link to the proof thread ->http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16810&highlight=proof

Further reading from Russell Barkley who is the leading expert on ADHD -> http://www.continuingedcourses.net/active/courses/course003.php

I personally don't believe ADHD to be a "disorder." I view it more so as being a normal genetic adaption, that is more difficult to apply for survival in modern society. I also don't advocate medication.

i.e. my nephew was "diagnosed" borderline ADD, of the Inattentive variety. My sister put him on mediation, and where he was making C's and B's...it went to D's and F's.
After the second quarter, my sister took him off of the medication and his grades for this year have returned to normal.

I believe the challenge for individuals under the ADD umbrella, is to identify their strengths and weaknesses just like everybody else. Develop strategies to strengthen those weakenesses.

I personally believe that ADD is bunk, and more so an opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals. i.e. there is some speculation ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident.

There are some things in life that simply aren't good for us. The items that have helped me most, are choosing to purchase organic foods and items that don't contain any preservatives. Choosing to clean my home with natural substances vs. chemicals. Getting a little excercise, sure I'm a little forgetful or distracted occassionally...but so is every other male I've ever met...unless there's an incredibly attractive female in sight, and/or a sports score.

I personally believe that ADD is bunk . . . In spite of that, you have continued to be an active member of ADD Forums for more than a year. Cool. :cool:
. . . and more so an opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals. i.e. there is some speculation ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident. Slippy, would you please provide links to support this theory. It has been a while and I don't remember the connection to ADHD meds.

In spite of that, you have continued to be an active member of ADD Forums for more than a year. Cool. :cool:
Slippy, would you please provide links to support this theory. It has been a while and I don't remember the connection to ADHD meds.
:D Hola! I do like the forum in that people post interesting strategies toward a more enjoyable survival.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/LEGIS840.htm

Psychotropic Medication and Children

By Tracy Delaney

October 2000
Volume 8, Number 40

During the past decade the number of American children receiving medication for behavioral and emotional disorders has increased dramatically, adding fuel to the fire in the emerging controversy over the administration of such medications to children. Although most prescriptions for so-called psychotropic drugs are for stimulants designed to remedy the increasingly common diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), there is also a growing trend for children to receive medications for depression and other behavioral and mental health conditions.

A startling report in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that the rate of prescribing psychotropic medications for preschool children rose threefold between 1991 and 1995. Among possible reasons for the increase, according to the report, are: 1) the larger pool of eligible youngsters because of expanded diagnosis criteria for ADHD since the 1980s; 2) more girls are being treated for ADHD; 3) greater acceptance of biological treatments for behavioral disorders; and 4) the larger role of school health personnel in identifying medical needs.

Opponents of the use of psychotropics express concern that there is not enough information about the drugs' effect on children's development or on their long-term side effects. They are also concerned that psychotropic medications are being overused on children.

On the other side of the argument are groups, such as the National Mental Health Association, that argue that children sometimes need medication to combat mental illnesses. According to the association, however, children should not be medicated unless a qualified clinician decides that such a course is in their best interest and medication is used in conjunction with other types of treatment, such as therapy, social skills training, emotional and educational support, and parent and teacher mental health training programs.



<CENTER>State Action



</CENTER>
Heightened awareness of the issue at the national level has prompted action by some state legislatures. Last year, for example, Colorado began looking into the issue in the wake of the painful Columbine High School tragedy. Lawmakers there explored the possible relationship between prescription drugs and school violence after hearing that one of the Columbine shooters was taking a psychotropic medication. In response, the Colorado Board of Education approved a resolution aimed at promoting classroom management solutions for behavioral problems rather than relying on prescription medications. The resolution does not have the power to eliminate the use of certain medications in schools. It says "...psychiatric prescription drugs have been utilized for what are essentially problems of discipline...". The resolution further stipulates "that the state board of education encourages greater communication and education among educators and medical professionals about the effects of psychotropic drugs on student achievement and our ability to provide a safe and civil learning environment."

This year, 11 states introduced legislation related to children and psychotropic drugs. Six (Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Washington) enacted laws. Most of the laws are broad-based, addressing various aspects of mental health for children, but two specifically relate to psychotropic medication use.

In Georgia, a resolution creates the Commission on Psychiatric Medication of School-Age Children and directs it to investigate the use of psychiatric medications and their effects on school-age children. It provides recommendations for improved oversight of the prescribed use of narcotics among Georgia's youth.

In Washington state, the law requires a study of children on psychotropic medication who are receiving state services. The intent of the study is to determine: the number of children who were prescribed medication during out-of-home care; the medical diagnosis of all children on prescribed medications; the number, types and frequency of medications prescribed to children; the number of children receiving multiple medications; the number of children prescribed Ritalin (most commonly used to treat ADHD); and the total number of children in out-of-home care exceeding 90 days during FY 1999 and the number of those children receiving medication. The report is due to the Legislature on Dec. 15.



<CENTER>Federal Action



</CENTER>
The federal government is also looking into this issue. A fact sheet on treating children with psychiatric problems was released by the National Institute of Mental Health for a March 2000, White House conference on mental health. The fact sheet includes detailed information about psychotropic medications that are often prescribed for children. The institute intends to invest more than $5 million in research on the use of medication to treat attention deficit disorder in preschool children. The Clinton administration also announced its intention to step up efforts to reduce the use of psychotropic medications by preschoolers.



<CENTER>Selected References

</CENTER>

National Institute of Mental Health. Treatment of Young Children with Mental Conditions. Washington, D.C., March 2000. http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/whmedchild.cfm

Zito, Julie M., et al., Trends in the Prescribing of Psychotropic Medications to Preschoolers. Journal of the American Medical Association 283, no. 8 (February 23, 2000). http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v283n8/full/joc91250.html

The research on the proof of ADHD being a disorder is overwhelming.As of August of 2003, there were over 6k worth of books, journal articles, chapters in book and professional presentations ALL SUPPORTING ADHD AS A PROVEN DISORDER.

You might want to check out any of the mainstream books or some of the continuing education links posted here.

Part of that same research, primarily thru twin studies, has established the 80% of ADHD is genetic/inherited.

Molecular genetic researchhas identified several candidate genes (DAT1,DRD4 and DRD5).

The initial or "landmark" molecular genetic study was Cook et.al.,1995.

It's summarized in the US Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health (Chapter 3) Disorders of Infancy,Childhood & Adolesence.

We, meaning the Forum as a whole, routinely get skeptics, non believers, zealots and others with either good intentions or hidden agenda's.

EVERY one of them gets a detailed description of the research, which proves them to be in error.

How they handle being proven wrong, ultimately determines their intentions.

I posted a thread in the Private Debate Forum on the ADHD Community in the 21 st century that addresses this exact same topic.

With the dawn of the internet, we are truly a worlwide community. As such, the need for accurate information is even more important.

One of my biggest frustartions is having to repeat the same proof that set the last person straight.

I suppose that makes common sense tho.Anyone who had actually read any of this , instead of concrete thinking/knee jerk reactions, would never say those things.

Just to save time, I'm sure scuro would be happy to repost the links to the 5 FAILED LAW SUITS ON TRYING TO ESTABLISH A CONSPRIRACY THEORY BETWEEN PHARMACEUTICALS AND ADHD.

Those people got their asses kicked 5 times, as every bit of that is total bull****. All those cases were thrown out because thee's no proof or any sembalnce of reality to that paranoid line of thinking.

And one more thing, before someone makes the mistake of saying that doctors get kickbacks, let me TELL you thats bull**** too.

If it were true (here's where common sense kicks in for most people ), there would be Federal RICO statute charges galore, Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations for stock manipulation, the IRS would be invloved for undeclared income and tax evasion, the Interstate Commerce Commission would tag in somewhere due to the nationwide nature of the transactions; not to mention the US Postal Service.

My late father put himself thru med school during the Depression, as did one of his brothers.

I had the priviledge of working with my dad twice; once in his private psychiatric practice and once as his being a consultalt at the correctional facility where I supervised the Diagnostic/Orientation Unit and the Psych,Dept at a correctional facility.

MY FATHER NEVER GOT A DIME from a pharmaceutical company.

I'm sick and tired of shoot from the hip bull****.

If you or anyone else has a real (substantiated as true) reference to support thier claims, then post it please.

