It's being reported as we speak. It makes me a bit sad though. The CDC itself is VERY responsible in the manner it looks at ADD. It will not for example count an ADD diagnosis for study purposes unless it is the result of a DSM-IV screening. The press, however, is reporting this without making any note of such things.

The data looks a lot worse when you associate it with all the other horror stories caused by improper diagnosis out there. Many people in the general public believe ADD is solidly over diagnosed, even though the "Experts" believe that on the basis of DSM-IV screenings it is underdiagnosed, Particularly in women. The reason for this? Most of the press reports include cases in which GP's (who incidentally, by their own admission in AMA studies, admit they feel uncomfortable and under qualified to make diagnosis of ADD. 70% of them said so and yet a large portion of ADD treatment comes from general practitioners making a call on treatment without the benefit of a proper DSM-IV screening) proscribe class two stimulants to kids without a proper screening. This isn't borderline medical judgement. It should be outright malpractice. Putting someone without ADD on stimulant meds like that is dangerous. It can be dangerous if you do have it (Although the meds do have a very long history of safety with proper use).

The whole thing just irritates me because it's more crap for the people who don't believe ADD is real to latch onto. It also scares parents of children of have it of a viable treatment option. The CDC also did a study of what happens to children diagnosed with ADD off of meds. One of the things it showed was a 400% increase in accidents requiring hospital treatment. I very much doubt the figures of emergency room visits due to medication come close to that.

I think the press emphasizes the parts that are sensational and ignores the large numbers of persons that are successfully treated using these medications. The majority of ER visits were not due to the prescribed use of the meds: "Nearly two-thirds — overdoses and accidental use — could be prevented by parents locking the pills away, the researchers say". Rather than a sensational headline which will be used to scare parents for years to come, these statistics should have been used as an educational tool for parents, patient and physicians to reduce potential accidental harm.

This is similar to the liver damage experienced by children who recieved too much acetominiphen because the parents did not understand that the infant drops were so much more concentrated than the children's version of the medicine. This was not due to proper use but accidental overdose. Education of parents was important to reduce the overdoses.

vickie