A longer and more academic version of this will be available later. Here are some factoids of my own regarding the information presented in Grace Jackson's "Truth about Stimulants"

Claim 1: Methylphenidate(Ritalin) causes decressed blood flow to brain and therefore atrophy (brain damage)

From the study she cites: MP (methylphenidate) does cause reduced blood flow to the brain. However the following details were omitted or overlooked by Dr. Jackson
- deminished blood flow was only observed at 5, 15, and 30 minutes after administation of the drug.
-the researchers do not say anything about this decrease causing brain damage, but do warn the physician should take care when prescribing for long term continual usage or in patients already having brain damage

Claim 2: Giving kids Ritalin upps their likelyhood of drug abuse in the future

From the studies she cites: the researchers concluded that taking Ritalin does not leading to increased risk of drug abuse.
-Dr. Jackson claims that these conclusions are supported only becuase of the study's "numerous flaws and statisical manipulations" She fails to mention what these flaws are or where we might find them.
-Social and medical research following these studies shows the connection to between ADHD behaviors and conduct and risk of drug addiction, methylphenidate being eliminated at a causal force.

Claim 3: Stimulant medications are not helpful, only dangerous.

From the resources: The studies the Dr Jackson uses to support the claim of "unhelpful" were done on participents without ADHD. A claim of how stimulants may or may not affect the ADHD brain can not be made using studies missing research of how stimulants affect the ADHD brain.

-Below is the section of "Pay attention:Ritalin acts much like cocaine" JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) 2001; Vol. 286, 905-906. For easier reading by ADDers, I have highlighted the major points omitted by Dr. Jackson.
After combining data from the volunteers, the team got its second surprise. Those who took methylphenidate displayed high levels of extracellular dopamine—just like people using cocaine. But if methylphenidate works like cocaine, why aren't millions of US children getting high and becoming addicted?

The answer came after Volkow combined her results with those from another research team. In 1999, Darin Dougherty, MD, and colleagues at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard University Medical School reported that people with ADHD have many more dopamine transporters than those without the condition (Lancet. 1999;354:2132-2133). This surplus increases the collective cleaning power of each cell; as dopamine fires into the synapse it is quickly sucked back, before it can home in on reward circuit receptors. "There isn't enough time for it to produce a signal," said Volkow.

It finally started to make sense. Children with ADHD produce weak dopamine signals, meaning that usually interesting activities provide fewer rewards. In effect, their attention circuitry is underfed. At the same time, they experience a related effect: random, distracting neuron firing. Or, as Volkow put it, more noise and less signal. This background hum interferes with concentration, making the child more distractible.

Methylphenidate flips the relationship, upping the signal and reducing the noise. After someone swallows methylphenidate, it enters the bloodstream and eventually finds the brain, where it blocks dopamine transporters and increases attention signaling. Again, cocaine acts the same way. But the two drugs differ in a significant way: methylphenidate takes about an hour to raise dopamine levels, whereas inhaled or injected cocaine hits the brain in seconds. "It is the speed at which you increase dopamine that appears to be a key element of the addiction process," said Volkow.

While the team is unclear on why this speed factor is so important, future research will focus on it. They also plan to map dopamine levels in volunteers who have ADHD when they are at rest or while concentrating. Other research will search for molecular tools to screen children for dopamine transporter levels; those with high levels could be identified early and encouraged with behavioral solutions before methylphenidate is prescribed. "We know that social interactions can increase dopamine receptors," said Volkow, but whether better interplay also affects transporter levels is unknown.

The long-term dopamine effects of taking methylphenidate for years, as many do, are another unknown. The only two large epidemiological studies conflict. One reports more drug addiction in children with ADHD who took methylphenidate compared with children with ADHD who took no drug (J Learn Disabil. 1998;31:533-544); the other shows the opposite result (Pediatrics. 1999;104:e20).

Because people with low levels of dopamine receptors are at risk for drug addiction, Volkow said that researchers need to understand if methylphenidate can alter the whole dynamic of the dopamine pathway. "Could chronic use of Ritalin make you more vulnerable to decreased dopamine brain activity as cocaine does? It's a key question nobody has answered."