You can't though, because there are none

Thanks, Slippy. The article does not state that the Columbine shooter had ADHD or was taking ADHD medications. Did I miss something? :confused:

I beleive the disorder is very real. I live through it every day. The one problem for me is that I have no syptoms that follow a set order. The things that should happen as everyday don't. I have to check and recheck everything and still overlook things. Write it down, Great but what happens when I forget that!! Is there a link between pain pills? I had a bad neck injury in 1980 and was on medication for 6 plus years for different ailments. My problems seem to be getting worse..

Thanks, Slippy. The article does not state that the Columbine shooter had ADHD or was taking ADHD medications. Did I miss something? :confused:

Actually you didn't. ADHD medications fall under the psychotropic medications umbrella.

Unreal.


ADHD meds don't make you a sociopath, which is what those were.

I have another detailed series of posts listed under the Adderall omg thread that shows 3 research studies covering a period of 13 years, conducted by some of the most respected scientists in the world, on unrestricted NIMH grants, published in major/mainstream peer reviewed journals,that shows............

THE USE OF ANY STIMULANT REDUCES THE RISK OF SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER BY AS MUCH AS 85%!

I personally went back and looked beyond the 13 years;going back 18 years from the time of that (2003) study and there were NO studies of any kind refuting that.

Thats because there aren't any.

Anyone can shoot from the hip and point fingers. Only those who know what's really going on because they've taken to time to read the research, can back up what they say.

I've worked in a prison, a residential treatment center, a pain clinic, 2 private practices and a rural non profit community mental health center (since Jan of 1984).

The (correct) use of psychotropics HELPS adress whatever the symtpoms are.

Trying to link Columbine to ADHD meds is insutling as hell.

Meds help adress symptoms. Period.

There are no meds for sociopathic, stone cold killing punks.

There's also no "smart" pill.

Careful Slippy. You're on a slippery slope and people will wonder what your private agenda is.

Tracey Delaney of the of the NCSL, Washington, D.C., did not state that a Columbine shooter had ADHD or was on ADHD meds. If your theory is based on fact, we would like to see the facts so we can form our own opinions.

The research on the proof of ADHD being a disorder is overwhelming.As of August of 2003, there were over 6k worth of books, journal articles, chapters in book and professional presentations ALL SUPPORTING ADHD AS A PROVEN DISORDER.

You might want to check out any of the mainstream books or some of the continuing education links posted here.

Part of that same research, primarily thru twin studies, has established the 80% of ADHD is genetic/inherited.

Molecular genetic researchhas identified several candidate genes (DAT1,DRD4 and DRD5).

The initial or "landmark" molecular genetic study was Cook et.al.,1995.

It's summarized in the US Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health (Chapter 3) Disorders of Infancy,Childhood & Adolesence.

We, meaning the Forum as a whole, routinely get skeptics, non believers, zealots and others with either good intentions or hidden agenda's.

EVERY one of them gets a detailed description of the research, which proves them to be in error.

How they handle being proven wrong, ultimately determines their intentions.

I posted a thread in the Private Debate Forum on the ADHD Community in the 21 st century that addresses this exact same topic.

With the dawn of the internet, we are truly a worlwide community. As such, the need for accurate information is even more important.

One of my biggest frustartions is having to repeat the same proof that set the last person straight.

I suppose that makes common sense tho.Anyone who had actually read any of this , instead of concrete thinking/knee jerk reactions, would never say those things.

Just to save time, I'm sure scuro would be happy to repost the links to the 5 FAILED LAW SUITS ON TRYING TO ESTABLISH A CONSPRIRACY THEORY BETWEEN PHARMACEUTICALS AND ADHD.

Those people got their asses kicked 5 times, as every bit of that is total bull****. All those cases were thrown out because thee's no proof or any sembalnce of reality to that paranoid line of thinking.

And one more thing, before someone makes the mistake of saying that doctors get kickbacks, let me TELL you thats bull**** too.

If it were true (here's where common sense kicks in for most people ), there would be Federal RICO statute charges galore, Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations for stock manipulation, the IRS would be invloved for undeclared income and tax evasion, the Interstate Commerce Commission would tag in somewhere due to the nationwide nature of the transactions; not to mention the US Postal Service.

My late father put himself thru med school during the Depression, as did one of his brothers.

I had the priviledge of working with my dad twice; once in his private psychiatric practice and once as his being a consultalt at the correctional facility where I supervised the Diagnostic/Orientation Unit and the Psych,Dept at a correctional facility.

MY FATHER NEVER GOT A DIME from a pharmaceutical company.

I'm sick and tired of shoot from the hip bull****.

If you or anyone else has a real (substantiated as true) reference to support thier claims, then post it please.

You can't though, because there are noneInteresting post. I view ADHD/ADD a little differently from those who make their living helping others in the industry. Some people have brown eyes, others have blue. Some folks can roll their tongues, some can't. I think the studies describe something that is perfectly normal, and a positive adaptation that is a legacy of evolution and pre-industrial society.

I have no doubt that it's an inherited and/or genetic trait. However point out, we've made it through over 3,000 years of recorded human history...and suddenly something as normal as left-handedness needs to be treated with medication?

I think individuals should take a buyer beware approach, and pursue a path that works best for them. If it happens to be treatment through a professional, and purchasing pills, as long as it works for them...that's all that really matters. Perhaps, my nephew was incorrectly diagnosed at the urging of well intentioned teachers. That kid is an average performer in school work, always has been...for our own families experience the diagnosis did more harm than good.

The kid's grades dropped, he stopped eating right...his self-esteem also dropped. My sister has had infinately more success, identifying and teaching that kid strategies to work through the challenges. Medication, might work better for others? I think it's important to be an informed consumer regardless.

Careful Slippy. You're on a slippery slope and people will wonder what your private agenda is.

Tracey Delaney of the of the NCSL, Washington, D.C., did not state that a Columbine shooter had ADHD or was on ADHD meds. If your theory is based on fact, we would like to see the facts so we can form our own opinions.
:) So we've noticed. Here's the key quote from the article: "psychotropic drugs are for stimulants designed to remedy the increasingly common diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), there is also a growing trend for children to receive medications for depression and other behavioral and mental health conditions."

The point of the article is that of psychotropic drugs. Doesn't matter if they're for depression, or adhd...they all fall under the same umbrella by definition.

The kid's grades dropped, he stopped eating right...his self-esteem also dropped. My sister has had infinately more success, identifying and teaching that kid strategies to work through the challenges. Medication, might work better for others? I think it's important to be an informed consumer regardless.
I am sorry that your nephew went through what must have been a stressful period for everyone. High school is such a different environment for students used to elementary school. Add puberty and adolescent issues to the mix and I'm amazed we survive it all.

There is no magic pill and it takes a correct diagnosis and trial of different meds to find the right combination. Behaviour or coping strategies, as your sister discovered, are a very necessary part of success at school.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=aoI5aS_nPVOs&refer=uk

Shire Shares Fall After Canada Pulls Adderall XR Drug (Update8)
Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Shares of Shire Pharmaceuticals Group Plc, the U.K.'s third-biggest drugmaker, fell the most in two years after Canada ordered the withdrawal of its best-selling product, Adderall XR, after it was linked to at least 20 deaths.

Adderall XR, used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, had third-quarter sales of $140 million, more than 40 percent of Shire's revenue for the period. Shire, whose shares fell 10 percent, maintains the drug is safe and ``strongly disagrees with the conclusions drawn by Health Canada,'' the Basingstoke, England-based company said today in a statement on Regulatory News Service.

I am sorry that your nephew went through what must have been a stressful period for everyone. High school is such a different environment for students used to elementary school. Add puberty and adolescent issues to the mix and I'm amazed we survive it all.

There is no magic pill and it takes a correct diagnosis and trial of different meds to find the right combination. Behaviour or coping strategies, as your sister discovered, are a very necessary part of success at school.

*applauds* :D

I'm not "viewing anything" . I'm qouting the real research;as opposed to biased personal opinion.

I was diagnosed with MBD (Minimal Brain Dysfunction or as my doc said to me "DAMAGE)" in 1972.
I have a severe case of ADHD-Combined type and take Adderall.I've landed in the hospital with an allergic reaction to Straterra and have gone on short term disability from work because of it.

