I just read this at helpguide.org -


Too much television - A recent research study (Source: LDA (http://www.ldaamerica.org/newsbriefs/print_television.asp)) looked at the connection between the amount of television that very young children watched and attention problems years later when those children were in school. The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports. A question to consider:
Does too much television viewing train the brain to require constant stimulation, so that the real world is boring in comparison?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This sounds very strange to me. So ADD can be inserted into an otherwise normal brain? With something as simple as media stimulis no less?

And what if a normal adult starts watching too much TV? Do they develop ADD too? Or can it only happen during the formative years?

I'm not comfortable believing their theory.

Saw a recent article where this one was debunked. Anyone else see that?

Well it doesn't prove causation it just discusses that television and ADD are correlated.
A possible interpretation could be that individuals with ADD are more likely to watch television as a way to procrastinate OR that these individuals have more difficulty turning off the television and adjusting their attention to other stimuli OR that the comorbid depression results in television watching as a form of withdrawl.
There may be lots of reasons but it certainly doesn't imply cause and effect.

Well it doesn't prove causation it just discusses that television and ADD are correlated.
A possible interpretation could be that individuals with ADD are more likely to watch television as a way to procrastinate OR that these individuals have more difficulty turning off the television and adjusting their attention to other stimuli OR that the comorbid depression results in television watching as a form of withdrawl.
There may be lots of reasons but it certainly doesn't imply cause and effect.In my opinion it does. I made the sentences bold that I think imply cause and effect -
The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports.
A question to consider:Does too much television viewing train the brain to require constant stimulation, so that the real world is boring in comparison?

interestingly tho does any ADD have problems watching TV?
I have had 48hr marathons after which i would feel sick...
but not counting such things, is there ever a feeling among any ADDs here that makes them revolt or watching TV/movies a boring experience.

I hate TV now, because my husband is a clicker. If I get sucked into a program, right at the climax he'll click, hover on a commercial for foot fungus cream, and click back after the climax is over. It's infuriating.
So our living room TV is always off, unless he's home.

I watched a ton of TV as a kid...wonder if it's more correlation that causation, but that's just my opinion.

In my opinion it does. I made the sentences bold that I think imply cause and effect -According to this Website (http://beoutrageous.com/IYP/death.htm), 77% of US deaths occur in some sort of healthcare facility. My conclusion: Stay away from hospitals, they'll kill you!

:D

Or may, it's not that hospitals cause death, but that (imminent) death causes people to go to hospitals? Nah, too boring that way. ;)

98% of all victims of natural cause death had consumed carrots within the previous 2 year period and 99.99% had consumed water within four weeks of death!! Avoid carrots and water!!

In my opinion it does. I made the sentences bold that I think imply cause and effect -
Although the method was fine, cause cannot be inferred from this kind of study.

Furthermore, the researchers themselves do not make that mistake. Here's a few quotes from the original research report about the limitations of the research:

"Several limitations to this study warrant consideration. First, the measure that we used for attentionalproblems is not necessarily indicative of clinically diagnosed ADHD. However, it was derived from the subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist, which was found to have a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 99% compared with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition criteria in a large, population-based sample........

"Second, we relied on parental report of television viewed. Although this may not be an entirely accurate measure of the true amount, there are no a priori reasons to believe that its imprecision would bias our findings in one direction or another......

"Third, we cannot draw causal inferences from these associations. It could be that attentional problems lead to television viewing rather than vice versa. However, to mitigate this limitation, we exploited the longitudinality of the data set and focused on television viewing at 1 and 3 years of age, well before the age at which most experts believe that ADHD symptoms are manifest. It is also possible that there are characteristics associated with parents who allow their children to watch excessive amounts of television that accounts for the relationship between television viewing and attentional problems. For example, parents who were distracted, neglectful, or otherwise preoccupied might have allowed
their children to watch excessive amounts of television in addition to having created a household environment that promoted the development of attentional problems. Although we adjusted for a number of potential confounders, including home environment, maternal depression, cognitive stimulation, and emotional support, our adjustment may have been imperfect. Finally, we had no data on the content of the television being viewed. Some research indicates that educational television (eg, Sesame Street) may in fact promote attention and reading among school-aged children........"

