(Parents Made Daughter Taking Stimulants to Improve Grades, simplified Chinese (http://news.sina.com.cn/s/l/2006-08-06/015810640516.shtml))

Wang Xueqing was diagnosed of ADD at 8, but all psychs somewhat discouraged the use of meds.

The doctors recommended Wang Xueqing a small dosage of stimulant[...] But the doctors recommended [her parents] to teach her the correct way to study; stimulants are extremely helpful at small doses but is addictive when used too much.

The Wangs got 10 tablets of Ritalin (10 mg per tablet) from the hospital.

The Ritalin is, of course, effective.

<blockquote>After the daughter [Xueqing] took it, she was much calmer, and for one hour she sat done and finished her homework. "This works really well!" Wang Daizhi[Xueqing's father] said to his wife smiling.</blockquote>

So after that they put Xueqing on Ritalin one tablet twice per day. (The tone of the line thought that negatively.) And since that hospital no longer wanted to prescribe the amount of Ritalin needed, they parents resorted to drug seeking behaviour, seeking Ritalin prescriptions from multiple hospitals.

Xueqing seemed reluctant in taking the tablets at that age, since she dislikes taking medicine in general, but her parents has stressed the importance for her to keep medicated.

"Qingqing, it's for your good that I am running everywhere to buy you these pills, so that you can riase your spirits and improve your grades. If you don't build your foundations now, how can you get to college?"

In 2001, Xueqing got into an elite middle school (In China, middle school is between the seventh and the ninth grades.) of the region. Somewhat after that, she known from her mother that the pill she took was, actually, a stimulant. She found the idea pretty repungent since:

<blockquote>"How awful is that, to let their daughter to take stimulants!"
(Language note: In Chinese as used in PRC, the word "stimulant" also referred to those physical enhancers that is banned in sporting events.)</blockquote>

And, as said by the reporter,

At this stage (i.e. taking 20 mg of Ritalin every day for 3 years) she has grown dependence on it; without taking it at breakfast she would be completly without spirit.

And at that time the weekend drug holidays have to be scrapped since Xueqing found she unable to go out if she wasn't medicated. "Even so, she would go back to the school campus at weekends since she felt the "family feeling" was lacking. She knew her parents love her, but the love was so selfish...

(A few paragraphs deleted)

After she got into high school in 2004, even she don't want to take medication, but she couldn't-- she would be absolutly without spirit if unmedicated, and since the tolerance has been ramped up, her dosage, actually, increased.

...Ritalin stunted her growth; at the age of 15 her height is still 1.5m (5 ft)...


[At grade 11 she found]her body figure was unnatural, and for a period she had nosebleeds every day, sometimes of the frequency of once per very few minutes. Also she has insomnia and hallucinations. When not medicated... [she would] feel as if many ants were biting her.

One weekend in September 2005, she delibrately gone unmedicated. And they she felt a bit dizzy and lied on the sofa. After an unknown length of time, she did actually get up. [...] She was actually passed out[...]

In early March 2006, she was brought to a hospital in Chongqing, and the diagnosis was that her growth was stunted and she has dependence over Ritalin. She was asked to stop taking Ritalin, small doses of tranquilizers to calm down the anxiety (and doing exerises when she feel jittery), and psychotherapy (to correct her learning style).

Mr Wang fainted when he found "drug dependence" on the diagnosis sheet. Then the doctor explained the harmful aspects of drug dependence [...]

Then there was an overall argument in the family on if Xueqing should go on taking meds and not. Mr Wang wanted to let her take meds for one more year till she get into college, and takes her off meds after that. Her wife disagreed, thinking that would ruin Xueqing.

On the other hand, Xueqing found emotional baggege from her parents. "It's normal to have expectations on children; but they can't control their lives. Children without freedom would not be happy. For these 8 years Xueqing have never been happy; she hated her parents for making her take stimulant. She agreed her parents loved her, but in a way she couldn't stand. She feels her parents' love as foreign as scary, and she thought she needed a more natural kind of love. "Even I can't get into college, it is still a happy thing to do things I like to do. It would be unfair to myself to use medications to live."

I don't know the moral of this story. It might be:


State anti-meds propanganda;
Chinese is still conservative over meds;
Xueqing should have something wrong in addition to Ritalin;
Parents should not force children to take meds after a certain age. or
It's not a med probelm; it's a parenting problem.
I am confused.

This is what I got from the story..