Right now, I've got another letter to do the same thing because my meds havent been working,Hopefully, this new adjustment will help.

My practice as a licensed/clinical child psychologist is 90-95% ADHD kids between 6-19/20.

Ive spent the last 17 years making it my primary area of expertise.

I don't know about your nephew, and Im sorry that he or any kid goea thru problems like that.

Your remarks about him and his difficulties are definately a valid experience for you and the rest of your family.

However, you can't turn around and make a blanket statememt abOut the rest of the ADHD world; because what you said is NOT true at all.

It's NOT normal, thats just it.

If you'd read some of the references you'd see that one of the 15 operational definitions is that ADHD is a "dimensional disorder of human behavior," meaning that everyone displays these behaviors to some degree.

That tends to confuse people.

What makes it a disorder is the developmental delayed differences that result in "impairments in major life activities."

Some of what you say makes some sense, while other parts are completely irrational and down right insulting.

Before you go on, it would be very helpful if you actually read some of those references.

Ultimately, a person with good intentions does read them and then discusses it, as though they learned something.

In the process, they usually apologize for their erroneous remarks.

This is about :

ACCURACY not EGO.

CONTENT not INTENT.

REARCH not RUMORS.

RATIONAL not IRRATIONAL.

Everyone here has paid their own unique dues to get here. Along the way we've all encountered people who've made similar erroneous statments.

What happens is that the subsequent discussion provides an "invivo" opportunity for the rest of the Forum members to see how to counter irrational and misleading remarks.

If you're here to learn something that could help out your family we'd be glad to help; starting with the recommended references.

There are lots of similar stories throughout the Forum.

if you're hear to try and tear us down, that is certainly your choice. There's just NO data on planet earth to suppot your point.

Skippy, I have managed to find one person who agrees with your theories; Dr. Peter Breggin. http://www.breggin.com/luvox.html

I wasn't aware that Luvox was commonly prescribed for ADHD, but I'll keep looking.

P.S. For Scuro: hang in there, big guy; we're almost done here. :D

You need to know that the Church of Scientology was found to have tried to pressure several researchers to "fake " their data to coincide with theirs.

Instead, they came forward and exposed the fraud.

Breggin is the least respected, most unethical ,fraudulent alleged "researcher" on earth.

Listing his name on anything is the Titanic of all references.

He is a proven liar and a fraud.

Shire Shares Fall After Canada Pulls Adderall XR Drug (Update8)
Sorry Slippy, but it's back. AdderallXR is available in Canada. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/2005/2005_92_e.html

Sorry Slippy, but it's back. AdderallXR is available in Canada. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/2005/2005_92_e.html (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/2005/2005_92_e.html)
It's good that they'd taken steps to add additional warnings to the labels. :)

Unreal.


ADHD meds don't make you a sociopath, which is what those were.

I have another detailed series of posts listed under the Adderall omg thread that shows 3 research studies covering a period of 13 years, conducted by some of the most respected scientists in the world, on unrestricted NIMH grants, published in major/mainstream peer reviewed journals,that shows............

THE USE OF ANY STIMULANT REDUCES THE RISK OF SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER BY AS MUCH AS 85%!

I personally went back and looked beyond the 13 years;going back 18 years from the time of that (2003) study and there were NO studies of any kind refuting that.

Thats because there aren't any.

Anyone can shoot from the hip and point fingers. Only those who know what's really going on because they've taken to time to read the research, can back up what they say.You make some interesting points. I do advocate individuals making informed decisions, being as you've stated. "There is no majik pill."

i.e. The most effective method for quitting smoking, is to go cold turkey. Double blind case studies prove that individuals seem to quit in spite of the cessation products vs. with their help.

I don't oppose medication for those who perceive a benefit. I do however believe medication, should be a "last resort" vs. a primary means.

If Einstein had ADD, and we'd medicated him to treat the symptoms. Would he have been able to make such a unique contribution to humanity? I don't know whether he'd accomplished more, less, or nothing at all. But if I were his parent, and could see into the future. I wouldn't have been willing to take that risk. Some other parent might, and I don't perceive a one size fits all "correct" answer.

From my personal experience, I consider ADD as a disorder. When I find myself unable to do a simple task no matter how hard I try and how hard I want to do it, there is something wrong. I see ADD as an inability to control our mind. "Self control" is even more fondamental then IQ.

That why neurotypical don't understand us very well. They see us as smart people so they say "Use your intelligence to solve your problem". Damn! How can I use my intelligence to solve my problem to access it! It's a self-referencing problem.

Slippy is a basher. Much of what he has posted is wrong. I view it as harassment. His Adderall spam post is a great example of bogus information. There is no content and it simply misleads or create doubt/ fear.

From my personal experience, I consider ADD as a disorder. When I find myself unable to do a simple task no matter how hard I try and how hard I want to do it, there is something wrong. I see ADD as an inability to control our mind. "Self control" is even more fondamental then IQ.

That why neurotypical don't understand us very well. They see us as smart people so they say "Use your intelligence to solve your problem". Damn! How can I use my intelligence to solve my problem to access it! It's a self-referencing problem.
There are an inumerable types of intelligence. Some people have more EQ, than IQ...and even those with IQ have strengths in differing areas. Reading through your post, you are obviously very intelligent.

It occurred to me, the term "disorder" may only be relevent in considering how much "disorder" any given weakness might create in our own lives. But I also believe it's very important to flip the coin, and see how that weakness might also contribute as a strength.

i.e. Someone says the person is a team player, which we might all agree is a strength. The weakness of being described as a team player, implies the individual may not be paticularly well suited for leadership?

See where I'm going? :confused:

Slippery is a basher. Much of what he has posted is wrong. I view it as harassment. His Adderall spam post is a great example of bogus information. There is no content and it simply misleads or create doubt/ fear.
If you take time to read the articles in question, you'll find that Canada did infact take Adderall XR off the market perceiving that 20 individuals had died. Later it was put back on the market with some adjustments to the warning labels. I am curious as to how you'd perceive the information as being misleading?

Point simply being, that I feel it's important to remain informed of information relevant to any medication one chooses to use. Whether it's heart medication, for diabetes or whatever.

It's not my intention, to be perceived as a basher. However, it does seem like there are some who automatically assume, this that or the other...if my personal opinion differs from their own.

I believe there are individuals who derive benefit, from the current ADHD/ADD gospel of today. But I also believe, there are instances where individuals are either incorrectly diagnosed, and/or caused harm being a "one sized" strategy does not fit all.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=aoI5aS_nPVOs&refer=uk

Shire Shares Fall After Canada Pulls Adderall XR Drug (Update8)
Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Shares of Shire Pharmaceuticals Group Plc, the U.K.'s third-biggest drugmaker, fell the most in two years after Canada ordered the withdrawal of its best-selling product, Adderall XR, after it was linked to at least 20 deaths.

Adderall XR, used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, had third-quarter sales of $140 million, more than 40 percent of Shire's revenue for the period. Shire, whose shares fell 10 percent, maintains the drug is safe and ``strongly disagrees with the conclusions drawn by Health Canada,'' the Basingstoke, England-based company said today in a statement on Regulatory News Service. "Of 12 total cases, five occurred in patients with underlying structural heart defects (abnormal arteries or valves, abnormally thickened walls, etc.), all conditions that increase the risk for sudden death. Several of the remaining cases presented problems of interpretation, including a family history of ventricular tachycardia, association of death with heat exhaustion, dehydration and near-drowning, very rigorous exercise, fatty liver, heart attack, and type 1 diabetes mellitus. One case was reported three to four years after the event and another had above-toxic blood levels of amphetamine."
...

"When one considers the rate of sudden death in pediatric patients treated with Adderall products based on the approximately 30 million prescriptions written between 1999 and 2003 (the period of time in which these deaths occurred), it does not appear that the number of deaths reported is greater than the number of sudden deaths that would be expected to occur in this population without treatment."
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/adderall.htm

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/InfoSheets/HCP/adderalHCP.htm

"The FDA's advisory said only that Canada had suspended all sales of the Shire Pharmaceutical Group medication, which is used by 700,000 Americans.

Shire said there have been 20 reports of sudden deaths by Adderall users since the drug was introduced in Canada in 1994. The company said the deaths were "extremely rare" and noted that more than 38 million prescriptions have been filled."