And they don't even scratch the surface of the possible alternative hypotheses.

In addition, the effects sizes were incredibly small. I seriously doubt the relationship would have been found with smaller samples. This makes it difficult to attach any practical significance.

[QUOTE]The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports.
A question to consider:Does too much television viewing train the brain to require constant stimulation, so that the real world is boring in comparison? [QUOTE]

The bold print really just tells us that of the children they studied those that watched more television were more likely to show signs of innattention.
This can only imply causation if they studied the children's attention at yearly intervals (like at age 1, then age 2, then age 3) and found that the children who were watching more television were originally attentive but developed attention problems the more television that they watched.
I would have to see the actual study but so far all this says is that they surveyed a number of parents with children under three, asked them how much television their child watches daily, and then resurveyed these parents some years later to find out if, by the parents estimation, these children had attention problems.

There are also a number of problems with a study like this.

Most importantly they used the parents report of the child's attention capabilities which means they didn't use a standardized test of attention. Parents views of attention are varying and subjective. Also, other things can affect both hours spent watching television and attention. Parents who limit their child's television watching are likely to also spend more time nurturing their child's interests and intellectual development. Conversely, lower income parents are far more likely to use the television as a means of childcare and are less likely to have the time to devote to their child's cognitive development. (This last bit is based on a number of studies and is not ment to indicate that low income parents can't be good parents). Not only that but children from low income families are more likely to be malnurished which means the child would be more likely to show attention problems. Many many more things could account for this.

Also, having attention problems does not directly imply ADD. Many disorders have attention problems as a side effect.

LOL!!

Somehow I didn't see your response barbyma!! How redundant of me!

I'm not saying I agree with it, as a matter of fact, as I said, I don't think their conclusion is valid.
What I am saying is that I think they're saying watching tv can cause ADD.

In my opinion it does. I made the sentences bold that I think imply cause and effect

This is a kin to saying apples and oranges came from the same tree because they are both fruit!

Or

My ADD fell out of the sky and hit me in the head just right….

= to (IMHO)

Why?

Because I have NEVER been much of a television watcher. When I was a kid I could watch cartoons for maybe 30 minutes TOPS before I went bouncing off else where. I have never had much interest in television still don’t. I used to have a few favorite shows I would watch. Together totaling about two hours a week. Half the time I would forget "my show" was on, if it was a re-run I would loose interest and wander off.

On cold rainy days…I would rent movies and get junk food and the girls and I would have a “slouch” day…this occurs once a year. My daily television watching time over the past year probably averages to less than five minutes a day!! As a child it may have been as high as thirty.

Sorry this doesn’t add up especially when speaking of hyper active people who are unable to sit still long enough to watch TV….this ADD caused by TV thing aint a pannin out………..in my brain!

Oh I see where the misunderstaning lies!
I made bold the sentences that I thought THEY are saying cause and effect - not that I believe it!
I posted this thread to get input because I think their theory is a little whack.

I caught that you weren't in agreement chameleon. You were understood.

I posted this thread to get input because I think their theory is a little whack.

Thanks for the clarification. I did misunderstand your intention. and agree it is whacked but more than a little.

Some have been trying to blame too much television on all sorts of weird stuff from violence to head aches.

Although many ideas are whacked not all are. Like the too much television and video game playing may decreased physical activity thus enhancing the chances of children being over weight....or being less than physically fit. Even that can't be blamed solely at the foot of television diet plays a role in heath and weight also.