The claims made by Dr. Jackson's "Truth about Stimulants" are the result of the objectivity of science giving way to personal belief. I encourge all readers to take the time to read the works used to support such claims in their entirety. A good researcher must always acknowledge the data that does not support his or her conclusions and address it in an open and objective way. Otherwise the reader has no way of knowing the the research is scientifically viable or a overworded and overeducated attempt to create converts to a cause. I have not yet finished reading most much less all of the works cited, but already I am convinced that Dr. Jackson has, by her omissions, mitigations and incomplete presentation, let her personal opinions overcome her objectivity and therefore has lost any credibility in my eyes.

Nice work. It is very time consuming to go through the claims vs. the "supporting" documents.

Proscrire, very interesting and I look forward to more.

Googling for Grace Jackson and
"Truth about Stimulants" I came
up only with psychrights.org A
quick read of the site they have
real problems with drugs for mental health.
Now I wonder who started this site?
Hmm a strange cult that hates
drugs...

Theta: Googling for Grace Jackson and "Truth about Stimulants" I came up only with psychrights.org A quick read of the site they have real problems with drugs for mental health. Now I wonder who started this site? Hmm a strange cult that hates drugs...
I ran googled "The truth about stimulants" without Grace Jackson's name. http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=truth+about+stimulants&ei=UTF-8&pstart=1&fr=ybr_sbc&b=1 (http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=truth+about+stimulants&ei=UTF-8&pstart=1&fr=ybr_sbc&b=1) An amazing number of articles popped up. An interesting observation? Many of the links were to people or organizations that promoted specific religious or personal beliefs. The Bill of Right guantees Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. But.... we have the ability to make-up our own minds. Members of the forum have the ability to think and make their own decisions. So, when looking at any information about ADD and stimulants, it is important to look for bias, misinformation, and motive when reading. Then, you can get more information if needed and make an informed decision to accept or reject the information or take it with a grain of salt.

The excerpt below is from one such link. I have quoted the first three paragraphs and then added my observations. Statements in bold and color are emphasized by me.
Excerpt from online article
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art39641.asp

We can’t live without food. It’s essential for our nourishment, growth and energy. Stimulants, however, are not essential. Nobody ever died from a deficiency of coffee, tobacco, alcohol or cocaine. In fact, millions of people have died from abuse of these substances.

Stimulants are drugs and they’re not safe. No matter what their source, stimulants affect the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and unhealthy biochemical reactions. Although they can increase alertness, they also increase blood pressure, body temperature, heart beat, anxiety and aggression, as well as causing addiction and death. That’s a pretty costly trade off.

Juan Valdez,”the “Miller Light” jocks, the “Marlboro Man” (who died from lung cancer) and your local “crack dealer” all understand addiction is a multi-billion dollar business. And so do the so-called “food supplement” companies that sell stimulant laden energy boosting formulas.
Author bio

---- --- is a no-nonsense researcher/journalist in the field of health and happiness. She's written and published over 500 articles and reports helping her readers to look better, feel better, have more energy, slow down the aging process and live a happier, healthier, more productive life.


Stimulants are drugs and they’re not safe. Bias and misinformation. Questions to ask yourself: Are all stimulants drugs? Are all stimulants not safe? What about medical treatments? Is this one person's opinion or is there data to support the thesis? Alcohol is listed as a stimulant-what? Alcohol is a CNS-a central nervous system depressant. This is not the type of mistake a reputable "journalist" makes. This, makes me suspicious of the rest of her information. Juan Valdez...and your local “crack dealer. Juan Valdez, a developing nation coffee-bean picker, is not even closely comparable to your local crack dealer. The author is using sensationalism to get your attention. Links within the article take you to products you can purchase. Motive? Money

The author's bio on this site lists information about her health while briefly stating She's written and published over 500 articles and reports. Most of the time you will find a listing of an author's body of work. Questions...really, so where are these articles? What kind of repors? Why would none be listed? No educational background is listed. She is not a registered dietican, a nutritionist, the only occupation listed is researcher/journalist. No links to her research exist on this page. Does she research other articles, conduct double-blind studies? We now have more questions than before reading the article.