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/adderall.html



It is very sad that these children died. However, with those odds, I will take my chances. Risks vs benefits. Of course I would recommend anyone (that has already decided that medication is necessary) to ask for an EKG (or whatever necessary testing) to rule out unknown heart defects/arrhythmia. (And bloodwork to rule out thyroid problems, etc that may be causing the ADHD symptoms.)

I feel that citing Canada's brief suspension of sales of Adderall is simply sensationalist.

i.e. The most effective method for quitting smoking, is to go cold turkey. Slippy, this is from the American Cancer Society. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_13X_Quitting_Smoking.asp

For most people, the best way to quit will be some combination of medicine, a method to change personal habits, and emotional support. The following sections describe these tools and how they may be helpful for you.

Double blind case studies prove that individuals seem to quit in spite of the cessation products vs. with their help.
Perhaps, but after thirty-four years and numerous failed attempts at quitting smoking, it took Wellbutrin to get me over the last hurdle. This may offend you, but bless all of the researchers, study participants and drug manufacturers for helping me quit smoking.

Slippy, re: parenting Einstein: are you currently a parent of an ADHD child?

Rather than actually read the references posted earlier, you change to subject.

What you said earlier about ADHD is wrong.

Reposting what I just posted is manipulative.


The US Surgeon Generals Report has excellent info on the history of meds. The track record for stimulants is positive;going all the way back to the first study in 1937.

Whether or not you actually go read any of the refernces we've posted, will speak volumes about your intent.

Your earlier comments are completely false.

Let's all play nice, okay?

As usual in these types of discussions, I see arguments take different angles. The problem is that we aren't all discussing the same thing.

At one corner, we have McTavish and Scuro taking the medical point of view, in which a disorder is a condition that causes impairment in functioning. Research on the brain differences that lead to the functional differences is cited. Quite simple. End of story.

At the other corner, we have most of the people here. They see the word "disorder" as a subjective term implying inferiority (in which the initial post was more toward this end). Since they do not view themselves as inferior (as they see strengths in themselves that make up for their weaknesses, like all other people), they don't see themselves as "disordered".

Both views are correct as long as one's view explicitly conveys what side one is on.

Let's all play nice, okay?...

....Both views are correct as long as one's view explicitly conveys what side one is on.

No, this isn't about playing nice. Nice gets you in trouble when there is no middle ground. We can’t say okay..maybe we will change the meaning of the word because some people’s feelings may get hurt.

It's about right and wrong and that's important because there is so much misinformation out there. The misinformation is used to confuse parents and people with the disorder to cause doubt and fear in their minds. The issue needs be handled in an exact and rigorous manner.

Take a look at the title. Is ADHD a disorder? There is no subjective viewpoint on the meaning of that word in the sentence. It clearly asks if ADHD is a medical disorder and there is absolutely no doubt that it is. End of story.

One thing more to add:

To say that psychotropic drugs cause tragedies like Columbine is over generalizing. It's not to say that such isn't possible for an ADD drug to be a factor, but it isn't likely either. It's best to look at the statistics. Just because an event has the possibility of occuring once doesn't imply that it will happen frequently.

No, this isn't about playing nice. Nice gets you in trouble when there is no middle ground. We can’t say okay..maybe we will change the meaning of the word because some people’s feelings may get hurt.

It's about right and wrong and that's important because there is so much misinformation out there. The misinformation is used to confuse parents and people with the disorder to cause doubt and fear in their minds. The issue needs be handled in an exact and rigorous manner.

Take a look at the title. Is ADHD a disorder? There is no subjective viewpoint on the meaning of that word in the sentence. It clearly asks if ADHD is a medical disorder and there is absolutely no doubt that it is. End of story.

While it is true that that is in fact the title, the initial post discusses what is considered normal vs. abnormal and how being statistically exceptional may or may not cause problems in functioning. It also discusses how it is subjective to decide if something/someone has been created/has developed into what was intended.

You are correct about the title if and only if the use of the word "disorder" was intended to point to the medical definition.

If you take time to read the articles in question, you'll find that Canada did infact take Adderall XR off the market perceiving that 20 individuals had died. Later it was put back on the market with some adjustments to the warning labels. I am curious as to how you'd perceive the information as being misleading?
Shire Shares Fall After Canada Pulls Adderall XR Drug (Update8) Sensationalist indeed, take a look at the large font and bold letters you used for the title. Why did you have to do that? Antipsych' do that, using bolds or caps, they also use sensationalist words like FRAUD, DEATH, BRAIN DAMAGE.



Point simply being, that I feel it's important to remain informed of information relevant to any medication one chooses to use. Whether it's heart medication, for diabetes or whatever.
Stay informed? lmao. You posted old news which is no longer relevant. Why?



It's not my intention, to be perceived as a basher. However, it does seem like there are some who automatically assume, this that or the other...if my personal opinion differs from their own.
..."I personally believe that ADD is bunk, and more so an opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals. i.e. there is some speculation ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident".

That was from your first post. The line, "Pharma companies profit by experimenting on individuals", I'd call that slander and it's against the law.

"Of 12 total cases, five occurred in patients with underlying structural heart defects (abnormal arteries or valves, abnormally thickened walls, etc.), all conditions that increase the risk for sudden death. Several of the remaining cases presented problems of interpretation, including a family history of ventricular tachycardia, association of death with heat exhaustion, dehydration and near-drowning, very rigorous exercise, fatty liver, heart attack, and type 1 diabetes mellitus. One case was reported three to four years after the event and another had above-toxic blood levels of amphetamine."
...

"When one considers the rate of sudden death in pediatric patients treated with Adderall products based on the approximately 30 million prescriptions written between 1999 and 2003 (the period of time in which these deaths occurred), it does not appear that the number of deaths reported is greater than the number of sudden deaths that would be expected to occur in this population without treatment."
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/adderall.htm

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/InfoSheets/HCP/adderalHCP.htm

"The FDA's advisory said only that Canada had suspended all sales of the Shire Pharmaceutical Group medication, which is used by 700,000 Americans.

Shire said there have been 20 reports of sudden deaths by Adderall users since the drug was introduced in Canada in 1994. The company said the deaths were "extremely rare" and noted that more than 38 million prescriptions have been filled."

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/adderall.html



It is very sad that these children died. However, with those odds, I will take my chances. Risks vs benefits. Of course I would recommend anyone (that has already decided that medication is necessary) to ask for an EKG (or whatever necessary testing) to rule out unknown heart defects/arrhythmia. (And bloodwork to rule out thyroid problems, etc that may be causing the ADHD symptoms.)

I feel that citing Canada's brief suspension of sales of Adderall is simply sensationalist.

I think you're taking what I like to call the "aware" consumers position. I believe all consumers should strive to look for the good, the bad, and the ugly...when it comes to making decisions about their health.

Citing Canada's brief suspension may be considered "sensationalist", however considering both my mother and step-father died of aneurisms within six months of each other...the common denominator turned out to be Ephedra.

That product was on the market for six or more years before people began pointing out the "sensationalist" stories. ;)

Shire Shares Fall After Canada Pulls Adderall XR Drug (Update8) Sensationalist indeed, take a look at the large font and bold letters you used for the title. Why did you have to do that? Antipsych' do that, using bolds or caps, they also use sensationalist words like FRAUD, DEATH, BRAIN DAMAGE.




Stay informed? lmao. You posted old news which is no longer relevant. Why?




..."I personally believe that ADD is bunk, and more so an opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals. i.e. there is some speculation ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident".

That was from your first post. The line, "Pharma companies profit by experimenting on individuals", I'd call that slander and it's against the law.
That's a fair quote, but if you examine it in context of...I believe ADD is completely normal and a genetic adaption that has been with humanity since the beginning. I don't percieve it as being a disorder at all, and believe to call it a disorder is bunk.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=29469

The Pharma companies don't know the long term effects, or how some individuals with certain genetic make-ups will respond to any given ADHD medication. Granted it's an educated guess, but they're still experimenting, still testing to see if they can pin down what's most effective.
Response to ADHD Medication May Be in The Genes

22 Aug 2005http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/images/blanktab.gif
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=145 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=newsbuttontable>[/url]</TD></TR><TR><TD class=newsbuttontable> (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=29469#)</TD></TR><TR><TD class=newsbuttontable></TD></TR><TR><TD class=newsbuttontable style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 12px">[url="http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/voiceyouropinion.php?associatednewsid=29469"] (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/youropinions.php?associatednewsid=29469)</TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Testable genetic differences might be used to predict the effectiveness of a medication commonly prescribed to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, a new study suggests.