The girl was diagnosed with adhd. Her parents medicated her against their doctor's advice. Unfortunately she was not under a doctors care and he medication schedule was not supervised by a doctor, but by herself and her parents. At a time when she should have been taken off of ritalin and placed on a different medication she was not, and she eventually developed problems with stunted growth, underweight, high blood pressure, addiction, and amphetamine psycosis.

I find it unlikely that anyone would develop every possible bad symptoms of using stimulants ast the same time. That leads me to conclude that the story is probably not based on a real case.

If it was state issued popoganda, my guess is that they are issuing a mildy anti-medication stance for kids with adhd.

The other side of the coin is that in a country like China, where the expectation to perform is very high, Parents would be very quick to place their child on medication for adhd.

Is it possible that China is experiencing problems with having large numbers of overmedicated and inappropriately medicated kids because their culture expects everyone to be a high-end performer ?

ME :D

At a time when she should have been taken off of ritalin and placed on a different medication she was not[...]

If it was state issued propaganda, my guess is that they are issuing a mildy anti-medication stance for kids with adhd.

The other side of the coin is that in a country like China, where the expectation to perform is very high, Parents would be very quick to place their child on medication for adhd.

Is it possible that China is experiencing problems with having large numbers of overmedicated and inappropriately medicated kids because their culture expects everyone to be a high-end performer ?

ME :DI am in HK so I don't know much about the case in China, but appreantly Ritalin (including their generics) is the only ADHD drug in China. (There are one or two Chinese medicine preparations that have allowed to be used for ADHD, but they seemed dubious.) There aren't "different medication" in China, and I persume you mean the off-label use of some anti-depressents... In any rate the tone of this article is pro-behaviour therapy.

This article belonged to the "social news" department of a provincial paper. Given the related liberty of Chinese press to the 1980s, the whole article would less likely to be totally farbicated but rather a true story gravely exaggerated to promote a government goal, if there are.

I read, before the traditional college exam season of May/June, that Ritalin is indeed used as enhancements by non-ADHDers, and press releases has been issued to warn against that...

If ADD people could simply control their behavior by "therapy" or another approach to "behaving", do you not think would have done so long before seeking a diagnosis? Many of us were older adults and tried every thing we could think of (multiplied by years)to raise our level of functioning. We are distractible, have a hard time directing focus (or filtering) upon command; we are by no means stupid!

Sorry but this comes off as trying to say we (who takes meds) want to solve all our problems by taking pills, this is untrue and to suggest this borders insulting.

Behavior therapy's are more likely to be successful with the proper medications. If you are interested in empirical evidence I shall be more than happy to provide some.

Gee you don't see people who need glasses as simply not trying the proper way to see? or bi-polar lack desire to regulate mood? Dyslexics not trying hard enough to process?

Universal laws apply universally

PS I forgot to take those addicting medications that wore off hours ago (like 6) and went un-noticed until now, when I read this. (Knew I forgot some thing) Trying to decide which category this goes into is a challenge as I do categories poorly, along with being unable to filter out things going on in my living room. Every sound grating on my nerves, I can’t make them back ground so this response can be in the foreground . . . . . .which is why I take medications.

Being in the medication section perhaps many more will give reason for why they are on medications as your initial post deals with medication issues.


. . . . . .enough said!

@meadd823: I don't need evidence; I just translated that article and post it here just because I feel confused because it sounded anti-medication.

On LiveJournal, there's a reply somewhat different from yours: <removed by moderator; see below>, but then I suppose there would be some common ground...

Back on the facts. I doubt the fact that Xueqing's dose didn't change in the first 6 years but changed very much at the 2-3 years after that.

*No links to other groups, forums or communities in signatures or posts, without the explicit written permission of a Site Admin.

And I agreed it sounds anti-medication to me as well.

I understand different cultures will present ideas in different manners depending on what is considered acceptable to that given culture. In my culture this is propaganda written soley as a scare tactic to use fear instead of information to manipulate peoples ideas a behavior.

Sorry if I came off harsh, wish I could say the Chinese were the only ones who used that approach then I wouldn't be so frustrated by it becuase it would still have some novelity left. However even here in the US the same tatic is toooo frequently used.

I become annoyed because stuff like this is twisting the truth which is the same a lying. It is misinformation a demon that crops up on a regular basis in these parts.

I do not feel angry toward you however I dislike this approach no matter where it is generated(US, China, the Moon). It is anti-medication dogma in my homest opinion.

If it was state issued popoganda, my guess is that they are issuing a mildy anti-medication stance for kids with adhd.