Would an education in dietetics or nutrition help? Yes, but even training in the field does not prevent bias or eliminate ulterior motives. That is the reason all information must be looked at critically and not swallowed hook, line, and sinker.

Hmm - There's already been a lot of poop on this scoop, but I need to chime in about psychiatric drugs in general.

Twenty two years of work with the mentally ill has taught me that psychiatric drugs are both miracles and curses. I have PERSONALLY witnessed the right drug, at the right dose, given and monitored by a competent professional work miracles in the lives of adults and children who might otherwise be condemned to a life of suffering and insitutionalization. I would never rob these people of that refief and independence. :)

On the other hand, if the drug is wrong, or the dose is wrong, or the prescriber does not know what he or she is doing, I have PERSONALLY witnessed adults and children condemned to needless suffering, and unnecessary instiutionalization. I would never condemn anyone to that kind of suffering and imprisonment. :mad:

So what can we do?! We can research and learn without judging those who are honestly working to relieve suffering, but with a critical eye for those act carelessly or dishonestly.

Natural treatments are great if they help, but lest we forget, the first poisons were all natural too! ;)

You know the more I think about it
the word "truth" is not a word a
scientific researcher would use in the
title of a paper in the context of what
is in the paper.

I did a medline search and got 2 hits for Grace Jackson.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16862719&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15279005&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum

Hmm - There's already been a lot of poop on this scoop, but I need to chime in about psychiatric drugs in general.

Twenty two years of work with the mentally ill has taught me that psychiatric drugs are both miracles and curses. I have PERSONALLY witnessed the right drug, at the right dose, given and monitored by a competent professional work miracles in the lives of adults and children who might otherwise be condemned to a life of suffering and insitutionalization. I would never rob these people of that refief and independence. :)

On the other hand, if the drug is wrong, or the dose is wrong, or the prescriber does not know what he or she is doing, I have PERSONALLY witnessed adults and children condemned to needless suffering, and unnecessary instiutionalization. I would never condemn anyone to that kind of suffering and imprisonment. :mad:

So what can we do?! We can research and learn without judging those who are honestly working to relieve suffering, but with a critical eye for those act carelessly or dishonestly.

Natural treatments are great if they help, but lest we forget, the first poisons were all natural too! ;)Very well said! It's like Hallowell and Ratey often say, they neither believe or disbelieve in medication -- it's not a religious conviction. They believe in the proper use of it when needed. It can definately be both a blessing and a curse and has a different times with different medication been both for me.

And addressing the earlier post where if was claimed that no one had ever died of a stimulent deficiency. Maybe not from the deficiency, but many people have died from not having stimulent medication when they needed it to help them lead healthier and safer lives, IMO.

Scattered

Nobody ever died of a chemotherapy deficiency either, but a whole lot of people die of cancer.

Also, I find it hilarious that she mentions that all stimulants have the same effect on the CNS (which is false, incidentally, as it is precisely the CNS effects that differ between ADHD and neurotypical persons), and then goes on to list a whole bunch of negative effects...all of which are peripheral nervous system functions. The author apparently does not comprehend the difference between CNS and PNS function. While this is a fairly esoteric distinction for most of us, it is not a mistake that a competent medical practitioner would make.

I also just read an article yesterday on some research that was showing how the ADHD brain handles stimulents differently from the non ADHD brain -- not that that is a big surprise, considering the "paradoxical" reaction ADDers have to stimulent medication.

Scattered

Imagine that Scatt ;).

Crazy

Imagine that Scatt ;).

Crazy
So do you think I should limit my comments to the merely obvious instead of the terribly obvious?:p

Scattered

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to put my 2 cents in. I am always stunned when it is mentioned that something can kill us, it's funny, h20 is good for me, but, if I drink too much of it, I can die. We can die from so many things, good or bad.