"This is an exciting finding because ADHD is such a common disorder and it's often difficult to know how patients will respond to ADHD medications," said Dr. Mark Stein, principal investigator of the study and director of the Hyperactivity, Attention, and Learning Problems Clinic at the University of Illinois at Chicago. "Our hope is to take a lot of the guesswork out of why some people respond to these medications and others do not."

The study found that children with a variant form of a dopamine transporter gene -- a variant known to be associated with ADHD -- responded poorly to one of the most common stimulant medications, methylphenidate. The transporter gene encodes a protein on the nerve cell membrane that helps to clear the neurotransmitter dopamine from the nerve junction.

Stein, a clinical psychologist and researcher who specializes in ADHD, and Dr. Edwin Cook, UIC professor of psychiatry, first reported an association of this gene with ADHD 10 years ago. In the new study, Stein, Cook and their co-workers examined the relationship between the gene and patients' medication response over a four-week period, first on a placebo and then on three increasing dosages of methylphenidate.

Let's all play nice, okay?

As usual in these types of discussions, I see arguments take different angles. The problem is that we aren't all discussing the same thing.

At one corner, we have McTavish and Scuro taking the medical point of view, in which a disorder is a condition that causes impairment in functioning. Research on the brain differences that lead to the functional differences is cited. Quite simple. End of story.

At the other corner, we have most of the people here. They see the word "disorder" as a subjective term implying inferiority (in which the initial post was more toward this end). Since they do not view themselves as inferior (as they see strengths in themselves that make up for their weaknesses, like all other people), they don't see themselves as "disordered".

Both views are correct as long as one's view explicitly conveys what side one is on.
That's a very concise, and well communicated observation. :D

I'm very fond of Thom Hartman's thoughts on the subject. I'm not sure about all of the theory, behind Thom's writings and/or even if they're reasonably correct.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0892811285/002-0832960-2892000?v=glance

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
In his new work, the author, a former psychotherapist who has written previously on attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (Attention Deficit Disorder: A Different Perspective), recommends techniques for raising children diagnosed with this condition. Although many of the specific strategies will be very useful to parents raising ADHD children, too much of the text is devoted to complex genetic and evolutionary theory. According to Hartmann, ADHD is a trait (referred to here as the Edison gene, because the inventor Thomas Edison is believed to have had the trait) rather than a disorder, because it once provided useful skills for functioning in a hunter-gatherer society. The hunter abilities contrasted sharply with the farmer trait, which carried the skills required in farming societies. For example, hunter children have a short attention span, beneficial in a dangerous world where the environment had to be constantly monitored. The innovative but impatient hunter child is usually placed in special ed classes and is looked on as a disciplinary problem; but Hartman believes that ADHD children should be thought of separately. He provides specific guidelines for parents, partly based on the work of Alfred Adler, which encourage mutual respect between parent and child. Hartmann is not an advocate of drug therapy, and he argues for educational reform and alternative schools or home schooling as better learning situations for ADHD children. Hartmann believes that creative outside-the-box thinking, characteristic of those with ADHD, is a real asset to solving many of the world's serious problems.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Edward Hallowell, M.D., author of Driven to Distraction
Thom Hartmann demonstrates that ADHD can be associated with creativity, high achievement, and a most successful adaptive style.

But I think he takes a very positive step, in considering ADHD more so as someone else's normal vs. a disorder.

I also like what the following ADHD Medical Treatment Center has to say on the subject:

http://www.addmtc.com/disease.html

"It should be noted that many ADD/ADHD individuals are successful, happy, and productive. In fact, their ADD/ADHD characteristics may contribute significantly to their ability to be creative and to their emotional strength especially if the environment in which they live and work is accepting of how they function.

The importance of the environment cannot be over stressed. For example, most ADD/ADHD children are first diagnosed because they are in conflict with their school or home environment. They are not able to sit still when required to do so by the teacher. They act-out at home in the evening because of their unfocused energy and inability to easily fall asleep when put to bed. Most children do not have a choice of what environment they want to live in. ADD/ADHD adults such as computer program writers often get to work around noon (late) and stay at work until midnight (late) because of their ADD/ADHD sleep dysfunction. When they are highly valued by the business and in an accepting work environment, however, working strange hours is not a problem, nor is it a good reason for dismissing such individuals.

In summary, the search for ADD/ADHD behavioral characteristics is the starting place, but confirmation of consequential distress is necessary for treatment to be justified. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! By the way, if treatment is indicated and proper, creativity and productivity is expected to be enhanced not reduced."

:soapbox:

I had a little read of the posts regarding the title of the Original discussion...
Is ADHD a disorder?

MY BACKGROUND: I have ADHD... I have felt different/unattentive/extremely impulsive/Hyper/Disruptive/ All my Life and at the ripe age of 41 i got diagnosed!!... If what i have/am suffering with mentally, isn't a DISORDER...Then i must have a Normal Brain?...NOT! lol

The word DISORDER from http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=disorder:

Main Entry: <SUP>1</SUP>dis·or·der
Pronunciation: <TT>(")di-'sor-d&r, -'zor-</TT>
Function: transitive verb
1 : to disturb the order of
2 : to disturb the regular or normal functions of

Main Entry: attention deficit disorder
Function: noun
: a syndrome of disordered learning and disruptive behavior that is not caused by any serious underlying physical or mental disorder and that has several subtypes characterized primarily by inattentiveness or primarily by hyperactivity and impulsive behavior (as speaking out of turn) or by the significant expression of both -- abbreviation ADD

Main Entry: <SUP>2</SUP>disorder
Function: noun
1 : lack of order <clothes in disorder>
2 : breach of the peace or public order <troubled times marked by social disorders>
3 : an abnormal physical or mental condition : AILMENT (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ailment) <a nervous disorder>

Seeing that a majority of the Population, don't have ADHD, i'm presuming also, that what ADDers have, with ADHD, is abnormal and is therefore a

Main Entry: <SUP>1</SUP>nor·mal
Pronunciation: <TT>'nor-m&l</TT>
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin normalis, from norma
1 : PERPENDICULAR (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/perpendicular); especially : perpendicular to a tangent at a point of tangency
2 a : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern
3 : occurring naturally <normal immunity>
4 a : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development b : free from mental disorder : SANE (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/sane)


Yes! ADHD is a DISORDER!
I wouldn't choose to have these difficulties,that i've suffered with, all my life...

I'm certainly not inattentive on purpose!...
I can't Concentrate!...
A majority of the Population CAN CONCENTRATE...
Therefore i'm NOT the NORM'.

My Mind races and makes little nothings into Big Issues.. as much as i try to control my thoughts, my Impulsive behavior takes over and causes great problems for myself and others around me... again, i don't mean to cause these situations...
It has caused me a loss of Friends and Relationships...My Marriage and Jobs!... Do i want this Life?...NO!

What i suffer, with ADHD is NOT NORMAL and therefore it's ABNORMAL and surely, that's enough to prove, that what i have, is a DISORDER...
Not a learnt behavior...More a Born instinct with abnormalities ; My abnormal brain is doing abnormal things...It's Disordered!..
And i'm suffering with a DISORDER.

Karen :)

Karen, what a creative post! Nicely done. :cool:

Karen, what a creative post! Nicely done. :cool:
Well Thank You Imnapl

*Karen takes a bow* lol

Karen:D

. . . and the crowd roars . . .

...Encore? LOL:D

Goodnight All... I'm a Pumpkin!

Karen :)

Oh, right, it's bedtime in the U.K.. Sweet dreams.

I think you're taking what I like to call the "aware" consumers position. I believe all consumers should strive to look for the good, the bad, and the ugly...when it comes to making decisions about their health.

Citing Canada's brief suspension may be considered "sensationalist", however considering both my mother and step-father died of aneurisms within six months of each other...the common denominator turned out to be Ephedra.