ME :D

Sorry but this comes off as trying to say we (who takes meds) want to solve all our problems by taking pills, this is untrue and to suggest this borders insulting.



Medications can cause their own problems. But, you don't want to hear about problems with medications. You can say it is government sponsored propaganda or "misinformation" but again, it is always the same people crying foul so quickly. These medications are abused by college students wanting to cram for a final exam, by parents who want to accomplish more in the time they have, and possibly by the ADDers themselves unintentionally. But anyone who thinks medications are the best approach do no want to hear about these problems. The truth can be a bitter pill to swallow. Medications are not the safest approach, not the most effective, but the one overused even in other countries. This is the reality of having so many scripts for these medications written each year: eventually, something nasty is going to happen and everyone (who uses medications) will call that propaganda or misinformation. It is reality and some people can't face reality because they haven't come up with a medication to help these people deal with reality.

These medications are abused by college students wanting to cram for a final exam, by parents who want to accomplish more in the time they have, and possibly by the ADDers themselves unintentionally

Lots of things are abused by college students, frankly just about any thing has the potential to be abused in the wrong hands, including but not limited to alcohol, food, sex and freedom,. If we are going to blindly bash or other wise advocate the elimination of things that have the potential to be abused then let us at least be consistent.





But anyone who thinks medications are the best approach do no want to hear about these problems.

I am sorry but you have mistaken me for some one who not aware of the possible side effects (or adverse reactions) of things I ingest, this is a mistake I assure you.

The inability to adhere to accuracy is the largest problem I have with the initial article of this thread as well as most anti-medication scare tactics. Inaccuracy can be done in a number of ways however the most common is bias distortion of facts, and exaggerations, closely followed by unvalided accusations.






Medications can cause their own problems.

Life can cause problems, every thing we eat, drink and breathe can cause problems, this I know extremely well.






But, you don't want to hear about problems with medications.

You have a problem with medications fine by me that is your business I am under no obligation to share this problem nor is it a requirement for me to be burdened by it. You are an adult and free to see things how you choose, as am I.






You can say it is government sponsored propaganda or "misinformation" but again, it is always the same people crying foul so quickly


I think when it comes to opposing perspectives and the ability to handle such, I have no need to whine. I am fairly secure in my perspective and am able to handle a decent challenge. My biggest danger to having my point of view challenged and proven wrong is I would learn some thing? Gee I face bigger threats driving to work every day. I am always open to learning new stuff and ways of seeing things however I am by no means gullible. In the arena you are addressing most of my positions, are well examined.





The truth can be a bitter pill to swallow.

You are free back up your truth with real scientific evidence (or at least a good line of logic) however due to guidelines it must be done in a different thread. You want to debate the issue you have found some one who enjoys a good debate. I must mention that I insist upon civilized respectful debating as I find insults, rude remarks, and flaming to require little in the way of ability, thought, or skill.

Now that I think we have successful vanquished this rabbit (for now any way) I believe the topic of this thread was an opinion on the initial post which is a parable of sorts. I do wish to be respectful to the member who began the thread. Sepialady you believe this to be an accurate and truthful story? I am merely surmising this by your obvious anti-medication post.

May I chime in, Sis? Thanks.

Lots of things are abused by college students, frankly just about any thing has the potential to be abused in the wrong hands, including but not limited to alcohol, food, sex and freedom,. If we are going to blindly bash or other wise advocate the elimination of things that have the potential to be abused then let us at least be consistent.
By way of the "potential for abuse" theory, let us consider this (http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=47975):

**source quote**Substances commonly used by inhalant abusers fall into several categories:



Volatile solvents, such as those found in paint thinner, gasoline, felt-tip markers, nail polish remover, glue, and other household products.
Aerosol sprays containing propellants and solvents. Examples include spray paint, deodorant, and hair care products.
Gases, most commonly nitrous oxide (laughing gas).
Nitrites, a group of chemicals that are used in room deodorizers, are more often abused by those seeking sexual enhancement rather than a euphoric state. Nitrites are most commonly abused by adults.
**end source quote**

I expect that removal of gasoline from society would have a significant impact, indeed! I can do without nail polish and remover, and hairspray, and possibly deodorant...but I really would prefer I were allowed to keep using deodorant and gasoline.



I am sorry but you have mistaken me for some one who not aware of the possible side effects (or adverse reactions) of things I ingest, this is a mistake I assure you. I have always been aware of the risk of possible side effects to myself and my child as well. I have many times stepped up at this forum and admitted my child had a psychotic episode at 30mgs of Adderall. I knew that risk, proceeded and dealt with the frightening results.