Television causing ADD is ludicrous simply because I have always had ADD and never been a television watcher probably due to the fact I am hyper active ADD and TV’s don’t walk and talk very well-lol

Yeah meadd, and everything is the mother's fault too :mad:

Yeah meadd, and everything is the mother's fault too


We'll file that one in the severely whacked file also. Although we as parents can influence our children we can not determine for our children who they are going to be. Mom reared four of us and we are all different as are my three daughters

As I understand it the current thinking on how genes go is that you're born with certain genetic markers but unless there is a stimulus to activate them the trait won't express itself. For example if you have the gene for type II diabetes, you won't necessarily get diabetes if you're extremely careful with your diet, exercise and weight control. Some are saying that TV won't cause you to have ADD if you don't have the gene for it, but it might activate that gene. However, since ADHD if more heritable than height between identical twins, it's probably that something will trigger the gene's expression whether or not you are exposed to TV. We had little to none when I was very young and I was diagnosed with hyperactivity disorder by the time I was 3 or 4.

Also I wonder if kids who are allowed to watch a lot of TV might not either be kids that needed a lot of stimulation to stay out of their parents' hair, so the parents turned to the easy medium (not that I've ever done that!:eek: ), or had parents who were a might distractible themselves and tended to take the easy way. Maybe not either of these, but my point is there are just too many possible explanations to causally link this to ADHD.

Scattered

There are several long term studies using spect scans ect on this type of study..Tv video gmaes ect... that are looking at the wiring in the brain. The theory is that we train the brain to need a certain type of stimulus, and that certain types of electrical stimulus mirrors different brain signals for arrousal, calming ect.

I don't believe that it actually causes ADHD, but I do believe that it can cause a greater need for fast input into the brain...or make our brains seek stimulus that had been supplied at a constant rate.

For every study there will be one to disprove it. Statistics and methodology are designed so that they prove a certain point of view and researchers can find links to explain their point of view.

interestingly tho does any ADD have problems watching TV?
I have had 48hr marathons after which i would feel sick...
but not counting such things, is there ever a feeling among any ADDs here that makes them revolt or watching TV/movies a boring experience.

I have a hard time sitting through movies and always have. I can stand sitting through an hour tv show, but I often wander off on commercials... it's not really something that I think about,but I suppose that I do have a problem sitting still and watching thigns for long periods of time.

As I understand it the current thinking on how genes go is that you're born with certain genetic markers but unless there is a stimulus to activate them the trait won't express itself. For example if you have the gene for type II diabetes, you won't necessarily get diabetes if you're extremely careful with your diet, exercise and weight control. Some are saying that TV won't cause you to have ADD if you don't have the gene for it, but it might activate that gene. However, since ADHD if more heritable than height between identical twins, it's probably that something will trigger the gene's expression whether or not you are exposed to TV. We had little to none when I was very young and I was diagnosed with hyperactivity disorder by the time I was 3 or 4.

Also I wonder if kids who are allowed to watch a lot of TV might not either be kids that needed a lot of stimulation to stay out of their parents' hair, so the parents turned to the easy medium (not that I've ever done that!:eek: ), or had parents who were a might distractible themselves and tended to take the easy way. Maybe not either of these, but my point is there are just too many possible explanations to causally link this to ADHD.

Scattered
Well said :) Saved me from writing this out myself ;)

I find it a little... frustrating how research is misinterpreted; usually by the media, but occasionally by a researcher that is looking to push a certain idea. It's in part because of this that the general public is misinformed on so many issues, ADD included.

This can only imply causation if they studied the children's attention at yearly intervals (like at age 1, then age 2, then age 3) and found that the children who were watching more television were originally attentive but developed attention problems the more television that they watched.

Actually, that wouldn't allow causal conclusions either.

Causal conclusions can ONLY be drawn from experimentation. That means manipulating a variable and doing random assignment to treatment groups.

This, like a LOT of research, is correlational. Correlation does not and cannot imply cause for a number of reasons.


Somehow I didn't see your response barbyma!! How redundant of me!