That product was on the market for six or more years before people began pointing out the "sensationalist" stories. ;)
Ephedra is a supplement. Adderall is not. I won't continue this because we are off-topic. :)

Thanks everyone for your response. I have a ton of stuff to research. I breezed through everyones posts but will go back and read every word carefully.<O:p</O:p

HighFunctioning,<O:p

I have a different perspective on "disorder," "minimal brain damage" etc.

I do not consider myself inferior. I think of myself as an intelligent, well-read guy that has something wrong with his brain. You see, in school, I was ridiculed as being lazy, doesn't apply himself, has his head in a cloud, etc. You all heard it, I'm sure. My problem was I believed it. Because of that I actually prefer the terms disorder and minimal brain damage over ADHD because they accurately describe a medical condition that is NOT MY FAULT.

<O:p</O:pThe adult version of my school day chides is you don't have a real disorder. Or you are concocting it to get speed. etc. I am generally an easygoing person but go postal when I hear such bull manure.<O:p></O:p>

<O:p</O:pI do wonder where the line is between weak and pathology. For example, I do well in science and math but am weak in language. I do not consider myself as having "language disorder." But my inability to focus on priority tasks goes way, way, way beyond being weak in ability to concentrate. IT IS PATHOLOGICAL. But where do the guys in the know draw the line. What is the definition? That is what I am after.

I'm sure between the posts and links I'll get my answer.

Thanks to all.

Bob

PS My apologies if this is a double post. Something went wrong first try, I think.

Whoa

Lets get something straight.

There's a HUGE difference between a rational discussion regarding opposing philosophical points of view and making outrageously rude, disrespectful and patently untrue remarks and insinuations and then refusing to acknowledge responsibility for it by avoiding the references given to refute those remarks.

As adults, we're always lecturing kids about the need for them to be "responsible."

When I make a mistake I own it,whether it was an accident or not. I've done it in here more than once and apologized for being rude.

I have a serious problem with people that come into the Forum and make degrading remarks and insinuations; only to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.

As a general rule, the respones given are along the lines of "Here's the Proof." I wrote that to try and make a point to someone who turned out to have a hidden agenda. Rather than read the references offered, and thus admit he was wrong ;he left in "search of the truth." That's as close to delusional as irrational can get.

We put up with so much disrespect from people who are clueless about ADHD.

I don't care if Slippy (or anyone else) thinks "ADD is bunk." That's no big deal.

However, the rest of the remark is outrageous and absolutely inappropriate.

. "I believe ADD is bunk..... and more so for the opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals,i.e.,there is some speculation that ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident."

That is so over the top that I believe a retraction is in order.

Posting Hartman doesnt mean a thing to me. He's not considered a serious scientist/researcher.

His work ,while entertaining, simply cannot be substantiated. It is enjoyable to read and has some interesting points.

It also has nothing to do with the references we offered to counter those remarks.

Shifting gears from "bunk" to Hartman and Hallowell is evasive.

This is "Our House" and some things just can't be allowed to "slip" by.

I have an issue with this board. The moderators "solution" to posters who continuously post opinions or materials that ADHD is fake or that Science is in Pharma's pocket, is to eventually lock the post.

The solution is to publically warn and then ban the offending member. Would a Jewish web board on the Holocaust allow repeated posts stating that the Holocaust is a HOAX! Why do we allow outsiders to do that here?

ADHD is a recognized disorder by all the major medical institutions, all levels of government, the court of law, and all Boards of Education across the USA. Why do we have to continuously have our noses rubbed in this ****e? It's harrassment, plain and simple.

[color=black]....But where do the guys in the know draw the line. What is the definition? That is what I am after.....

They draw the line at impairment, does ADHD impair your life in two settings? Are you're observed behaviours exceptional...I believe at the 93%? That again would show impairment. If you get a diagnosis of ADHD, then your current life is challenging. Take a look at the posts on any given day. So many people are having difficulty just functioning.

Whoa

Lets get something straight.

There's a HUGE difference between a rational discussion regarding opposing philosophical points of view and making outrageously rude, disrespectful and patently untrue remarks and insinuations and then refusing to acknowledge responsibility for it by avoiding the references given to refute those remarks.

As adults, we're always lecturing kids about the need for them to be "responsible."

When I make a mistake I own it,whether it was an accident or not. I've done it in here more than once and apologized for being rude.

I have a serious problem with people that come into the Forum and make degrading remarks and insinuations; only to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.

As a general rule, the respones given are along the lines of "Here's the Proof." I wrote that to try and make a point to someone who turned out to have a hidden agenda. Rather than read the references offered, and thus admit he was wrong ;he left in "search of the truth." That's as close to delusional as irrational can get.

We put up with so much disrespect from people who are clueless about ADHD.

I don't care if Slippy (or anyone else) thinks "ADD is bunk." That's no big deal.

However, the rest of the remark is outrageous and absolutely inappropriate.

. "I believe ADD is bunk..... and more so for the opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals,i.e.,there is some speculation that ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident."


That is so over the top that I believe a retraction is in order.

Posting Hartman doesnt mean a thing to me. He's not considered a serious scientist/researcher.

His work ,while entertaining, simply cannot be substantiated. It is enjoyable to read and has some interesting points.

It also has nothing to do with the references we offered to counter those remarks.

Shifting gears from "bunk" to Hartman and Hallowell is evasive.

This is "Our House" and some things just can't be allowed to "slip" by.


I agree completely. The idea of pharmacutical companies experimenting on patients is rediculous. If they really were, I'm sure they could find more creative ways of doing such. The Columbine idea is rediculous as well, as previously implied.

I would like to make a clarification about my previous posts. I am in no way trying to protect those who post misinformation. It is quite common for threads such as this to appear here. The majority of those are asking if ADHD is a disorder, expecting a subjective answer. That was my belief at first as to the intent of this thread.

It's not very productive to compare a purely subjective, philosphical argument to a collection of information based on research. The usual intent of such subjective arguments is to give a "big-picture", meaningful view of the disorder, something that a research based view does not provide. On the other hand, the subjective view does not take into account the actual nitty-gritty details acurately. This is what research is for. It's like the difference between science and religion. They simply do not mix (though they both have their purposes), and thus the same should apply here. The intent of the post should be obvious or clearly marked in relation to this.

By definition it is a disorder, because the requirement for the diagnosis is that there is some kind of impairment.

The bottom line is... if it hurts it is a disorder. If it does not, it is not a disorder. :p

does my lousy typing qualifyu as an impairmwent ?

Me :D

Bob,

My original response to your question gave you the answer as to exactly where the line is drawn on the definition of a "disorder."

Please check out the journal article entitled International Consensus 2002.

Its available at www.chadd.org or at Russell Barkley's website.

As for my previous remarks, I'm less concerned about the "pharma" cheap shot, as that's at the heart of all 5 law suits that were thrown out for having no basis in fact.

Talk about perefect examples of...."Put up or Shut up."

However, the attempt to somehow imply a connection between the Columbine massacre and ADHD is the single most insulting and cruelest remark I've ever heard made anywhere about the subject of ADHD; including the medications used to treat it.

THAT CROSSES THE LINE and this is where I think it needs to be drawn. I strongly believe that a retraction and an apology is in order.

Trying to further imply that physicians are engaged in a "growing trend" of misusng stimulants to treat depression by way of qouting a book is also misleading.

In order for any statement about the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, which is what I do for a living, to make an impression on me, I need to see the research data that supports it.

Qoutes are nice as long as they are backed up by something other than opinion and conjecture.

I work with 5 psychiatrists and 4 clinical nurse specialists (who can also prescribe).

None of them do that.

I also have as my main referral sources 5 pediatric psychiatrists, 1 pediatric neurologist, 7 pediatricians and 10-12 Gp's and Internists.

None of them do that either.

I have seen one physician with a notorious reputation for dispensing meds inappropriately, try and use a stimulant to treat depression.

He is the exception to the rule.

Using medications "off label" is common place, but treating depression with stimulants is NOT the accepted standard of practice in my part of the country.

Even if it were, the context in which it was presented was deceptive.

I don't mind discussions or debates as long as they're rational and realisitic.

Those remarks were neither.

Okay, probably going to get myself in trouble here with people that I really respect (my prearranged excuse for my lack of better judgement will be that it is 3:44 AM and I've been awake for 3 hours and obviously no meds are on board!).

:soapbox: As a lawyer's daughter I was taught that there are two sides to the thinnest piece of paper. While I don't care for Slippy's remarks or opinions, I wonder if there isn't a place here to voice those (maybe the debate forum). Censorship even of garbage is problematic, because it suppresses the freedom to think about and question things (research is always learning and revising what it once "knew" and if we eliminate all questioning how will that happen?). Secondly, people on the forums are going to run into this stuff other places in the real world. How much better are they going to be prepared to respond, if they have seen it hashed out here first?

I believe personal attacks on individuals need to be quelched but the freedom to look at more than one side of an issue or point of view tends to dimenish us.

Scattered

I'm still kind of new here, so I hope I'm not stating the obvious or stepping on toes here. But I've read through the entire thread and have some thoughts on it.

The original question - is ADD a disorder? - has a definite yes answer. The chemical things happening to an ADD brain when it is subjected to stress and overstimulation are not normal, not a variation on normal, and are not positively received by the body.

I do understand the effort some people make to see their ADD in a positive light. After all, they've been subjected to all kinds of negativity through out their lives, and probably far more than their fair share of failure. All of this has an effect on self-esteem and I can really relate to the need to compensate.

I guess you can compare it to grieving. Once I got diagnosed with ADD, it was like something went "click" and I understood the reasons behind my private suffering. But after the euphoria came the need to grieve the lost parts of myelf - the parts that had suffered too much. My way of grieving has been to try to accept the cold realities and give myself a fresh start. For other people, I suppose grieving means celebrating the good things. That's not me, but I respect the need others may have to do that, on this board and elsewhere.

The problem comes in when ADDers who are new and looking for help and support come in and read posts without knowing the background. They may make a snap judgement - we ADDers are known for that kind of thing, after all :) - on whether or not they should seek medical help based on one post that combines Columbine with ADD meds. They may not seek help for their very real problems, telling themselves "Well, it's bunk anyway and just a variation on normalcy. I need to buck up and just take it."

Two years ago, I would have accepted slippery's post as fact, based on the very anecdotal story of my mother on Effexor. But since then I have learned that one person + one pill does not a medical history make. It took me nearly two years of serious depression and a lifetime of adrenaline, fatigue and despair over my own lack of control to understand that I could exercise and take every vitamin supplement under the moon without getting at the core problem. And it is possible that if I had started out by reading a post like slippery's, I might still be in the same sad place I was then - with my head stuck firmly in the sand.

I'm just sayin'.

How many times must you be offended before it is considered harrassment? Once again, we have a thread where the poster's main purpose is to harass and spread mis-information. There is no freedom speech when your purpose is to harrass. Ignorance, is not an excuse.

Speaking of personal stories...my brother committed suicide because he went off of his medication. He thought that he could fly and jumped off a bridge. He pushed himself off the bridge like a swimmer would push off from the side of a pool and landed on his back. I had to identify the body. He had no idea that he was wrong, even as he "flew" through the air. He believed that his meds were harmful to him based on mis-information such as we see in this thread. To do nothing is not the answer. To do nothing is a choice, and it may change the outcome of someone's life.

I agree with scuro.

This ISN't about censorship.; unless you're okay with someone deliberately trying to connect the Cloumbine massacre with ADHD.

That is the single rudest most despicable act Ive seen in the 2 years Ive been in here OR the nearly 10 years Ive been in ADD Support chat.

No one has ever stooped this low.

No one gets censored in here that I've ever seen. IN this case, we didn't jump to conclusions, we listed references, including ...."Here's the Proof",which I wrote.

Somehow,somewhere. common sense demads that there MUST be some things you just can't say.

The mere fact that he wouldn't own and then shifted gears from ADD is bunk, to qouting Hartman & Hallowell, is pure manipulation.

This thread doesn't need to be closed. That would allow the person to escape having to take responsibility for their actions.

It also sends the wrong message to the rest of the Forum.

There needs to be a resolution of conflict.

An apology and a retraction is in order. Anyone who wouldn't apologize for having offended a number of Forum members shows their true intentions.

Situations like thos are the exact reason I started a thread in the private debate section.

In the 21st century, the whole notion of "community" takes on a new meaning, because the ADHD is now global.

So far, I've had 17 views and no replies.

Lastly, if somone came in your home and deliberately insulted you or your family, would you not ask for/demand/expect an apology?

This isn't about rational ("normal") type of posting conversation.

That's where the whole notion of freedom of speech comes into play

Scattered,

There are 2 sides in a conversation.

However, the underlying premise is that one of them NOT be based on a malicious lie.

The whole notion of a converstation or a debate if you will, is based on the resepective points of view each having some merit.

I made that distinction earlier.

A rational statement is based on irrefutable scientific proof. An irrational statement isn't.

Unless there's some "merit" in trying to connect ADHD treatment with the Columbine massacre, this isn't something that deserves credibility by allowing it to go on unopposed or unchallenged.

The comment made is, in my personal opinion, the equivalent of a "hate crime" type of statement, because it is not only untrue, but also heinous in content and subject matter.

Any person with a sense of decorum and decency, upon seeing their remarks had offended others, would "step up" and say they were sorry for "inadvertently " hurting others feelings or being disrespectful, etc.

The longer they wait, the clearer the intent.

Can't you see this deviates from "normal" criticism's?

I've confronted other's who've attacked the science of ADHD and done a good job of it.

This is different. It's more than mean spirited.

I'm sorry you can't see it but I respect your feedback.

take care
mctavish23 (Robert)

Bob,

My original response to your question gave you the answer as to exactly where the line is drawn on the definition of a "disorder."

Please check out the journal article entitled International Consensus 2002.

Its available at www.chadd.org (http://www.chadd.org/) or at Russell Barkley's website.


Robert,

Some quotes from "International Consensus Statement on ADHD:"

Under approaches used to validate a medical or psychiatric disorder: "... there must be scientificantly established evidence that those suffering the condition have a serious deficiency in or failure of a physcial or psychological mechanism that is universal to humans."

Under agreement of leading clinical researchers: "ADHD involves a serious deficiency in a set of psychological abilities and these deficiencies pose serious harm to most individuals possessing the disorder"

Under studies using various scientific methods: ADHD is linked to "several specific brain regions (the forntal lobe, its connections to the basal ganglia, and their relationship to the central aspects of the cerebellum). Most neurological studies find that as a group those with ADHD have less brain activity and show less reactivity to stimulation in one or more of these regions."

There are also comments showing the strong link to genetics and biology and the inconsequence of environment as a contributing etiological factor.

Good stuff,

Bob

Bob,

Thank you so much for checking that out.

It's a pleasure to be able to help someone who is sincerely looking for knowledge.

The other less obvious thing your response does, is that it once again validates the references we posted as being accurate and reliable.

Sometimes people take that for granted, which is understandable.

My personal preference though is for people to not take things at face value or simply rely on another person's remarks as being "true."

We can ALWAYS back up the references regarding the science of ADHD. The people who have hidden agenda's cannot.

I would therefore encourage people to check out all references for themselves.
In the process, you can also learn more about the subject matter at hand.

I appreciate your feedback and wish you luck.:)

take care
mctavish23 (Robert)

The TOVA (or any other CPT) alone is completely inappropriate for diagnosing ADHD due to its high rate of "false negatives (you have ADHD and it misses you)."

Robert,

I don't doubt you. After all, I am not in the brain business. The TOVA wasn't not used alone. My wife and I first went through interagation by a psychologist who feed the data to a shrink. He invited my wife for her to share her observations of me. They left it up to me whether to do a formal ADHD eval, no doubt because both doctors were convinced I was as ADD as can be. I opted for it because I have this need for empirical evidence to substantiate what I already know namely, ADHD is indeed a biological malfunction of the brain.

I was amazed how well the TOVA test nailed it. I'll give actual values from my test and define the variables for those that might not be familiar with it. There are four variables: Omissions, Commissions, Response Speed and Variability of Response Speed. Like an IQ test, average is assigned the value of 100. An overall score of 100 means 50% of the population does better and 50% does worse (Robert correct me if I am wrong). That translates to percentile.

A target is flashed on a monitor. Intermittently a "bogie" (a dissimilar object) is flashed. The object of the game is to key a micro switch as soon as you see the target and do not key if you see the bogie.

Omissions is when you do not key on the target. Commissions is when you do key on the bogie. Reponse speed is how long you take to key and Variability of response speed is how consistent you are in how long it take to respond.