It is pertinent to note that my child is not only quite alive, but doing very well, although ingesting 72mgs Concerta daily.

The inability to adhere to accuracy is the largest problem I have with the initial article of this thread as well as most anti-medication scare tactics. Inaccuracy can be done in a number of ways however the most common is bias distortion of facts, and exaggerations, closely followed by unvalided accusations.
That's my issue as well, and made more difficult by this (http://www.m-w.com/):

Main Entry: truth
Pronunciation: 'trüth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/
Etymology: Middle English trewthe, from Old English trEowth fidelity; akin to Old English trEowe faithful -- more at TRUE
1 a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b : sincerity in action, character, and utterance
2 a (1) : the state of being the case : FACT (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : ACTUALITY (3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics> c : the body of true statements and propositions
3 a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an original or to a standard
4 capitalized, Christian Science : GOD
- in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY

Entry Word: truth
Function: noun
Text: agreement with fact or reality <there is no truth to her accusation that Emory cheated on the test>
Synonyms factuality, verity
Related Words accuracy, actuality, authenticity, correctness; credibility, honesty, trustworthiness, truthfulness, veracity; dependability, reliability
Near Antonyms erroneousness, fallaciousness, fallacy; falsehood, fiction, inaccuracy, incorrectness; deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, untruthfulness
Antonyms falseness, falsity, untruth
http://www.m-w.com/images/pixt.gif
:faint: :faint: :faint:



Life can cause problems, every thing we eat, drink and breathe can cause problems, this I know extremely well.
Like I tend to say, life is the leading cause of death.


You have a problem with medications fine by me that is your business I am under no obligation to share this problem nor is it a requirement for me to be burdened by it. You are an adult and free to see things how you choose, as am I.

I agree and support this. In now way do I personally wish to trample anyone's rights to free speech or a personal opinion.


I think when it comes to opposing perspectives and the ability to handle such, I have no need to whine. I am fairly secure in my perspective and am able to handle a decent challenge. My biggest danger to having my point of view challenged and proven wrong is I would learn some thing? Gee I face bigger threats driving to work every day. I am always open to learning new stuff and ways of seeing things however I am by no means gullible. In the arena you are addressing most of my positions, are well examined.
I am the same, and in fact Tammy is a person I refer to with questions very often. I am always willing to learn as much as I can.


You are free back up your truth with real scientific evidence (or at least a good line of logic) however due to guidelines it must be done in a different thread. You want to debate the issue you have found some one who enjoys a good debate. I must mention that I insist upon civilized respectful debating as I find insults, rude remarks, and flaming to require little in the way of ability, thought, or skill.I certainly hope this happens and soon. I am also a member of the debate forum, and enjoy the times that it is active (it has not been so active lately).

Now that I think we have successful vanquished this rabbit (for now any way) I believe the topic of this thread was an opinion on the initial post which is a parable of sorts. I do wish to be respectful to the member who began the thread. Sepialady you believe this to be an accurate and truthful story? I am merely surmising this by your obvious anti-medication post.I am not personally thrilled by the original article posted. It does appear to be a parable of sorts and I prefer facts, even if analogy helps them to appear more clearly to me. A story is just a story.

Crazy :cool:

Many times stories are used because they tend to remain in the minds of most readers, better than facts. When stories are used to explian a concept okay but in this case the concept is distortion. Distortion is still not very truthful = in my book flat out lie!

The main objective of the story present above is clearly manipulation by fear. Perhaps I won't feel like I have been hit by a truck tomorrow and will have the engery provide a closer to truth story of my own. Thank for the referances Crazy~Feet. Now I am going to find my bed. . . . think it under the cats!

You can say it is government sponsored propaganda or "misinformation"
Well, in this case the story came from the official Chinese state media, which happens to be actual government-sponsored propaganda. Virtually every official news story in China is either written or approved by the Communist Party. You don't have to take my word on this, ask any political analyst about China's control on their media.

These medications are abused
Opioid painkillers such as oxycodone are abused by all manner of people. However, I just had some minor surgery earlier today, and thank g_d for percocet. Just because a particular drug can be abused says nothing about its safety and efficacy when medically necessary.