NP. You probably blocked it out because it was long! :p



I'm not saying I agree with it, as a matter of fact, as I said, I don't think their conclusion is valid.
What I am saying is that I think they're saying watching tv can cause ADD.
Please check out my post on the subject. These researchers admitted to their limitations. If they hadn't I doubt "Pediatrics" would have published it, even though it is missing p-values....

But, yes, I originally thought you were agreeing.

The link that you provided does indeed cross over the line, IMO. They misrepresented what the researchers found. This happens a LOT.

I don't agree with this study either. My parents limited TV watching and made books a huge part of my childhood. I read more than watched TV. Whenever I watched TV, I was usually doing something else, unless I was sick. TV is too boring for me to just watch with out multitasking.

However, since ADHD if more heritable than height between identical twins, it's probably that something will trigger the gene's expression whether or not you are exposed to TV.
Not an unreasonable hypothesis, and one many psychologists have been wondering about.

However, I actually take this study as evidence that TV is NOT a big influence.

Even though their results are statistically significant (I actually had to do the math to be sure since they didn't publish the standard stats), their sample size is huge and the effect sizes are TINY.

This leads me to believe that there is no practical relationship. Even if causal conclusions could be drawn, the influence would be so minimal it wouldn't have any practical value. Especially considering the research on educational TV.

For every study there will be one to disprove it. Statistics and methodology are designed so that they prove a certain point of view and researchers can find links to explain their point of view.
That's a pretty sweeping generalization.

Statistics and methodology are designed to answer specific questions, not support one's own view if that view is incorrect. Statistics and methodology are designed to gain knowledge, test hypotheses, and maximize objectivity.

The statement I've bolded is most certainly true, however, there is a process of peer review that legitimate scientists must pass if they are to publish in respectable journals. A study in the JAMA is a bit more credible than one published on the "ADD is a Myth" website.

Good point Chloe - we didn't have a tv in our house for most of my childhood and I have severe ADHD. HA!

That premise has been approached before with respect to ADHD.

There's NO CAUSATION EFFECT between excessive tv watching and ADHD.

There' s lots of research on how watching violence on tv perpetuates anger & aggression, however, every attentional problem DOES NOT imply ADHD.

Interesting stuff tho.

Thanks for the heads up.:)

You're welcome mctavish, thanks for chiming in :)

HEY! I just drank some water! Why didn't anyone tell me about this side effect before?

Who do I sue? ;):p


98% of all victims of natural cause death had consumed carrots within the previous 2 year period and 99.99% had consumed water within four weeks of death!! Avoid carrots and water!!

. . . The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports.


I was five years old when our first t.v. appeared. I could have been the poster child for ADHD. I still don't watch much t.v..


I would be more concerned with the connection between t.v. watching and obesity.

I just read this at helpguide.org -



Too much television - A recent research study (Source: LDA (http://www.ldaamerica.org/newsbriefs/print_television.asp)) looked at the connection between the amount of television that very young children watched and attention problems years later when those children were in school. The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports. A question to consider:
Does too much television viewing train the brain to require constant stimulation, so that the real world is boring in comparison?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This sounds very strange to me. So ADD can be inserted into an otherwise normal brain? With something as simple as media stimulis no less?

And what if a normal adult starts watching too much TV? Do they develop ADD too? Or can it only happen during the formative years?

I'm not comfortable believing their theory.

Correlation != Causation

As I've previously stated.......EVERY ATTENTION PROBLEM DOES NOT = ADHD

(Anymore than feeling sad = major depression )

You CAN'T have ADHD without meeting the diagnostic criteria first!!!

HEY! I just drank some water! Why didn't anyone tell me about this side effect before?

Who do I sue? ;):p


We'll add you to the class action lawsuit once we figure out this whole causation equals or doesn't equal correlation argument! Stay tuned.

...and the study I mentioned earlier.

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Parenting/tb/2812

An excellent point made by the source Scuro provided.