The test lasts for 20 minutes.

The psychologist had me come in two consecutive days. Day I was to take my 20mg of Ritalin two hours before testing. Day 2 no Ritalin.

The doctor gave me a graph that I have in front of me now. It captures the results over the 20 minute period for both days. Day one in Red, day 2 in Blue. I'll give the best and poorest scores (in order) of the 20 minutes for each variable.

The results are as follows:

Day 1 Day 2
Ommissions: 105 105 (nearly linear both days)
Commissions: 108-112 110-80-122 (higher numbers = less mistakes)
Response Speed 130-120-142 115-80-86
Variability of
Response Speed 105-98-110 92-40-55-48

Ritalin made no difference in Ommissions. I did slightly better than average both days. It helped me stay consistent on commissions but notice that mid-test day 2 I dropped to 80 and finally recovered.

I was cooking with Ritalin on Response Speed averaging out at 138 but day two I averaged out at 86.

Variablity of response speed averaged out to 105 day 1, Day 2 FORTY-STINKY-EIGHT. I don't think "stinky" will get me censured but I did have another word in mind.

The doctor told me he was most interested in Response Speed and its Variability both of which are measured in 1/1000 second intervals. An ADDer can with earnest effort fudge for 20 minutes and keep the omissions and commssions above average. My implusivity did break through on day 2.

However, there is no way conscious effort can fudge response speed and its variability when measured to the 1/1000 second. The psychologist gave me an overall score of -2.84 and said it was consistent with the ADHD diagnosis.

I am very impressed with the TOVA test.

Bob

Here the link to the proof thread ->http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16810&highlight=proof

Further reading from Russell Barkley who is the leading expert on ADHD -> http://www.continuingedcourses.net/active/courses/course003.php
scuro,

Read it. Thanks. I think the impression given by the media is the experts are divided on whether ADHD is a disorder. Also, and unfortunately, amphetamines are among the most abused drugs henced the general public is willing to buy in to the conspiracy theories.

I've learned a lot about myself the past year since diagnosis. I was so maligned as an adolescent (in the 1960's) that I am extremely sensitive to any comment that insinuates that what I go through is not real. The effort I have put into correcting my ADHD are nothing short of heroic. Yet none of it worked satisfactorily, at least not without the meds. I take it so personnally when it is in essence said that all my remedial efforts are a farce.

Time to face reality. I will NEVER be understand by anyone other than those of you in the same boat. It sucks. But it is true.

Bob

Thanks for that feedback.

I have several friends and colleagues who use the TOVA with a "blended" report. I can live with that because I know they'll use valid checklists,as well as screen for comorbidity.

I personally don't believe ADHD to be a "disorder." I view it more so as being a normal genetic adaption, that is more difficult to apply for survival in modern society. I also don't advocate medication.Slippy,

If do not believe ADHD is a disorder, you do not have it. Or you have a mild case.

i.e. my nephew was "diagnosed" borderline ADD, of the Inattentive variety. My sister put him on mediation, and where he was making C's and B's...it went to D's and F's.

After the second quarter, my sister took him off of the medication and his grades for this year have returned to normal.Doesn't surprise me. I found it impossible to get skilled ADHD medical care. My MO is, and I am not kidding, to research ADHD on the net, tell my doctor what I've discovered and what to do about it, and he does it - unless I missed something important.

Not everyone with diagnosed ADHD needs meds. Also, ADHD subtype and any coexisting conditions will determine whether a particular med/therapy will work. Obviously, the med(s) your nephew was put on was not effective.


I believe the challenge for individuals under the ADD umbrella, is to identify their strengths and weaknesses just like everybody else. Develop strategies to strengthen those weakenesses.I do too. But ADHD is not a weakness. It is a disease. Should I stop taking my med (adderral xr 20mg) that enables me to work, make my wife happy, provide for my 84 year old father, have money for a few nice things and some left over for charities?

I'm sure I could do manual labor without the med. But I spent my life mastering computer programming. As we speak, I am adding some new features to a C++ program for a client. It takes enormous focus. That is the only cognitive function I lack. I have the brain power to manage the exceptionally cryptic C programming language and the ability to understand the complex relationships involved in a commercial software project. Should I throw those mega-hours I spent mastering my craft, grab a shovel and go to work? If I do that, will you pay my bills? Because I'll tell you right now, we cannot survive on $15 per hour. Hey maybe my wife will go out to work and make up the difference instead of managing my software business. Would that make you happy?


I personally believe that ADD is bunk, and more so an opportunity for the pharma companies to profit by experimenting on individuals. i.e. there is some speculation ADD medication may have contributed to the Columbine incident.Again, you either do not suffer from ADHD or have a mild case.

There are some things in life that simply aren't good for us. The items that have helped me most, are choosing to purchase organic foods and items that don't contain any preservatives. Choosing to clean my home with natural substances vs. chemicals. Getting a little excercise, sure I'm a little forgetful or distracted occassionally...but so is every other male I've ever met...unless there's an incredibly attractive female in sight, and/or a sports score.We eat mostly organic foods - no preservatives. We clean with natural substances. I worked out for 2 hours today. Last week I did little because of schedule - all help increase the efficacy of adderral - but NADA without the med. And please don't say haven't been at it long enough. We've been at it for years.

And, YES, I enjoy looking at an incredibly attractive blazing hot female - my wife. I took my vow seriously. No other babes but my wife. Oh, forgot to mention - I like sex too. Unfortunately, my wife need all sorts of wining, dining, and romantic stuff to enjoy intimacy. I can not effectively give that to her in my normal ADHD mind state. She is as happy as I about the med.

Bob

My problem is with the Columbine remark.

Asking for a retraction and an apology under the circumstances is appropriate.

Without confronting that statement and allowing it to "slip" by, the broader implication is that it insinuates ADHD meds will make you "crazy" or "psycho."

It's like saying, "Look what it (ADHD meds) made those 2 kids do."

There's no speculation that ADHD meds or ADHD were invloved in that horrific incident.

Trying to imply that there's a connection is disrespectful and deceitful. It also serves no purpose other than to hurt and confuse.

If a "newbie" were to read that , without a confrontation or challenge of some sort, the tacit implication is that it's true.

That's like a sin of omission on our part.

Slippy,

If do not believe ADHD is a disorder, you do not have it. Or you have a mild case. Or you are in denial - or you are Trolling - period!

You visit this support Forum and Post blatantly offensive garbage, without the cojones to return and apologise for your ill-conceived and spiteful comments?! -

***comment removed by moderator***

Andy.

I beleive the disorder is very real. I live through it every day. The one problem for me is that I have no syptoms that follow a set order. The things that should happen as everyday don't. I have to check and recheck everything and still overlook things. Write it down, Great but what happens when I forget that!! Is there a link between pain pills? I had a bad neck injury in 1980 and was on medication for 6 plus years for different ailments. My problems seem to be getting worse..Welcome Chewy! You kind of snuck in your first post in a very hopping little thread, but I wanted to say welcome to the forums!:) I hope you'll also post on the introduction thread so folks can get to know you a bit and give you more personalized feedback!

Scattered

To me, you can call it anything you want to.
But we are not the majority.

AD/HD is not voo doo.
It shows up on brain scans...the blood flow is different according to my doctor. It is necessary to treat if it is disrupting your life and keeping you from functioning in your immediate world.
That is, if this is your wish. Because I have children, a husband, and have chosen a traditional lifestyle, that is the path for me.
I take medication and try to alter my behavior in order to maintain this lifestytyle for my family.

~gourmet~

Welcome Chewy! You kind of snuck in your first post in a very hopping little thread, but I wanted to say welcome to the forums!:) I hope you'll also post on the introduction thread so folks can get to know you a bit and give you more personalized feedback!

Scattered
Welcome Chewy. Scattered is right, you've come in on a "hopping little thread".

I want to thank all who have been involved with this discussion for their frank and informative rebuttals to anti-ADD debate.

We encourage the free exchange of thoughts and oppinions and naturally, buttons can get pushed.

In my oppinion this thread has had excellent replies but perhaps has run its course. I am temporarily closing this thread. It may be reopened at a later date, but if this subject should turn up again, and it is likely it will, I would like to further encourage the frank, intelligent replies and that we not succumb to less than mature arguements.