Medications are not the safest approach, not the most effective,
I'll leave the safety question aside for a second, but what evidence do you have that they are not the most effective? The largest childhood mental health study ever conducted, under the supervision of the National Institute of Mental Health, spanning multiple cities in the US and Canada, showed that medication was, in fact, the most effective treatment for ADHD. In fact, more than 40 papers have been published based on the data from that massive study, and for the most part almost all have found that medication was the most effective treatment.

but the one overused even in other countries.
Dunno about other countries, but they are actually underused in the US. While studies have found that ADHD most likely affects between 3-8% of the population, childhood prescription rates are below 3% (and have held steady for almost a decade), and adult prescriptions are far lower. This indicates that it is very likely that many children, and very many adults with ADHD are not medicated. But don't take my word for it:

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/press/adhdmedsuse.cfm

This is the reality of having so many scripts for these medications written each year: eventually, something nasty is going to happen
In the past five years, during which prescription rates have held fairly steady at their current rate, there have been roughly 25 deaths and 52 other serious adverse events. That's with roughly 3 million prescriptions filled each month. So yes, with so many scripts written, bad things will happen to some people. That the total is 25 people out of 36 million prescriptions tells me that my odds of dying from Adderall (less than one in a million) is far less than my odds of dying from cancer (1 in 550 for the average person).

It is reality and some people can't face reality because they haven't come up with a medication to help these people deal with reality.
“You don’t know the history of psychiatry. I do.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8344309/

If you all have to attack sepialady, go on, but I need, for twice, get myself clear over this. I did not sponsor the article.

First, I am myself an ADDer, (Look at my past posts about my frustrations.) and has been benefitted by the same durg the article mentioned-- Ritalin. Even not as dramatic than others, my grades has risen from B- to B+ since I medicated, and side effects has been minimal (headaches sometimes. Concerta would help with that, but it's too expensive).

My original intent to post it here by saying China was too conversative on ADD treatments (I think the views portrayed is likely to be the 1980s view or even earlier); I have attacked other Asian nations of that before, like posting that the labelled indication of Ritalin in Japan is still depression only (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17844).

My dosage of the medicine is also higher than Xueqing's allerged 20mg/day. (I take 30mg/day) I also cannot why she, in the article, had nearly constant nosebleeds (high blood pressure) but still didn't even have a stroke incident; at that level of blood pressure nosebleed is too minor a symptom.

And, I perfer speedo's reply on the topic over anyone else's.

A quick search shown China Daily has the official English version of the article: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-08/09/content_660792.htm

Go on bashing.

I think that part of the Chinese and Japanese dialogue over ADHD is likely influenced by their cultural norms. This is similar to how the American idea of the so-called "protestant work-ethic" and the idea of personal responsibility/laziness always pop up in American discussions, where ADHD often becomes a pawn in a larger sociocultural game.

It is no surprise that ADHD might wind up being used similarly in other countries. I am not an expert on northeast Asia, but I can imagine that societies that value conformity, orderly work and play, following directions, and efficiency might certainly hold negative viewpoints on ADHD. If there exists a cultural meme that anyone is capable of finding self-discipline if they try hard enough, and that lack of such discipline is seen as a moral failing, then they will have some serious issues with ADHD.

Also, looking specifically at China, they're going through many of the same things that the US went through back in the 1950s. You have rapid industrialization and urbanization, there is rapid migration from rural farmland into the larger cities, huge gaps are developing between the haves and the have-nots, economic disparity between the port cities on the east-coast and the poorer rural west...it's all going to create some interesting sociological changes as well as some growing pains. This is also going to come about as modern science begins to replace traditional wisdom. China is developing a space program, they're trying to send educated physicians out into the poorer areas where modern medicine is unknown, their universities are aiming to produce graduates who can compete on the world's stage (and they do). This merely increases the gap between the educated and the uneducated, and it makes sense that we'd see "culture clashes" as modern discoveries conflict with long-held traditional beliefs.

And finally, you have a political system which actually bears a decent amount of similarity to the US in that bureaucrats with little technical expertise are given a wide amount of responsibility in many areas. So much of Chinese policy on ADHD is likely to result as much from the politburo as it is from physicians and researchers.

One final bit of informal analysis: The Chinese government is no longer run by the idealists as it was back in the days of Chairman Mao. Those currently in power have often struck me as being far more shrewd and pragmatic. This doesn't mean that they often make intelligent decisions, or that they're often right, but rather that when they make decisions, they base it on what they believe will accomplish their goals. I think that the sea change can be best summed up by Deng Xiaoping's statement: "To be rich is good," which indicated a policy that the advancement of the Chinese economy was far more important than a pretend allegiance to communist principles. My hope is that those who have the authority to make such decisions recognize that diagnosing and treating the ~5% of the population (50 million people!!!) with ADHD offers the most effective and efficient economic outcomes for their society as a whole.