Quote***
Furthermore, the authors pointed out "it should be noted that ADHD, although identified by other names, has been recognized as a disorder of childhood well before children had television to watch."
***End Quote

Originally Posted by ADDrift

This can only imply causation if they studied the children's attention at yearly intervals (like at age 1, then age 2, then age 3) and found that the children who were watching more television were originally attentive but developed attention problems the more television that they watched.

Actually, that wouldn't allow causal conclusions either.

Causal conclusions can ONLY be drawn from experimentation. That means manipulating a variable and doing random assignment to treatment groups.
Thanks for the correction Barbyma...you are so very right! Hey, you should proofread my essays!!

Oh and guys I PROMISE YOU correlation DOES NOT equal causation! There's a lot I don't know but I know that. :)

IToo much television - A recent research study (Source: LDA (http://www.ldaamerica.org/newsbriefs/print_television.asp)) looked at the connection between the amount of television that very young children watched and attention problems years later when those children were in school. The researcher found that for each additional hour of television per day that children watched on average before age three, they were 10 percent more likely to have attention problems, by parents' reports. A question to consider:
Does too much television viewing train the brain to require constant stimulation, so that the real world is boring in comparion?.
I completely disagree - just my opinion.

I was not really allowed to watch television as a child. We only had one and that was strictly for the adults (except on Saturday morning). I had ADHD as a child and in adulthood have lost the "H" part but am still very inattentive.

I really think "they" are just looking for someting else to blame it on other than genetics so "they" can once again say we are just medicating our children (and ourselves) for some illness that doesn't exist or we can be blamed for being bad parents because we caused this to happen to our children.

Reminds me of a movie .... :D

BEDEVERE: Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
VILLAGER #1: Are there?
VILLAGER #2: Ah?
VILLAGER #1: What are they?
CROWD: Tell us! Tell us!...
BEDEVERE: Tell me. What do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2: Burn!
VILLAGER #1: Burn!
CROWD: Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...
BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1: More witches!
VILLAGER #3: Shh!
VILLAGER #2: Wood!
BEDEVERE: So, why do witches burn? [pause]
VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?
BEDEVERE: Good! Heh heh.
CROWD: Oh, yeah. Oh.
BEDEVERE: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.
RANDOM: Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...
BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1: No. No.
VILLAGER #2: No, it floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1: Throw her into the pond!
CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!
BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1: Bread!
VILLAGER #2: Apples!
VILLAGER #3: Uh, very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1: Cider!
VILLAGER #2: Uh, gra-- gravy!
VILLAGER #1: Cherries!
VILLAGER #2: Mud!
VILLAGER #3: Uh, churches! Churches!
VILLAGER #2: Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR: A duck!
CROWD: Oooh.
BEDEVERE: Exactly. So, logically...
VILLAGER #1: If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE: And therefore?
VILLAGER #2: A witch!

Sorry for the sidetrack, but I think it relates to some part of the discussion. :D

I hope there aren't still some of you under the false impression that I believe the report I posted here. If so, please reread the opening post.
I DON'T believe it, that's why I posted it. I think it's a bunch of bull and wanted to show you guys. :D

I hope there aren't still some of you under the false impression that I believe the report I posted here. If so, please reread the opening post.
I DON'T believe it, that's why I posted it. I think it's a bunch of bull and wanted to show you guys. :D
Burn her...burn her!!!! Throw her in the pond!!!! ;)

At first I was thinking to myself, "Did she get knocked off her rocker?"

Thanks for posting.

LOL!

Thanks tim. I've learned my lesson! From now on if I post something I think is Zonkers I'll preface it in BIG BOLD LETTERS that I THINK IT'S STUPID instead of following the article with my opinion in regular typeface :D

So...did I float or not? :p

Saw a recent article where this one was debunked. Anyone else see that? Yep, he's correct on that. Do a Google News (http://news.google.com/) search on it and soon enough you'll find articles pointing to the study titled, "There Is No Meaningful Relationship Between Television Exposure and Symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder".