I reccently wrote a research paper on ADHD/ADD, I found an article I thought you all might find interesting. I will just quote them, it's easier than trying to explain it,

"'Brain scan studies at the National Institute of Mental Health have noted that the volume of matter in several key parts of the brain are 3-4% smaller in children with ADHD than in other children. These key areas include the frontal lobes of the cerebellun, which regulates motor coordination; and the caudate nucleus, a structure in the basal ganglia that organizes information sent to the frontal lobes from other areas of the brain. The researchers also found that the volume of white matter (the fibers that connect and transmit electrical signals between the regions of the brain) in study subjects who had been treated with medication equaled that of the control group, while those who had never been medicated had an unusually small volume of white matter.

Here is the link if anyone wants to read the whole article:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/brain/adhd/adhd_about_print.htm

So, if medication can make our brains become more neurotypical, how are they so bad? I don't get it. I also read another report that stated that same thing.

So do you think I should limit my comments to the merely obvious instead of the terribly obvious?:p

Scattered LOL! Not at all m'dear, did that ever stop me? :o...I maybe need to limit my own comments to the helpful ones and not the randomly silly ones, ya think?

Crazy :cool:

So, if medication can make our brains become more neurotypical, how are they so bad? I don't get it. I also read another report that stated that same thing.:eek: but....but...eek! I don't wanna be more neurotypical! I just wanna get along in the Farmer society!

I swear if I met a NT version of myself I would have to over-ride the impulse to strangle her, but maybe that's all in my head?

Crazy :cool:

It's okay crazy, it only makes the white matter in our brains like that of an NT, I was just saying that, in a way, stimulants help us be more "normal". Don't worry, I don't want to be more NT either, I love being who I am. That is a funny picture, the thought of us as NT's. :D

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/kzrainbow/NTforbreakfast.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/kzrainbow/NDcelebrate.gif


Whew! That's better! :D

Crazy :cool:

It's okay crazy, it only makes the white matter in our brains like that of an NT, I was just saying that, in a way, stimulants help us be more "normal". Don't worry, I don't want to be more NT either, I love being who I am. That is a funny picture, the thought of us as NT's. :DThanks for sharing that study -- I was wondering where I could find it. They alluded to it at the ADDA Conference and I wanted to read more about it.

BTW -- no great danger of any of us becoming too NT!:cool:

And there is no such thing as being too silly -- world needs more smiles, Crazy!:D

Scattered

Thanks bunches Scatt. Its nice to know I have a good healthy place in the equation after all. http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/kzrainbow/icon_cheer107.gif


Crazy :cool:

A longer and more academic version of this will be available later. Here are some factoids of my own regarding the information presented in Grace Jackson's "Truth about Stimulants"

Claim 1: Methylphenidate(Ritalin) causes decressed blood flow to brain and therefore atrophy (brain damage)

From the study she cites: MP (methylphenidate) does cause reduced blood flow to the brain. However the following details were omitted or overlooked by Dr. Jackson
- deminished blood flow was only observed at 5, 15, and 30 minutes after administation of the drug.
-the researchers do not say anything about this decrease causing brain damage, but do warn the physician should take care when prescribing for long term continual usage or in patients already having brain damage

Claim 2: Giving kids Ritalin upps their likelyhood of drug abuse in the future

From the studies she cites: the researchers concluded that taking Ritalin does not leading to increased risk of drug abuse.
-Dr. Jackson claims that these conclusions are supported only becuase of the study's "numerous flaws and statisical manipulations" She fails to mention what these flaws are or where we might find them.
-Social and medical research following these studies shows the connection to between ADHD behaviors and conduct and risk of drug addiction, methylphenidate being eliminated at a causal force.

Claim 3: Stimulant medications are not helpful, only dangerous.

From the resources: The studies the Dr Jackson uses to support the claim of "unhelpful" were done on participents without ADHD. A claim of how stimulants may or may not affect the ADHD brain can not be made using studies missing research of how stimulants affect the ADHD brain.

-Below is the section of "Pay attention:Ritalin acts much like cocaine" JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) 2001; Vol. 286, 905-906. For easier reading by ADDers, I have highlighted the major points omitted by Dr. Jackson.
After combining data from the volunteers, the team got its second surprise. Those who took methylphenidate displayed high levels of extracellular dopamine—just like people using cocaine. But if methylphenidate works like cocaine, why aren't millions of US children getting high and becoming addicted?

The answer came after Volkow combined her results with those from another research team. In 1999, Darin Dougherty, MD, and colleagues at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard University Medical School reported that people with ADHD have many more dopamine transporters than those without the condition (Lancet. 1999;354:2132-2133). This surplus increases the collective cleaning power of each cell; as dopamine fires into the synapse it is quickly sucked back, before it can home in on reward circuit receptors. "There isn't enough time for it to produce a signal," said Volkow.

It finally started to make sense. Children with ADHD produce weak dopamine signals, meaning that usually interesting activities provide fewer rewards. In effect, their attention circuitry is underfed. At the same time, they experience a related effect: random, distracting neuron firing. Or, as Volkow put it, more noise and less signal. This background hum interferes with concentration, making the child more distractible.

Methylphenidate flips the relationship, upping the signal and reducing the noise. After someone swallows methylphenidate, it enters the bloodstream and eventually finds the brain, where it blocks dopamine transporters and increases attention signaling. Again, cocaine acts the same way. But the two drugs differ in a significant way: methylphenidate takes about an hour to raise dopamine levels, whereas inhaled or injected cocaine hits the brain in seconds. "It is the speed at which you increase dopamine that appears to be a key element of the addiction process," said Volkow.

While the team is unclear on why this speed factor is so important, future research will focus on it. They also plan to map dopamine levels in volunteers who have ADHD when they are at rest or while concentrating. Other research will search for molecular tools to screen children for dopamine transporter levels; those with high levels could be identified early and encouraged with behavioral solutions before methylphenidate is prescribed. "We know that social interactions can increase dopamine receptors," said Volkow, but whether better interplay also affects transporter levels is unknown.

The long-term dopamine effects of taking methylphenidate for years, as many do, are another unknown. The only two large epidemiological studies conflict. One reports more drug addiction in children with ADHD who took methylphenidate compared with children with ADHD who took no drug (J Learn Disabil. 1998;31:533-544); the other shows the opposite result (Pediatrics. 1999;104:e20).

Because people with low levels of dopamine receptors are at risk for drug addiction, Volkow said that researchers need to understand if methylphenidate can alter the whole dynamic of the dopamine pathway. "Could chronic use of Ritalin make you more vulnerable to decreased dopamine brain activity as cocaine does? It's a key question nobody has answered."


The claims made by Dr. Jackson's "Truth about Stimulants" are the result of the objectivity of science giving way to personal belief. I encourge all readers to take the time to read the works used to support such claims in their entirety. A good researcher must always acknowledge the data that does not support his or her conclusions and address it in an open and objective way. Otherwise the reader has no way of knowing the the research is scientifically viable or a overworded and overeducated attempt to create converts to a cause. I have not yet finished reading most much less all of the works cited, but already I am convinced that Dr. Jackson has, by her omissions, mitigations and incomplete presentation, let her personal opinions overcome her objectivity and therefore has lost any credibility in my eyes.
I'm not exactly sure why you didn't post all this in the original thread! (here) --> The Truth About Stimulants - FDA Hearing Presentation 03-23-2006 (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31161)

However, all of the hard work you've done is still appreciated! :)

Thanks for sharing that study -- I was wondering where I could find it. They alluded to it at the ADDA Conference and I wanted to read more about it.

Scattered
Here ya go,

Here is the link if anyone wants to read the whole article:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health...about_print.htm

:)

I'm not exactly sure why you didn't post all this in the original thread! (here) --> The Truth About Stimulants - FDA Hearing Presentation 03-23-2006 (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31161)

However, all of the hard work you've done is still appreciated! :)
Figured it would be easier to find if it had it's own thread. I just kept thinking about being a mom who's 5 year old just got diagnosed. If I found that crap while trying to help my kid, I'd be terrified. So I thought the easier the truth is to find, the better for everyone.

Still doing more reading though.