I know that we're not supposed to discuss politics here, but I would hope that this post, being more of a policy analysis than a political debate, would be considered acceptable.

Today I came across a Chinese governmental press release that is in fact a new correction: http://www.moe.gov.cn/edoas/website18/info21289.htm (Chinese, of course)

It was released by the Ministry of Education, on news reports-- some came from the newspaper which wrote this ADHD story, Democracy and Law Bulletin-- about a place in Shandong selling college exam marks and it had queues of 400 metres (12 feet), etc. MoE clarified that since the day the queueing was the last day to change college choices, people are naturing queuing at the education office to change it. On the other hand, there are no real score-selling people except for a few swindlers...

So, you see, now the State is arguing with the "state" media!

Also as a fact, now Chinese newspapers are running commercially despite of the controls (imposed by the Central Propaganda Office), and, as a fact, many things can be discussed and criticized, unless that is considered harmful to the legitimacy of the CCP rule. I have to say, ADHD treatment is hardly the thing CCP would care.

Why is it that I am the only one posting against drugs here? Does that seem balanced to anyone?

It seems in the other forums, namely nutrition and misc. treatments & approaches, there are plenty of people who are more than willing to play devil's advocate in those forums.

There are plenty of people who repeatedly (and I do mean repeatedly) express their ignorant opinions against natural or alternative therapies. But I am alone when it comes to taking a anti-drug stand here.

And I do want to point out that opinions were asked for on this topic, and I felt that I should at least represent the other side which was being ignored. I would not want anyone to think that I stooped to the same level as those ignorant opinion poster's do so often in nutrition and misc approaches. I only offered because it seemed like no one else was presenting that POV here.

Do we HAVE to have a polarized view to join in this discussion?

Do we HAVE to have a polarized view to join in this discussion?
That is how it is in the nutrition and misc. treatments forums. Posters "have to" play devil's advocate there all of the time. So many threads get off topic because of those argumentative posts. So many times the implication is that people who consider those alternative therapies can't possibly have the capability of questioning if that science is psuedo or not. blah blah blah blah.

Your point is that when I do it I should be challenged. Remind me again how many times I have taken a stand for the sake of playing devil's advocate.

Why is it OK or seems to continue to go on in the nutrition and misc. forums, but here I get challenged for it?

MY POINT, and it seems I do have to draw you a picture, is that I don't go off like those ignorant opinion posters do offering their opinion on any topic that they don't know anything about.

I DO IT NOW ONLY TO MAKE THE POINT OF HOW THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THESE (drugs) FORUMS ANYWHERE NEAR THE FREQUENCY THAT IT HAPPENS IT THE OTHER FORUMS FOR ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES.

So, no, we don't have to get polar but why not mention this in the forums where I think it should be brought up.

So many times the implication is that people who consider those alternative therapies can't possibly have the capability of questioning if that science is psuedo or not. blah blah blah blah.Sepialady, if we know more about science and medicine than the poster, does it upset you if we join the discussion?

Sepialady, if we know more about science and medicine than the poster, does it upset you if we join the discussion?
Your question is out of line. What does my being upset or not have anything to do with this forum?

Sepialady, it is my desire not to upset people when communicating with them. You asked why no no one was responding to this thread. I'm sorry if I've upset you.

Why is it that I am the only one posting against drugs here? Does that seem balanced to anyone?

It seems in the other forums, namely nutrition and misc. treatments & approaches, there are plenty of people who are more than willing to play devil's advocate in those forums.

There are plenty of people who repeatedly (and I do mean repeatedly) express their ignorant opinions against natural or alternative therapies. But I am alone when it comes to taking a anti-drug stand here.

And I do want to point out that opinions were asked for on this topic, and I felt that I should at least represent the other side which was being ignored. I would not want anyone to think that I stooped to the same level as those ignorant opinion poster's do so often in nutrition and misc approaches. I only offered because it seemed like no one else was presenting that POV here.I can venture a guess...it may be because the article in question seems to be anti-medication propaganda, and nobody wished to escalate the situation any more by making an anti-medication post.

Crazy :cool:

Sepialady, it is my desire not to upset people when communicating with them. You asked why no no one was responding to this thread. I'm sorry if I've upset you.
The only reactions from me you should worry about are the ones that appear in black and white on the page (my words). My feelings are none of your business and not your concern at all.

"You asked why no no one was responding to this thread."

I never asked anything like that.

Why is it that I am the only one posting against drugs here? Does that seem balanced to anyone?
Well first off, whether the forum is "balanced" is fairly irrelevant. People will write whatever they choose to write, and aside from editing posts that touch upon off-limits topics, there's nothing that anyone can do to keep things "balanced."

But more importantly, I don't understand this whole "pro-med vs. anti-med" view of yours. That's not what I see in the med forums. I myself have made many posts advising that people with certain health conditions might not be able to take certain medications and that persons with those conditions need to have a long talk with their doctors about it. I have also made many posts discussing side effects, contraindications, and other problems that could arise while taking medication. I have also answered posts where people have asked whether a given medication would be likely to cause side effects if they had problems with a similar med (ie Ritalin and Concerta, or Adderall and Dexedrine) by pointing out that it was very likely that if they had negative effects with one, they might have negative effects with the other.

So I fail to see how there is some pro-med or anti-med side here. Now, if your issue is whether one "believes" that medication is an effective treatment, then I suppose you might have a point, inasmuch as the vast majority of people here accept the scientific evidence showing that medications are effective at treating ADHD in many people, as well as the evidence from the MTA showing that medication was the most effective single treatment, and that adding behavioral therapy to medication was only mildly more effective than medication alone, and even then only for certain specific situations. However, this isn't an issue of what one "believes," but rather an issue of looking at objective evidence and reaching a conclusion.

So if your question is whether you are the only person who refuses to accept the evidence of the eficacy and effectiveness of medication treatment, and whether you are the only person who believes that the negative effects of medication always outweight the potential benefits, and that medication should never be used, or should only be used rarely, then yes, I suppose that you may be the only person here who holds that viewpoint.

But my biggest objection has nothing to do with that. The original post discussed a particular article about ADHD in China. Most of us posted comments regarding either ADHD in China, or about the specific article (note my absurdly long political analysis of Chinese socioeconomic development), but rather than dispute or support the article, or even the question of whether the assertions in the article were true, you chose instead to attack people for criticizing the article, which actually would not be a problem, except that you didn't really make any assertions to support the article.

Now, do you have anything to post about the article, or about the subject raised in the article, or do you just want to sit here and complain about how you feel that people don't agree with you?

But more importantly, I don't understand this whole "pro-med vs. anti-med" view of yours.
Ill give you a hint since its not so obvious. The view involves Xenu and a dead hack of a scifi writer who enjoyed taking young boys on boat rides.

Ill give you a hint since its not so obvious. The view involves Xenu and a dead hack of a scifi writer who enjoyed taking young boys on boat rides.Saying a person is a Scientologist is an insult here-- it's not funny, D. B. Cooper.

Saying a person is a Scientologist is an insult here-- it's not funny, D. B. Cooper.
Would you like to give a rational reason why someone would be against chemical treatment for a neuralchemical imbalance that doesnt respond to CBT?

With something like anxiety disorders its understandable that some people would simply want to go the therapy route because theres a proven success rate.

Scientology is well known for trolling psychiatry forums and disorder forums trying to press their agenda.

Yes, but I don't believe that all, or even most, of the so-called "anti-med" sentiment on these boards is related to that particular religion, or to any religion in particular. Also, being a member of a minority religious group that has had it share of discrimination, I'd prefer not to attribute one's views to religion as a general rule.

Besides, most of said sentiment comes from the altie-woo types. They're a distinctly different brand of woo from flat-earthers, young-earthers, scientologists, and assorted other breeds of woo. This is more along the lines of the new-age neohippie crap, except without the good music of the actual hippie movement.

Oh, that and most actual hippies were rather pro-pharmaceutical, if I remember my history correctly.

Oh, that and most actual hippies were rather pro-pharmaceutical, if I remember my history correctly.

Okay if this wasn't funny I would be depressed because I actually remember the hippy days which are now considered history . . . . . :( I don't want to be old!


Yeah don’t we have a topic going on? Oh yea this is it, the story of these children and ADD regarded to medication usage. Is it propaganda

If one would like to read a ADD medication story that shows balance my I recommend this one!

Posted by Dorm! (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31525)

Okay if this wasn't funny I would be depressed because I actually remember the hippy days which are now considered history . . . . . :( I don't want to be old!


Yeah don’t we have a topic going on? Oh yea this is it, the story of these children and ADD regarded to medication usage. Is it propaganda

If one would like to read a ADD medication story that shows balance my I recommend this one!

Posted by Dorm! (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31525)Heh...sis, we are gettin' old, girl! I agree with Hyperion for the record. I don't intend to further any particular agenda and I stand by my last post. Propaganda irks me.

But hey, I tend towards the hippie-chick kinda gig with a dash of old-school biker tossed in. I do listen to great music too IMO. I like my own style :D and prefer not to get involved with propaganda if I am able to refute it in some logical fashion.

Crazy :cool: (my daddy always said I was 10 years too young to be a hippy)

Okay if this wasn't funny I would be depressed because I actually remember the hippy days which are now considered history . . . . . :( I don't want to be old!What if I told you that the new generation of teeny boppers swoon to think I was young and alive during that era. I have a hand embroidered, not sewn together yet top I've kept all of these years that several thirteen year olds would covet. You know, the tunic style shirt, collarless, belled sleeves, embroidery around the neck and down the front.

I should finish it and raffle it off for the basketball team. I'm never going to be that size again. :D

I have a needlepoint to finish. Lost my embroidered jeans I loved-my own project.

Apple-you can buy patterns for the same kind of tops now! I plan on making an updated one soon. :D

If ADD had been a common diagnosis during this time, I wonder how it would have been treated. It was the age of better living through chemistry, and tune in, turn on, and drop out.

Funny how the Age of Aquarius brought in the age of pharmaceuticals, traditional medicine took off because of scientific advances, and alternative medicine. I believe the three go hand-in-hand if used wisely, carefully, and when well researched by the consumer receiving the services. No one area has all the answers.

The consumer rights movement started in three key areas:

Food safety-hence theMeat inspection act that ledt to the USDA, thanks to Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, 1907
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1906, thanks to Dr. Harvey Wiley, who fought against harmful substanstances in those products, this led to the formation of the FDA.
Chase and Schlink, who wrote, Your Money's Worth, in 1927? About false advertising and dangerous drugs and chemicals in food and medicine that were not labeled on containers-people were dying. This led to the Truth-in-Advertising law and eventually, the FTC.
You can see how these three acts impact the medicines we take today, the growth of alternative medicine practices, the regulation of health claims of vitamins and supplements, preventing or stopping the production and sale of dangerous products, and so on. This has always been an issue in American society-just think of the proprietary medicine shows-i.e., snake oil men that made outrageous claims.

It is from this history that we have learned to be careful consumers. The internet now affords us easy access to all sorts of information-from the reliable to total lies. I hope the interchange of ideas, questions, sharing of information through links and other sources will never stop. It is how we learn and grow.

May we all find the best treatment approach for unique selves through the hearty discussion and sharing of information.

Thanks for reading, Becky

Yupsie, and the Age of Pisces ought to bring us the ability to merge all lifeforms on one level or another, so stay tuned!

I want one of those tops, I once a closet full, what size is yours Imnapl?


It is from this history that we have learned to be careful consumers. The internet now affords us easy access to all sorts of information-from the reliable to total lies. I hope the interchange of ideas, questions, sharing of information through links and other sources will never stop. It is how we learn and grow.

May we all find the best treatment approach for unique selves through the hearty discussion and sharing of information.
Indeed! Here here, big round of applause and a few random "Amens" for good measure.

Crazy :cool:

Apple-you can buy patterns for the same kind of tops now! I plan on making an updated one soon. :D Far out! :D
Funny how the Age of Aquarius brought in the age of pharmaceuticals, traditional medicine took off because of scientific advances, and alternative medicine.I saw the 5th Dimension perform The Age of Aquarius at an open air concert. Groovy!

Peace Out-

Sepia,

You asked why the discussion is so one sided. It is because the people here have done a lot of research on meds (I am not including myself in that group) and they feel that meds work. Their statements are supported by reams and reams of medical studies on the affects of stimulants and meds on the treatment of ADHD. I am not talking about a few studies, I am talking about THOUSANDS of studies. They are mostly double blind, drug vs placebo studies. Plus there are all of the brain scan studies, etc. So, the people here have lots of amunition to dissect most arguments against meds.

When you go over to the nutrition boards everyone is talking out of their *** because there are no studies that show that they work. Most have not been proven not to work, but no one can comment authoritatively since there are no scientific studies to back it up. I am not against nutritional treatments/etc. but no one can authoritatively state whether they do or do not work.