From http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/117/3/665
Effect sizes for the relationship between television exposure and symptoms of ADHD were close to zero and not statistically significant. There's really no need to discuss the possibility that any link exists.

Thank you Albino Fox! :D

Hi all;

Just wanting to play devil's advocate for a moment here...

I do not believe that watching too much television can cause AD(H)D.

But I'm wondering if it might be able to bring about some attentional problems that perhaps mimic aspects of the disorder? NOT the disorder itself, but perhaps some minor attentional problems? Is this perhaps a possibility?

(e.g.; imagine a young child very used to frequently watching exciting and stimulating TV shows who then has to sit down and try to do some (maybe boring) homework - perhaps he/she might have difficulty learning to apply him/herself to something far less stimulating).

This idea is not thought through very well (I barely had any sleep last night), but I just thought I'd throw it out there ;) :) .

addinbc I love devil's advocates :D
And I'd be willing to believe your point. I think the amount, and the content of tv watched can have many effects on children and adults alike. From what they expect out of life and other people to their moods, morals, and personalities.

I think that makes sense. I wonder how many people may have that problem and are diagnosed with ADHD because of it?

Yeah, there are a lot of things that cause symptoms like ADD, even mercury poisoning. That's why sometimes I wonder if people who don't get relief from ADD meds don't actually have ADD but some other illness that mimics it.

I wondered about that too. Kind of like you only get rid of pain from taking an asprin if you have pain to begin with?

I have a student who was evaluated for ADHD, the psych made the diagnosis but said in her recommendations that a med should be tried to further confirm the diagnosis (or something along those lines.)

But I'm wondering if it might be able to bring about some attentional problems that perhaps mimic aspects of the disorder? NOT the disorder itself, but perhaps some minor attentional problems? Is this perhaps a possibility?

Anything is possible. Is it plausible? VERY. There are a great many who think that TV & video games could contribute. Our brains are very plastic and it's not hard to develop a good explanation for how it could happen.

BUT, before we go putting together explanations, anything can be explained. But the explanation means absolutely nothing if the effect is illusory.

This study actually convinces me that TV has no influence, and I'm one of those cognitive researchers who thought that it might.

The effect sizes are far too small and the sample sizes too large. Even a correlation between these two things is unlikely given their results.....

I have a student who was evaluated for ADHD, the psych made the diagnosis but said in her recommendations that a med should be tried to further confirm the diagnosis (or something along those lines.)
A lot of physicians do this but I haven't heard that many psychologists do this. As much as the idea of giving med's to an individual to determine if your diagnosis is correct makes a few warning signals go off in my head I guess that with the lack of resources to properly diagnose every individual with ADHD makes this kind of diagnosis an every day occurance.

I think it just worries me because these types of diagnostic short cuts are what makes people think ADD doesn't exist. When a child with behaviour problems is given ritalin without having been through the appropriate testing and then later it is discovered that the poor child is being abused and is acting out on that basis it just fuels the idea that our society is on some kind of mission to medicate children so that we don't have to deal with their behaviour.

I guess at first it seems harmless to just give a child ritalin to see if it helps but if a longer examination of the childs actual behavioural and cognitive deficits could lead to ADHD being ruled out and the parent continuing on to find an accurate cause for the childs problems I think that it isn't harmless.

Also, I'm not convinced that some of the med's (ritalin most notibly) wouldn't work for people without ADHD. It is in fact an amphetamine and as such has a neurological effect on most individuals. While it may affect non ADD individuals differently it does affect them. Also, even if the effect was too little to notice we do know a lot about placebo's. Giving a child ritalin when they don't need it could have a similar effect to placebo. Even if it doesn't change the child's behaviour at all it can change a parents perception of the child's behaviour.

Wow...I could go on and on!!! :p Very interesting subject!

Yeah, there are a lot of things that cause symptoms like ADD, even mercury poisoning. That's why sometimes I wonder if people who don't get relief from ADD meds don't actually have ADD but some other illness that mimics it.The current ideas about symptoms of mercury poisoning originated with the dental filling myth. It can certainly affect the central nervous system, but the actual symptoms of mercury poisoning are more like menopause or stomach flu than ADD.

From the "Calpoison" website:

Elemental Mercury:
"Neurologic symptoms include tremors, headaches, short-term memory loss, incoordination, weakness, loss of appetite, altered sense of taste and smell, numbness and tingling in the hands and feet, insomnia, and excessive sweating. Psychiatric effects are also seen after long-term exposure. Acrodynia can result from repeated exposures to mercury-containing latex paint fumes. Acrodynia is usually seen in younger children. The symptoms include chills, sweating, body rash, irritability, sleeplessness, leg cramps, swelling of the cheeks, nose, hands and feet, light-sensitivity to the eyes and peeling skin layers on the palms of the hands and soles of the feet. "

Inorganic Mercury:
I"norganic mercuric salts are corrosive and they damage the kidneys. Following ingestion, symptoms include nausea, vomiting blood, burns and tissue death in the throat and stomach, abdominal pain, bloody diarrhea, decreased urination and kidney failure. Long-term application of mercury-containing substances causes skin redness and staining of the skin. More severe symptoms include nerve damage resulting in weakness, numbness and tingling."

Organic Mercury:
"These mercury compounds can attack all body systems. They can cause nausea, vomiting, lack of appetite, weight loss, abdominal pain, diarrhea, kidney failure, skin burns and irritation, respiratory distress, swollen gums and mouth sores, drooling, numbness and tingling in the lips, mouth, tongue, hands and feet, tremors and incoordination, vision and hearing loss, memory loss, personality changes and headache. Allergic reactions can also occur."

These don't sound much like ADD to me! :p

I agree, though, that with the number of look-a-likes, there are probably as many people misdiagnosed withADD as there are ADDers misdiagnosed with other things.

I guess at first it seems harmless to just give a child ritalin to see if it helps but if a longer examination of the childs actual behavioural and cognitive deficits could lead to ADHD being ruled out and the parent continuing on to find an accurate cause for the childs problems I think that it isn't harmless.
I've never heard of meds being a tool for dx of a child.

While I fully support this practice with adults, I would never say it's OK with kids. There are far too many possibilities and not enough history to rule them out. Learning disabilities is at the top of that list, but if a child is bipolar it would cause them a great deal of harm!



Also, I'm not convinced that some of the med's (ritalin most notibly) wouldn't work for people without ADHD. It is in fact an amphetamine and as such has a neurological effect on most individuals. While it may affect non ADD individuals differently it does affect them. Well, these substances do affect normals. But, if attention isn't the core of the problem, it won't go away with the meds....

Hmmm....
couldn't read through everything, just wanted to chime in.
We didn't have a TV growing up. We didn't have one until I was 14 or so but I devoured books. Read them in class when the teacher was talking, read them on the bus, read them under my covers with a flash light. I think that means that reading books must have caused my ADD.

Something interesting and I don't know if anyone else is like this but now as an adult, I have the TV on constantly. I'm not watching it though. It's just background noise. I'm sure my kids will be deeply affected by this in some way. :)

Something interesting and I don't know if anyone else is like this but now as an adult, I have the TV on constantly. I'm not watching it though. It's just background noise. I think most people have the TV on for background 24/7. Of course, a lot of those people are staring at it, too!

I like to keep it off when I'm alone and working. Even sometimes when my husband is home we'll keep it off. It's off right now.

My kids can't stand to have the TV off even though they're ignoring it as much as they're watching.

But here's the funny thing. My dog gets anxious when I'm home alone with her and the TV isn't on! I swear my dog has ADD. :rolleyes: